zlacker

[return to "The problem with reinforced concrete (2016)"]
1. brutus+J5[view] [source] 2021-05-25 22:00:07
>>hrl+(OP)
This should be an economics piece, not an environmental piece. The author states that "one of iron’s unalterable properties is that it rusts" yet further on acknowledges the existence of stainless steel.

There's nothing wrong with reinforced concrete, but the incentives to produce long lasting buildings are not there. The cheapest bidder will generally win and their building will last the "design life" of the building, but often not much more. The simplest way to change this is to extend the design life, which would result in stainless steels or another more expensive material being used in this application.

◧◩
2. quickt+lf[view] [source] 2021-05-25 23:02:01
>>brutus+J5
> The cheapest bidder will generally win and their building will last the "design life" of the building, but often not much more. The simplest way to change this is to extend the design life, which would result in stainless steels or another more expensive material being used in this application.

Just FYI, on a ‘plan and spec’ construction project, all material is specified by the architect and engineers. If the project specs say you have to use stainless steel rebar, then even the low bidder will have it included.

◧◩◪
3. singlo+3k[view] [source] 2021-05-25 23:33:06
>>quickt+lf
But on big projects, doesn't the architect often work for the bidder?
◧◩◪◨
4. quickt+Rk[view] [source] 2021-05-25 23:38:14
>>singlo+3k
No, the architect works for the building owner (or tenant). The bidder is typically a general contractor.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. fsckbo+1o6[view] [source] 2021-05-27 19:58:17
>>quickt+Rk
but... there is also bidding for selecting architects, is there not?
[go to top]