This presentation is provided to explain one of our philosophical foundations for how and why we build what we do at North Star Construction. Why do we build Square Houses and only Square Houses? The reasons are simple but the implications are far reaching for you personally in acquiring your next home but also in mankind's use of materials. In our quest to ensure that everyone on the planet has access to reasonable shelter it is important to return to the basics of how and why we build. If, in the blink of an eye, we could create (or save) enough wall material to house 25% more people than are currently being housed, I think we would all choose to do so. But in our building practices we rush right past geometry in our quest for shelter. So for the next few minutes we are going to backtrack to find the origins of where we might find those lost or wasted resources.
Most structures are some derivation of a square, rectangle, or combinations of the two, but we rarely, if ever, delve into why we create living spaces in the shapes we do. (I will spend more time at the end of this presentation to talk about other shapes, such as circles [yurts and geodesic domes] as well as the myriad shapes in between such as pentagons and hexagons. But for now, we will focus on the rectangles and squares.)
The single most important driving factor in creating a shelter is to determine the amount of shelter one might need. This is generally determined as square footage. In determining square footage, we will return to our 5th grade math class and examine the equation A=LH. In this equation we are searching for the area (A) by multiplying the length (L) times the height (H). This equation works for any rectangle, of which squares are considered to be part of the family.
So, in comparing a rectangle and a square of equal area (or square footage) we have found that a 1600 square foot rectangle can be described as being 20' wide and 80' long. A square of the same area would prove to be 40' wide and 40' long. Simple enough.
And now, once again, let us return to 5th grade math class and work out the linear wall required to build the two homes in question. The perimeter of a rectangle or square is a sum of all sides. In adding all the sides of the rectangle we find a linear wall dimension of 200'. In adding all sides of the square we find a linear wall dimension of 160'. Wait a minute? What just happened?
We just found that a rectangle of 1600 square feet that is 20'x80' needs 200 feet of wall but a square of 1600 square feet needs only 160' of wall!
THIS revelation, this incredibly simple piece of math, is what escapes most designers, builders, and homeowners. The simple fact that two different shapes of equal area do not have the same perimeter is usually new news to most contractors and builders. So it is little wonder that in this day and age of precious resources, we continue to built structures where the actual shape is the beginning of inefficiency.
It is important to continue this discussion to understand the full ramifications of building structures that are inherently inefficient in material use. First, by building a structure that requires 25% more wall for the same square footage, we must understand that the material costs for those walls will be 25% higher. 
And this is not true just for the framing materials. It leads directly to 25% more lumber and sheeting but also more doors, windows, electrical wiring, outlets, switches, plumbing lines, insulation, sheetrock, paint, stucco or siding, and trim.
When there is 25% more wall to be built, it will require 25% more labor, 
and 25% more maintenance in regards to material and labor for the life of the structure. 
Also, keep in mind that the waste does not end there. The loan for the house increases to cover the initial materials and labor and that is amortized out through 15 to 30 years at whatever percentage rate of loan you happen to acquire. But most importantly, the envelope or jacket of the home is increased by 25% without any increase to living space. This means that the area of the home that loses heat in the winter and loses cooling in the summer has just increased by 25% as well... and that too is inherited by the homeowner for the life of the structure.
This is the basis for why we produce only The Square House. Our foundation of engineering philosophies does not end there. It goes on to incorporate passive solar design, high efficiency recycled insulation which is resistant to moisture, mold, mildew, and fire, along with industrial grade windows, frames, glass and doors. Our philosophy of structural honesty forces us to use materials which require no special treatments or coatings and minimal or no maintenance. These concepts and many more can be found in our subsequent posts. For more, please link to http://www.squarehouseinfo3.blogspot.com/ for a brief discussion regarding our use of steel post and beam construction to decrease the use of wood products as well as labor and maintenance. Thank you for your time and we look forward to hearing from you. (but I did promise you a further rambling regarding other shapes in construction... so if I still have your attention, read on!) Decades ago, when I was a young carpenter, I worked for a man who told me about his adventure in creating the first Buckminster Fuller Geodesic Dome in Upstate New York. Everyone in the surrounding area of Woodstock was enthralled with the project and folks came to volunteer to help build the new and strange shape. Upon completion, he and all who built the dome revelled in their accomplishment and had many a beer that evening to celebrate.
