[Cob] Washington DC cob: The experimental wood chip and paper clay wood shed

[L.M. knecht]

(Refer to thread below)This is irresponsible. It can never be up to 'good enough' to put lives in the balance.'Good enough' to whose standards? An off the cuff experiment's?Experimentation is no stranger to me, but I would never advise or inform anyone to the use of an unproven method. Triple, and quadruple, testing and a lot of patience ( time ) is what merits credence.Whether you agree with building code, or authority in general, it makes it harder to gain momentum in the realm of sanctifying natural building methods when un-verified sources reporting on experiments are passed along threads like this, without the proper facilities to perform and organize such a test.Just because you stand on your roof now does not mean that it will stand up against time and most importantly the elements. You said you had been an engineer- not all are trained for the same kind of engineering. Were you structural engineer? Engineers are trained in specialty areas, and not all of them are able to go from one to the next.If you want to beat the record of contemporary builders then you will have to stand up without structural failure for 10-15 years to know if your experimental methods compete. A few days/weeks/months are not going to be able to attest to that.Personally, I believe that Cob construction, and other earthen building techniques, are the most sustainable ways to build. We need to continue strengthening that argument.Only use the necessary technologies. And we don't need to question the validity of a traditional cob mix that has already stood the test of time, unless we are bringing something in new that is at least equivalent in strength.This takes a studied approach to design and construction, and must not be underestimated.-Liam> From: raduazo at cox.net> Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2010 21:51:39 -0400> To: howard at earthandstraw.com> CC: coblist at deatech.com> Subject: Re: [Cob] Washington DC cob: The experimental wood chip and paper	clay wood shed> > I have been walking on the roof it seems plenty strong enough. If it > blows over or falls down this winter I will learn something. That is > why I experiment. I am also using an available material (paper) which > appears to be superior to horse shit. In several plaster situations > where both manure and paper clay were exposed to the weather The > paper/clay/sand mix lasted longer. Most paper components are > biodegradable. My recycling paper into a composite roof material will > not cause more of it to be created.> I use shredded wood because I can get truck loads delivered to my > door free of charge. When someone delivers a truck load of hemp to my > door free of charge I will use that. I don't mind it if wood cob is > weaker than straw cob. I am mostly interested in the science of "good > enough".> > Ed> On Sep 25, 2010, at 7:41 PM, Howard Switzer wrote:> > > I'm not sure I understand what makes you think your cob building > > with wood chips in lieu of straw was a success. Did you do a > > lateral forces structural test of it? Getting a mud wall to stand > > is not so difficult, I was at Pine Ridge recently and saw some big > > thick walls someone had done that had almost no clay in them, > > mostly they were silt. A lateral force, of course, could bring > > that mess down hopefully with no deaths or injuries.> >> > The point of straw, long grasses, in the cob is to provide lateral > > reinforcing(shear strength), length matters, wood chips not being > > very long are not likely to do that, more likely making a weaker > > wall by displacing cob. Test it against good cob and let us know > > how it does. On the other hand there are probably better materials > > for lateral reinforcing such as hemp and probably Kudzu as well, > > both are toothy compared to the slick sides of straw.> >> > I am a big fan of experimentation so I am not talking from any lack > > of experience, but I do caution folks that it is important to learn > > the nature of and especially function of materials for building so > > suitable alternatives can be used. Building with what is a > > available is appropriate but a material's use should be appropriate > > too. Just because you can do something doesn't make it the right > > thing to do, necessarily.> >> > You were reeling at the un-naturalness of local manure and > > straw ...but not the un-naturalness of chlorine bleached paper not > > to mention toners and ink?> > Not sure I understand.> >> > best wishes,> >> > howard> >> >> >