/diy/ - Do It Yourself

>>1443585
Realize that they will just sell it for the cash...

>>1443588
Regardless, the main goal is just to live in it.

Not an expert on this topic, but here in Europe (in my country at least) most houses are brick houses.

The way they're done is like in this pic. An inner wall, insulation, cavity, outer wall. I think it's called "Cavity wall" in English.
They're hold together with these steel pins, they have a little nudge in them in them where the water can collect and fall off.

>>1443585
This depends greatly on where you live. No home should be built in a vacuum, so to speak. There is no 'best' type of home for every given area. You should tailor everything to your locality. From the materials you build with, to the orientation of the building, to the color you paint it.

>>1443593
I've looked into this, but it strikes me as a modern method. I'd like to make the walls solid brick if I can. I'd prefer not to have to use the wall ties.

>>1443595
Right, but there are general principles, yes?

>>1443598
Then enjoy a shitty house with moisture problems and ignore 100 years of building progress. Not even the guy you are answering but solid brick walls are out dated and not a good idea in any environment.

>>1443600
Aren't moisture problems caused by the insulation?

>>1443598
>but it strikes me as a modern method
I know older homes didn't put insulation between them, or just less, but cavity walls have been used for decades. I haven't really heard of any brick houses being build without them.

Again, I'm not an expert but our climate is moderate but recommended thickness of insulation is somewhere between 10-16 cm, even going as far as 20 for "passive" houses. But I guess it depends on the materials used. Double paned windows are pretty much a must.

>>1443601
The outer brick wall lets the moisture through so that's why we need a cavity.

>>1443604
Okay. I'll take a look at the cavity construction

>>1443601
Nah moisture is caused by not ventilating. As the other dude said brick sucks water like a sponge so you need the cavity with a moisture barrier on the warm side of the insulation. This will prevent condensation on the inside of the barrier. There should also be a small gap between the insulation and the outer brick wall so condensates water dosent get sucked into the insulation.

>>1443585
Brick is beautiful, but it has it's faults.
Brick growth, as it is often called, is a property of fired clay materials which begins from the time the product comes out of the kiln and continues, at a reducing rate, for the life of the brick.

The ‘e’ value, as it is commonly known, is an estimate of the amount of growth expected in the first fifteen years after the brick leaves the kiln. This figure is used by designers to size and space control joints.

The coefficient of expansion or ‘e’ value of clay bricks when tested in accordance with AS/NZS 4456.11 can vary from a very low 0.3mm/m (millimetres per metre) to over 1.6mm/m.

Most general purpose bricks have a coefficient of expansion in the range 0.5 to 1.0mm/m over 15 years.

More importantly, the thermal expansion rate of clay brick, differs from the expansion and contraction of mortar, resulting in constant cracking of the joints. This problem is compounded by moisture in freezing climates.

>>1443684
To a point, old Victorian brick homes were allowed to breathe with no vapor barriers. People have issues now from painting the soft brick used as it prevents the air from passing.

>>1443585
Give a location.

If you want something to last you got to do it right. Watch how they build schools or public buildings where the budget is unlimited.

They typically frame up the building with steel and then spray foam it leaving ties to put up the facade which can be brick or stone.

Just make sure you leave enough room on the foundation for the facade to still go on after allowing for 3 inches of closed cell foam.

When you insulate from the outside in between the facade/brick and framing, you lock the elements out from even entering your inside space. It also allows you to spray open cell foam in your wall cavities on the inside if you want to go full retard or you can leave them empty.

Insulation Spray Foam is a must if you want your building to last forever. The shit doesn't mold, rot, water proof, no nutritional value for bugs or pests, will increase the framed strength of a wall 200%, will allow you to heat with a candle and cool with an ice cube.
It pays for itself.

https://www.demilec.com/

>>1443585
just do slipform stone.

>>1443588
Teach your children to adhere to a 100 generation rule. That they do nothing to harm their genetic lineage for the foreseeable 100 generations and that anything they decide, create, or own needs to directly reflect that. If they decide to sell it, at least you'll know they are doing it because that is what is needed to further their genetic line in the best way possible at that time.

>>1443585
>>1443598
All you need to do is have an excellent and deep foundation specifically tailored to your location. All rainwater and runoff needs to be 100% removed from the location as fast as possible. All walls need to "breath" enough so that moisture will never be trapped anywhere. Modern building materials used by contractors are the worst ones to use. They trap moisture and cause problems that ensure job security for the contractors. Vapor barriers rot houses from the inside out simply from bodily perpetration and cooking moisture. Using vapor barriers requires a host of other support systems to ensure the entire thing actually works just enough to keep contractors from getting sued quickly. That's the main reason why you have extremely old masonry houses and castles still doing well today, yet there are so many modern masonry houses that are falling apart, yet both are well kept and not neglected by their occupants.

In some areas, a masonry building will need a heat source to help drive out the terrible humidity of the local area.

>>1443780
Don't do this, it is the worst form of "masonry" you can do and reflects the contractor mindset of quick, dirty, and future job sourcing.

>>1443585
Build a brickhouse i live in a brickhouse from 1926 It's still going strong :)

>>1443787
contractors don't typically do slipforming. you have an irrational fear of people with more money than you and assume they are inherently bad actors.

>>1443791
I know this shit because I worked for several contractors and was told specifically the how and why these things are done first hand. I have never in my life met a contractor who was not a shady piece of shit business-wise.

>>1443585
If you have earthquakes in you are it is not a good idea. I mean it is possible to build a brick house that will withstand earthquakes (add some reinforcement bars like in concrete)... Heat insulation is not a problem as well.
Problem is not in brick. Real problem is that you live probably in not-brick house counties like US, Japan, Latin... There are not much specialists. And all plumbers, electricians will charge you extra in long run.
Anyway, why would you even want a brick house? Typical wooden house is good for 100 years, if you will take care.

>>1443807
>Typical wooden house is good for 100 years, if you will take care.

I wish that were true in America now. The lumber available at most places is knotty pine and various types of particle board woods (plywood, MDF, OSB, etc). The older houses, like the one I grew up in were made from solid, local, hardwood lumbers. I grew up in a house that is currently 255 years old. It still has wooden siding. The only real changes have been metal underpinning/skirting and metal roofing. In my life time, that house has outlasted all the modern houses I've ever lived in or know of personally. The main failures seems to be poor roofing, poor foundation work, and materials that when wet expand and fall apart.

One year my neighbor's entire roof flew off their new house and landed in my yard. Every neighbor's porch roofs were tore off at the same time. Nothing on my house or porch roof was damaged. My current house uses all local hardwood lumber, screws, and bolts with huge washers. I built my house myself and got the lumber from a local guy who had a portable saw mill.

If contractors used hardwood lumber instead of knotty pine, more houses would last multiple life times. I've seen this (pic) happen in my area countless times, yet this is the USA and not China.

tl;dr OP is a cool guy for wanting masonry instead of wood for his home, in this day and age.

>>1443807
>(add some reinforcement bars like in concrete)
no the opposite, you ave to let it wobble.

>>1444215
Yeah, the rebars are really more for keeping slabs of concrete from smashing people if they crack suddenly. The Japanese have masonry work that is earthquake proof, which involves allowing the stone to dance and move a tiny bit without going out of place. I think Himeji castle is such a structure, but I'm really not 100% on that.

>>1443585
Unless you live in a very arid location, an all brick house is not very advisable.

Other Anons are correct here >>1443593
>>1443595 >>1443784


Modern buildings are built using the "rain screen principle" meaning that there are two layers so to speak on the wall. An outer layer called the rainscreen that is only meant to shed bulk water . This layer is not necessarily water proof and there is an expectation that some water will pass through. Behind the rain screen is an air gap to allow movement of air from bottom to top to dry the cavity and ensure moisture dos not get trapped. Next is the insulation. This layer has to be thick enough to force the dew point high enough that it falls outside the inside of your house. Directly beneath the insulation is the air vapour barrier. Typically polyethylene on residential construction or a bitumen backed membrane on a structural. There are some veriations which involve placing insulation between studs rather than on top of the structural backing and involve a vapor permeable membrane too.

Long story short is all brick will be wet, poorly insulating and drafty. A big reason old brick structures are still standing is that they were poorly hated/cooled in the old days and were also extremely drafty to allow drying of the masonary. Under modern hvac and building envelope, they will not age well.

>>1443684
Can bricks get coated with something to avoid water absorption?

>>1444871
Kinda defeats the purpose. You want it to clear away the moisture buildup.

>>1444842
>Long story short is all brick will be wet, poorly insulating and drafty.

Sounds like you are a shit contractor. lol

>>1444876
But i think the OP wants a brick house due it structural properties, then you could(?) cover the bricks/brick walls with something, then you can add a removable moisture absorption material, is that doable?

>>1444214
>hardwood lumber
...something ...something sustainable development

>>1443585
ICF
C
F

>>1443585
You want virgin vinyl clad aluminum, low-e coated, Krypton gas filled, triple pane windows anon.

An autherized Applebee salesman can hook you up

And no. I didnt make any of that shit up.

>>1443787
>All walls need to "breath" enough so that moisture will never be trapped anywhere. Modern building materials used by contractors are the worst ones to use. They trap moisture and cause problems that ensure job security for the contractors.

so building stone withour concrete? why are you so against slipform stoning for house non foundatin walls if you do the slipform by yourself?

Im from Croatia and peasant stone houses in Dalmatia are superb quality but I have no idea what concrete they used.

>>1444214
>tl;dr OP is a cool guy for wanting masonry instead of wood for his home, in this day and age.

yeah, whenever I see someone suggesting concrete slab as quality foundation I cringe

>>1443588
Fpbp.

The only person that appreciates your time, energy, and money is you.

>>1445742
>yeah, whenever I see someone suggesting concrete slab as quality foundation I cringe
Care to elaborate?

>>1445773
>>yeah, whenever I see someone suggesting concrete slab as quality foundation I cringe
>Care to elaborate?

Earth moves constatnly and McConcrete breakes, McRebar gets wet and enhances braking of McConcrete.
stone foundations are "flexible" that is why they last so long

>>1444214
Looks like failure of a crappy EFIS installation.

>>1445776
Alabama has expansive clay soils. Slab on grade shatters like glass (well in slow motion at least) in less than a decade around here. But, it "meets code" so it's in every cheap subdivision filled with crackerbox houses. Foundation repair guys makin' bank on it, too.

>>1445776
no, they last so long because it's illegal to remove them. muh heritage listing.

>>1444214
the only difference between hardwood and treated pine in terms of longevity in construction is that pine swells when it gets wet and the treatment can wash away allowing fungi to eat it. mostly it's a matter of just cleaning your fucking gutters.

>>1444871
no. bricks are mostly water. you cant have a water free brick.

>>1444909
>structural properties
what did he mean by this?

>>1445742
>the old buildings still standing are good
>therefor old building practices stand the test of time
no they fucking dont. what you are seeing is the few well build buildings not every building. also goddamn look at the mix of masonry work. look at all the remediation done to that structure. it didnt last that's why it needed to be constantly repaired.

>>1446281
>Foundation repair guys makin' bank on it, too.

Im pretty sure they do, in europe we dont even have that term "foundation repair" since even cheap houses, when using concrete slab go at least half a floor deep in ground with it.

Im sorry to say it, but american construction is china level.

>>1446288
>also goddamn look at the mix of masonry work. look at all the remediation done to that structure. it didnt last that's why it needed to be constantly repaired.

LOOK AT THE ARCH on that pic

not one structural repair, 2000 years old and its still livable up to this day.

pic rel might be 200 years old, at least 1m thicc stone walls, its a crackhouse but still structurally perfect and can shine with a bit of repair, unlike dogshit framed out of pinewood

>>1446288
here is another peasant house made out of stone (notice that the stone block are smaller so it obviously wasnt built expensivly), but its still 100 years old and functional, no McSlab as "foundation" just rocks and gravel

>>1443601
No. Brick houses are fine but you need to have a studded wall on the inside with proper insulation (very important) with vapour barrier over top of the studs and insulation to prevent the moisture from getting to the drywall. Yo also need exterior insulation foam (comes in 4x8 sheets) on the outside of the framing and tuck taped as a means of preventing moisture from getting to the insulation and studs. Then you put backer board over the foam insulation, then brick over the backer board. Also, get a sump pump in the basement to blast out water that accumulates under the foundation. and make sure the grading around the foundation is slanted, like a ramp, away from the house. God speed, anon.

>>1443604
older homes didn't put much insulation in because the cost of heating the home at the time was cheap. No longer the case.

>>1443780
>>1443787
>Don't do this, it is the worst form of "masonry" you can do and reflects the contractor mindset of quick, dirty, and future job sourcing.

can you explain whats so shitty about it and maybe suggest a method that might be a good alternative without breaking the bank?

>>1446282

Dear Mom and Dad,

Today on 4chan I learned that legislation can determines how physics operate. A poster told me about how the nice government in Croatia made laws telling the stone foundations to be solid and reliable. I was about to ask him why some of those 1000+ year old buildings on stone foundation were still standing through all the changes in government over time but I forgot. Next time I will ask him if he thinks that concrete is more durable than billion-year-old stones when those laws are not in place.

>>1446852
It isn't masonry. It is just facade, like those 1-brick thick walls on the new houses these days. It also looks aesthetically like shit. Well, there's also 2 kinds. Some people for some reason use a slipform to make an actually thick wall of stone because they evidently can't use a plumb or something. That still looks like shit, but at least it is a bit better structurally. The truly shitty stuff is the one where all the face stones are the only stones that exist in the wall, there's 1 face, and all the stones are laid horizontally. This latter version isn't structural and shouldn't be. Pic is the worst kind.

Now the worst part about slipform masonry, even with those thick walls, even if they have 2 faces, is that they are chop full of runs. Nothing is properly tied in any way. It is all a random jumble waiting for long cracks from top to bottom inside of 1-2 generations at best. Why? Because the faces are hidden behind the slipform when it is being built and unless you are using glass forms, or have a eidetic memory you more than likely will make tons of runs everywhere, even if you know what a run is and want to avoid them.

>>1446855
He is talking about the fact that non-heritage sites, even if they are made of amazing stone and foundations can be torn down by anyone who buys them and people have done so all through history....except to heritage sites that are actively being protected from such people.

>>1446859
okay that makes sense, can you tell me what I should be researching instead of slipform masonry? Is the only other option just laying the stones 1 by 1 and shaping them as needed?

>>1446864
> Is the only other option just laying the stones 1 by 1 and shaping them as needed?

That's the correct way. You can do a hodge podge like this wall, where there's no real sense to each course and different sized stones are used. The main thing is to reduce and eliminate all runs beyond the largest stone you are using on the course. The red circles show places where there are runs. Most are short, but some are getting a bit long. If that is any indication of the workmanship then the rest of the wall we can't see will also be poor and there may be some really long runs that will cause problems down the road. Also, the use of all those wee tiny stones is a bit ridiculous. Save those for inside the wall between the two faces. Faces should be as unbroken as you can make them for longevity purposes.

>>1446864
Oh, and in case you are wondering. This is what it looks like when you have a long run that eventually turns into a crack. The stones where not overlapped far enough. If a run is really long, yet there's 1-2 stones actually bisecting it, it will still probably fail eventually and crack right through those stones, depending on how thick they are.

>>1446875
>>1446873
thanks for all the great info; is there any chance you have a recommendation on where I might find more info on this or where to start? any good resources would be appreciated.

thanks again

>>1446877
Just about every general masonry book will work. The older the better since there won't be anyone trying to sell a method, (like slipform for instance).

>google, "building stone house book"
>get 3 slipform house building results at the top

kek

I know I have "Building Stone Walls" by John Vivian and "The Stonebuilder's Primer" by Charles Long in my library, but I can't really recommend them since I recall one wasn't very good for some things. I have a mountain of books in my unsorted library so finding things takes a while. I'm sure that I have, "The Art of the Stonemason," by Ian Crumb somewhere and that it was pretty good. I've not read these books in at least a decade.

>>1446880
I went and found "The Stonebuilder's Primer" then "Stone Work Technique and Projects" by Charles McRaven and it is pretty good. I'd say both books are about equal in knowledge, but each has aspects the other doesn't have. I can't seem to find the rest of the masonry books. I have them on barns, churches, field stone wall fences, and retaining walls.

>>1446880

not op, but you seem like a neat guy

>>1445776
>gets wet
>being this retarded

if you are going to bemoan concrete spalling, at least look up the actual mechanism before spouting your bullshit.

