Bonded Beed Cavity Wall Insulation

Moanin

Has anybody ever got these beeds pumped into the walls of their house? If so did it work and what kind of costs are you talking about?

I see a crowd in my neighbourhood are doing alot of the houses:

www.i.love.muffler.com

Thanks

muffler

Moanin wrote: »

Has anybody ever got these beeds pumped into the walls of their house? If so did it work and what kind of costs are you talking about?

I see a crowd in my neighbourhood are doing alot of the houses:

www.i.love.muffler.com

Thanks

See. I fixed that for you.

No company names please. Read the charter.

Moanin

Apologies but has anybody had this done?

Quazzie

Had my semi detached done there a while back and I have to say i do notice the difference.

I must point out that mine is an old council house that had no insulation and is standard semi-d size and cost me €750 but that was a reduced price because i got a few others in the area to sign up to get it done the same day

P.S Stop promoting exhaust pipes Muffler its against the charter :P

muffler

Quazzie2002 wrote: »

P.S Stop promoting exhaust pipes Muffler its against the charter :P

Ah ha. Didnt think that would connect to anything. Now I must go and infract myself

SonOfPerdition

Moanin wrote: »

Has anybody ever got these beeds pumped into the walls of their house? If so did it work and what kind of costs are you talking about?

I see a crowd in my neighbourhood are doing alot of the houses:

www.i.love.muffler.com

Thanks

Yes, we had our house pumped about 2 years ago with silver bead insulation as part of a series of improvements to make the house warmer .. this will be our second winter since we installed it.

We have a small bungalow with a flat roof kitchen extension. The sales guy recommended only to go to ceiling height on the gable ends of the main house , but i might put in an attic conversion at some time so i paid 200 extra for both gable ends to be pumped to the top. The house plus the extension cost 1250 ..would have been 1050 originally.

Did it work? Yes, but our house needed some other work to make the most of it. I put an extra 8 inches of insulation in the attic on top of the 4 inches that was there and we've just had the flat roof replaced and insulated.

One thing it seems to have helped with a lot is mould on some of the walls, we used to have to clean one room in particular annually (clean and repaint), since the walls were pumped we've seen a drastic reduction in the amount of mould.

SOP

muffler

SonOfPerdition wrote: »

Yes, we had our house pumped about 2 years ago with silver bead insulation as part of a series of improvements to make the house warmer

Just out of curiosity was your cavity completely uninsulated prior to this or did you have any kind of partial insulation in it like "Aeroboard"

Lex Luthor

sorry for jumping on here, but is this beaded insulation only possibly on a cavity wall construction?

If your house is built with cavity blocks, I am thinking its not possible???

RKQ

Crazy prices in Ireland if you compare a standard 3 bed detached house in uk costs £198-00! to pump walls. Have a look at this:-
http://www.diy.com/diy/jsp/bq/nav/nav.jsp?fh_view_size=6&fh_eds=%3f&fh_reffacet=categories&fh_locatio

Eddie Hobbs must be right.

Lex Luthor, Bead is installed in the air space in a cavity wall, usually 100mm thick between the two leafs of solid blocks.

40701085

Oh man...

Paid €1,700 for mine - platinum bead for a 220 sq m house in the west, thought I was doing well after 2 prev quotes came around €2,500!

It's a new build & I've gone with IPB on external walls inside too, so I suppose I'll never be able to gauge it's effectiveness on it's own...

sorry I'm not any help.

endplate

I'm gonna get this done in my new build it's a 3100sq ft house. I already have 60mm high density insulation in the cavity. The rep claims bet €1200 - €1600 for most houses. I think it'll help with air tightness.

On another note my in laws had a hollow cavity and noticed a difference straight away after filling the cavity. Dampness cleared up in the room furthest from the heating but condensation started appearing on the windows which were new double glazed windows and frames

Lex Luthor

afaik in the UK they get a big grant from the govt to get it done

MicktheMan

if your walls are cavity block (hollow block) single leaf you cannot EFFECTIVELY insulate the wall by pumping the cavities with any kind of insulation (foam, bead etc) no matter what the insulation company sales man says. Can't be done. Period.

