!!!!! Adobe brick domes

I want to build a home made of 3 domes. I'll probably be posting more on different aspects of the construction.

Right now, I'm mostly inclined to use adobe bricks. However, I've read a lot about earthbags/superadobe that people have largely adopted for domes. But I'm not sure I understand the advantages.

I have Khalili's book "Ceramic Houses and Earth Architecture" and Minke's book "Earth Construction Manual". It seems that traditionally they would build domes using adobe bricks, and there are a few techniques on how to lay the bricks in order to shape a dome. It seems to me that the earthbag technique would have the following advantages, and maybe that's why it was developed.

1. To make it easy for people without experience to build domes.
2. Each bag ends up essentially being a really big brick and this may lead to better structural stability.

I would be concerned about the latter. However, in that case would a fully monolithic dome with either rammed earth or cob not be a better option? Tools and/or formwork might be required, but ignoring #1 would stability not be better than earthbags? Or even using lime-stabilized adobe bricks.

So, I want to see if there's any other advantages of earthbags that I am not aware of - any feedback appreciated.

Welcome to permies, Dimitris!

I have no practical experience with either of these, but have read a lot. The thing I would consider first is Geology - I live in a high earthquake zone, so I would need to build with that in mind. Most of these techniques *can* be built to be earthquake safe - it's a matter of learning how to do it and being willing to pay the cost (be it extra time or extra money). Most of the techniques that make a building earthquake safe, can also make them safer in some of the mega storms that seem to be hitting in unexpected places (much of norther Europe is flooded as I type this, as an example)

For domes specifically, some building techniques have a bad reputation for developing leaks. Similarly, I'm sure there are good ways to prevent that, of which a strong, safe foundation is likely a part, so you don't get uneven settling.

Homes generally represent a huge investment of time and energy. Natural building often substitutes time for toxic stuff which is a big win, but I'm pushing safety first because I happen to like my Permies alive!

I've built with cob and earthbag but never a dome. From Earthbag Building by Kaki Hunter and Donald Kiffmeyer earthbag domes have more tensile strength then brick domes. They also don't require form work.

Dimitris Bozelos wrote:I want to build a home made of 3 domes. I'll probably be posting more on different aspects of the construction.

Right now, I'm mostly inclined to use adobe bricks. However, I've read a lot about earthbags/superadobe that people have largely adopted for domes. But I'm not sure I understand the advantages.

I have Khalili's book "Ceramic Houses and Earth Architecture" and Minke's book "Earth Construction Manual". It seems that traditionally they would build domes using adobe bricks, and there are a few techniques on how to lay the bricks in order to shape a dome. It seems to me that the earthbag technique would have the following advantages, and maybe that's why it was developed.

1. To make it easy for people without experience to build domes.
2. Each bag ends up essentially being a really big brick and this may lead to better structural stability.

I would be concerned about the latter. However, in that case would a fully monolithic dome with either rammed earth or cob not be a better option? Tools and/or formwork might be required, but ignoring #1 would stability not be better than earthbags? Or even using lime-stabilized adobe bricks.

So, I want to see if there's any other advantages of earthbags that I am not aware of - any feedback appreciated.

Where are you located, Dimitris?  Just curious, as I will be attempting something very similar in the jungles of Belize in the next several months.

C Simpson wrote:Where are you located, Dimitris?  Just curious, as I will be attempting something very similar in the jungles of Belize in the next several months.

I live in the mountains of Peru, Cuzco.

Jay Angler wrote:Most of these techniques *can* be built to be earthquake safe - it's a matter of learning how to do it and being willing to pay the cost (be it extra time or extra money). Most of the techniques that make a building earthquake safe, can also make them safer in some of the mega storms that seem to be hitting in unexpected places (much of norther Europe is flooded as I type this, as an example)

Yes, I have come to understand that there are solutions for most problems with natural materials but you have to spend time learning all the details and adapting them to your circumstances - which is where I currently am at.

Aaron Yarbrough wrote:From Earthbag Building by Kaki Hunter and Donald Kiffmeyer earthbag domes have more tensile strength then brick domes.

Good to know, thanks. That's the barbed wire, right? I'll look into this, maybe there's a study on how that would compared to tensile strength of lime-stabilized earth.

