/diy/ - Do It Yourself

[Anonymous No.1750587]

Is it a good idea to build something big, while having bricks bear most or all of the load of the heavy thing?
I'm talking low tech medieval construction. No steel, and concrete only used sparingly as mortar.

[Anonymous No.1750589]

Something like this basically, except, you know, low tech rather than clean factory cut planks.

[Anonymous No.1750602]

Ever seen an old church? It's perfectly fine as long as your design is right.

[Anonymous No.1750605]

>>1750587
like BIG big? brick will work if you've got the geology for it. you must have a bedrock foundation, and no earthquakes, sinkholes or frost heave.

[Anonymous No.1750607]

>>1750587
It may be good, but the practice was dropped because others ways were better.

[Anonymous No.1750668]

>>1750605
anon is correct. It is still much more expensive than concrete and steel. You can make a concrete building and surface it with brick so it looks like your pick.

[Anonymous No.1750685]

China has been building houses out of brick for thousands of years. Large earthquakes kill thousand of people in china because brick structures will not withstand being shaken around.

[Anonymous No.1751073]

>>1750685
The pyramids too were all masonry, right?
So basically buildings that are all masonry last 5000 years if there's no earthquake, or fall on top of their owners the first time there is an earthquake?

[Anonymous No.1751074]

>>1750607
No, because other ways were cheaper

[Anonymous No.1751079]

>>1751073
The bricks the pyramids are made of are so large it might be easier to chisel rooms into them rather than making a house out of them.

[Anonymous No.1751088]

>>1751074
This is partly true, the other ways involve a greater liberty concerning the architecture and a better safety.

The old way was prone to problems such as building something heavy on a land that is not capable of support such a weight. Today we can build on sand, in the sea, on dried swamps, etc. It was nearly impossible before.

[Humble croatian red aerated te(...) No.1751781]

>>1750587
>Is it a good idea to build something big, while having bricks bear most or all of the load of the heavy thing?

generally no, but it actually depends entirely on the qualtiyand type of the brick. Here loading is exclusivly done with RC poured in specialy type bricks while regular bricks are fill in.

[Humble croatian red aerated te(...) No.1751783]

>>1751781
>Here loading is exclusivly done with RC poured in specialy type bricks

this pic

for orders to USA and special offers to burger customers go to my site and type in "f150applepie"

[Anonymous No.1751889]

>>1751079
clueless.

[Anonymous No.1751903]

>>1750587
>Is it a good idea to build something big
why not?

[Anonymous No.1751925]

Just dont make corner pillars like that OP, if you stumbled drunk into that you'd probably end up with the 1st floor on your head :DDD

[Anonymous No.1751940]

>>1750587
Most modern homes in Britain are full brick and cinderblock construction
Don't see any reason why the whole thing couldn't be brick, I think they only use cinderblock because it's cheaper
>https://www.taylorwimpey.co.uk/customer-service/building-your-house/how-new-homes-are-built

[Anonymous No.1751963]

>>1751940
UK's "concrete block" is a solid block, and they call cinderblocks with the two big square holes "breeze block".

[Anonymous No.1751986]

>>1751963
>they call cinderblocks with the two big square holes "breeze block".
its not even that cut and dry now, anything block is your pic.
we don't really have your cinderblocks at all.
we have thermo blocks that weigh nothing though, you can cut them with a handsaw.

[Anonymous No.1752037]

>>1750587
>bricks bear most or all of the load
enjoy your swift death during an earthquake. hopefully it happens at night and you get crushed during your sleep.

[Anonymous No.1752309]

>>1751925
How come? Gravity and weight pulls them down. And if you hit them at any one point, you are only attempting to move one piece, and the rest are keeping it in place. Seems pretty stable desu.

[Anonymous No.1752311]

>>1752037
Would you say this is more stable?
I've seen houses like this that are 300+ years old, and the brick isn't even baked red.

[Anonymous No.1754042]

>>1751781
>>1751783

[Anonymous No.1754046]

>>1754042
just leave this here

you could probably jack it up and put gravel under it and its fine again.

[Anonymous No.1754110]

>>1751986
Is there any particular reason those blocks and bricks are used as opposed to just having a brick and board house?

[Anonymous No.1754165]

>>1750587
I guess a construction engineer could draft you some plan assuming you can get bricks for dirt cheap... and tell you a couple things about earthquakes, inclement weather, and ground resistance, because your freshly built house should stay--uhm--vertically aligned.

Medieval architects planned for way more force than usual. The Cathedral of St. Peter in Rome was recently verified for ~7.5 kg/cm2 while it could have been enough ~2.1 kg/cm2, and that's way after five centuries and lots of earthquakes it's still there.

[Anonymous No.1754196]

>>1754110
what does brick and board look like? we might be doing it and calling it something else.

[Anonymous No.1754225]

>>1754042
>3rdworldengineering.jpg

[Anonymous No.1754272]

>>1754225
This is almost certainly from Serbia after big floods couple of years back. Bricks are not the issue here, houses werent built on proper foundations, be it too shallow foundations or people ditching them altogether.

[Anonymous No.1754338]

>>1750685
Han dynasty structures were mostly wood.
This includes the Great Wall, which originally was earthen.

[Anonymous No.1754437]

>>1754042
Looks like the actual house held up great. Its still in one piece.
However, this isn't a weight carrying masonry build. Its the steel reinforced concrete carrying the structure, and the bricks just filling in space.

[Humble croatian red aerated te(...) No.1754456]

>>1754042
>>1754046
>>1754437
>>1754272
>This is almost certainly from Serbia after big floods couple of years back

I think that is where the pics are from, floodings erroded the foundations, but notice how solid the house structure still is even when its almost flipped sideways. Brick walls with concrete that carries the load are extremly durable method of building.

[Anonymous No.1754729]

>>1750685
>Large earthquakes kill thousand of people in china because brick structures will not withstand being shaken around.

Or because Chinks cheap out on construction methods? Don't get me wrong, steel reinforced concrete is better but most of Chinese buildings drop because Chinks don't value Chink lives

[Anonymous No.1755017]

>>1754729
OP here, I specifically am asking about brick construction that does NOT feature concrete or steel. Imagine you were building 3000 years ago.
I know such were made in Mesopotamia, Egypt, etc, HUGE constructions in the flat desert where earthquakes are rare. I wanted to know how reasonable it is to build something large, like a school or library, in that method, and expect it to exist for more than 1 human life worth of time.

[Anonymous No.1755151]

[Anonymous No.1755161]

>>1752309
buckling

[Anonymous No.1755437]

>>1755017
>I wanted to know how reasonable it is to build something large, like a school or library, in that method, and expect it to exist for more than 1 human life worth of time.

It would work just fine if you design it properly. Its the building code assholes that will be your biggest obstacle because they hate anything that is non-standard techniques.

[Anonymous No.1755461]

there are brick houses and schools made of brick in CA. this high school has brick facade:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Segundo_High_School

[Anonymous No.1755577]

>>1755437
Where I'm from you just need an approved architect to sign up on it, saying it won't kill anyone by existing. And the fire department too, but thats easy.

>>1755461
Looks pretty solid.

[Anonymous No.1755756]

>>1755577
>>1755461
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Segundo_High_School

early 20th century. Its all RC behind the bricks.