|
Posted by Dan Deckert on October 10, 2006, 11:08 pm
Brian, You can build a metal bldg. with Foam panels (metal skin inside &
out) on the walls & roof and get a heck of an insulation factor plus a
completely open bldg. free of internal supports. You can free span 150+ feet
if you want and go to 20, 30, 40 foot eaves as well.
However, I really believe you need to decide, and list, a definitive set of
parameters that will fit what you're looking for to get some best result
answers here. Anything can be done as long as you have the money to pay for
it......Anything else is probably guesswork from any responses you'll get
here....
Dan
> As I said before, I was asking for ideas about different kinds of
> materials, designs, or techniques. I was also trying to put together
> ballpark figures for the various steps involved while acknowledging
> that some of the things may be difficult or impossible to estimate.
> Instead I got stomped for having an idea that didn't fit the norm.
>
> I don't have foresight because I'm looking for ideas and nothing's been
> designed or planned.
>
> I'm not willing to talk to professionals *now* because I have no idea
> what I'm building.
>
> Like I said, I'm looking for ideas. Instead of suggesting more and
> smaller buildings, or a smaller building with additions later, or one
> story instead of two, or radiant floor heating to get around the
> problem of heating a larger airspace, or this type of window instead of
> that type, you told me that the way you've been doing things for 30
> years is obviously cheaper than a steel building and that I'm nuts for
> even considering the idea when I have a dozen other sources telling me
> otherwise and over a dozen examples of other people who have done
> exactly this to get a cheaper house, or a larger house for the same
> money.
>
> Instead of arrogance, how about open-mindedness?
>
> brian
>
>
> Bob Morrison wrote:
> > In a previous post dpb wrote...
> > > I think what derailed this thread was primarily the emphasis on the
> > > "cheap" end of it and what appeared I think too overly optimistic cost
> > > savings and too simplistic planning for solving real problems on a
> > > sizable structure.
> > > In essentially all the examples you mention, I suspect the residence
> > > itself is essentially a conventional structure inside the frame and
> > > that the actual cost on a square footage basis isn't that much less
> > > than if the home itself had been built free-standing (counting only
the
> > > residential space, of course). I've seen several similar as well and
> > > know that in those instances that is definitely true, the savings is
> > > that since the other building was to be built anyway, some savings
> > > could be effected on the outer structure. Also, in all of those
> > > instances, there wasn't an attempt to make all the modifications ad
hoc
> > > solutions without the use of design and engineering services.
> >
> > I think this sums up the reason for the comments from those of us who
have
> > been down this road before.
> > I don't "hate" the OP. I just think he was being way too optimistic in
> > evaluating the use of a steel building for use the shell of a residence.
> > As the above indicates, the "idea" isn't wrong-headed. What is "wrong-
> > headed" is the apparent lack of adequate foresight and apparent lack of
> > willingness to hire local design professionals to help evaluate the
> > concept. This will not be a simple project by any means.
>
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap