[GSBN] R value export straw blocks?

Tue Jan 27 12:31:00 UTC 2015

I heard that Bruce! 

I am willing to try to take on that challenge. As I noted earlier, this thread began only 3 days after I had my first meeting with the local folks that make the high-density bales. Just the extra little shove I needed to keep pursuing it. I am meeting with my supervisor when he returns from leave in Feb to discuss details. Any info any of you have on hand (links, pdf, etc) of previous research or testing in this area (published or otherwise so long as good science) would be hugely appreciated.  Feel free to send directly to me. 

Ideal density is an interesting intellectual exercise; however, does this really have a practical application? How many home builders would have access to custom tensioned bales? An argument for bale building is that the material is common, easily available, locally sourced (ideally) and otherwise waste material. IMHO determining an optimal density for a bale and then believing that is what we should use for building may be asking for a bale that doesn't exist in real-world situations. That of course leads one to think further outside the box (or bale) to other materials that may possess some of the positive qualities of bales yet perform better (Stak Blocks perhaps)........ at that point, we have added manufacturing and transport to the equation.........

Thanks,
Enga

enga at thelokeys.net

On 27/01/2015, at 7:27 AM, Bruce EBNet wrote:

> 
> Graeme (et al) —
> 
> Be sure to read John Straube’s extensive reply on this thread, like “Cellulose, rockwool, fiberglass and expanded polystyrene all increase their R-value as density increases from very low levels All have an optimal point, which varies slightly, and then the R-value drops again.”.
> 
> John surely knows more than I, but it’s easy to imagine that a per-inch R-value for an insulation material will be a function of several things, such as:
> - the conductance of the material itself (as opposed to the fluffy insulation product), e.g., the solid wall of the straw vs. a tube-shaped single straw vs. a straw bale — three very different things
> - the size of the captured air pockets:
> 	- how much do they vary?
> 	- how much do they interconnect?
> 	- what is the average size? ( can there be convection cycles within them?
> 	- and probably other things
> 
> Everybody make a mental note:  the next time some student asks what straw bale subject needs further research, this is it:  what is optimal density for optimal thermal resistance?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bruce King
> 
> (415) 987-7271
> BuildWellLibrary.org
> 
> <BWL logo for email.jpg>
> 
>> On Jan 26, 2015, at 12:06 PM, Graeme North <graeme at ecodesign.co.nz> wrote:
>> 
>> Bruce
>> 
>> Interesting
>> 
>> My observation of R values of different materials over many years , (esp with earthen materials  mixed with  aggregates of different densities ranging from stone to straw), generally points to an almost linear and direct inverse correlation between density and R value, whereby R value increases as density decreases - so am a bit puzzled by this discussion
>> Unless the  k value for straw is significantly better than that of still air?
>> And is there really any significant convective flow of air within a straw bale, plastered or not? 
>> Has anyone got any figures?
>> 
>> More questions than answers
>> 
>> 
>> Graeme    
>> 
>> 
>> On 25/01/2015, at 12:43 PM, Bruce EBNet <bruce at ecobuildnetwork.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> Let me jump right in with a couple of things to add to Martin’s post:
>>> 
>>> 1)  I have been a board member and partial owner of Stak Block for ten years, so speak with a bit of certainty when I basically agree with Martin;  the thermal tests were a bit funky (an undergrad engineering student doing his first unguarded hot plate test at Cal Polytechnic University in California).  I emphatically agree that we don’t know, and would like to know, the optimal density of a straw bale (or block) for insulating purposes.  My gut sense is that it will be denser than conventional bales, maybe even as dense as Peter’s super-compressed bales.
>>> 
>>> 2)  The widely-accepted R-values Martin quotes are averaged values taken across a plastered bale section, including the thickness of plaster.  A plastered straw bale wall is an intricate composite assembly that achieves far better structural, fire and thermal properties than the sum of its constituent parts.  That is, a straw bale by itself probably has much less than R1.3 or 2 as described because there is no plaster to arrest convective air flow across the assembly.
>>> 
>>> 3)  When we ran the straw bale research program 14 years ago we did look at super compressed bales, but only glancingly.  If someone contemplates using them in a building, they should consider not only R-value, but also bond of plaster to the face of straw (is it better?  worse?).
>>> 
>>> cheers everyone,
>>> 
>>> Bruce King
>>> 
>>> (415) 987-7271
>>> BuildWellLibrary.org
>>> 
>>> <BWL logo for email.jpg>
>>> 
>>>> On Jan 24, 2015, at 3:12 PM, martin hammer <mfhammer at pacbell.net> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hello Lance,
>>>> 
>>>> A delayed reply on this.
>>>> 
>>>> A company in California called Oryzatech (http://www.oryzatech.com/) has for years been in the development of manufacturing a compressed straw block called Stak Block (see attached fact sheet). They have made claims of an R-value of 3.89/inch (see 2nd attachment). I like this product in many ways and think it has tremendous potential. However I’m skeptical of the R-value claim because I haven’t seen a bona fide testing report, and it’s hard to believe the R-value of a compressed straw block would double compared to a typical straw bale. 