Lex Luthor

MicktheMan wrote: »

if your walls are cavity block (hollow block) single leaf you cannot EFFECTIVELY insulate the wall by pumping the cavities with any kind of insulation (foam, bead etc) no matter what the insulation company sales man says. Can't be done. Period.

Thanks, I was thinking to do it properly each cavity in each block would need to be drilled to fill and thats just not possible

RKQ

endplate wrote: »

I'm gonna get this done in my new build it's a 3100sq ft house. I already have 60mm high density insulation in the cavity. The rep claims bet €1200 - €1600 for most houses. I think it'll help with air tightness.

Be careful endplate - not always a good idea to mix materials. Remember that bead has a certain u-value for 100mm thickness. Your cavity is probably only 40mm so its less than half. This thickness may not be worth installing.

Also the quote seems dear, if its €1200 for standard house then, you'll need less than half the standard amount, 40mm wide, so it shouldn't cost more than €500 or €600.

SonOfPerdition

muffler wrote: »

Just out of curiosity was your cavity completely uninsulated prior to this or did you have any kind of partial insulation in it like "Aeroboard"

Insulation was completely absent in the cavity between all the walls, the house is about 30 years old so maybe not as much emphasis on standards back then.

SonOfPerdition

40701085 wrote: »

Oh man...

Paid €1,700 for mine - platinum bead for a 220 sq m house in the west, thought I was doing well after 2 prev quotes came around €2,500!

Your house is about 3 times the size of mine, so it doesn't seem such a bad price to me . . . well, for irish prices that is! :rolleyes:

RKQ

SonOfPerdition do you have any problems with damp patches on the internal leaf?

Do you now have 12 inches of insulation in your attic?
"I put an extra 8 inches of insulation in the attic on top of the 4 inches that was there"

300mm / 1 ft of insulation would be of considerable benefit - making the wall insulation difficult to value. Of couse the wall insulation is also beneficial.

Glad it worked out for you:)

SonOfPerdition

RKQ wrote: »

SonOfPerdition do you have any problems with damp patches on the internal leaf?

Do you now have 12 inches of insulation in your attic?
"I put an extra 8 inches of insulation in the attic on top of the 4 inches that was there"

You'll have to explain to me what an internal leaf is, but I've no damp patches anywhere that I know of.

yes, its 12 inches in most of the attic (some parts of it was missing insulation for some reason best known by the previous owner), the existing 4 inches was old fiberglass and i put an extra 8inch layer of insulation on top of it. That did make a noticeable difference at the time.

300mm / 1 ft of insulation would be of considerable benefit - making the wall insulation difficult to value. Of couse the wall insulation is also beneficial.

The two jobs were done about 6 months apart so i could tell the benefit of pumping the walls nearly immediately by how much easier it was to heat the house and how it retained that heat longer. Our external walls feels much warmer to the touch and if i sit near one I don't feel the cold radiating from it like I used to.

Glad it worked out for you:)

it has worked out for us indeed. but the nature of our our house made it the only real viable option. The house is too small to put up internal insulation (i didn't want to lose any space), and external insulation worked out quite expensive.

RKQ

SonOfPerdition wrote: »

You'll have to explain to me what an internal leaf is, but I've no damp patches anywhere that I know of.

Thanks SonOfPerdition a cavity wall has an external leaf of blockwork, a cavity and an internal leaf of blockwork.

Glad you haven't any damp patches on the walls. Small circular patches, 50 - 75mm dia would indicate damp / water penetration at wallties. Damp patches around the windows would have shown themselve by now, if there was a problem.

Ashfield

Hi all,
I am building a new house and was just wondering at what stage exactly the walls should be pumped?
I heard that the windows need to be sealed, is it ok if there is some insulation board in around the windows or should the windows be fully sealed with plaster??
Thanks

RKQ

Check with the manufacturer or installer.
I'd assume the windows and doors installed and sealed with foam filler, roof complete but before plastering begins!
(Get a copy of their IAB cert!)

