A "breathing" frame house

[buldozer]

It works!
Look at the diagrams of pressure in the house with respect to the outboard value.
Through the bottom part of walls the air is infiltrated, heated in the walls. Through the upper part of walls the air comes out, simultaneously becomes cold the walls, giving the heat back.
Of course, all this infiltration and exfiltration should be within reasonable limits. There must be the Golden mean or the house will simply be blown, especially in the regions with strong winds ...

[constructor]

Should be heated any way. If the heat is taken "from walls," it must be reheating as much as a heat is transferred to the air.
So, there is no difference as long as we maintain the same level of ventilation. Moreover, in cases where the energy is actually very expensive, a separate ventilation system allows us to establish an efficient heat exchanger (rotary preferred), which one, incidentally, is more effective if it is cold outside.
Further, in contrast to the uncontrolled ventilation through the walls and cracks, a separate ventilation system can control the process, dramatically reducing losses in unused rooms.

[buldozer]

An infrared transmission of wall is very small, it will not be warmer then the air in a room. It’s about 20 degrees. The share of heat released by radiation from the body, is growing rapidly with an increasing temperature (as the fourth power of absolute temperature), but at a room temperature, this proportion is small. Moreover, the wall material itself absorbs infrared, so, the fraction of radiation in a heat flow will drop dramatically.

[Summer]

And can you write some details, not on the level it "comes into mind?" At the same point of wall, the air will not move once in both directions. So, consider the option proposed by bill.
It turns out that inside the room the air pressure is so different at altitude? It is clear that at a sea level and on a hill at 3 km a pressure is very different, but the difference in a height of 3 m the difference is low, about one percent. So, I'm very skeptical about the "air wall recuperator."
Can result in physical, rather than a figurative explanation?

[baltazar]

The wood has a gas permeability, I guarantee you. The fact that along the fiber, it is much more permeable than across it, I think you can guess. But where to find the quantitative data ... Last year we discussed the same kind of article about the diffusion of carbon through various wall materials, including a wood (albeit across the grain). There were exact figures. For "along the fiber," this number can be increased at least tenfold.
Another for your reference.
The diffusion of different gases can keep the same point in different directions of walls – a oxygen for home, and a carbon dioxide out of home, according to the gradient of partial pressure. So, that no transfer of heat in the vertical is not required.
And the gas well soluble in the water, so, that even in pores there is a gas exchange. And totally agree with sumer. The term "open porous" (in Russia means "breathing"), the house is meant mainly its vapor penetrability. The air permeability is the quantity strictly regulated for wall materials in all countries. So, I do not like the term "breathable" it only confuses.
A brick house, by the way is open, too.

[bill]

I do not pretend to have knowledge of theorists, but it comes to mind such explanation for the heat recovery of warm air escaping through the wall.
The air permeability (a water vapor permeability, respectively, at least) the walls from well laminated veneer lumbers, a thickness of 150 mm is about 1.2 kg/m2. This is more than 2 times exceeds the allowable level of SNIP (Standard norms and codes) and it is several times higher than that of other common wall constructions. So, the wooden walls have an unmatched ability to "let off steam."
Consequently, when a closed ventilation all the vaporous moisture in the house (and there are 1-2 buckets or more per day) it comes quite freely through the walls due to the fact that in winter the backwater pressure is predominant from the inside out. The steam condenses inside the wall, separating 0.5-0.6 kWh per kilogram of condensate. The wall, of course, is heated up and takes less heat conductive than from the air space. Further, the condensate is partially absorbed by the wall material, or washed out the same air flow in the form of tiny ice crystals, the formation of which also released a lot of energy.
A simple calculation shows that this phenomenon is due to that fact, wooden walls in the house can receive per day more than 10-20 kWh of additional energy, which when activated exhaust ventilation would be useless ejected into the atmosphere.

[buldozer]

The air permeability (a water vapor permeability, respectively, at least)" Why was founded this statement?! The water vapor and air gases are behave quite differently! Water molecules have a very strong tendency to form hydrogen bonds, that is "in Russian" they always go astray in the bunch. The amount of such piles can be orders of magnitude and it is larger than the molecules of nitrogen or oxygen. In addition, in the wood a steam goes through a hydrophilic environment, i.e. an environment, which selectively catches the water molecules. What does it mean "breathable"? If you mean a convective air transfer, then it will not be "across the grain" of wood, otherwise the plant could not exist. There is a diffusive transport of gases (not the "air"! There is no such concept in chemistry, namely, a gas, and for different gases, it can be different, both because of the different size of molecules, and because of their varying importance for plants. But "across the grain, "it is too small, again, because the plant could not exist if an oxygen and a carbon dioxide were “walking” free. And so the fact that "washed out the same air flow in the form of tiny ice crystals" also doesn’t exist! And there is an evaporation of trapped water, with the expenditure of energy itself, which was highlighted by its "condensation" on the surface of wood pulp. A word "condensation" specially picked in quotes because it's not a kind of condensation, as in a dew point. Lord! I understand that you do not understand it, but still listen! You are not dealing with a brick wall, but with a very complex structure of wood, which can be quite differently related to the substances that pass through it.

[constructor]

The thing is that we have here a normative gas-/vapor- transmission of wall made of wood (and not just a tree). It consists of passing the actual-wood and all sorts of cracks and joints. So, in this passage the total role of crack-joints will be 10 times higher than that of the actual material.
Proper materials for wood I have not found. However, this argument is so: there is a solid wooden kitchen hardware. Even if it is not dyed, then pouring the water we do not observe any noticeable passage thereof through the walls of vessels (a process goes and in several weeks or months, the tree finally gets wet and begins cracking).

[Summer]

Oh. I messed you up, sorry. The difference is that there is an adsorption rather than a condensation. The essence is that there are the same hydrogen bonds, but the environment of molecules is different and the resulting structures are different, so there are different processes and the energy. Water is generally a very interesting substance, its properties will be a long time "secret". And we are here, on the forum, are trying to stretch “on fingers". Of course, it is useful to train the mind, but the people read it, and then based on that currently build something (adding more and your mind). And it will be a complete mess.
With the "breathing" frame house it is a very difficult situation. Many countries spend large sums of money on it. And the results are very ambiguous.

[baltazar]

Ah, if it was so ...i.e. you want to say that condensed at some point of wall, a vapor can give up its heat back into the room? I will allow myself to doubt. The temperature inside the walls at the point where a condensation occurs is lower than the temperature of the same wall, close to the premises. A heat transfer from cold to hot unfortunately is not possible. All the heat goes out.
There is another deal. If the temperature on the outer surface of wall is such that the freezing of condensate does not occur, and there is an evaporation of it, what will happen? Another great heat. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[buldozer]

But I did not write that the energy liberated from a process of condensing will directly heat the room. Just a slight increase in temperature of the layer where a condensation has occurred, will reduce the amount of heat flowing to it from the inner surface of the wall.
In winter there, as I imagine it, the evaporation of a condensate formed from a sublimation of ice particles takes place on the outer surface of wall and is mainly consumed an energy that circulates in the atmosphere. Well, as for drying clothes in a cold weather. And most importantly: so, what is the difference in the subjective feelings? Between a stone house and a breathing house. If you try to eliminate the factor of the air cleanliness in a city and a countryside. Assuming a similar heating system (a convective battery) and ventilation (vents in sealed double-glazed windows).

[Summer]

Walls are inside-out without a finishing work:
a plaster on metal profiles, Isoplate 25 mm, 145 cm a wooden frame with the ecowadding, Isoplate 25 mm, a wooden rake, magnesium (there isn’t a final finishing of the facade in the form of ceramic tiles).
Three bathrooms and a laundry, I made a mistake, the log house is as follows:
A magnesium, a vapor barrier, a skeleton with the ecowadding, Isoplate 25 mm, a rake. The error is in the fact that a magnesium attached directly to the frame, without a metal profile. Plus, not much of magnesium. Ceramic tiles in a bathroom at first began to crack, and now at the junction of tiles just is broken.
My two bathrooms have flizil waterproof wallpapers. There, at the junction from a wallpaper and a putty turned bulging “sausages”. They were clipped and pasted on the joints of bamboo logs, and, accordingly, the whole design of toilet was made according to the Chinese style.
Everything is good in the laundry room. They were glued cheap Ukrainian vinyl wallpapers and there were no joints or “sausages” or cracks. A perception of stone and wooden houses is subjective. I'm in a stone house and it is stifling indoors, but other people feel good. Maybe I have this condition also because the fact that I was born in Siberia and I have being living there for 23 years in a wooden frame house.
I have a natural ventilation in my house in form of seven exhaust channels, the air heating with a forced ventilation and a fresh air from outside, so, the air is clean and fresh, easy to breathe. My friend made heated floors on the ground floor in his frame house, and radiators on the second and he saved on a ventilation (a couple of channels in total). Now, he lives only with the open windows.

[constructor]

What is the floor area, a ceiling height, a number of living?
What does it mean a "forced-air heating with a forced ventilation"? It is strongly a heating influences the climate in the house. Where does come the air flow?
And what is the temperature in Kiev in winter? Sorry for the stupid question.

