|
|
|
||
Line 20:
The use of SIPs brings many benefits and some drawbacks compared to a conventional framed building.
The cost of SIPs are higher than the materials for a comparable framed building in the United States; however, this may not be true elsewhere. A well-built home using SIPs will have a tighter building envelope and the walls will have higher insulating properties, which leads to fewer drafts and a decrease in operating costs. Also, due to the standardized and all-in-one nature of SIPs, construction time can be less than for a frame home, as well as requiring fewer tradesmen. The panels can be used as floor, wall, and roof, with the use of the panels as floors being of particular benefit when used above an uninsulated space below. As a result, the total life-cycle cost of a SIP-constructed building will, in general, be lower than for a conventional framed one—by as much as 40%. Whether the total construction cost (materials and labor) is lower than for conventional framing appears to depend on the circumstances, including local labor conditions and the degree to which the building design is optimized for one or the other technology.
An OSB skinned system structurally outperforms conventional stick framed construction in some cases; primarily in axial load strength. SIPs maintain similar versatility to stick framed houses when incorporating custom designs. Also, since SIPs work as framing, insulation, and exterior sheathing, and can come precut from the factory for the specific job, the exterior building envelope can be built quite quickly.
| |||