Where I live people build houses mostly with brics and mortar, autoclaved aerated concrete or concrete. Wikihouse system won't help.
Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses
101–110 of 223 posts
Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses
#102They should have start with standard sizes and publish their standards for all sub components ( and to matching existing pipe and electrical standards)
Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah as soon as someone gets a demolition bill as high as the construction bill, the desire to reuse everything will disappear quick. This also presumes in 40-100 years when a house presumably makes sense to demolish, the same standard design is still considered good and the new owner has heard of your weird bespoke construction style. Consider that currently the age of a house maybe worthy of demolition is 1978 and…
Reclaimed building materials are in high demand. Homes from the 1970s and older usually have excellent lumber, more often than not sourced from old-growth timber. My former home from 1949 sat on a 40-foot 12x12 solid cedar beam, for instance. The only other stuff in the walls is either in demand (copper, plumbing metals) or we just throw it out (drywall, insulation). So if these engineered materials are sturdy enough…
A big reason reclaimed lumber is interesting is because it's generally plain straight high quality boards and can be used in things with an intentional weathered look. Wooden LEGOs will not have that sort of value, because unlike your 12x12 solid beam, these will be hacked up pieces of plywood.
Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses
#104If you live in California, you can potentially build one of these as an ADU (Accessory Dwelling Unit). Local agencies are required to approve an ADU within 60 days, and recent state bills (AB 976, 434, 1033, and 2221) make it easier to build/sell/rent ADUs on your property. You'll have to wait until 2025 before every locality is forced to have a process for pre-approved ADU plans (at which time you could potentially…
I would think that a pre-built manufactured home delivered pre-assembled would make more sense. Pour a slab, hookups for water, and electricity, done.
These do not make sense if you are looming for similar build quality to match your home. If you have been inside of a pre manufactured home (a “mobile home”) then you’ll know how everything has to be made of oddly hollowed plastic in order to keep shipping weight down.
The frame is the cheapest part of a permanent structure, and a 300-500sqft ADU is not going to have much in the way of plumbing, electrical, and hvac. Paying a plumber, electrician, and hvac tech for new construction on a tiny building is not going to represent a significant chunk of your budget for what amounts to 1-3 days work maximum.
Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses
#105Note that the walls and interior floors are equally thick and as insulated as the roof. It is not a sensible or efficient use of materials, given how the physics of heat work. It is great, however, if your approach to construction was formed by playing Minecraft.
Or perhaps if you're prioritizing things other than maximally efficient use of materials? It seems like they're prioritizing standardization, especially of methods, more than almost anything else. AFAICT we have far more excess material than excess labor, so it doesn't seem particularly crazy to me?
“It is freezing honey” “I know dear, but the house was built efficiently”
Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses
#106This is some kind of Cory Doctorow dream come true
Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses
#107Cease building dwellings using unsealed wood.
Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses
#108I like the ethos but to me it's pointed in entirely the wrong direction. Why not just make standard sections of 2x4 or 2x6 framing? Start standardizing window sealing details? Literally anything that will actually get some use? Instead we get opensource plywood boxes? Using plywood for all of the structural components means if you get a leak, which all houses get, you are in danger of much more significant damage tha…
The last time wikihouse showed up on HN (September '23) I did a deep dive on the process I still haven't come out of. 20 years ago as a grad student getting my masters in architecture, I definitely would have had similar comments to most of what's on this page. But I don't feel that way any more and I'm actually disappointed by the negativity toward this project – not because it's not warranted, but if this were a software project I feel like the criticism would be more constructive rather than so dismissive.
WH is not a perfect system, but the approach is commendable for its comprehensive take on building systems. And building systems are broken. For the past two years I've been trying to build my own house (using a contractor), and even as a trained architect the process is ridiculously opaque, costs are exorbitant, and quality control is difficult to manage.
I applaud the fact that WH has tried to tackle the entire structure (and for that matter the entire building process – their parent organization has additional projects [0] for design, local building codes, and innovative financing structures). Yes, in the US 2x framing is cheap and relatively inexpensive, but is still complex in its own ways. Floor systems are different from wall systems are different from roof systems. I like that WH has tried to make one unit type (plywood boxes) work for the different systems. Is it the most efficient way? Probably not, but it affords other opportunities.
From an ideological perspective I also like that they prioritize sustainability, low energy use, and accessibility of design information to laypeople. On top of that, they've organized their building information like a programmer – they use GitHub to track versions and even have the start of a components database. They are an API short of making this really something the HN community could easily play with.
That said they have a long way to go. Framing a house is the easy part. I think if they could standardize the interface for cladding and interior finishes they would be in a better position to disrupt the building industry, but for now contractors will still be a requirement – so there goes your budget and quality.
Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses
#109Just learned about a Belgian company called Gablok doing something similar. One of the cool things about a Gablok house is that you can move it. The company that builds it for you can dismantle and reassemble it. For example if you live in Michigan and retire to Florida you can take your house with you!
The video doesn't clearly show they deal with electrical and plumbing. They actually have slots built in where you can run the utilities. Then some small boards are screwed into the blocks and drywall is nailed into them.
Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses
#110Where I live people build houses mostly with brics and mortar, autoclaved aerated concrete or concrete. Wikihouse system won't help.
Where do you live? (I'm guessing it's humid?)