This is a whole bunch of little cob cottages featuring the artist/architect ianto evans.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qzX1jUWa_s
I just know I'm gonna come off as cynical and negative, and I sure don't mean to ruffle any feathers here, but I just gotta ask... What's the point?
I mean, looks to me like a bunch of middle-class background white folks playin' out in the woods, pretty much like kids, building forts and such, and being organized and supervised by older white, middle-class, "artist" hippie types.
Not that there's anything bad about that in any way, but what's good about it? Seems to me to be very similar to, say, folks who followed Maharishi Mahesh Yogi around, listening to his lectures back in the 70's. Harmless enough, and they thought they were on the forefront of some big change in the human condition too, at least they pretended to.
If anything the whole business seems a bit antithetical to what I consider the noble ideals of human progress and technological innovation. More than a few scenes in the film could have been scenes from some remote, primitive village in Cambodia or some-such, albeit with smatterings of counter-culture artistic touches scattered around. I can't help but be reminded of the romantic, yet mistaken idea of the "noble savage" and the logical conclusion of that idea, which would be that if we reject modernity, that we can somehow regain our supposed lost nobility.
I guess the main question is, as I asked above, what's good about it, aside from perhaps that it could be claimed that the project promotes public awareness of ecological issues? Is it really superior in some way to conventional modern construction?
Thanks
Cost of materials is very low.
Ability for people without building skills to build a building is quite good.
Being there .... you can be in what you logically conclude is a small space, but it feels like a far larger space. Therefore there is an intelligence at work that is beyond my understanding.
These buildings looked like they were fun to make. And, as a side effect, they look fun to live in.
If nothing else, this is a model where it makes the possibility of living mortgage free far more plausible.
While I was there, I don't remember any talk of any yogi's. Although I did learn a lot about how fire and heat works. And I learned a lot about rumford fireplaces and rocket mass heaters (http://www.richsoil.com/rocket-stove-mass-heater.jsp). So, I can now heat my home with five times less wood than a conventional wood stove. That seems like a radical advancement to me.
Very cool, Paul. Thanks a million for posting this.
Raindog, maybe I'm one of those old hippie types as my front porch and some of my walls are cob, because - guess what. With the current ripoffs of the financial system and the destruction of the housing industry, lumber yards and businesses are dropping like flies. Any of us may be reduced to learning to use our natural resources at any time, not so much because Corporate produced materials are not available at any cost, but possibly because we may not even have a job with which to buy those code promoted corporate produced materials.
I would suggest that we all take advantage of this opportunity to learn another method of providing shelter even if we don't use it. We have all been so brainwashed into believing that the system and it's cronyism is the only way. Our very own forefathers used the natural resources when they arrived in America in most cases. If we do not relearn those skills we may be out in the cold when our jobs are gone. I currently know many who are in this situation... no money to buy commercial crap from the man..... I know I'm listening.
The homeless tent city in Fresno has increased in size by three times in the last couple of months with lots of families now there. This information could directly benefit them yet they only camp in plastic tents on top of the mud that could provide them shelter. Contrary to popular belief, it does not immediately melt in the rain, if the roof is covered, and it takes many years for sidewalls to wear even if rain does get them a bit. 800 year old cob homes remain in England and very old cob homes are still in ....gasp... Carmel, California - home of Clint Eastwood, and they are in the best part of town too. Probably at least a half million a piece for them and they are also small.
Thanks again Paul.
By the way... my front porch area......Sorry the pix are so big - I don't have time to resize them right now.
Clay oven
(https://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d184/glennkangiser/Underground%20update%202005-01-30/8ac1___69b1.jpg)
Wall area cob plaster with cement stabilizer - appx 7 years now on this - this is a progress pix - it got another coat.
(https://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d184/glennkangiser/Underground%20update%202005-01-30/8ac1___a3d3.jpg)
Front door and cob frog
(https://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d184/glennkangiser/Underground%20update%202005-01-30/8ac1___1544.jpg)
Cob stairs from kitchen through uphill patio at greenhouse and shop to upper ground level.
(https://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d184/glennkangiser/Underground%20update%202005-01-30/8ac1___874b.jpg)
There was a documentary of sorts on the History channel (I think) Sat. night about what might happen if there was a major epidemic that wiped out so many people that society breaks down.
I didn't see the whole thing, but it was very intereting. How do you survive and thrive when there are no jobs, no hospitals, no law, etc.? It was "back to basics" to the max.
I tend to agree with Glenn, and not because we are both two old codgers with grey beards. ::) It's a matter of taking advantage of what's available and trying to do things in an efficient way.