40701085

Like RKQ says, you'll have to consult the supplier. If they pump it from the inside, you can plaster away on the exterior, but windows & roof they would need on. I had some inch polysio to close cavities at windows & they were happy with that - any spots I missed they packed with rockwool.
Get a drill pattern from them to satisfy yourself.

Ashfield

thanks lads,
our builder does seem to have the cavity blocked with some board insulation alright so hopefully will be grand
sound

SonOfPerdition

RKQ wrote: »

Thanks SonOfPerdition a cavity wall has an external leaf of blockwork, a cavity and an internal leaf of blockwork.

ah, I have you now.

Glad you haven't any damp patches on the walls. Small circular patches, 50 - 75mm dia would indicate damp / water penetration at wallties. Damp patches around the windows would have shown themselve by now, if there was a problem.

so it would be regular patches along the wall assuming more than one tie would have this problem? Can pumping the cavity with insulation cause this? I would be interested to know how so i can inform people of the risks if i'm talking about it in future.

i've definitely not seen any small patches of damp, so it looks like we're ok..

RKQ

SonOfPerdition wrote: »

so it would be regular patches along the wall assuming more than one tie would have this problem? Can pumping the cavity with insulation cause this? I would be interested to know how so i can inform people of the risks if i'm talking about it in future.

Yes, here's the quick answer, hopefully others will add to it:-
Cavity construction was developed to eliminate rising damp and damp patches on solid construction.
The 100mm air cavity prevents wind driven rain crossing the cavity, as wallties have a drip in the centre, to throw any water down into the cavity.
Dpc at the floor level prevent rising damp. Dpc over window and door opes, throw water out over the window / door. Dpc at reveals stop damp transfer.

Partial cavity fill, was used to insulate walls, but as requirements in insulation levels rose so thickness increased. So does the size of the cavity or you must consider full cavity fill. Removing the cavity removes the waterproof element, developed over decades.

Filling the cavity can result in rain water traveling across the cavity. We alway assume the exterior leaf is wet. Especially unrendered clay brick - as its extremly porous.

A good render is preventing your wall getting wet. We have a great history of render in this country because of our damp moist winters with heavy wind driven rain.

I'm sure your insulation will be fine, as modern processes have been developed to prevent water ingress / soakage/ transfer.:)

cathalmd

RKQ wrote: »

Be careful endplate - not always a good idea to mix materials. Remember that bead has a certain u-value for 100mm thickness. Your cavity is probably only 40mm so its less than half. This thickness may not be worth installing.

Also the quote seems dear, if its €1200 for standard house then, you'll need less than half the standard amount, 40mm wide, so it shouldn't cost more than €500 or €600.

That's the most ridiculous reply ever. Just because you need about half the product doesn't mean it costs half. What about paying the guys + plant etc. Dumb reply

RKQ

cathalmd I've been expecting you!
Why waste your first post criticising me?

Its your fist post yet you are an expert on Boards posts to date, stating "most ridiculous reply ever". Thanks for your 1st post. I'll be gentle with you.

What took you so long - digging up my post from 20th November - interesting timing.... yet again.

Average house takes 3 - 4 hours to pump with 100mm cavity. Same plant and staff required for 40mm cavity BUT less material and LESS installation time, therefore less cost.

Still I wouldn't recommend installing 40mm.

gizmo555

RKQ wrote: »

Average house takes 3 - 4 hours to pump with 100mm cavity. Same plant and staff required for 40mm cavity BUT less material and LESS installation time, therefore less cost.

Less installation time, but not half the installation time. Travel time, time taken to drill holes and time taken to make good the holes are the same whether the cavity is half filled or completely filled. Other costs, such as sales, office and administration overhead, insurance, etc. would also have to be taken into account.

All in all, I would have to agree that your comment that half filling a cavity with bead should cost exactly half the price of completely filling a similar cavity is at best grossly simplistic.

