Facts about everything. Insulate the ceiling of a bathhouse - the old way. Houses made of straw
Looking a little into the past, you can see that our ancestors were masters in insulating their homes. Now there are many companies that will provide you with individual heating for a private house or apartment, but what was your first experience with insulation? At first, animal skins were used, and more recently late times they began to use fabric and frescoes, which also served to decorate the walls. Soon wall coverings turned into a whole form of art, and animal skins on the floor were replaced by soft and warm carpets, which were later used to insulate even the walls.
Insulation of houses in Rus'
Wood was the main building material in Rus'. Every owner always knew how much material and firewood was needed to heat a new house, because in ancient times they used a large Russian stove to heat rooms. Even during construction, our ancestors thought about thermal protection: they selected the thickness of the logs, installed double window frames, insulated attic floor. Nowadays, many people have forced ventilation in their homes, but in ancient times there were practically no problems with ventilating the room.
In winter, the house served not only the owners, but also became a shelter for livestock. The stove prevented anyone from freezing, and the warmth of the animals was used as an additional source of heating. But, of course, this was a necessary measure. The correct layout of the house also insulated the room, protecting it from cold northern winds. In the walls that were directed to the north, windows and doors were made only in extreme cases. The stove was located near the most cold wall to keep the hut from getting cold. The windows were directed to the south so that the sun's rays would fall into the house longer. These tricks helped our ancestors insulate their houses without extra costs.
Real estate and electricity prices are growing steadily. Construction corporations and ordinary people who want to build their own home are forced to look for ways to reduce the cost of providing heat to their premises.
- one of best options decisions. To tell the truth, this is not a new thing at all. This technology has long been used by our ancestors. It was first remembered in Europe and the USA, when the issue of thermal efficiency of houses became an issue. You should not naively assume that a house made of straw will fall apart at any moment, as in the fairy tale about the three little pigs. Thanks to special technologies, such a house will last a hundred years to the delight of its owners.
In America, for example, straw houses have been built since the mid-19th century. This began because straw was a widely available material, but wood was in short supply. As soon as pressing machines were invented, building houses from straw became popular. After new construction technologies(mid-20th century) they forgot about straw, but not for long. The environmental crisis and concern for their health have prompted people to revive such construction.
has a number of advantages listed below:
- Excellent thermal insulation.
- Relative speed of construction.
- Cheap straw.
- Quite good sound insulation.
- Ecologically pure material- does not harm health.
If technology is not followed insulating a house with straw the following consequences may occur:
- Straw rotting at a moisture content of more than 20%. It is necessary to strictly monitor during construction to ensure that the straw is dry.
- Fire is very dangerous during construction. The straw blocks themselves, pressed using special technology, are resistant to fire. But, during the construction process there should be no fire on the site (even smoking is prohibited), because A few tufts of straw on the floor can cause a large fire.
- Risk of rodents settling in straw walls. To avoid such troubles, experts advise using rice or rye straw, which mice do not feed on.
- Although it is not expensive to build houses from straw, you must immediately have the funds for the complete construction, taking into account the interior and exterior decoration. Such construction cannot be “frozen” and continued in a year or two.
Where to begin insulating your house with straw? First you need to purchase compressed straw blocks. It is very important that the pressing is strong and of high quality (otherwise there will be risks of fire). Next, the blocks are placed between the frame posts. Straw blocks are fastened with rods (both metal and wood can be used). The next stage of insulating a house with straw is processing the straw. As a rule, a clay-lime solution or a mixture of clay and water is used. It should be applied in several layers.
Drywall covers the inside of the wall. There are many options for exterior finishing. The lining looks good. Thanks to frame technology a wall insulated with straw is quite resistant even to hurricane winds.
If the walls of the house are made of straw, then the roof cannot be constructed from strong heavy materials. To prevent rain and snow from falling on the walls in large quantities, they usually make a cornice with a margin (at least 50 cm).
The positive thing about building walls from straw is that the foundation does not have to be massive, which speeds up and reduces the cost of the construction process.
In addition to the obvious environmental benefits, insulation of walls with straw is cost effective. Brick house with the same level of comfort it usually costs twice as much. Wood prices are also constantly rising, due to insufficient regeneration of the Earth's forest reserves. Straw, in fact, is a waste product that often rots. The price of straw bales mainly consists of the cost of baling the straw. The cost of the material is scanty. It’s worth thinking about why, despite a number of advantages, straw houses have not replaced other construction? The answer is simply simple - it is not profitable for someone, namely corporations that produce expensive building materials. So, before enriching someone's pockets, you should study the pros and cons in detail. And choose a house made of straw!
Our ancestors built nice houses that were warm in the long winter and cool in the summer. However, they did not know the abstruse words “energy efficiency”, “passive house”, “heat-saving technology”. Vladimir Kazarin tells why the Russian hut, built with common sense and some secrets, was and in many ways remains the best house in terms of energy efficiency.
The topic of energy-efficient housing construction is becoming increasingly widespread, and new projects of energy-efficient, passive, or heat-saving houses and technologies are increasingly appearing.
In some projects, they rely on effective insulation and increasing the thermal resistance of walls, in others they add competent orientation to the cardinal points, in many projects alternative energy sources are used...
There are many projects, and even more people want to build you such houses, simply because it is usually very expensive. The high cost of construction is usually justified by the reduction in operating costs afterwards. This is usually the fault of sellers. effective insulation materials promising savings on heating by three or even five times, and sometimes even more. They promise, but in practice, “for some reason” it is not possible to achieve any significant savings even on heating.
Many projects, many materials, many technologies, many approaches. How to understand all this, to find a rational grain? How to understand what will be truly energy efficient, and what is just a senseless waste of money, effort, and resources?
When we talk about the energy efficiency of a house, we should understand that we are talking not only about operational energy costs, but also about energy costs for the extraction and production of building materials, for the construction itself, and for disposal after the house has already served its purpose.
