3D Printer Built 10 Homes in 24 Hours(ryot.org)
ryot.org
3D Printer Built 10 Homes in 24 Hours
http://www.ryot.org/3d-printer-home-shanghait/641445
8 comments
> I do wonder how this competes with straw bale / rammed earth, shipping containers, and other recycled, rapid prefab building manufacturing.
On labor? Much cheaper. And labor is typically the greatest cost.
On labor? Much cheaper. And labor is typically the greatest cost.
In First World countries, sure. In Third World countries, maybe not so much.
A lot would depend on whether there was a local concrete industry.
Edit: I'm not so sure that this is all that "eco-friendly" either -- cement production requires a lot of energy.
That said, concrete is very durable (if made and poured properly) and might be a win in the long term.
A lot would depend on whether there was a local concrete industry.
Edit: I'm not so sure that this is all that "eco-friendly" either -- cement production requires a lot of energy.
That said, concrete is very durable (if made and poured properly) and might be a win in the long term.
I should have said "skilled labor". Also, while cement production takes energy, it can be made in a carbon-neutral way. I'd argue its a win with regards to longevity vs energy input.
This is very promising and on its way to commercial availability http://www.ruralstudio.org/initiatives/20k-house
For the indian market Worldhaus.com has a roof/floor panels that reduce construction cost and time by around 40% and blocks that reduce construction time by 50%.
Monolithic Domes did such a project in India. I have no idea how successful it turned out to be in the end.
The speed is what's impressive. One can build a structure in California for a similar price.
It seems people often over estimate the hard costs of construction in the first world. It's cheaper than people think.
In 2005, at the height of the building boom (labor was scarce) in Southern California, I built a 400 sq ft detached garage: Stucco, rolled composite roof, concrete slab, drywall, swiss coffee interior paint, garage door, and 30R insulation in the ceiling (well insulated).
Using all contracted labor.
Total cost: $5,500.
IOW, not much more than this 3D printed house. Building a house in 2.4 hours is the impressive part.
It seems people often over estimate the hard costs of construction in the first world. It's cheaper than people think.
In 2005, at the height of the building boom (labor was scarce) in Southern California, I built a 400 sq ft detached garage: Stucco, rolled composite roof, concrete slab, drywall, swiss coffee interior paint, garage door, and 30R insulation in the ceiling (well insulated).
Using all contracted labor.
Total cost: $5,500.
IOW, not much more than this 3D printed house. Building a house in 2.4 hours is the impressive part.
Built on pre-existing foundation. No kitchen nor bathroom in evidence. So for 2nd-world poor housing, maybe.
Without rebar, I am concerned with how well these structures hold up against earthquakes. There are places where earthquakes are not a significant consideration, but it is probably something that limits where this sort of tech could be deployed.
Maybe there are alternative ways of increasing the tensile strength of the material that lend themselves to this sort of manufacturing. Incorporating some sort of fibrous material into the mix maybe?
Maybe there are alternative ways of increasing the tensile strength of the material that lend themselves to this sort of manufacturing. Incorporating some sort of fibrous material into the mix maybe?
Right. The article refers to the fact that it may be of use to China's poor.
3-d printed outhouse. boom, problem solved
They're just ahead of the curve, a century from now people will be amazed that 20th century first-worlders went to so much expense and effort to bring filth and vermin as close as possible to where they live.
Water isn't cleaning the fecal bacteria off the toothbrush you keep in the same room as your toilet, your wall-to-wall carpeting is full of food crumbs that roaches love, etc.
Water isn't cleaning the fecal bacteria off the toothbrush you keep in the same room as your toilet, your wall-to-wall carpeting is full of food crumbs that roaches love, etc.
I think there's a market for shared-bathroom shared-kitchen housing. Look at dorms, look at hotels in many countries.
re: toothbrushes. Mythbusters did a pretty convincing job debunking this.
as far as carpeting, sure it holds junk more than hardwood or tile, etc. But nobody's saying these folks should shag out their floors.
as far as carpeting, sure it holds junk more than hardwood or tile, etc. But nobody's saying these folks should shag out their floors.
