🧵 3D Printed Houses?
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 01:02:12 UTC No. 16370861
Are 3D printe structures really viable? Are there any real use cases for this technology? It's still in it's infancy, relatively speaking, and there is still very little information about it to be found. The majority of what I've seen seems biased and meant to attract outside investment by making vague and unqualified claims. Any anons more familiar with this? If so, what are the pros and cons? Do you think it will see wider adoption in the mainstream? Is it a solution, or just an interesting curiosity?
I actually applied with a 3D printing housing startup based out of southeast USA some years ago, sadly I wasn't accepted and I never got to get a closer look at this new technology. (Im aware it isnt actually "new", strictly speaking, but afaik this particular application is still pretty obscure)
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 01:08:27 UTC No. 16370873
idk just build them and see how they hold up compared to plywood shacks
it's a house, not a projectile
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 01:08:35 UTC No. 16370874
For the amount of preparation time it takes to set up a house sized concrete 3d printer you could have just thrown up some forms and poured the concrete.
Sure, it won't be as "curvy" as the printer but this is advertised as a low cost solution for housing. Aesthetics shouldn't be the first consideration.
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 01:10:56 UTC No. 16370875
>>16370874
You could 3 print some absolutely batshit designs though.
This 3d printed shit will be ugly as fuck and it better have a facade on it. Stucco would do it but then again you can just build with stucco lmao
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 01:30:15 UTC No. 16370899
>>16370861
>Are 3D printe structures really viable?
no
>Are there any real use cases for this technology?
no
>It's still in it's infancy, relatively speaking,
cope
>and there is still very little information about it to be found.
all the information about it is available cope x2
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 01:57:58 UTC No. 16370920
>>16370861
>takes specialized equipment and personnel
$$$
>takes a lot of site prep time
$$$
>requires specific formulations of concrete made to a tight specification
$$$
furthermore wiring and plumbing the house will be a nightmare and forget altering the house in the future.
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 02:23:05 UTC No. 16370951
>>16370861
The shell of a house is not even the majority of the cost. IIRC, it's about 40% of the cost. Even if this could reduce the cost of the shell by half (and it won't be anywhere near that), that's at most a 20% reduction in cost.
This seems like something that would be better used on small scale buildings that aren't inhabited like storage sheds. Scale it down to where it fits on a trailer and can be towed to your house by a standard F150. That would be a nice small business for locals.
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 04:19:28 UTC No. 16371092
>>16370861
There better gains to be had in economies of scale. Factories for pre-cast houses and streamlined installation would likely be much more efficient.
With this... thing you just take the third world bricklayer out of the equation and the third world bricklayer is usually the cheapest part of building a house. Insulation, electric, piping and finishing are way more demanding both in time and cost.
Factory-cast structures can have all that embedded in the walls, etc.
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 04:36:25 UTC No. 16371132
>>16371092
In the United States there has been a huge propaganda campaign against manufactured housing. Even just the walls of a normal home. It tanks the value for absolutely no reason.
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 05:36:01 UTC No. 16371262
>>16371132
That's because it kills the job market for Mexicans.
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 06:00:46 UTC No. 16371302
>>16370861
>Is it a solution,
No, houses are more complex than hunks of plastic. Not to mention that plastic is too expensive to make a whole house out of it.
I have however seen 3D printers that work with concrete but again it doesnt work, as they cant do the formwork or install rebar, pure concrete doesnt work if you want to build a house.
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 06:08:32 UTC No. 16371319
>>16370920
>furthermore wiring and plumbing the house will be a nightmare and forget altering the house in the future.
Both of those problems are solved with exposed wiring and plumbing or just print plastic covers for them.
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 06:11:19 UTC No. 16371325
>>16371092
>thing you just take the third world bricklayer out of the equation and the third world bricklayer is usually the cheapest part of building a house
Labor is about 10% of the price of a house. Land 25%, materials 25%. Adds up to 60% of the sale price.
