5 ms·

As a European in US owning homes on both sides of the Atlantic - we are too fast to judge wood frame construction. After all the wood frame construction techniq

As a European in US owning homes on both sides of the Atlantic - we are too fast to judge wood frame construction. After all the wood frame construction techniques came to the US from Europe. I can safely say that there's little difference between a good wood frame and masonry house, today. Modern concrete isn't as long lasting as Roman concrete from 2000 years ago. Modern concrete doesn't play well with water.

sfn42 3y ago
Modern concrete is what you need it to be. We know much more about concrete production today than the Romans did. We make compromises, it's not all about quality. If you're building a garage you're fine with it lasting 100+ years, you don't give a shit about 1000+ years. So you don't pay for the stuff that will last for ever. If you're a civil engineer designing a huge dam you go for the good concrete. You also test the concrete before pouring to make sure it's up to spec. Because your budget and priorities make that make sense.
- mannyv 3y ago
  And yet, Frank Lloyd Wright made the wrong concrete choices at Falling Water. If he couldn't get it right then the average Joe won't get it right either.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - coryrc 3y ago
    His buildings are known for being high-maintenance. I've had houses with 70-year-old concrete foundations that are perfectly functional.
  - defrost 3y ago
    Classic architect|designer fubar .. this is why they're great at conceptual design and mostly much weaker than they'd admit at pragmatic functional structural engineering. Not all architects, to be clear, some really know their foundations but...
  - JohnAaronNelson 3y ago
    Don’t blame Wright. The builder changed the design and didn’t pick the right concrete.
  - sfn42 3y ago
    I never claimed Frank Lloyd Wright knew more than the Romans..
coryrc 3y ago
Steel-reinforced concrete does not perform well in salt water. You can use modern concrete without steel and build things about as good as Roman concrete. You'll pay a whole lot more than reinforced because you'll use at least 3x more concrete and limit the shape -- only arches. Compare Prague's Charles bridge[0] to Seattle's West Seattle bridge. Or compare the windows of the Roman Pantheon (uh, none) to those in any skyscraper. You won't have as much self-healing in salt water as some Roman concretes. But modern concretes also have far more compressive strength. You can still buy lime mortars and build brick masonry houses, if you want to pay for the labor; the materials themselves have never been cheaper. [0] Yes I know it isn't Roman nor especially made of concrete but there's a lot of good information on its construction and it's basically the perfection of Roman-style bridge building, and without reinforcement you need to build just like that.
- shawn_w 3y ago
  The WSB might not be the best example of modern concrete construction considering it was closed for a couple of years not very long ago for repairs to said concrete.
  - coryrc 3y ago
    That makes it a great example :)
pfannkuchen 3y ago
> After all the wood frame construction techniques came to the US from Europe. As did the musket.
hx8 3y ago
> there's little difference between a good wood frame and masonry house, today The wood frame will do better in an earthquake. The masonry will do better in a flood or high winds. Consider the natural disaster risks of your local area when picking a home.
scotty79 3y ago
I'm puzzled why would anyone make windows out of wood when PVC exists.
- woah 3y ago
  It’s required by law in San Francisco
  - scotty79 3y ago
    Good to know. Wow. Just wow.
  - mleonhard 3y ago
    I live in a building in San Francisco that was built 10 years ago. It has metal windows and frames.
- KaiserPro 3y ago
  Because PVC windows last ~15 years, are massive, and are not structural, unless there are steel supports. Wood lasts a shit tonne longer, assuming you maintain it. The only thing really thats better is the thermal performance, and price.
  - scotty79 3y ago
    > Because PVC windows last ~15 years, It's completely untrue. I have PVC windows that after 30 years are as good as new. Before that there were two glaze wooden windows that after 10 years were horrible. Not sure how bad they were from the start. > are massive, I see you might make smaller window out of wood (or pvc) but you'd have to sacrifice thermal isolation quality to do it. They are large because they have air pockets in them for isolation. > and are not structural, unless there are steel supports. Load bearing window? That's insane idea as well. > Wood lasts a shit tonne longer, assuming you maintain it. Yeah, so not really, because people don't maintain things on average. > The only thing really thats better is the thermal performance, and price. Which are the two most important qualities for a window, plus the ease of use which is better for pvc and stays better.

