If you have the ability to pump concrete, and a gantry across the whole site, why wouldn't you pick and place concrete blocks or other materials rather than concrete the whole thing on site?
Also, aren't these walls significantly more CO2 unfriendly than lumber, and more difficult to renovate? What if I need to get a builder in to do repairs, is there a concrete wall guy who knows how to repair them?
Can it print multi family housing?
It takes four weeks to print, which seems long to frame a single story three bedroom house. If the home buyer isn't feeling savings, what's the draw here.
It’s mechanically less complex than using existing materials and allows for a new range of possible shapes. Moving a printer head around a gantry vs highly precise manipulation of objects.
3D printing homes is currently a terrible option, but the result is visually distinct which should help sell the homes. It doesn’t need to be good to make someone money.
Is it purely that this robot never takes vacation and never asks for a raise? Feels a lot like this permits building a home largely without human labor, which I'm sure the VC class would be very excited about.
If you happen to live in a flood plain, concrete is much less susceptible to water damage than a traditional timber frame building.
I would also imagine that a home with a concrete exterior (with appropriate roofing) would be more likely to survive a wildfire, in areas susceptible to those.
"...range in price from around $450,000 to close to $600,000."
In other words, there is little economic incentive to recommend this construction method. Not much in the way of aesthetics either --- unless you want a ranch box.
3D printing doesn't relieve any important construction constraints and probably raises costs because unfamiliarity increases risks and increased risk increases price.
Superstructure is about the easiest and fastest part of residential construction. Sitework, finishes, and MEP systems are harder, tend to take longer, and cost more.
Anyway, market rate housing sells at market rates no matter how it is built.
I disagree, they are priced the same as a new timber framed house but concrete is way better insulated and more efficient, which is great for the Texas heat. Also they are much more resistant to storm damage.
Look at the results in Florida where the only houses left standing after hurricanes are the ones which are built with ICF (insulated concrete forms)
So for the same money I would argue you are getting a better product. That’s also saying nothing about a more consistent build quality. Timber framed houses vary a lot in quality depending on the crew who built them and the quality of the materials used. Framing with a robot means that there is far less variation in quality, vs framing with crews of humans who are often paid a little as possible and told to work as quickly as possible.
I never understood how 3D printing buildings even come about. Desktop 3D printers work by melting thermoplastics that solidify when cooled down and is ready for the next layer.
With concrete, you have to wait for it to set before you can print on top of it. D
That is what I was thinking. I mean what is nice about those prefab housings like the ones you see on Amazon and Walmart is that they are really cheap!
Seems pointless and expensive, and it's concrete that doesn't lend itself to modification or repair. 3D printing in this case appears to be used as a tech gimmick rather than an actually-scalable process, or it would already be in-use everywhere.
The most inherently sensible home would be protected from wind (derecho, hurricane, and the uncommon tornado), fire, flooding, and severe heat and cold (and associated climate control costs) by building mostly underground on flat, stable, high ground.
I have toured the Icon houses at Wolf Ranch. I went through their show house, but I also went to some of the houses under construction and examined them and talked to the workers a bit. You couldn't approach them them while the printer was running -- note also, they have a next-gen printer that looks more like a cement pumper crane arm, these were the previous ones.
Anyway the modification of them is addressed in some of the videos in the show house. Essentially you use a circular saw with masonry teeth to cut new holes, they provide shade-matching grout to fill in an old hole. It's less flexible than sheetrock but about what modifying a cinder block wall would be. Unlike most cinder block commercial buildings, the wiring is inside the wall and not in an exposed conduit, there might have been one exception in a bathroom or something.
Over all, to my non-professional opinion, it seemed more expensive than traditional "stick built" but also higher quality, probably worth it if you wanted a high quality structure.
I have also visited their site in South Austin on St. Elmo, and the small "tiny houses" they built in the Community First village for the ex-homeless, but I wasn't able to go inside those.
My overall impression is that it's a great technology that will be used for more and more structures. Thus far I think they have been too traditional in their floor plans, they have been focusing on showing that they can build real up-to-code houses that banks will accept as collateral. Hopefully with their new cheaper printer, maybe in some area outside of HOAs and zoning, they can starting making some more interesting houses -- like round towers Victorian style, for example.
