|
|
|
|
|
by WalterBright
5127 days ago
|
|
When I watch crews build a house, I am struck by how resistant this activity has been to automation and mass production techniques. A truck will drive up to the site with a stack of lumber on it. Workers will individual measure, cut, and fit the pieces together. Wiring is all eyeballed by the electrian, and custom fit. The same for plumbing. Finish carpentry is all done piece by piece, by skilled craftsmen, and all hand fitted (and are a huge component of the expense of a house). It all seems ripe for a revolution. I'm not suggesting that houses be all cookie-cutter identical. But a custom design could largely be built in a factory, trucked in, and then you'd just have final assembly done on site. The result would be higher quality and lower cost (and less labor). You can see some of this with roof trusses today, which are custom built in a factory and then trucked to the site. |
|
There are numerous problems with innovation in construction -- building codes and trade union resistance being two of them. Building codes are often written in such a way as to exclude nonstandard materials altogether. "Component X must be made of 2x6 lumber" (a "prescriptive" building code) rather than "component X must be capable of withstanding a load of Y pounds with a safety factor of Z" (a "performance" building code). An advantage of that is that building inspectors don't have to be engineers. The disadvantage is that it's hard/expensive/impossible to do something that isn't in the book.
Another problem is that there's still something of a "trailer park" stigma associated with prefab construction.