Building for extreme weather.

[harryopal1]

Perhaps the most extreme weather is found at the north pole where the Innuit found the best housing was circular.

With wild winds and tornadoes becoming more common perhaps, for housing, it is time we built within domes that carry down to ground level so that wind cannot catch edges of roofing and tear buildings apart. The Victorian country town of Castlemaine has just had a massive hail stone storm causing a lot of damage. A circular roof would allow the hailstones to slide off and prevent collapse from the accumulated weight.

And now I will just duck inside my circular igloo before forum members start throwing stones at me.

 

[Samoerai]

Perhaps the most extreme weather is found at the north pole where the Innuit found the best housing was circular.
View attachment 4303

With wild winds and tornadoes becoming more common perhaps, for housing, it is time we built within domes that carry down to ground level so that wind cannot catch edges of roofing and tear buildings apart. The Victorian country town of Castlemaine has just had a massive hail stone storm causing a lot of damage. A circular roof would allow the hailstones to slide off and prevent collapse from the accumulated weight.

And now I will just duck inside my circular igloo before forum members start throwing stones at me.

Not a bad idea .. but .. what about the 'banjir'?

 

[jstar]

We have buildings with dome shaped roofs here already, every 300 meter

 

[harryopal1]

Not a bad idea .. but .. what about the 'banjir'?

The innovative in the ground designs would also offer good insulation against heat and cold. I wonder how costs compare with conventional structures and then there are intractable regulations with many councils.

 

[HappyMan]

The government built a bunch of those houses in Yogyakarta after the large earthquake there. I've been to visit the neighborhood which has some houses you can tour. You can find them by searching for rumah teletubbies.

It seems to me that the main problem is space efficiency. Most things that people want to put in houses are made from 90° angles: refrigerators, kitchen sets, washing machines, wardrobes, etc. I don't know whether it would make more sense to build interior walls or try to convert all that space into storage or what; but if you do decide to square off all that space, you would lose a lot of the savings in building cost that were the initial appeal for someone like me.
If you don't square it off and insulate it, things like heating and cooling actually become a lot more expensive. You will cool and heat a semisphere with a volume of 800 m3 but essentially live in a cuboid with a volume of 400 m3.
I really think they're cool, but I'd take a hard look at the numbers before building one. Course, last time I looked at them was at least 5 years ago, and I'm sure the various manufacturers have continued innovating since then.

 

[harryopal1]

The government built a bunch of those houses in Yogyakarta after the large earthquake there. I've been to visit the neighborhood which has some houses you can tour. You can find them by searching for rumah teletubbies. View attachment 4308

It seems to me that the main problem is space efficiency. Most things that people want to put in houses are made from 90° angles: refrigerators, kitchen sets, washing machines, wardrobes, etc. I don't know whether it would make more sense to build interior walls or try to convert all that space into storage or what; but if you do decide to square off all that space, you would lose a lot of the savings in building cost that were the initial appeal for someone like me.
If you don't square it off and insulate it, things like heating and cooling actually become a lot more expensive. You will cool and heat a semisphere with a volume of 800 m3 but essentially live in a cuboid with a volume of 400 m3.
I really think they're cool, but I'd take a hard look at the numbers before building one. Course, last time I looked at them was at least 5 years ago, and I'm sure the various manufacturers have continued innovating since then.

I guess one might weight the extra cost against a total wipe out of a conventional home. apart from considering an area as possibly being flood prone I daresay insurance might be negotiated at a better rate for fire or burglary

 

[Shadrach]

The innovative in the ground designs would also offer good insulation against heat and cold. I wonder how costs compare with conventional structures and then there are intractable regulations with many councils.

Yes, you are absolutely correct, as to having a more efficient structure pertaining to heat, and cold. The Navajo Indians, in the Southwest US, have been building such structures, called Hogans. They stay cooler in the summer, and warmer in the winter. I built a home once using this idea. I dug into the side of a hill, so my back windows were at ground level. It looked like the house was small, but it was actually quite roomy inside, due to it being underground. I also extended the south facing roof out three feet. It provided protection from the hot summer sun, and allowed an abundant amount of winter sunlight to warm the rooms.
You just have to waterproof the walls on the outside, that are underground.