Wood vs Concrete - which is best per dollar?

Get 4 months for free on a 2-year plan here ➼ nordvpn.com/Th...
It's risk-free with Nord's 30-day money-back guarantee!
This video investigates the strength per dollar of wood and concrete in different structural applications. The investigation compares beam, plate (slab), and axial (column) elements. Further sensitivity analysis is investigated by varying the labour cost of concrete which is usually higher than wood. However, with the latest increases in the price of wood, the analysis unexpectedly swings in favor of concrete.
The contents of this video are provided for entertainment purposes only.

[@TheEngineeringHub]

Get 4 months for free on a 2-year plan here ➼ nordvpn.com/TheEngHub It's risk-free with Nord's 30-day money-back guarantee!

[@1982nsu]

How about a strength to weight comparison?

[@davidstamenov1084]

Really puts into perspective how much wood prices have inflated in the last couple of years.

[@hafeeznoormohamed1259]

Interesting analysis -- with matetial prices fluctuating as they are today, we may be rethinking once obvious choices for construction materials.

[@michaelimbesi2314]

It’s fun to look at this as a naval architect, since we don’t use concrete due to the fact that its complete lack of tensile strength, low compressive strength, extreme brittleness, high weight, and porosity make it utterly useless for shipbuilding applications. It continues to amaze me how much land engineers manage to do with it.

[@ciprianghenghea7779]

I would not say too low compressive strength. High strength concrete reaches 100-150 MPA. And it was used in 100 meter ships back then (feroconcrete).

[@bigjay875]

It would have been very interesting to toss steel in to the mix and see how the chips drop

[@DanielGonzalez-vx6dr]

0:19 What happen if instead of and straight beam uses a beam with a curve? Catenarian or some curve that give Moré strength

[@honeytubs]

Or I beam which would be easier to precast out of concrete than make out of wood. Or hollow core slab.

[@marks6663]

In Canada, a place where wood is rare, a 2 x 12 x 10 pressure treated is $50. But at the end of the day, wood is cheaper. That is why builders frame all their homes from wood, not concrete. A concrete house is nice but much more expensive to build.

[@ProfesionalAP]

But will last more, you won't have to repair every 20 years your roof...

[@honeytubs]

Please make a video explaining exactly how concrete is more expensive.

[@WhiteytheLab]

I absolutely HATE stick frame homes, but thank you for putting some real numbers to it.

[@kakashi_senpai042]

You are an amazing engineer! Your technical knowledge and hard work is incredibly inspiring. Congratulations on all your success!

[@arkevans1939]

While an interesting video, comparing materials goes well beyond their raw costs. AS a 40 year "low rise" commercial GC, concrete rarely wins the cost analysis comparisons, except for footings and slabs on grade. The labor and equipment costs to move concrete vertically is a huge factor. Add to that the need for steel reinforcing and form material. Obviously, the load carrying capacity, fire resistance and better STC ratings make concrete superior for certain end uses. If we life cycled buildings beyond the original financing then if would win a few more comparisons. However, the current energy codes favor wood due to the cavities available for increased insulation. These cavities also provide a place for electrical and plumbing. Assemblies are what have to be considered.

[@estudianteuni4578]

Excellent video, my friend engineer. One question, what program do you use to create your animations?

[@markhall2405]

All homes where I live are made from concrete; foundations, columns, walls, floors, roof framing in metal. Having my home built now and labor is cheap cheap cheap, so concrete is a far superior choice. Ofcourse, lots of termites here too, so the little wood used as possible the better. Learning a lot about concrete now being that all my previous homes in the US were framed with wood and those rules don't apply.

[@kevpatguiriot]

Steel vs precast price comparison : )

[@neerajwa]

Being based in India, I am always surprised by the prevalence of wood houses in North America. Indians generally would never consider wood for any structural use. I doubt if even a single wood constructed home exists in urban india. Disclaimer : Wood is far costlier in India. But that is hardly a consideration for builders.

[@csehszlovakze]

Hungarian here, and fully wooden housing is also rare here, although most roof structures are built with it. Most modern houses are built from bricks, soviet-era apartments are (prefab) reinforced concrete, while poor rural folk used to build with mud bricks.

[@flourishomotola5306]

Great video. Well done 👍🏿

[@TheEngineeringHub]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@garrysekelli6776]

How about as a roof? Then if a structural failure ocurrs and anyone is underneath it at the time of the collapse if wood possibility of survival. İf concrete almost certain death. Put a pricetag on that.

