No one has any comments about Composite ICFs? Made of 85% recycled material?

those all seem a little different from each other. but in the end not as strong as a monolithic icf wall. but you know that. alot of thermal breaks and places for air vapor transfer. so while those are great systems and recycled is good. i still believe ICF's are and will stay the Cadillac of wall system's for a long time to come.

I was thinking composite ICFs would be ideally suited for stucco or synthetic stucco coating. Being cementitious coatings could be applied directly to them without lathe. I also thought composite ICFs were airtight.

Nobody uses composite ICFs here in the north-land, but they are popular in the SW, were stucco is king.

Would the APEX Block with the interlocking module eliminate the thermal breaks? I spoke to some folks that have built with this product in AZ, NM, and Texas, they seem to be happy with the product. Does anyone have any construction stories to share regarding building with the APEX composite block?

We want thermal breaks, right? Thermal bridges or thermal conductivity we don't want.

Composite ICFs have a minimum of 4" of the composite insulation and 10" or so where the post and beams are not.

OK, here is my question. What rating is given to the APEX Block for insulation/thermal capability verses other ICF. i'm looking at building a house with this material and am looking at comments, suggestions, and advice.

Thanks!!

Here's my answer: ask someone at Arxx elemsnts to answer the question. They now own Arxx, Polysteel, Apex, and Eco Block. Which system do they prefer since the websites for each contradict each other.

If you go by the Apex websites side by side comparisons of Apex vs. "foam Forms (ICF)" you would wonder why they bother carrying the Arxx product line as theyr are "inferior".

If you are doing the installation, pick up a 5.33 s.f "ICF" forms then pick up a 5.33 s.f Apex form. Which one is heavier and by how much? Which do you think is easier to work with on a jobsite?

This forum is not for "bashing" different types of systems, but for giving personal opinions based on experience. I have not worked directly with composite ICFs such as Apex, but contractors I have worked with have preferred the foam forms vs. the composite on a regular basis.

Just a couple of thoughts.......Good Luck with your research.

The energy efficiency of Composite ICFs appear to be untested and the manufactures state you will save 50% on your heating and cooling cost. Tech Block says "has a clear wall R-value of 47.5". Rastra being the oldest, seems to have the most testing or a least the most information.

I know that any ICF is better than any other system for almost all structures. Composite ICFs have there place. Benefits are the high recycled content and less concrete. Also they are ideal for masonry exteriors especially stucco. No lathe is required. I installed manufactured stone on Composite ICFs without lathe or scratch coat without a problem.

But lap siding is likely not cost effective to install without ties. Although I believe glueing drywall would be fine, I think MN building inspectors would give us a hard time.

I would like to use more Composite ICFs in MN.

I have worked with Rastra here in Texas and, like any product, has its pros and cons.  It is a cementitious material and accepts stucco (exterior finish) and plaster (interior finish) readily.  It can be shaved and formed into nearly any shape.  Very artsy.  The One World Theater here in Austin is a Rastra project (http://www.yelp.com/biz_photos/3daC2zIjC5Cn9_9lxspAwg?select=g3HSP3pMpNArL0uEHhhIVg).

Also, since it is cementitious, you can put a flame to it and it will not burn.  It will hardly smoke.

Drawbacks include:
*Weight.  You will need a forklift to offload the material.  Two men can handle a block, but for high walls, some type of crane may be necessary.  Foam forms are much lighter and easier to handle.
*Storage.  You do NOT want to let the blocks get wet.  They can delaminate.  You will want to keep the blocks covered/tarped while being stored.  This isn't nearly as big an issue once the blocks are set in place, because the water will drain through the assembly.
*Connecting blocks.  Unlike foam forms, these blocks have no ties to connect them.  They are "glued" together with a foam gun, so you'll go through a lot more foam than you would on a "normal" ICF block.  You need to pay special attention to corners and reinforce these securely.  Also, the first row of block is foamed to the slab.  I can't speak for the other ICFs out there, but Quad-Lock uses a metal track, attaced directly to the slab, for its first course.
*Rebar placement coming out of the slab is critical since it must line up with the holes in the block.  With foam forms, you can always bend the rebar slightly to accomodate the webbing or ties.  This is not a critical issue if you are precise in your lay-out, but it is something to be cognizant of.


Rastra was my first intro to ICFs and, like that first car, still holds an attraction.  If I had a project with a Mediterranean/Adobe style - think round and smooth - I might suggest Rastra to my client.  For the typical, square-cornered, veneered house, I would probably go with an ICF block simply because of the ease of use.

Hope that helps

My solution for lap siding w/ composite ICFs would be to install 1x2 furring strips.  You can run long screws through the 1x2, into the concrete chase.  Run baling wire around the 1x2 to hold it in place while the concrete is poured.  When the concrete is poured, it grabs the screws.  Siding can then be nailed to the 1x2.  The 1x2 has the added benefit of a weep channel between the siding and the block.

Green,

What do you me it laminates when it gets wet?

I think Rastra, Perform wall and Cempo are two pieces glued together. Amazon and Apex are one piece.

icf,

What I meant was that, if the block becomes saturated, the glue joint can be weakened, increasing the possibility of a blow-out.

Also, the man who introduced me to introduced me to Rastra (who had several years and several projects under his belt - One World Theatre, for example) told me that sometimes during shipping, the blocks at the bottom of the shipping stack could become weakened by the weight of the other blocks.  Since you generally pull your stock from the top of the stack as you build, however, this wasn't always a problem since the "weakened" blocks would be pulled last and placed at the top of the wall where there is less head pressure and, therefore, less chance of a blowout.  (sorry for the long run-on sentence.)

For the record, I have not had any of the problems I just described.  Just something to keep in mind.  I have talked recently with several contractors who use Perform wall and they have had no problems either.

I still think Rastra is a cool product.

jeff

Also, if the block gets saturated with water, being already "heavy", it will be more than twice its weight - you might as well install a CMU, which as a unit is smaller and less cumbersome to install than the huge, heavy Rastra block. In dry conditions Rastra is a good product.

I met the owner or boss anyway of Cempo in Nevada, which is dry of course. But he had a two story shop office made of their Composite ICF but never stuccoed it, and it is many years old. The only way it was affected by the exposure was the sun had completely dissolved any exposed EPS. But that is not a problem.