▲ 113 points
back
104 comments
Interesting, but I think that modern factory built panels - which are already in common use for commercial buildings - are the future. They regularly put foam insulation between two layers of cement so they are well insulated (or at least can be), and because they are built in a factory they can better control quality. A worksite can put panels up a lot faster once they get going.
So west is again catching up to the East block?
> They regularly put foam insulation between two layers of cement so they are well insulated (or at least can be), and because they are built in a factory they can better control quality.
Not always possible: some locations need counter-measures against termites by building code, and insulated concrete forms (ICFs) have no/fewer options in that regard:
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxJkYAA5jTU
Further, on shorter schedules, it may be difficult schedule a large concrete pour on short notice, so a team of guys and a portable mixer can lay block on an ad hoc basis on short notice. Blocks (cinder or other) also also often used for (small(er)-scale) retaining walls. The Essential Craftsmen channel has a video titled "Block vs Concrete" (where they used both for different aspects of the same project):
Whenever anyone pitches an on-site robot to do something, and important question to ask yourself is "can centralized factory robots already do this?"
Pizza is a great example. We know how to get robots to make pizza (sorry, but DiGornio is not hand-made), we just long-ago realized that you need a pretty large volume of output to make robotics economical.
Until we get AI to the level where the robot drives itself to the site and collects/prepares materials on its own, centralized factory robots will always be the answer.
It seems that way to me as well. There are interesting challenges involving electrical and plumbing systems -- say, around connecting in-wall sections with in-floor sections. I imagine these can be overcome within the limits of existing building codes.
I agree, if the goal is cost and speed, prefab is the way to go.
I also think a major limitation here is the boom itself, there's plenty of bricklaying done in fairly confined spaces. Between two buildings for example. Here one could just lower panels into a confined space with a crane.
The only thing I disagree with is that factory built equals better quality control. Lots of factory built things lack quality. Furthermore this brick laying machine might have high precision ability it’s not fair to say it won’t without seeing it in action.
For anyone unaware the significance of the name "Handrian":
> Hadrian's Wall (Latin: Vallum Hadriani), also known as the Roman Wall, Picts' Wall, or Vallum Aelium in Latin, is a former defensive fortification of the Roman province of Britannia, begun in AD 122 in the reign of the Emperor Hadrian.[1] Running from Wallsend on the River Tyne in the east to Bowness-on-Solway in the west of what is now northern England, it was a stone wall with large ditches in front of it and behind it that crossed the whole width of the island. Soldiers were garrisoned along the line of the wall in large forts, smaller milecastles, and intervening turrets.[2] In addition to the wall's defensive military role, its gates may have been customs posts.[3]
Thanks for that!
This reminded me how as a kid for about a decade I used the CDROM burning software Nero Burning ROM [0] without any idea that it was a reference to the Roman emperor Nero [1] and the Great Fire of Rome [2] until my mom saw me using it and educated me.
[0] https://www.nero.com/eng/products/nero-burning-rom/
Thanks for that - I was wondering why it sounded so familiar (actually I had this name on my board games to-buy list for quite some time : https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/304783/hadrians-wall)
In the UK it is in the news a lot at the moment because at a famous location on the wall, 'sycamore gap', somebody cut the famous sycamore tree down for no apparent reason.
I found this intriguing. The guy is probably in a lot of trouble, but Sycamore is an invasive non native species. In other areas people are paid to cut them down!
Hadrian's Wall is also the inspiration for "The Wall" in the ASoIaF series/Game of Thrones.
Ah finally, my daily required dose of thinking about the Roman Empire.
Hello, I'm just here to gripe about "tennis court sized walls". Besides being a stupid measurement (1 tennis court equals 260.87 m2), a tennis court is a horizontal thing, and is wholly unsuitable for giving the approximate size of a vertical thing.
I can easily imagine the area of a tennis court, far moreso than the size given (in square meters, no less! <s> I live in a country that uses Freedom Units! </s>).
Then, in my head, I can imagine what this area would look like as a wall.
I clicked on the article because I was like "What the hell is a 'tennis court sized wall'?" so maybe just good bait
How much is that in football fields?
Yes, thank you, it was making me twitchy.
A tennis court sized wall made of bricks is just a large meta-brick.
Whew! Cheers! That was gonna bug me all day (but I don't like to quip on HN, y'know?)
also it would make little sense to build walls around it
I usually see high fences before I see the court, so it makes sense to me.
So it needs special adhesive, special bricks, special maintenance (Whats the lifespan on that internal saw if you have a lot of corners?) and it's only for the inner walls? What is the value proposition here?
It's backbreaking work and there's a labor shortage
It seems hard to think that in 20 years all those issues won't be better (it will be able to do other types of walls, windows, integrate plumbing, etc.)
The "special bricks/adhesive" also doesnt seem to be a huge deal at scale. Every type of construction has its own speciality equipment (there are drills just for drywall, just for concrete, just for glass etc.)
