Technology

parent

[–] Atelopus-zeteki@kbin.run 48 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

For comparison: From Seves Glass Block: "Unlike standard glass blocks that have a thermal transmission coefficient "U"of 2.8 W/sq mt x K), HTI has a "U" value of 1.8 W/(sq mt x K). (https://www.sevesglassblock.com/product/191916-hti-wave-sahara-2s/). So common glass block is 2.8, fancier glass block is 1.8, and this new Aeroblock 0.053!! I think I did my numbers correctly, and DANG! I wan't to start building walls with this stuff tomorrow!!

Also: Get the light & keep the warmth - A highly insulating, translucent aerogel glass brick for building envelopes https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352710222016060

Edit: Looks like my numbers are off, above, per @A_A@lemmy.world. Clearly, I'm neither an architect, nor a mathematician.

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 35 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Anything to get rid of modern vinyl houses.

Masonry is always worth it for housing, we need to go back to building houses that'll still be habitable a century later.

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca 22 points 2 years ago

Except earthquake prone areas, and maybe others I'm not thinking if. Wood isn't the problem, cheap+fast wood is.

parent

[–] frezik@midwest.social 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

Houses generally will last a century with basic maintenance. Modern US construction techniques are a lot more thought out than is generally acknowledged.

I'm more concerned with things becoming "outdated" in aesthetic ways. A properly installed tiled bathroom (including the bath stall) can last a long, long time, but future owners might not like the look and tear it all out. Recycling it all is a laughable dream. There are designs, though, that stand up to the test of time, and we should be pushing those more.

parent

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Man.

I wish my standard of living was so high I'd think redoing a bathroom for aesthetic choices was a common run of the mill thing everybody's just doing on a whim.

Congrats.

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] SparrowRanjitScaur@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

It's fairly common. People with money hire contractors to do the work for them. People that want to save money tend to DIY it. But redoing bathrooms is quite common.

parent

[–] frezik@midwest.social 4 points 2 years ago

It does happen all the time. If a flipper buys a house, redoing an old bathroom is one of their first things they think of.

parent

[–] A_A@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (1 child)

You are confusing the units : the value for aerogel is for a 1 m thick wall, while the value for your glass blocks is for 16 centimeter (one block thick). So an error of 16/100 ratio (or 100/16).

parent

[–] Atelopus-zeteki@kbin.run 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

whoops! TY! Umm, wait, a 1 meter thick wall of aerogel?

parent

[–] GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk 8 points 2 years ago*

WMK values are generally quoted as transmission for 1m thick for insulating materials. (watts lost per meter squared per delta kelvin).

For example, PIR board is about 0.022. So for 100mm thick, it would be 0.22W lost per degree difference.
The aerogel glass is quoted at 0.053
Mineral wool is 0.038
Brick is 0.600 on a good day.
Pure aerogel is about 0.018.
Glass is about 1.000 (varies).

I can see this being used in situations where light is needed, but a window is not.
I can definitely see the benefits of making utility walls out of it.
It's going to be expensive though, at least until aerogel prices come down.
And it's not going to beat using the same depth of PIR board, or mineral wool. (assuming the numbers are all correct)