Ask HN: Why did 3D Printing buildings never became big?
I have been thinking about this recently as prices of houses just keep inflating up and being so hard to purchase for an average family.
Why didn't 3D Printing buildings became big? It seems like a perfect tech to help us build faster and more consistent.
Clear the ground. Get the 3D printer out there. And then boom 48 hours later you have a building.
Or printing the bricks like Lego so you can just collect them together.
What is it I am missing here?
14 comments
[ 9.6 ms ] story [ 670 ms ] threadAlso, aesthetic zoning rules are super-conservative. You can't build an unusual looking house in most cities.
The tile guys take 3 days to tile a bathroom. The cost isn't in the skeleton, but all the things that go on it or through it
and I guess the cost is the wiring and plumbing?
it seems to be the current method and needs no new equipment.
Are construction bricks not already essentially 3d printed? They're 3d objects produced on mass to aid in affordable and standardised construction.
We've been "3d printing" stuff for years just with different methods like injection molding. The 3d printing your referring to in contrast is generally more expensive per unit and the only real advantage of it is its flexibility which is why it's used often in prototyping, but wouldn't be of much use in the mass producing of affordable homes (or anything for that matter).
Homes are already pre-fabricated to the largest possible extent.
Just printing walls out of concrete that won't even have great surface properties is a curiosity at best.