Often we are not interested in energy costs for the extraction of raw materials and the production of building materials, but simply in their cost. These numbers should be directly related to each other, but this is not always the case. And would you agree to pay for the restoration of the biosphere on the site of, for example, an old quarry? Do manufacturers include this in the cost of building materials?
Let's focus on the issue of operating costs, heat saving, and along the way we will pay attention to other energy costs. Of course, the range of questions should be much wider, but for now let’s concentrate on this.
So. Heat saving.
The first thing that comes to mind, and what needs to be dealt with first, is the question of insulating the walls of the house. Often this is what is considered the most important and they even think that if you make the walls twice “warmer”, then you can save half on heating. What is “right” and what is “wrong” here:
Firstly, heat loss through the walls is only ten to twenty% of the total heat loss of the house, because... There are also heat losses:
through the roof, which is often twice as much as through the walls;
through windows, as a rule, here more than through walls;
with ventilation, and here, as a rule, for modern houses heat loss is also greater than through the walls;
through doors;
through the floor and foundation;
Well, and a couple more not very significant ones, such as heating water flowing into the sewer.
those. By additionally insulating the walls, we will save some percentage of this 10-20%. And that's all!
And how much is “some”? But this is even more interesting:
The fact is that the value of the thermal resistance of the wall (reduced heat transfer resistance - R) and heat loss through this wall are in a hyperbolic and NOT in direct dependence. Those. As R increases, heat loss decreases disproportionately.
Example: the difference in the amount of heat loss from a wall made of a 50 mm board and a 100 mm beam will be two times different, and if you further increase the thickness of the wall - up to 200 mm, then the heat loss will decrease not by two, but by one and a half times. If you further increase the thickness of the wall from 200mm to 300mm, then heat loss will decrease by only 16%; a further increase in the thickness of the wall, or insulating it with anything else, will give an even more modest result.
And if you consider that heat loss through the walls is only 10-20% of the total heat loss of the house, then there is no talk of any significant heat savings here.
If, for example, you insulate the walls of an ordinary log hut from ordinary logs, then “on firewood” you will save 1.5-2%. Such insulation will pay for itself longer than the deadline insulation services, i.e. WILL NEVER PAY OFF.
And with some insulation options, the log house can rot in a couple of years.
Now, if a seller of “efficient insulation” promises you savings on heating by three to five times, or even 30-50%, you know who he is taking you for. And he knows what he’s doing - after all, since childhood, we all want to believe in fairy tales.
This graph shows how they are trying to scam us all. With the advent of new “energy-saving” SNIPs, people began to save very modest percentages on heating, but sales volumes of mineral wool and foam plastics increased tens (if not hundreds) of times.
And the standards for insulation from supporters of the “passive house” idea went even further. :) But this is due to European hysteria from almost zero energy supply (no firewood, no gas) and the lack of “northern” traditions (and, therefore, understanding).
That’s why they didn’t try to make excessively thick walls in our cold climate.
In fairness, it should be noted that even if a hut was cut from thin logs, it was only out of hopelessness. Optimal thickness wooden walls 30+-10cm.
If earlier someone in Rus' had tried to build from excessively thick logs, “to make it warmer” (there were meters tall trees at that time), it would not have been perceived otherwise as “a bad head does not give rest to the hands.”
What if someone in Rus' followed modern European standards for energy-efficient housing - R=10! - and tried to cut down walls from the corresponding trees, and there were such trees - such a “smart guy” would probably have been unanimously removed from making any decisions by the entire village as mentally incompetent. :)
By the way, the production of wall materials - logs - and its disposal do not pose a problem. Just as there are no problems with other natural local materials. With concrete and stone it is more difficult. I don’t really want to leave my grandchildren having to dispose of a pile of rubble somewhere. And with synthetic materials, especially those whose service life is not the longest, it’s completely sad.
Of course, if you get these % heat savings on everything, on the walls, ceiling, roof, windows, floor, foundation, ventilation, then the savings will already be noticeable. This is what it is based on A complex approach. Let’s take this into service too, it’s a must. It would be even better to find solutions that increase thermal efficiency not by 1.5-2%, but by 1.5-2 times.
There are an endless number of solutions offered by different authors, different companies, that SEEM to be effective. And there are solutions, honed by practice, proven, that REALLY provide significant savings in “wood” at adequate costs.
How to figure all this out?
You can, of course, try to study all existing projects that are energy efficient, passive, etc. homes, and take the best from everywhere. But even in order to simply evaluate which of this is really the best, and which is just another beautiful advertisement, you need to start from something, rely on something.
And it would be best to take as a basis one well-known “project”, an ordinary, traditional, Russian hut, really tested in our climate, take it apart piece by piece, understand how it works, and on the basis of this all that remains is to compare what is better and what is not worse.
What's worse is to throw it away; What's better is to add.
IZBA
WALLS
We've already sorted out the thickness.
The hut, as a rule, has only two walls facing directly onto the street - with windows, they cannot be blocked. The other two are reliably protected from blizzards and cold by a thermal vestibule. On the one hand, from the entrance, there is a senki, on the other, there is a household part (yard, stable, closet...).
There is no need to explain how effective the vestibule is in our climate.
These solutions are really effective, and from the point of view. heat saving and with t.z. reducing all other energy costs, including energy costs for “cleaning the path to get to the barn” - the yard and outbuildings are built close to the hut, under one roof.
The walls of the hut do not necessarily have to be made of logs.
Where stone was available and wood was in short supply, stone ones were also built.
Hut huts were built in treeless areas
Huts, like all traditional dwellings, were built from local available materials.
A log house is only one way to build the walls of a hut, but not the hut itself. Today, even professional builders often do not understand the difference.
Wood was the most common material, and despite the fact that we have lost many of the “secrets,” log houses are still relevant today.
But a log house has many features that you may not be ready for. The log house shrinks and cracks (especially if it is prepared incorrectly, cut and dried), seams are not allowed! seal, and many other small issues. And there are fewer and fewer smart craftsmen.
