4 ms·
This seems awful. The inflatable form is not reusable.
by netfl0 4y ago
This seems awful. The inflatable form is not reusable.
- booi 4y agoWell concrete is not waterproof (generally) so they are technically also using the form as waterproofing. It's pretty clever IMO but you'd need rebar at the very least for any structure worth building...
- netfl0 4y agoIt seems like a high amount of complexity. Lots that can go wrong. I’ll take tyvek and wood :)
- john_the_writer 4y agoConcrete is also super bad for the environment. Wood is renewable and far easier to get locally.
- newaccount2021 4y ago
- retrobrandcool 4y ago[dead]
- retrobrandcool 4y ago[dead]
- teeray 4y agoInsulation might be nice once it gets chilly.
- ewzimm 4y agoConcrete construction without rebar is more durable and worth bringing back. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_concrete https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_concrete
- nradov 4y agoHow well does it handle earthquakes?
- midoridensha 4y agoIt doesn't.
- ewzimm 4y agoEarthquake resistance is increased by strengthening the concrete, but it mainly depends on how the structure is built, not just the shape but additoinal measures used to strengthen the structure. We've been stuck on rebar for so long that research on alternatives has stalled, but there are interesting opportunities and developments in that area. For example, basalt fiber and bamboo have potential. Sustainable, innovative building structures that don't require energy-intensive and corrosive steel will depend on a convergence of strengthening technologies and archtectural techniques, maybe even including ones like described in the original article. Considering all the environmental and social problems we have with modern housing and construction, this is a prime area for innovation! https://www.architectmagazine.com/technology/two-natural-rebar-alternatives-for-concrete_o https://www.architectmagazine.com/technology/two-natural-reb...
- monkeywork 4y agoIsn't there a massive difference in wall thickness between what the Romans did and what we do today?
- ewzimm 4y agoModern uses of Roman concrete go beyond what the Romans did. We can create completely different types of structures using the same principles. Here's an example of recent developments in research: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/01/210113090920.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/01/210113090920.h...
- zbrozek 4y agoIt's reused immediately as a waterproofing membrane.
- reneherse 4y agoEven worse, it becomes the inside and outside vapor barrier for the entire house. An air tight home lined with phthalate-laden PVC? No thank you.
- jjeaff 4y agoDangers of pthalates notwithstanding, you do actually want an airtight home. Ventilation should be controlled and filtered with the HVAC system.
- tapland 4y agoNow, I'm from a place where HVAC is rare, and thus this sounds like a mold disaster waiting to happen. But is that actually best practice where HVAC is common?
- z9znz 4y agoVentilation is not HVAC. Ventilation can be as simple as having openable vents at proper locations in a structure which could be manually operated to provide air exchange on demand.
- 29083011397778 4y ago> Ventilation is not HVAC. That 'V' in 'HVAC' must have an industry-specific meaning beyond "Ventilation" then.
- z9znz 4y agoOk, let me say it more precisely: You can have ventliation without an HVAC system.
- leoedin 4y agoA modern, energy efficient house is intentionally very air tight, and ventilation is achieved using mechanical ventilation with heat recovery. That basically gives you the best of both worlds - a highly ventilated house (so low humidity levels) coupled with very little heat loss - MVHR systems can often recovery 90% of the heat in the ventilated air. Look at Passivhaus for the most extreme version of this. But even regular new build houses in the UK now have to meet air tightness regulations.