I am certainly not a tree hugging hippie from the 1960's (and I'm guessing that neither is Glenn), but I do believe in things like using renewable resources and certainly believe in weaning ourselves from foreign oil. c*
Ianto has a nice racket going. People pay him to build for him. And not just build, work in his gardens, maintain his compost bins, and anything else he may desire them to do for him, all the while taking their money. True, he does impart knowledge and teach skills, but cob is a long, slow process. I know a couple who built a cob home up here and it took them over three years to get to the point where they could live in it, and it's a very small place.
Thanks, Paul. That's a reasonable answer. I see it as fun and interesting too. Watched the video, then googled Evans and looked over his website. The rocket mass heaters are fascinating, I expressed interest in your post regarding them, and I'd certainly consider trying to build one myself in certain situations. I really hope you don't consider my questions disrespectful in any way, as the truth is quite opposite. I question because I am interested. Please keep up your posts, they're appreciated greatly.
Glenn, great sculpture. Looks like fun! I've been to Carmel, and I know there's a lot of fun stuff there. Nothing wrong with fun. I won't address the ideological aspects of your post here, fighting "The Man" and such, but will say that I strongly hope there's better answers to homelessness than "go build something out of dirt and straw". It doesn't hurt to know how to do it, knowledge is power, but as far as an answer... that's not progress, that's regress.
Poppy, I'm right with ya on the value of using renewable resources and weaning ourselves from dependence on foreign oil, but to be perfectly honest, I have to admit wincing a little when I read that as an argument for cob. Why does the solution have to be to do with less and less, instead of using our wealth and ingenuity to live better and cleaner with technology already available to us? Why throw away our ideals of progress and innovation...
Whoops, I guess I've slipped into an ideological assertion as well...
Hard to avoid sometimes.
pagancelt, you said it, but I thought it too. Just didn't mention that part. Too chicken. ;D
RainDog
Quotewincing a little when I read that as an argument for cob. Why does the solution have to be to do with less and less, instead of using our wealth and ingenuity to live better and cleaner with technology already available to us? Why throw away our ideals of progress and innovation...
I wasn't trying to advocate cob or any other building method; just supporting the general principles here. I would never want to build a cob house for any reason.
I'm kind of a middle-of-the-roader when it comes to any of this stuff. There is a happy medium somewhere between the energy hog McMansion and the cob hovel.
We need to live with less because we have gone way over the top in consumption. For example,with all of the increase in standard of living and all the technology that the Japanese now have, they still use 1/2 the energy per capita as we do.
I am for using technology; it makes perfect sense to use a microwave oven, for example. Going backwards in technology is certainly not the answer; but if cob building or any other less impact method helps move us in the right direction, then I am all for it.
I always love looking at your house pics, Glenn.. Somebody should do a documentary on that thing. It's so creative and unique, whimsical and yet functional and practical.
For the record, we live in a rocket stove-heated cob house as well...
(https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/AirsoftAndy/ourhouse.jpg)
Call it backwards progress if you want to... We built it dirt cheap with renewable resources right off our land, and when its useful life is over much of what can't be reused will rot into nice topsoil without polluting the neighbor's water supply.
Nice homestead Earnest T!
There are mud homes all over the Southwest that have stood elegantly for over 100 years. They weren't unconventional until people became brainwashed into believing a home had to be stick framed, brick, or whatever else happens to be de jour in your particular neighborhood.
I don't think cob is regressing, either. It's inexpensive, can be built with materials from your own land, something even an amateur could build -- and I like the hand-built look of it. There's something much more pleasing to the soul about wood and clay and stone in comparison with steel, glass and plastic (I don't like 'modern' for either interiors or exteriors). I'm not an old hippie, either. Just one of those people with more time than money who likes the look of cob. I wouldn't go pay someone to teach me how to do it, though. I did buy Ianto's book on cob-building (and the rocket-stove book), but that should be plenty of information to go ahead and build something with.
And if I was homeless, I'd much rather build a tiny cob cottage than live under a blue tarp.
Kathleen
Last year, I read Ianto Evans' "The Hand Sculpted House" and enjoyed it immensely. Seeing some of the stuff done in the book, Ernest T. Bass' house, and Glenn's work makes me consider incorporating some cob construction into a project someday. Maybe it won't be the house itself, but an outdoor wall, fireplace, oven, or who knows. If I'm lucky enough to live somewhere without fanatical building departments or somewhere simply out of sight and mind, then maybe more. I really get a kick out of seeing construction with virtually no constraints but the builder's (artist's) imagination.
Now I'm going to hit the search button for more on Ernest T. Bass' house. If there isn't a build thread or pictures, then please post some & tell us about the build!
