Single family house in Erlenbach

In this single-family house, the combination of solid construction with ClimateCoating^® ThermoProtect and infrared heating with ClimateCoating^® ThermoPlus ensures lower energy consumption than in the neighbouring house with a “better” U-value.

It is a single-family house. The wall construction consists of 24 cm porous concrete, inside and outside a total of 3.0 cm plaster and inside and outside coated with Thermo-Shield (i.e. outside with ClimateCoating^® ThermoProtect and inside with Thermo-Shield Interior).

Heating is provided by IR (infrared) radiant panels, which consume primary energy-devil electric power and provide better thermal comfort than any convection heating can.

The infrared heating installed here, in combination with the IR reflective coating ClimateCoating^®, creates maximum comfort and economy. For the period from March 2008 to March 2010, heating costs of less than € 450 p.a. have been verified.

At the same time, the evaluation of the measurement results leads the U-value theory ad absurdum. It is analytically and metrologically proven that the so-called U-value as a primary measure for the heating energy demand is a fantasy product.

The basis for the evaluation is a protocol from 2011 on measurements of the U-value of exterior walls of several single-family houses with different wall constructions. The measurements carried out prove the positive influence of Thermo-Shield Interior and ClimateCoating^® ThermoProtect on the thermal resistance of exterior walls.

The task of the measurements was to prove the positive influence of ClimateCoating^® on exterior walls with different wall constructions. Furthermore, the cooling behaviour as well as the warm-up phase of the air and the wall temperature should be determined.

The measurement locations were 2 single-family houses with different wall constructions. Measurements were taken on the west side of the house at a height of approx. 3-5m. All measurements were subject to largely the same conditions with a temperature difference between inside and outside of approx. 15°C. On the one hand, the TESTO 635 measuring device and the PT100 sensors were used. The wall structure of the neighbouring house consists of 36.5 cm aerated concrete, the U-value here is on average 0.30 W/m²K, as the manufacturer also specifies in his flyer.

From 20.02.2010 17:30 o’clock to 21.02.2010 9:00 o’clock different measured variables were measured in the room and outside:

• – Indoor air temperature
• – Air temperature outside
• – Wall surface temperature inside
• – “the U-value”
• – rh [%]; probably the rel. Humidity outside
• – Mat [%],the material moisture at unknown location

Here, among other things, one must ask the question as follows: What is being measured? Is it really the room air temperature? The wall surface temperatures rise because the IR heater emits heat radiation. In addition to the primary radiation, the secondary radiation also has an effect. This is the reason why even concealed wall surfaces that are not in the direct cone of the heater, e.g. behind an armchair, become warmer.

The sensor for the room air temperature therefore does not display the actual measured variable, but a higher value. This is because it is radiated in the same way and thus heated.

When it comes to radiation processes, the U-value theory is out of place. It merely adds to the confusion and dilution rather than providing a model explanatory contribution. This is because radiation processes are foreign to the nature of the U-value theory.

The room air temperature is not the determining variable when it comes to IR processes. This involves radiation physics in the wavelength range around 10 µm in the following cases:

• – surfaces coated with thermoceramic membrane technology (IR reflection)
• – Heating with heating systems based on the principle of heat radiation (IR heating)
• – the combination of IR heating and IR reflective coating

By combining the IR heating with the ClimateCoating^® coating, the occupants of the single-family house in Erlenbach achieved a high degree of energy efficiency as a result of comfort (higher surface temperatures, more temperature symmetry), faster heat-up, delayed cool-down – all with a “worse” U-value than the neighboring house.

Since 2015 you can read at www.thermoshield-farben.de: “For the period March 2008 to March 2014 heating costs below 450 € p.a. are proven. Compared to a passive house according to EnEV2009. 30% less heating costs, 20% less construction costs, 50% less maintenance costs.” This contradicts the U-value theory, but this is the practice.