Not sure why this is currently front page. They could have built even better houses had they used what is referred to around here as 'tilt-up' construction. You pour a concrete foundation, You stake out four wall forms around that foundation and pour in the walls, when they cure you tilt them up and tie the tops together with steel. Boom, "instant" building with windows and doors.
The approach is somewhat novel and interesting, and it's the first time I've seen photos of an actual end-to-end implementation of the "3D print a house!!" trope. I do agree that it's probably impractical, but I found the approach fun to think about.
I also think this has a few advantages over tilt-up:
1) The resulting product is lighter, since the walls are mostly air rather than concrete. I suspect they could manufacture small houses at a factory and transport them by truck, without the construction overhead of other prefabricated home systems.
2) The end product probably insulates better. With the right internal design to try to limit air movement (and thus natural convective losses), these walls look like they could have a decent R-value.
3) Less space is required to print in-place or construct a manufacturing facility. Tilt-up requires enough space to pour the wall forms around the building in addition to room to utilize cranes and cherry pickers - an in-place gantry system for printing a house should only take (house+gantry) footprint rather than (house + height of house).
I also think this has a few advantages over tilt-up:
1) The resulting product is lighter, since the walls are mostly air rather than concrete. I suspect they could manufacture small houses at a factory and transport them by truck, without the construction overhead of other prefabricated home systems.
2) The end product probably insulates better. With the right internal design to try to limit air movement (and thus natural convective losses), these walls look like they could have a decent R-value.
3) Less space is required to print in-place or construct a manufacturing facility. Tilt-up requires enough space to pour the wall forms around the building in addition to room to utilize cranes and cherry pickers - an in-place gantry system for printing a house should only take (house+gantry) footprint rather than (house + height of house).
Uh, because it's a new / interesting / powerful way of creating buildings that enables a vast degree of complexity and customization?
The previous discussion from Oct '13 (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6628137) on these guys : http://www.industrytap.com/the-printer-that-can-print-a-hous... suggested an interesting powerful way of creating buildings. Looking at the article it appears this guy prints a concrete tube and then tilts it over on its side and puts windows/doors on either end. That seems to me to greatly restrict his complexity choices.
[deleted]
If only they could print something for me, the sophisticated urbanite. I will be very impressed when a high-rise condo can get squirted out the business-end of this thing.
Ah sweet: Future of Construction Process: 3D Concrete Printing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfbhdZKPHro
Ah sweet: Future of Construction Process: 3D Concrete Printing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfbhdZKPHro
This is cool, it does seem unfortunate that Behrokh Khoshnevis and the University of Southern California haven't gone and done this already given how long they have been developing contour crafting, moon bases are great and all, but cheap housing is immediately practical and in dire need in California.
California - You mean Everywhere, right? Because no state, province, country, etc is without a need for cheap housing.
No, I was just meaning that there was a need relatively locally to where cement printing was under heavy development.
The Latest - Miley Cyrus tweets from hospital
Guess where you can find that on the front page?
RYOT is exactly what an ideal news site should be.Hope it succeeds.
Guess where you can find that on the front page?
RYOT is exactly what an ideal news site should be.Hope it succeeds.
lol, did you also see "Check Out an Epic River Battle Between Hundreds of Hippos and Crocodiles" [alpha]
[alpha]http://www.ryot.org/hippos-vs-crocodiles/644425
[alpha]http://www.ryot.org/hippos-vs-crocodiles/644425
I also suspect that the mostly-hollow walls have a decent R-value on their own.
I do wonder how this competes with straw bale / rammed earth, shipping containers, and other recycled, rapid prefab building manufacturing.
"Making cheap houses for the poor" seems to be a common design+architecture firm/student theme - does anyone know of any success/failure stories where these "cheap house" designs were applied in real life?