We did a bit of blogging when we built the house.. http://home-n-stead.com/about/blog_files/category-3.html
Yes, there are things we'd do different a second time around, but the building method itself is very promising and any faults were due to our lack of experience.
Quote from: dug on January 11, 2010, 09:36:42 PM
There are mud homes all over the Southwest that have stood elegantly for over 100 years.
I'm hoping one will stand in the Northeast as well! ;D
Quote from: waggin on January 12, 2010, 03:10:05 AM
Last year, I read Ianto Evans' "The Hand Sculpted House" and enjoyed it immensely.
That was one of our favorites as well. I agree with Freeholdfarm; I wouldn't pay someone to teach me how build with the stuff, but you do need a few good books (the internet is a vast resource as well), and a healthy amount of time on your hands to experiment with different mixtures and stuff..
Ernest T. Bass, very impressive and beautiful home you have there. A true labor of love, it's obvious. My hat's off to you.
Very much a hybrid, especially compared to those cobville homes. I realized after submitting my initial post the fault in my questions about the viability of cob as an alternative to conventional building methods, and that was that the cobville structures simply weren't comparable, in any real way, to more mainstream homes. Apples and oranges.
But yours... a nearly perfect example for the comparison. I'd like to brush all issues such as maintenance, longevity, etc. aside for just a moment and ask about cost alone. You state that it was built dirt cheap, but is that taking into consideration the value of the time and effort taken in it's construction? I've seen it repeatedly said that cob is a labor intensive endeavor, and since most of us place some value on our time, and consider our labor to be a commodity, it begs the question as to whether it is ultimately so inexpensive as the material costs alone might indicate.
In other words, is it less expensive to build, for instance, some given area of wall than using the time you expend instead earning the money and buying, then assembling, lumber, sheathing, siding, insulation, and drywall? Man hours need to be factored in when considering costs.
As far as cob houses for the homeless... for multiple reasons that's not just low on some list of preferences, it's simply not an option at all, and it's not because they're brainwashed or ignorant of the method, it's a matter of practicality.
Again, great place you've got there, Ernest. I'll be checking your website out after posting this.
Thanks for the compliments!
Quote from: RainDog on January 12, 2010, 11:36:23 AM
You state that it was built dirt cheap, but is that taking into consideration the value of the time and effort taken in it's construction?
That's a good question.. We are a large family, so there were many hands involved in the project. Yes, it's quite time-consuming; a building method that is more appropriate for large groups of laborers, as many natural construction processes are. It encourages community interaction from all age groups and levels of ability, so it can be a very bonding effort. It takes more 'human energy' to build a home like this, but if you compare it to the 'embodied energy' consumed by a conventional house, the cob comes in way ahead. The true 'cost' of a conventional house is hidden. The parts go together quickly on your building site, but think of all the fuel consumed in the process of harvesting the material (often in very unsustainable ways), processing it and trucking it to your location. It's very convenient to be able to dump a truckload of concrete into a form and start building on it in a couple days. It saves your arms a great deal of earthbag-tamping strain, but the earth and your checkbook pay dearly for that convenience. ;)
It's basically an ethical question more than a monetary one... It helps if you have more time than money. ::)
" As far as cob houses for the homeless... for multiple reasons that's not just low on some list of preferences, it's simply not an option at all, and it's not because they're brainwashed or ignorant of the method, it's a matter of practicality."
Thousands of homeless in tent cities are not practical either, but you are right - there is no solution here that I know of.
I have to agree that you are right for the USA, Raindog, but partly because we look down on earthbuilding, because of what we call improvements, codes and the taxation system that regulates our every move and records every improvement to tax it....natural resources are near free so do not create a good tax base, but likely in another country in fact around 2/3 of the world, they would not only be practical, they would be living in them and not be homeless. Land ownership creates other problems.
I am reading a book -- off and on by Hassan Fathy "Architecture for the poor", and it starts out with his being appalled that his fathers farm workers were living in mud brick houses that were run down and nothing more than hovels. He took it upon himself to learn the ancient ways of building with mud and straw but also to beautify the homes of the workers by educating them in better building practices. It did not take a ton of money, but proper education and a desire to learn about the natural resources.
He did also build fancy houses - still with mud and straw for the well to do but at a higher cost.
Fathy eventually was commissioned by the government to build an entire affordable city of mud and straw to get the grave robbers away from Egypt's national treasures which they were plundering and selling in order to survive.
Note that most earthbuilding is of similar proportions and differing or similar remedies for different soils, so I refer to this along with the cob topic.
