Hi i am in western australia and looking into building residential homes commercial units/factories in durisol. This product has just become available here and wondering how it compares to eps systems to us it seems durisol is alot more user friendly? Both systems are rarely used here we are stuck in a mindset of double brick cavity construction, there has to be a better way.
How do the R values EPS to Durisol compare? (PS am dubious of some company's claims)
How many Durisol can be laid in a day comm/resi?
Blowouts in eps look likea problem is this true?
Any info would greatly appreciated especially contractors on site. TA

Positiva,

Good luck with your new venture. Durisol is not used much in my area. A good quality ICF form is easier and stronger than the Durisol or CMUs. The R value of Durisol is around 1.75 per inch where a good eps is around R 5 per inch. What this equates to is ICF forms are typically around 3 times more energy efficient than Durisol. Your second question is too vague to answer. Your third question is false, if you use a good quality ICF. We routinely use a 2" vibrator in our walls with out having a problem with blow outs. I do not have any personal experience with Durisol but a good friend of mine has worked with it a couple of times and said it has a few issues like good concrete consolidation down each hole due to the dryness of the product sucking the life out of your concrete and if the product get wet from rain it has a tendancy to blow out if you try to vibrate it. Hope this helps.

ICF Contractor

I just found this post and would like to correct some inaccuraccies that ICF contractor has communicated and set the record straight. I have worked with multiple Durisol projects and can tell you the followoing:

1. Although Durisol does have an insulation value of R1.75 per inch for the durisol itself, what ICF Contractor didn't communicate is that durisol adds additional insulation inserts made from Rockwool mineral fiber insulation inserts that have an R-value of 4.4 per inch. Moreover, since this insert is positioned on the exterior face of the concrete core, it maximizes any thermal mass benefits that may be realized - if there are any based on location, orientation, climate information, etc. The durisol webs are not a thermal bridge since the R-value through the web of a 12" block is R-22 and through the cavity with the insert it is R-21. Furthermore, there blocks available can range to up to R-28, which is more than the typical EPS ICF form.

2. Typical productivity rates will range from 70 blocks per day per person to over 100, depending on the project complexity, etc. This is an average over the whole project and includes days when there is no stacking occuring - days where you are just pouring concrete, prepping, etc.

3. The "good friend" that indicated that the Durisol blocks get weaker when wet is completely false. The Durisol is a cementitious product and like all cement, it gets stronger with water. ICF contractor is correct about the requirement for a more water in the concrete as Durisol will allow the water to drain through the blocks. Durisol does not suck or wick moisture, and to this end acts as a drainage layer. It will allow water to drain through with gravity. It is important to have a high slump concrete so that you don't end up with stiff concrete in the wall. The advantage to this that I find, is that you can use a really high slump concrete, which ensures no voids (with minimal vibration/consolidation) and since the water drains through, you do not end up with weaker concrete. In conventional forms, high slump concrete means more water and weaker concrete. This is not the case with Durisol and they have shown me tests that show that for the same concrete mix, the concrete that cures in Durisol is approx 10% stronger because of the "dewatering" effect.

4. Durisol makes millions of square feet of both block and noise barrier products. The noise barrier products are installed and left exposed outside for years (oldest is over 30 years old) and there is no more durable material out there (in my opinion).

I know the post a year old, but I hate to see misinformation out there for anyone to read and see.

www.durisol.com is for the noise barrier systems
www.durisolbuild.com is for the ICF system

An experienced ICF crew can lay 12 sq. ft. of ICF per hour.  The time starts when you arrive at the job and ends when you leave the job. Braces back on the trailer walls all straight, plumb, and level.  Any rasping needed finished.  Once you understand how to handle the concrete pumping and ordering the correct mix blowouts become almost a non issue.  We always use vibrators to consolidate concrete and still have almost no blowouts.  If one should occur it is handled in an organized fashion without panic.  

That productivity rate of 12 sq ft per manhour works with both my Styrofoam and Durisol ICF experience as well (even though the Durisol blocks are smaller - the sq ft rate per manhour is the same for some reason).

With styrofoam ICF, we always use a vibrator (can not get the high slump concrete with this).

With the Durisol, we rarely use a vibrator (because we have the wet mix).

Can you elaborate a little bit more on "the productivity rate of 12 sq ft per manhour" is this all included, like windows, rebar, ... . Thanks

Caluwe-Gong -- see futurestone.com for a timelapse of a 50K square feet job that was done in about 13 sqft per manhour. Yes, in order to have a meaningful metric, i subscribe to the approach of icfblocks above. Your better installers regularly stack 100 sqft per man hour but the metric has no real meaning (or can tell a misleading story) unless you include popping lines, bracing, bucks, bending and/or cutting steel, pumping, cleanup, etc. etc. etc.

The example did cover snaping lines, cutting/bending steel, unloading/installing bracing& scaffolding, pumping concrete, vibrating concrete, installing window bucks, removing braces, cleanup, rasping if needed, loading braces on trailer and oh by the way we built on a set of futers that  were 36" out of leval.  We had to scribe the blocks to the footers. 

Good for you. We are on the same page exactly. I try to call attention to this occasionally because you will find examples on youtube etc. that only show the stacking and make claims on speed. I my opinion (and yours) you haven't set a example of speed if you don't actually include the entire task. P.S. Hope they were sloped by design and not actually 36" out of level. :)

Wasn't by design.  nothing like a great surprise.  I'l try to attach  picture.  Footers were done by a GC.  His own people under his supervision.