Cost of getting permits is very high but gets proportionally small for large projects where you pull permits for hundreds of units at the same time.
Labor includes white collar labor.
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 06:13:52 UTC No. 16371329
>>16370861
"3d printing" big things from concrete is already a mature technology, so no it won't be a thing. The challenge is printing things that are small or have an intricate mix of materials and doing it cheaper than a dedicated machine. For specialized small parts or prototyping this can be viable, for mature industries that operate on bulk products it's not. Just extruding concrete or cement or something like that isn't difficult, a prefab factory does that all the time, except it does it into ready made molds in fraction of the time and cost. Something like this will never be cheaper than a prefabricated and assembled on site structure. Now it may see some use as a novelty because it allows you to customize the way your house looks for some funny geometry but it will never be mainstream and definitely not for the poors.
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 06:14:02 UTC No. 16371330
>>16371302
>No, houses are more complex than hunks of plastic.
Except doll houses and toy houses are literally just hunks of plastic.
> Not to mention that plastic is too expensive to make a whole house out of it.
Nobody is printing actual houses out of plastic.
>I have however seen 3D printers that work with concrete but again it doesnt work
Then how have you seen it be done if it didn't work?
>as they cant do the formwork or install rebar
Except they can.
>pure concrete doesnt work if you want to build a house.
Explain OP's picture, you think its just AI or something?
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 06:16:26 UTC No. 16371333
>>16371325
>Labor is about 10% of the price of a house. Land 25%, materials 25%. Adds up to 60% of the sale price.
So heres how to get "cheap" housing, i.e commieblocks
Get cheap land. Knocks out 25% of the cost. Land is made by god. Or just build apartments so you can use the same land for many units.
Make the units 1/5th the size of an american home.
So the costs per units are, compared:
Land: 0%
Labor: 10/5%=2%
Materials=25/5%=5%
No profit margin because commieblock.
A commieblock apartment can be built at 7% of the cost of a common american house
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 06:18:36 UTC No. 16371338
>>16371330
>Then how have you seen it be done if it didn't work?
It works as an example of a failed experiment
>>16371330
>Except they can.
They cant 3D print rebar
>>16371330
>Except doll houses
These are just toys, people cant live in a toy
>>16371330
>Explain OP's picture, yo
A house built of pure concrete has no strength. You can build a concrete husk but it would collapse pretty fast.
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 06:23:40 UTC No. 16371349
>>16371338
>It works as an example of a failed experiment
No, a failed experiment, by definition specifically did NOT work.
You can 3D print around rebar.
There are literal houses built to look like Legos, some people do live in toys and scale models are often made of plastic.
>A house built of pure concrete has no strength.
Do you not see how OP uses shapes that add strength? They will have just as much strength as brick houses, sure you can't build a three story house that way, but people don't need to.
>You can build a concrete husk but it would collapse pretty fast.
No it wouldn't there are houses made of stone older than your parent's parents still standing or you can just print over rebar and retain the strength of metal.
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 06:46:46 UTC No. 16371377
>>16371329
>Something like this will never be cheaper than a prefab
How about in particularly difficult to reach geographical locations? I.e: Remote area, difficult terrain, shipping prefab and getting proper equipment expensive or too hard. In this case wouldn't 3D printing be a reasonable alternative?
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 06:48:57 UTC No. 16371380
>>16371377
That makes it worse because it's easier to haul prefabs to a difficult location than try to set up a 3d printing operation in a difficult location.
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 07:12:25 UTC No. 16371427
>>16371349
>You can 3D print around rebar.
You cant 3D print the rebar, so the whole idea of 3D printing a house has failed already. Its pretty stupid anyway, you can just pour concrete.
>houses like lego
So what? Dont change the goalposts, are you not talking about 3D printing or what?
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 07:13:28 UTC No. 16371429
>>16371377
>How about in particularly difficult to reach geographical locations?
Always this cope
>Sure our idea doesnt work on earth but what if we were in Mars? What if we were stuck under a volcano?
