12 ms·

The question I would have around automated building construction is "why use bricks?". Bricks are great for humans to build with, they are just the right size

The question I would have around automated building construction is "why use bricks?". Bricks are great for humans to build with, they are just the right size and weight for the human hand to manipulate and place. They are not optimised for machine manipulation. I would guess that if you wanted to automate construction you would start by making things like walls on an automated production line, then ship the largest practical piece to the construction site. Once there I'm guessing some automated cranes could move them into location far more easily than thousands of slightly randomly sized pieces of hard clay. Work out what problem you are trying to solve. Do you want cheap construction? then why choose a material that requires thousands of operations just to build a wall regardless of if it is a human or machine doing the building. There are far more efficient building materials used every day... Just see how fast commercial buildings can be constructed and you can be sure that they are optimised both for speed of construction as well as (hopefully) energy efficiency and ease of maintance after construction. The problem seems to be people have a emotional idea of what a dream house is, an idea that is firmly stuck in the red brick house of 1970's sitcoms.

chrisseaton 5y ago
Bricks are easy to maintain and remodel and repair. It's a modular system.
krapp 5y ago
>The problem seems to be people have a emotional idea of what a dream house is, an idea that is firmly stuck in the red brick house of 1970's sitcoms. Your fully automated house-extrusion company isn't going to have many customers, especially after you explain to people why their ideal dream home is obsolete and that they should pay you for a plascrete tube to live in instead because the profit margins are better. Those "emotional ideas" are what drive market incentives, you can't simply ignore them.
- flemhans 5y ago
  Plasteel is even better.
- wallacoloo 5y ago
  > ideal dream home It’s weird to focus on the upper end of the market for a thing like this. If the utility in automated construction is to reduce costs, it might make more sense to consider the more price-conscious portion of the market. I.e. starter homes and the like. My guess is that since there are so many other large costs involve in home construction, automating this one component just doesn’t make a significant price impact in almost any market segment.
function_seven 5y ago
Because they’re pleasant to look at. Half the time, the wall isn’t even “needed”, other than for aesthetic purposes. Whenever a wall is purely functional, it’s almost never made of small clay bricks today. I’m talking about foundation walls, subsurface retaining walls, and similar things. The types of walls that aren’t meant to be looked at, but instead meant to hold something back or up. Whenever you see a wall being made of red clay bricks, that’s because the builder wants it to look nice. I suppose you can cast a concrete wall and apply a façade of bricks. But there’s still a skill required for that final step. Of course, you may have a different design aesthetic, wherein exposed concrete or large modular sections are both functional and pretty. But brick laying is all about looks. CMUs are a different story, and kind of prove your point. They’re much larger and so reduce the piecework involved, but still small enough to allow for onsite flexibility in construction.
- dmix 5y ago
  So bricklaying it’s basically an ‘artisanal’ type of product not a mass production type of thing that is ill suited for automation anyway. The article links to the MULE product (which was an evolution or pivot of their 15yr attempt at making a traditional bricklaying robot) makes more sense as it takes advantage of the lifting power of machines and uses much larger/longer bricks that would otherwise be too heavy to pick up by humans while accelerating the process. https://www.construction-robotics.com/ https://www.construction-robotics.com/ This is much like why pigeonholing AI into traditional cars is more difficult than say having a fleet of cars region wide which all talk to each other and coordinate movements with roads and crosswalks that are also designed for automated cars.
- mr_toad 5y ago
  > But brick laying is all about looks. I’ve seen stores with moulded facades designed to look like bricks that are attached to reinforced concrete.
  - endymi0n 5y ago
    From what I'm understanding the hard part of doing that stuff concrete is curation time. There's a lot of projects trying the "easy" route and effectively do additive 3D printing with concrete instead of glue. Conversely, they have the same problems... they look pretty ugly: https://www.realestate.com.au/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/15111803/China-3D-printed-house4-2000x15000.jpg https://www.realestate.com.au/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/0... Doing it "properly" means building proper moulding, rebar, vibration casting all the stuff that sounds like almost impossible to automate with 2021 technology. Bricks have the advantage that they're pre-cured, so you don't have to wait ages until the wall actually supports something — and if that something is just the next layer.
turtlebits 5y ago
Agreed. Bricks aren’t great for construction. Not structural, poor R-value, a ton of labor. Just have concrete poured or stick frame and a fake brick facade. Will probably last longer as well. Seems like the wrong problem to solve.
- com2kid 5y ago
  Bricks can last a long time. Brick houses also hold their value well. No one cares about a brick facade. Also why do you say bricks aren't structural? I assumed those 100 year old brick houses used bricks for structural support.
  - turtlebits 5y ago
    Bricks are for decorative purposes nowadays (pretty siding). They aren't practical as you won't meet code for insulation. You will also need to frame another interior wall for vapor control. A single layer brick wall isn't structural.
    - uCantCauseUCant 5y ago
      There are foam bricks which meet the insulation codes in europe - in one wall with no additions. Will all be special waste though one day.
    - MagnumOpus 5y ago
      > A single layer brick wall isn't structural My 92-year old house with single layer brick walls says otherwise. (And yes, it insulates badly, but it kept standing through a lot of storms.)
      - danans 5y ago
        > My 92-year old house with single layer brick walls says otherwise. ( Not structural by current building standards. No doubt it is carrying a load today, bit you can't build a house that way anymore.
  - 5y ago
SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
> The question I would have around automated building construction is "why use bricks?". Well, eventually roads will also be optimised for self-driving cars not human drivers. But until then, self-driving car have to interoperate with the existing, pervasive, legacy infrastructure, even if it isn't optimal for their needs.
MomoXenosaga 5y ago
My brother lives in an apartment building from the 1930s made of bricks. It is absolutely horrendous.
fennecfoxy 5y ago
This (and similar comments below) are a very American view of the situation. To be honest, as a kiwi I was the same when the first moved to the UK "why are they building NEW buildings out of brick???" It's because there's so much clay here, the materials to make bricks are abundant and this is similar in other parts of Europe. Brick is also more resilient to the weather here, if they build hosues with wood like NZ (or America) they'd degrade incredibly quickly.
necovek 5y ago
It is a great question, but it's like jumping on refactoring: you'll solve all the problems that were obvious with the old solution, but introduce new ones that you didn't think of that were already solved by the old one. Basically, "thermal blocks", which is mostly what's used in construction in areas where they are used (Europe, rather than filled-in bricks) need to be modified to accommodate imperfections: you need half bricks, third-bricks, and they are easy to make on the spot. For automated construction, you'd have to have a bunch of these pre-made, and the larger the block you are building with, the more types of those smaller ones you'll need. These blocks are also relatively simple to put electrical and plumbing installations in (it's a lot more demanding to make "channels" in concrete than bricks). Anyway, block construction is way cheaper than eg. gypsum board construction for interior walls in Serbia, and other than taking a lot more space, being heavier, and requiring curing time, it has a bunch of better properties (acoustic, thermal,...). The price not being high is actually the reason this is not further improved. Filled-in bricks are mostly used for decoration of outside walls these days (and usually as plasterboards these days), and as far as paying for things go, humans will happily pay the most for good looks!
tsjq 5y ago
pre-cast concrete slabs made offsite and then lifted by cranes to lock on to make walls. eg this builder's projects https://www.providenthousing.com/ https://www.providenthousing.com/
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
Three dudes can do the bulk of a cinder-block foundation in a few workdays with no special equipment. Blocks and bricks are cheap to work with because there are no special material handling requirements to increase overhead costs. This approach is economically viable pretty much everywhere except the urban areas most heavily represented on HN. When you get into fancy high dollar construction in HCOL areas where time costs more money that's when you get bigger blocks that need machines to move them or you get formed and poured structures.

