3 ms·
Thanks for the thoughtful response. > The down side of wood is that it doesn't handle wetness well So, vapour barriers are a Very Big Deal then, right ? Or do
by bch 11y ago
Thanks for the thoughtful response.
> The down side of wood is that it doesn't handle wetness well
So, vapour barriers are a Very Big Deal then, right ? Or do we have better solutions to the wood/water problem ?
I was going to ask "will this bear out over 50, 100(+) years", but I realized I'm putting my desire of how long a building should last... so, question: How long should a (say, 4-10 story apt) last ? Can we get 100 years out of modern one that are being put up ? What do people in the industry punt-around as a figure for the life of a building ?
I have a great love of wood -- it seems to work in compression, and in tension, has interesting failure modes, seems easy to work with and is versatile... but I do like the perceived permanence of concrete. Makes for interesting judgment of buildings...
- 3pt14159 11y agoThe question isn't whether something will last for 100 or 1000 years. The question is "is it cheaper / safer to get something to last for 1000 years with wood or concrete?" And for most buildings wood is far, far easier to maintain. And yeah, moisture is a really big deal. Most of building science is around moisture and heat. Humans and building materials don't like getting too wet.
- bch 11y ago> for most buildings wood is far, far easier to maintain. Interesting. I always thought of it as (relatively) delicate.