Ideal building soil is from the mineral clay a foot or two below the surface in most cases - not the top organic clay. Ideal mixture is about 30% clay and 70% sand and aggregates including that in the clay. Less available sand and aggregate is compensated by adding more straw. Cob is built in place with a lesser amount of shrinkage than adobe which is generally made into bricks with straw added to hold them together. There are still many successful variations. Rammed earth is another variation.
As far as communes go -in general, the lazy ones usually sit on their butts and let the industrious ones do the work until they refuse to care for them.
I saw the video linked on permies Paul thanks.
Cob is defenitly a great option for people with more time then money. It's all about options. I also think it looks freakin' awesome! Something that is made by hand has so much personality ... you can't compare to stick frame which is more focused on getting it done quickly, in stages that can been farmed out to different people. It also has the advantage of being "uneven" without getting upset and having to undo things. I like this aspect!
If NY state was more open minded about alternatives... cob would be one that I would favor . Much more so then even straw. Being though that I (we) are trying to make a completely passive solar house I really didn't feel like battling with any code office. I didn't want to added costs and time associated with any thing un-conventional I just wanted to build. I am also more familiar with concrete and wood, and have friends that are as well. I think a Cob oven would be a good place to learn, kind of like the one on BK's and glenn and sassys thread. 8)
Very cool stuff... not regression at all!! Freedom from wage slavery.
Speedfunk, you mentioned what I think is the biggest reason that building methods like cob are so slow to catch on with the general public -- people are familiar with 'normal' construction methods and materials, and there's a big mental effort required to change to an unfamiliar material and methods, even though it's not an inferior material and may even be superior in many ways. It's not so hard for me to imagine living in a cob house because I've always, from when I was little, been interested in old types of housing (especially the housing of the indigenous peoples of this continent). Growing up one of our chief entertainments was building 'forts' out of whatever we could find. Building with cob is just another step in that progression. I do know how to build using standard construction, but I LIKE cob!
Kathleen
I was watching the Haiti earthquake info and came across this emergency earth bag information. Thought I would post a link here.
http://www.earthbagbuilding.com/emergency/emergency.htm
Quote from: glenn kangiser on January 12, 2010, 10:50:39 PM
in another country in fact around 2/3 of the world, they would not only be practical, they would be living in them and not be homeless. Land ownership creates other problems.
Absolutely. Transport me suddenly, with no resources, to a place where there's no access to any other building materials I could scrounge, and allow me a place to build with no great probability of being run off at any moment, close enough to services, food, potential employment, medical, etc, and I'd be right on board with earthen shelter. It would be self-destructive not to be.
On the other end of the spectrum, give me a place in California, preferably somewhere in the Bay area (I'm asking for a lot, huh?), an income that would enable me to not have to scramble to meet more immediate needs, and a lot of free time, as well as the inclination to do such things, and I'd be right on board too! Might even be able to sell the product to some wealthy San Francisco software giant who wants a place to show off to his friends.
You know where I'm comin' from. ;)
Aside from those two situations, it boils down to a matter of aesthetic tastes, and mine just don't run in that direction. There's no accounting for personal tastes, yours or mine. I'd personally save the effort for something else.
Glenn, you made me google "tent cities", and when I do that I get scared and depressed simultaneously. Shocks me how the search results show such growth in the problem from the last time I looked, not very long ago. A lot of us, if not most of us, are only a couple of really bad days away from being in that situation.
Anyway... more coffee or I'll surely die. Interesting thread, in all its implications, I must say.
Like Glenn, I have been watching some of the Haiti earthquake coverage; and on the subject of cob construction, how is earthquake resistance handled?
RainDog was talking about building in CA. How do you earthquake protect cob?
Good point, poppy. I have no idea on that myself. But that reminds me that earthquakes in developing countries always seem to have much higher death tolls than quakes in the USA. We are always shown pictures of piles of rubble, rubble that used to be homes before the quake(s) struck.
I was thinking the same thing, but from Pakistan earthquakes two years ago. I didn't want to rain on anyone's parade. Many of the reports said the death toll was higher because most of the houses were cob and fell apart from the quake. This seems like a good form of construction for non natural disaster areas.
Actually, earth homes in the Middle East aren't cob. They are usually built with mud bricks, often with insufficient straw (straw acts as reinforcement for the cob). There is a cob building in New Zealand that is over a hundred years old and has withstood two severe earthquakes with less damage than conventional homes in the same area. Adobe homes in California have also withstood earthquakes. I wouldn't be afraid to live in a small cob home here with the cob walls supporting the roof (and we can get bad earthquakes here), but a larger home should probably have a post and beam frame with cob in-fill.
