AI for American-produced cement and concrete (engineering.fb.com)

by latchkey 118 comments 224 points
Read article View on HN

118 comments

[−] Animats 44d ago
Hand-held devices for testing concrete properties would be more useful. Most concrete problems come from a bad mix - too much water, not enough cement, etc. Concrete testing usually involves cutting a core out of the poured slab and sending it to a lab. Something where you stick a probe in the mix and can reject it before pouring would help. Here are some on-site concrete testers.[1] They're heavy and a pain to use.

There should be an app for this. But that's so last-decade.

[1] https://store.forneyonline.com/concrete-testing-equipment/fr...

[−] GorbachevyChase 44d ago
It’s customary to prefix these comments with credentials, so I’ll just say that I’m a roadway engineer. Sampling at the batch plant or even at the truck is not going to give you the whole story. While the most common crime of contractors is to overwater the concrete slurry to make it flowable, other problems in workmanship can arise from failing to vibrate the concrete in its forms, leaving voids, or vibrating it too much, creating segregation of the aggregate. If the finisher overworks the concrete or tries to correct the shape when it’s green, the that can compromise strength. If the concrete is finished too early, you can get delamination. If time allows and your contractor is careful they might protect the freshly poured concrete and let it cure wet. That makes a huge difference in cracking. There is also a whole world of chemical additives that structural engineers don’t even think about in the design process.

I’m not trying to say that mix doesn’t matter, or that I’m not pleased to see that Facebook is doing something a little more noble than surveillance technology, but as with a lot of construction issues, it’s just not that simple.

[−] datsci_est_2015 44d ago
“it’s just not that simple” - my career in industrial data science in a nutshell. Lots of large companies come into the domains I’ve worked in with grand promises, and while sometimes they move the needle in terms of what executive leadership within the industry believes is possible, they also often poison the well for us smaller firms who provide much more leveled and concrete (heh) offerings. Curse IBM, for example.
[−] emmelaich 43d ago
Is the slump test still commonly used? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concrete_slump_test
[−] munk-a 44d ago

> too much water, not enough cement, etc.

I wanted to mention that Concrete is far more complex and regional than folks might imagine. The quality of gravel and sand, local impurities - these all contribute massively. It's probably best to think of it like a wine's terroir - except, unlike a bottle of wine, it's prohibitively expensive to ship both the components and the finalized mixture to different areas. If a region's limestone has a massive clay impurity then it may simply be unsuitable for large structures or require extensive filtering to the point of being uneconomical.

It's important to be aware of just how much the local geological mix can impact the viability of building with concrete because while theoretically we could use perfect concrete for every project - at that point most projects would simply be too expensive to consider undertaking. There is a very large field of engineering around establishing the realism required in settling for what you've got for the price you can afford in. It can absolutely mean that the materials required to build a high rise in Philly might be priced starkly differently from the same structure planned in Milan even with adjustments for the labor impact on pricing.

[−] MisterTea 44d ago
On-site, before pouring, they use the slump test: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concrete_slump_test
[−] harimau777 44d ago
I'm surprised the ratios for a given situation isn't standardized by now. Is it just people cutting corners?
[−] prpl 44d ago
I think people rarely reject even if it fails a slump test though
[−] no_shadowban_6 44d ago
[flagged]
[−] georgeburdell 44d ago
Wrong day to release this. I had to read halfway through the release before realizing it’s legitimate.
[−] wxw 44d ago
Awesome. People take concrete for granted. Even at small scales (e.g. your patio) with formulas provided on the cement bag, concrete can go wrong (crazing, scaling, cracks). There's a lot of unappreciated craft in the work, not only in the composition and mixing, which is what this research seems dedicated to, but also in the placing, leveling, curing, finishing.
[−] kevin_thibedeau 44d ago

> As a result, producers need a way to rapidly explore and validate new formulations without spending months in the lab.

How do you bypass the normal process of pouring test articles and testing them months and years after cure? This is fundamentally a research activity that needs to conduct verifiable science. Not something you can guess at with an LLM.

[−] ortusdux 44d ago
Tangentially related, but there is a new generation of trucks that mix the concrete on-site. They can output small batches and change the mix on the fly. They solve a lot of headaches!

https://cementech.com/volumetric-technology/

[−] barbazoo 44d ago

> Meta’s AI for concrete model can help suppliers more quickly incorporate U.S. materials into their mixes through an approach called adaptive experimentation.

> Proposes high-potential candidates: The AI suggests new mixes most likely to meet target specifications and can compare performance between U.S.-made and foreign materials

US imports 22% of its cement

> In 2024, Portland and blended cement were produced in 99 plants in 34 U.S. states, led by Texas, Missouri, California, and Florida. Nevertheless, there was significant import reliance. Net imports were 22% of total consumption, with the major source countries being Turkey (32%), Canada (22%), and Vietnam (10%). U.S. exports of cement last year were negligible.

https://www.constructconnect.com/construction-economic-news/....

I'm assuming this isn't for national security reasons, probably more to help the domestic industry deal with tariffs. I hope Meta used their extensive connections to the government.

