Metro Nashville SchoolsMetro Nashville Schools
Koreteck Presentation Koreteck Presentation
Koreteck solid core insulated wall panel systemsKoreteck solid core insulated wall panel systems
May 13, 2010
Wall Systems ComparisonWall Systems Comparison
Sustainability StudiesSustainability Studies
This one hour presentation provides for an understanding of sustainable wall construction using basic panelized wall units vs. other modular products. The featured sustainable wall units presented will be Koreteck solid core insulated panels.
Specifically we will give a brief description of Koreteck solid core insulated wall panel systems and then discuss comparative data for Koreteck vs. cmu, insulated concrete forms, insulated tilt up wall construction, and autoclaved aerated concrete panels. This data will compare each different wall system as they pertain to wall costs per square foot, steady state R-values, installation rates, and cooling and heating loads.
Sustainable interior finish systems for the Koreteck panels will also be presented by Gigacrete natural mineral cement-based interior wall coatings.
Following lunch we will walk outside and inspect a Koreteck wall mock-up with a brick veneer exterior and a Gigacrete interior finish system.
This one hour presentation provides for an understanding of sustainable wall construction using basic panelized wall units vs. other modular products. The featured sustainable wall units presented will be Koreteck solid core insulated panels.
Specifically we will give a brief description of Koreteck solid core insulated wall panel systems and then discuss comparative data for Koreteck vs. cmu, insulated concrete forms, insulated tilt up wall construction, and autoclaved aerated concrete panels. This data will compare each different wall system as they pertain to wall costs per square foot, steady state R-values, installation rates, and cooling and heating loads.
Sustainable interior finish systems for the Koreteck panels will also be presented by Gigacrete natural mineral cement-based interior wall coatings.
Following lunch we will walk outside and inspect a Koreteck wall mock-up with a brick veneer exterior and a Gigacrete interior finish system.
Building Panelization
Cole Elementary School
Building Panelization
Cole Elementary School
DAY 1
Sustainability StudiesSustainability Studies
DAY 2
DAY 3
DAY 4
DAY 5
DAY 6
DAY 7
DAY 8
DAY 9
DAY 10
DAY 11
DAY 12
DAY 13
DAY 14
DAY 15
DAY 16
DAY 17
DAY 18
DAY 19
DAY 20
DAY 21
DAY 22
DAY 23
DAY 24
DAY 25
DAY 26
DAY 27
DAY 28
DAY 29
DAY 30
DAY 31
PANEL LAYOUTPANEL LAYOUT
Sustainability StudiesSustainability Studies
Climate Zones
Zone 1 is less than 2,000 CDD and greater than 7,000 HDD.
Zone 2 is less than 2,000 CDD and 5,500 – 7,000 HDD.
Zone 3 is less than 2,000 CDD and 4,000 – 5,499 HDD.
Zone 4 is less than 2,000 CDD and less than 4,000 HDD.
Zone 5 is 2,000 CDD or more and less than 4,000 HDD.
Climate Zones
Zone 1 is less than 2,000 CDD and greater than 7,000 HDD.
Zone 2 is less than 2,000 CDD and 5,500 – 7,000 HDD.
Zone 3 is less than 2,000 CDD and 4,000 – 5,499 HDD.
Zone 4 is less than 2,000 CDD and less than 4,000 HDD.
Zone 5 is 2,000 CDD or more and less than 4,000 HDD.
Chicago, IL – Zone 2
Austin, TX – Zone 5
Chicago, IL – Zone 2
Austin, TX – Zone 5
Wall Systems ComparisonWall Systems Comparison
Sustainability StudiesSustainability Studies
Wall Systems ComparisonWall Systems Comparison
Sustainability StudiesSustainability Studies
Wall Systems Comparison / Life Cycle Overview
Koreteck Wall Systemsvs.
Xella AAC, CMU, Thermomass, and Polysteel Wall Systems
Wall Systems Comparison / Life Cycle Overview
Koreteck Wall Systemsvs.
Xella AAC, CMU, Thermomass, and Polysteel Wall Systems
Wall Systems Comparison / Life Cycle Overview – Koreteck wall systems vs.
Xella AAC, CMU, Thermomass, and Polysteel wall systems
1. Illustrations of one typical wall section in a Chicago, Illinois and Austin, Texas store incorporating the use of each different product in their construction
2. Summary sheet
• Wall Costs per square foot• Steady State R-Value• Installation Time• Cooling and Heating Loads
Wall Systems Comparison / Life Cycle Overview – Koreteck wall systems vs.
Xella AAC, CMU, Thermomass, and Polysteel wall systems
1. Illustrations of one typical wall section in a Chicago, Illinois and Austin, Texas store incorporating the use of each different product in their construction
2. Summary sheet
• Wall Costs per square foot• Steady State R-Value• Installation Time• Cooling and Heating Loads
Wall Systems ComparisonWall Systems Comparison
Sustainability StudiesSustainability Studies
Wall Systems ComparisonWall Systems Comparison
Sustainability StudiesSustainability Studies
Wall Type 1
Section II
Wall Type 1
Section II
Wall Type 1
KoreteckKoreteck
Wall Type 1
XELLA AACXELLA AAC
Wall Systems ComparisonWall Systems Comparison
Sustainability StudiesSustainability Studies
CMUCMU
PolysteelPolysteelThermomassThermomass
Wall Type 1
Wall Systems ComparisonWall Systems Comparison
Sustainability StudiesSustainability Studies
Wall Costs (per sq. ft.)