RKQ

I never recommend filling the cavity of a wall with bead or rockwool insulation.

I would highly recommend NOT to pump a cavity with insulation.
I never recommend to retro-fit a part insulated cavity- far too risky. Filling the cavity doesn't make sense.

IMO pumping a cavity is almost acceptable in reto-fit of uninsulated cavities of old houses. Where no other option is financially viable.

Never pump insulation into a brick wall or part brick wall. Never pump insulation into a wall full stop!

Thats as simplistic as I can make it.

gizmo555

RKQ wrote: »

I never recommend filling the cavity of a wall with bead or rockwool insulation.

I would highly recommend NOT to pump a cavity with insulation.
I never recommend to retro-fit a part insulated cavity- far too risky. Filling the cavity doesn't make sense.

OK, I've already asked you in another thread and I'd like to ask you again here please - what risk are you talking about? And if there is a substantial risk, why has the government just decided to grant aid precisely what you believe is far too risky?

Quazzie

gizmo555 wrote: »

Less installation time, but not half the installation time. Travel time, time taken to drill holes and time taken to make good the holes are the same whether the cavity is half filled or completely filled. Other costs, such as sales, office and administration overhead, insurance, etc. would also have to be taken into account.

All in all, I would have to agree that your comment that half filling a cavity with bead should cost exactly half the price of completely filling a similar cavity is at best grossly simplistic.

My dad is currently building his own house and is going for a 150mm cavity filled with pumped bead and he asked the company supplying the pumped bead whether it was much difference betweent the price of the 100mm cavity and 150mm cavity and they told him there was no difference and he was given the 150mm fill for the price he was quoted for the 100mm. I think this was solely because they were eager for sales but he was told by the sales guy that the price of the beads is cheap and thatits the labour thats the majority of the price.

RKQ

gizmo555 wrote: »

OK, I've already asked you in another thread and I'd like to ask you again here please - what risk are you talking about? And if there is a substantial risk, why has the government just decided to grant aid precisely what you believe is far too risky?

I've given my opinion above. IMO there is a substantial risk.

Why bother building a cavity wall if you are going to fill the cavity with bead?
You no longer have a cavity wall or the advantages of a cavity.

The Government grant aid alot of things. This does not mean that the product is ideal - just that it is financially viable. Filling the cavity is a cheap and quick way to insulate old houses.

The Government give much bigger grants to Externally insulate a wall or Internally dry-line a wall. By your logic these options are better and I'd agree with that logic, unfortunately external or internal insulation is much more expensive.

I suppose you get what you pay for! IMO full cavity fill insulation is a bad option.

gizmo555

RKQ wrote: »

I've given my opinion above. IMO there is a substantial risk.

Sorry, I am not being deliberately obtuse, but as far as I can see you've stated three times that filling a cavity wall with pumped insulation is risky without ever giving any explanation as to what the nature of this risk is.

I would genuinely like to know. My interest is as a homeowner who is considering having a wall with a 110mm cavity, which already has 60mm of rigid insulation, pumped with bonded bead to fill the remaining 50mm gap. This is what I've been advised to do by a BER assesor, who is also a professional engineer. If there is a genuine problem with following this advice I'd like to know about it.

As for the options of dry lining or externally insulation, I had a vendor of an external insulation system look at my house and he advised that while it could be done, it would be vastly more expensive (10x plus) and he recommended cavity insulation too, even though he doesn't sell it himself. He said his system is more suitable for older houses with no cavity, like my last house built in 1940 and which had solid mass concrete walls. As I understand it, grants are being made available for drylining or external insulation for cases like this, where cavity insulation is not possible. Dry lining has other problems apart from cost, it reduces habitable space and is much messier and disruptive to install.

RKQ

I can only give my honest opinion. Its risky because the cavity is full, therefore water that penetrates the external leaf can cross the cavity via the "fill" and penetrate the inner wall.