Kathleen
Wasn't it a cob house that the second little piggy in the fairytale lived in before the wolf came? ;D
I don't see how cob structures are gonna have any real earthquake resistance without a top bond beam to hold the building rigid, and plenty of vertical and horizontal reinforcing rebar. In which case it's not the cob itself that resists disintegration, but the wooden, metal, and/or concrete framing. How is a shake table stress test going to be performed on a substance that is inherently different in composition from building site to building site, and probably even from batch to batch within a single structure, in any case?
I've seen references to that house in New Zealand made whenever cob's earthquake resistance is questioned. You have to travel to the other side of the planet to find a cob structure that survived earthquakes, and that's supposed to be reassuring? Begs the question: How many didn't?
(http://www.smate.wwu.edu/teched/geology/GeoHaz/eq-general/eq-general-10.JPG)
Earthen buildings, Earthquake of May 31, 1970, Huaraz, Peru.
Quote from: MountainDon on January 13, 2010, 03:05:04 PM
......earthquakes in developing countries always seem to have much higher death tolls than quakes in the USA. We are always shown pictures of piles of rubble, rubble that used to be homes before the quake(s) struck.
I would wager that most code enforcement people would say something like:
"Those homes were just merely rubble piled up before the quake."
There is something to be said for the codes. Most are really for our protection.
This is the downside of anything goes building.
If cob cannot supply lateral strength, any post and beam frame would have to provide that...
Well, England is where most of the old cob houses seem to be -- how often do they get bad earthquakes? (I'm thinking not very often, but maybe someone knows otherwise.) Here in the US, cob is a pretty new building material for the most part. Does anyone know more about the adobe houses in California and the Southwest, how well they've stood up to known bad earthquakes?
Kathleen
Quote from: Freeholdfarm on January 13, 2010, 05:50:02 PM
Does anyone know more about the adobe houses in California and the Southwest, how well they've stood up to known bad earthquakes?
From Earthquake-Resistant Construction of
Adobe Buildings: A Tutorial
Published as a contribution to the
EERI/IAEE World Housing Encyclopedia, www.world-housing.net
"In addition to its low cost and simple construction technology, adobe construction has other advantages, such as excellent thermal and acoustic properties. However, adobe structures are vulnerable to the effects of natural phenomena such as earthquakes, rain, and floods. Seismic deficiencies of adobe construction are caused by the heavy weight of the structures, their low strength, and brittle behavior. During strong earthquakes, due to their heavy weight, these structures develop high levels of seismic forces they are unable to resist, and therefore they fail abruptly. Considerable damage and loss of life has occurred in areas where these materials were used."
Interesting report. It goes on to make building recommendations and covers some improved building technologies.
http://www.world-housing.net/uploads/WHETutorial_Adobe_English.pdf (http://www.world-housing.net/uploads/WHETutorial_Adobe_English.pdf)
If someone wishes to build with cob, I encourage them. Go ahead, and have fun. Just try not to kid yourself if you live in a seismic zone. Earthen walls are very difficult to make safe in an earthquake.
I think that's probably enough from me on this subject. I'm harshing everyone's buzz. n*
A few of my research notes.
http://www.newsroom.uts.edu.au/news/detail.cfm?ItemId=14005
QuoteOn Wednesday 17 December the half-size model made of earth and bamboo was put to the test on the state-of-the-art UTS shake table, the only earthquake simulator of its kind in Australia.
The four tests were based on the El Salvador 2001 earthquake which measured 7.8 on the Richter scale. The first test was set at 100 per cent intensity, the second at 125 per cent intensity. The third and fourth tests represented the aftershocks that occur after the main earthquake hits and these were set at 100 per cent intensity. Impressively, the model suffered minor cracks but remained standing.
Hickson collaborated with the Head of School, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Professor Bijan Samali and final-year engineering students Luke Punzet and Jean-Michel Albert-Thernet in building and testing the model.
"If this were an actual building then it could have been safely reoccupied without any repair," Professor Samali said. "It is an outstanding success because not collapsing and killing or injuring people is enough to claim success."
Each piece of straw is bonded to the clay working as rebar similar to fibermesh in concrete. Just because we are not familiar with a building technique, does not mean it is not good. We have been guided away from natural building and good old technology in favor of new unsustainable technology and profits. I was talking to Reza Assemi today - a young developer in Fresno who comes from the families of two of our biggest housing developers. He said it is a shame the way we are building nowadays with planned obsolescence in housing -about 75 years and commercial buildings -around 30 to 40 years. The plan is that that is their useful life with our modern materials then they will be torn down and replaced. Earth houses that last 800 years are no longer in the plans.
