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

How to design a house to last 1000 years

constructionphysics.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 402 posts

Re: How to design a house to last 1000 years

#341

Post by justnotworthit »

mywittyname wrote: post #332
jppope wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is super funny to me. I just bought a house where the kitchen is separate. My parents, and my mother-in-law were all like... "you can knock down the wall and bring the rooms together"... and I was like: "hell no. As if I want a bunch of kids playing tag while I'm chopping things with sharp knives and running around with burning oil." ...Leave me alone to cook an awesome meal in peace. I'm working in there not me…

I'm actually designing a new house and was surprised at the resistance I'm getting from the builders/architects in having a kitchen which is out of the way of the rest of the house. Like you, I'm not interested in dumping hot oil all over a kid/dog/mother who decides to run through the kitchen despite the blockade I set up to keep them out. That, and kitchens require so much maintenance to keep clean and presentable.…

I'd guess that's because of another phenomenon: A "good" house is one ready to sell to the next guy. Youre never living in your own house, always the next buyer's house. Hence the need to keep up with the latest fads, desired by the next guy who is buying from you for the sake of the next guy.

Re: How to design a house to last 1000 years

#344

Post by Retric »

Cogito wrote: post #340
Retric wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you must have skimmed some parts. He isn’t burring steel into the ground. It’s only to be used inside the buildings shell and above the foundation. Thus it’s generally going to stay dry and mostly avoid significant corrosion issues, especially considering the generous safety factor suggested. The foundation is concrete piles to bedrock supporting a floating concrete foundation. Clearly that limits building lo…

The point you are replying to is that stainless steel is unnecessary, because 'normal' steel will ast more than 1000 years in the conditions described.

Not when one of the assumptions is that the shell will be seriously compromised at some point. Stainless steel is just another durability vs cost tradeoff, but it could be what makes the difference between repair vs rebuilding and it’s not that expensive.

Wood for example could hypothetically last that long, but both fire and leaks are a real concern.

Re: How to design a house to last 1000 years

#345

Post by gonzo41 »

ortusdux wrote: post #53

Stainless steel rebar is an often overlooked option. In theory, solid SS rebar should outlast the concrete, but it is a difficult thing to accurately study. In favorable conditions, regular rebar reinforced concrete starts to need major repairs after ~40 years due to corrosion. The Progresso Pier in Mexico was build over 80 years ago with SS rebar, and reportedly has not needed any renovations. A pier built 20 years…

Hey this is a little late, but now they are looking at non oxidizing basalt based rebar and mesh's as an alternative to steel. It's work a look. it's got a lot going for it.

Re: How to design a house to last 1000 years

#347

Post by hilbert42 »

rsync wrote: post #98

This is a very odd design document and it makes me think this author has thought a lot about materials and buildings but not actually built anything . The steel moment frame, to someone with shallow knowledge, sounds so strong and resilient . But in fact, a rigid steel structure is more vulnerable to seismic (and even wind) loads than wooden framing which can flex and move and dampen those loads naturally. The stainl…

"If I had an unlimited budget and was aiming for >1000 years I would pour the piles to bedrock with stainless rebar inside fly-ash concrete and top those pilings..."

What would situation be if you used proper hot-dipped galvanizing instead? (And I mean proper quality hot-dipped galvanizing, not the usual 'toy' stuff that passes for galvanizing these days.)

I've a good reason for asking, as I've an example of galvanizing that is in such good rust-free condition after being exposed to the weather and elements for 65 years that I would not have believed the fact unless I'd actually known its background and seen its condition, which I've done on multiple occasions for reasons I've explained below.

The galvanizing in question involves an extant clothesline that's still rust-free and in good condition, it consists of three galvanized, multistrand (7 strands if I recall correctly) of clothesline wire that span the full length of the backyard and that terminate on wooden poles with horizontal 'T' beams spanning them (it's a typical clothesline that everyone's familiar with).

The clothesline was installed in the backyard of my patents home in the mid 1950s and in 1957 an electrical conduit tee junction of 3/4" diameter (for joining conduits) that was made from folded steel was wrapped freely around the middle clothesline and a dog chain attached. This meant that the dog could pull the tee junction along the line so that he could gain almost full access to the total area of the backyard.

Despite the wear and tear on the clothesline from the steel in the tee constantly sliding over the line—to wear that's even extended to the galvanizing being worn off from the high points of the strands of wire by the steel tree to the extent that it's exposed the underlying bear steel yet nevertheless this clothesline still shows no signs of rust after 65 years.

I've studied chemistry for some years so I understand how galvanizing works but I still find it incredible that this galvanized wire is still rust-free after 65 years. Frankly, I find it so astonishing that every time I visit my parents' old home I cannot but help to cheek up on the status of said clothesline.

Incidentally, little remains of the electrical tee junction, it was made of mild steel and painted black, the paint offering little protection and there would have been no paint that the point of interface between the steel and the wire.

Re: How to design a house to last 1000 years

#349

Post by frosted-flakes »

anchpop wrote: post #310
thehappypm wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wood is flammable, and so it’s kind of out of the question. I’d build out of stone or brick, single story but larger footprint. Then of course ground source heat pump and all electric appliances, and solar nearby..

modern wood construction is more resistant to fire than steel, steel loses its structural strength when it gets hot while wood chars on the outside (becoming fire resistant) and doesn’t lose its strength

I've seen the aftermaths of a few barn fires over the past few years. These were old structures, pre-1950s based on appearance, framed with heavy timbers and clad with wood planks and a steel roof. After the fires, the timber frames were still standing on their stone foundations, charred and black, but there was nothing to be seen of the rest of the structure.

Re: How to design a house to last 1000 years

#350

Post by saalweachter »

jandrese wrote: post #162

One thing he didn't mention in the location section: Make sure your spot is at least 20 meters above sea level. Not only do you need to account for the ground subsisting, but you also need to account for sea level rise. I wouldn't put it near moving water larger than a creek at all, riverbanks can shift over time and so can coastlines. His suggestion to build in New York City is a bit dubious in a future where we may…

The elevation of Manhattan varies from 10 to 80 meters.
Post reply on HN