4 ms·
The low-tech "old farmer" Goldilocks solution I've seen is to mostly fill in the large gaps with free concrete rubble or stones, so a lot less (expensive) concr
by schiffern 3y ago
The low-tech "old farmer" Goldilocks solution I've seen is to mostly fill in the large gaps with free concrete rubble or stones, so a lot less (expensive) concrete is needed to infill the rest.
But that ain't sexy, so most people ignore it. :)
Obviously it's somewhat impractical on large jobs, and inadvisable in very strength-critical roles, but for small household / farmstead projects it's a great way to save money and get rid of ugly rubble you have lying around.
- lnsru 3y agoUsed bricks is very sexy solution. However it’s getting harder and harder to find old buildings to be demolished. And I wouldn’t use these bricks for critical infrastructure.
- schiffern 3y agoYeah for something you're gonna see, bricks are fantastic. If you're just making an anchor for a post or similar, rubble-infill concrete is a great cost saver.
- mynameisnoone 3y agoYep. Don't use expensive, new, pristine, energy-intensive materials wherever possible. Reserve those for finishes and exterior coatings. Appropriate filler materials should be suitable for the strength, longevity, and safety profile and function desired. This also reminds me of some DIY and volunteer experiences installing residential fence posts. On a volunteer gig, I saw people using 200 lbs. of concrete and keep adding water until it's soup triumphally proclaim it's "the right way" while dismissing supervisors and others who knew what they're doing. Meanwhile, I was looking at depth, slope, wind risk, and soil (hydrology), and gathering site debris like rocks and chunks of metal to stick under each post so it wouldn't rot in 5 years or become the Big Dig in time, materials, or quality.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- schiffern 3y agoThanks, you said it better than I could. Nicely encapsulated the whole picture.
- kragen 3y agoyeah, despite my extremely limited construction experience, i've done this, recycling concrete as aggregate also though 'fill in the large gaps with aggregate' is what makes concrete concrete instead of cement however, if you want to make soaring thin shapes out of concrete, you aren't going to do that with chunks of demolition debris as aggregate. even gravel won't do. for ferrocement you need an all-sand aggregate, and mining construction sand is a lot cheaper than crushing demolition debris into sand
- lupusreal 3y agoFiguring out the volume of your rubble so you can mix/order the right amount of concrete can be a bit tricky.