chrisseaton 5y ago

Bricks are easy to maintain and remodel and repair. It's a modular system.

krapp 5y ago

>The problem seems to be people have a emotional idea of what a dream house is, an idea that is firmly stuck in the red brick house of 1970's sitcoms. Your fully automated house-extrusion company isn't going to have many customers, especially after you explain to people why their ideal dream home is obsolete and that they should pay you for a plascrete tube to live in instead because the profit margins are better. Those "emotional ideas" are what drive market incentives, you can't simply ignore them.

flemhans 5y ago
Plasteel is even better.
wallacoloo 5y ago
> ideal dream home It’s weird to focus on the upper end of the market for a thing like this. If the utility in automated construction is to reduce costs, it might make more sense to consider the more price-conscious portion of the market. I.e. starter homes and the like. My guess is that since there are so many other large costs involve in home construction, automating this one component just doesn’t make a significant price impact in almost any market segment.

function_seven 5y ago

Because they’re pleasant to look at. Half the time, the wall isn’t even “needed”, other than for aesthetic purposes. Whenever a wall is purely functional, it’s almost never made of small clay bricks today. I’m talking about foundation walls, subsurface retaining walls, and similar things. The types of walls that aren’t meant to be looked at, but instead meant to hold something back or up. Whenever you see a wall being made of red clay bricks, that’s because the builder wants it to look nice. I suppose you can cast a concrete wall and apply a façade of bricks. But there’s still a skill required for that final step. Of course, you may have a different design aesthetic, wherein exposed concrete or large modular sections are both functional and pretty. But brick laying is all about looks. CMUs are a different story, and kind of prove your point. They’re much larger and so reduce the piecework involved, but still small enough to allow for onsite flexibility in construction.

dmix 5y ago
So bricklaying it’s basically an ‘artisanal’ type of product not a mass production type of thing that is ill suited for automation anyway. The article links to the MULE product (which was an evolution or pivot of their 15yr attempt at making a traditional bricklaying robot) makes more sense as it takes advantage of the lifting power of machines and uses much larger/longer bricks that would otherwise be too heavy to pick up by humans while accelerating the process. https://www.construction-robotics.com/ https://www.construction-robotics.com/ This is much like why pigeonholing AI into traditional cars is more difficult than say having a fleet of cars region wide which all talk to each other and coordinate movements with roads and crosswalks that are also designed for automated cars.
mr_toad 5y ago
> But brick laying is all about looks. I’ve seen stores with moulded facades designed to look like bricks that are attached to reinforced concrete.
- endymi0n 5y ago
  From what I'm understanding the hard part of doing that stuff concrete is curation time. There's a lot of projects trying the "easy" route and effectively do additive 3D printing with concrete instead of glue. Conversely, they have the same problems... they look pretty ugly: https://www.realestate.com.au/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/15111803/China-3D-printed-house4-2000x15000.jpg https://www.realestate.com.au/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/0... Doing it "properly" means building proper moulding, rebar, vibration casting all the stuff that sounds like almost impossible to automate with 2021 technology. Bricks have the advantage that they're pre-cured, so you don't have to wait ages until the wall actually supports something — and if that something is just the next layer.

turtlebits 5y ago

Agreed. Bricks aren’t great for construction. Not structural, poor R-value, a ton of labor. Just have concrete poured or stick frame and a fake brick facade. Will probably last longer as well. Seems like the wrong problem to solve.

com2kid 5y ago
Bricks can last a long time. Brick houses also hold their value well. No one cares about a brick facade. Also why do you say bricks aren't structural? I assumed those 100 year old brick houses used bricks for structural support.
- turtlebits 5y ago
  Bricks are for decorative purposes nowadays (pretty siding). They aren't practical as you won't meet code for insulation. You will also need to frame another interior wall for vapor control. A single layer brick wall isn't structural.
  - uCantCauseUCant 5y ago
    There are foam bricks which meet the insulation codes in europe - in one wall with no additions. Will all be special waste though one day.
  - MagnumOpus 5y ago
    > A single layer brick wall isn't structural My 92-year old house with single layer brick walls says otherwise. (And yes, it insulates badly, but it kept standing through a lot of storms.)
    - danans 5y ago
      > My 92-year old house with single layer brick walls says otherwise. ( Not structural by current building standards. No doubt it is carrying a load today, bit you can't build a house that way anymore.
- 5y ago

SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago

> The question I would have around automated building construction is "why use bricks?". Well, eventually roads will also be optimised for self-driving cars not human drivers. But until then, self-driving car have to interoperate with the existing, pervasive, legacy infrastructure, even if it isn't optimal for their needs.

MomoXenosaga 5y ago

My brother lives in an apartment building from the 1930s made of bricks. It is absolutely horrendous.

fennecfoxy 5y ago

This (and similar comments below) are a very American view of the situation. To be honest, as a kiwi I was the same when the first moved to the UK "why are they building NEW buildings out of brick???" It's because there's so much clay here, the materials to make bricks are abundant and this is similar in other parts of Europe. Brick is also more resilient to the weather here, if they build hosues with wood like NZ (or America) they'd degrade incredibly quickly.

necovek 5y ago

It is a great question, but it's like jumping on refactoring: you'll solve all the problems that were obvious with the old solution, but introduce new ones that you didn't think of that were already solved by the old one. Basically, "thermal blocks", which is mostly what's used in construction in areas where they are used (Europe, rather than filled-in bricks) need to be modified to accommodate imperfections: you need half bricks, third-bricks, and they are easy to make on the spot. For automated construction, you'd have to have a bunch of these pre-made, and the larger the block you are building with, the more types of those smaller ones you'll need. These blocks are also relatively simple to put electrical and plumbing installations in (it's a lot more demanding to make "channels" in concrete than bricks). Anyway, block construction is way cheaper than eg. gypsum board construction for interior walls in Serbia, and other than taking a lot more space, being heavier, and requiring curing time, it has a bunch of better properties (acoustic, thermal,...). The price not being high is actually the reason this is not further improved. Filled-in bricks are mostly used for decoration of outside walls these days (and usually as plasterboards these days), and as far as paying for things go, humans will happily pay the most for good looks!

tsjq 5y ago

pre-cast concrete slabs made offsite and then lifted by cranes to lock on to make walls. eg this builder's projects https://www.providenthousing.com/ https://www.providenthousing.com/

throwaway0a5e 5y ago

Three dudes can do the bulk of a cinder-block foundation in a few workdays with no special equipment. Blocks and bricks are cheap to work with because there are no special material handling requirements to increase overhead costs. This approach is economically viable pretty much everywhere except the urban areas most heavily represented on HN. When you get into fancy high dollar construction in HCOL areas where time costs more money that's when you get bigger blocks that need machines to move them or you get formed and poured structures.