Earthquake resistant cob/earth building.
http://www.eartharchitecture.org/index.php?/archives/1042-Earthquake-Resistant-Housing.html
A few of my research notes. Rounded cog walls resist earthquake damage much better than square cornered walls. There are cob structures in England that are around or over 800 years old.
http://www.seattlepi.com/lifestyle/334487_cobseattle06.html
QuoteUniversity of British Columbia engineers tested cob's earthquake resistance and, according to one account, the test structure survived a simulated 7.4 quake with only minor cracks, even after prior shaking.
Steel does not work well with earth building at least in the clay/earth mix itself. Reinforced concrete posts and beams are used successfully in modern rammed earth building.
Fresno Homeless - tent city as of early this week. About 3 times larger than 6 months ago or less. Note that this is only a small portion of them.
(https://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy62/the_troglodyte/fresnotent1.jpg)
(https://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy62/the_troglodyte/fresnotent2.jpg)
(https://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy62/the_troglodyte/fresnotent3.jpg)
(https://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy62/the_troglodyte/fresnotent4.jpg)
and a partial solution - not that great either - appx 6 feet x 8 feet I think.
(https://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy62/the_troglodyte/fresnotent5.jpg)
Cob and adobe are different during an earthquake although both methods of earth building. Cob works as a unit and is very earthquake resistant. Adobe without bond beams or a restraining timber structure can be subject to failure as they are like a stack of bricks.
India does have some very earthquake resistant building methods with interlocking reinforced bricks and a diagonal method that will resist the shaking.
http://anangpur.org/anangpur.asp?kat=APPROPRIATE%20TECHNOLOGIES&abc=WALLING%20SOLUTIONS%20&cba=57&pat=HOLLOW%20CORE%20INTER-LOCKING%20BLOCKS&tmn=tt
I'm not saying we are all going to go out and build a new house using these methods. I am saying it does not hurt us to store the knowledge upstairs of how to do it, for who knows when or why.
I think cob would perform better than adobe bricks in an earthquake. This comes from the fact adobe bricks are mortared together, usually with a mud slip, and thus there are thousands of places where the bricks can slip apart. Cob, on the other hand, is a solid mass wall, I remember Ianto Evans calling it "monolithic adobe" because as you build the entire wall becomes one massive structure without joints or places that can be easily broken apart.
What abut poured adobe?
Does poured adobe have straw mixed into it?
I have read reports that say many of the "houses" in Haiti that collapsed were made of mud bricks. I'd wager that cob will not be well received down there even though it could be made to work well and cheaply.
Never heard of Cob before this thread. After doing some reading, turns out the hard clay soil I've been cussing while building my house would be about perfect for making cob. ;D
I'm not sure if I would want to build a house out of the stuff, but an outdoor cob oven does sound like a great project to give cob building a try.
Was also thinking that it might work for skirting under the house, would be easy to pack in around the posts and all the bracing. I've got about three feet of open space under the house. Would cob work to close that area in? I'm guessing I would need some kind of gravel filled trench for a footing under the cob. ???
QuoteDoes poured adobe have straw mixed into it?
I'm pretty sure it usually does
Now I am not suggesting that every reasonable precaution should not be taken into consideration when considering how to safely construct a home,
however- one should maintain a proper perspective. If you happen to be at ground zero during a 7.0 quake it may not matter what you built with.
Conversely, many more lives and property are lost due to fire, something mud is pretty impervious to.
I love the look and feel of adobe homes, and would have built one were I not saddled with a bum back.
That's pretty funny!
When it's cold out, every reasonable precaution should be taken by dressing accordingly, however, one should maintain a proper perspective. If the sun goes supernova and the earth flies off its orbit, it may not matter what you're wearing.
I love this thread.
Quote from: pagancelt on January 14, 2010, 08:46:42 AM
Does poured adobe have straw mixed into it?
I haven't heard of poured adobe but have heard cob called "coursed adobe" by some building department literature. I found a reference to it in this book.
http://books.google.com/books?id=88P3boXpscUC&pg=PA39&lpg=PA39&dq=coursed+adobe&source=bl&ots=tQBmMG_t4S&sig=QdBOGbQxeuwJWhB7iFPmLerXkPQ&hl=en&ei=FvhPS9y-J4GqswPLupiHCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=17&ved=0CFAQ6AEwEA#v=onepage&q=coursed%20adobe&f=false
In general as the clay ratio is higher more straw is used for reinforcement. As aggregate quantities get to be less the clay shrinks more and that is why it is made into bricks rather than cob. Cob is more like sandstone when properly made.
Quote from: Beavers on January 14, 2010, 11:54:18 AM
Never heard of Cob before this thread. After doing some reading, turns out the hard clay soil I've been cussing while building my house would be about perfect for making cob. ;D
I'm not sure if I would want to build a house out of the stuff, but an outdoor cob oven does sound like a great project to give cob building a try.
