Source (in Danish): dr.dk/…/poelset-op-i-beton-nu-staar-europas-stoer…
3D-Rinted Houses Are Already Failing - Megaprojects youtu.be/nRLqld_jD_g
3D printing a house
Submitted 3 weeks ago by 
sortekanin@feddit.dk@feddit.dk to 3dprinting@lemmy.world
https://feddit.dk/pictrs/image/afc7b7e0-9a76-4bf5-94c4-b0dac3d5f331.mp4
Comments
nulluser@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
runner_g@piefed.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
I watched this video a couple weeks ago and it’s pure click bait. He discussed one single instance where a known scammer takes advantage of a poor community and doesn’t do what he said he would. The video completely ignores all the progress the printer manufacturing companies are making and only devotes like 60 seconds at the very end to mention that the industry is improving rapidly.
Here’s a Tested video from last year where Adam visits one of the manufacturers. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=orurGdrlzIs
Nomad@infosec.pub 3 weeks ago
Tldw cracking in the concrete and quite scammy companies.
SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
3D house printing has been a scam from day one. Not cheaper, not faster, not more reliable and they cannot be altered or upgraded in the future. Questionable R values.
These turds got pinched out but will all be knocked down in a decade.
chris@l.roofo.cc@l.roofo.cc 3 weeks ago As far as I have seen it’s very finicky. The concrete mixture is very special because normalnconcrete is not made for stacking layers and it’s also very sensitive to the weather. If it’s not exactly right it will start cracking.
I am not sure if anyone could yet demonstrate it at scale while being cheaper than traditional building.
kalpol@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
You are correct. I watched one being built. It is only the walls, for one thing, they still did foundation, roof, interior framing the old-fashioned way. The concrete was trucked in on pallets and mixed on site and it looked like a ton of work, and the machine was always breaking, it looked like.
Honestly don’t know why they don’t print the concrete forms in plastic and inject concrete, injectable cast concrete has been a thing for like a hundred years. You could do your raceways and plumbing runs and all then fill.
- chris@l.roofo.cc@l.roofo.cc 3 weeks ago
Honestly don’t know why they don’t print the concrete forms in plastic and inject concrete, injectable cast concrete has been a thing for like a hundred years. You could do your raceways and plumbing runs and all then fill.
That would be a lot of waste plastic. Concrete is very heavy. That means the form hast to be extremely tough. For plastic that means a lot of plastic. At a certain point you won’t win anything there either.
philipp_@discuss.tchncs.de 2 weeks ago
Also we should be moving away from concrete as a building material where possible because it’s terribly energy intensive to make. Of course we need it for some things but there are better materials for walls in normal residential buildings.
Rooster326@programming.dev 2 weeks ago
I agree. We should work on 3d printing wood. Stick houses are superior
Hueristic_Autistic@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
where possible because it’s terribly energy intensive to make
Bruh it takes a mixer and water. The only thing that would get used more than not, is water.
Lumber is stupid expensive, brick homes are labor intensive, you can do mixed substrate horns but that’s expensive too. Glass paneling is usually only for stupid rich people or businesses and metal siding with metal interior and a metal roof, you may as well live in a shipping container.
rizzothesmall@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
“Der terk er jerbs” ~ Brickies
MonkeMischief@lemmy.today 3 weeks ago
“Deh derk eh durrrr!!!”
Kolanaki@pawb.social 2 weeks ago By all accounts I have read that didn’t come from the company selling them, these constructions are terrible.
Hueristic_Autistic@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Literally in the 3D printing for dummies book, it says that 3D printed houses that will be disposable will be part of the future and the next industrial revolution.
I don’t see a problem, lumber is expensive af and there’s a huge homeless problem here in the US, so if that tech was supported it could make villages for homeless people to get services and have a temp home.
justme@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
compared to brick houses, or compared to cardboard houses? anyway… every time there is a new technology, it is terrible. just remember when the first digital cameras or the first flat screen monitors came.
- Kolanaki@pawb.social 2 weeks ago
Compared to anything structure that is actually up to code.
Hueristic_Autistic@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Horsehair plaster homes that are used as apartments with old metal clad wiring and lead paint are a thing. I think a 3D printed home is a step up.
the_fuckler@nord.pub 3 weeks ago
Can anyone tell me now this compares in efficiency to traditional building? It looks like a lot of setup
- sortekanin@feddit.dk@feddit.dk 3 weeks ago
Not sure about speed but I imagine it could be pretty speedy, if for no other reason than the fact that it can run with much fewer workers and probably also running during the night. I mean even if it was half as slow as manual labour, if it ran for 24 hours, it would still be faster overall.
