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

141–150 of 402 posts

Re: How to design a house to last 1000 years

#141

Post by unethical_ban »

EricE wrote: post #78
dr_orpheus wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Adding interior insulation makes the house much more comfortable, but also changes the thermal dynamics, potentially causing freeze/thaw damage in the brick, and allowing moisture to accumulate between the brick and the insulation. This is one of the many details that would need to be worked out for the complete design of the home. Yeah, this comment struck me as a more major detail to be worked out compared to the…

Yup, that's when I stopped reading. It's clear the author has little practical, real world experience with building. In another comment I pointed out if he started watching Matt Risinger's YouTube channel he would see that things like his concern about bricks and moisture have been solved problems, with even better solutions that handle the issue better while decreasing construction time and cost. Also is 1000 years…

> It's clear the author has little practical, real world experience with building.

Who gives a damn? Is anyone reading this and checking their $2 million bank account to start a build? It's a thought exercise and a fun one that has generated some cool ideas in my head and some good discussion.

It's one thing to comment on mistakes or corrections to be made, but it's frustrating to see someone go "this is silly and the author is stupid".

Re: How to design a house to last 1000 years

#142

Post by flanbiscuit »

tablespoon wrote: post #116
kube-system wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. The idea that homes don't last 1000 years because of their construction quality is conflating correlation and causation. Homes don't last that long because ideas about what (or where) a home should be don't last 1000 years. Heck, in recent times, they hardly last 100 years.

> Agreed. The idea that homes don't last 1000 years because of their construction quality is conflating correlation and causation. Homes don't last that long because ideas about what (or where) a home should be don't last 1000 years. Heck, in recent times, they hardly last 100 years. And (IIRC) in Japan they often don't last past one owner, since a new owner will typically want to build a new house for themselves on…

> in Japan they often don't last past one owner

This has been brought up before on HN and I remember a comment mentioning that they thought it was due to the fact that earthquake proofing technology advances quickly in Japan so an old house might not be up to the most current standard. Curious if that's correct, and if not, why is this so common in Japan then.

Re: How to design a house to last 1000 years

#144

Post by jacquesm »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #137
jacquesm wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, another way to spell Slate roof = work. The reason is simple: Slate, layers of fossilized leaves, has a rough surface and frost and the weather in general will work on it and split the layers apart, seeds will find enough purchase to germinate (the handy supply of water certainly helps) and lichen and moss just love to grow on slate. This whole article to me reads: "I'm planning on an overpriced construction for…

> Slate, layers of fossilized leaves, has a rough surface and frost and the weather in general will work on it and split the layers apart, seeds will find enough purchase to germinate (the handy supply of water certainly helps) and lichen and moss just love to grow on slate. 25 years ago, when I saw some roofers working to replace an old slate roof on a church outside Philadelphia with asphalt (I was horrified), I as…

Interesting, I never realized that there can be such a huge difference in quality, thank you.

Re: How to design a house to last 1000 years

#146

Post by flovec »

Gravityloss wrote: post #17

Why have the chimney outside? It's very inefficient... https://www.quora.com/Why-do-American-houses-often-have-the-...

I was wondering that too. If I wanted to design a wood-burning apparatus that would be efficient and last 1000 years, I'd use a design that was more like a masonry stove (centrally located on the inside of the house). In any future (I think), a backup source of heat in a cold climate is a necessary redundancy? I would use the most efficient tech now for the burn chamber (rocket?), but also design the burn chamber in such a way to allow for it to be replaced with better tech in the future (perhaps the masonry stove outer structure and thermal bank would support itself - steel exoskeleton? - etc.).

Re: How to design a house to last 1000 years

#147

Post by jcadam »

Centuries-old wooden buildings have the advantage of being made from old-growth wood, which isn't available to modern builders.

My current house is made out of logs. We'll see how long it lasts, though I suppose I won't be around to see it in 1000 years.

Re: How to design a house to last 1000 years

#148

Post by foofoo55 »

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…

Stainless steel needs oxygen[1], otherwise it will eventually corrode with pitting and "crevice corrosion"[2]. I wonder what the ingredients are in stainless rebar, and what the oxygen environment is like.

[1] https://www.thermofisher.com/blog/metals/is-stainless-steel-...

[2] https://www.cruisingworld.com/how/beware-stainless-steel-cor...

Re: How to design a house to last 1000 years

#150

Post by brixon »

prox wrote: post #134
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…

How does the Pantheon in Rome keep its structure? Is it just concrete? Since it’s 2000 years old now.

Roman concrete is not like modern concrete. The process in modern concrete does not stop and eventually makes it too brittle and falls apart, Roman concrete does not do this and can last a very long time.

https://science.howstuffworks.com/why-ancient-roman-concrete...

Post reply on HN