>>1446886
>>1446880

Thanks anon, your doing god's work

>>1443585
Just search some european DIY sites. Almost every house here are fully brick houses or a combination where the outer wall is brick.

bong here, i renovate mainly traditional houses built between 1900 and WWII. these things are indestructible. most will still be standing strong in 500 years i believe.

they use cavity walls. originally nothing was inside the cavity (just air) and suspended timber floors. but sometimes the kitchen will be on a concrete slab.

roofs are usually high quality slate or clay tile, i have seen many with their original roofs going strong. the tiles become brittle and just need replacing when they shatter but generally these roofs will last hundreds of years also without needing to be replaced.

foundations are either brick or concrete footings going down anywhere between 1 and 4 feet. they usually have a small amount of cracking. i have seen some built on the worst clay imaginable and they always seem fine. the brick footings do seem to result in less cracking among the rest of the structure

obviously this method of construction would be astronomically expensive now. but if you can afford it and want to build a lasting legacy then go for it.

>>1446862
>He is talking about the fact that non-heritage sites, even if they are made of amazing stone and foundations can be torn down by anyone who buys them and people have done so all through history....

most buyers with a brian dont do that, since you cant match the quality or it would be to expensive to build a new stone foundation + many people forgot the skill and stone isnt as cheap anymore

>except to heritage sites that are actively being protected from such people.

even when they werent protected, people who happen to live in them just refurbished them and resused them, there is no upgrade from stone.


>>1446859
>Some people for some reason use a slipform to make an actually thick wall of stone because they evidently can't use a plumb or something. That still looks like shit, but at least it is a bit better structurally.

hey, but its still better than drywall, cement or brick, so an upgrade in most cases and faster than proper masonry. Im not usually for it but a McRebar might help in building a solid slipform wall?

Your point about possible cracks since free spaces within the slipform wall stands.

>>1446891
>concrete

concrete DOES get wet - that is why quality marines are built out of stone, insted of concrete if you have the money. Same as iron McRebars.

>>1446948
>bong

you bongs have fantastic stone and brick masonry tradition. Did some of old buildings had stone foundation insted of brick?

Who makes houses out of steel or aluminum and why don't more?

>>1446975
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycTajJov1jI

Yep.

>>1446975
>>1446976
betta install some lightning rods though

>>1446975
Im thinking the same, why dont they use steel slats instead of wood for roofing? From my knowing, its only around 20% more expensive...but how do you install tiles on it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ej59_wDozJQ&t=745s

>>1446980
what kind of fucking 3rd worlder welding is that? guy has a pair of sunglasses on

>>1446986
>what kind of fucking 3rd worlder welding is that? guy has a pair of sunglasses on

exactly, but still a better qualtiy roof than McConstruction

>>1446964
>slipform better than brick

Not in the slightest. Pile on another problem with it, the stone's grain isn't horizontal. You end up with sections of the stones' face falling off. It is worse in areas with a freeze thaw cycle.

>>1446964
>Did some of old buildings had stone foundation insted of brick?

it was used in the past yes but generally victorian houses onwards just used brick and then progressed to concrete, some of the brick footings are so shallow that you would be amazed the houses are still standing. i have seen one victorian terrace with no foundations - bricks just going down a few courses below ground level - still standing strong and no signs of cracking. not recommended though.

in the 1950s onwards, slab foundations became popular and although lauded for some reason, all of the houses that i've seen with severe movement and rising damp problems have had slab foundations. i'm not a qualified engineer but i personally wouldn't buy one and wouldn't build foundations in this way unless it was a necessity.

>Who makes houses out of steel or aluminum and why don't more?

us bongs tried this in the post-war housing boom often with disastrous results (google BISF houses). the steel tended to rust and fail and you can't even get a mortgage on these houses because of their dire reputation. i'm sure techniques have moved on now though.

>why dont they use steel slats instead of wood for roofing

it's becoming increasingly common and i notice it a lot on new build housing developments. smaller builders still stick to timber probably because it's what they know and easier to work with on site.

>>1447010
>Not in the slightest. Pile on another problem with it, the stone's grain isn't horizontal. You end up with sections of the stones' face falling off.

Ill keep this in mind, thank for the feedback!

>>1447017
>i'm not a qualified engineer

neither am I but constructin uses things based on cencesus and what is more profitable since a lot of money is in it, you see yourself how much of McConstructor methods are sold as "progress" today and how much modern buildings last. Its mostly a total scam.

>BISF houses

I searched and see a lot of rust, I like the look of steel beams, but for now, wood seems like a better option, even for roofing...infact roofs are exposed to water damage more and tested with time so I guess Ill skip on steel for it.

>>1447033
>Its mostly a total scam.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks so.

There's a historical house in this area made of stone that is like 200 years old that house outlasted every house around it 3 fold. The walls are 2-3 feet thick and it is 2 stories tall.

>wood seems like a better option, even for roofing

So long as the wood is allowed to breath so it can get rid of moisture, and the roof isn't leaking, it will outlast any metals that corrode which are built in a similar fashion.

>>1447076
>There's a historical house in this area made of stone that is like 200 years old that house outlasted every house around it 3 fold.

brits know their masonry, you are surrounded with historical construction that serves as a living witness of the scam of current. Whenever I see peasant houses in croatia built out of stone or wood I think the same.

>So long as the wood is allowed to breath so it can get rid of moisture, and the roof isn't leaking, it will outlast any metals that corrode

there is another issue - finding craftsman that can built it that way using mortise tenon joinery and without screws (that is if you can find properly dried and quality wood which is as rare and expensive as ever), screws on wood are a relativly light form of McConstruction and play a role in wood rotting

>>1443787
>Teach your children to adhere to a 100 generation rule. That they do nothing to harm their genetic lineage for the foreseeable 100 generations
hahahahahahahahaha

>>1446372
>2000 years old and its still livable.
what a bullshit.

this crap is not functional. it's ugly. it's thermal characteristics are disaster. it's dark inside. good luck making it to comply with the local building regulations, it will be 10 times cheaper and faster to rebuild this shit from scratch.

housing is replaceable commodity. deal with it.

>>1447136
>this crap is not functional. it's ugly. it's thermal characteristics are disaster. it's dark inside. good luck making it to comply with the local building regulations

Stone walls are 10x more functional than any of the McDrywall2000 houses you have. Its thermal properties are fantastic in the summer, in fact house is so cool you dont even need ventilation, in winter rock stays warm when heated.

THERE IS NO UPGRADE FROM STONE.

>housing is replaceable commodity. deal with it.

McContractor detected. How far have yanks fallen...

>>1447136
>housing is replaceable commodity. deal with it.

Ill take this statement seriously, only when they start getting priced as replacable comodities.

>>1447154
~$60,000 dollars in todays money.
Not bad.

>>1447132
That's actually a native American thing. I'm not sure which tribe/nation though. The fact that you laugh at that sentiment says heaps about you.

>>1447140
I'm stealing that moniker.

>>1447136
>t. McContractor

>>1446964
concrete being wet is not what causes spalling and cracking from the expansion of rebar. your service life estimates are absurd and obviously pulled out of your ass. there are 100+ year old sky scrapers built with rebar and concrete that are in perfectly good condition and will remain to be so for another 100+ years. you quite literally don't know what you are talking about.

>>1447169
$117405.75 (money was gold back then).

>>1447171
>I'm stealing that moniker.

no problem, protip if contractors name is Chip Lee he is most likely a McContractor, if his name is Billy Boy he will make a logged house that will last a few centuries and give you good tested tips for mainintence.

>>1447173
>concrete being wet is not what causes spalling and cracking from the expansion of rebar.

being wet doesnt cause cracking, being wet and frozen does. water can get frozen. frozen water expands. rusted McRebar expands. Concrete surface lasts only if you spray it with McPrimer (buy now and get yours for just 29.99$!!!!!).

Also, Ive seen many state of the art skyscrapers built out of reinforced concerete first hand - they look like puke after 30 years, sure they stand upright but concrete is damaged on the surface and looks like shit, meanwhile that peasant house made out of stone looks like a mansion.

>>1447203
i can smell your irrational fear of authority from here.

>>1447203
>ure they stand upright but concrete is damaged on the surface and looks like shit, meanwhile that peasant house made out of stone looks like a mansion.

fucking lol. you are regrouting that stone every 10 years and you are going to get pieces of stone ablating off the surface. its just not as noticable because the pattern is intentionally random and organic to hide such discrepancies. not to mention the horrendous moisture control problems you have to deal with due to crazy high thermal latency, so i hope mold is part of the aesthetic you are going for. i can counter every single one of your bullshit anecdotes with my own.

>>1447204
>i can smell your irrational fear of authority from here.

what does that suppose to mean?