And you need to take into account one more point if you have chosen wood: the environmental friendliness of wood and inter-crown tow is beyond doubt, but very few people today are ready to give up wood processing. And this shifts the question of the environmental friendliness of wood to the question of the environmental friendliness of what it will ultimately be processed with. 
And the prices for a “correct” log house are sometimes several times higher than, for example, for a box made of gas silicate.
By the way, the Hut can also be built from gas silicate. Nobody forbids it.
Heat loss through the CEILING AND ROOF
With a roof, with a traditional roof for Rus' and what they do today - there is even more interesting stuff.
Not everyone pays attention to this, but the area of the walls and the area of the ceiling are usually approximately the same, and the temperature under the ceiling is higher, so heat loss through the ceiling is higher than through the walls. The greater the temperature difference, the greater the heat loss, and there is a direct relationship here!
And what kind of roofs were traditionally made for huts in Russia, and for palaces too?
Firstly, all roofs were made with a cold attic, and the attic floor was insulated. You can insulate the ceiling in this scheme with anything - sawdust, earth, fallen leaves, hay, or even seed husks - and all these insulation materials are no less effective than modern mineral wool and polystyrene foam, but absolutely environmentally friendly and free. And roofs protected from precipitation are practically eternal. Even if there was a need to add additional insulation, or simply stir up the caked insulation, then doing this in the attic is not a problem at all.
Secondly, the roofs were made low enough so that they could be easily repaired if necessary, and so that snow would lie on them. Snow is an even more effective insulation material, which falls completely free of charge where it is needed, then where it is needed, is absolutely environmentally friendly and is not subject to aging. It would be a sin to refuse such gifts from nature. :)
True, such insulation only works at subzero temperatures... Well, so be it. From +25 under the ceiling to -0 we insulate with “husks from seeds”, in the attic 0 or a slight minus, and from zero to -40 snow insulates. Everything is brilliant.
The chopped gables of the hut are not accidental; in order for the attic to function as a full-fledged thermal vestibule, the gables must be warm.
Snow insulates only from above.
The roof overhangs of the northern hut are made quite large, up to two meters, this not only protects the walls and base from precipitation, but also protects from the high, hot summer sun.
Dormer windows allow you to effectively ventilate the attic.
This is necessary not only to dry it, or what is drying on it, if necessary, but also to protect the hut from the summer heat. The heat from the roof heated by the sun is simply blown away by the draft.
In a good hut, even in the hottest weather, air conditioning is not needed.
Another point related to the cold attic, entryway and door.
The house also loses heat through the doors. Yes, the thermal vestibule helps, but there is another simple and ingenious traditional solution. Where does the heat coming from open door huts? That's right - with warm air through the siding into the attic. This heat helps keep the attic 0 and reduces heat loss through the ceiling. As a result, the heat remains in the hut!
The ceiling in the senki was not insulated and did not make it dense, and the hatch to the attic always remained open so that warm air that came out of the hut freely spread throughout the entire volume without condensing anywhere and without creating any problems. The attic of a traditional Russian hut is always dry.
Another type of heat loss that was easily mastered in a hut is heat loss through a chimney (aka ventilation) pipe. On the floor of the attic, the pipe had (somewhere still preserved) a horizontal section called a borovok (hog, lounger), in addition to many purely constructive tasks: transferring the mass of the pipe from the stove to the beam, moving the pipe closer to the ridge, the possibility of inspection, the possibility of separate repair of the pipe and stove, the boletus took some of the heat from the escaping smoke and slightly heated the attic every time the stove in the hut was lit.
Of course, the southern mud hut is different from the northern hut. Due to the fact that there were no such frosts here, the general layout, materials and even the slope of the roof changed. The roof was no longer supposed to hold snow (of which there was almost none), but it insulated just as well.
And what about mansard roofs, roofs invented for the poor French, which became fashionable here in the early nineties with the easy suggestion of Comrade. Mansara?
And everything is quite simple: the ceiling and the roof are practically the same thing. Let's compare? Heat loss through the ceiling in the hut is proportional to the temperature difference from +25 to 0, i.e. 25 degrees, and through the “ceiling” of the attic is proportional to the difference from the same +25, to... what is on the street. Those. the twofold difference is a reality. This is roughly what usually happens.
And if there are also windows in this roof... windows that are not only expensive (or unreliable) and through which heat escapes in winter, but also in summer they turn this attic into a real greenhouse.
Air conditioning costs must be added to operating costs.
Yes, a ventilation duct under the roof is a mini-semblance of an attic, but in practice this “semblance” does not work, to put it mildly, far from what we would like. Often, the heat from the house melts the snow in winter, it turns into ice, destroys the roofing material in a couple of years, snowdrifts periodically slide off the roof (it’s good if you guessed the roof slopes should be oriented away from people), in winter it is usually cold in this residential attic, and in summer hot. More or less comfortable conditions can only be created using add-ons. equipment: additional heaters, humidifiers, and in summer a constantly running air conditioner.
It was even luckier if the builders were more experienced and persuaded the customer to immediately spend more money on “ the right pie", which in cost turned out to be comparable to the construction of a full floor with a regular roof, but at least the air conditioner does not constantly plow in the summer, and the roof does not ice up.
It is worth immediately considering other aspects of energy efficiency.
Compare: the extraction of raw materials and the production of effective insulation materials such as mineral wool and polystyrene foam - against - sawdust, earth, seed husks! By the way, in the Saratov region, the husk was actually often used. The difference is obvious, but the service life of modern slab insulation (it is problematic to insulate an attic with anything else), to put it mildly, is limited.
Operating costs:
In addition to the costs of heating and air conditioning, you also need to consider maintainability. Most likely in years... when this question arises, those builders will no longer be around, and you really won’t like dismantling the ceiling in the bedroom.
Cold attics were built not only over huts, but also over palaces.
This is the attic of the Winter Palace. Here, not only and not so much the issues of heat conservation become clear, but the issues of other operating costs, in particular the maintenance of rafters and roofing.
“The engineering condition of each sector was controlled by a non-commissioned officer and three craftsmen (a blacksmith, a mechanic, a roofer). The entire roof was constantly maintained by 16 people.”
“Every month, from year to year, one of the Bau adjutants, who was responsible for the safe condition of all metal structures palace, compiled a report...
According to the standards of that time, it was prescribed to paint the roof once every three years, not only from the outside, but also from the inside.”
Of course the idea is to do Winter attic in this light it looks like complete nonsense; maintaining such a roof would not only be prohibitively expensive, but also practically impossible.
But modern roofs and palaces and houses also require maintenance...
Heat loss through the FLOOR and FOUNDATION
How foundations are made today:
“classic”: they dig a trench to the freezing depth (sometimes they save money and bury less), pour sand into it (it’s like a non-heaving base), fill it with concrete grades no lower than m200, and attach a concrete blind area to this concrete.
What's wrong":
Firstly; the freezing depth is indicated for soil, and not for concrete, the freezing depth of concrete, as you understand, is greater;
secondly: the “non-heaving base” - sand, is located inside a clay trench - i.e. This is a bathtub with sand, into which, if you pour it, water will also fit, and a lot of it - up to 20% of the volume. What do you think will happen when the concrete freezes to it? If the house is very heavy, then it may not lift it, but sand with ice still expands, and if not upward, then to the sides, and when it thaws, back... And so on year after year. The house will stand for some years, but how long?
Thirdly: concrete blind area It only helps the concrete to freeze, it works like a radiator, which radiates heat from the ground (usually +5 there) to the street, freezing the soil.
fourthly: frost heaving, in addition to pressing from below, presses on the walls of the foundation and tangentially. The force per meter reaches up to 25 tons. This is even more difficult to deal with. Waterproofing the foundation here is more necessary not so that the foundation does not get wet, but so that the soil does not freeze with the foundation.
fifthly: it’s worth calculating the numbers: the concrete grade M200 means its compressive strength is 200 kg/cm2, with a foundation thickness of 50 cm for a house 10 by 10, the bearing area will be at least 200,000 cm2, i.e. this concrete will withstand, attention!, forty thousand tons. If an ordinary stone house weighs one hundred tons, then the strength margin (for compression) will be 400 times! And at the same time it does not guarantee the absence of problems.
But builders can afford it... at your expense.
The total height of the strip foundation (actually walls?) is usually from one and a half to 2 meters and sometimes even more.
What do we have? - the foundation and... some strange space under the house in which you can only crawl on all fours.
But these are already finished (and paid for) walls! What if you take out the soil from there?
There are also pile foundations. In some places they are very good, for example for free-standing unheated buildings, transformer booths, towers, even bridges. And quite effective at low cost.
But how will they behave? residential building, and won’t they drag additional ones along with them? expenses? Customers usually start thinking about this when the piles are already in place. Have you seen houses on thin legs?
These piles still have to be covered with something, which would need to be added to the cost of the foundation, and you have to make a grillage, and not just attach a beam (it won’t hold up over time), but concrete a full-fledged concrete reinforced beam, which itself could easily do without piles act as a foundation.
The main problem with screw piles is their, to put it mildly, limited durability, which directly depends on the materials and technology used.
That's why experienced builders Those who are more intelligent sometimes reveal the secret of the best screw piles:
— the pile must have a diameter of more than 200 mm;
- from of stainless steel;
- full-bodied;
- cast.
P.S. for those who didn’t notice the emoticon and didn’t understand that it was a joke:
- IT'S A JOKE! There is no need to buy such piles! ;)
p.s.s. for those who do not understand what this joke is about: - screw piles in a different design are extremely, catastrophically, short-lived and there is no point in using them for a residential building! Not at all.
And there are slab foundations. With them, the consumption of concrete is greater, but their advantages are also significant. Such a foundation can be made on any, even very weak soil (this is important near cities, where there are no more areas other than swamps. And this slab, in the case of a basement floor, is a finished floor.
There are other types of foundations, but this will suffice for now for comparison.
How did you make the foundation for the hut? (the most common option).
They removed the fertile layer, laid stones, often dry, and placed a log house on it. Outside, and sometimes from inside, they made a mess. All.
And many of these foundations have been standing for more than a hundred years, with minimal investment in materials and construction, they are absolutely repairable, reliable and efficient.
What's the secret?
Firstly: under the fertile layer there is the so-called. continental soil. This is soil that over millions of years has already compacted enough and for the next couple of hundred years it will no longer move or settle (unless you foolishly dig it up, of course). This soil in itself is already a reliable foundation.
Those. It is not at all necessary to bury or drill into this soil, you can simply place it on it.
(Ravines, lowlands and swamps are a special case; such places were never built in Rus'.)
How to check the bearing capacity of the soil? Folk method.
Of course, you can order geological exploration... or
Just stand with one foot on the ground, and if it doesn’t press through, then load bearing capacity sufficient. All. :)
(We are necessarily talking about continental soil (not the fertile layer) and not in a lowland, ravine, swamp. Something else is more important there.)
Geologists will certainly quarrel. :) But let's count:
With what force does the foundation press on the ground? Let’s take a modern house 10-10, the foundation is strip (for a slab the pressure will be less) 50 cm wide, the weight of the house is 100 tons. After calculating, we get 0.5 kg/sq.cm. The numbers in the textbooks are approximately the same, so they were not mistaken.
Now we divide the person’s weight by the area of the foot - we get... the same 0.5 kg/cm2.
For greater confidence, you can stand on your heel. ;)
Secondly: the walls of a log house made of logs are a very deflection-resistant structure. Bridges were also built from logs. And taking into account the stacking of logs with crowns, the strength is even higher. Look eg. what is a Derevyagin beam - two logs connected vertically have a deflection strength not two, but four times greater than one. What if there are ten of these logs? If a couple of stones move, no one will even notice it.
