Pavadentro

[Nemesis]

While I have my reservations about interior insulation, this product might be of interest/use to some:

http://www.natural-building.co.uk/pavadentro_renovation.htm

 

[Gareth Hughes]

While I have my reservations about interior insulation, this product might be of interest/use to some:

http://www.natural-building.co.uk/pavadentro_renovation.htm

I was recently at an event where this was presented - I seem to recall that another occasional poster here was not as entirely convinced by the presentation as a whole? You there Mr G?

 

[Nemesis]

He sent me the info...

 

[Penners]

Does having the CE mark automatically imply an Agrement Board certificate? If not, I wonder whether the product is acceptable under UK building regs?

 

[Flyfisher]

The CE mark means a product complies with the relevant standards required to meet the relevant European Directives that allow the product to be 'placed on the market' throughout the EU. A CE mark should be supported by a certificate of conformity that specifies what those standards actually are (clearly they are different for different types of products).

If things work anything like the electronics industry, I would guess that CE on building materials would indicate compliance with the relevant standards, administered in the UK by the BBA, and therefore would have to be accepted by UK building control.

 

[MdB]

If it works anything like the electronics industry then the CE mark means nothing at all. All goods have them whether they meet the regulations or not as they are self certificated and there is very little enforcement.

 

[Flyfisher]

I take your point about self-certified products from certain parts of the world but I think most reputable companies would not risk self-certification without supporting test results from a reputable source. Director liabilities are such that I certainly wasn't prepared to.

 

[MdB]

Ditto, but going through all the hoops is a pain when you do see what comes in.

 

[Flyfisher]

Absolutely.

 

[andrew gayton]

While I have my reservations about interior insulation, this product might be of interest/use to some:

http://www.natural-building.co.uk/pavadentro_renovation.htm

I was recently at an event where this was presented - I seem to recall that another occasional poster here was not as entirely convinced by the presentation as a whole? You there Mr G?

Yes, quite correct, although that was because the presenter did not understand the product or its intended application........... since the presentation I have had chance to do my own research and see this product has its uses, primarily in conversions. This is however, almost identical to other like products which appear to have been pidgeon-holed for specific one type use only................ in the 'olden days' I used p*v*the*m roof sheets for internal walling insulation (shock horror)........... similar products, new labels. The main problem is the initial monetary cost to the builder - this material is much more expensive than c*l*ot*x.......... hopefully a rise in demand will see a drop in price and a wider acceptance by both builders and (some) architects who fail to see the connection between reduced permeability and poor thermal performance.

p.s kingfisher - you should have a hit-and-miss vent also to comply with b.regs. groan.

 

[Welsh Builder]

I don't think this product would work as well as they claim. They boast of capillary action controlling internal moisture content but don't mention that capillary action holds moisture through surface tension and won't let it out again. Water vapour is moved in and out of a breathable material because of pressure differences not capillary action.

Their literature actually gives the game away. It mentions that it should not be used in rooms subject to constant high humidity, that the exterior of the wall must be protected from driving rain, that it must not be used in areas of rising damp (capillary action!) and must only be used above DPC. All these caveats would not be needed if the material was genuinely vapour permeable. Basically they claim it is breathable then insist it is only used in perfectly dry situations.

Manufacturers like to make claims of breathability for their products which they are not required to prove. This is different from U-values which do require proof although, as Gareth Hughes mentions, there is a clear connection between reduced permeability and poor thermal performance.