Anyone have any input for me as to what they might be paying or charging for structural insulated panel systems in their areas? I’m bidding a large project now and looking to check myself against other’s experiences. It will be for both walls and roof assemblies, and there’s a lot of rooflines, so I will be taking that into account as extra labor. This is labor only, not material costs. We’ve had some limited experience, but not a lot, with sips. I will need to modify pricing as it is a prevailing rate project, but any info will help.
Thanks for any info.
Replies
Bish,
Whoa, that's a hard one! I installed my own panels and the speed I gained by the time I'd installed the final panel was massive! So without real experiance you will be extremely hard pressed to be effective.
Good news there are a lot of people afraid of even tackling them and I've heard outragous rates being bid and winning the bid because they were the only one bidding..
That's both a good and bad news thing. If the house is definately committed to be built with SIP's you have a chance to get an education on someone elses dime.
If it's still out for bidding the high cost might cause someone to rethink they're construction thoughts which forced them back to the drawing board..
There is a whole lot more to it as well.
Will those panels be precut for windows doors etc.. or will you be taking bulk panels and making them fit and work?
Frenchy,
We have done a couple small homes so have experience with the wall panels, but not complex roof shapes. Window openings will be precut. This is actually a commercial building project consisting of numerous separate buildings with some buildings sharing the same plans. It is a combination of concrete load bearing walls, precast floor slabs and sips exterior walls and roof system with steel and timber {LVL} roof frame. Definitely a more complicated job than normal. One good thing {I think} is with all the repetition, the first building gives us the opportunity to work out the bugs and the next eleven we should be able to pick up some efficiency.
I actually think I could stick frame the roof system cheaper, including insulation, but I'm not the architect.
Bish,
Do you want to be known as the go to guy with regard to SIP's (I think it would be a good move)
Then I would price it at the same cost as if you stick framed everything..
Assuming two things..
First you have the crew and needed equipment to do it efficently (telehandler with a decent sized work platform) plus specialty items needed to work panels..
And second A crew eager to master the technique..
My justification would be you can erect panels a whole lot faster than you can stick build a wall once you figure out a good technique. The time you gain doing that should offset the time you lose figuring out how to do the roof. Since you have so many more identical to do you should be able to speed things up dramatically as your techque and understanding improves..
Frenchy,
I agree with your thinking, and my pricing is about the same in man hours as if we stick frame, with allowances made for the higher labor rate. Around here, we typically figure carpentry rates as in the $35-45 per hr. as far as billing goes, with the lower end being rough carpentry and the higher finish work. With these rate jobs the actual wages will be around $37-38 per hr. which drives up the cost.
We do already have our own telehandler, but I'm thinking crane for most of the roof work, especially the three story sections. I would also have a manlift on site too.
We charge more than if we stick framed it ourselves.
Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Blue,
I've watched experianced crews panel a whole house in a day and a half. One that would require close to 2 weeks to stick frame by most crews..
Now I couldn't have done that but I know I can panel faster than I could stick frame..
I know I can prefab a 1600 sf ranch, with overhangs and paper and stack the walls in one day. At $20 per hour labor, that equates to $320 to stick frame the paneled walls. It takes us a couple hours to hook the full length walls and set them with three guys.
Based on my real world, hard number experience, I don't have to listen to SIP salesmen telling me how fast his system is and how much carpentry labor I'll save. There is a lot of rigging and extra work that goes into installing sips. You can't easily assemble the entire wall, build the overhangs, install all the paper, install all the siding and hook it and set it. It sounds like the stick framers you know might need some production lessons. Have em call me...if I get a break in my schedule, I'll go give em a few tips.
Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Blue,
I called on thousands of builders over my career.. I knew one builder who with his two sons could stick frame, panel, window and doors a 2500 sq.ft. 2 story house in four days. The roofers would be applying shingles on the 5th day..
The vast majority of builders would take up to two weeks to do the same thing.. and a few would take even longer..
Panels come in sizes up to 8x30. It doesn't take very long to tilt that up into place so any claim that you can frame that fast is met with a great deal of skepticism. If you take enough time to set panels into place faster than someone can build a stick built wall either your technique or equipment is faulty, how about I show you the proper technique <grin>
It only takes five minutes for our crane to lift a 30' SIP panel and set it after it's been hooked. It only takes five minutes for our crane to lift a 30' prebuilt wall and set it after it's been hooked.Where is the savings? Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Blue,
The time it takes to prebuild a 30 foot wall with window and or door openings!
Please understand the benefits of SIP's remain.. they are as much as 200% stronger than that same stick built wall. They are thermally far more efficent and all the other benefits of SIP's exist..
Edited 8/7/2008 10:22 am ET by frenchy
Frenchy, I'm okay with SIP companies selling their products and bragging about the improved qualities and strength. That's a valid discussion. I'm not okay with them telling their clients that it's faster and cheaper to assemble them and that the carpenter's bill will be cheaper. I know from experience EXCACTLY how much it costs me to preframe all the outside walls on a 1600 sf ranch with an attached garage: 16 hours! So, if the SIP people can deliver the walls prebuilt and only charge me $320 more for the product than I could get from the lumber yard, I'm in. I'm out there in the real world giving real world bids Frenchy. The last SIP job we bid was for 28k labor. The lady wanted us to discount the bid because the SIP people told her that she would save on the framing labor bill. I know what it will cost for both. I offered to stick frame her house for 24k. That's a 4k upcharge for SIPs on a 3000sf house. I don't care what anyone else will charge...I know what we can stick frame for and I know how much screwing around goes with SIPs. It's a different system. There is more time spent prepping, caulking, screwing, hooking, connecting, planning, sorting, etc. Later, there are interior issues that demand time. We can preframe a 9' x 40' wall on the tables in an hour. We then can sheath and paper it and add the overhangs and siding. If the windows are available, we can set them and trim them out. We don't need any scaffolding or have to do any high work after the wall is swung into place. Can you say the same thing with SIPs? Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Edited 8/7/2008 10:44 am by Jim_Allen
Blue
Your numbers are similar to the numbers one of my favorite builders used to use. He too had tables and gang staplers etc to automate much of his assembly. (it was really cool to watch those walls get built)
He had cranes and telehandlers galore plus all the trucks etc. to be really efficent..(that was my favorite part, selling him all that equipment<grin>
He's out of the business now. That high fixed overhead drove his prices up untill he could no longer compete.
Today he's back to a small crew and building ICF homes.. He's found a little niche and since he can still command a little premium he's able to make a little money to pay his child support. (his wife divorced him because he spent so much time on business he neglected her and the kids)
Anyway shortly after watching his first SIP built home being assembled he declared bankruptcy, went thru the divorce, and a real binge drinking stage. and when we talked he acknowledged that it takes less time to glue some foam between two sheets of OSB than it took to stick build things (even with all his automation) At that point recognized that he was fighting a losing battle.. One that he couldn't win.
Let me correct a few minor errors you made.. I'm sure they weren't deliberate simply the short cuts common with the internet.
First panels are screwed usually only to a timberframe not in a stand alone SIP house.. Glue is only used where two panels come together and finally Of course you can command a premium. SIP's are considered superior and we all know that people are willing to pay more for better things..
Frankly you would be foolish to attempt to build at the same cost when there is profit potential to be made..
That won't last forever.. As I said you can glue to pieces of OSB to a chunk of foam faster than you can stick build.. Market forces being what they are how long before you make your own SIP panels?
I don't think as long as you let a middle man in between you and your customers you'll ever be able to buy SIP panels as cheaply as you should be able to make them (that's pure speculation on my part)
Edited 8/7/2008 11:10 am ET by frenchy
All of this discussion is interesting Frenchy and I'm not opposed to Sips. I have some reservations about them in some areas because of possible water and mold issues. Those can be dealt with though if the installers are careful.I wouldn't argue that stick framing is better. I'd concede that SIPS are superior for several different reasons. My only discussion against them is that rookie framers are getting suckered into lowering the frame bill on them when they should be increasing the frame bill. And, quite frankly, I don't really care if some rookie framers want to donate some of their pension fund to a homeowner. That's their business. This discussion is the same one that occurs when we talk about other engineered systems, such as floor trusses. Yes, in some instances, floor trusses and SIPS will save labor but my experience has been the direct opposite. Perhaps I haven't been in the right situation. Most of the work I did was cut up, complicated and didn't lend it self well to engineered systems other than roof trusses, which become a world unto themselves on big cut up customs. I am not in the business anymore of supplying sub contract framing labor so I'm not at all interested in learning how to build my own SIPs. You might have a good idea though and Austin would be a good place to try it. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Blue,
Since I don't really have a dog in this hunt I can stand back and look at long term potential. There is more then a century of experiance stick framing homes yet today less than 1% of the homes built are built with SIP's and the vast majority of those are high end timberframe homes.
That means the vast majority have no real experiance and only a tiny minority have done it enough to have developed any effective systems or methods..
If the speed and efficency we've gained from all that combined experiance building stick built homes were applied to SIP's think of how fast construction could be.. I mean when I installed mine just on one house my speed more than trippled.. I'm a fat old amature with no real actual construction experiance. Get some young creative person the problem and watch speed improve with experiance!
But I think SIP's are a stop gap to the real future which I believe will be ICF's I can think of many ways already to improve them and thus shorten assembly time while at the same time increasing value.
America is fortunate we produce as much wood as we do.. but we have already reached the practical end of increased production. Plus wood has too many flaws to provide long term viable solutions to the housing needs of the future..
Within my chilrens lifetime I can see when having any wood at all in a house will be considered a real luxury. Something to be celebrated and highly featured rather than hidden behind sheetrock.
"America is fortunate we produce as much wood as we do.. but we have already reached the practical end of increased production. Plus wood has too many flaws to provide long term viable solutions to the housing needs of the future..'Again, we disagree. One of the reasons why wood homes have been so popular is that it is relatively easy to get. The lumber companies treat the forest as a renewable resource. Every day, they plant trees that they know will be harvested in the future. It's not too difficult for them to know how to manage their resources and therefore they will NEVER run out unless of course the ice age hits that was promised to us when we had our last energy crisis in the 70's/80's. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Blue
Please look objectively at the facts..
While it's true that trees are renewable it's not true that we can continue to increase yield from the forests as fast as the population is growing.. 300 million and going to reach 400 million within 40 more years..
As population increases less land is available for free or near free. Some species require 80+ years to become harvestable..
True some monocultured land can grow what we used to call trash trees can be harvested in as few as 15 years.. Those trees provide the chips etc. for engineered wood. Engineered wood will provide some growth in the short term but pressure will reduce even that.
The amount of wood that is produced in Europe has been on the decline now for over 200 years and hasn't been a major source of construction material for at least 50 years..
Not to mention that old growth forests account for only 2% of the forest land anymore.. Thus those giants that we used to harvest won't be available..
Currantly we are harvesting Canada's wood but eventually she will have her own needs for that wood and won't want to expost much anymore..
The only real source for future wood will be Russia but even those millions of acres have limits.. China will be the most likely buyer for all those trees.
You are wrong Frenchy. We have enough wood and the scientists at the major lumber companies are planting plenty enough to sustain themselves indefinitely. Currently there is more forested land than there was in 1900. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Blue
A few corrections..
First I have always agreed that trees are a renewable resource and should be harvested when ready..
Second at currant population growth rates nothing can be sustained forever..
Third there is a world of differance between a monoculture growing one species of tree and forests
fourth. All of those numbers are suspect.. For example Minnesota claims to have more mature trees over 24 inches in diameter today than in 1955.
That is true,..... except! They are counting urban grown trees in those numbers.. As any one who's worked in a sawmill knows urban tress are not harvestable due to embedded metal which will quickly ruin sawblades or bands..
Same applies to tree counts..etc.. compare tree counts from 1800 to today!
What is known is the percentage of old growth wood is down to 2% of the forested land.. Some of that includes the pinon forests which produce non-harvestable trees..
Finally there is simply no way a tree grown for 15 years can replace the giants we harvested which took 2000 years or more to grow.. a tree selected for rapid growth under ideal conditions will not replace a tree grown under natural conditions whereby each growth ring is achieved by competiton from other trees for light and nutrition..
No way can a 60 year old douglas fir be as strong as a 2000 year old tree..
You should know that!
You seem to be obseessed with overbuilding. Trees don't need to be old growth lumber to be strong enough to frame a house. We've been building with fast growth lumber for many years now and the houses are standing firm. I dont' think you give the big lumber companies enough credit. I think they are much smarter than you think and I'm not going to worry about them running out of lumber. There's no shortage now and none projected. You are the only one projecting that we are running out. I'll belive them, not you.I had a guy that worked for me that planted trees. He said the tree planting operations were massive. Get some sleep....if we can't build houses, we'll dig holes and turn into moles. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Blue.
Please consider this.. every three or four people require another housing unit. Todays population is over 300 million tomorrows will be 400 million (well by 2040 it's estimated at currant rates of growth) that growth will largely come at the expense of forest lands..
Companies legitimately are concerned about profit..
While they may anticipate long term profit from the land the trees are growing on if sufficant financial incentives are offered that land can be sold for development rather than wood harvest..
Sufficent financial pressure will because by those additional 100 million more Americans seeking a home.
Figure say 1/3 of an acre per family unit the potential in the next 40 years is a loss of up to 1 million acres of forest land lost. (or is it ten million? My calculator doesn't have that many zero's available)
Hopefully my children will live more than another 40 years..I'm not sure when 500 million Americans will exist but that's another massive loss of forest land..
Do you see where I'm going with this?
At some point we will simply run out of space to grow trees..
I'm not worried that the large companies that own so much of America's forest land won't think long term. Nor am I particularly worried about the issues of monoculture versis a true forest right now. That's a debate on another subject entirely and I suspect we're not that far apart.
Finally yes I am! (obseesed with over building) I feel it's my moral duty to be sustainable. IF the home won't last as long as it took to grow then I'm taking away for mankind rather than adding to mankind..
The average home in America last 57 years before it's either demolished or so dramatically altered it may as well been demolished..
I look in dumpsters and see these old growth doug fir 2x4's that took 2000 years to be made and want to cry.. Sure it's like looking a dumpster full of money but it's also something that won't be available ever again!
Sorry if that sounds too much like tree hugging But I'm sure there are things you hate to see wasted as well..
Frenchy,
Look's like I started something here. I think you both do have some valid points. We already use ICF's quite a bit and I agree they are a great system, but I also wonder if they are a good long term solution with their use of concrete and petroleum based foam, which are high energy use materials to produce. Wood used in engineered form, seems to be a good compromise for now until new technology gives us a better solution. I think in the future we will start living in and on smaller footprints of space for example. I'm already seeing a trend towards smaller, better designed living spaces. Don't get me wrong, I love my ICF's, but if the whole country turned from wood to icf's we would have some new issues to deal with. I foresee a slow increase in icf, sips, and other alternative construction systems, but I think wood in some form is with us for a long while.
Bish
I love wood too much to see it used in ways it's not good at. (look at pictures of my house at 94941.1 and 85891.1 to see just how much I love wood)
Couple of points.. wood doesn't fall from the sky. It's moved around with diesel powered equipment. If you've ever run a sawmill and paid those fuel bills you'll understand just how much oil is consumed in it's creation. add drying costs and delivery costs etc.. and the amount is staggering! Not to mention the manufacture of plywood etc.
Second
Wood isn't a good insulator, foam is infinitely superior.
third
Rot, insects, fire, decay, and other things destroy wood based homes quickly. an average of 57 years here in America. Since it takes longer than that to grow replacement trees wood as used presently isn't sustainable..
ICF's with their use of concrete are a far more durable solution to our future housing needs. There are still examples of Roman concrete in use today a couple of thousand years later! No wood based home I know of is that old..
True we are moving from near sole use of wood framed homes to other options and while it's slow, it is gaining momentum.. I guess patience is needed..
The population will be at 400 million at present growth rates here in America by 2040. By that time I expect to see wood predominately featured in homes not as something hidden behind sheetrock but as something celebrating the real beauty and qualities of wood!
I love trees too Frenchy but you just aren't facing the facts. The lumber companies are significantly more invested in maintaining their resources and I don't believe for a moment that we'll run out of lumber anytime soon in this millenium or the next. No matter how many times you say it, I'll never believe it. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Blue,
Have I ever accused the big lumber companies of being short sighted? Oh sure they've made mistakes in the past and clear cutting was short sighted.. But that doesn't mean they haven't learned from their mistakes and try to do better..
I'm not one of those people who insist that all trees be left alone. I'm relatively moderate when it comes to trees.
However they are a business. They grow trees for a profit. if 1000 acres will yield the company a few hundred thousand dollars of profit every 50 years or so and they get a chance to sell the land off for millions of dollars the land will be sold and homes will be built on that land..
That doesn't make them bad, just good businessmen..
That is a reasonable use of an asset. Espeically considering the millions of acres they own. Forest land is highly desirable and another 100 million peple need to go someplace.. Since we won't suddenly get another 20 or 30 states to put people in the value of that forest land will grow untill it's value for homesites greatly exceeds it's value as crop land. (and make no mistake trees are a crop, harvest when ready)
One final point.. they won't suddenly sell of large tracts of forest land.. instead they will sell small plots here and there quietly.
"However they are a business. They grow trees for a profit. if 1000 acres will yield the company a few hundred thousand dollars of profit every 50 years or so and they get a chance to sell the land off for millions of dollars the land will be sold and homes will be built on that land.."Wrong, wrong, wrong again.Growing trees is nothing more than farming with a longer harvest time. Farmers don't sell off their farms even though they can cash in and be millionaires and retire and major corporation CEOS don't sell off their cash cows. Your time frame for harvesting is significantly off too. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Blue,
Farmers do sell their farms. It's called the final crop and occurs with great regularity whenever the city moves out to enough so that the farm land is incorporated into an outer ring suburb.
IF farmers didn't sell their land New York city would be mostly farms..as would Chicago and every major city..
As for the period of time between harvests of trees that varies greatly depending on the species. Some trees are harvested in as little as 7 years some are harvested after 80 years or more..
Reading this thread is kind of amusing. First, I spent seven years watching homes in my neighbor go up. It took them 3.5 weeks on average to stick frame and sheath 2500-3000 SqFt homes. This isn't including anything other than the studs, plates, joists, and OSB (sheathing & subflooring).
And in 2002, I asked the crew and learned they charged $3.25/SqFt on slab and $4.25 on basement. So, the labor charge was rather cheap in 2002 as we're talking $4.25 x 3000 = $12-13K. Now, I've always known one cannot talk materials without labor when comparing building technologies.
As a non-builder, I am an anomaly as a consumer when it comes to alternatives and not expecting to save a dime on something, but just trying not to get the worse solution in performance. As someone already noted, the costs on calculation locally to me in 2002-3 (Buford, GA) were break-even, but the benefits were considerably different.
Unfortunately for me, I couldn't afford a customer built home when that was being researched, and I missed out the last opportunity to sell for a break-even on what I got. But, my next time around will be with SIPs, without any expectation on saving money, but with an accelerated building rough-in and with a notion of increased thermal and acoustical performance therein.
Ok, this anomalous consumer will #### up now. :)
Nuke
Please consider ICF's when you do build your next home.. I used SIP's on my timberframe as well as ICF's and in retrospect the ICF's went together much faster much much easier and will result in a longer lived product
Well, you might come down here to TX and save a bunch of money on your framing. I think you can get that same house framed here for $1.75. You might have to add .50 if the roof is conventional. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Down here? Where do you think I am located? I never thought of Atlanta being up there.
It's all relative isn't it? I'll have to check with google earth to see if you are up there or down there. You'll like the savings though on the framing prices. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Thats the problem with suppliers and vendors giving labor quotes or installed SF prices for certain materials. They have no real world experience in what it takes to get the job done.YMMV
ML
What's stick framing range in your area. Here, there are still a couple fly-by-nights that work for around 3.50 a sq. ft. but anyone any good gets around $8-9 per ft. This project doesn't involve any floor framing, but the roof details are a nightmare with tons of beams, cross gables and steep pitches, up to 18/12, so I think that outweighs the floor framing, especially with some three story sections. Did I mention the sleepers with 3/4 t&g roof sheathing over the top of all roof sips panels?
I just priced a 4K sf cape with an attached 3 car garage at ~$150K (labor and mtls). Pretty large for a cape actually with 3 shed dormers on the back, and one on the front.
Forgot to mention that this cost includes floor system as well as installation by experienced crew.
Edited 8/6/2008 11:50 pm ET by RedfordHenry