Does such a thing exist? Is there a forum topic, blog, or website out there somewhere in the great expanse that has gathered together an exhaustive (if such were possible) list of enclosure methods for timber frames?

If not, would there be any opposition to the idea that we gather here, for the benefit of all of us, such a list?

I'm always in search of the 'perfect' enclosure method, a mythical object I know does not exist, but still I am always looking to innovate and solve the problems inherent with this craft of ours. The thought came to me, gee it would sure be nice if there were some convenient database we could go back to, share with each other, and see what our colleagues are doing in this specific field.

Maybe I'm crazy. Or maybe it's out there and I've just been missing out!

I'll second the motion! I've read some good books on "Green" building, but none that deal with varying options for timber frames in particular. I would be happy to add whatever I am able.

I believe the "ayes have it" if we all waited to vote...Great topic David!!!...

I can start with perhaps some "category breakdown" suggestions...

Within the two primary categories I would suggest:

Thermal Mass Systems (aka "flywheel effect") measured in U Values

Loft Systems (aka trapped "dry" air) measured in R Values

Combination Systems.

Within the above we have the following:

Modern and/or Heavily industrialized:

Spun Glass (virtually worthless in the big picture.)

Foams (Not something I recommend at all anymore except perhaps for roofs

Cellulose (This could be in both "natural/traditional" also, as it has been used for well over 500 years in several applications if not older...

Aircretes

Fibercretes

Mineral Wools (over 150 years old, very good and could be considered traditional because of the longevity of its application and "recycled" material elements...)

(??? I feel I am missing one or two ???)


Natural/Traditional:

Cobb (...and related infill systems of masonry, stone, nogging, chinking, etc...)

Bale Materials

Sawdust (cellulose)

Cotton

Wool

Mineral Wool

Stack Wood (aka "Kubbhus" and related infill systems)

Textiles (felts and related modalities)

Build into a bank/ground, utilize the sun, face the building accordingly. Do away with this idea of a traditional building. Use the earth to stabilize the interior of the building, moderate it with dirt. This removes a lot of infrastructure of a building. Much less insulative material is needed. Less area of windows choices, put them all on the south side. Triple glaze, as in greenhouse with in a greenhouse with in a greenhouse. Timber framed walls between these rooms to accommodate the glazing with minimal framing. Vent the earthen enclosed area so it breaths, this is driven by the heat of the south facing glazing, a self driven engine. Very little siding, low to the ground so no 3 story building to fall off while constructing, low visibility to the surroundings and it is less susceptible to high winds. Low pitched simple roof systems. Did I mention almost nothing to paint year after year.

Yes, Earthship driven. Be creative in your buildings. There are too many choices of insulating or enclosing most building and timber frames are no different. I think we need to rethink how we build, in general.

Hmmm...I can't say I have seen any real improvement in modern methods at all? Different yes, but "better" seldom to never...in the big picture...

As for "fossorial architecture"...Humans have been building "under ground" or into cliffs for about "forever." Some of the systems of architecture are very complex.

Having about 5 "direct builds" of these types of structures and countless consults and observations done over the decades of what folks would call "earth-ships," I can say few last very long (outside arid regions) that don't end up with very serious interstitial moisture issues and related challenges...

Great concept...seldom works...but can be made to work well if "traditional modalities" are implemented...and/or appropriate biome type is chosen for the location...

I have heard about this moisture issue. Most all if not all houses have this same issue, it occurs in the basement where there is not enough exchange of air. Where is the science to counter this moisture issue? This is in part what I would like to see addressed. It should be a simple equation to solve. The other part that will keep this vision I have from fomenting is the colossal cost incurred within the building industry. Right up there with school loans the purchase of your home it right at the top of your financial outlay you will ever incur.

Were these five builds you encountered built with tires? Tires seem far too labor intensive. Concrete is a great replacement.

How many damp daylight basements have you seen? Was the moisture issue due to improper site prep? Built in a swamp with poor or no drainage incorporated? So many question should be asked before blame is placed on a cause/effect.