Kindergarten in Vilnius

Double-skin masonry 2 x 11 cm, cold winters. Instead of facade insulation with polystyrene on the advice of a German building expert: Core insulation with cellulose and ClimateCoating^® inside and outside; Golden Globe Award 2011

Short summary
The kindergarten “Saules Gojus” (Sun Grove) is located on the outskirts of Vilnius. With approx. 500 m² the house offers space for up to 45 children. As part of the first renovation phase in 2004, core insulation made of cellulose flakes was blown into the air gap of the exterior walls. In the second phase, the interior and exterior were painted with the thermoceramic membrane technology ClimateCoating^® to improve thermal insulation. As a result, heating costs were reduced and cooling times extended – with improved thermal comfort and a reduced risk of mould even in problem areas. In addition to long-lasting weather protection of the dehumidified wall, the coating protects against heat radiation in winter and heating up in summer.

Evaluation criteria

• Project Objective:
  energetic retrofitting, max. Results with a small budget of a young family-run company (economic efficiency), durable ecological building materials with structural-physical and health safety.
• Innovative approach:
  not doing what everyone around is doing – instead combining technologies/systems, using surface active coating.
• Cost/Benefit:
  maximum upgrading of the building at modest financial cost (see also: project objective), long maintenance intervals, the objective (high benefit at low cost) was achieved.
• Multiplicability:
  In principle, yes, although the individual case must always be examined – in this case the special feature was the core insulation, other combinations are also possible (cf. project “Wood fibre ETICS in Berlin”).
• Environmental Sustainability:
  is given to a high degree, toxic and pollutant-free building materials, as a result emission reductions are given.

In the first stage of the renovation, the sanitary facilities and the entire electrical system were renewed and the house was adapted to the needs of the children. It was important to improve the energy efficiency of the exterior walls, which were double-shell masonry with an air gap of 7 cm and a U-value of 0.8 W/m²K. Although the U-value is not the only decisive factor for the energy balance of the building, it is nevertheless a parameter that must be taken into account in winter temperatures of around -20°C.

The expert advised against covering the façade with polystyrene panels as an ETICS, as was often and readily done throughout the country. One important reason is that it is considered absurd to build tighter from the inside out – even more so when it is known that calculations according to standards, including the Glaser method, do not produce realistic results (Hauser, 2003).

The U-value could be improved to 0.37 W/m²K by core insulation with EKOVATA cellulose flakes, whereby a decisive advantage is that in the end a fully sorption-capable wall construction with capillary conductivity is available.

In February, construction measures were discussed during a property inspection with the following focal points: Rainproofing of windows in the attic, plaster repairs to the façade, insulation of soffits, replacement of foam under the window plates, painting of the façade and interior, renewal of the south wooden gable, painting of the wooden gable aisle strips, reduction of vibrations in the grid ceiling above the basement.

On 11.02.2007 it was -23°C at the outskirts of Vilnius. On average, room temperatures of 19°C and wall surface temperatures of 16°C were measured. The measurements with the pyrometer for non-contact temperature measurement showed considerable temperature differences of the wall surface temperatures of the facade. This shows what the term “solar gains of opaque components” means: the heat flow from 20°C to -10°C is less than the heat flow from 20°C to -20°C.

In order to improve the energy quality of the exterior walls, the building expert advised the use of ClimateCoating^®. Reasons for this include protection against solar load in summer, compensation of thermal bridges, protection against driving rain, improvement of thermal comfort. The practical benefits have proven this planning approach right, the following experience report is self-explanatory.

“We used ClimateCoating^® for renovation work on our kindergarten in the summer of 2007, both inside and outside. While at the beginning we had to reheat in the middle of the night and during the day, the house can now be kept warm with two heatings, even at temperatures of -20 (January 2009). We are thrilled with the properties: despite the extreme Lithuanian conditions of -20°C in winter to almost 30 degrees in summer compared to Germany, ClimateCoating^® does not fade and no cracks are visible at all, neither on the wood cladding nor on the plaster – a major problem of many paints in this country and observable on almost every corner when walking through Vilnius.”