>>1447207
>you are regrouting that stone every 10 years and you are going to get pieces of stone ablating off the surface

you just have to seal the connection as they do with old +1000 y.o. castles (they vandalize it with McConcrete and damage it further instead of using lime mortar).

mold is a problem you can work around, or are you saying that raw concrete (raw without McPrimer and without McPlaster and other expensive shortlasting rubbish you put on it) cant attract mold?

>>1447207
built in 106 ad

>>1447207
>regrouting that stone every 10 years

This and other anecdotes from your post show that you are not only extremely ignorant of the subject but also trolling your heart out. This is as bad as getting caught at the butt end of a muffler bearing joke.

>>1443787
>foreseeable
>100 generations
that's like 2000-2500 years man, nothing is foreseeable that far out. even 5 or 10 generations is really stretching it, even when it comes to houses.

>>1447388
There are several structures more than 2 times...nearly 3 times that old. The only things left to most are the stone walls and some are in excellent condition despite not having a roof anymore. Ones that are around 2500 years old are rather nice still. But for the purposes of this thread, the "Saltford Manor House" has been continually lived in since it was built in the 12th century. Though, that is like at best 34-35 generations space of time I think.

>>1443787

100 generation rule works if youre wealthy and influential and your children and their offspring are raised to respect your family values.

If all you're leaving is a DIY brick house and a pickup truck then they wont give a FUCK about your 100 generation rule bullshit. The first toxic wife or husband that infests your bloodline will easily convince your kids that you were just a crazy old man clinging to delusions

>>1447418
You sound really bitter, anon. Remember, you're the one who makes the future your children will live in.

>>1447423

Not bitter, just addressing your point. Good job brushing off criticism by quoting posters on retirement homes.

You seem really delusional

>>1444842
>A big reason old brick structures are still standing is that they were poorly hated/cooled in the old days and were also extremely drafty to allow drying of the masonary.
So why not just build them like this now? A drafty house is healthier to live in than a sealed plastic box.

>>1444909
Mate if you add a waterproof layer on the outside of the wall the damp air from inside is gonna condensate on this barrier. This creates a damp wall with excess moisture, causing fungi.

>>1447424
>>1447418
What you did was to construct a strawman argument that is no argument at all really. Literally anything can wreck anyone's plans regardless of money. Like who hasn't heard of a toxic wife or husband ruining millionaires before? You have no argument.

>>1447426
What anon said isn't completely true. Many stone houses kept a fire in the house year round to help drive off the moisture to prevent health problems with mold.

>>1447426
Because why live in an uninsulated shitty house when you can enjoy stable temperatures in a well built modern house?

>>1447430

My argument is that your plan of just making your kids follow 100 generations is delusional and stupid and that any discrepancy can fuck it all up.

I'm addressing your delusion by telling you that you're wrong.

It's only strawman if I'm attacking you directly by saying something like, "Only an idiot who tries to build ancient brick houses with no concept of modern day architecture, building code and goes on anonymous forums to ask for advice would believe that his children will keep his house when in fact they will probably tear it down and sell the land the week after he's buried."

But I'm not saying that.

Is it now considered a strawman argument if it hurts your feeewings?

>>1447436
It is a cultural thing. If you are not part of this culture then I can see why you'd have a problem with it. You and none of your ancestors were raised in that manner.

>>1447440
>100 generations
Where does the 100 come from? Is it just meant to emphasize how forward thinking you're supposed to be. I don't understand how you could harm your descendant 80 generations removed from you yet not hurt one 12 generations in the future for example.

>>1447444
>I don't understand how you could harm your descendant 80 generations removed from you yet not hurt one 12 generations in the future for example.

Hmm...I wonder.

>>1447446
The people in your picture are already being harmed though and have been for some time.

CONCRETE DOGSHIT

A BRIDGE THAT LAST ONLY 50 YEARS IS A SCAM

>>1447903
Italians built that, and Italians are some of the worst of the worst...

>>1447426
I too, would love to live in a cold wet cave

>>1444878
>Sounds like you are a shit contractor. lol

This, any contractor worth his salt can throw a tarp over brick, snap his fingers, and raise it's R-value

>>1445776
>Earth moves constatnly and McConcrete breakes, McRebar gets wet and enhances braking of McConcrete.
>stone foundations are "flexible" that is why they last so long

So the Mcconcrete slab breaks and deflects your house, and the stone foundation flexes and also deflects your house

Concrete only breaks if the grade it's poured on is shit, same with a stone foundation that shifts. I hardly consider one situtation preferable to the other. Even the shittest concrete slabs have control joints.

But concrete is easily reinforcible and slabs spread the footprint of the house. I'd prefer it if I knew I was building on shitty grade.

>McRebar gets wet

Moisture barrier goes under the concrete, your house goes over it. Though McRebar really is shit and comes pre-rusted, I'd use galvanized

>>1446281
>Alabama has expansive clay soils. Slab on grade shatters like glass (well in slow motion at least) in less than a decade around here.

I wouldn't even blame the dirt because the builders are full retard

They don't compact the soil
Some don't put gravel down
They don't put any plastic down or they use shit plastic that rots
They throw the reinforcement down and don't elevate it properly
And finally they don't fucking water it. Just watering it for 3 fucking days will yield a majority of the strength

>>1447444
>>1443787
The 100 generation rule is for everyone, not just your family.

>>1447423

he's realistic. Its a lot easier to tear something down than build it up.

Youve never seen a family divided by one person? Said person may not break it, but they will splinter that wood

>>1447446

this 100 generations thing is noble, but so unrealistic that it invites derision. how about 10, or 5 or 3? How can you even conceive what earth will be like with human society in 100 generations?

You think 1/2 the world, who are low income and can barely even NOT shit where they eat cares about next year, let alone the next 2000??

Every one of these threads is the same thing.

>Wood is bad, Concrete is bad, Brick is bad, Stone is bad, why can't my house stay up thousands of years like an old stone bridge or a pyramid.

Oh and everyone wants to build it and never maintain it. Unless you're carving your building entirely from a solid block of stone there is maintenance.

Build a 2000sqft house for $60k yourself and live in it until you die with the knowledge it will be torn down within 5 years of your death. Or dig that cave in a mountain and turn it into your tomb so someone can rob it within 5 years of your death.

>>1443787
>That they do nothing to harm their genetic lineage for the foreseeable 100 generations

Yeah. Good luck with that. The myth of monogamy was debunked by genetic testing a long time ago.

>>1443585
if you want a house that will outlive you then build it like the traditional greek houses
https://www.google.com/search?q=%CF%80%CE%AD%CF%84%CF%81%CE%B9%CE%BD%CE%B1+%CF%83%CF%80%CE%AF%CF%84%CE%B9%CE%B1&num=20&hl=en&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj1z4jZhPrcAhVylIsKHW4KCNUQsAR6BAgCEAE&biw=1680&bih=926#imgrc=_

>>1446281
Do you happen to be in the Birmingham area anon?

>>1448380
>Every one of these threads is the same thing.

It's literally the same retard anon in every building thread. He thinks someone will give a shit about anything he builds for hundreds of years, even though he sounds like an aspie that couldn't possibly reproduce. He doesn't understand that we stopped using those materials because they became scarce and expensive, and they were designed for a non insulated envelope dried out by a fire place. No one wants to live like that now, let alone in 50 to 100 years.

>>1448362
>dat dragon coppin a feel

This thread is very depressing. I always looked forward to build my own home in a long lasting way but it seems the techniques and methods are mostly forgotten or absurdidly expensive. How the hell is this "progress" when things like housing get more and more shortlasting and cancer inducing?

Anyway the question I have is, why the fuck would you build a McHouse that will fall apart in 50 years instead of buying a prefab house of some kind? Isn't it a better investment? Even a fucking caravan/trailer looks like a better investment than paying for a proper home and getting some shoddy shit with shit lifespan instead that will become a moneydrain from so many repairs or outright fall down.

>>1449025
Trailer living is the real redpill

>>1449025
You can still build a house that will last hundreds of years with modern techniques, and you don't need rare materials or craftsmanship, you just need to know building science and accept that your house might be kind of ugly. It's still on the pricey side, but you can always build smaller

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8i-93ABo3I

>>1449025
>>1449200
There's also lstiburek's "institutional wall" that will last an absurdly long time and you seem to have a hard on for masonry

https://buildingscience.com/documents/insights/bsi-001-the-perfect-wall

>>1443598
Solid brick is a terrible idea. Aside from moisture problems it will be expensive as hell, more time consuming to make, and about two hundred times worse for your homes energy consumption. Bricks/masonry/concrete will transfer heat like a mofo. That's half the reason for cavity walls, air is a decent insulator.

