|
The gov't lab at Oak Ridge came out with a report awhile back after examining insulation placement. They confirmed my assumptions. I use mass, much more than you're considering, for almost all of our heating/cooling needs. The system I adapted is called Passive Annual Heat Storage (book came out in 1983). Mass, properly used, will help immensely in making a house comfortable. Ever talk to someone living in a log house? They generally tell me how well insulated the house is. Well, that's almost always wrong. Comfortable, yes, well insulated, almost never. It's mass working there. Slow to heat up, slow to cool down. Ours takes half a year to heat up, half a year to cool down. Annual storage, which requires a LOT more mass than you asked about. If you put insulation between the mass and your interior, you lose a lot of the benefit of the mass. That's what Oak Ridge determined too. But as I said, I still recommend ICFs over most other choices. R value is the total of the parts. 2" foam, 6" concrete, plus 2" foam. Total will depend a great deal on the foam, XPS or EPS. R26 is not an ususual claim. Anybody who claims R50 lies, or has foam I haven't seen. With the mass, the wall can have lower R and still be as comfortable as a low-mass, but better insulated, wall. Then there's infiltration to consider. Concrete's pretty immune. We live in a 4166 degree-day climate. Madison is 7863, Milwaukee 7635. I use 2" of XPS on our exteriors. I'd use more there. Only by doing a total heat loss calculation can you really know what the benefit of additional insulation might be. Plumb and straight are what the bracing does. Absolutely necessary. Not unusual for a novice user to assume you can drop the mud straight down and that there's no need for bracing. That's the guy who's frantically looking for shoring lumber from anybody in the neighborhood so he can finish his pour. This is a LOT more than anybody else where probably wanted, so if you really want to hear more, I suggest it go off-list.
|