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

Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses

wikihouse.cc

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 223 posts

Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses

#161

Post by dstudzinski »

hettygreen wrote: post #75

There's an episode of Grand Designs (great show) where some people build an entire house by bringing a CNC machine onsite and banging out pre-fab wall sections exactly like this and connecting them in place. Here's the full episode: https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6hsxwd It's pretty cool to see, but in the end it seemed like way more effort than nailing some 2x4's together.

There was also episode related to https://u-build.org from Studio Bark: https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x7sqcy5 (Grand Designs: The Streets - Box House) which is another option

Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses

#163

Post by cycomanic »

class3shock wrote: post #73

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…

It's funny how every country thinks their approach to building is good and everything else has huge problems. For example Germans tend to think wooden houses will not last.

The approach taken here is similar to what people are commonly doing in Scandinavia. Most generally almost all houses are pre fabricated in factories and assembled on site. The actual blocks vary quite a bit, mostly they are large wall sections, but there are approaches using blocks like this. There is also a manufacturer that makes all sections out of plywood. With all of the approaches I have never heard of issues with leakage. In fact they tend to be much more tight then houses build on site (often meeting passive house standards).

Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses

#164

Post by quaestio »

class3shock wrote: post #73

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…

And what about recycled foamed PVC boards instead of plywood? They have decent mechanical properties (12-15MPa)

Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses

#165

Post by ianburrell »

avidphantasm wrote: post #146
class3shock wrote: post #73

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…

All good points, especially about the risk of leaks on the material. I've also heard anecdotally that framing is the cheapest part of the house.

It looks like framing usually takes two weeks to a month. Whole house takes 8 months. The lumber is a good chunk of money, but comparable to wallboard.

Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses

#166

Post by SamBam »

francis_t_catte wrote: post #88
class3shock wrote: post #73

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…

wait until you learn about 'engineered beams' I shudder thinking about all the structures built with those things that're one undetected bathtub drain leak away from serious structural failure.

I'm confused. Do you have evidence that an engineered beam will fail faster due to water damage than a beam made from 2x4s?

Weatherproof LVLs are actually much more water resistant than a regular solid piece of pine. Even indoor engineered beams are quite water resistant.

Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses

#168

Post by notahacker »

hk__2 wrote: post #162

Just like yesterday [1] I’m confused by that name: what’s the "wiki" part in Wikihouse? Anybody can modify your house? [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38915999

> Anybody can modify your house?

I think that would be more fun as an art installation than a home. Comments from the neighbours on the edit page would be wild!

But seriously, it looks like they're open sourcing their block designs to allow people to modify them, and any third-party with suitable CNC machining equipment to create them. Whether that's a Wiki is another question...

Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses

#169

Post by geraldwhen »

ethanbond wrote: post #60
shermantanktop wrote: post #51

Note 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?

Is that so? Materials went crazy expensive during Covid and didn’t come back down.

Re: Wikihouse: Open-Source Houses

#170

Post by pmayrgundter »

ivyirwin wrote: post #156
pmayrgundter wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's really interesting about Github-based versioning. My company (bldrs.ai) makes a webapp that views IFC (soon STEP) and has github integration, so any *.ifc path on GH can be pasted into our search for viz. I'm not seeing any IFC files on Wikihouse repos, but they look old ( https://github.com/wikihouse ). Do you know where they're hosting?

Oh wow, you just sent me down a really intriguing path. I was not familiar with IFC, but looking more into that now. No, it does not look like their repo [0] has IFC files, but I don't imagine it would be that difficult to export the additional needed file information. [0] https://github.com/wikihouseproject/Skylark/tree/main/SKYLAR...

Their site does have IFC for that project tho and I've loaded it in Bldrs, so seems fine there.

Yeah, IFC is neat. It's actually a dialect of STEP, so able to carry the geometry and tons of BIM metadata. We've estimated the spec is ~7k pages printed. It's like an abstract toolkit for working with building codes

Happy to chat more too. We have our project Discord and DMs on Twitter

Post reply on HN