[@wumi2419]

Cost of life insurance. Or probably much less, as I don't know the way profitability of a person is calculated. But I can assure you, corporations take such losses into account.

[@garrysekelli6776]

@@wumi2419 the cost of life insurance is not a set value. İt is different for everybody.

[@wumi2419]

@@garrysekelli6776 you can still estimate. And it can be a pretty good estimate if type of home (or just the fact question of cost is asced) is taken into consideration

[@lindsay_1849]

There is a design and permitting process, engineered structures don't just fall down.

[@garrysekelli6776]

@@lindsay_1849 lots of buildings fall down.

[@UGPepe]

I don't understand why gluing wood beams together on the job site is not a popular solution. Glulam shouldn't even exist. People citing "factory conditions" don't know what they're talking about.

[@Steamrick]

Hmm... the main thing this doesn't take into consideration is that if I build a 3mx3m suspended deck, I'm not going to squeeze a hundred people on there, so the extra strength of concrete doesn't do anything for me but it's still more expensive... Though on the other hand, 2 tons of load capacity sounds like I could expect the thing to collapse under its own weight during heavy snowfall?

[@omulduda]

the mistake is in the fact that the simulations are made around the volume of the material and not around the functionality.

[@1982nsu]

How about a strength to weight comparison?

[@davidanalyst671]

exactly. this becomes an issue on the second floor

[@ravshanbekmavlonov2996]

Great comparison!

[@leocurious9919]

Fastest VPN with speeds measured in "milli bit per per second". Amazing. Maybe they meant Mb/s and not "mbp/s".

[@freedom_aint_free]

If the labor cost are not a issue any more (let's say, a 3D printed house, or robots do the works) concrete will beat wood every single day, the thing that really makes wood win it as said in the video: workability, which translates into fewer days paid to workers. Concrete is much slow to work in the job site.

[@romane.67]

I think it still depends on the location if in this future a robot that can work wood and concrete are equally priced the wood frame robot would be able to put up more buildings over time than the concrete due to the cure time of concrete becoming a limiting factor.

[@bigjay875]

Prefab concrete has made great advances in the past 15 years and with a bit of planning your dollar can go much farther than when i first joined the field constitution industry 👍

[@davidsellars646]

Cement to make the concrete is energy intensive to produce and also creates great amounts of carbon dioxide. Steel is also energy intensive to produce and creates a lot of air pollution and solid waste. Both also create big holes in the earth to mine the required limestone and iron ore. Wood is renewable without substantially altering the place it was obtained. Historically, the energy to manufacture lumber products from logs has been produced by burning the wood waste from manufacturing. The huge amount of fossil fuel generated energy is not required. In your examples, the extra strength gained in using concrete and reinforced concrete is not required. Wood provides all the strength needed for the task. Concrete structures are heavy and require much more substantial foundations. That adds heavily to the cost and material required. Advances in mass timber structures are making wood seem more and more attractive compared to concrete and steel. Wood is not the homogeneous material offered by steel and concrete. This, in itself, makes engineers shy away from it.

[@honeytubs]

There are hundreds of square miles of destroyed ecosystems and decimated forests in North America. Look on a satellite image of California and you will see. Then try to find a concrete quarry in California without searching for an address. You will not be able to find the damage done by concrete mining.

[@markkiely8326]

hi a question for you how much load can a 6 inch by 6 inch wood post 8foot long span horizontally with the weight in the centre take? standard construction timber

[@firstnamelastname7476]

2:50 love the stock footage of concreter wearing sandals :) if he had double-plugger thongs i'd expect him to be an aussie

[@marioxerxescastelancastro8019]

Disliked for using “exponentially” incorrect. 👎

[@CarlosLopez-ft2hs]

Also in my expert opinion wood wood would overall be cheaper then concrete in the lifetime of whatever is being build like repairs, materials, and labor compared to conrete if we're talking about homes because concrete would take too long and time is money

[@jafinch78]

Good point, though I do wonder about advanced in structural engineering and material science like using UHPC in RCC designs and maybe along with like better material than steel rebar. Instead of having 30 year lifecycle house designs, the plans can be 500 or longer year designs. Even granite has a better long term potential as a structural material. Seems there may be potential advances in geopolymers as well to ease the materials lifecycle energy requirements more.

[@geezzzwdf]

yes more videos on same

[@ajazmahemoodsayyed4122]

Amazing sir

[@ChefEarthenware]

Fascinating, but I would have taken aesthetics into consideration. Concrete is ugly, wood is beautiful. I realise that aesthetics are subjective, but there are limits to subjectivity.

[@geezzzwdf]

yes more videos on same