Not signed in (Sign In to the Green Building Forum)
Categories
- General
- Essential for Newbies
- Building Regulations and Standards
- Commercial build
- Data and monitoring
- Downshifting
- Energy Assessment
- Events and Courses
- Fundamentals
- Green Building Bible
- Green Building magazine
- Green Living
- Heating and cooling
- Housing - New Build
- Housing - Renovation
- Offers and wants
- Politics
- Products
- Renewable Energy
 |
||||
|
Vanilla 1.1.4 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
Welcome to new Forum Visitors
Join the forum now and benefit from discussions with thousands of other green building fans and discounts on Green Building Press publications:: Apply now.
Join the forum now and benefit from discussions with thousands of other green building fans and discounts on Green Building Press publications:: Apply now.
-
- CommentAuthordovecote
- CommentTimeAug 20th 2012
My designer has spec'd kingspan K7 for a new warm roof. Is there any reason not to use TP10 - a cheaper alternative that is maybe not 'quite' as good? -
- CommentAuthorjamesingram
- CommentTimeAug 20th 2012 edited
TP10 thermal conductivity 0.022 - 0.023 W/mK Urethane
K7 thermal conductivity 0.020-0.022 W/mK. phenolic
I guess you're aware of this , so does the suggested thickness achieve the design/required u value.
Are you happy with the U value of the cheaper option ?
Can you increase the thickness of the the TP10 to make up for the difference and still see a cost saving ?
cheers Jim -
- CommentAuthordovecote
- CommentTimeAug 21st 2012
I was thinking that I would keep the thickness the same as that keeps the design of the roof the same (it's an over & between rafter one) and take what appears to be a slight hit on the U value for what appears to be a significant saving.
The loss in U value seems to be from 0.16 with K7 to 0.18 with TP10.
It seems such an obvious choice to make - so I can't help thinking I have missed somthing. -
- CommentAuthorjamesingram
- CommentTimeAug 21st 2012 edited
Seems the closer you want to get to 0.15 and below , the more you get hit by the old law of deminishing returns and exponential costs . I'm still not sure if it's worth the additional cost and effort
Personally in your posistion I'd go for the TP10 ( and shop around for a similar cheaper brand) -
- CommentAuthorborpin
- CommentTimeAug 21st 2012
Posted By: dovecoteMy designer has spec'd kingspan K7 for a new warm roof. Is there any reason not to use TP10 - a cheaper alternative that is maybe not 'quite' as good?
Would appear you are not comparing the same types of insulation. I have used a 'generic' PIR insulation at about 2/3 price of brand name and I am sure it comes from the same factory! -
- CommentAuthorGreenPaddy
- CommentTimeAug 22nd 2012
dovecote,
probably telling you something you already know, but just ensure the reduction in insulation has been taken into account in your heatloss calcs (hence heat input figures - rads/UFH sizing). I work with Scottish Regs which are a bit tougher than in England, but does 0.18W/m2K pass regs for an extension pitch roof?
Just my personal view, but whilst you have the chance, add a bit more insulation of the cheaper stuff. Looks like you're at about 150mm. Add another 20 or 30mm (or more)? Wouldn't change the detailing at the roof that much I'd guess?
Have you tried secondsandco dot co dot uk? They do offer a good saving on kingspan and other named boards, just because there might be a little discrepency in thickness, or mis-aligned printing. Be a little careful with some cheaper brands, as I've sometimes come across large air bubbles as I've cut them, or even obvious bubbles under the foil surfaces - what does that do to lambda values?
1 to 6 of 6
