4 ms·

> Sway Tower was the first building in Britain to be made of non-reinforced concrete Unless I am completely confused, this cannot be true. Concrete has been us

> Sway Tower was the first building in Britain to be made of non-reinforced concrete Unless I am completely confused, this cannot be true. Concrete has been used since the ancient Romans while iron and steel reinforcements were only really developed in the mid 19th century.

nkoren 4y ago
(Caveat: I'm not truly an expert on Roman concrete, although I love it -- the Pantheon being my favourite building in the whole if human history.) My understanding is that the use of Roman concrete was very highly centralised in and around Rome, and tailed off dramatically towards the outer reaches of the Empire. Indeed I've seen this cited as the key factor in the technology going extinct -- basically, it was very locally endemic. In any case, I'm unaware of any Roman concrete structures having been found in Britain, so this statement may indeed be true.
- iampivot 4y ago
  Wasn't this also because they needed certain volcanic ashes for their concrete, which would be hard to find elsewhere?
  - chucksta 4y ago
    Yes, seawater and ash https://unews.utah.edu/roman-concrete/ https://unews.utah.edu/roman-concrete/
- jessriedel 4y ago
  It doesn’t have to be Roman concrete. English concretes made with, e.g., Portland cement, predates Sway tower by a hundred years. Obviously, the only version of this claim that could be true is that Sway Tower was the first building in England built exclusively of unreinforced concrete. (There were uncountable buildings built by using unreinforced concrete and stone, e.g., the third Eddystone Lighthouse completed in 1759.) But I’d still find it very surprising that people built structures in England from reinforced concrete for decades without anyone trying to do it without the reinforcement. (“The first home built using reinforced concrete was a servant’s cottage constructed in England by William B. Wilkinson in 1854.”)
rosetremiere 4y ago
Wikipedia seems to agree with you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concrete#Industrial_era https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concrete#Industrial_era
tokai 4y ago
Its not that surprising. Even though Romans had concrete, they didn't build many building wholly of concrete. The British Romans did use concrete in their buildings. Especially in floors, walls, and as mortar to bind building elements. But there is no evidence of any Roman building in Britain made with concrete as the primary building material. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-roman-studies/article/abs/notes-on-buildingconstruction-in-roman-britain/16E4A959BE685AEAF9DDC83C9FBA240A https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-roman-stu...
- throwaway0a5e 4y ago
  In a pre-industrial world concrete doesn't usually pencil out except in the most extreme use cases. You're usually better off mortaring real stone together. In the modern world it makes sense because bulk liquids are fast/efficient/cheap to handle.

nkoren 4y ago

(Caveat: I'm not truly an expert on Roman concrete, although I love it -- the Pantheon being my favourite building in the whole if human history.) My understanding is that the use of Roman concrete was very highly centralised in and around Rome, and tailed off dramatically towards the outer reaches of the Empire. Indeed I've seen this cited as the key factor in the technology going extinct -- basically, it was very locally endemic. In any case, I'm unaware of any Roman concrete structures having been found in Britain, so this statement may indeed be true.

iampivot 4y ago
Wasn't this also because they needed certain volcanic ashes for their concrete, which would be hard to find elsewhere?
- chucksta 4y ago
  Yes, seawater and ash https://unews.utah.edu/roman-concrete/ https://unews.utah.edu/roman-concrete/
jessriedel 4y ago
It doesn’t have to be Roman concrete. English concretes made with, e.g., Portland cement, predates Sway tower by a hundred years. Obviously, the only version of this claim that could be true is that Sway Tower was the first building in England built exclusively of unreinforced concrete. (There were uncountable buildings built by using unreinforced concrete and stone, e.g., the third Eddystone Lighthouse completed in 1759.) But I’d still find it very surprising that people built structures in England from reinforced concrete for decades without anyone trying to do it without the reinforcement. (“The first home built using reinforced concrete was a servant’s cottage constructed in England by William B. Wilkinson in 1854.”)

rosetremiere 4y ago

Wikipedia seems to agree with you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concrete#Industrial_era https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concrete#Industrial_era

tokai 4y ago

Its not that surprising. Even though Romans had concrete, they didn't build many building wholly of concrete. The British Romans did use concrete in their buildings. Especially in floors, walls, and as mortar to bind building elements. But there is no evidence of any Roman building in Britain made with concrete as the primary building material. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-roman-studies/article/abs/notes-on-buildingconstruction-in-roman-britain/16E4A959BE685AEAF9DDC83C9FBA240A https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-roman-stu...

throwaway0a5e 4y ago
In a pre-industrial world concrete doesn't usually pencil out except in the most extreme use cases. You're usually better off mortaring real stone together. In the modern world it makes sense because bulk liquids are fast/efficient/cheap to handle.