> The most inherently sensible home would be protected from wind (derecho, hurricane, and the uncommon tornado), fire, flooding, and severe heat and cold (and associated climate control costs) by building mostly underground on flat, stable, high ground.
If I had the luxury of time and money that's the kind of home I'd build out, probably with a few Maginot line type turrets peeking out from the "roof".
When I was working at USC-ISI back in 2009–10, there was a project about doing 3D printing for construction taking place there back then. I was a bit surprised to learn that not only was this company not derived from those efforts, but according to their website, “In 2018, we told people we were going to 3D print a house and unveil it during SXSW in Austin, TX before we knew how to do it.” I wonder what ever happened with that ISI research work.
Glad to see new building techniques being attempted in real world scenarios. 3d printed structures will be most compelling when they do more things that are difficult or impractical with traditional techniques: curved walls, built inside, ornamentation, patterns, etc.
There is nothing you can’t do with classical drywall. Curved walls, ornamentation, patterns, integrated furniture… you name it. 3d printing has a huge limitation here - you need support to print over empty area. I am sure it’s not fun removing concrete support pieces from huge concrete structure without cracks.
How would plumbing and wiring work? The article states that the wall is a semi-hollow, corduroy pattern, so do the printers leave openings in the walls so pipes/wiring get shoved into them after?
Yes. I visited that site and examined some of the partially constructed buildings, and talked to a couple of the workers.
They have videos discussing how you would add a light switch or remove one -- basically a mansonry hole saw, and matching grout to fill in.
It seemed slightly more trouble to do modifications than a cinder block wall, but the quality and strength was much higher. I went with low expectations but I was impressed.
I didn't see any walls at the stage of construction where I could see what the insulation was, whether is was expanding foam or fiberglass.
I think everyone is missing the real reason for this. From TFA:
> requires fewer workers
what TFA didn't say, and which I'm sure is also true, is that the workers can also be less skilled.
I found it fascinating that interior walls are also concrete, and wifi signals are blocked. I betcha cellular doesn't fare too well either, and not easily fixed with multiple access points.
Lots of cynical takes here. Its cool. Time will tell if this method makes sense. One concern I have is in Texas the extreme weather and clay soil causes foundations to move. Lots of houses have foundation problems. Foundation shifts will likely translate into cracks.
I'm usually neutral on suburban hellscape buyers, but it's getting ridiculous. It made more sense to me I guess when 1/4 acre lots were standard. But these...man. The houses appear to be just a few feet from each other, and the yards are utterly pointless.
I can't believe I find myself saying this, but it would have been much nicer to just build nice condos in the middle, and use the rest as shared greenspace.
There is a huge amount of time and materials-- for the forms-- that go into building a cast concrete structure. Those are the bulk of the cost. Additionally, shapes with voids or curves are even more expensive to form via traditional means while the printing technique can do them naturally.
Maybe if you compared it to the cheapest 2x4 construction that would cost 1/4 the amount. If you spent even just half of the structural cost on a better wood design you can have offset 2x6s 12 inch spaced stud walls for an 8 inch thick wall space. I don't see how any masonry work no matter how low density could have better insulation values.
Oh look, a suburb printer. Thirty minutes from Austin? I wonder if there's any grocery stores or places to gather any closer. So what if it's printed? Still looks like a miserable place designed more for cars to live in than humans.
Lol, Georgetown isn't really a suburb of Austin. It's a separate city that is almost as old as Austin, home to the oldest college in Texas, and is the seat of an entirely different county. So yeah, there are a few places to gather and get groceries. ;)
ternnoburn|1 year ago
Also, aren't these walls significantly more CO2 unfriendly than lumber, and more difficult to renovate? What if I need to get a builder in to do repairs, is there a concrete wall guy who knows how to repair them?
Can it print multi family housing?
It takes four weeks to print, which seems long to frame a single story three bedroom house. If the home buyer isn't feeling savings, what's the draw here.
Retric|1 year ago
3D printing homes is currently a terrible option, but the result is visually distinct which should help sell the homes. It doesn’t need to be good to make someone money.
wkat4242|1 year ago
The benefit of 3D printing is making unique things. If you make the same thing over and over there's way better options.
xrd|1 year ago
GeekyBear|1 year ago
I would also imagine that a home with a concrete exterior (with appropriate roofing) would be more likely to survive a wildfire, in areas susceptible to those.
tmountain|1 year ago
amelius|1 year ago
jqpabc123|1 year ago
In other words, there is little economic incentive to recommend this construction method. Not much in the way of aesthetics either --- unless you want a ranch box.
brudgers|1 year ago
Superstructure is about the easiest and fastest part of residential construction. Sitework, finishes, and MEP systems are harder, tend to take longer, and cost more.
