
The tent that turns into concrete in less than 24 hours - thekevan
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-13430747
======
run4yourlives
I'm not sure I'm sold completely on the need. It's a very cool idea, to be
sure, but I'm confused at the role it fills.

My knowledge of disaster zones is limited, but for military deployments - the
other major customer - it's pretty in depth.

Here's the thing, there are two classes of structure, basically: Temporary and
Permanent.

For a temporary structure - even longer term - a modern, modular tenting
system (such as TEMS: <http://www.mandbmag.com/tents/index.html>) has this
beat hands down in pretty much every way. Lighter, faster setup, faster tear
down, adaptability, etc.

For a permanent structure, seriously? It would be much easier to build a
traditional wooden structure once you've decided that you need one. You could
even put the locals to work (which they would need) doing so. I find it very
difficult to believe that anyone would want one of these dingy, musty things
over a proper wood or concrete framed construction.

So where exactly does this fit in the spectrum? I'm not sure it does.

~~~
gigawatt
Difficulty in getting the materials to build a wooden structure to the
disaster zone would make the concrete tent a better option in many cases.

~~~
jonnathanson
This. I think the advantage is in ease of transport vs. wood and related
wooden building materials. Furthermore, not every disaster site is going to
have in situ wood on hand for building, let alone in a form suitable for any
sort of ad hoc construction needs.

~~~
run4yourlives
You both completely missed my main point.

You're aging the fact that these things provide better temporary structures
than wood buildings, but as temporary structures, the current standard is
modular tenting.

------
dodo53
yeah, the company won an innovation award for it in 2006:
[http://www.trust.org/alertnet/news/concrete-tent-gets-
mixed-...](http://www.trust.org/alertnet/news/concrete-tent-gets-mixed-
reviews-from-aid-experts/) I guess it takes a while to productionize.

~~~
rglover
Thanks for posting this article. I was curious as to the cost for each of
these as well as the mechanics of the delivery. It seems like a lot of people
are asking the same questions. It's not an exorbitant cost, but ideally it
would be a price where you or I could donate one in the event of a disaster.
Still an awesome idea, though. I hope the team behind it gets the right
support.

------
elbelcho
Was this featured on Dragon's Den (A BBC show were inventors pitch idea to
investors) a year or more ago? I seem to remember someone pitching something
very similar to this.

~~~
roel_v
Yes I think it was these two.

------
DTE
I'm sure this has been worked out by the team, but I am curious to know more
about the load-bearing nature of the concrete shell. I would imagine this is a
very important consideration if it is to be used in post-disaster areas (i.e
earthquake disaster areas where there may also be aftershocks). If, for
example, the tent is not fully inflated before the concrete is added, would
the hardened building be structurally compromised?

------
brudgers
One of my mentors in Grad School (the late David H. Crane, FAIA), got a grant
to design an emergency shelter right out of Harvard GSD. He and his team spent
months designing a precast concrete building which could be deployed and
erected quickly. At the end they did the economic analysis of the fabrication
costs. The only place where it was economically viable to build it was lower
Manhattan (this was back in the early 1950's).

This design suffers similar conceptual problems: diverting potable water to
make a concrete structure when a tent would serve adequately - one of the
biggest problems early in a disaster is providing potable water in sufficient
quantity to maintain sanitation and provide adequate hydration for the local
population and aid workers.

~~~
jws
The water need not be potable. Maybe not a great idea for a drought/famine
caused dislocation, but maybe for a flood/typhoon destruction of housing
event.

~~~
brudgers
The typically adverse effects of using non-potable water on concrete quality
would seem to offset the sole advantage of the design over a simple tent -
permanence. Flood events in densely populated areas (i.e. those most in need
of large amounts of housing quickly) tend to produce particularly polluted
water (e.g. Katrina Soup).

~~~
jojopotato
At 1:00 in the video they said that they could use seawater and could even
work underwater but didn't mention that it had an adverse effect on the
quality of the concrete.

~~~
billswift
Concrete ideally should have clean water for best strength, but it need not be
potable. Salts, silt, organic matter, and small bits of trash all weaken the
concrete to some, greater or lesser, extent. But the effects can be taken into
account in the structural design. For that matter, there are additives that
are commonly added to concrete under special conditions, for example to lower
the freezing point in winter pouring, that also weaken it in similar ways.

~~~
VBprogrammer
I also know very little about concrete but I would expect that this
construction varies slightly from traditional concrete due to the water being
sprayed on the outer surface, rather than being part of the mixture. I could
be wrong though.

------
armored
I think the real innovation here is using an inflatable form. This could be
cool with a spray on concrete too, like Gancrete:
<http://www.grancrete.net/videos/index.cfm#>

------
sudonim
A little off topic, but did anyone else not wait through the 30-second ad to
watch the video? I find myself bouncing more and more on videos that do that.

~~~
jrockway
Adblock Plus seems to be as effective for video ads as it is for regular ads.

------
kjell
Does anyone see how these sit on the ground? I don't see any footings in the
video. Just compacted and graded topsoil? What is the floor made out of?

See also: Dante Bini's air formed domes

<http://openfarmtech.org/wiki/Air-formed_domes>

~~~
njharman
Well you can always just lay down more of the concrete cloth for a floor.

------
patrickk
There's other interesting examples of this concept:

<http://www.monolithic.com/>

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yJfcnIFYqg&feature=relat...](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yJfcnIFYqg&feature=related)

(not affiliated with these guys)

------
wladimir
It's primarily aimed at quickly building structures in disaster areas.

But maybe this will finally revolutionaize/disrupt the construction sector?
It's long due...

~~~
jerf
I doubt there's a city code in the land this would not violate very nearly
every clause of. But a similar thing that could actually evolve into something
disruptive is something like this:
[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/02/16/business/realestat...](http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/02/16/business/realestate/main2487598.shtml)

~~~
gavingmiller
Along the same lines as your link, there's a company here in Alberta that is
building houses that are pre-fabbed in a warehouse and put together onsite in
under a day.

Surprisingly the homes actually look good: [http://karoleena.com/karo-
homes/karo-multi-collection/the-gr...](http://karoleena.com/karo-homes/karo-
multi-collection/the-graycie-fourplex/)

------
pitdesi
This reminds me of the very cool class I took at Michigan. In 08, our design
challenge was to design and build an easily shipped, carried and deployed
station for disaster areas that facilitates bathroom functions, washing and
showering. The product criteria included that it:

Must be free standing and use no external power source.

Must allow people to go to the bathroom, wash one’s face and hands, bathe an
infant and bathe/shower an adult.

Must have a safe, easily executed waste removal and transport system from the
bathroom facility. All waste must be easily removed and reliably sealed off
from the local environment as it is transported elsewhere.

Must weigh less than 40 pounds and pack down for easy transportation.

Must manage gray water from the sink and shower, by directing it to a hose
connection.

[http://www.tauber.umich.edu/News%20and%20Events/IPD/2008/ind...](http://www.tauber.umich.edu/News%20and%20Events/IPD/2008/index.htm)

We had a cross disciplinary team (engineering, design, and business) and had
to actually build the product, and were judged based on profit... how many
"purchases" were made at a fixed price ("purchases" were made by designers
around the world on the web and in person at a live show) minus costs (we had
to cost out the thing at scale). It was amazing and we ended up winning (I was
part of the "cocoon" team).

If you can get a chance to take a class like this, do it. Definitely do
Integrated Product Development if you're at Michigan!

