- Home
- Intelligence for Architects
- Subscribe
- Jobs
- Events
2024 events calendar Explore now Keep up to date
Find out more
- Programmes
- CPD
- More from navigation items
The ready availability of concrete and steel seems to have discouraged us from experimenting with new possibilities, says Anna Beckett
For almost a century we have designed buildings using four structural materials: steel, concrete, timber and masonry. There have been some developments – we’ve regulated steel section sizes and grades, developed precast concrete and created engineered timber products such as glulam and CLT – but the structural elements of most buildings are made of one of those four materials. We actually use concrete so much that it is now the second-most abundant substance on earth; the only thing we have more of is water.
What is it about these four materials that makes them so great? And, with huge technological advances in other sectors, what’s stopping us from developing greener, more efficient options?
Concrete clearly is an incredibly useful material. It’s cheap, easy to make and use, and widely understood. It works well in compression and, when properly maintained, has a relatively long life. But are we using concrete because it’s the most suitable material, or are we designing our buildings to suit a concrete structure because it’s cheap and easy? If the latter, could we be using other materials instead?
…
You are not currently logged in.
Existing Subscriber? LOGIN
REGISTER for free access on selected stories and sign up for email alerts. You get:
Subscribe to Building Design and you will benefit from: