There's a large number of tiny houses (especially the kind on wheels) where there's not much of an overhang on the roof. That's probably for aerodynamic reasons for the towed variety, but it's also a thing on stationary ones (probably for style)
Overhangs are overlooked, but very important to protect the walls. The walls of a house are *not* meant to withstand direct water impact. That's the roof's job and it needs to have an over hang to do it properly
Ideally, at least 1 foot or more
There's an art project by Dave Sinaguglia called the "Modular Men's Library", a title that's a bit tongue-in-cheek, which ironically illustrates what a roof overhang on a tiny house should be like
The library itself is basically the same style I'm envisioning for my library (but with insulation, of course)
https://cargocollective.com/davesinaguglia/Modular-Men-s-Library
Something else I've seen is the prevalence of flat roofs on tiny houses
There's again nothing wrong with the roof itself, but it needs to be built correctly or you'll have a lot of leaking issues. It's also a burden to have flat roofs in heavy snow areas. Especially since walls on these are made of lumber, not steel
@cypnk I feel like all of this is reasons to not construct a tiny house as a house, but rather as a vehicle, if you’re designing it to be regularly moved around.
Although flat roofs are silly for aerodynamics too… but having a longitudinal roof ridge is even worse (because you have a taller roof without any aerodynamic benefits for it). A transverse roof peak about 1/4 to 1/3 of the way down the length (like about where the door is on the tiny home you posted) could give you significant aerodynamic benefits…
@bhtooefr My read is that most tiny homes *aren't* designed for frequent mobility, but instead are (generally) a building-code hack: trailer means standard codes don't apply. (With consequences as noted in this thread.)
There are exceptions.
The ones that *are* built for mobility *and* practicality tend to apply hacks -- extending eves, for example, or removable panels, to optimise both livability *and* portability / road-handling.
Many are also occasional-use / rentals.
@bhtooefr There's a related movement based on living out of a converted vehicle. Variously, box vans, Sprinters, occasionally school busses.
And of course, actual motor homes / caravans, including the iconic Airstream trailers.
Again: compromises are made. Vehicles and homes serve different and distinct needs.
@bhtooefr An arbitrary entry point.
YouTube's algo will send you down the rabbit hole as far as you can stand.
tiny houses would be a good concept,
from a social society point of view!
think on the homless?
should we?
@_microbe101 Ultimately, tiny homes still require land, and trailered homes do little for density. They mostly apply to rural / low-density regions where parking on a lot is an option. They work poorly within cities (where jobs/opportunities are).
And they combine the failure modes of *both* vehicles *and* housing, with each strongly compromised.
@dredmorbius @bhtooefr @cypnk
yes, i know these cenarios, and i agree with
that, whst you pointing out.
seems #adventsonntag makes me thinking
in an other way round!