I have seen this happen when there is mortar on a wall tie. I know that these insulants have an IAB cert and are safe to use but they are relatively new and only time will tell. A house is suppose to last 50 years, no house has had full cavity insulation for 50 years. Truth is nobody is really sure what happens to it over time.

The cavity was developed in our damp wind driven rain, out of necessity over the last hundred years. Damp proof courses, cavity tray etcs were developed so that the external wall can be wet but this water can not travel to the inner leaf.

If you fill the cavity then you are depending on your external render to keep you walls dry. One hairline crack is a potential water penetration risk.

How water-proof can aeroboard or rockwool be? Have you left either material out in the open air for a length and time? Most things deteriorate over time, when wet.

All clay brick soaks water. Water penetrates brick. Houses with half brick fronts, brick arches or brick quoins should not use bead or rockwool.

Your case in particular is difficult as its likely you already have high density foil backed insulation in your cavity. These boards are unlikely to be perfectly plumb. It will IMO be very difficult to pump a consistant 40mm of insulation into your cavity.

IMO internal insulation would be much more beneficial. Pumped insulation is a "magic bullet" at the moment. It is incredibly cheap and very cost effective but it is not without risk.

The jury is out. Time will tell. If it does allow water penetration, then it will be almost impossible to remove it from the cavity.

If you can get a 10 year absolute guarentee from the manufacturer then take a chance - if you can't get a guarentee then really think about your options.

gizmo555

RKQ wrote: »

I can only give my honest opinion. Its risky because the cavity is full, therefore water that penetrates the external leaf can cross the cavity via the "fill" and penetrate the inner wall.

This is in direct contradiction of the IAB Agrément certificates for these products, e.g.:

4.2 LIQUID WATER PENETRATION
4.2.1 Test data obtained by the NSAI Agrément confirms that a masonry wall incorporating [Some Bead Product] Cavity Wall Insulation and built to the requirements of IS 325: Part 1: 1986, will not transmit water to the inner leaf.
4.2.2 Test data obtained by NSAI Agrément also demonstrates that [Some Bead Product] Cavity Wall Insulation material does not absorb water by capillary action. Water which penetrates the outer leaf of the wall will drain down the cavity face of the outer leaf. When the product is used in situations where it bridges the dpc in walls, dampness from the ground will not pass through, provided the cavity is taken down to at least 150 mm below the level of the lowest dpc.
4.2.3 [Some Bead Product] Cavity Wall Insulation System, when used in accordance with this Certificate, present no significant risk of water penetration.

RKQ wrote: »

I know that these insulants have an IAB cert and are safe to use but they are relatively new and only time will tell. A house is suppose to last 50 years, no house has had full cavity insulation for 50 years. Truth is nobody is really sure what happens to it over time.

Isn't this precisely the type of situation the Agrément system is supposed to address? As it says on the IAB website:

Agrément certification is designed specifically for new building products and processes that do not yet have a long history of use and for which published national standards do not yet exist.

To follow your logic to its conclusion, no-one should use any construction material or technique less than 50 years old.

RKQ wrote: »

If you fill the cavity then you are depending on your external render to keep you walls dry. One hairline crack is a potential water penetration risk.

Again, this is in direct contradiction of the IAB Agrément certificates for these products

RKQ wrote: »

Your case in particular is difficult as its likely you already have high density foil backed insulation in your cavity. These boards are unlikely to be perfectly plumb. It will IMO be very difficult to pump a consistant 40mm of insulation into your cavity.

My existing insulation is unfortunately not foil-backed. I agree it is a major drawback of pumped insulation that you can't directly see the finished job to ensure there is full coverage. It is therefore very important to get a reliable contractor - I'n sure the new grant scheme will bring plenty of cowboys out of the woodwork. The Agrément certs are only valid if the products are installed in the ways outlined in them. One could also have a thermal image survey done afterwards to check for gaps, but this is an extra cost - I've been quoted €500. This, however, is a separate issue from any possible risk that the pumped insulation might cause damp.

RKQ wrote: »

If you can get a 10 year absolute guarentee from the manufacturer then take a chance - if you can't get a guarentee then really think about your options.