Was also thinking that it might work for skirting under the house, would be easy to pack in around the posts and all the bracing. I've got about three feet of open space under the house. Would cob work to close that area in? I'm guessing I would need some kind of gravel filled trench for a footing under the cob. ???
Yes - it could work quite well. Have drainage routed around and away from the foundation. Just a layer of rocks under the cob will be sufficient to stop moisture from wicking up into it. I use my Bobcat to mix my cob. The squishing action of the tires is great for the right mix. I do a yard or two at a time.
Here my clay has some aggregate so a 50/50 mix of sand and clay with a good amount of straw - maybe a flake or two torn up and scattered then well mixed per yard is good. You can cut bailed straw with a chain saw along the ropes to make shorter straws that mix better. Squishing it well. with your toes or tires is necessary for it to work well -
http://www.weblife.org/cob/ Cob Builders Handbook - most of it online - thanks to Becky Bee.
Good stuff- http://www.knowledgehound.com/topics/green_building.htm
If the sun goes super nova... :)
Try it, you'll like it. [waiting]
With a bit of proper direction you can get the hippie gals to mud wrestle.... [cool]
Quotehippie gals to mud wrestle....
I don't know Glenn; the hippie girls I remember didn't bathe or shave, but then again, they'd be covered in mud. ;)
Glenn,
Thanks for the info and the links.
Looks like I got some reading to do. [cool]
Drat! All the hippie girls done moved to damn CALIFORNIA, and now I know why. Cob!
I think though, really, that my position can be illustrated like this:
Were I to come to this forum with thoughts on a NEW building material or method, of equally low dollar cost but with the same high labor intensity, having all the inherent problems of earthen structures, I think the idea would quickly be cut off at the knees as completely impractical and ultimately written off as unrealistic.
In my view, the attraction to cob as a building material is ultimately that it satisfies some romantic or ideological criterion for certain people. Folks may be yearning for a simpler time, a closer relationship to Mother Earth, a way to go against the grain of the sheeple's mainstream, or entertaining a romanticized view of primitive culture. Perhaps it satisfies their sense of artistic flair, adventurous spirit, individuality, need for attention from peers, or any combination of those and other personal abstract, metaphysical, and aesthetic motivations.
Not that there's anything wrong with that! If one likes the way it looks, or it satisfies them in some other way, no problem. I just can't help but notice the degree to which people are willing to bend over backwards, using all kinds of contortions of logic, to defend the building method's structural integrity. I doubt that some, say, plastic product with equal limitations would be defended so fervently.
We all have heartfelt loves that may defy practicality, but are still worthwhile to us on a personal level and that we should pursue to fruition. "I think it's cool" would serve perfectly well as a justification for using cob. If it's a matter of personal expression, then it becomes a matter of taste, and beyond reasonable criticism.
Anyway... blither blither. Someone's gonna bop me upside the head before long if I don't get off this thread. I can feel it in my bones. :D
I like the cute factor of some of these cob buildings, same as I admire some of the cordwood buildings, stone buildings, real log buildings, straw bale and pumicecrete buildings I've seen. However, for me, they all involve too much labor effort or in some cases machinery to move components like logs.
It simply comes down to "different strokes for different folks", child of the sixties that I am.
As for earthquake resistance, wouldn't it be nice if someone built a test village someplace that's prone to 'quakes, with a nice selection of back to the earth and modern engineered techniques. Arranging to have a flood and a wildfire roll through would be nice tests too.
Quote from: RainDog on January 15, 2010, 03:27:55 PM
In my view, the attraction to cob as a building material is ultimately that it satisfies some romantic or ideological criterion for certain people. Folks may be yearning for a simpler time, a closer relationship to Mother Earth, a way to go against the grain of the sheeple's mainstream, or entertaining a romanticized view of primitive culture. Perhaps it satisfies their sense of artistic flair, adventurous spirit, individuality, need for attention from peers, or any combination of those and other personal abstract, metaphysical, and aesthetic motivations.
One of the cool things about this forum is that you get to see all the other folks who are building their own houses. It seems like everyone is building their own house...but how many times do you get that weird look with the raised eyebrow from people in the real world, when you tell them you are building your own house?
It's easy for me to forget that building your own house is not a normal thing that the majority of people do. A lot of people would say you are some kind of hippie, backwoods, nut job for doing so. ;)
So yeah, cob or strawbales or any of that stuff isn't a "normal" thing, but neither are the things most of us here do.
I agree with you though Raindog that I don't think a cob house would be for me, but like I mentioned in an earlier post an outdoor cob oven would be great. The materials cost is almost nothing, and my time isn't worth much more. ;D I could see trying a cob shed, or chicken coop, or stuff along those lines.