Why do you want solid masonry walls? Do you think it'll be stronger? Not really. Whether you use 5% or 10% of the walls capacity doesn't really make a difference in the long run. And you ain't getting away from including some steel in there if that's what you are trying to do.

>>1447941
>So the Mcconcrete slab breaks and deflects your house, and the stone foundation flexes and also deflects your house

Stone foundations without cement DO indeed flex, but the rate of the flex is different, since rock is not a unit, parts will flex and parts will stay on their place - a good mason would position stone foundations to allow stones to flex and not to deflect the house which you cant do if you just McConrete it all like a tard (note that pavers are installed just on gravel without concrete).

Its like Iron VS Steel. Rock foundations are the most intelligent solution.

>Though McRebar really is shit and comes pre-rusted

is there a functional reason for that or its just for the cost?

>>1449025
>How the hell is this "progress" when things like housing get more and more shortlasting and cancer inducing?

lets fix that anon!

>>1449200
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8i-93ABo3I [Embed]

McConstruction = 100 years MAX! Unless you use stone+qualtiy would you wont get more than 100.

modern VS old meterial is like
plastic VS steel, and yes plastic has its usefull place but its still plastic

>>1449212
>Why do you want solid masonry walls? Do you think it'll be stronger? Not really.

yes really. Show me a McCement and McRebar bridge or house that outlasts a stone one (controlled for size).

>>1447941
>>1449373
>Stone foundations without cement DO indeed flex

its a similar system like human brain that is wrapped in celebral fluid within the skull to more easily embrace impact. So why on Earth did we regressed from that?

Sure, there is place for building fast and cheap which is a life saver sometimes, but its not like stone is an expensive material - you can get it FOR FREE! Just ask local farmers to pick them from their fields, theyll be happy also. When you count all in its probably cheaper than a McConcrete Slab.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5qDH-3QI_w

>>1449373
>a good mason would position stone foundations to allow stones to flex and not to deflect the house
You don't even know what you're saying retard. If the stones move the house moves. Deflection can result from flexing and failing.

>which you cant do if you just McConrete it all like a tard
You can over-engineer the fuck out of concrete and make it unbreakable on anything because it can be almost any shape and reinforced with steel as much as you want. You can basically make your house a concrete boat floating a shitty soil if you have the money.

None of this matters if you build on good grade. Which is the only thing you should do if you're interested in a lifespan of centuries.

>is there a functional reason for that or its just for the cost?
Cost. It will continue to rust until it's gone.


>McConstruction = 100 years MAX! Unless you use stone+qualtiy would you wont get more than 100.
No, you're a retard and this wall system is state of the art building science. The stick structure and its membranes are not exposed to water, sunlight, or temperature changes. If you stored a pine 2x4 in a museum, you would be dumb enough to believe it would rot in 100 years. Time needs damage functions to destroy things.

>>1449376
Something likely changed the alkalinity of that concrete. It looks like it holds up a roadway so it could've been salted in winter.

>Although steel’s natural tendency is to undergo corrosion reactions, the alkaline environment of concrete (pH of 12 to 13) provides steel with corrosion protection. At the high pH, a thin oxide layer forms on the steel and prevents metal atoms from dissolving. This passive film does not actually stop corrosion; it reduces the corrosion rate to an insignificant level. For steel in concrete, the passive corrosion rate is typically 0.1 µm per year. Without the passive film, the steel would corrode at rates at least 1,000 times higher (ACI222 2001).

>Because of concrete’s inherent protection, reinforcing steel does not corrode in the majority of concrete elements and structures. However, corrosion can occur when the passive layer is destroyed. The destruction of the passive layer occurs when the alkalinity of the concrete is reduced or when the chloride concentration in concrete is increased to a certain level.

http://www.cement.org/learn/concrete-technology/durability/corrosion-of-embedded-materials

Also here's the first re-enforced concrete bridge from 1875.

>>1449379
>Cost. It will continue to rust until it's gone.
And this may happen slower than I thought.

>>1449379
> If the stones move the house moves.

House obviously moves less on stone than on shitty McSlab. Stone without McConcrete akts like a spring on stress, McConcrete just cracks when overstressed. Would you pour concrete between pavers? Total dumbass.

>You can over-engineer the fuck out of concrete and make it unbreakable on anything

so that is why McRebar builds last so long? Neat-o!

> this wall system is state of the art building science.

I believe you but its durability just isnt there - its like comparing WV Touareg to Lada Niva (or Rolex to Vostok Amphibian).

>The stick structure and its membranes are not exposed to water, sunlight, or temperature changes.

yet they are wrapped in plastic, so in case water gets in there (protip- it will eventually) it will have a hard time getting out.
Ever noticed why wood buildings that lasted 500 years and still last dont cover their wood but expose those beautiful wood beams? It serves a superb function - wood can dry itself and breathe the moisture out. When you cover it with McIsolator2000 it rots itself inside out (same shit as McRebar explosion).

WHY DONT WE BUILD LIKE THIS ANYMORE!!!!

FUCK IT MAKES ME DEPRESSED LOOKING AT ALL THE UGLINESS AND PLASTIC NIHILISM.

IMAGINE PAYING A LIFELONG MORTAGE FOR SHIT THAT WILL CRUMBLE WITHIN 50 YEARS

>stone (lime mortar or smth, def no cement)
>wood (no screws on metal joinery! also, use only PROPERLY DRIED qualtiy wood not the cheap undried pine Chip Lee tries to sell you)
>mud

that is it!

those are all cheap materials, you dont have to poison yourself and your family or workers with some cancerous plastic in building a house like this. Look at that beauty!

>>1449384
>House obviously moves less on stone than on shitty McSlab.
>praise flexibility
>it moves less!

No retard. Stacked stone has garbage tensile strength, it just moves and takes your house with it.

>McConcrete just cracks when overstressed

Concrete typically cracks in almost all applications. It doesn't inform you about the maximum lifespan of the material. Roman concrete has cracks that formed soon after it was formed, and it's still here.

>so that is why McRebar builds last so long? Neat-o!

They fail because they're exposed to damage functions >>1449383. I can find pictures of blown the fuck out stone buildings too, it doesn't inform anyone of what's typical or what's possible. Oh, look, here's the first reinforced concrete skyscraper from 1903, also still here. Standing next to it is the first stone skyscraper since never.

>I believe you but its durability just isnt there - its like comparing WV Touareg to Lada Niva (or Rolex to Vostok Amphibian).
>yet they are wrapped in plastic, so in case water gets in there (protip- it will eventually) it will have a hard time getting out.

"Eventually" destroys any structure, period. But in terms of comparison to real buildings, no, because building scientists are smarter than you. Like those wood beams, this structure is self drying. The cladding has an air gap for drainage and to prevent hydrostatic pressure in the walls. The insulation on the outside of the membrane prevents condensation. Every layer of the building is deeply overwrapped to prevent water from entering. Surprise, water has limitations. It can only flow with gravity, capillary action, or condense.

>>1449392
lmao that deflection on the half-timbers

>>1449399
forgot my picture

>>1449399
Oh, and I forgot. The stick framing is exposed on the inside. So if some miracle happened and water penetrated, it would be quickly dried by the air conditioning and/or dehumidifier

>>1449399
>Stacked stone has garbage tensile strength, it just moves and takes your house with it.

Exibit 1 - stacked pavers outlast McSlab driveways
Exibit 2 - Romans, Greeks, Great China Wall
Exibit 3 - Alpine houses
...

All of those "garbage tensile strenght" building outlasted and continue to outlast postmodern crap.

>because building scientists are smarter than you

So why do "modern" houses have such a short lifespan then? Why are they more expensive at the same time? Smth doesnt add up.

> Every layer of the building is deeply overwrapped to prevent water from entering. Surprise, water has limitations. It can only flow with gravity, capillary action, or condense.

Water turns into ice when cold. How will you counter that? More plastic?

>>1449401
>lmao that deflection on the half-timbers

and?

>>1449376
>ayy you see how there's no footer underneath that there wall that's resting on bedrock
what so if the house is supported you don't have to add supports?

>>1449411
>Exibit 1 - stacked pavers outlast McSlab driveways

No they don't. In the worst case scenario, the concrete can break into pieces, and then it'll just be in pieces just like the pavers. woooaaah

>Exibit 2 - Romans, Greeks, Great China Wall
>Exibit 3 - Alpine houses

Did you notice those were in mountains idiot? Soil is shallow on mountains and supported by solid rock. No tensile strength is required.

