I'm planning on building a 2,000 sq ft, single story home in Placitas, NM in the next 30 months.  We plan on using a passive solar design.  Our lot is on a ridge with some strong winds.  It is close to the highway, so noise reduction is a concern.  I don't expect to have usable basement, just a foundation.  I'm starting to do research on building materials.  From what I've read SIPs for the the walls will run us 10% - 15% then ICFs, but SIPS don't provide the sound insulation of ICFs.  Should that be one of my concerns?  Based upon the scant information I've provided, should I take any other factors other than cost into my decision?

Thanks for whatever information you can provide.

Bill,

Get quotes for alternative building systems before you decide which will cost the least.  I would think that in most areas, ICFs would cost more than SIPs.  But lately, with this crazy economy, ICFs may cost less.  I guess it depends upon the local competition and what is available. 

Most companies can quote from conventional home plans.

It is close to the highway, so noise reduction is a concern.

Yeah, the winner there is ICF. It's also high desert and I think that means ICF again because of the mass. You have to search very carefully for a contractor who will not only do the ICF for you, but who can do it well and efficiently.

Hi Bill,

If noise reduction is a concern, you probably will want to use ICFs. Because of their high mass, ICFs are very effective at reducing noise transmission, even low frequency noise. SIPs on the other hand are not effective in regards to reducing low frequency noise.

Good luck with your project.

High diurnal temperature swings (deltas of 30F+ are common) in Placitas also tip the performance balance toward high-mass walls. ICF will measurably outperform SIP in that climate, at equivalen-R. While that wall-mass is unavailable for tempering the passive solar gains from windows, it dampens the heat gains/losses through walls.

In a true passive solar design you'd probably need/want R30+ walls (independent of the internal mass and mass-weighted "effective R") given that Placitis is still within US climate zone 5.

I would look into SCIP systems.
Check out http://www.ornl.gov/sci/roofs+walls/research/detailed_papers/thermal/index.html
CONCLUSIONS

Comparative analysis of sixteen different material configurations showed that the most effective wall assembly was the wall with thermal mass (concrete) applied in good contact with the interior of the building. Walls where the insulation material was concentrated on the interior side, performed much worse. Wall configurations with the concrete wall core and insulation placed on both sides of the wall performed slightly better, however, (((their performance was significantly worse than walls containing foam core and concrete shells on both sides.)))
I am running one 1,500 amp elect.110 heater to heat the first and second floors for the drywallers.
Thermal mass with the proper thermal break is the answer. You can add thermal mass to SIPs and ICFs for an added cost.

Weather this week

44°F | °C

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Mostly Cloudy

Wind: E at 2 mph

Humidity: 65%

51°

36°

57°

39°

60°

44°

68°

45°

A number of SCIP retailers and builders exist.
I will be taking a model home to Texas to demonstrate its fire resistance, 2- 4 hour rating. R30-40 walls and much more.

I am running one 1,500 amp elect.110 heater to heat the first and second floors for the drywallers

Maybe you mean 1500 watts.

Is it a small home or is it a very efficient home?

Thanks everyone for your responses. My concern with ICFs is that I've read that the high mass may not be critical. I've also read that the SIPs outperform ICFs because the outside insulation prevents the sun from heating the mass of the concrete walls.

Are SCIPS and SIPs synonymous? The SCIPS sites I've been to claim great sound insulation also. I'm looking for a builder or architect in Albuquerque who has experience with both and can help me in design and decisions. Any recommendations?

Thanks again for everyone's help.

I've also read that the SIPs outperform ICFs because the outside insulation prevents the sun from heating the mass of the concrete walls.

I think you might be confusing thermal mass with mass effect. It's hard to call it "critical", but it is real and can be measured in testing.

Thermal mass is important in passive solar applications when the sun is directly, or in some cases, indirectly incident on a massive surface which stores warmth and releases it slowly. The mass effect with ICF has to do with slowing heat transfer through the walls. It is real and it is what makes ICF perform better than a wall with an equivalent calculated R-value.

I'd use active solar, but if you really want passive, then you want the concrete exposed to the sun. SCIPs do this, ICFs don't.

Bill: SCIP is not synonymous with SIP, but there are some similarities with both SIP and ICF.