Just remember that the Jones' in the new subdivision in suburbia think that all of us here are freaks! ;D ;)
Quote from: Beavers on January 15, 2010, 05:09:34 PM
Just remember that the Jones' in the new subdivision in suburbia think that all of us here are freaks! ;D ;)
We should go kick his butt for that.
I like the bumper sticker.... "My kid can beat up your honor student".
One of the nicest things about living underground or possibly in a cob house is that people think that you are crazy and they are afraid to screw with you. [crz]
I like to enhance that perception by wearing a beat up Crocodile Dundee leather hat, growing a beard that sticks out in all directions, looking at them with one eye half shut and talking to animals, rocks and myself... [waiting]
Quote from: Beavers on January 15, 2010, 02:30:49 PM
Glenn,
Thanks for the info and the links.
Looks like I got some reading to do. [cool]
Glad I could be of assistance.... :)
For enduring an quake, a low/no mass struture would obviously be best. No mass inertia to resist the earth's movement. Think "tent". With no heavy furniture. But a tent in "open spaces", ... not under a raised portion of the expressway! Nothing to come crashing down!
Years ago in a strength-of-materials class, we touched briefly on structures in siesmic areas. I remember one final idea concerning mass: There is an "ideal distribution of mass" in a structure, especially in multi-floored structures that grow upward and become more slender. Best to put nearly-all the total structure mass in the walls ... and as little mass as possible in the floors. With windows, doors and other openings ... our buildings usually don't follow this principle very well. According to Wikipedia, cob material may lend itself to this principle for simple one floor buildings: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cob_(material). But then, they mention 2 foot thick walls!
There has been some interesting information on public TV, concerning "siesmic resistive" building foundations using layered elements that easily slip so that the horizontal oscillations of earth do not pass upward into the building. The first footing is poured and processed with a very flat smooth hard finish. Then a covering of flat metal is applied. Then another pouring of reinforced concrete .... finished smooth and flat again. Another covering of metal ..etc, etc. The final upper pouring of reinforced concrete is massive and rigidly coupled to the building structure. This leaves the building free to stay in place while the foundation slips horizontally to follow the earth's movements. When the system works as it should ...equal slip in all directions... the final location of the building (or, of the footing) will be very much as before the quake.
Quote from: glenn kangiser on January 13, 2010, 10:04:20 AM
I was watching the Haiti earthquake info and came across this emergency earth bag information. Thought I would post a link here.
http://www.earthbagbuilding.com/emergency/emergency.htm
I like these tubes shown in the photo from the site you linked. The idea of earthbags seems, to my mind, at least, to be intuitively less likely to suffer catastrophic failure than cob or adobe. That's just my kneejerk guess, which may or may not be true. There are apparently different methods used to tie the bags together, from barbed wire to rebar, though I don't see anything like that in this photo.
Earth-tubes used rather than standard bags:
(http://www.earthbagbuilding.com/images/projects/morelia13.JPG)
For a much less time consuming build, but with great insulative value and much the same look, yet with less likelihood of totally murderizing the inhabitant if it were to ever somehow tump over, how about something like this, made with thermoplastics:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Xb9PFF4MSc&feature=fvw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Xb9PFF4MSc&feature=fvw)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHljTXBAwXU&NR=1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHljTXBAwXU&NR=1)
Looks groovy enough. You could just TELL the granola crowd that it's cob. They aren't gonna check. Too stoned. Again.
:D
Perhaps it was not conveyed well in my video. In which case, the error is mine and not that of the buildings.
These buildings were each (IMOO) and amazing piece of art + architecture. I would have to say that the quality of life of living in one of these is higher simply because of the aesthetic. I have witnessed a lot of amazing forms of construction and I have to say that one would be hard pressed to come up with anything that can beat cob in this respect. Some ferrocement structures come close perhaps - but cob still wins.
Next up is to consider somebody that is currently unemployed and cannot find work: building an outbuilding or two with cob is amazingly cheap. It is time consuming, but if you have heaps of time and little to no money, this may be a good option.
A very similar story for somebody that wants (needs?) to live on acreage, but cannot afford to buy a house on acreage. This could be an option to buy some land far cheaper and then build on it.
Also, the whole thing about how folks that are not very construction savvy can build with this stuff.
There are upsides and downsides to using cob. I'm not a big fan of doing it myself, but when I see a home built with it, I know how long it took to build it and can imagine people stomping mud day after day - and how when they are all done and they move in how they are ..... more tied to their home than I might be tied to mine.
part 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2YD4PenDxI