>So why do "modern" houses have such a short lifespan then? Why are they more expensive at the same time? Smth doesnt add up.

Builder's don't listen to building scientists. They wing it and build the cheapest shit that will stand up.

>Water turns into ice when cold. How will you counter that? More plastic?

Water has to sit somewhere to freeze to a significant size, and then ice has to grow a certain distance to be a problem. Show me the spot on this house where that can possibly happen.

>and?
You think concrete detonates when you look at it and deflects, and wood and stone don't move as much.

>>1449424
>In the worst case scenario, the concrete can break into pieces, and then it'll just be in pieces just like the pavers. woooaaah

no problem, just cash out 5k for a McContractor when your drivay looks like shit from deep or surface cracks to go there and jackhammer entire driveway, now compare to paver realignment fix.

>Did you notice those were in mountains idiot? Soil is shallow on mountains and supported by solid rock. No tensile strength is required.

nigga do you live in Japan and see earthquakes daily? That is the only legitimate structural issue with stone foundations or stone houses. Dont start a nation on places where you have daily earthquakes - RCC or deep stabilizators it doesnt matter - avoid places with earthquakes.

>Show me the spot on this house where that can possibly happen.

foundatins, roof...plenty of possible scenarios. For one, that roof is to short, so any icing on the roof will create great damage to upper part of that plastic wall. You only need one weird winter to destroy that house - it can happen in Texas, it will happen at least once in the next 50 years, but who cares about that, lets just put plastic and sell it amrite?

>You think concrete detonates when you look at it and deflects, and wood and stone don't move as much.

that house is 5 centuries old. BUILT ON A STONE ARCH.

>>1449375
Classic logical fallacy. Comparing the structures that survived the test of time (vast minority) with the average of today.

It has to do with the design life of the structure. In ye olde times they either way overdesigned (the stuff that survived) or didn't (the vast majority of old structures that didn't survive).

Modern designers generally assume that developers don't want to pay for a structure that will last 1000 yrs unless told otherwise, as the building will likely only be owned and serviced by that owner(s) for 50-100 max.

We could design for nigh infinite service life, but nobody wants us to cuz money. Also dumbfuck's handmade house ain't gonna last 100 yrs, much less 1000.

>>1449436
>no problem, just cash out 5k for a McContractor when your drivay looks like shit from deep or surface cracks to go there and jackhammer entire driveway, now compare to paver realignment fix.

Or you could use reinforced concrete for your driveway and still have the option for a single surface that doesn't need realignment. You have no such option with stone.

And needing reinforcement for your driveway means you're on shit grade, which would make a stone foundation for the house you're pulling up to a fucking joke.

>nigga do you live in Japan and see earthquakes daily? That is the only legitimate structural issue with stone foundations or stone houses. Dont start a nation on places where you have daily earthquakes - RCC or deep stabilizators it doesnt matter - avoid places with earthquakes.

You're just a complete fucking idiot. My statement had nothing to do with earthquakes. When you build on solid rock, the load is transferred straight to rock. There are no tensile forces, no sheer forces, only compression, which both concrete and stone do well. Long lasting stone structures on solid rock is not a demonstration that they have tensile strength. I mean what the fuck did you think? Where are the stone cantilevers? Stone skyscrapers? Stone spans? The best they can do is stack them in an arch, limited by the size of the units.

>foundatins, roof

Nope. And the slab is protected from ground frost.

>For one, that roof is to short, so any icing on the roof will create great damage to upper part of that plastic wall.

Lmao. It's a steep metal roof. It will shed snow faster than your mom will sleep with me. It's also well insulated so any kind of ice dam would be impossible even if it was asphalt shingled roof. If ice did magically work its way under the metal roof, there's just furring strips and insulation there. It's physically blocked from ever touching the membrane.

>>1449452
>Classic logical fallacy. Comparing the structures that survived the test of time (vast minority) with the average of today.

I can compare all kinds of comparable structures as can you - recent stone houses to recent brick to recent pinewood and drywalll. Results are the same.

>Also dumbfuck's handmade house ain't gonna last 100 yrs, much less 1000.

a simple wooden loghouse lasts 100 years in Alaska.

>>1449453
>reinforced concrete for your driveway and still have the option for a single surface that doesn't need realignment.

surface cracks. mainintence costs. call McContractors to pour some black crap on in.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZ1LMmANIAw

>Long lasting stone structures on solid rock is not a demonstration that they have tensile strength.

and why is that important, house is not a skyscraper.

>It's a steep metal roof. It will shed snow faster than your mom will sleep with me. It's also well insulated so any kind of ice dam would be impossible even if it was asphalt shingled roof.

Ha, you absolute moron! That house wouldnt last a year if the weather changes - it would start cracking from enitire lenght of that McPinewall. Imagine walls swelling and that shitty plastic your destroyed and wrapped already cheap wood bursting trough walls (if TERMITES dont attack already).
Pic rel is how civilised people build structures to INTELLIGENTLY deal with the elements instead of overbuilding them with future explosions like absolute 2 IQ digit morons. Murca!

>>1449384
>yet they are wrapped in plastic, so in case water gets in there (protip- it will eventually) it will have a hard time getting out
its a special foil which lets humidity out but not in, which you should know if you ever actual worked with it, there is even being differentiated between inner and outer foil which have different properties

>>1449470
>surface cracks.
Superficial cracks if reinforcement was sufficient.
>call McContractors to pour some black crap on in.
Call you a faggot and sip lemonade

>and why is that important, house is not a skyscraper.
Because most houses are not built on solid rock. You need tensile strength to prevent deflection when the grade moves.

>That house wouldnt last a year if the weather changes - it would start cracking from enitire lenght of that McPinewall. Imagine walls swelling and that shitty plastic your destroyed and wrapped already cheap wood bursting trough walls
So we've gone from you not knowing anything about buildings, to mild case of dunning kruger effect, and we finally end with your incoherent fantasies. And you wanted to build a house?

>(if TERMITES dont attack already).
Termites only prefer wet wood. This wood will be perfectly dry for hundreds of years. You could also use douglas fir for more determent. This particular builder also puts physical barriers for termites in his slab penetrations. Not that it matters, and I have to tell you again, the framing is exposed on the inside retard. You would literally see the termites almost immediately and remove them if it ever happened. Meanwhile no one is going to see the termites in your cold wet non-existent house because no one lives there, and anything that isn't the most badass heartwood would be devoured.

>Pic rel is how civilised people build structures
Even the paintings are on solid rock because the artist knew that's the only place you can build them

>>1449480
I think that wrap is a vapour barrier actually, but any water that miraculously got it could just dry to the inside. Vapour barriers are only a problem if you use two of them, or don't account for temperature differences making condensation

>>1449488
LIPSTICK ON AN INFLAMABLE PIG

>>1449505
JUST BUILD ME ON A CLAY SOIL ILL BE FINE BRO

how can this house stand still, why doesnt it move around since it doesnt have McSlab!!??? I dont understand???

>>1449509
hgnh! What a cool house!

>>1449489
all that plastic just enhances the matchbox effect

>>1449509
this house is a disaster waiting to happen, please pour some McSlab over it so it doesnt collapse!!!!!

>>1449509
again, no McSlab, exposed wood on an apparently all American household! Quick, put some cancerous plastic on the walls, impregnate the wood so it cant breathe!!!! That stone is about to crumble, put some rebar!

>>1449511
>how can this house stand still, why doesnt it move around since it doesnt have McSlab!!??? I dont understand???

That's McBlock elevated foundation retard. Can be built on a McConcrete footing, filled with McConcrete and McRebar. The brick is veneer

>>1449512
>>1449513
Also probably McBlock foundations. Why aren't you warning them it's about to crack?

oh no no no

>>1449515
>>1449518
>>1449518
>McBlock foundations

McBlock isnt Mc, best foundations are a deep basement.

>will produce no permanent improvement to our country while the unhappy prejudice prevails that houses of brick or stone are less wholesome than those of wood … A country whose buildings are of wood can never increase in its improvements to any considerable degree. Their duration is highly estimated at 50 years. Every half century then our country becomes a tabula rasa, whereon we have to set out anew, as in the first moment of seating it. Whereas when buildings are of durable materials, every new edifice is an actual and permanent acquisition to the state, adding to its value as well as to its ornament.”

Thomas Jefferson

USA USA USA USA USA

anon help

>>1449523
>McBlock isnt Mc, best foundations are a deep basement.