Today's modern super insulated tight houses will have horrible moisture issues, if air circulation is not addressed. The "earthship" is no different. I actually don't like the term "earthship". I hesitate to use it.

I have a bit of an interesting place in this discussion, as I build and install extremely tight panel enclosures and have done a lot to perfect the system as much as possible, but really have trouble with it on a foundational basis.
To address the moisture issue, I think that it is possible to address it in a modern enclosure, but it really requires an active and well designed mechanical air exchange and regulation of interior moisture levels. This is something lacking in far too many modern builds.
The other issue is that the tighter that you make an enclosure the more catastrophic the smallest air leakage can be. It's like a puncture in a balloon, a little hole pops it. For example, if you have positive indoor air pressure in the winter and moist interior air is able to find even very small pathways to the cold outer face of the enclosure you get condensation which is often not detected until it's far too late.
Things such as cold roof assemblies, rain screens for siding, redundant sealing methods, active ventilation, etc. go a long way to prevent issues, but add a tremendous amount of complexity and cost to a build, magnifying the problem of quality housing being out of reach for too many people. And even if all the measures are taken, it is a very intensive complicated system. One has to ask the question, is there something wrong with the basic concept that it requires such complex solutions? I'm out of time for now and will get back to it later. Great discussion, thanks DL Bahler!

I like this stuff, but it's not exactly what I meant. I hate to be a party pooper, but maybe I'll reign this in a little bit.

I'll just put up a little list to illustrate what I mean:

Note that I'm looking at entire enclosure methods, not simply materials that make up a part of the process.

'Traditional' or 'Natural' Enclosure methods:

Straw Bale
Cobb/brick/wattle-and-daub or other infill (exposed timber inside and out) methods
Just nail some boards to it and call it a day.

Modern or Industrial

SIPs
Wrap and Strap
Larsen Truss
'Exo-framed'

things like that.

I suppose that it did get into the weeds before it even started to get on track! I'll give a run down on what I know.

My background would be SIP type enclosures, tailored to my own special formula.

My panels are typically 5 5/8" EPS for walls 10 3/8" for roof. I use 7/16 ZIP sheathing on the exterior taped with ZIP tape. (I am not sure on the long term viability of the tape, but I am impressed by the durability of the ZIP sheathing coating as well as the tack and weather tightness of the tape. I detest house wrap and the extra material cost of the ZIP system is more than made up in expedited installation time. The OSB used in the panels is also higher quality IMHO.)

Interior facing is typically 7/16 OSB. The panel is shimmed away from the frame to accommodate finished wall covering (5/8" ply spacer for 1/2" drywall for example).

Panel intersections are foamed with Dow high expansion foam, splines and and other structural insets foamed with Dow wall and floor adhesive as well as nailed. One thing that I am aware of is the importance of not relying on spray foam as total seal, it's really more to fill voids. Even if applied perfectly it will crack as a building shifts slightly over time, rendering the seal ineffective. Redundancy is critical here. To that end I also tape my interior OSB seams with Zip tape, which really does stick quite well to OSB. I also use a lot of EPDM gasketing, at major seams such as wall to wall joints, or wall to roof joints. A well planned gasketing system will go a long way toward producing an unbroken seal around the building.

Though not necessarily within my typical scope of work other critical components to make this system work well are:
1. A cold roof system
2. Rainscreen detail for siding
3. Whole house heat recovery ventilation system with humidity controls and well place ventilation at bathrooms kitchens and other potential moisture sources.
4. Make sure the electrician and plumber foams the chases at every box, switch, or penetration in the panels.

That's a quick overview of my method, I'll be interested to see what others have to say.

Thanks for the input,

Have you ever run cost analyses of your systems in comparison to others, like common wrap and strap or 'exo-framed' enclosures (I'm using that to mean, where you build out with 2x4's on the exterior to create an insulation cavity and a framework for attaching siding and drywall)

I like the concept you have there, it's something that will be attractive to a lot of people.