Guides on building a quality house that will last ? Maybe

>>1051514
Building codes from blue states are a great place to start. Especially ones with earthquakes or high winds.

>>1051514
concrete and steel.

>>1051554
>concrete

>>1051560
>not using concrete
nigga, put up a brick or stone facia if you care about looks so much. reinforced concrete will last hundreds of years, is pretty fucking cheap, and is easy to do if you use the little foam lego forms.

File: images-3.jpg (4KB, 259x194px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 259x194px

>>1051514
I have a cunning plan. 30 years from now I'm going to buy out constantly failing concrete yard in my town and build a rebar reinforced concrete mansion. I'm going to build 2 stories down and 2 stories up. I have the skills and my brother in law is design engineer specializing in concrete. I'm going to finish the whole fucking thing to look like marble

>>1051514
proven methods are stones or bricks and arches as structures and wooden beams and floors and roofs

>>1051561
Structural lifespan of concrete is 50 years, stone is a 100.

File: images.jpg (3KB, 129x90px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 129x90px

ALL YOU NEED MY FRIEND

File: 11ecff0299a362cb7139ee670e5b5912.jpg (77KB, 564x423px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 564x423px

>>1051596
u wut?

File: Figure031.jpg (401KB, 1898x1356px) Image search: [Google]

401KB, 1898x1356px

>>105159

>>1051596

>Stone
>100 year lifespan

Even christfags understand that stone has been around for more than a couple generations.

>>1051596
Concrete was refined by the romans... you know, that silly colosseum thingy that is still standing... Granted a lot of stone in it , but it is all held together by roman concrete... just saying... it has been a tad bit longer then 50 years..., and well stone, I know there are structures older, but lets just call out the pyramids for being more famous... So either you are mentally handicapped or you are a troll... I choose to think you are retarded :)

File: 1472776283284.jpg (42KB, 640x625px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 640x625px

>>1051681
>not overlapping the stones

>1051686

Roman concrete is not Portland type II

>>1051596
>Things children say: example post.

>>1051686
>I choose to think you are retarded :)

Judging by >>1051689 I think you are correct.

>>1051596
>Structural lifespan of concrete is 50 years, stone is a 100.

Explain the many concrete structures much older than that still in service.

>>1052026
They are not reinforced with steel rebar. Steel rebar makes concrete strong, allowing for thinner (read: cheaper) pylons, but shortens it's life.

>>1051596
thats exposed concrete bridges and large buildings, not a single family dwelling where the concrete is protected by ICF blocks.

File: 156_1556.jpg (119KB, 975x600px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 975x600px

>>1051514
>>1051514
triangle house is the strongest house known to man (this is a geometric fact)

but your basically gay for it if you don't get at least 4 feet of snow a year

>>1052044
>triangle house is the strongest house known to man (this is a geometric fact)

ok, finish your sandwich and fuck off back to school henry

>>1051514
Over engineer the structure.

>>1052254

Over build you mean.

Over engineering is what happens when you over complicate something to make it impractical

>>1052266
over engineering is a more suitable word here because structures are engineered, you dont over build a structure because that is dumb

it is not a matter of "bigger beams" but "more beams" hence over engineer and not over build

>>1052266
over-engineering would be wasting money on curing concrete to break at over 7000 psi when 4000 works fine

>>1051681
Looks terrible.

>>1052279
at least it lasted two thousand years

>>1052299
Is that the definition of lasting, a pile of stones?

Then why did they dig up the trade centre, it was in better condition than that.

File: derp.jpg (87KB, 564x423px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 564x423px

>>1051514
>Maybe one out of brick?
Different structures for different defeating vectors.

- Hurricanes; build underground or a dome
- Tornadoes, build underground
- Earthquakes, build above ground + harmonic dampening
- Floods, build above ground, on pylons & posts
- Tusnami, build far from shorelines, at elevations of height
- Avalanches, do not build up high
- Volcano, you're fucked if anywhere near the eruption, so another reason not to build up high
- Large meteors, you're fucked.
- Nearby gamma pulse events from dying stars and merging black holes, you're fucked.
- Direct solar flare slamming into Earth from Sol, you're fucked
- Niggers rioting, tear gas turrets
- Forest fires, you're fucked
- other natural disasters ????


If you accept the risk of gamma pulse events-- as fuck, nothing we can do here-- the safest place to build a house is in the mesosphere on a ballasted structure. This keeps you safe from quakes, forest fires, niggers, tornados, hurricanes, floods, tusnamis, volcano (unless they are FUCK HUGE, f.e,x if Yellow Stone goes off the ash cloud would be high enough to fuck your shit up), etc.

The sea is also a pretty safe place all said, particularly if you're building about 100 ft below the surface in the deep ocean. There could be world ending disasters and you wouldn't even notice. Still, a gamma pulse will fuck you up.

>>1052306
meteor strike - fucked
you get sick - fucked
your cattles get sick - fucked
your crops get sick - fucked
your crops dont grow bcos of weather - fucked
your wife runs away bcos reasons - fucked

I would say building a building that lasts "forever" is largely meaningless, in >300 years it is either turned into a museum, or is demolished becos ur grandson thinks it does not have a dock for his space shuttle

TLDR: this thread is full of why

>>1052033

Don't have to use the cheapest steel.

What would be the structural life of say a concrete block structure with stainless steel rebar reinforcement filled with concrete?

>>1052324
its not about the quality of the steel. that 50 year estimate comes from large concrete reinforced buildings that are constantly exposed to large static and dynamic loads as well as corrosion from the elements because nobody paints a concrete bridge.

>>1052044
>triangle
So you're telling me the extended room in your pic will collapse anytime soon...

>>1052330
Especially when your dropping salt every winter.

>>1051676
Let's talk about tinyhouses while we're at it.

>>1052343
ok lets start, i want to bury a container underground to make a super durable bunker, how do i make it last 2000 years? also it should come with everything inside, so it will be like a tiny house where you can have everything hidden in a small space, such as a container

>>1052330

Okay, so it is entirely irrelevant to the lifetime of reinforced concrete when used for a home. Well, that was a useful diversion then.

>>1052346
What you need is bunkeranon he is our authority on underground shit

>>1052044
the sheer levels of homo buttsecks in that house is beyond comprehension

>>1052312
I would argue that building a home with quality materials and quality construction techniques would be worth the trouble of building because there should be fewer major problems to fix than with 1950s-1990s homes.

I'm a layperson when it comes to these things, but to me, it would be worth it to build a home. Building a home - while more expensive and more troublesome than buying a home - means that the home you will inhabit for possibly the rest of your life is exactly the way that you wanted it to be. With good, modern materials, it should last well after you're dead at which point you've reaped the benefits of a modern home, namely fewer major problems. Then your children may choose to inhabit the home, and it could stay in the family for as long as it's standing - a nice gift for your posterity.

Or you could sell it, and it should keep its value quite well. It seems like a good investment if you ask me.

>>1052383
>Building a home - while more expensive and more troublesome than buying a home

its less expensive actually. a good chunk of the price of a house is the labor required to build it. quality materials are actually quite cheap unless you are going for exotic stone/wood or you want a massive 5000 sq ft McMansion.

the most difficult parts of constructing a house is doing the roof and the earth work required to set foundation forms. maybe the interior finish work if you have really high standards.

modern construction techniques are intentionally designed to be easy and quick.