A house 3D printed from raw earth

Post by brudgers » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 3:49 AM UTC

elihu wrote: post #226

brudgers wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if I'm an architect and my client wants their living room to look like a gothic cathedral If you were an architect with those kinds of clients you would have a list of potential builders with track records of successfully completing similar work. It’s among the kinds of expertise architects have. And you would look at this with the jaded cynicism that an architect’s experience inevitably produces...for you will have…

> If you were an architect with those kinds of clients you would have a list of potential builders with track records of successfully completing similar work. My point is that you don't have to have this knowledge, and you don't have to hire expert craftspeople and pay them expert wages if you can have a machine do the difficult work. > And most importantly you would know that right angles are almost always the right…

Post by Animats » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 4:07 AM UTC

noughtme wrote: post #206

Animats wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The actual products that make it work: Mapesoil 10.[1] "High-performance, fibre-reinforced powdered stabilising agent for sports sub-base contruction surfaces".The amount of Mapesoil 10 required is 3%-5% of the dirt weight. Comes in 500kg bags, on pallets. Dynamon SR4 [2] "Superplasticizer based on acrylic polymer for concrete with long slump retention". About 1%-2% of the mix. That gets the material through the 3D p…

>The trouble with most of these 3D building systems is that there's no tamping I would call that a feature. Building forms is basically building the entire building out of wood (or metal), then building it again out of concrete. Single family homes or multi-unit low rises don't require low void high compressive strength. They need speed. Residential prefab never caught on in North America. Maybe this will. If it is c…

Post by pensatoio » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 4:52 AM UTC

romwell wrote: post #230

brudgers wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the thing that tells you?

It's called "Google". Here's the first hit for "early criticism of automobiles": https://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2017/01/get-horse-americ... I am leaving it as an exercise to the reader to verify the extent to which your concerns mirror those of people 100 years ago.

Post by vanderZwan » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 7:47 AM UTC

mbgerring wrote: post #144

vanderZwan wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your argument is the equivalent of asking in what sense a wheel is novel technology while comparing a car to a horse drawn carriage. It's not about the mud hut. It's about how the mud hut was made .

I am aware that novel techniques for building mud huts are created all the time, and none of those new techniques address the fundamental issue with all of them — this building technique is only suited to single-story buildings on large tracts of land. 3D printing the mud hut doesn’t meaningfully alter that constraint. The “environmental sustainability” gains you get from using on-site materials would be totally eras…

Post by elihu » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 8:35 AM UTC

brudgers wrote: post #231

elihu wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you were an architect with those kinds of clients you would have a list of potential builders with track records of successfully completing similar work. My point is that you don't have to have this knowledge, and you don't have to hire expert craftspeople and pay them expert wages if you can have a machine do the difficult work. > And most importantly you would know that right angles are almost always the right…

“Not using an architect” can have benefits. Among them not having to deal with an architect. However, improved aesthetics is often not among them. Same for functionality. The advantage of an architect is that you won’t get what you think you want.