[expert]

Does your friend have a log gypsum house (inside-out). Is it true? A plaster on the outside of mineral wool. And you can specify the type of plaster (actually interested in acrylic or not)? And what kind of finish from the inside?
I collect specific examples of houses with no vapor barrier.
Disputes about "breathing" walls in terms of ventilation I also consider as a meaningless. That proportion of gas exchange, which goes through the wall is too low to provide a normal comfort. And your home is comfortable (in terms of air) because of the existing in a house a powerful ventilation (the air heating), which, as I understand, it is quite a large share of expenses for heat. But for the humidity you can try to compete. Without a prejudice to the walls, of course.

[bill]

State Standards (SNIP) allow the air permeability of 0.5 kg/m2 per hour. Multiply this by the area of external walls and you will get a number that can not be ignored.
Another thing is the fact that it is not true for a classical frame house. Yes, and for reasons of preventing leakage of heat to the ventilation of unregulated, and most importantly, a durability of construction, and other types of houses are usually preferred to reduce the porosity of wall enclosures.
But that does not mean that it is impossible in principle to do otherwise. Our nature after all does not protect all its living creatures with armor, and most warm-blooded animals living in the air, supplies a breathable fur and feathers. The question, as always, actions and a competent combination of properties used wall materials.

[expert]

It can not be ignored, but it can not only breathe. In the article about carbon dioxide were also specific figures, and it was concluded that a ventilation is required.
And the animals breathe mainly with lungs. Even for a fish - a special body in the form of gills, although they seem to breath by skin. But the shell for a warm-blooded indeed is undesirable, but with a different purpose is to preserve the heat and for the cold-blooded insects just like an armor.
And those who have a fur and feathers, they have no sweat glands on a skin not to wet an "insulation". As you can see, everything in nature is captured.
But these are paroogranic, not a vapor barrier. That's exactly I want for myself, in a particular house to make an analogue "of a skin with a fur”.

[Summer]

It's understandable. We are all children of nature and live in it. Therefore, without the need to get into the suit it is not very desirable.
A classic frame house is a large equipped suit. I have any illusions on this score does not amuse, so watch with interest to find ways to save "a skin with a fur" (we are, humans, by the way, 1% of respiratory carry through the skin).
The ideal home seems to function like a well-chosen clothes, which allows our body to carry out the air from the environment (which is the main channel of interaction with our bodies), not only through the nose (an inlet valve or a fan), but also through the skin (a breathable wall). Moreover, the "skin" breath, as it allows for SNIP (state standard) (and therefore without a substantial loss for the heat economy), we can do much more than 1%.

[baltazar]

A technology is not running on place. So, now it is possible to make a a classic frame house but not a suit.
There is a vapor barrier with a variable vapor penetrability. It is still very expensive, but it's a matter of time.
There is an opportunity instead of a polyethylene vapor barrier to put a special kraft paper (like a wax). Yes, a lot of material from the bourgeoisie is limited, and with a zero vapor barrier. And we built a lot of old frame houses. They are also quite vapor passing.
And indeed, the future is just for the frames. In nature, virtually all living things are frames.

[constructor]

No, one vapor transfer is not enough. It is only important for builders to adjust the vapor of walls, so, that their product is not quickly disintegrated or rotten.
For the living in the house it is important not to let off (blow off) steam, but to breathe with a good air. Therefore, in my opinion, a reasonable combination of moderate air permeability of walls with conventional displacement ventilation (as with clothing), the optimal characteristic of forced labor, with its inevitable changes in the composition of natural air ducts and fans. I do not need too high price paid for the damage cost of air heat exchanger. And subject to the conditions of preservation of the air quality inhaled my natural (in fact for this I'm on the cost of building in a country side), It is not so important, a frame or a solid wall construction of power components to be used. A good frame house is not distinguished by its cheapness.

[expert]

Well, actually, the vapor penetrability is inseparable from the gas permeability. And to do in a frame house the same permeability as in the log house it not a problem. In particular, the house IZOPLAT – an ecowool – an IZOPLAAT is much more gas permeable than the timber wall (without gaps). But to create a comfortable humidity in winter, as the lumber in the house, it is much more difficult task.
And as for a ventilation I absolutely agree with you. There so many pitfalls in terms of the air quality that are not counted. But you are made of lumber in his house did not really do without natural ventilation, so what prevents to do the same in frame house with a gas-permeable log house.
A low price is not a main criterion. In the future, you can create much better frame house with consumer qualities (in terms of ecology, too) than a traditional home.