Oh you mean the ones that cave in, provide a home for crickets and black mold?

>A country whose buildings are of wood can never increase in its improvements to any considerable degree.

Good. You can never post about timber framing ever again

>>1449529
>provide a home for crickets and black mold?

fixable solution for a minor problem when you count the structural stability.

>You can never post about timber framing ever again

stone houses or half timber houses have PROPER timber frames roofs and floors

>>1449533
>the structural stability.
How is building your house taller underground making it more stable? You also need to spread the weight so it won't sink unevenly. If only there was something rock like, that was also flat, and you could order it at the drive through.

>stone houses or half timber houses have PROPER timber frames roofs and floors

And Jefferson clearly stated he hates that eurocuck shit USA USA USA

>alpha male concrete slab and steel floats over the waterfall
>Stone masonry stays back on the rocks like a bitch

Its like they knew there would be this debate one day

>>1449529
>best foundations are a deep basement.

from stone, not blocks. Nothing wrong with blocks btw.

>>1449535
>How is building your house taller underground making it more stable?

basic leverage + better footing.
I think if your early presidents looked at shit you build today they would rightfully call you a bunch of cheap chinks.

>>1449537
that house has that "Im a pretencious fag" look

>>1449558
>basic leverage + better footing.
Better leverage, it won't tip over, wow. A non-issue for 1 or 2 story buildings unless a tsunami hits it. The footing is equally shit if you don't make it any wider than the walls, your house is still trying to sink. And it's exposed to earth's weight pushing from the sides so it can buckle. Basements are shit. It's much stronger if you fill it in.

>your early presidents
I should've figured you were foreign. Why are you so asspained then? Old masonry houses are common outside America and you can just go buy one, and it literally makes zero difference to you what we build here.

>that house has that "Im a pretencious fag" look
Its not this houses fault you're obsessed with stagnant architecture and afraid of engineering. I mean how many thousands of years ago were people stacking rocks around themselves and happy with it? Probably the only thing more primitive than your arguments.

>>1449564
>The footing is equally shit if you don't make it any wider than the walls, your house is still trying to sink.

Its not that you yanks all live in arizona or smth that you have such shitty ground.
Dig a few meters (or whatever stoneage measurments you use for lenght) and surpsise, surspise, youll find more harder ground.
They didnt used McSlab on buildings lasting for half a millenia so it might work again.

Build on stronger foundation and in most cases it will be stronger than McSlab its not rocked science. Above you can finish with wood or brick, even shitt drywall if you want...and if you all that well, you can even put a heavy and quality roof and put those LUXURY EUROPEAN terracota rooftiles every shitty house in Europe has but for some reason you consider it luxury.

>Its not this houses fault you're obsessed with stagnant architecture and afraid of engineering.

Unsonian design is pretention garbage.

>>1449572
>Dig a few meters (or whatever stoneage measurments you use for lenght) and surpsise, surspise, youll find more harder ground.

Perfect spot for a monolithic slab

>Unsonian design is pretention garbage.

Fallingwater is not usonian retard, if thats what you even meant. This is a usonian, and it shits all over your country. You might like it, it's not insulated.

>>1449578
>Fallingwater is not usonian retard

you knew what I tried to say, same level of unfunctionallity and quasi suave expensive euro look. dogshit esentially.

>>1449584
>and quasi suave expensive euro look.

You know you're not american, you LARP as an american, and you never know what you're talking about at akk. Usonian is 100% american and a direct antithesis to euroshit. If anything it lowkey channels japan. It's also a cheap house. What is "suave and expensive" about common off the shelf materials in the mid century.

I liked you better when the dumb shit you said was only about foundations

>>1449511
You're a fucking idiot. That house is built on a foundation of... guess what? That's right, reinforced concrete. Maybe a shallow concrete footing, maybe a basement wall on a slab, either way concrete.

There's damn good reasons for that, as others have pointed out. And the Mcrebar as you so poignantly call it does important shit. If you build on shitty, or even average soil you will have problems without a good foundation. Differential settlement, voids forming under the walls from soil migration, expansive or collapsible soils. Reinforcement allows your foundation and therefore wall to withstand varying soil pressures, span distances without soil support, and distribute load to the soil over a larger area.

I'd love to see what a masonry home you'd build would look like, with your ignorance of soil mechanics, total veneration of ye olde rock construction bullshit, and disdain for centuries of engineering progress.

You'd likely just build a heavy solid rock wall directly on top of the ground and then wonder why it's cracked to fucking hell and sinking the following spring. God forbid you build on clay and deal with a minor earthquake.

>>1449523
Imbecile, my grandparents 2 1/2 story home is built of wood. In eastern SD, probably the worst possible weather conditions for building a home. Hot and humid and cold as all hell... plus the three tornadoes that have hit their property (obviously not the structure itself, but one even demolished six old growth cedars in the driveway, it was that close)

Guess what, it's 125 years old. They've repaired the roof a couple times from trees falling on it, but aside from that it's still in great condition.

Also quoting Thomas Jefferson as if he is a respected figure in structural engineering is like quoting Sylvester Stallone's opinion on quantum mechanics and thinking it means something.

>>1446975
Sounds loud when it rains or is windy. Why aren't there more entirely concrete homes?

>>1449572
Most people aren't exactly at liberty to choose their house's location based on the soil condition. There might not be good soil in the whole fucking city... it happens.

And your argument that you can dig a few meters down doesn't hold shit. Have you ever read and interpreted a geotechnical boring before? Not a chance. There's plenty of places with shit ass soil for a hundred or more feet. Why the fuck do you think we use deep foundations like drilled piers, caissons, and driven piles?

You constantly argue that because 500yr old plus stone bldgs exist, it means something. It doesn't.

Pretty much the only buildings that stood the test of time we're major infrastructure projects and other big gov supported structures. They poured tons of money into it. And they didn't know jack about the material properties of the shit they built, so they just used as big of fucking rocks as they could quarry, especially for the foundations. Guess what, big ass flat rocks are kind of like concrete, except you can make concrete thin.

The autistic argument between the retard going on about "mcslab, mcpine, mccontractors" etc and the Anon preaching common sense is the funniest thing I've seen on 4chan in a month.
Thank you both so much.

I tried my best...your construction is garbage, its a bad investment, its often tacky, not even cheap when you count in all the plasters and crap you put on wood. Jefferson called you out on McConstruction centuries ago.
Its not even a matter of money - just use your head and think what will last longer. There.

>>1449757
>etc and the Anon preaching common sense

there is no common sense in making such a bad investment. If you cash out for smth you need it to last or buy quality used (same as you would buy tools youll use often - you must have a certain level of quality), you cant to that with a mcmansion construction.

>>1449644
>Imbecile, my grandparents 2 1/2 story home is built of wood.

I bet they used mcmansion type framing and shitted it up with drywall to last that long didnt then so wood can rot itself?
Oh wait, they probably used qualtiy wood and made proper foundations, now why would someone do that again?

>>1449558
Where are you from?

>>1449824
>I tried my best...your construction is garbage, its a bad investment, its often tacky, not even cheap when you count in all the plasters and crap you put on wood.

Everyone knows typical American construction is uninformed, cheap, and tacky. You're receiving criticism because you ignore sound modern construction methods and your alternative of building with materials we don't have enough of to make envelopes we can't air condition is completely retarded.

By the way, we don't use plaster anymore. Drywall replaced that decades ago. And that crap people build their houses with is cheap, the wastefulness lies in the excess square footage. And that's only for the class of americans wealthy enough to build a mcmansion. The large majority of americans don't live in newly built homes.

>Its not even a matter of money

Hey fucktard. Houses are not just a product of your imagination and illusionary superiority in your mom's spare bedroom. They cost a lot of money, as does energy to heat and cool your house.

>there is no common sense in making such a bad investment. If you cash out for smth you need it to last or buy quality used (same as you would buy tools youll use often - you must have a certain level of quality), you cant to that with a mcmansion construction.

You think state of the art methods and materials informed by the best building science will produce a house that self detonate in a few years. Knowing that, it is absolutely useless for me to try to differentiate good construction from "mcmansion" construction. I don't even care to tell you a mcmansion is a non-architectural style and not a construction method.

>>1449825
>I bet they used mcmansion type framing and shitted it up with drywall to last that long didnt then so wood can rot itself?

Drywall is completely vapor permeable and has nothing to do with rotting. Just shut the fuck up and leave to the message board's IQ will leap 30 points.

>>1450357
He's a self-loathing wannabe american seeking cultural redemption. I also want to know what country produces this kind of person.

