[Cob] Fwd: Are you willing

[Shannon Dealy]

On Fri, 18 May 2007, Shody Ryon wrote:

> Why does a bond beam not make sense for cob?
> I expect that a continuous reinforced concrete
> foundation will also be indicated.
[snip]
> --- Georgie Donais <georgie at busygirl.ca> wrote:
[snip]
>> Barb mentions that the NM requires a bond beam on top of cob, which to 
>> me makes sense for adobe but not so much for cob.
[snip]

Adobe is discrete blocks with no interconnect or reinforcement, cob is 
monolithic and straw reinforced, in essence, cob is it's own bond beam.
That doesn't mean there aren't circumstances where a stronger bond beam 
might be needed for cob, but as a general rule?  As George put it above:

    "which to me makes sense for adobe but not so much for cob"

FWIW.

Shannon C. Dealy      |               DeaTech Research Inc.
dealy at deatech.com     |          - Custom Software Development -
                       |    Embedded Systems, Real-time, Device Drivers
Phone: (800) 467-5820 | Networking, Scientific & Engineering Applications
    or: (541) 929-4089 |                  www.deatech.com