This is good advice, but I suppose the problem is the guarantee is only as good as the manufacturer offering it. If they go belly up, so does the guarantee. It's a pity there's no Irish scheme like The Cavity Insulation Guarantee Agency in the UK (www.ciga.co.uk), effectively a mini-Homebond scheme for cavity insulation offering an independent 25 year guarantee. Still, the fact that such a long guarantee is even available there, for methods and materials identical to those used in this country, must be some reassurance.

RKQ

gizmo555 wrote:

4.2 LIQUID WATER PENETRATION
4.2.1 Test data obtained by the NSAI Agrément confirms that a masonry wall incorporating B]Some Bead Product[/B Cavity Wall Insulation and built to the requirements of IS 325: Part 1: 1986, will not transmit water to the inner leaf.
.

Why persue me for my opinion, if you are so well informed and you obviously have your mind made up?
Are you an Installer? (The 90% of your posts to date are about Cavity fill insulation)

Can you address water penetration in brickwork and state how you will ensure compliance with I.S 325: Part 1:1986.

gizmo555 wrote:

Again, this is in direct contradiction of the IAB Agrément certificates for these products.

You asked for my opinion 3 times! Now you want to poke holes in it.
An IAB cert clearly states that a material will work if its installed in accordance with the IAB cert. You are being subjective in the parts of the cert you are quoting.

gizmo555 wrote:

My existing insulation is unfortunately not foil-backed
.

Why not?
60mm Aeroboard when out 6 years ago! Circa 2002, I thought your house was recently built?

gizmo555 wrote: »

This is good advice, but I suppose the problem is the guarantee is only as good as the manufacturer offering it. If they go belly up, so does the guarantee. It's a pity there's no Irish scheme like The Cavity Insulation Guarantee Agency in the UK (www.ciga.co.uk), effectively a mini-Homebond scheme for cavity insulation offering an independent 25 year guarantee. Still, the fact that such a long guarantee is even available there, for methods and materials identical to those used in this country, must be some reassurance.

This is not the UK. We have more rainfall.
We do not have District Surveyors / Building Control Officiers that inspect the full construction. (If we did, you'd have foil kingspan in your walls)

Of course you could get a UK company to install it and take their 25 year guarantee! Or they might think its too wet here!

Lets keep it simple and clear - I would never use full fill cavity insulation, far too risky, especially if you already have a partially filled cavity.

I believe that full fill cavity insulation will be the "asbestos" of the future.

There is no point in building a cavity and then filling it - that totally defeats the purpose of the cavity!

I'd live in a tent before I'd touch the stuff - thats my opinion, take it or leave it

gizmo555

RKQ wrote: »

Why persue me for my opinion, if you are so well informed and you obviously have your mind made up?
Are you an Installer? (The 90% of your posts to date are about Cavity fill insulation)

I pursued you for your opinion because I was genuinely interested in it. You stated a number of times pumped cavity insulation was risky without explaining what risk you meant. Now you have. Thank you! (BTW, I am not an installer - as I said, I am merely a homeowner.)

I'm no better informed than anyone could be through the use of Google. I'm researching this area before taking a decision and discussions here are part of that research. Hence most of my posts are on this topic.

In fairness to you, I have found one other writer who is just as adamantly opposed to pumped insulation, Jeff Howell of the Daily Telegraph. Here's one piece he wrote:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/3346244/On-the-level-should-I-insulate-my-cavity-walls.html

Google his name and "cavity insulation" and you'll find much more.

RKQ wrote: »

You asked for my opinion 3 times! Now you want to poke holes in it.

I asked you to clarify it 3 times. Now you have. Thank you! When you made clear that the risk you had in mind was water penetration I just pointed out that your views are contradicted by the IAB certs referenced.

RKQ wrote: »

An IAB cert clearly states that a material will work if its installed in accordance with the IAB cert. You are being subjective in the parts of the cert you are quoting.