>>1450366
>You think state of the art methods and materials informed by the best building science will produce a house that self detonate in a few years.

well how long do those stateOfTheArtTM houses last? Drywall is overpriced dogshit btw.

>They cost a lot of money, as does energy to heat and cool your house.

they do indeed. So that makes buying used insted of McSlabbing everything ever 40 years a better and more affordable choice.

>>1450369
>He's a self-loathing wannabe american seeking cultural redemption.
>>1450357
>Where are you from?

why do you take things so personally?

>>1450369
>>1450357
>Where are you from?

Dont worry about it, I LOVE AMERICA!

V8, apple pie & big tits, man USA eggball is GOLD! Those sexy black athletes really can throw that eggball nicely, really wish my daughter would date one of them!
Could an anti-american like myself eat so much cheeseburger and sing the national anthem so beautifully?

Remember: do NOT put me on the watch list!

>>1450366
>used
>>1450551
>So that makes buying used insted of McSlabbing everything ever 40 years a better and more affordable choice.

oh, wait a sec, you CANT BUY A USED MCHOUSE, since the lifespan is barely 50 years, I guess youll have to take a mortage for your house wite boi and pay for that matchbox FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE (dont forget the pricey mainintence cost in the meantime also). Good luck getting some ROI when trying to resell it also.

>>1450573
>since the lifespan is barely 50 years

bullshit. houses built before 1968 are being bought and sold all the time. Any house where the roof is maintained can last hundreds of years.

>>1450551
>well how long do those stateOfTheArtTM houses last?

I posted one in this thread retard. Projected 500 years.

>So that makes buying used insted of McSlabbing everything ever 40 years a better and more affordable choice.

Depends on how long you plan to live in the house and how easily you can improve an existing house.

>>1450573
>oh, wait a sec, you CANT BUY A USED MCHOUSE, since the lifespan is barely 50 years, I guess youll have to take a mortage for your house wite boi and pay for that matchbox FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE (dont forget the pricey mainintence cost in the meantime also). Good luck getting some ROI when trying to resell it also.

I'm a contractor. My boss told me one stick framed how we're working on as a remodel was built in the 20s and I had no idea. It's hilariously out of square because it uses foundation methods you'd praise but it hasn't rotted.

You realize I'm not trying to correct you. I'm forcing you to respond as much as possible so everyone knows you're a complete retard and no unsuspecting /diy/er will ever take your advice.

>>1450587
>Projected 500 years.

Yeah, Ive seen the video, total meme.

>My boss told me one stick framed how we're working on as a remodel was built in the 20s and I had no idea.

that is because in the 20s they framed them with proper woodworking techniques and properly dried wood, if done that way and kept free from McWaterproofing paint and other vulgar stuff that chokes the wood, there is no reason wood framed houses wont last 500 years as they do in old British towns.

So please stop comparing McFraming with proper wooden framing.

>>1450631
>that is because in the 20s they framed them with proper woodworking techniques and properly dried wood

Like the "meme" house or what you could still do off-the-shelf now? I love how you suddenly decided timber framing isn't required for houses to last an appreciable amount of time. What does it feel like to self admit you were retarded?

>if done that way and kept free from McWaterproofing paint and other vulgar stuff that chokes the wood

Again you need to criticize vapor barrier paint, and only most of the time. Water barrier paint is good and will make wood last much longer.

>So please stop comparing McFraming with proper wooden framing.

This is literally you. Everything stick framed was a Mcmansion to you until 10 minutes ago when you realized not every house in america was built in the 90s or later.

>>1450643
>Everything stick framed was a Mcmansion to you until 10 minutes ago

are you fucking imbecile? Castles in China are stick framed with wood and last a 1000 years. They were build by CRAFTSMAN not shady McContractors.

one more time for the stupid people
>>1443787
>All walls need to "breath" enough so that moisture will never be trapped anywhere. Modern building materials used by contractors are the worst ones to use. They trap moisture and cause problems that ensure job security for the contractors. Vapor barriers rot houses from the inside out simply from bodily perpetration and cooking moisture. Using vapor barriers requires a host of other support systems to ensure the entire thing actually works just enough to keep contractors from getting sued quickly. That's the main reason why you have extremely old masonry houses and castles still doing well today, yet there are so many modern masonry houses that are falling apart, yet both are well kept and not neglected by their occupants.

>wat? a wooden building with stone underneath?
>no McSlabbing and stands still for centuries? I must have some hidden McRebar
>no way that thing can survive without McWaterproof laque
>how do you mean it doesnt have tar flamed all over the roof? how else would it survived more than 20 years?

>>1450673
>>wat? a wooden building with stone underneath?
>>no McSlabbing and stands still for centuries? I must have some hidden McRebar
>>no way that thing can survive without McWaterproof laque
>>how do you mean it doesnt have tar flamed all over the roof? how else would it survived more than 20 years?

>>1450551
>>1450569
I asked where you were from because your english mistakes look like the same my people would do. And since your talking about european houses, I think you're from Spain.

>>1450657
>are you fucking imbecile? Castles in China are stick framed with wood and last a 1000 years. They were build by CRAFTSMAN not shady McContractors.

Stick framing is 2x4 and 2x6 studs retard. It started in the 1800s with balloon framing. Those castles are timber framed like probably every single ancient wood building. You've never understood the most basic vocabulary for construction. So not only do you never know what you're talking about, we can't understand what you don't know either.

>>1443787
>Teach your children to adhere to a 100 generation rule. That they do nothing to harm their genetic lineage for the foreseeable 100 generations and that anything they decide, create, or own needs to directly reflect that. If they decide to sell it, at least you'll know they are doing it because that is what is needed to further their genetic line in the best way possible at that time.
Is this some "rule" you pulled out of your stupid asshole?

>>1449509
>CLAY SOIL
In Alabama, it's all we have. Expansive clay soils. Oh Joy.

>>1447209
>>1449376
do you actually think the structures pictured here are in any way analogous to single family residential dwellings? nothing but concrete and rebar construction could actually get those structures to stand up. your posts are strawmen of the highest order.

>>1444842
This.

I do building envelopes in institutional grade commercial buildings, like hospitals, high rises, and higher education buildings. Focus is on building envelopes. You will be wasting your money building a literal brick shithouse for no reason. Instead of buying 3 wythes of brick or wasting money on block just build a normal wood framed house with brick veneer. It will last as long as it's properly maintaned and taken care of. You can try to build a cmu block house I guess, it's going to be a ton of money and you will need serious waterproofing detailing. Even then you will want to build a cavity wall with brick anchors and maybe additional insulation.

>>1446282
>t. Butthurt McContractor who hates well built homes cause they’re “bad for business”

I have a thought, can anyone tell me if it's crazy or not.
Essentially: a method for temporary building foundation that works like a 3-point levelling system.
So a building would be built on a triangle steel frame, and use 3 floating pads and have 3 jacks that can be adjusted to keep the building level every year to account for frost heave / soil settling.
Call it 4 point leveling if that makes any more sense.
I'm just fishing for building ideas on poor soils / muskeg because I like thinking about this stuff, I don't have plans to build anything.

>>1454211
Just build this on land. Scatter fake treasure maps in the surrounding forest to send pirates astray

>>1454211
It would work, but there are much simpler methods to building on shit soil.

Your idea would really only work for very small, very lightweight buildings. Otherwise the steel frame you'd build would get very prohibitively large and heavy. Also, you'd have to use pretty large pads in order to distribute the much larger point load from your system.

Avoiding frost heave is easy, just dig the bottom of your fnd about 4' below grade. Shitty soils can be worked around by using relatively large shallow foundations, or with high enough load, the use of drilled piers, driven piers, aggregate piers, micropiles, helical piers, or soil remediation (chemical stabilization, saturation, grout injection).

We actually quite often build structures in a similar way to how you are describing (minus the temporary nature and jacks). Using deep foundations we would basically support all the grade beams or slabs above the soil, leaving a void between the dirt and the structural elements. This allows the structure and soil to move pretty much independent of each other.

>>1443585

https://www.youtube.com/user/MattRisinger

OP watch some of Matt Risinger's videos. He's a home builder and has some great advice and he talks about brick homes in several videos.

TLDW: Brick is porous and will absorb some water so you need to leave an air gap to allow it to dry out and prevent moisture from sitting between your brick and interior walls. So if you want a strong wall with good insulation, it'll be something like Brick>Air gap>Waterproof house wrap>Foam insulating panels>Plywood>Studs and insulation>drywall