For comparison: the slightest movement or crack in the foundation under stone house will instantly cause a crack to appear in the wall. So you just have to! under stone houses make the foundation so that it works like a full-fledged beam, with a margin of bending strength.
Thirdly: the heap protected the foundation and the soil underneath from freezing. Soil that does not freeze and therefore will not heave. No frost heaving - no problems with the foundation.
Zavalinka (synonym prizba - in a hut, Ukrainian prysba, Belarusian pryzba) - an embankment structure along the outer walls at the base along the perimeter wooden house(baths), serves to protect the building from freezing in winter. The rubble can simply be an earthen mound along the walls. In a more advanced version, it is made of boards, planks (which are sometimes even whitened with lime for beauty) or poles installed at a distance of 30-50 cm from the walls of the house; Sawdust, straw, firewood, slag, peat, and earth (turf) are poured into the formed space. The height of the pile is up to the second crown (row of logs). Wood flooring on top of the heap protects the backfill from moisture penetration and turns the heap into a long and wide bench (bench), on which it is convenient for household members to rest.
The modern analogue of the heap is thermal blind area and insulation of the base.
Fourth: insulated soil, foundation, and log walls the basement kept the heat coming from the ground in the underground. The same one that always gives +5 in caves or cellars. In winter, heat comes from the ground and isolating yourself from it, as is proposed in some projects of “passive” houses, is stupidly irrational.
Heat loss through the floor (and its area is also comparable to the area of the walls), under which it is +5, is significantly lower than if under the floor it was -30 as on the street. Those. if near the floor it is +15, and under the floor +5, then the heat loss will be proportional to 10 degrees, and if under the floor it is -30, as, for example, with pile foundation and a non-insulated base, the difference is 45 degrees, i.e. and heat loss through the floor will be 4.5 times higher. Insulating the floor will help somewhat, but not that much. By the way, the traditional floor of the hut - “floorboards” - is the floor of a log, also quite a lot.
Where else does the heat leave the house?
Through the WINDOWS.
Options various windows Today there is a lot on offer, including: etc. energy-saving, with three, five, seven-chamber profiles, double-glazed windows, with low-emission glass, with vacuum, gas, and absolutely sealed, and with special “valves” for micro-ventilation. For any color and budget.
Of course, all this affects thermal insulation, but to what extent?
Reduced heat transfer resistance per 1 m2 of window:
Double glazing in wooden frames - R=0.42
Triple glazing in wooden frames - R=0.55
Three-layer double-glazed windows in wooden or plastic frames:
from ordinary glass— R=0.52
with hard selective coating internal glass R=0.72
- the same with filling the interglass space with argon R = 0.86
Those. You can spend a lot of money on energy-efficient windows, and they will indeed be twice as warm as regular ones (as long as they retain their properties), but they will still be heat holes in your home.
What was traditionally used in Rus' to reduce heat loss through windows? That's right - shutters. Shutters made of simple boards closed on a winter night have significant heat savings more efficient filling glass unit with argon. The air gap plus a layer of wood almost doubles the thermal resistance, and just in those values where it is most effective. And if you cover the window with a warm curtain at night...
The secret of heat-saving windows is warm curtains and shutters, and not in the stream of plastic profiles and Euro-windows that rushed to us “from somewhere.”
By the way, in Finland, for example, plastic windows They are installed only in sheds, garages, workshops, stables, and in people’s homes - two-frame wooden ones. And you can still buy these from us.
It’s a pity that heat-protective shutters cannot be found during the day with fire. Consumers don’t ask; producers don’t produce.
BAKE
The Russian stove is an absolutely universal structure (stoves are built). It alone replaces the entire heating system for the entire hut: boiler, heat accumulator, radiator, oven, bed and dryer for clothes, mittens... Previously, it was easy to even steam in stoves.
In terms of simplicity of design, efficiency and reliability, nothing equal has yet been invented.
Placing the stove in the center (or slightly closer to the door and north wall) keeps everyone warm and minimizes heat loss through the walls.
The quality of heat is better than radiant heat from clay large oven- there’s nothing either. Yes, heat can be of high quality or low quality. Previously, every peasant understood this, but today we often confuse the concepts of “heat” and “warm air”.
If stove heating is impossible, or simply does not suit you, then you can find an alternative.
The closest analogue of a Russian stove in terms of heat quality could be considered a “warm floor” - a low-temperature radiator large area, but warm, with t.z. health and physiology can be considered a floor with a temperature of 15-18 degrees C., but this is not suitable for heating. And what is hot would be more correctly called a “hot” floor.
Enthusiasts solved the problem of how to make a large-area radiator similar to the RP - they placed a “warm floor” system in the walls!
VENTILATION
heat loss with ventilation is often estimated as the main heat loss of a house - up to 40%.
Therefore, it is quite understandable that many proposals have appeared to reduce heat loss through ventilation. Many types and types of ventilation systems, various equipment.
How was the ventilation arranged in the hut?
Of course from the point of view a modern ventilation specialist - no way. But…
After all, there have never been any problems with ventilation in the hut.
Remember such an integral part of the hut as the floor? Children usually slept there! There, under the ceiling, where all the “already used” air should concentrate, carbon dioxide etc. But no one felt stuffy, otherwise the lodgings would not have been built at all. Anyone who has had the chance to sleep on a bed will confirm this.
In addition to the fact that during each firing of the furnace, all the air was completely replaced with fresh air, it was always possible to open the chimney door, which is usually located just above the breathing zone, and, if necessary, open the doors. Burst ventilation almost instantly replaces all the air in the room with fresh air, which quickly warms up from the stove and walls.
By the way, the most economical and perfect type of ventilation known today - displacement (also not understood by everyone) - was implemented in the hut, and in almost all national homes, without any additional devices.
And there is one more moment! Important!
The hut was never airtight, neither the walls, nor the floor, nor the ceiling.