I have made precisely this point several times already, e.g:

gizmo555 wrote: »

The Agrément certs are only valid if the products are installed in the ways outlined in them.

I don't agree that I'm being particularly subjective, but I at any rate did provide a link to where the certs can be downloaded and read in their entirety by anyone interested.

RKQ wrote: »

60mm Aeroboard when out 6 years ago! Circa 2002, I thought your house was recently built?

It was built in 2000 - I guess, from what you say, a couple of years before the foil-backed product you mention came into general use.

RKQ wrote: »

This is not the UK. We have more rainfall.

Northern Ireland is part of the UK and is covered by the guarantee scheme mentioned.

RKQ

I have given my opinion. As the saying goes, "Doctors differ, patients die".

Jeff Howell and I are not the only ones. The risk exists.
The jury is well and truly out.

I wouldn't put it in my cavity wall.:D:D:D

Slig

I think the options for retrofit insulation are limited. Personally I am very concerned about the attitude towards insulation in todays society. There seems to be huge emphasis on getting the best U-values for your wall and the only concern seems to be how much insulation you can pack into it.

Dry-lining or internal insulation is not an ideal solution, it causes damp and mould growth if done wrong, something we will see alot of in the near future.

Cavity fill insulation can also lead to moisture ingress. I know that the IAB certs say that moisture will not transfer across the beads but what about the gaps and air voids that will enevitably be created around wall ties etc.

There are alot of opinions being bandied about by people about ideal wall constructions, everybody has an opinion. Unfortunately in todays energy crisis climate most of the methods being used today are experiments.

gizmo555

Slig wrote: »

There are alot of opinions being bandied about by people about ideal wall constructions, everybody has an opinion. Unfortunately in todays energy crisis climate most of the methods being used today are experiments.

Guys, I fully accept the sincerity of your views. However, having delved a bit deeper into the British Board of Agrément's website (www.bbacerts.co.uk), the earliest certification I can find there for pumped cavity insulation dates back to March 1987 - just short of 22 years ago! (This is for a bead product first certified in 1987 and with a revised certificate taking account of new building regs issued in 2007.)

How long, in your opinion, does a construction technique or material have to be in use before it's no longer considered novel or experimental and "the jury comes back in"? If 22 years isn't long enough, how long is?

muffler

gizmoo555 you have made your point and I am at a loss to see why you are pushing this.

The guys give their opinion, an opinion they are entitled to just the same as you are entitled to yours. You have done your research and you have sought and been given advice here so now its time for you to make up your mind.

gizmo555

muffler wrote: »

gizmoo555 you have made your point and I am at a loss to see why you are pushing this.

The guys give their opinion, an opinion they are entitled to just the same as you are entitled to yours.

Well I guess you can put it down to "Comment is free, but facts are sacred." I'm, as I say, researching the issues and soliciting opinions on the forum here, but that doesn't mean I have to blindly accept any opinions offered without challenging their factual basis.

RKQ after repeatedly saying that cavity fill insulation is risky without explaining why, finally gave it as his opinion that there is a risk that water will cross the insulation to the inner leaf. It is a fact that the Irish and British Agrément boards - having carried out appropriate testing - agree that this will not happen where these products are correctly installed.

Both RKQ and Slig describe these products as "relatively new" and "experimental". It is a fact that they have been in use for about a quarter of a century - they are not in any meaningful sense novel or experimental and there has surely been ample time to assess their long-term performance in the field.

I'll leave it at that . . .

RKQ

gizmo555 wrote: »

Well I guess you can put it down to "Comment is free, but facts are sacred." I'm, as I say, researching the issues and soliciting opinions on the forum here, but that doesn't mean I have to blindly accept any opinions offered without challenging their factual basis.

Very strange, you continue to ask for an opinion, once you hear it you go to great lengths to prove a person wrong.

Nobody has backed up your "theory" or quotes. If you want to use it and you know the risk, then go and used. Gamble your home!

I'd never use full fill cavity insulation in a cavity wall - it defeats the purpose and carries a risk of water penetration. That my last word...:D