7 ms·

I'm not sure I'm sold completely on the need. It's a very cool idea, to be sure, but I'm confused at the role it fills. My knowledge of disaster zones is limit

I'm not sure I'm sold completely on the need. It's a very cool idea, to be sure, but I'm confused at the role it fills. My knowledge of disaster zones is limited, but for military deployments - the other major customer - it's pretty in depth. Here's the thing, there are two classes of structure, basically: Temporary and Permanent. For a temporary structure - even longer term - a modern, modular tenting system (such as TEMS: http://www.mandbmag.com/tents/index.html http://www.mandbmag.com/tents/index.html) has this beat hands down in pretty much every way. Lighter, faster setup, faster tear down, adaptability, etc. For a permanent structure, seriously? It would be much easier to build a traditional wooden structure once you've decided that you need one. You could even put the locals to work (which they would need) doing so. I find it very difficult to believe that anyone would want one of these dingy, musty things over a proper wood or concrete framed construction. So where exactly does this fit in the spectrum? I'm not sure it does.

WiseWeasel 15y ago
Keep in mind this is the first commercial version of the technology; I'm sure it will rapidly progress beyond dingy, musty blobs. With the strength and light weight of the structure, along with the product's minimal cost compared to more traditional building materials and methods, I could see this being used to create very interesting and organic home designs. If the material is able to pass California building codes for earthquake preparedness, I could see people building whimsical temporary substructures, placing these on top and hardening them, then removing the substructures, enabling a much greater variety of possible forms. I could see doing something cool with stacked layers of bubbles and cut-outs for passages and windows. Another interesting application for something like this would be structures on the Moon or Mars, if you could make the material on-site, or at least the heavy parts of it (cement and water).
evo_9 15y ago
You're not sure about the need for a sterile structure that can be erected in 24 hours, almost anywhere in the world?
- famousactress 15y ago
  I think he's suggesting that he's not convinced this is better than a tent for a relatively temporary sterile structure. I'm also not really sure what 'sterile structure' means in this context. I suppose it means it's very cleanable? Cause as far as literally being sterile.. these concrete tents have just been blown full of air, which presumably came from just outside.
  - dazzla 15y ago
    In the video he said steralizable not that its already steralized.
- run4yourlives 15y ago
  You're aware that western military forces currently build entire trauma centres out of the tenting I described, correct?
famousactress 15y ago
I wonder if the sweet spot here might be the adaptability of the material. Maybe there are specific needs to quickly install structures of a specific shape/size where this material could be especially advantageous.
- sesqu 15y ago
  I agree. Quick, ugly and permanent are not qualities of a good solution to most problems, but quick, strong and pliable are. It looked fairly demolishable, too, so there might be something in using it for installations and wilderness construction. I'm thinking specifically about youth events - festivals and campsites. Basically, anything unique to the location that or that you'll be leaving unsupervised in a slightly hostile environment.
gigawatt 15y ago
Difficulty in getting the materials to build a wooden structure to the disaster zone would make the concrete tent a better option in many cases.
- jonnathanson 15y ago
  This. I think the advantage is in ease of transport vs. wood and related wooden building materials. Furthermore, not every disaster site is going to have in situ wood on hand for building, let alone in a form suitable for any sort of ad hoc construction needs.
  - run4yourlives 15y ago
    You both completely missed my main point. You're aging the fact that these things provide better temporary structures than wood buildings, but as temporary structures, the current standard is modular tenting.
- sesqu 15y ago
  A good example of this might be Haiti. I believe there was very little wood around, which contributed the the crisis to begin with.
- run4yourlives 15y ago
  Again, the difference is that of the nature of the structure. In a disaster zone like in say, Haiti, modular tents would outperform these things in every conceivable way, including survivability. You don't even begin to think of rebuilding until months later. At that point, I don't think you'd want to make one of these your permanent home.
kragen 15y ago
> I find it very difficult to believe that anyone would want one of these dingy, musty things over a proper wood or concrete framed construction. Well, around here, wood-framed construction is only found in shantytowns. This would be a big step up, I think. And if you think it's easier to build a wood-framed structure than to inflate a wet bag, count me skeptical of your construction experience.
FrojoS 15y ago
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. At least it looks cool, organic and futuristic at as other posters already said. When I saw the video, the first thing that popped into my mind was: I want to use this to build a retreat in some desert in the middle of nowhere. Reminds me a bit of the settlements in Star Wars - A New Hope and those autarkic villages in New Mexico.
vacri 15y ago
It would be much easier to build a traditional wooden structure once you've decided that you need one. One of the problems Haiti has is that they have no more wood.
crc32 15y ago
Have you considered price in your analysis?
- run4yourlives 15y ago
  Pretty sure fabric tents are cheaper in every way.