> it needs special adhesive
Masonry adhesives are common
> special bricks
Where does it say that? The specs just say "blocks up to 600mm x 400mm x 300mm."
> Whats the lifespan on that internal saw
The blade or the saw? According to the marketing it "allows for quick change out of parts"
It's interesting to see the different forays into building process automation. I've come across a couple other brick-laying solutions, and a few 3D-printing-inspired ones (using concrete as the extruded medium). I do think the approach that is most likely to succeed would be pre-fab components assembled on-site.
Some of the immediate challenges that the demo videos didn't show include the placement of headers / spanning gaps, and keeping the courses even / level. It's interesting they introduce some custom adhesive; I'm guessing because mortar delivery in that setup was prohibitively expensive.
Interesting choice with the flat cinderblocks -- one would think for a method like this, they'd choose some type of an interlocking block, to make alignment easier and increase contact surface for the adhesive. I'd compromise on the saw in that case -- lose the dimensional granularity (eg have the wall dimensions be specified in 6" increments) but get rid of a complex component in the pipeline.
These folks must have a solid business plan to have gotten this far - I guess the value proposition is lower cost than traditional building methods, coupled with 24/7 builds?
its actually a hard problem: the massive boom that's required to provide reach is inherently quite unstable, not in the mm or cm but we're talking decimeters here. some of the core tech of FBR dating back ~15 yrs addresses this kind of dynamic stabilization. FBR is impressive and they've built decent an IP.
> The system uses a construction adhesive that's stronger than mortar and dry within 45 minute
Notably absent from this demo. And probably a harder problem than just placing bricks down.
> And probably a harder problem than just placing bricks down.
Actually, the unreasonably long boom arm is bouncing around significantly, yet the bricks are being place precisely independent of the boom movement. There's some nontrivial PID going on in that brick placement. Plus planning where to place the brick. Optical, lidar? This is impressive imo.
It's visible from this video, at least:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPhRb2AF92I&t=78s
Glue is getting popular for ytong and similar already.
This won't put bricklayers out of a job, it will allow them to focus on the more meaningful and creative aspects of their job. [eye twitching]
That picture didn't look like any building site I've ever seen. Edit: same with the video Where are the piles of stuff everywhere? And the power leads? And the saw tables and tools and ladders and trestles and scaffolding and...
Nice lab demo.
This appears to be done without mortar, on a level surface, inside a warehouse.
I understand the allure, but 300 blocks an hour is the equivalent of 2 guys with some skill, and they'd be able to do it with mortar and rebar in an outdoor setting.
Many of these technologies will only ever be profitable in a small handful of Western nations - building-block log homes, this type of masonry, foam formed concrete.
Advances in building technology are about balancing pre-site prep with on-site flexibility. Stick construction is an advancement over timber construction partially because timbers are expensive and partially because it's much more flexible (and you can use smaller trees, and a bunch of other things). We use cinder blocks for construction now instead of bricks because it's a lot easier to transport large blocks in the automobile age, etc.
A good advancement in building construction reduces labor cost with either new materials, new systems, or more pre-site prep. A good example of this would be SIPs, pre-site cutting of lumber (think an Ikea house), and integrated sheathing systems like the ZIP system. Replacing very flexible human beings with expensive equipment (that needs a human being to watch it anyway) tends to not save all that much money.
> As for the final result, well, FBR's first outdoor test build as shown in the video below might result in some harsh words from an employer – take a look around the 1:08 mark, where the lighting shows some clear inaccuracies in brick placement. But given that this was literally the first testing and calibration run for the next-gen robot, we'll assume that's not likely to remain a problem for long.
That's a bit too fawning for my taste. A more level-headed analysis might be "it might improve over time". NewAtlas tends to spooge over any new tech. That's their bread and butter.
I wonder how this compares with just 3D printing in concrete, like Icon. It seems a little bit like putting a round peg into a square hole to have a robot fastidiously recreate a building technique designed around humans, whereas doing it in a way optimized for robots can be easier and more flexible. Kinda how roombas don't vacuum like a human.
So what problem is this solving? I mean this and the concrete wall 3d printer are cute and all, but does it improve on existing building practices?
How are those vertical gaps between the bricks filled?
Western Australian robotics has been coming along since building a sheep shearing robot in the 1980s.
From Wikipedia : The court is 78 ft (23.77 m) long. Its width is 27 ft (8.23 m) for singles matches and 36 ft (10.97 m) for doubles matches.
In case anyone was wondering. Why is it so difficult to just give the measurements instead of some vague size?
In terms of lower cost of fast robotic construction I like the Italian company doing giant 3d prints of houses, if the soil is right they use local soil and leave a hole for a pond next to the house.
I am not a expert on any relevant level, but aren't you supposed to put cement between the bricks? A little blow from the wind will knock down those walls in not time.
Reminds me of South Park
I want to see a LEGO version of this!