>>>> 
>>>> The R-value for a straw bale, from the most trusted test in the US (the 1998 guarded hot-box test at Oak Ridge National Laboratory) is R 1.3/inch laid flat and R-2/inch on-edge. This is still a matter of debate, but this is what the testing showed. The difference in R-value per inch is explained by the predominant orientation of the straw in a bale (or at least in the bales tested). 
>>>> 
>>>> Though counterintuitive, it’s possible a compressed bale would have a higher unit R-value than a normal bale, if by being compressed it confines more air spaces. Thermal resistance is all about maximizing the number of confined air spaces and reducing thermal bridging. Regarding the latter, I would expect the thermal bridging across a bale would increase when it is compressed. There is likely an optimum density for straw that will yield the highest unit R-value, but this has yet to be researched and demonstrated.
>>>> 
>>>> Another point of thermal resistance comparison is polyiscocyanurate, which has the highest unit R-value of any foam plastic insulation at R 5.6/inch. For years polyiso claimed an R-value of 6.0/inch (or higher), but it was adjusted downward a year ago under new testing protocol. (Sorry to bring a distasteful petrochemical insulation into the discussion of natural insulation! It does have quite an ability to insulate however.) Fiberglass insulation is said to be R3.1 to R4/inch (material only, not including thermal bridging of framing).
>>>> 
>>>> Regarding density, from the Stak Block fact sheet, the 1’x1’x2’ blocks weigh 30 pounds. So they are 15 pcf or 240 kg/m3. Peter’s compressed bales are 468 kg/m3. Those are quite dense, almost twice as dense as the Stak Blocks, and 4 times as dense as a typical straw bale. Even if you trust the R-values I’m stating for a typical straw bale and for a Stak Block, I don’t know how you would reliably extrapolate them to a denser block. The obvious answer is to subject Peter’s blocks to a reliable test.
>>>> 
>>>> You or Peter Torok might contact the co-founder of the company Stak Block to better understand nature of their blocks and their tested thermal resistance.  Ben Korman: d2bdesign at gmail.com
>>>> 
>>>> Speaking of Peter, was he ever seconded and brought into GSBN?
>>>> 
>>>> I hope this is helpful.
>>>> 
>>>> Best.
>>>> 
>>>> Martin
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Martin Hammer, Architect
>>>> 1348 Hopkins St.
>>>> Berkeley, CA  94702
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 1/1/15 7:41 PM, "Lance Kairl" <sabale at bigpond.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Any one have  an idea on R value for super compressed export Bales.
>>>>>  
>>>>> Any info will be passed on ,
>>>>> Although I should nominate Peter  to join the list.
>>>>> Is there a seconder out there, and then I will fill you in on his good works.
>>>>>  
>>>>> Regards lance kairl
>>>>> Hosue of Bales.
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> From: Peter Torok [mailto:torokenterprise at me.com] 
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, 11 December 2014 1:13 PM
>>>>> To: House of Bales
>>>>> Subject: R value
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> G'day lance, 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> As discussed these bales are very well compacted, the dimensions are 400x500x480 45kg or 400x500x240 22kg baled at less than 12% moisture and compressed at 5000 psi. If the bales were sitting on the 400 side, the straw runs horizontal. I inquired about lowering the pressure and he felt the integrity of the bale would be jeopardized, but more pressure can still be applied. I hope that is enough information to calculate a rough R value for both thickness', I look forward to hearing what you come up with. Thanks for helping me out with this, it's very much appreciated.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I have found old studies from around 2003 that calculate between R1.4-2.4 US measure / inch
>>>>> 
>>>>> This R1.4 – 2.4 relates to standard housing bales,
>>>>> Export ones may equate to the R value  for Timber??
>>>>> 
>>>>> Regards Pete Torok
>>>>> 
>>>>> Earth Wood & Straw
>>>>> 
>>>>> 0411 304 794 <tel:0411%20304%20794> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> GSBN mailing list
>>>>> GSBN at sustainablesources.com
>>>>> http://sustainablesources.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/GSBN
>>>> <StakBlockFacts.png><StakBlockR-Value.png>_______________________________________________
>>>> GSBN mailing list
>>>> GSBN at sustainablesources.com
>>>> http://sustainablesources.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/GSBN
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GSBN mailing list
>>> GSBN at sustainablesources.com
>>> http://sustainablesources.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/GSBN
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> GSBN mailing list
>> GSBN at sustainablesources.com
>> http://sustainablesources.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/GSBN
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GSBN mailing list
> GSBN at sustainablesources.com
> http://sustainablesources.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/GSBN

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sustainablesources.com/pipermail/gsbn/attachments/20150127/fb4ee810/attachment.htm>