• Jun 25

Fawning Over Foundations

When it comes to foundation construction in Canada, there are essentially 3 methods to consider: Block, Poured or ICF. Each is made with concrete, they all must be constructed on top of a concrete footing, and proper waterproofing, insulation and drainage is a must. This all sounds great, but what’s the difference?

Concrete Block
Let’s start with the quick and dirty solution. Block foundations are constructed by arranging a series of concrete blocks on top one another, each being held together with mortar. They are constructed in a straightforward manner, don’t require forming, require little maintenance, and are pretty much available everywhere. As a result, a talented mason can build the foundation relatively cheaply and quickly.

However, it’s not uncommon for moisture to weep through the walls and cause all sorts of problems. If improperly waterproofed, I suppose each approach is vulnerable to moisture in one way or another, but block construction is especially susceptible because of the amount of mortar used and the porous nature of the blocks themselves.

Poured Concrete
Poured walls are also quite common, however their construction is a little more involved when compared to a block wall. Before the concrete can be poured, temporary forms must first be erected. These forms create a hollow structure in which the concrete is poured, and they remain in place for about a day until the concrete has started to cure. As a result, labour costs are greater as you’ll need a crew to erect and dismantle the forming, plus you’ll need to coordinate the concrete delivery and pour.

Poured walls do result in a stronger structure (so long as the concrete mix is correct), so you can typically go deeper than you could with a block wall. Definitely a plus if you’re looking for higher basement ceilings.

Insulated Concrete Forms
We opted for ICFs, which are somewhat of a hybrid in that they require both blocks and poured concrete. According to the trusty Wiki, ICFs are described as a “stay-in-place formwork for energy-efficient, cast-in-place reinforced-concrete walls”.

There are a variety of companies that offer a variety of ICF solutions, but they all basically work the same way — Foundation walls are erected out of reinforced polystyrene foam blocks, and those blocks are then filled with concrete. Rebar is often inserted or integrated into the block for added strength, and temporary shoring is required for additional support during the pour.

ICFs are considered the “greener” solution because of the vast benefits they afford; even temperature, fewer drafts, fewer hot and cold spots, consistent floor-to-ceiling temperature, noise reduction, strength, and durability. But the real beauty of ICFs is the inherent insulation value that comes with the foam. There appears to be lot of varying opinions on the matter, but if the thermal mass and air-sealing effects of the concrete are considered, it’s argued that the effective R-value of ICFs is somewhere around 40+.

ICF foundations will ultimately cost more than other two solutions, but you’ll make up the difference in materials and labour costs as you don’t have to frame or insulate the basement (drywall affixes directly to furring strips built into the blocks), plus the energy savings that result from the higher R-values.

Once again, the greener solution costs more up front… however, it also appears to be a smarter investment with all things considered.

Photos via finehomebuilding.com & Flickr

 
 
 

4 Comments

Brad

I can’t wait to see this project done. I’m pretty excited about it!

— posted on June 27, 2008
Jeremy Bell

Thanks Brad… we’re pretty excited too!

— posted on June 27, 2008
Michael Clarke

Jeremy:

Great project, and so far nice description of the materials trade-offs. Neat idea to thoroughly document all phases, write the articles, and do the book.

I have to ask you, though: Did you seriously consider ICF construction for the above-grade exterior walls as well as just the basement?

I would be interested to hear about your rationale. I have been looking at a product called Rastra (www.rastra.com) that can be used in that way.

Michael Clarke

— posted on October 31, 2008
Jeremy Bell

Hi Michael - indeed, we did consider ICF to the roof (I spoke about it here). Quite frankly, I would have preferred to go ICF to the roof - however there were a few complications that came with that decision.

  1. I wasn’t aware that ICF was a viable option for all exterior walls until well into the design process, and making that change would have required a great deal of revisions. Given our deadlines, it really wouldn’t have been possible to make these changes and get the plans submitted into the city. We considered submitting what we had, revising and submitting again… but we ultimately decided against it.
  2. Because the ICF blocks are wider than a traditional stud wall, we ran into issues with the overall width of the house, particularly in the kitchen. If you look at the drawings, you’ll see that there isn’t a great deal of distance between the kitchen island and the stairs. Had we used ICFs, we would have needed to reduce this even further and we weren’t prepared to loose another few inches. It seems trivial, but that will be a high traffic area.
  3. Price was another factor. Taking everything into account, ICFs were more expensive. Now, it wasn’t a huge difference, but it was a difference nonetheless… and we really didn’t have any additional wiggle room in the budget.

I can’t speak to the Rastra product, but we used Nudura for our foundation and we would have used it for the entire structure had we gone that route.

— posted on November 10, 2008

Leave a comment