logoalt Hacker News

demosthanostoday at 5:07 AM4 repliesview on HN

Related, Grady Hillhouse on the myth of Roman concrete.

> The miracle of modern chemistry has given us a wide variety of admixtures like superplasticizers to improve the characteristics of concrete beyond a Roman engineer’s wildest dreams. So why does it seem that our concrete doesn’t last nearly as long as it should? It’s a complicated question, but one answer is economics. There’s a famous quote that says “Anyone can design a bridge that stands. It takes an engineer to build one that barely stands.” Just like the sculptors job is to chip away all the parts of the marble that don’t look like the subject, a structural engineer’s job is to take away all the extraneous parts of a structure that aren’t necessary to meet the design requirements. And lifespan is just one of the many criteria engineers must consider when designing concrete structures. Most infrastructure is paid for by taxes, and the cost of building to Roman standards is rarely impossible, but often beyond what the public would consider reasonable.

https://practical.engineering/blog/2019/3/9/was-roman-concre...

A large part of why Roman concrete lasted longer than ours tends to is that we suffer from a shortage of narcissistic emperors with the means to wield entire economies towards their own immortality.


Replies

justin66today at 1:52 PM

This is a good link and the Practical Engineering guy doesn’t appear to reference a “myth.” Which is a good thing, because there’s nothing mythological about the high performance of Roman concrete.

show 1 reply
userbinatortoday at 5:19 AM

Most infrastructure is paid for by taxes, and the cost of building to Roman standards is rarely impossible, but often beyond what the public would consider reasonable.

Would you pay 10x more to have something that lasts 100x or even 1000x longer? The upfront cost is higher, but the TCO is ultimately lower. IMHO it's ultimately a form of planned obsolescence. This becomes even more obvious when plenty of expense is spent just on "engineering" to deliberately reduce lifespan.

show 4 replies
modo_mariotoday at 7:40 AM

The same is said for why we don't build classical buildings anymore and trend towards more featureless stuff... and it's also mostly bullshit with plenty of counterexamples.

Truth is it's often just a bit cheaper so we trend that way under capitalism, we change styles faster and have come to subconsciously accept shorter lifespans and the kind of things you can build more practical for cars, large overhangs, etc

show 1 reply
seydortoday at 5:17 AM

> we suffer from a shortage of narcissistic emperors

not recently

show 1 reply