Jay Angler wrote:Natural building often substitutes time for toxic stuff which is a big win, but I'm pushing safety first because I happen to like my Permies alive!

Of course! Here's my stability plan.

1. Stone/lime foundation.
2. Lime-stabilized adobe bricks or other earth mix.
3. 60 cm / 28" thickness at the bottom of the walls, apparently they should become thinner going up.
4. Properly cure the walls with occasionally spraying water then letting them dry well.
5. Hydrophobic plaster on the exterior of the walls to protect from rain.
6. Use of buttresses to direct force to the ground.
7. Keep them small, I plan for two smaller up to 3 m / 10 ' interior diameter and a bigger one 5 m / 16.5 '.
8. Possibly harden the walls with heat, not necessarily burn them to ceramic like Khalili would do - you'd lose thermal mass, but I've heard here of a case where carbon was used.

If I decide to go with bricks, there's the spiraling technique used in iglu which apparently avoids some of the ring forces present in concentric circles - even though I haven't seen that used in earth domes. Otherwise, if I can find the way to do the formwork, or with a rotational guide as per Minke, I might go with rammed earth.

I want to use lime because from what I've read from traditional lime work it actually hardens with time and with a little water. While cement deteriorates over time and it may also cause cracks in the stones.

Jay Angler wrote:For domes specifically, some building techniques have a bad reputation for developing leaks

Yes, absolutely crucial to protect from water. From what I've found so far, stone foundation with protective mortar between it and the earth walls to prevent absorbing humidity via capillary action is important. Then to protect the exterior walls I've found the following:

1. Here they use the gelatinous substance extracted from a plant called "giganton" mixed with straw and earth. There's a small pyramid further down the road and survived some really long rains last year with no additional protection e.g. roof.
2. Tadelakt - quite expensive, more difficult to apply, and difficult to come by in this part of the world.

The last major earthquake here was about 40 years ago, there's mild seismic activity from time to time that the majority adobe-based buildings survive. But you never know when the next big one will come - so I'd rather do it well. If you can poke holes in my plan, that would be great, jeje. Honestly, maybe I'm naive, but I would probably feel safer in a well-made one-floor dome where I can be outside in, like, 3 seconds, rather than in the two story adobe houses that they build here - rushing down the stairs during an earthquake or having a two-story building falling on your head does seem worse to me, jaja.

Dimitris Bozelos wrote: The last major earthquake here was about 40 years ago, there's mild seismic activity from time to time that the majority adobe-based buildings survive. But you never know when the next big one will come - so I'd rather do it well. If you can poke holes in my plan, that would be great, jeje. Honestly, maybe I'm naive, but I would probably feel safer in a well-made one-floor dome where I can be outside in, like, 3 seconds, rather than in the two story adobe houses that they build here - rushing down the stairs during an earthquake or having a two-story building falling on your head does seem worse to me, jaja.

I am *really* happy knowing that you're thinking along these lines!  I can't personally poke any holes, but knowing that you're taking Mother Nature's threats seriously, is all I wanted. Good luck with whatever plan you end up following!

Dimitris Bozelos wrote:
 Khalili's book "Ceramic Houses and Earth Architecture" and Minke's book "Earth Construction Manual". .

Wow! Thank you
I found Minke's manual at
https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/earth-construction-manual/251596450

Is that the whole book?

And I have a Kindle subscription making Khali's book "free"

I've got a bunch more used books
the Kiko Denzer books and all things earthy

Ra Kenworth wrote:
I found Minke's manual at
https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/earth-construction-manual/251596450

Is that the whole book?

No, this seems to be a presentation with some important points that somebody else put together. The book (I have the spanish version) is 200+ pages.

Dimitris Bozelos wrote:

Ra Kenworth wrote:
I found Minke's manual at
https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/earth-construction-manual/251596450

Is that the whole book?

No, this seems to be a presentation with some important points that somebody else put together. The book (I have the spanish version) is 200+ pages.

Thank you! I see he has a 5th edition expected next March as well.

Lucky for you, you can read in Spanish: I am envious!

I see it on the Internet archive but I don't know enough to know if that's a legal copy... I am pretty respectful of the massive amount of time and knowledge that goes into charging a reasonable price for served-up knowledge