• Roboticide@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

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

      • Roboticide@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months 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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months 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.