Builders have a wide range of choices when it comes to selecting wall systems for commercial buildings. Contractors can narrow these options by evaluating wall assemblies against key criteria, including performance, sustainability and cost. When comparing wall systems using these criteria, insulated metal panels (IMP) deliver an advantage over conventional concrete wall systems.

Performance

Performance is an area where IMPs deliver the biggest advantage over precast concrete and tilt-up concrete wall systems. IMPs offer an all-in-one system that seals the building enclosure while delivering insulation properties, inhibiting energy loss more effectively than uninsulated concrete wall assemblies. Delivering unmatched thermal efficiency and a full vapor and water barrier, IMPs are an energy efficient cladding option that cuts down on building heating and cooling costs.

Using IMPs is also an easy way for contractors to meet building code requirements. Increasingly stringent energy codes are creating an imperative for selecting materials like IMPs with high R-values. Building codes like the International Energy Conservation Code, which establishes the minimum energy efficiency standards for commercial and residential construction in the nation, have consistently increased minimum R-value requirements for new construction and some retrofits with the goal of reducing energy consumption.

Today, innovations in insulated metal panel technology are helping increase R-values to meet tighter energy codes without increasing the thickness of walls. Airtight insulated metal panels with maximum thermal resistance are increasingly important in the construction industry’s drive to meet specific energy targets.

Sustainability

As buildings become more operationally efficient, contractors are increasingly considering the impact of building materials on the carbon footprint of the built environment. According to Architecture 2030, embodied carbon emissions from the building sector produce 11% of annual global greenhouse gas emissions and will be responsible for almost half of total new construction emissions by 2050.

Concrete production is one of the world’s largest sources of carbon emissions—the production of cement, a key ingredient in concrete, accounts for about 8% of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions. If the cement industry were a country, it would be the third largest carbon dioxide emitter in the world, surpassed only by China and the United States.

Insulated metal panels are a good alternative to precast concrete and tilt-up concrete wall systems. They aid net zero energy and carbon-neutral efforts by producing an airtight, moisture-resistant, rigid, continuous-insulation envelope, offering the high R-values and superior thermal performance for the same wall thickness that ultimately results in fewer greenhouse gas emissions and reduced energy costs.

A recent study by architectural research and planning firm KieranTimberlake compared different industrial claddings in the design of an industrial building and examined their impact on embodied carbon. The study found that in the modeling used for the research, a specific hybrid core IMP manufactured in the United States was clearly a lower carbon choice, containing 28% less embodied carbon in some cases, when compared to traditional industrial claddings such as insulated concrete and tilt-up concrete for building envelopes.

Cost

While sustainable materials are becoming more of an imperative in building projects, the misconception that these materials drive up build cost is creating a barrier to more widespread adoption of more sustainable construction practices.

A new study refutes the perception that low-carbon material choices cost more. Results of the study demonstrate that using IMPs instead of concrete wall assemblies could save on both construction costs and embodied carbon.

The study, conducted by global construction and asset management consultancy Currie & Brown, examined the installed costs of a specific hybrid core IMP wall system manufactured in the United States, insulated precast concrete and tilt-up concrete wall systems in typical warehouse or light manufacturing buildings of approximately 150,000-square-foot gross floor area. A total of 18 cities across the United States and Canada were included in the study to provide a broad representation of regions.

Results of the comparison study revealed that the installed costs of the IMP wall system was on average 25% lower in the United States and 27% lower in Canada compared to insulated precast and tilt-up concrete walls. The potential cost savings ranged from averages of 18% to 32% depending on location, with the variation being largely driven by differences in local labor costs.

When it comes to performance, sustainability and cost, IMPs can deliver advantages over conventional concrete wall assemblies.