this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2023
84 points (98.8% liked)

United Kingdom

4092 readers
102 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Badass_panda@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

To be fair, the Romans also had a lot of concrete that is not with us today, there's a bit of survivorship bias going on here.

[–] jabjoe@feddit.uk 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Very true. But still, seams like we have been doing it long enough we should know what lasts.

[–] tal@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

We have definitely built concrete structures that have lasted a lot longer than 30 years. This was a very particular form of concrete construction that was apparently only a few decades old when the issues were discovered.

I mean, building one form of concrete structure doesn't give us a complete understanding of every possible new variant invented and their tradeoffs.

[–] roboticide@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Sure, but Roman concrete was also actually really good due to the ingredients used. They had self-healing concrete millennia before we came up with the idea.

A fair critique is the Romans built their shit to last and didn't have advanced computers to calculate loads to just ~10% of failure, like we do now. We'll use cheaper, local materials if it's good enough and make sure the building stands for maybe a century. The Romans shipped ash and concrete ingredients halfway across Europe to make sure they were using the good stuff.

[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Do you think they built everything that way? Cause they certainly didn't. Hence the bias.

[–] roboticide@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

No, they also used a lot of wood.

But doesn't change the fact the concrete is good concrete. Better much of ours.

[–] Caestus@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

One thing to note regarding the self-healing concrete. They came across that formula by complete accident. All they knew was adding volcanic ash resulted in longer lasting concrete but wouldn't have known about the lime clasts that would mix with water and refill cracks.