Is a non airtight wall part of an MAM

Plans and things, layout, style, where do I put my near-fields etc.

Moderators: Aaronw, kendale, John Sayers

irecord
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 3:10 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Is a non airtight wall part of an MAM

Post by irecord »

Hi Bastiaan and All,

I am particularly interested in the subject line of this thread and how you are dealing with the following from your initial post:

"Humidity is an attention point in the dutch climate, and therefore a brick wall will have several openings in it for ventilation, and possible water drainage. The purpose of those openings are to prevent that moisture enters the inner building. Should I still consider the brick wall one of the leaves in a MAM even if it is not airtight?"

"I think I can come away with omitting the openings, as the current insight is that it is not necessary. So that will define my first leaf"

In Australia our building regulations require that we include these "weep holes" for the reason you described. As I am proposing a brick (concrete block) outer leaf and a timber stud wall inner leaf for my studio build in a new home, I am interested to know how you came to the conclusion that the weep holes are not necessary to prevent moisture buildup?

As was stated, leaving weep holes in the brickwork compromises the acoustic integrity of the two leaf structure, so is not an option, however once I have complied with building regulations, if I seal these holes I want to ensure I am not going to have wall cavity moisture issues in the future.
John Sayers
Site Admin
Posts: 5462
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2003 12:46 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Is a non airtight wall part of an MAM

Post by John Sayers »

Should I still consider the brick wall one of the leaves in a MAM even if it is not airtight?"
No - to achieve a soundproof room you must have two totally sealed rooms, an inner and an outer.

Remember, sound is air pressure.

cheers
john
John Sayers Productions

If this site helps you build your studio please use the Donate button.
irecord
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 3:10 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Is a non airtight wall part of an MAM

Post by irecord »

So in Melbourne's more temperate climate, you would advise NOT sealing an outer brick wall built with say Besser blocks to act as an outer leaf, but rather construct a standard brick veneer cavity wall with weep holes, then air gap, then another stud wall with 2 sheets of gyprock for the internal structure?

This would obviously reduce the internal studio dimensions somewhat, but would function as a two leaf system while preventing moisture retention?
gullfo
Moderator
Posts: 5344
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 3:55 am
Location: Panama City Beach, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Is a non airtight wall part of an MAM

Post by gullfo »

as John noted - the MAM works if there are two sealed rooms - in the case of the brick veneer - this is a facade with ventilation which has behind it has a sealed framed wall? so outer leaf is sealed. then you build an inner room which is also sealed. the outer brick veneer while technically a 3rd leaf is ventilated and likely more massive than either of the two inner layers of mass, so unlikely to be problematic.

so if you have:

brick (vented) -> small air gap -> plywood sheath w/ moisture barrier -> frame + insulation -> 1" air gap -> frame + insulation -> inner mass (plywood + 2x gwb)

my thought is you likely need to beef up that outer sheathing - install drywall or cement board between studs to increase the mass there.
Glenn
anodivirta
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2019 6:41 pm
Location: Finland

Re: Is a non airtight wall part of an MAM

Post by anodivirta »

gullfo wrote:as John noted - the MAM works if there are two sealed rooms - in the case of the brick veneer - this is a facade with ventilation which has behind it has a sealed framed wall? so outer leaf is sealed. then you build an inner room which is also sealed. the outer brick veneer while technically a 3rd leaf is ventilated and likely more massive than either of the two inner layers of mass, so unlikely to be problematic.

so if you have:

brick (vented) -> small air gap -> plywood sheath w/ moisture barrier -> frame + insulation -> 1" air gap -> frame + insulation -> inner mass (plywood + 2x gwb)

my thought is you likely need to beef up that outer sheathing - install drywall or cement board between studs to increase the mass there.
Can you (generally) say that in 3-leaf design you should beef up inner/outer/midle leaf, or is there some generic guidelines for this?
ie. what has the greates effect or what is the best place to add mass (apart from tearing the wall and making a 2-leaf design :D )
gullfo
Moderator
Posts: 5344
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 3:55 am
Location: Panama City Beach, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Is a non airtight wall part of an MAM

Post by gullfo »

if your outer brick facade needs to stay vented to comply with code, then you're either going to remove that or violate code and practical venting to reduce risk of moisture damage. and since it's vented, there is not really MAM on the inner layer although there will be some effect because of its mass. tradeoffs.
Glenn
Bastiaan
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2020 1:04 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Is a non airtight wall part of an MAM

Post by Bastiaan »

irecord wrote:
In Australia our building regulations require that we include these "weep holes" for the reason you described. As I am proposing a brick (concrete block) outer leaf and a timber stud wall inner leaf for my studio build in a new home, I am interested to know how you came to the conclusion that the weep holes are not necessary to prevent moisture buildup?
In my personal situation, we have some liberty in the Netherlands to build without a permit. The building still needs to meet the building code, but nobody will come and check it. I do the organization of the build and part of the actual building myself. Of course I follow 99% of the building code, because I don't want damage or unsafe situations. However, in this case, I make an exception for the weep holes, but only where the studio is located in my building.

