Live from—wait, is that a 3′ x 4′ concrete panel? Lately, Thermal Mass and Buoyancy Ventilation Research Project Team has been delving into the interior of the test buildings. Inside, Wood and concrete thermal mass line the walls of the test buildings. The thermal masses thickness and surface area are optimally proportioned based on the thermal properties of the materials, size of the room, and ventilation required. This proportioning makes the whole passive temperature and ventilation control strategy tick. Therefore, the TMBVRP team must figure out an elegant solution for hanging the thermal mass to create a beautiful interior which also operates optimally. Let’s take a look at how they are tackling this task. Hint: it involves very big concrete panels …
Typically, designers think of concrete as the go-to material used in passive thermal mass strategies. This is why the TMBVRP team is testing it in the Testing Buildings alongside the more surprising material; Southern Yellow Pine. If you remember from previous posts when the materials are proportioned properly using the Optimal Tuning Strategy they can be equally effective at cooling and creating buoyancy ventilation cycles.
However, when it comes to hanging the two materials on the SIPs walls, Pine is obviously much more straight forward. The pine boards attach to the SIPs panel walls with a simple screw. Well, multiple simple screws. On the other hand, the team will have to get much more creative to secure the concrete panels.
To start, the team tested two strategies hanging concrete panels; masonry anchors and cone form ties. First, they cast the masonry anchors and cone form ties into two 12″ x 12″ concrete panels. Similar to the panels in the Concrete Test Box in size, but different in the attachment system as the security of the panels in the test box is far less crucial as no one will be sleeping in it. Both test panels are attached at all four corners to shear walls in the Red Barn.
Masonry anchors are fluted plastic chambers that adhere to the concrete and are screwed through tp attach concrete to wall. They allow for a connection point that looks as if the screw passes directly through the concrete. However, for the sake of durability, the team would include a washer in this scheme to keep the screw from bearing into the concrete.
Likewise, the cone form ties act the same as the masonry anchor, but are larger in diameter and thickness. Also, they are able to set into the concrete to create a nice reveal. While the team liked the effect of this reveal, team collaborator Professor Salmaan Craig revealed a possible hurdle for the experiment. Revealing edges at the attachment points could slightly disturb the direction of heat transfer. The direction of heat transfer is integral to the strategy which is why the panels are insulated on the back. And, while this is a very small area that could be affected it is multiplied enormously by the number of panels and screws. We call this problem, fastener effect loss. Fastener effect loss assumes, very conservatively, that the small area around the reveal is ineffective to the system.
Next, the team ran the numbers and if all the panels were 12″ x 12″ with four form ties each, 6% of the thermal mass would be lost to faster effect. Now, that’s not bad at all for a real building, and again that’s an extremely conservative estimate. However, for an experiment establishing the most ideal situation for a small building, 6% is not negligible enough. Going forward, if the team prefers the cone form ties, they will need to lessen the amount of panels therefore lessening the number of form ties. Fewer form ties means less fastener effect loss. Fewer form ties also means bigger panels. The team sketched out many different possible panel arrangements but decided they needed to test just how large they could cast a concrete panel. Above on the far right, you will see their biggest panel possible design. This design consists of 3′ x 4′ panels in a running bond pattern.
Next, Jeff and Rowe got to work creating the panels for biggest panel possible design. The estimated weight for these panels is 200 lbs. While this is fairly difficultl for construction, the size of panel cuts down on the number of panels needed from 128 to 39. So while it may be hard to lift, the team would have to make far fewer panels. And the fastener effect loss shrinks exponentially as the design goes from using over 500 screws and form ties to under 200. The question still remains, however, will the panels crack at this size?
To address the issue of cracking concrete panels, the team tested two different mixes for their large panels. If you remember from their blog post on concrete thermal property testing, the team obtained the thermal property data from three different standard concrete mixes. They ended up using the Quikrete Pro-Finsh for the Concrete Test Box, but thought for the large panels they should also try the Quikrete Fiber-reinforced mix. The fiber-reinforced mix is increased in structural integrity which will be beneficial for larger panels by reducing possible cracking. Jeff and Rowe built two form works to test both mixes at the 3′ x 4′ panel size.
Look at that! Both the fiber-reinforced and smooth finish concrete mixes came out great! Very smooth with zero cracks, but very heavy. Above you see the fiber-reinforced panel which turned out just as good as the professional finish and would be much stronger. This does not mean that the team will be using the enormous panels, most likely they will cut them in half. However, the team now knows their largest limit on size is possible. The team will continue to weigh their options between attachment method, panel size, and panel arrangements as they solidify their design. Keep tuning in to see where these crazy kids and their crazy concrete end up!