Austin Chicago Austin Chicago Austin Chicago Austin Chicago Austin Chicago
Wall Type 1 $27 $41 $35 $50 $34 $46 $42 $50 $37 $58
R-Value (Steady State)
Wall Type 1 3.23 (0.310) 13.68 (0.073) 34.73 (0.029) 12.63 (0.079) 24.04 (0.042)
Installation Time (1 Man Day production)
Wall Type 1 79 sq. ft. 235 sq. ft. 244 sq. ft. 100 sq. ft. 86 sq. ft.
Cooling (Tons Per Hour) for the entire building envelope
Austin Chicago Austin Chicago Austin Chicago Austin Chicago Austin Chicago
53.3 50.7 21.1 18.1 17.3 15.7 21.8 18.8 18.6 16.3
Heating Loads (MBH) for the entire building envelope
Austin Chicago Austin Chicago Austin Chicago Austin Chicago Austin Chicago
758 1326.3 238.8 434.5 153.0 268.3 255.9 457 182.9 316.6
KORETECKKORETECKXELLA AACXELLA AAC PolysteelPolysteelThermomassThermomass
Summary SheetSummary Sheet
Wall Systems ComparisonWall Systems Comparison
Sustainability StudiesSustainability Studies
CMUCMU
Wall Systems ComparisonWall Systems Comparison
Section IV
Conclusions
Section IV
Conclusions
Sustainability StudiesSustainability Studies
Wall Systems ComparisonWall Systems Comparison
IV. Conclusions
1. Individual Rankings2. Overall Rankings
IV. Conclusions
1. Individual Rankings2. Overall Rankings
Sustainability StudiesSustainability Studies
Wall Systems ComparisonWall Systems Comparison
Initial Wall Costs (lowest to highest)
1. Concrete Masonry Units2. Koreteck Insulated Metal Panel System3. Xella Autoclaved Aerated Concrete Panels4. Polysteel Insulated Concrete Forms5. Thermomass (tilt-up)
Initial Wall Costs (lowest to highest)
1. Concrete Masonry Units2. Koreteck Insulated Metal Panel System3. Xella Autoclaved Aerated Concrete Panels4. Polysteel Insulated Concrete Forms5. Thermomass (tilt-up)
Individual Rankings
R – Values (Steady State) (best to worst)
1. Koreteck Insulated Metal Panel System2. Polysteel Insulated Concrete Forms3. Xella Autoclaved Aerated Concrete Panels4. Thermomass (tilt-up)5. Concrete Masonry Units
R – Values (Steady State) (best to worst)
1. Koreteck Insulated Metal Panel System2. Polysteel Insulated Concrete Forms3. Xella Autoclaved Aerated Concrete Panels4. Thermomass (tilt-up)5. Concrete Masonry Units
Installation Rates (lowest to highest)
1. Koreteck Insulated Metal Panel System2. Xella Autoclaved Aerated Concrete Panels3. Thermomass (tilt-up)4. Polysteel Insulated Concrete Forms5. Concrete Masonry Units
Installation Rates (lowest to highest)
1. Koreteck Insulated Metal Panel System2. Xella Autoclaved Aerated Concrete Panels3. Thermomass (tilt-up)4. Polysteel Insulated Concrete Forms5. Concrete Masonry Units
Thermal Performance (best to worst)
1. Koreteck Insulated Metal Panel System2. Polysteel Insulated Concrete Forms3. Xella Autoclaved Aerated Concrete Panels4. Thermomass (tilt-up)5. Concrete Masonry Units
Thermal Performance (best to worst)
1. Koreteck Insulated Metal Panel System2. Polysteel Insulated Concrete Forms3. Xella Autoclaved Aerated Concrete Panels4. Thermomass (tilt-up)5. Concrete Masonry Units
Sustainability StudiesSustainability Studies
Wall Systems ComparisonWall Systems Comparison
Overall Rankings – Pros and ConsPros: Cons:
1st Koreteck Insulated Metal Panel System
• Second least expensive of all 5 materials• Best Steady State R-Value• Fastest Installation rates• Highest Thermal Performance
• Cannot Handle Shear Loading; Building must be braced
• Exposed insulation on both sides of the panels which must be covered
• Requires additional misc. steel supports
2nd Xella Autoclaved Aerated Concrete Panels
• Third least expensive of all 5 materials• Third Best Steady State R-Value• Second Fastest Installation rates• Third Highest Thermal Performance• Material can be painted or exposed
• Cannot Handle Shear Loading; Building must be braced
• Requires additional misc. steel supports
3rd Polysteel Insulated Concrete Forms
• Second Best Steady State R-Value• Second Highest Thermal Performance• Installation of forms can be expedited by
panelizing them in the factory prior to erection
• Exposed insulation on both sides of the walls which must be covered
• Fourth least expensive of all 5 materials• Fourth Fastest Installation rates
4th Thermomass (tilt-up)
• Third Fastest Installation rates• Walls can be constructed on the ground
incorporating all finish materials prior to erection
• Product can be pre-cast or tilt-up
• Casting slabs must be constructed and then removed
• The most expensive of all 5 materials• Fourth Best Steady State R-Value• Fourth Highest Thermal Performance
5th Concrete Masonry Units• Least expensive of all 5 materials• Can be readily supplied
• Worst Steady State R-Value• Worst Installation rates• Worst Thermal Performance• Most Wasteful
Sustainability StudiesSustainability Studies