sfn42 3y ago

Modern concrete is what you need it to be. We know much more about concrete production today than the Romans did. We make compromises, it's not all about quality. If you're building a garage you're fine with it lasting 100+ years, you don't give a shit about 1000+ years. So you don't pay for the stuff that will last for ever. If you're a civil engineer designing a huge dam you go for the good concrete. You also test the concrete before pouring to make sure it's up to spec. Because your budget and priorities make that make sense.

mannyv 3y ago
And yet, Frank Lloyd Wright made the wrong concrete choices at Falling Water. If he couldn't get it right then the average Joe won't get it right either.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- coryrc 3y ago
  His buildings are known for being high-maintenance. I've had houses with 70-year-old concrete foundations that are perfectly functional.
- defrost 3y ago
  Classic architect|designer fubar .. this is why they're great at conceptual design and mostly much weaker than they'd admit at pragmatic functional structural engineering. Not all architects, to be clear, some really know their foundations but...
- JohnAaronNelson 3y ago
  Don’t blame Wright. The builder changed the design and didn’t pick the right concrete.
- sfn42 3y ago
  I never claimed Frank Lloyd Wright knew more than the Romans..

coryrc 3y ago

Steel-reinforced concrete does not perform well in salt water. You can use modern concrete without steel and build things about as good as Roman concrete. You'll pay a whole lot more than reinforced because you'll use at least 3x more concrete and limit the shape -- only arches. Compare Prague's Charles bridge[0] to Seattle's West Seattle bridge. Or compare the windows of the Roman Pantheon (uh, none) to those in any skyscraper. You won't have as much self-healing in salt water as some Roman concretes. But modern concretes also have far more compressive strength. You can still buy lime mortars and build brick masonry houses, if you want to pay for the labor; the materials themselves have never been cheaper. [0] Yes I know it isn't Roman nor especially made of concrete but there's a lot of good information on its construction and it's basically the perfection of Roman-style bridge building, and without reinforcement you need to build just like that.

shawn_w 3y ago
The WSB might not be the best example of modern concrete construction considering it was closed for a couple of years not very long ago for repairs to said concrete.
- coryrc 3y ago
  That makes it a great example :)

pfannkuchen 3y ago

> After all the wood frame construction techniques came to the US from Europe. As did the musket.

hx8 3y ago

> there's little difference between a good wood frame and masonry house, today The wood frame will do better in an earthquake. The masonry will do better in a flood or high winds. Consider the natural disaster risks of your local area when picking a home.

scotty79 3y ago

I'm puzzled why would anyone make windows out of wood when PVC exists.

woah 3y ago
It’s required by law in San Francisco
- scotty79 3y ago
  Good to know. Wow. Just wow.
- mleonhard 3y ago
  I live in a building in San Francisco that was built 10 years ago. It has metal windows and frames.
KaiserPro 3y ago
Because PVC windows last ~15 years, are massive, and are not structural, unless there are steel supports. Wood lasts a shit tonne longer, assuming you maintain it. The only thing really thats better is the thermal performance, and price.
- scotty79 3y ago
  > Because PVC windows last ~15 years, It's completely untrue. I have PVC windows that after 30 years are as good as new. Before that there were two glaze wooden windows that after 10 years were horrible. Not sure how bad they were from the start. > are massive, I see you might make smaller window out of wood (or pvc) but you'd have to sacrifice thermal isolation quality to do it. They are large because they have air pockets in them for isolation. > and are not structural, unless there are steel supports. Load bearing window? That's insane idea as well. > Wood lasts a shit tonne longer, assuming you maintain it. Yeah, so not really, because people don't maintain things on average. > The only thing really thats better is the thermal performance, and price. Which are the two most important qualities for a window, plus the ease of use which is better for pvc and stays better.