How does acoustic performance compare between the three systems?

CLT provides the best acoustic performance due to its mass (100–200 kg/m² for floor panels). Timber frame floors are lightweight (30–50 kg/m²) and require additional mass (sand pugging, concrete screed, or multiple plasterboard layers) to meet acoustic regulations.

CLT provides the best acoustic performance due to its mass (100–200 kg/m² for floor panels). Timber frame floors are lightweight (30–50 kg/m²) and require additional mass (sand pugging, concrete screed, or multiple plasterboard layers) to meet acoustic regulations. Glulam beams themselves do not affect acoustics — the floor system they support determines acoustic performance. For residential separating floors, CLT with acoustic interlayer achieves Rw 55–62 dB; timber frame requires careful detailing to reach Rw 50–55 dB.

Why this matters

This question relates to Timber Frame vs CLT vs Glulam: Structural Comparison for Architects, which covers the broader topic in detail. Understanding this specific aspect helps architects, builders, and timber dealers make informed specification decisions.

For full context and additional technical detail, see our comprehensive guide:

→ Timber Frame vs CLT vs Glulam: Structural Comparison for Architects

Related questions

• What is the difference between timber frame and CLT?
• When should I specify CLT instead of timber frame?
• What spans can glulam achieve compared to CLT and timber frame?

About this answer

This answer is part of the PuurModulair Knowledge Base — comprehensive timber specification guidance for architects, builders, and dealers across the UK, EU, and Scandinavia. All technical content is reviewed by qualified timber technologists before publication.