 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| |
REPP-CREST
1612 K Street, NW
Suite 202
Washington, DC 20006
contact us
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
| Strawbale Archive for January 2000 |
 |
| 472 messages, last added Tue Nov 26 17:39:45 2002 |
[Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "Bale-block" system: vertically-augered holes filled with concrete? Ideas?
Rick Green and I tossed this idea around quite a bit a couple of years ago,
and I rejected it as not producing sufficient strength in the columns for
most of what we do; but Rick built a building near Oregon House, California
(that's a place), which was sucessful. The bales were drilled singly and
then lifted into place. Labor costs were thus a significant factor. We
talked about making a giant drill bit/hole cutter from a section of bandsaw
blade.
John
At 11:43 AM 1/27/00 +0200, Peter Webber wrote:
> Thanks to everyone who helped me with my bale-storage questions. ""
>system. " holes down into your walls, slipping in some rebar and pouring
>in concrete. But I cannot find any further info. Does anyone know: How
>far apart you drill? Who has done this? Whether you drill the whole wall
>height at once or bale by bale? How you anchor the vertical rebar to the
>base slab? On the face of it, it seems a fantastically cheap way of
>creating a load-bearing framework. Each column would cost about $3 in
>concrete and rebar (work it out...) and assuming 1 column per bale length,
>a mid-sized SB house could be done for $150. No formwork costs, as the
>bales do it for you. The upper horizontal beam could be poured straight
>onto the top layer of bales (with minimal formwork...) " diameter every
>3 feet or so, the cost would still be around $500 total in concrete and
>rebar. Embedding the (slightly over wall height) rebar in the base slab
>and threading accurately pre-augered bales over it would seem a possible
>route. I had a static analysis done on the idea and it exceeds the local
>code requirements for seismic resistance. Of course, there would be some
>slight loss of insulation, but in comparison to conventional (concrete or
>timber) post-and-beam, the costs are much better than halved, the post and
>beam structure is made to fit, and bond to, the bales rather than the
>bales being squeezed into an existing structure. You wouldn't need rebar
>pins either. Intuitively I visualize the system as having great
>stability. These are just thoughts. Any other thoughts on this subject
>or relevant experience out there? Thanks to all Peter Who is attempting
>to embark on the first fully-approved SB house in Greece (of all places!)
>
John Swearingen
Skillful Means--Architecture and Construction
We invite you to visit our web site at: http://www.skillful-means.com
 |
 |
|