WALL TYPES
| Wall Types | Material Density [kg/m³] | WINTER | SUMMER | HYGROMETRY | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thermal Conductivity λ [W/mK] | Useful Thickness [cm] for a unit transmittance U of 0.4 W/m²K | Specific Heat c [kcal/kgK] | Useful Thickness [cm] for a thermal lag (*) of 10 hours ≈ | Vapor Resistance Coefficient μ | ||
| Concrete | 2400 | 2.158 | 510 | 0.21 | 45 | 150 |
| Stone Masonry | 1800 | 1.20 | 280 | 0.20 | 40 | 30 |
| Clay Earth | 1800 | 0.90 | 210 | 0.21 | 35 | 20 |
| Solid Brick | 1800 | 0.781 | 185 | 0.20 | 34 | 20 |
| Tuff | 1500 | 0.63 | 150 | 0.30 | 27 | 20 |
| Porous Brick | 800 | 0.26 | 61 | 0.20 | 38 | 15 |
| Solid Fir Wood | 450 | 0.18 | 42 | 0.65 | 20 | 60 |
| Gasbeton | 600 | 0.11 | 26 | 0.20 | 31 | 15 |
INSULATING MATERIALS
| Insulating Materials | Material Density [kg/m³] | WINTER | SUMMER | HYGROMETRY | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thermal Conductivity λ [W/mK] | Useful Thickness [cm] for a unit transmittance U of 0.4 W/m²K | Specific Heat c [kcal/kgK] | Useful Thickness [cm] for a thermal lag (*) of 10 hours ≈ | Vapor Resistance Coefficient μ | ||
| PUR (polyurethane) | 32 | 0.032 | 7.5 | 0.30 | 50 | 60 |
| PS (polystyrene) | 25 | 0.035 | 8.5 | 0.30 | 60 | 170 |
| Wood Fiber Board | 150 | 0.040 | 9.5 | 0.57 | 19 | 5 |
| Rock Wool | 55 | 0.040 | 9.5 | 0.20 | 52 | 1.2 |
| Glass Fiber | 30 | 0.040 | 9.5 | 0.20 | 72 | 1.2 |
| Expanded Cork Board | 130 | 0.045 | 10.5 | 0.50 | 23 | 11 |
| SANAWARME | 700 | 0.077 | 19 | 0.48 | 14 | 9 |
| Mineralized Wood Wool | 500 | 0.109 | 26 | 0.50 | 17 | 20 |
NOTE: The values, in terms of thickness, shown in the “Insulating Materials” table, refer to the insulating materials as such, assuming a wall made of only insulating material. The functional thickness of each of them, to achieve the prescribed unit transmittances, must be determined by adapting it to the different wall types.
(*) Thermal Lag (in hours): Indicates the time difference between the hour when the maximum temperature is recorded on the outer surface of the structure and the hour when the maximum temperature is recorded on the inner surface of the same. The optimal thermal lag value is 12 hours and it is important to have a thermal lag of at least 8 hours and no less than 10 hours in areas with more challenging summer climates. With such thermal lag values, the heat will enter during the night hours during which it can be dissipated with air changes. The value of thermal lag, often overlooked in conventional design, is certainly important for determining summer thermal comfort and, as such, has important repercussions also in terms of energy savings.
| COMFORT ASPECT | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| CHARACTERISTICS | BARE WALL | SOLUTION WITH SYNTHETIC MATERIALS | SOLUTION WITH SANAWARME |
| Increase in winter comfort | None | High | High |
| Increase in summer comfort | None | Low | High |
| Breathability | – | Low | Very High |
| Surface condensation probability | High | Low | Very Low |
| Interstitial condensation probability | – | Low | Low |
| Dehumidifying capacity | – | None | High |
| Preheating/cooling times | High | Medium | Low |
| Probability of local discomfort | High | Medium-Low | Low |
| Indoor air quality | – | Medium | High |
| Acoustic insulation | – | Low | High |
| ECONOMIC ASPECT | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| CHARACTERISTICS | BARE WALL | SOLUTION WITH SYNTHETIC MATERIALS | SOLUTION WITH SANAWARME |
| Construction costs (new) | – | Medium | Medium |
| Construction times (new) | – | Medium-Low | Medium-Low |
| Waiting times (new) | High | Low | High |
| Construction costs (existing) | – | Medium | Medium |
| Construction times (existing) | – | Medium-Low | Medium-Low |
| Waiting times (existing) | High | Low | High |
| Solution duration | – | ??? | High |
| Disposal costs | – | ??? | Low (inert) |
| Heating cost savings | None | High | High |
| Cooling cost savings | None | Low | High |
| Preheating/cooling cost savings | None | Medium | High |
| Overall savings | None | Medium | High |
| Payback times | – | Medium (3-5 years) | Low (< 3 years) |
| ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECT | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| CHARACTERISTICS | BARE WALL | SOLUTION WITH SYNTHETIC MATERIALS | SOLUTION WITH SANAWARME |
| Winter energy savings | None | High | High |
| Summer energy savings | None | Low | High |
| Preheating/cooling energy savings | None | Medium | High |
| Overall energy savings | None | Medium | High |
| Reduction of pollutant emissions | None | Medium | High |
| Type of materials used | – | Synthetic | Natural |
| Environmental impact of materials used | – | ??? | Low |
| Recyclability of materials | – | ??? | High |
| Disposal complexity (post-demolition) | – | ??? | Low (inert) |
| Environmental impact of solution | High | Medium | Very low |
| TECHNICAL ASPECT | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| CHARACTERISTICS | BARE WALL | SOLUTION WITH SYNTHETIC MATERIALS | SOLUTION WITH SANAWARME |
| Solution Complexity | – | High | Low |
| Material durability | – | ??? | High |
| Solution durability | – | ??? | High |
| Fire resistance | – | No | Yes |
| Thermal inertia | – | Low | High |
| Possibility of use for both interior and exterior | – | Generally No | Yes |
| Suitability for thermal bridges | – | Yes | Yes |
| Mechanical strength | – | Very low | Medium |
| Legal certification | – | ??? | Yes |
| CONSTRUCTION ASPECT | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| CHARACTERISTICS | BARE WALL | SOLUTION WITH SYNTHETIC MATERIALS | SOLUTION WITH SANAWARME |
| Construction times | – | Medium-Low | Medium-Low |
| Waiting times | High | Low | High |
| Ease of implementation | – | ? | High |
| Application method | – | Manual only | Manual or mechanical |
| Material availability | – | High? | High |
| Safety during installation | – | High? | High |
| Number of materials used | – | High? | Low |
| Compatibility of materials used | – | ??? | Very High |
| Need for additional plaster | Yes (traditional) | Yes (specific) | No |
| Workability post-application | – | Very low | High (= 1h) |
| Probability of discontinuities | – | Medium | Very Low |
| Operator competence | Medium | High | Medium |