Hacker News Reader

Comment by jacquesm | Hacker News Reader

These have been built since the 70's, the quickest constructions were essentially inflated balloons that concrete loaded with Styrofoam was spread over, after curing the balloons were deflated and used for the next unit.

Pretty similar construction here, tons of other examples (really, too many to even list) in various publications:

https://www.motherearthnews.com/green-homes/foam-dome-zmaz80...

I really do not see the novelty.

View on HN

The Barbapapa family built their house like this in the 70's as well:

https://live.staticflickr.com/1787/42134502335_045815b1ee_b....

I'm pretty sure if I dig back enough I'll be able to find stuff from the 60's with rapid dome construction based on styrofoam and concrete in it. It is definitely an interesting way to construct things, I know of a company that uses styrofoam loaded concrete for the fabrication of window frames for brick houses and there are probably a lot of other current applications for that.

Domes have - since Buckminster Fuller, really - been built from all kinds of materials, this is one of the more interesting combinations because it at least does away with all of the nasty seems at nasty angles that a 'normal' geodesic dome has. But some of the problems remain: windows and doors will always require either a special panel or be a bad match for the rest of the dome. The floorplan will pretty much ensure that there aren't any right angles anywhere, so furniture such as bookcases and such (but hey, who needs books... ok, wardrobes) will have to be custom made or placed inefficiently, or all around the center of the dome where they will have a big impact on light.

It's a super elegant concept, but it has problems. I built a small (8 meter diameter) dome in Canada as a spot to sit near the river that ran through our property, we didn't really get around to finishing it (just foil over wood & steel) but it blended in nicely, in a way that very little other buildings would and for that reason alone I'd love to build another one here in NL. But the problems with the shape have so far withheld me from doing it. It might also work well as an office.

https://www.architectmagazine.com/technology/the-restoration...

Higher number of panels will approximate the dome shape better, will be easier to put up by a single individual, but will also cause more length of seam and hence more chance of springing a leak or rot in case of woodwork in the panels.

I like the "smart, but not wise" quote from Kahn in regards to their utility as permanent living spaces. When everything in our material culture is built around straight lines and right angles, domes just don't use space well. But for temporary structures that don't need interior walls or substantial furniture, they work great.

Also, 8m is pretty big in my eyes - I've made two geodesic domes, one 3v 24' (~7.3m) diameter and one 4v 32' (~9.7m) diameter, and even the 24' was a pretty decent bit of work to fabricate and assemble.

Hm, when you put it that way, yes, it wasn't really small but the intent was to make it a spot where you could sleep with a couple of people in some comfort if you wanted to, not something garden shed sized.

Agreed on the temporary spaces that don't need interior walls, the carrying capacity of a geodesic dome frame is incredible relative to the weight of the materials that are used to put it up. You could hang a couple of hundred kilos from the central joint in the top of the frame and the frame itself was constructed with nothing but 2x4s. I was a bit skeptical about the strength prior to that but afterwards I was totally sold on the concept strength wise. Seeing is believing I guess :)

Best way to sleep in comfort in a dome is to take advantage of the crazy strength and hang hammocks!

Yes, absolutely.

Barbapapa's Ark seems like the inspiration for Wall-E

I imagine the builders of inflated balloon house going are saying 'hub hub' all the time

I'd imagine the original inventor has been dead for decades.

Although it's an apples-to-oranges comparison, I wonder how the efficiency of these domes compare to Earthship designs[1], where the intake of solar energy is prioritized over leakage prevention.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthship

Not good, they are hard to affix solar panels to and the amount of light that makes it into the interior where it can be trapped as heat is minimal. Insulation properties can be pretty good though and you could make it into a selective surface with the South side black and the North side white if you wanted. That should help to trap and retain at least some heat.

I've visited an Earthship somewhere in Iowa and it was incredible how efficient it was, midwinter and absolutely comfortable inside with barely any extra heating. Passive solar is a very powerful concept, but you will need a massive thermal sink if you don't get enough sunlight during the winter to tide you over the bad days. Probably easier to add a small amount of auxiliary heating to take the edge off if you ever need it.

The further north you get, the less efficient earthships become. When you have close to no sunlight during the coldest time of the year you want more insulation. Passive house designs work better.

That makes good sense, also, the further North you get the longer the path sunlight has through the atmosphere which can significantly diminish the amount of power per unit area by the time you try to capture it.

The original idea dates back to the sixties:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29216984

30's.

Slight correction, I believe the inflated forms are left in place as an additional outer vapor barrier after rebar reinforced concrete is sprayed from the inside.

Perhaps there are different techniques.

That's clever, this sounds like an improvement on the way they were making these in the 70's. Or maybe they coat the inflated forms with the plastic that will become the vapor barrier later? Anyway, there are so many variations on this theme I'm pretty sure that you'll be able to find examples of all of those in practice.

What I find a bit annoying about dome construction in general is that people are always incredibly busy showing what things look like as they go up, but not so much when they are in actual use, what kind of maintenance they end up with and how they look after 5, 10, 15 and 30 years. Because the interesting part of a building is how well it holds up over the longer term.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com