Live data from Hacker News

Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses

wikihouse.cc

131–140 of 223 posts

Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses

#131

I 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…

I think it's about this solution being easy to make with CNC routers. Traditional framing is not made for automation, so they went to precut sheets of plywood. It's similar to 3D printing: You could make a doorstop in 30 seconds from a block of wood and a saw, or you could print it in 1 hour from plastic. The second option is better if you have no saw and a printer.

Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses

#132

I love the idea of this. My wife and I watch a decent amount of Grand Designs are there are a few houses that experiment with the concept of cnc-cut block based assembly. I intend to build something like it someday (in the US, so it might be harder to find a manufacturer). One thing that strikes me as at odds is that they tout their reusability as well as the customization aspect of the block. It’s cnc cut so they’re…

> I intend to build something like it someday (in the US, so it might be harder to find a manufacturer). Its seems like every episode of Grand Design does include an almost spiritual journey to a glue-lam pre-fabricated wood factory in Germany. I’m not sure that stuff is as easy to get over here. > how would you reuse it in a different project? The blocks are standard sizes so you can reuse them like legos.

> Its seems like every episode of Grand Design does include an almost spiritual journey to a glue-lam pre-fabricated wood factory in Germany.

This is really weird to me because nobody builds like that here. Brick and concrete rule supreme and people living in wooden houses are seen as old hippies who cuddle with termites.

Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses

#134

https://www.iso-bella.nl/containerwoning/

There are many companies offering such small prefab houses. This one [1] offers a system of container-sized blocks that are assembled in the factory, carried by truck and joined together on site. (Initially the blocks were container-size, and carried whole. Current designs are > 3m wide.) The biggest problem with container-based buildings is that the standard road size of 2600 mm is very narrow. Subtract 150 cm on ea…

From a research perspective you choose specifically what you need. Multiple containers can be used to optimize space but in these houses you don't need much and the houses shown on iso-bella are cheaper. I think you can be making those units self sufficient by self sustaining (vertical) crop farming where your own feces are used as furtilizer for example. Solar panels and satalite internet can be used for remote locations. There are plenty of inovations to apply to container building even a refurbish plan for old units. Plenty of options when you think about all unit functions not only living but also scientific or medical units that can be easily moved.

Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses

#137
So I'm the hexayurt guy -- http://hexayurt.com and http://appropedia.org/hexayurt

We've been at this FOSS housing thing for 20 years, aiming for upgradable shelters for climate refugees rather than middle class housing. I've known the wikihouse folks from before the beginning and (frankly) I've always found the to be predatory jerks. Wikihouse came out of a potential collaboration between that team and the hexayurt project. We spent quite a bit of time discussing doing an FOSS house together, then they cut me out of the deal and six months later launched wikihouse.

Never have I been more grateful that somebody ignored every bit of advice that I gave them. Nothing of our thinking is in this bloody thing. Fortunately.

The core problem with wikihouse is that *it is designed to get grant funding* not to be buildable. The architecture group behind it is a grant farming operation with a rumoured tendency to implementing ideas that are very close to (but not exact copies of) things which are around in the ecosystem. So they took a good look at the hexayurt, ignored everything about it which made it practical (uses standard 4x8s, uses widely available fasteners like deck screws or aluminium tape), and then shipped something which they knew was never going to be economic to build but hit the grant funding sweet spot: CNC machines, parametric design, and so on. That's why it looks this way.

Like any technology which is designed to live on grand funding practicality has never been the point. The point is that universities etc. can noodle around with it, learn from it, get some ideas tested, make a contribution, and then move on. Architecture has a constant need for things to design and things to do.

Architecture for Humanity used to have a web site which collected together hundreds of designs for emergency shelter and basically it was just a place for students to publish impractical designs because they had to be published somewhere.

No harm in it as long as nobody expects it to be buildable and fortunately that mistake was not made: theory stayed theory.

Hexayurt Project has never been incorporated, and never taken grant funding. Once or twice people have paid me as an engineer to work on specific projects, but I make a living as a tech CEO. Many thousands of builders for Burning Man, and a ton of genuine grass roots innovation on multiple fronts. It is, by any standards, a pretty good open source project with a lot of contributors and a lot of users.

What it isn't yet is a refugee shelter. To turn the "well proven at Burning Man" design into something that can be built at scale to cushion climate refugees and other displaced people is going to require a serious investment from somebody in testing in a range of environments, and refining the designs particularly when it comes to flooring and variants like spraying the shelters with shotcrete to make them permanent where needed.

https://www.appropedia.org/Hexayurt_project/Master_List_of_D...

Donor driven aid is a huge problem. Lack of testing regimes for new shelter technology is a huge problem.

There is a total revolution in open source architecture coming but nobody seems to know how best to get it started. Neither one of these projects is it.

Not yet. Roll on the day.

Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses

#138
The best form of open source houses are free and complete framing plans with material and cut lists and detailed instructions that don't assume the builder is a professional. Add some guides on exterior and interior finishing, basic plumbing and electrical and walk-throughs on how to obtain permitting and being your own general contractor and you'd have something genuinely useful for everyone.

Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses

#139
post #131

I 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…

I think it's about this solution being easy to make with CNC routers. Traditional framing is not made for automation, so they went to precut sheets of plywood. It's similar to 3D printing: You could make a doorstop in 30 seconds from a block of wood and a saw, or you could print it in 1 hour from plastic. The second option is better if you have no saw and a printer.

It seems like it would be much, much slower to CNC all the plywood and insulation and assemble the boxes and then put the boxes together than it would be to just frame a wall, sheet it and put insulation batts in. Having access to and operating a CNC also seems harder than learning to use a skill saw and hammer a nail. It feels like they're trying to apply abstraction to construction where you just have one unit that can be adapted to work for everything but they don't realize that already exists and it's called dimensional lumber.

Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses

#140
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

required to approve or required to decide, and they can reject? is the approval criteria checking mechanistic? (ie. every criteria is quantified and "objective"?)

> ADUs subject to State ADU Law must be considered, approved, and permitted ministerially, without discretionary action. https://www.hcd.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-07/ADUHandbo...

So their work is to check if it's conforms to state ADU law?
Post reply on HN