There are two functions for the weep holes: the holes on the lower end of the wall are for water drainage in case water manages to get into the cavity between the leaves. It drips down and is guided with a foil to these holes. The holes further up on the wall are for ventilation, so damp can escape easily. The idea to use these holes originate from several decades ago. Back then, the general thought was that most of the moist related problems were due to moist coming from the outside, transfering to the inside of the building.

Since we started insulating buildings, the "moisture management" has gotten more attention. Due to the insulation the outer structure of the building gets colder and chances increase that damp condensates against the coldest surface in the cavity, turning it into water. If this water cannot escape, accumulation can cause damage. It turns out that water can escape from the cavity, also without the weep holes. The brick wall itself is porous and rather open for water damp. In the Netherlands it is fairly common nowadays to blow the cavity full with thermal insulation which effectively renders the weep holes useless. The dutch government investigated it, approved it, and even has subsidized it for some period.

Another modern insight is that, in most situations where moist is an issue, it orinates from the inside of the building as people release damp or their activities do. So in general, one should take care that it is very difficult for damp to enter the cavity from the inside, and that it is very easy for damp to escape from the cavity to the outside.

My plan of action is to use damp proof foil on the inside of the building, damp open (but water proof) foil between the brick wall and the wooden frame, and taking serious care of ventilation (with muffler boxes). Ventilation will prevent 99% of moisture issues anyway.

I am not saying my reasoning applies to your situation as well, but I think I am taking a fairly small risk.
Bastiaan
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2020 1:04 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Is a non airtight wall part of an MAM

Post by Bastiaan »

The outer shell of my building is nearly complete, apart from the garage doors and the windows. 2022 will be the year I will make a start with the actual studio and I am really looking forward to making this dream come true :yahoo:

The response from John Sayers on my initial question, and the response from Gullfo got me thinking if I need to make an adaption to my plan.

At this point it is still fairly easy and cheap to not use the outer brick layer of the building as the outer shell. I just have to add a double layer of plywood and a solid amount of caulk, but that's it. My problem is that I cannot judge so well how the brick layer will interact with the rest of the system. I can simply drill some weep holes in it to make sure it will not be air tight and create a triple leaf.

What do you guys think?
gullfo
Moderator
Posts: 5344
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 3:55 am
Location: Panama City Beach, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Is a non airtight wall part of an MAM

Post by gullfo »

the idea of the vapour barrier is to prevent inbound or outbound moisture condensation depending on your climate. in this case, a new set of inner "exterior mass" walls will likely still need to comply with barrier practices - however if the new mass is lighter than the existing mass, you likely won't have a triple-leaf condition and your barrier configuration should be simpler as the existing wall and interior wall + air gap & insulation will be a different temperature difference (typically smaller) than the outer-most wall and the existing interior wall.
Glenn
Bastiaan
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2020 1:04 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Is a non airtight wall part of an MAM

Post by Bastiaan »

After reading Glenns response and giving it some more consideration, I am still wondering if I should stick to my original plan and use the outer brick layer as the outer leaf, and not add a mass in between. The situation is as follows:
airtight leafs.png
The outer brick layer, the polytex membrane, the studs and the rockwool are in place, the inner brick layer is not in place yet. The polytex membrane stops water, but allows damp to escape.

I cannot judge fully if the outer brick layer is 100% airtight, this is a matter of workmanship, but it looks pretty good. If I would add a vapour barrier at the location pointed to by the arrow, it is an additional opportunity to seal the space off and make it airtight. However, since the mass of the vapour barrier is so small, I suppose LF sound will probably go right through it, so I am not sure if this will help me in terms of sound isolation.

It are the junctions between walls and walls and walls and ceiling that I am worried about. If I would add a 3rd mass at the location of the vapour barrier, it would be far easier to build an airtight leaf with uniform surface density, but it would reduce the distance between my leafs from 24 cm to ~10 cm, and the rockwool would be on the wrong side of the cavity...
Bastiaan
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2020 1:04 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Is a non airtight wall part of an MAM

Post by Bastiaan »

I have more or less completed the wood frame for my studio. On the bottom side it is very sturdy, but if I push the frame in the upper corners, it sways a bit. This is what one should expect I guess. I have contacted Mason industries for a quote on their sway braces. This will couple the inner room to the outer room to gain additional stability. However, I think it should also be possible to eliminate part of the swaying using x-braces on the frame of the inner room, like they do on steel buildings. Do you guys have any experience with this?
gullfo
Moderator
Posts: 5344
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 3:55 am
Location: Panama City Beach, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Is a non airtight wall part of an MAM

Post by gullfo »

you can use steel straps as an x-bracing as this will fit under the interior mass. but recommend the sway bracing as a more stable option.
Glenn
Bastiaan
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2020 1:04 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Is a non airtight wall part of an MAM

Post by Bastiaan »

The mason DNSB sway braces turned out to be pretty costly for my small order, so I decided to do both. I used wood slats for x-braces and I ordered 6 Mason sway braces to be used around the door frame. The wood slats make the frame much more sturdy for a total cost of €22.

Left and right of the door frame I will install a sway brace in the middle and on the top (on the bottom the frames are fixed to the floor) and in the wall opposite to the doorframe I will install 2 sway braces on the top of the wall.
Post Reply