Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why has the quality of brick buildings declined in the last 100 years?

greenbuildingadvisor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 282 posts

Re: Why has the quality of brick buildings declined in the last 100 years?

#11

Post by SamBam »

coryrc wrote: post #8

The author admits to the limited comparison. I have a few other reasons: 1. We actually care if our buildings are insulated now and withstand earthquakes. 2. People are so wealthy here they don't have to get it right, they can always pay to do it over again. They don't care to put in the research to make sure it is done right. [0] 3. Corollary to #2, we don't need our buildings to last 100 years because we expect the…

How would any of the issues with the Dartmouth brick building in the article have been caused by #1?

Re: Why has the quality of brick buildings declined in the last 100 years?

#12

Post by cecilpl »

Isn't this simply an instance of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias?

The only brick buildings you can still look at from the 1800s are the ones that were built very well - all the shoddily-constructed buildings from that era have since disappeared.

Re: Why has the quality of brick buildings declined in the last 100 years?

#13

Post by beachstartup »

Retric wrote: post #10

Survivorship bias is a really important caveat: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias Many cheap brick buildings from 100 years ago are gone, where the high quality ones are more likely to remain. Also, steel Lintel are often used over windows in brick buildings. They don't last as long, but are fine for cheap construction that is not expected to last. AKA the kinds of building that are unlikely to be aroun…

not only that, but back in the day brick was the fancy expensive option, today it isn't. those with big budgets and ambitious design goals choose other materials (steel, glass, etc.)

Re: Why has the quality of brick buildings declined in the last 100 years?

#15

Post by Joeri »

coryrc wrote: post #8

The author admits to the limited comparison. I have a few other reasons: 1. We actually care if our buildings are insulated now and withstand earthquakes. 2. People are so wealthy here they don't have to get it right, they can always pay to do it over again. They don't care to put in the research to make sure it is done right. [0] 3. Corollary to #2, we don't need our buildings to last 100 years because we expect the…

4. The 19th century buildings which were shoddily built (the majority) have been torn down. It's the same bias that makes people claim old appliances were built better than modern ones.

The article's author is not wrong. The average 1980's brickwork building is built less well than the average 100 year old building. However, 100 years ago buildings probably were built worse on average than today. Both of those statements can be true at the same time.

Re: Why has the quality of brick buildings declined in the last 100 years?

#16

Post by douche »

SamBam wrote: post #11
coryrc wrote: post #8

The author admits to the limited comparison. I have a few other reasons: 1. We actually care if our buildings are insulated now and withstand earthquakes. 2. People are so wealthy here they don't have to get it right, they can always pay to do it over again. They don't care to put in the research to make sure it is done right. [0] 3. Corollary to #2, we don't need our buildings to last 100 years because we expect the…

How would any of the issues with the Dartmouth brick building in the article have been caused by #1?

I'm pretty sure they don't care about insulation that much at Dartmouth. There's a huge steam plant on campus, and all the brick dorms are equipped with old-fashioned steam radiators that have two settings - over-bearingly hot, and "boil my pot of ramen noodles." It's common to see the dorm windows wide open when it is -20 F in February, with students trying to regulate the temperature to a livable level.

Re: Why has the quality of brick buildings declined in the last 100 years?

#17

Post by Animats »

Is the brick actually holding up the building? In many modern buildings, it's just a veneer, about 1cm thick. The steelwork holds it up. The new Box.net HQ in Redwood City looks like a brick building, but it's not; it's steel and concrete with about 1cm of brick on the outside.

There's some nice work being done with brick today.[1] Some of this is gentrification, built to fit in with existing brick buildings, or to imitate them in new construction. All those examples have recessed windows, although not structural stone lintels. Many lintels today are precast stone and decorative; steel is carrying the load.

Robotic bricklaying is here.[2]

In earthquake country, you really don't want tall brick buildings where the brick is structural. San Francisco is very anti-cornice; in even minor earthquakes, overhanging masonry cornices tend to fall off and kill people.

[1] http://www.bdcnetwork.com/7-emerging-design-trends-brick-bui... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ppk4O7iyzPI

Re: Why has the quality of brick buildings declined in the last 100 years?

#18

Post by coryrc »

SamBam wrote: post #11
coryrc wrote: post #8

The author admits to the limited comparison. I have a few other reasons: 1. We actually care if our buildings are insulated now and withstand earthquakes. 2. People are so wealthy here they don't have to get it right, they can always pay to do it over again. They don't care to put in the research to make sure it is done right. [0] 3. Corollary to #2, we don't need our buildings to last 100 years because we expect the…

How would any of the issues with the Dartmouth brick building in the article have been caused by #1?

The masons and architects have a lot more to care about these days. Even so, they should have gotten the flashing and water flow right (even cheap 80s houses usually have slanted window sill).

Oh, and the insulation reduces drying of the brick to the interior, which can cause it decay within a decade if not done right: http://www.bluegreengroup.ca/bluegreen-launches-a-study-on-a... (though that's not the case here).

Re: Why has the quality of brick buildings declined in the last 100 years?

#19

Post by Plough_Jogger »

This is a clear example of survivorship bias.

Buildings from 100 years ago that still stand today necessarily must have been those that were most carefully constructed or those that have been thoughtfully preserved. This creates a biased comparison between the highest quality buildings of the past and an average (or perhaps worse than average) building from modern times.

This article could conclude that not all brick buildings today are superior in construction to the highest quality buildings built 100 years ago, but making a more general statement would be a fallacious extrapolation.

Re: Why has the quality of brick buildings declined in the last 100 years?

#20

Post by the_mitsuhiko »

If you are curious about this topic you should bring it up with some architects from different countries. From my understanding there are indeed regressions in building quality in some countries but it's not entirely clear what causes it other than decisions that have been made at the time.

In particular the brick did not decrease in quality but the way they were built did. For instance for a while people paid less attention to protecting buildings from water damage to achieve more interesting designs.

A particular crazy architectural style that suffers a lot from this is British brutalist architecture.

Post reply on HN