Of course, the wind did not blow between the logs, but the gases that made up the air easily passed through moss or tow, as well as through a non-vapor-insulated ceiling with loose insulation. And in any direction: carbon dioxide out - oxygen in. There is nothing new here - just the law of equalization of concentrations, which, unfortunately, modern science cannot correctly calculate and measure due to a metrological error.
This is a topic for many more studies, but in practice you can always feel for yourself that in a hut, as in any natural home, “breathing easier.” And it’s very easy to be convinced that the hut, incl. the ceiling (non-vapor barrier), which plays the main role in this, does not suffer from condensation, “dew points”, etc.
No one in the hut needed any special ventilation equipment or services for its installation - everything necessary for effective ventilation The carpenter and stove maker have already done it.
But, in a modern hut, where the air is “spoiled” not only by cooking and breathing, but also by computers, televisions, synthetic materials, it still wouldn’t hurt to think about additional ventilation.
By the way, behind the patterned carvings, which distract a lot of attention and are often mistaken for the Russian style...
...hiding is a truly Russian style - precise rationality and thoughtfulness of every detail.
By the way, in Soviet times They also knew that to heat a small rural house, 4-6 cubic meters of firewood per year (a bathhouse separately) was enough. At that time, statistics on firewood consumption were kept (standards were calculated on its basis). Those who are lucky enough to live in huts also know: one car of firewood for a year! if it’s more, it means something is wrong and it’s time to either go caulk it or shake up the rubble...
But this was at a time when builders were still building “traditionally”, i.e. actually huts, even if made of brick or timber.
More than half a century has passed since then, and during this time, construction science and a bunch of new energy-efficient technologies should have improved these indicators significantly, but... in practice, the opposite is true, the average consumption of “firewood” has increased significantly.
And if the builders of the so-called energy-efficient houses achieve such figures - they consider this a super achievement. And this is with a much larger budget! With the use of technologies that are themselves energy dependent and require maintenance costs, and also, as a rule, with the unresolved problem of disposing of this equipment afterwards.
Modern huts do not need to be built exactly the same way as they were built before. Any culture, of any people, is living and developing.
There is no need to sing Russian folk songs the same way your toothless grandmother sang them to you to the accompaniment of spoons. You can sing them the way, for example, Pelageya does it. :)
And a modern hut does not have to look the same as in a museum.
And modern canopies, of course, do not have to be the same as a couple of centuries ago.
Making a “warm” basement with stone is easier today than it was a century ago.
Many will probably be surprised, but the difference in the cost of building a house with just strip foundation and with the ground floor (basement) - only a few percent.
(if the location for construction is correctly chosen)
Residents middle zone Today, the Russian hut is often imagined as a small, old, unprepossessing house of the village poor.
And it is no coincidence, because basically those huts that we see today were built during the times of corvee.
And where there was no serfdom and the state and its “elite” did not particularly interfere ordinary people to live according to their own understanding - there people lived differently and built dwellings of a different kind. Examples of how people solved the housing problem according to their own understanding are shown in the photographs below.
The first two photographs represent, from two angles, a peasant hut standing on the island of Kizhi ( North West Russia, Republic of Karelia) in the architectural ethnographic museum reserve of the same name.
This is the house of Sergeeva from the village of Lipovitsy, dating back to late XIX- the beginning of the twentieth century.
It is reported about him:
“The house is a timber-type complex with a widened barn.
The living part is raised to a high basement and combines two huts, a room, storage rooms and a light room in the attic. In the two-story utility half there is a courtyard with stables and a barn.
The house was built “in oblo” and covered with a gable roof without nails. An abundance of decorative carved elements, a balcony, a walkway and a high porch give the house a special elegance characteristic of Zaonezhsky buildings.
The house was transported to the island of Kizhi and restored in the village of Vasilyevo according to the design of T.I. Vakhrameeva in 1977.
House length - 26.4 m, width - 11.9 m, height - 8.3 m, area - 121.2 sq. m.
Material: pine, spruce.”
Another house preserved in Kizhi, the Oshevnev house (1876), is shown in three angles in the photographs below. The house was reportedly built by members of the Oshevnev family.
His dimensions: 22 m x 18 m x 8.1 m.
The website from which we took these photographs says about Oshevnev’s house:
“Oshevnev’s house is a traditional “purse” type house for Zaonezhie.
Built in 1876 in the village of Oshevnevo for the family of a wealthy peasant Nestor Maksimovich Oshevnev.
The house is set on a stone fence. Boulders are placed under the corners of the log house.
The house, under a gable asymmetrical roof, combines a two-story residential half and a utility part. In the residential half there are three huts, an upper room, a light room, three storerooms, upper and lower vestibules with an internal staircase. In the economic part there is a barn and a yard with 4 sheds.
There is a mezzanine above the façade with the entrance.”
But even in these areas, where there was no serfdom, there were their own poor people. The photograph below gives an idea of the estate of a poor peasant of those places (Verkhnyaya Putka village, 1880s).
This construction is reported:
“The house was built by a poor peasant Nikita Alekseevich Pyatnitsyn.
The house is a "timber" type complex. The layout and construction of the house are traditional. A three-slope “cap” roof is installed above the living cage.
The house was transported and restored to the island of Kizhi in 1977 according to the design of L.N. Salmin.
The length of the house is 17 m, width - 5.7 m, height - 5.2 m, area - 96.6 sq. m. m.
Material: pine, spruce.”
For comparison:
As can be seen from the photograph, the residential part of the house is slightly less than half its length. In other words, the living area of a poor man's house is about 45 square meters. m, although a certain proportion of this area (about 5 - 6 sq. m) is occupied by the stove. City 4 room apartment“Khrushchev” in a panel house was the ultimate dream of many in the 1960s - 1980s. It has total area 60.4 sq. m with a living area of about 44 sq. m. That is her living space approximately equal to the living area of a poor peasant's house, but it is significantly inferior to a poor peasant's house in terms of the area of utility premises, even taking into account the fact that a city dweller does not have to maintain livestock and supplies for it. In addition, Khrushchev apartments are characterized by a stupid, non-functional layout (location of rooms, utility and utility rooms). Moreover, a comparison of a 4-room “Khrushchev” with houses such as Sergeeva’s house or Oshevnev’s house (not to mention a comparison with Sergin’s house) shows that we have been lowered into poverty. And the most common Khrushchev apartment is a two-room apartment, with a living area of about 27 square meters. m., - in those regions where there was no serfdom and the oppression of the lordly “elite”, can only be compared with the temporary structure of past eras...
Moreover, in Malye Korely, the signs that stand next to such huge (by today’s standards) houses of peasant estates explain that they were built mostly by “middle peasants,” and not just by the rural rich.
Among them there are also two-story “huts” in which both “housing” - on the first and second floors - are heated. In some northern houses, only the lower “housing” is “warm”, and the upper, unheated, is summer housing.
It is only necessary to clarify that families used to be large. A home for a multi-generational family with a dozen children needs to be large. And for the family from three people?
Now you yourself can evaluate any project for an energy-efficient house, and I think in the vast majority of cases you will also have something to suggest to the designer. Especially if he is not Russian. :)
For training, we can consider some types of houses that are positioned as energy efficient:
FRAME HOUSES. “Canadian”, “Thermos House”...
It would be more correct to call them not “frame”, but...
Frame buildings were always and everywhere, this is not news. Hut huts - frame construction, half-timbered houses- frame, japanese houses- frame, and all barns in Rus' are frame.
so the word "framework" is about this new technology says little.
The essence and novelty of these houses is not in the frame, but in the cotton wool and polyethylene. This is a plastic bag lined with cotton wool that just holds it all.
Cheap and fast? No, not really. Today there are companies that build from gas silicate and offer both prices and terms better than frame builders, sometimes many times better.
How energy efficient is this bag? Where does it come from? The energy efficiency of these houses can only be believed by those who still confuse the concepts of “heat” and “warm air” and try to force this warm air into a bag and keep it there.
By the way, we need to figure out how and with what we can replace cotton wool with polyethylene with minimal costs without having to remodel the entire house.
Perhaps many owners of thermos houses will want to remodel them soon...
Dome house
The dome is one of the most elegant forms in construction. This form has perhaps more advantages than any other.
What is a DOME HOUSE? What is this essentially?
Yes, this is just an attic placed directly on the ground!
Yes, of a special intricate shape, insulated, but just an attic!
The thermal efficiency of a residential attic in our climate has already been sorted out. From the point of view of heat loss, everything is clear, but from the point of view. saving energy costs on building materials and construction how?
Yes, somehow the same. Savings on space (usually about 25%) are completely eaten up by the amount of trim. And in the case of using “square” building materials (which need to be cut into triangles or other shapes), the trim can be more than 25%.
In terms of construction costs, you can simply compare the prices offered construction companies- everything will immediately become obvious. Or, for example, you can compare volume and complexity roofing works- the entire dome is one continuous curved roof, and even with windows and doors embedded in it.
To be correct, the dome should be compared not with a parallelepiped or the classical shape of the house, but with the classical shape mansard roof. And here it turns out that the space savings are no longer 25-30-40%, but only 11-15%.
The idea of living in attics in our climate (even triangular, even broken, even spherical) is inherently flawed. And this defect brings with it a bunch of problems: how and with what to insulate them, which “roofing pie” is correct, how to solve the issue of maintainability and reliability of the roof, how to install windows in them, where and how to arrange an entrance...
In the case of a spherical attic placed on the ground, all these issues are only aggravated.
For example, choosing a roof. In the upper, almost horizontal part, most roofing materials they simply cannot provide sufficient waterproofing.
It is very problematic to insulate any roof, let alone a frame dome, with anything other than mineral wool and polystyrene foam.
Making a full-fledged thermal vestibule at the entrance to the ball... is not an easy task.
Window. A separate, expensive story. Or they can simply be inserted into inclined “walls” - which means you need not just windows, but special attic ones. And sometimes also triangular. Or specially build complex window openings.
Against this background, the issues of planning and furniture placement are just a trifle.
HOUSE – Fox Hole
There are also plenty of supporters of this type of housing.
This technology is positioned as cheap and energy-saving.
How it is usually built.
Dig a pit the size of the house ( excavation one of the most expensive), they build a full-fledged house in it (!!!), and it’s also stronger than just a house, because... then it is planned to throw several hundred tons of earth onto it (i.e. it is already more expensive than just a full-fledged house), and... they fill it all up with earth! Yes, just like that!!!
A! Before laying it down, it is wrapped in several more layers of waterproofing, pasted over, coated, because otherwise it will very quickly rot in wet soil (and our soil, unlike the Sahara, is always wet). Some have not only rotted but also managed to collapse. (Ah-ah!!! that’s what a house with an embankment means!). :)
But before it collapses, look at the diagram of what happened:
Here, in general, everything was combined in one place: the cellar, the living area, and the attic...
No, personally, a shared bathroom was enough for me. Combining an attic with housing, and now also with a cellar... well, this is too much. So you can get to the point where you can also bury a woodpile, a barn, a workshop, a bathhouse, and without a bathhouse, a room for food.
By the way, the toilet in Rus' was always called a latrine. And they did cesspool"Somewhere in the yard. It was considered unhealthy to relieve yourself where you eat. Where should I bury him in the fox hole?
And taking into account the fact that it snows here in winter, and we are below... what if it takes a long time for them to dig it out? ;)
Humidity issue.
The fact is that the so-called natural humidity soil, with very rare exceptions (Sugar, for example), is usually above the hygroscopic limit. What does it mean? That any material in contact with this soil will be damper than it would be just in the air. And even if this does not lead to its destruction, it will almost certainly lead to mold.
For example, wood that is in conditions of airborne equilibrium humidity (any kind simply protected from getting wet), this is about 18%, is not susceptible to mold or fungi, but lying simply on the ground already has a humidity above 30% (above the hygroscopic limit) and rots in a few years.
Embankment (instead of burying) does not help much because... firstly, precipitation will also fall on this “hill”, and, secondly, no one has canceled capillary suction, and as a rule no one is taking measures to combat it. For reference: in clayey soils, the height of capillary suction is up to 12 meters.
It is possible to solve the problem of high humidity with the help of ventilation, which is what we have to do. But such a solution negates all efforts to save heat. Why then did they dig in at all?
Selection of material for fox hole, By by and large limited to stone and concrete! Everything else under these conditions is extremely short-lived. Waterproofing only partially solves the problem.
But, in fairness, it should be noted that for a certain type of people this will be a very economical home in terms of heating. For those who are +5, high humidity and the absence of electromagnetic fields of the earth are well suited. I really don’t know anyone like that.
Most normal people really need electromagnetic fields (natural ones, which are the norm for planet Earth), and without them we feel bad. Submariners get a vacation and chocolates for this...
In some areas of the planet, “fox hole” type dwellings are indeed quite justified.
Firstly, there are simply no other materials there except the earth under your feet!
Secondly: the soil there is always (with rare exceptions) dry;
Thirdly: - the climate is “suitable”
- average annual temperature, and therefore the soil temperature (in the ground) - 17-18 degrees C.
Those. Taking into account the fact that to some extent the house is “heated” by people with their bodies and stoves while cooking, ideal conditions are obtained.
Not like ours +5 degrees C..humidity...snow...
TROGLODYTE HOUSING - that's what it turns out to be called.
Turf roof.
This is roofing technology! And it has no direct relation to the “fox hole”.
It can be installed above a cold attic - an excellent, energy-efficient, environmentally friendly, durable option.
And with the advent of polyethylene, and in particular polyethylene geo-membranes, this technology has become more accessible and durable. Polyethylene covered with a layer of earth is practically eternal (since its only enemy is ultraviolet radiation). The service life of such a roof is orders of magnitude longer than most (if not all) modern roofs.
You can install such a roof over the attic. This is many times better than modern synthetic ones." roofing pies“, but the question of the appropriateness of attics in general, and especially in our climate, remains. ;)
Or you can install this roof over an attic buried in the ground, embanked. Only in this version such a roof will be part of the “fox hole”...
HOUSES MADE OF STRAW
This is rather not a technology for building houses, but only a technology for erecting walls.
By the way, it’s also not new; light huts were built in almost the same way, only not from bales, but from bundles of straw or reeds inserted into a frame and plastered with clay.
The straw mud hut is a little new - excellent.
With this technology it is quite possible to build half-timbered house, and a hut, and even insulate a dome house.
One issue has plagued straw construction a lot: compressed straw blocks are becoming increasingly difficult to find.
People have already begun to invent presses to press straw... into blocks, and then build from them.
Why didn’t anyone think that it was possible to press straw directly into the future wall?..
Vladimir Kazarin
A warm room in winter is much cozier and more comfortable. Although wooden beams and logs have excellent thermal insulation properties, there are vulnerable spots that require additional thermal insulation.
Construction wooden houses has its own specific features, one of which is the insulation of walls, floors and ceilings.
Why additionally insulate a wooden house?
Wood contains a large number of moisture, which evaporates over time. Wherein geometric shape and the dimensions of the logs from which the house is built change.
Previously, moss was used to seal cracks between logs. With the advent of new insulating materials there was an opportunity to do this in other ways.
What and how should be insulated in a wooden house?
IN wooden building additional insulation require:
- walls;
- ceiling.
The floor is insulated with a layer heat-insulating material, placed on top of wax paper or waterproof film used as a waterproofing.
If the house has a basement, then film or paper is spread over the ceiling of the basement. If the house is on the ground, the waterproofing is laid on the base slabs.
We insulate the floor
The thicker the insulation layer, the less heat will leave the house through the floor. The plank floor is laid on top of the insulation.
See more details:
In addition, the so-called system is currently becoming popular in wooden houses. warm floors:
If the house has an attic, then insulating the ceiling is done in the same way as insulating the floor. A layer of hydraulic insulation is laid on the attic side, on which insulation is laid.
Insulation of the attic floor
See more details:
Insulation of the walls of a wooden house is carried out using two methods:
- outside;
- from the inside.
When the main temperature change occurs in the facing layer. Wherein wooden structures are in more favorable conditions. Temperatures inside the house and from outside logs (if available external insulation) differ little.
External insulation of a wooden house with polystyrene foam
External insulation is carried out mainly by finishing a wooden house different materials- clapboard, brick, lining aerated concrete blocks etc. Between outer wall and a layer of insulation is laid over the cladding.
When covering a wooden house with brick, it is necessary to leave a gap between the wooden wall and the brick for ventilation. This will ensure timely removal of excess moisture and protect the wood from premature aging.
Aerated concrete blocks can be laid without a ventilation gap. They have greater vapor permeability than wood, so excess moisture is quickly removed.
See more about methods of external insulation:
With a wooden wall in winter time is exposed to high negative temperatures. This contributes to conditions that adversely affect the condition of the logs.
Insulating a house from the inside with mineral wool
Excess moisture can accumulate between the insulation layer and the wall, which leads to faster aging of the wood.
- See more details: .
The insulation method is the same: waterproofing and a layer of thermal insulation are applied to the wooden wall. If the house is insulated from the inside, higher requirements must be placed on the environmental friendliness of the insulation than with external thermal insulation.
Decorative finishing on top of the insulation can be done with boards.
Also, which may not seem so obvious, sometimes it’s a good idea to insulate the roof and foundation. Cm.:
Useful video about heat conservation in a wooden house
If you want to keep warm in wooden house, the owner should decide what he wants to have as a result. Internal insulation preserves the appearance of a wooden house, stylized as antique. External insulation gives the house a modern appearance and does not affect the beauty of the interior.