Anyway, market rate housing sells at market rates no matter how it is built.
9cb14c1ec0|1 year ago
Dig1t|1 year ago
Look at the results in Florida where the only houses left standing after hurricanes are the ones which are built with ICF (insulated concrete forms)
So for the same money I would argue you are getting a better product. That’s also saying nothing about a more consistent build quality. Timber framed houses vary a lot in quality depending on the crew who built them and the quality of the materials used. Framing with a robot means that there is far less variation in quality, vs framing with crews of humans who are often paid a little as possible and told to work as quickly as possible.
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
torginus|1 year ago
With concrete, you have to wait for it to set before you can print on top of it. D
nyclounge|1 year ago
magic_smoke_ee|1 year ago
The most inherently sensible home would be protected from wind (derecho, hurricane, and the uncommon tornado), fire, flooding, and severe heat and cold (and associated climate control costs) by building mostly underground on flat, stable, high ground.
RobGR|1 year ago
Anyway the modification of them is addressed in some of the videos in the show house. Essentially you use a circular saw with masonry teeth to cut new holes, they provide shade-matching grout to fill in an old hole. It's less flexible than sheetrock but about what modifying a cinder block wall would be. Unlike most cinder block commercial buildings, the wiring is inside the wall and not in an exposed conduit, there might have been one exception in a bathroom or something.
Over all, to my non-professional opinion, it seemed more expensive than traditional "stick built" but also higher quality, probably worth it if you wanted a high quality structure.
I have also visited their site in South Austin on St. Elmo, and the small "tiny houses" they built in the Community First village for the ex-homeless, but I wasn't able to go inside those.
My overall impression is that it's a great technology that will be used for more and more structures. Thus far I think they have been too traditional in their floor plans, they have been focusing on showing that they can build real up-to-code houses that banks will accept as collateral. Hopefully with their new cheaper printer, maybe in some area outside of HOAs and zoning, they can starting making some more interesting houses -- like round towers Victorian style, for example.
Simon_O_Rourke|1 year ago
If I had the luxury of time and money that's the kind of home I'd build out, probably with a few Maginot line type turrets peeking out from the "roof".
dhosek|1 year ago
xnx|1 year ago
lnsru|1 year ago
mikebelanger|1 year ago
RobGR|1 year ago
They have videos discussing how you would add a light switch or remove one -- basically a mansonry hole saw, and matching grout to fill in.
It seemed slightly more trouble to do modifications than a cinder block wall, but the quality and strength was much higher. I went with low expectations but I was impressed.
I didn't see any walls at the stage of construction where I could see what the insulation was, whether is was expanding foam or fiberglass.
oldpersonintx|1 year ago
[deleted]
jiveturkey|1 year ago
> requires fewer workers
what TFA didn't say, and which I'm sure is also true, is that the workers can also be less skilled.
I found it fascinating that interior walls are also concrete, and wifi signals are blocked. I betcha cellular doesn't fare too well either, and not easily fixed with multiple access points.
janalsncm|1 year ago
Unless the houses can sell for half of traditional housing costs their main market will be building houses on the moon.
binary_slinger|1 year ago
OutOfHere|1 year ago
wstrom|1 year ago
SapporoChris|1 year ago
iamleppert|1 year ago
seanmcdirmid|1 year ago
silisili|1 year ago
I can't believe I find myself saying this, but it would have been much nicer to just build nice condos in the middle, and use the rest as shared greenspace.
userbinator|1 year ago
nullc|1 year ago
mwambua|1 year ago
kentbrew|1 year ago
beretguy|1 year ago
AngryData|1 year ago
ternnoburn|1 year ago
kouru225|1 year ago
NicholasGurr|1 year ago
[deleted]
foxglacier|1 year ago
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5aea220096e76febe0e35...
egypturnash|1 year ago
jdbernard|1 year ago
throwawaymaths|1 year ago
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Lennar+at+Wolf+Ranch/wolf+ra...
CyberDildonics|1 year ago
nullc|1 year ago