But another point is that it uses much less material, 70% less according to the article. I suppose that helps with costs and CO2 emissions.
impairedimperator@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
If you’re switching to concrete, emissions will be worse than pretty much anything else you could use. Concrete is already responsible for some 8-12% of all global CO2 emissions.
the_fuckler@nord.pub 3 weeks ago
That makes sense. 70% less material is a staggering amount, that would probably offset if it ran on literal coal and steam
dharmacurious@slrpnk.net 3 weeks ago Honestly, this would be a really cool way to build Cobb houses, which are very environmentally friendly, have fantastic insulation, and are some of our oldest still standing structures, iirc. Good hat and boots (roof with overhang and foundation), 3d printed Cobb walls, and a lime coating, and I could see this really making housing costs a lot lower in certain communities.
Biggest downside to Cobb from my research is just that electrical and plumbing typically needs to be running conduit on top of the wall, instead of inside the wall, if you want the option to upgrade or change it later.
olafurp@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
I really don’t understand why people don’t go for prefab walls instead. Am I missing something? It sounds to me that creating a house out of composable units that contain insulation, wiring and plumbing makes more sense.
- sortekanin@feddit.dk@feddit.dk 2 weeks ago
The article says this uses only 30% of the concrete you’d otherwise use. Presumably prefab would use more.
Waterpumpee@lemmus.org 3 weeks ago
If this is 3d printing, making love is bio engineering.
papalonian@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
How does this not meet the definition of 3d printing? The machines that do this are legitimately just giant core-XY machines with concrete hoppers instead of a hot end
AnyOldName3@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
A shame they’re not brave enough to print a building on a bedslinger.
Honytawk@discuss.tchncs.de 2 weeks ago
Sex is bio engineering. It is just that you don’t get to decide the engineering part. Your genes and proteins do.
SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world 3 weeks ago
I want to 3D print bricks and use it to build my house so I can use a smaller printer.
Ludicrous0251@piefed.zip 3 weeks ago
It’s neat in concept, but such a waste of material over stick framing.
Also, do you need to bust out the impact drill every time you want to hang a photo? What it you need to move an outlet?
Also also, what happened if you foundation shifts, like at all?
And how’s the insulation on this? Nothing is thermally broken, you’re gonna have a good amount of heat going through those rounded corners.
Nomad@infosec.pub 3 weeks ago
I always thought it curious that Americans like to build houses that blow away while experiencing lots of hurricanes all the time.
SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
Sure, pretend like European clay roofing tiles do not blow off and European stonework isn’t a patch quilt of continuous repair.
blackbeans@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
You must be an American. Stone or concrete walls are normal in many countries.
Youn can indeed use a hammer drill to drill holes. You can buy them for as little as 30 dollars these days. And you can use an angle grinder to make cutouts for cables/tubes, and apply plaster afterwards.
Many houses in the colder regions already have cavity walls with insulation in between the walls regardless of the building method, so I don’t think this method is very wasteful in amount of material.
However, I agree that 3D printing houses had various downsides, such as the weird corners, inflexibility to modify/expand/repair after the initial build and potentiality worse insulation characteristics. I am more of a believer in prefabricated houses, where building houses becomes an industry instead of a project.
azimir@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
As to the stone thing: most of the houses and apartments in Germany are mainly stone walls. Somehow we manage it here.
Benefits include: massive soundproofing. Heat and cold envelope. Stability of buildings in tighter blocks. Build once, use forever.
Store is just fine, and yes we have an impact drill. It cost 30 Euro and does all of the light duty stuff we need.
Renovations are tougher, but also rarer.
SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
Stone is horrible for insulation.
runner_g@piefed.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
You print 2 layers with an air gap between. Themis gap gives room for plumbing and electrical, and also serves as an insulation layer. A thin layer of still air has relatively low thermal conductivity, minimizing heat exchange between inside and outside.
SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
The people who thought 3D printed houses were innovative had no idea how houses are built.
AnyOldName3@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
The problem with this kind of innovation is that it’s improving what’s already one of the fastest and easiest parts of building a house. Digging foundations, plastering the walls, doing the plumbing, doing the electrics and laying the flooring can all individually take longer than the bricklaying, and are much harder to automate.
It’s like they forgot precast exists and that there’s a reason you don’t see it used in houses.
bobslaede@feddit.dk 3 weeks ago
Guessing you didnt read it, because its in danish.
The article specifically mentions that this technique uses 30% of the material that would have been used for precast.
bstix@feddit.dk 3 weeks ago
One of the things that this project is testing is how the foundations are made. They do not have to clear the trees to dig and level out the area to fill in loads of gravel just to make a concrete pour. They are somehow able to make the foundations around existing structures like trees and on somewhat uneven ground.
AnyOldName3@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
This machine looks much bigger than a wheelbarrow, and you still need to dig the foundation, so I don’t see how it could possibly need less space to be cleared than just pouring concrete into a hole would.
majster@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
That is why developers over here love to sell houses that are just walls, windows, roof and facade. You get to juggle 10 different contractors until finished yourself
dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
What’s the labor savings?