[−] ajkjk 44d ago
They sure are stretching to find a way to make this have something to do with being pro-America.
[−] scythe 44d ago
The website talks about making cement, but only describes making concrete. Making concrete involves mixing cement and fillers with water under controlled conditions. Making cement involves heating calcium carbonates and oxides with silicon dioxide or calcium silicate to form alite at a temperature of (so far as we understand) no less than 1250 C. Usually this is done with fossil fuels and any impurities in the raw materials (which are cost-constrained) go up the flue, making cement plants rather polluting. Carbon dioxide is a nearly inevitable byproduct (CaCO3 + SiO2 >> CaSiO3 + CO2) and is either captured at source (not implemented at most facilities) or released.

There is plenty of room for improvement in cement production. I'm not sure exactly how to apply AI to it but I guess I was hoping for more than this. If we are going to have the infrastructure renaissance that keeps being talked up by reformists of various stripes, we need more cement.

South America is also a surprising laggard in cement production, which is odd considering they have the materials and they need the roads. I think that environmental concerns and a continental aversion to coal might contribute.

[−] anarticle 44d ago
This also feels like "we're about to build a bunch of datacenters and we cannot meaningfully verify the quality of the concrete at our sites." This enables them to monitor the variables and probably not pay if it's out of spec would be my guess.

In my concrete mixer experience that's just one part of the process, lot of other crap goes wrong, forms, vibing, water, additives. I'm not pouring foundations, so my xp is only to say there's a lot going on. Guess it's a first step?

[−] modo_mario 43d ago
Tangential question:

Does anyone here have experience with or knowledge of diy wood ash cement? I produce a fair bit of ash. Often enough from hardwood or something close enough and keeping it and going trough the calcification process in the fireplace sounds easy enough. I wonder if I could produce enough for hobby projects and if it would hold up outside.

[−] hedayet 44d ago
Only (April) fools would trust Facebook's technology with anything as safety critical as construction work.
[−] largbae 44d ago
I love this concept but the introduction is very odd. It feels like the first, third and 4th paragraphs make the same point (1/4 of cement is imported). It gets better as it gets technical.
[−] martinclayton 44d ago
Wet cement is kind of sloppy, so this makes some sense.
[−] Mr_P 44d ago
I had to double check that this wasn't an April Fools joke. The GitHub project has commits from 2 weeks ago, so it's not.

Looking more closely though, this looks a lot like the Google "AI Cookie" from 2017, which also used Bayesian Optimization: https://blog.google/innovation-and-ai/technology/research/ma...

[−] nerdralph 44d ago
Concrete mixes have become more complicated over time. Flyash has been around for a while, GU/L is relatively new and seems to set faster, often requiring retarders. Many different water-reducing additives are available. Air entraining agents tend to reduce strength. Fibers or steel pins added to the mix can improve crack resistance.

Batch plants will design mixes so some water can be added on site to improve workability. If you don't add water, the concrete will likely exceed spec.

A slump test is only one factor if many that impact concrete strength.

[−] Hasz 44d ago
man, I fucking love concrete. So cool. If you like concrete, check out [Tyler Ley's youtube channel](https://www.youtube.com/@TylerLey/videos). Anyways, I am curious why Meta is investing in this. They use a lot of concrete no doubt, but it's nothing compared to a highway, all the commercial builds, etc. I would have expected them to release something like a very general materials optimization framework to explore a space, but glad to see it applied specifically to concrete.

There are a lot of alternative cements to portland, interested to see if that is in-scope. The list of admixtures is also very long and also fairly secretive. UHPC is a pretty cool development, and I am especially bullish about removing rebar and replacing it with FRP bar to limit the eventual rust cracking that comes with the gradual march of carbonation.

Anyways, very cool and looking forward to the mix developments that come out of this framework.

[−] seemaze 44d ago
First there was the rampocalypse. Then there was cementpocalypse. Let just hope the AI datacenters don't latch on to biofuel to supplement their energy requirements. It's just more profitable for farmers to sell calories to the AI overlords, the consumer food market is just a low margin grind.
[−] simonw 44d ago
I hate April Fools day so much. Is this a joke? I genuinely cannot tell.
[−] taurusnoises 44d ago
If it reduces the cost of concrete (which has been going crazy in NYS), have at it. If it's just another clever bot trick, save it.
[−] gwbas1c 44d ago
I honestly thought this was going to be an April Fools gag.
[−] HeytalePazguato 44d ago
[dead]
[−] gostsamo 44d ago
The masons just showed up their involvement with AI and everything wrong in our times. The masks have fallen. /s
[−] ValveFan6969 44d ago
[dead]
[−] AngryData 44d ago
Jesus I hope they do proper testing for these experimental mixes and don't trust whatever random garbage AI decides you should mix in. This is exactly the kind of thing AI is absolutely terrible at because it has no logical skills or direct experience or ability to test it. If your AI coded stuff goes belly up, you get to try again. If your multi million dollar cement foundation turns out to be sub-par, thats multi million dollars to tear it out and then millions more to do it again right, and that is a best case scenario. The alternative is people dieing when their apartment building collapses.