But the next morning came and after cleaning up the beer bottles, he and the rest of the crew went to work putting the structure to use. It had been built as a hay barn for the horses and cows and after loading only a mere fraction of the bales into the barn that were housed in the previous squarish barn of the same square footage, they realized something that has stuck with me since I was first told this story. The dome could only hold a small amount of bales because of the shape. The building was great, it was the "furniture" that didn't fit.
In exploring shape towards function, we started out by asking the question, "What is the shape which requires the least amount of surface area for the largest volume?" The answer, without competition, is the sphere. The ball requires the least amount of material to enclose the largest volume. The eye is a perfect example, as is any droplet of water cast into the vacuum of space and allowed to adjust to its new environment. The sphere is the perfect shape in regards to efficiency of materials.
And so, one would postulate that we should be building spheres in which we live, or at least pushing ahead with Buckminster's fabulous creations and populating the planet with geodesic domes for the masses. Although this is true in theory, it somewhat comes unglued, literally, when you realize that domes are currently not one smooth surface, but rather many flat surfaces stuck together at the seams, somewhat like a soccer ball. It is the seams that are, no pun intended, the undoing of the plan. The surface area is small, but the linear amount of joints and seams is exceedingly large and that will be, for the time being, the downfall of the structural design of domes.
However, there is a secondary reason that the dome does not work as well as I would like it to. That is the simple fact that all our furniture, our bales, if you will, have a history and lineage of coming from rooms that are square in the corners and perpendicular of wall. The available square footage of a dome is large. The usable square footage is actually quite low.
In our further quests for the right design of structure for an ever expanding population (the population of the planet increases by 250,000 people every day! Over 10,000 people per hour are added to the world census.) we are trying hard to find the right materials, the right design to house the masses. Our next design followed the path of the cylinder. The populations of central Africa and the Himalaya Range have been living in cylindrical structures for centuries because they required a small amount of materials and are inherently stable. They are stable because any time you push on one wall, all the rest of the structure has to move along with it in order for it to give. It uses its size and shape to withstand external forces. Because of the small amount of materials, they are simple to transport which is a huge benefit for a nomadic people.
However, in our use of simple design for a modern structure in the western world, one of the same problems that the dome collides with is true for the cylinder; furniture. Another problem needs to be discussed at this point and the problem is owned by both the dome and the cylinder. The problem is sound. The Asian yurt and the African round house are made of relatively soft materials; cloth or grasses. These materials absorb all sorts of forces, including sound waves. Living in a cloth or grass home is very, very different from living in a rigid structure of the same shape. The rounded walls reflect sound in ways that cause it to bounce across the room and although furniture, carpets, and other belongings help to absorb these errant sound waves, it is true that the end recipient is usually the occupant.
So I will take a step back in this discussion and say that for the developing world, where resources are the most scarce and population densities are at their highest, the cylinder is a spectacular solution. However, the problems that the cylinder brings into the equation continue onto the mundane platform of "city and county approval" and these are elements that we, as a construction company are forced to deal with daily.
In working towards what we feel is the best design for a structure we have actively taken many, many hurdles and placed them in our way. At each stage of design we work towards providing the correct answers, not just answers, to all of these problems and although this is a work that is evolving and we do not purport to have all the answers, we feel that we have stepped over many of those hurdles and are offering a truly well thought out answer to the housing question.
I hope that someday we are all able to live happily in tiny little single-membrane spheres, (honestly, that is not a joke) but until that time, we at North Star Construction are going to be building The Square House. If I still have your attention, please head on over to our next section at http://www.squarehouseinfo3.blogspot.com/ or just call us at 1-505-577-0490 and talk to Ed Lyons about scheduling a tour of one of our homes. We appreciate your interest and look forward to hearing from you.
Other sites to visit for information:
Other sites to visit for information:
htttp://www.squarehouseinfo4.blogspot.com/
For more information about what we do and why, please call Ed Lyons, our Director of Sales and Contracts us at 1-505-577-0490 or visit our website at http://www.nscnm.com/.
