re: Why isnt AAC(Autoclaved Aerated Concrete) used more in construction?

quote:

---

There is one being built on Old Jefferson Highway between Antioch and Highland.

---

Yep. Built like a big Styrofoam ice chest. Jealous of it.

This.

Any new technology in construction has to go through a tedious vetting process with a great deal of pushback from the status quo.

I was a commercial sales manager for a very large ready mixed concrete producer. It took many years AFTER years of R&D to persuade Architects and Structural Engineers to allow new products as options.....much less to have them actually spec the product.

I worked for several years along side a company out of Vancouver on their innovative foundation waterproofing product. While all Structural Engineers show great interest in innovation, they are also all reluctant to be the "first" to approve it on their project. There has to be years of research and dozens or more of example projects available for them to even consider actually allowing the product. After years of a concerted effort with the manufacturer, we finally got the product listed as an option on the Georgia Aquarium project. And it was only to be an option on small areas scattered around the project. That was around 10 years ago and the minimal use on that project led to it being used on future projects.

Same exact process occurred in working to get structural fiber specified as an alternative to traditional concrete reinforcement on elevated mezzanine slabs and industrial slabs on grade. Worked with the innovators of that technology out of Pennsylvania pitching it to SEs for many years before it was finally specified and used on the 12th and Midtown project.

Aside from those, we had our own in house R&D on SCC ( self consolidating concrete) and Pervious Concrete that our Tech department spent years designing and testing.

Of course, the traditional waterproofing and steel reinforcement producers did not like it and fought tooth and nail to maintain status quo. We were adding the waterproofing and reinforcement ( other than around columns and beams)to the concrete mix and that was detrimental to their industry. It required innovation and progress on their part and up and down the line.....which means investment.

I imagine that the same dynamics are at play in this situation.

I used SIPs on my home and really like it.

Structurally it is weaker than grout filled CMU or even CIP concrete. Also falls apart when there's water leakage or moisture infiltration. We had a building that was exposed to freeze thaw cycle and the AAC bricks were just really deteriorating from water exposure. Wood does something similar but much less pronounced.

Didn't see it included, that would be my biggest suspicion.

Also, additional cost for something other than stucco.

Gonna look at some already finished before I do anything. Thanks for the info. I really think this is the way to go.

I heard the same thing about steel framing a few years back. Now, you have a bunch of half-assed steel framed house that nobody wants.

Proper traditional build techniques yield a home that is hurricane wind-resistant, relatively inexpensive, and with foam, very energy efficient.

I don't think concrete will catch on, even with it's positives.

AAC home that survived the california wildfires








I can see this being very advantageous in storm/flood prone areas. I would not classify Baton Rouge being one of those areas.

I think aerated concrete is priced a little different than regular concrete