WiseWeasel 15y ago

Keep in mind this is the first commercial version of the technology; I'm sure it will rapidly progress beyond dingy, musty blobs. With the strength and light weight of the structure, along with the product's minimal cost compared to more traditional building materials and methods, I could see this being used to create very interesting and organic home designs. If the material is able to pass California building codes for earthquake preparedness, I could see people building whimsical temporary substructures, placing these on top and hardening them, then removing the substructures, enabling a much greater variety of possible forms. I could see doing something cool with stacked layers of bubbles and cut-outs for passages and windows. Another interesting application for something like this would be structures on the Moon or Mars, if you could make the material on-site, or at least the heavy parts of it (cement and water).

evo_9 15y ago

You're not sure about the need for a sterile structure that can be erected in 24 hours, almost anywhere in the world?

famousactress 15y ago
I think he's suggesting that he's not convinced this is better than a tent for a relatively temporary sterile structure. I'm also not really sure what 'sterile structure' means in this context. I suppose it means it's very cleanable? Cause as far as literally being sterile.. these concrete tents have just been blown full of air, which presumably came from just outside.
- dazzla 15y ago
  In the video he said steralizable not that its already steralized.
run4yourlives 15y ago
You're aware that western military forces currently build entire trauma centres out of the tenting I described, correct?

famousactress 15y ago

I wonder if the sweet spot here might be the adaptability of the material. Maybe there are specific needs to quickly install structures of a specific shape/size where this material could be especially advantageous.

sesqu 15y ago
I agree. Quick, ugly and permanent are not qualities of a good solution to most problems, but quick, strong and pliable are. It looked fairly demolishable, too, so there might be something in using it for installations and wilderness construction. I'm thinking specifically about youth events - festivals and campsites. Basically, anything unique to the location that or that you'll be leaving unsupervised in a slightly hostile environment.

gigawatt 15y ago

Difficulty in getting the materials to build a wooden structure to the disaster zone would make the concrete tent a better option in many cases.

jonnathanson 15y ago
This. I think the advantage is in ease of transport vs. wood and related wooden building materials. Furthermore, not every disaster site is going to have in situ wood on hand for building, let alone in a form suitable for any sort of ad hoc construction needs.
- run4yourlives 15y ago
  You both completely missed my main point. You're aging the fact that these things provide better temporary structures than wood buildings, but as temporary structures, the current standard is modular tenting.
sesqu 15y ago
A good example of this might be Haiti. I believe there was very little wood around, which contributed the the crisis to begin with.
run4yourlives 15y ago
Again, the difference is that of the nature of the structure. In a disaster zone like in say, Haiti, modular tents would outperform these things in every conceivable way, including survivability. You don't even begin to think of rebuilding until months later. At that point, I don't think you'd want to make one of these your permanent home.

kragen 15y ago

> I find it very difficult to believe that anyone would want one of these dingy, musty things over a proper wood or concrete framed construction. Well, around here, wood-framed construction is only found in shantytowns. This would be a big step up, I think. And if you think it's easier to build a wood-framed structure than to inflate a wet bag, count me skeptical of your construction experience.

FrojoS 15y ago

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. At least it looks cool, organic and futuristic at as other posters already said. When I saw the video, the first thing that popped into my mind was: I want to use this to build a retreat in some desert in the middle of nowhere. Reminds me a bit of the settlements in Star Wars - A New Hope and those autarkic villages in New Mexico.

vacri 15y ago

It would be much easier to build a traditional wooden structure once you've decided that you need one. One of the problems Haiti has is that they have no more wood.

crc32 15y ago

Have you considered price in your analysis?

run4yourlives 15y ago
Pretty sure fabric tents are cheaper in every way.