What kind of concrete construction are they using? Straight up reinforced concrete? Or something like ICFs? Or maybe mortar joined cinder blocks? Do you maybe have some links I could read up about that?
As for brick veneer, I dunno really about its durability. It definitely is less susceptible to decay than traditional wood siding, but I don’t think it’s any better than cement fiber cladding, or other modern non-wood materials. Additionally, if anything goes wrong with it, I think it’s much harder to fix it in a seamless way, unlike other most types of siding, where you can just repaint them after repair. I have it on half of my house, and I can’t say I’m a huge fan.
My house is wood frame, brick veneer. It was relatively cheaply built government housing back in the 40s/50s. It seems to have held up just fine with the weight of concrete tiles.
"Brick" homes are common in the US too, but most made after WWII are simply veneers over a structure of a different material. Are you sure that's not the case there? I did an image search for "uk home construction", and all of the instances on the first page also appear to be veneers.
It's been a very long time since brick or stone were commonly used as structural elements in US houses. For decades, houses have typically been stick-frame, perhaps with brick or stone used for the facade. In such cases, the brick or stone is serving merely as cladding for the house just as siding would. Brick or stone facades are typically more expensive than wood or fiber cement sidings but the choice of the former rather than the latter is based on aesthetics, not intrinsic quality. There are definitely high-quality and attractive houses that have no brick or stone. For example, this older house was re-clad with fiber cement siding and it's appropriate for the character of the house:
Unreinforced masonry, like a church, are extremely inefficient in terms of material and labor, think 6 foot deep walls that taper up to carry load. Optimally, bricks work in conjunction with reinforced concrete skeleton for modern construction. Cost is also a big factor, especially in developed countries, more so for high quality finishes. There's a case for small brick constructions in less developed countries with high unemployment and low wages.
In terms of embodied energy, brick veneer (composite of materials with a layer of exterior brick) typically have the best life-cycle ecological performance, 20%-60% better, compared to curtain wall (glass+steel) and precast concrete panels, across many climates and regions. Engineered wood for buildings is probably the better option in the long run. There's a lot of movement recently, construction is a very slow and conservative industry though. Probably need for results to be validated. A lot of claims are by industry publications. But intuitively it feels right.
Very much depends. The foundation is always concrete, although for single-family or duplex homes the floor being concrete would pretty non-standard (that's usually wood, tile, or faux-wood e.g. vinyl, laminate). The framing is generally lumber. The exterior siding can come in any number of forms: stucco, wood, metal, vinyl, brick, etc. Brick in particular is rare on the west coast, FWIW, due to seismic conditions, but is much more common in the east.
I think even some old (100 year old) buildings w/ "full sized" bricks (not 1cm veneer) are still wood-frame construction w/ brick non-structural outerwork.
> You won't find a new house in South Florida built out of wood.
Interesting, what do they build them from?
> In Texas you will find a lot of new houses with internal wooden frames, but the outside walls are made of solid brick, I think this is called "brick veneer".
Brick veneer is just a decoration. It’s not structural in any way. There is usually an inch wide gap between the veneer and the actual wall for drying purposes.
Agreed, it would also be very interested to see how this compares to other siding alternatives rather than simply wood vs treated wood (stucco, stone, steel, aluminum, vinyl etc.)
Yes, almost all US housing is timber frames (either 2x4 or 2x6 studs), but the exterior veneer depends greatly on where you live in the US.
Where I live in Oklahoma City, almost all of our houses are brick or stone on the outside. It's a veneer so it's not structural, but it provides a great thermal layer beyond just insulation between the timber studs. Brick is made locally in Oklahoma because the "red dirt" soil has a lot of clay in it, so bricks are actually the same price or cheaper than many siding products. Siding is really only widely used on second floors and "bonus rooms", etc. since brick is too heavy for the second floor and would require a lot more structural support.
Most of the HOAs in newer neighborhoods around OKC will even require 70-80% brick or stone exteriors because it's lower maintenance and less likely to become an eyesore with fading/chipping paint, etc. So the requirements are pretty regional.
The point in brick/concrete walls is that they are much sturdier and harder to break - voluntarily or involuntarily - than plywood. It sounds like proponents of wooden structures keep forgetting that.
For thermal protection you can add the same insulation as for the wooden frame.
How those stone houses in New England fare during the year, are they that obsolete in terms of insulation?
On the West Coast nearly all residential buildings have a wood frame with plywood on the outside and drywall (gypsum sandwiched between two layers of paper) on the inside.
The decorative/weatherproof finish outside of the plywood is increasingly made with concrete products, which can be made to look like stucco, brick, or even wooden planks or shingles.
The advantages of this sort of construction are that it's inexpensive (wood, after all, grows on trees, which we have plenty of around here), fast (particularly when using nail guns), and doesn't require a great deal of experience or training at the laborer level. It also has good seismic performance and is easy to remodel.
The downsides are that the structure is vulnerable to fire, water, insects, and stray cannonballs.
But in most cases the short lifespan is a good fit for the rapidly changing geography and demographics we have in North America.
Nothing is built with brick anymore. If you see a newer than 1940s brick house, its a stick frame (wood) with a layer of brick outside it for aesthetics. Also people associate brick with longevity, but as several of my friends in old ass brick row homes, their foundations are crumbling, and are usually in need of serious structural repair. Brick isnt bomb proof like people think it is. Its even more susceptible to long term stress from wind shear.
They are in the UK. It is very common to have a decorative weatherproof facade of brick, with a cavity (often filled with insulation) between the bricks and an inside skin of insulating block, or more often now, a prefab timber frame.
As for brick veneer, I dunno really about its durability. It definitely is less susceptible to decay than traditional wood siding, but I don’t think it’s any better than cement fiber cladding, or other modern non-wood materials. Additionally, if anything goes wrong with it, I think it’s much harder to fix it in a seamless way, unlike other most types of siding, where you can just repaint them after repair. I have it on half of my house, and I can’t say I’m a huge fan.
reply