Fully assembled, SCIP technology becomes essentially a concrete-skinned SIP (concrete instead of OSB, etc) with a substantial amount of thermal mass on the interior side fully within the insulation. The interior thermal mass gives it a thermal performance edge over ICFs & SIP. It's typically set up by erecting the pre-made EPS w/ steel reinforcing steel wire/bar either already built-in or site-applied, and the concrete skins are spray-applied shot-crete style or with stucco-pumps. (In less-developed it can even be applied by hand with trowels.) Some SCIP systems are designed with periodic hollows in the EPS cores for pouring concrete pillars in the center of the wall thickness to add structural strength with thinner exterior/interior skins. The exterior finish is usually stucco, interior usually hard-plaster. For a rough idea of the process see:

http://www.3dsmartstructures.com/tridipanel_procedure.html#thumb

In some ways SCIP can be structurally superior to either SIP or ICF, since it can be done with the walls & roof as a single reinforced concrete monocoque, and the hard concrete exterior makes it quite resilient against hurricane-blown debris, etc. Having a high-mass roof is very useful in cooling dominated climates. No surprise that it's most-popular in tropics and in hurricane zones.

Dana,
Thanks for the reply and website link.  I've viewed a few videos on SCIPs on You Tube.  So, in an earlier post, you recommended ICF over SIP for Placitas.  Would you recommend SCIP over ICF for Placitas, or still stick with ICF.

Thanks again

Where is Tridipanel manufactured?  I am concerned about freight costs.

When I used this system it was called Insteel.  It required expensive shotcrete equipment and a lot of labor.  I would be surprised that SCIP would cost less than ICF.  But that is why one should get quotes.

What Alton said- get quotes, and importantly, try to get an in-person look at the finished product- some contractors are better than others at getting things level & square with good moisture control, etc. I've never built with SCIP, nor do I know of any SCIP contractors in my area, so I'd have a hard time getting a look at it, whereas I'd have multiple options for ICF contractors. YMMV

But think beyond just the structural wall costs, think finishing costs too. SCIP seems inherently higher labor for the structural parts compared to ICF, but has lower concrete volume and lower material & labor on the finish surfaces. With stucco siding + hard-plaster interior the shot-crete of the SCIP is your scratch coat. With ICF you need to install interior gypsum or plaster to meet fire code, and there's a wide range of siding options, but none would be as cheap as stucco on shot-crete.

The thermal performance boost of SCIP over ICF isn't huge, but it's measurable. If you're going all-out on the passive-solar design there are many ways to increase the thermal mass inside the thermal boundary of the home, but with SCIP high interior mass is an inherent aspect of the approach.

I'm missing something about the termal performance of SCIPs with the sandwich having block reinforcing wire going from the outside wall surface to the inside wall surface there has to be a problem with conduction lose.

Then total cross-section of the connecting wires isn't huge, and doesn't have to be. But yes, the through-wires are a thermal bridge, just as the fasteners through the EPS into ICF for mounting siding & interior walls are, reducing the performance a bit.

Some SCIPS are now using non-conducting (very low conducting) polymer ties instead of galvanized steel wire.

An additional layer of EPS could be added to the exterior side of the shotcreted SCIP before stucco to offset the problem with the energy loss through the wire ties.  This method could easily increase the R-value to enhance energy savings.  It should also add some more insulated mass to the walls.  Adding the extra EPS would be easier to do if done before the shotcrete fully cures.  Depending upon the mix, shotcrete can achieve a very high PSI which would make it more difficult for attaching anything other than stucco.

Adding an extra layer of EPS to the exterior would also compensate for some of the EPS that was removed for embedding rebar.  (Some EPS has to be removed so that shotcrete can fully cover the rebar used around the openings.)  Been there and done that with InSteel (now called Tridipanel).

Same with fasteners with any exterior board insulation

I calculate that on a 170 lin. ft wall you will have about 47"x 8' ft of steel transfering heat , hardly insignificant. The fasteners in icf's are going into poly webs not steel, a big difference. Poly in not a big heat transfer medium.  You can also add an extra layer of EPS to the outside of icf's to increase the r-value, which I've done

> I calculate that on a 170 lin. ft wall you will have about 47"x 8' ft of steel transfering heat

I get ~5"x5".