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 07:18:43 UTC No. 16371431
>>16371427
>You cant 3D print the rebar, so the whole idea of 3D printing a house has failed already.
You can mechanically put the rebar in place and pour concrete around it mechanically, nothing has failed other than the completely unnecessary limits you are trying to impose on the process.
>Its pretty stupid anyway, you can just pour concrete.
You can just grind you wheat into flour and make dough by hand manually too, but smart people have mastered technology that can do that many orders of magnitude faster than you.
>Are you not talking about 3D printing or what?
Yes, I just don't need to impose a bunch of stupid limits to make it seem stupid when I can suggest ways to make it better instead.
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 10:30:42 UTC No. 16371821
>>16371431
>You can mechanically put the rebar in place
Thats not 3D printing tho, stop moving the goalpost
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 10:32:13 UTC No. 16371827
>>16371431
>Yes, I just don't need to impose a bunch of stupid limits
Sorry but you did when you asked if you could 3D print a house. You couls have asked if you could use 3D printing as a part of the building of a house, but you didnt
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 10:32:24 UTC No. 16371830
>>16370861
why not just use beaners?
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 10:41:50 UTC No. 16371852
Why use 3D printing? Why not cast the house from molten aluminum using steel molds?
Just have AI robots ERECT the molds and pour the molten aluminum from a helicopter
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 10:44:43 UTC No. 16371855
>>16371821
It is, that is like saying its not actually printing if you put it on a sticker that gets transferred to something else.
>>16371827
That is like saying if you have a machine that puts ink on the book and binds it between a cover, then it didn't actually print the book.
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 13:42:35 UTC No. 16372189
>>16371817
I can get one to work for 20 USD a day.
And since you're importing millions of these guys every year, you'll get these prices too, one day.
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 14:05:21 UTC No. 16372228
3d tounge my anus
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 14:09:17 UTC No. 16372236
>>16371333
How to deal with the rocket scientists loitering in both of the 2 stairwells?
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 14:11:30 UTC No. 16372239
>>16371817
These porotherm blocks are amazing
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 15:02:33 UTC No. 16372299
>>16370861
Unironically, the best application of this technology is for structures on the moon.
If you could make a regolith-based slurry which sets like concrete, you could use a gantry-style three-axis extruder to fabricate basic structures on the moon.
Landing pads, dust barriers, roads, shielding around pre-fab buildings. One heavy machine could do all that without needing to transport hundreds of tons of building materials from Earth.
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 15:58:43 UTC No. 16372409
>>16372299
Much like hydroponics, such locations do alter the value proposition quite a bit. I do wonder how they would deal with regolith dust getting into the machinery? There's only so much you can do to seal joints from what's essentially clouds of Asbestos.
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 19:55:51 UTC No. 16372973
>>16371319
Ugly
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 21:52:29 UTC No. 16373248
why would anyone want to live in a plastic house?
Anonymous at Wed, 11 Sep 2024 05:30:38 UTC No. 16373732
>>16373248
Because its green, shaped like a hobbit hole from the movie, and designed to be covered in soil like one?
https://www.planetorganics.com/gree
Anonymous at Wed, 11 Sep 2024 17:19:02 UTC No. 16374542
>>16370861
3D printing houses is retarded. There are no pros, only cons.
>>16370875
>You could 3 print some absolutely batshit designs though.
No, you can't. Concrete flows too much and doesn't harden fast like 3d printed plastic. All the 3d printed houses are just vertical walls with some curved corners. The design limitations are severe.
You want to really improve construction? Improve prefabrication and humanoid robots. 3D printing can be used to make parts (not concrete, but plastic, metal or ceramic components). But printing the entire house structure is fucking retarded.
>t. architect.
Anonymous at Wed, 11 Sep 2024 18:27:34 UTC No. 16374629
bullshit tech not suitable for real homes. just buy our half million printer and make it double
Anonymous at Thu, 12 Sep 2024 15:23:22 UTC No. 16377071
Bumpu