This study compares two wood materials, cross-laminated timber (CLT) and traditional wood studs, for small house construction. The aim of this degree project is to assess their specific properties and differences in terms of sustainability and safety. The method for the study employs semi-structured interviews, development of wall elements using Revit and an extensive literature review to arrive at conclusions. CLT is examined as an innovative construction material known for its high strength and stability, while wood studs are analyzed for their energy efficiency and compliance with modern building standards. The findings are supported by previous research comparing different wood construction methods. Through a comprehensive analysis, this study provides valuable insights into the advantages and disadvantages of CLT and traditional wood studs for small house construction. The results from this work were that CLT used more material and had more waste than traditional wood. The interviews indicated differences and challenges related to fire risks associated with adhesive use in cross-laminated timber. Both PUR adhesive and MUF adhesive have their advantages and disadvantages, so it is important to follow the safety protocols and increase industry knowledge for improving fire safety in cross-laminated timber. The conclusion of the study was that cross-laminated timber is affected by the adhesive when considering the reuse of wall elements and fire challenges. It also requires more material, making traditional timber studs a better choice.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:mdh-63533 |
| Date | January 2023 |
| Creators | Kibar, Meltem, Kudhayer, Zhra, Hanna, Valentina |
| Publisher | Mälardalens universitet, Akademin för ekonomi, samhälle och teknik |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0023 seconds