Concrete beehive

[Beesnaturally]

I suggest you read Mitchell D. 2016 Ratios of colony mass to thermal conductance of tree and man-made nest enclosures of Apis mellifera: implications for survival, clustering, humidity regulation and Varroa destructor. Int. J. Biometeorol. 60, 629–638. (doi:10.1007/s00484-015-1057-z)


if you left your room via a trapdoor you would have less of a problem. The whole thing is covered in Mitchell D. 2017 Honey bee engineering: Top ventilation and top entrances. Am. Bee J. 157, 887–889. Your room with its tall door is like a top entrance hive

a) trapdoor above or below?

b) trapdoors can be opened or closed. Bees don't have that capacity, so I struggle to see the relevance.

c) I can see that having an entrance low or high will make a difference, and size and colony location the same.
noteworthy perhaps: bees like high nests (which trees offer) - but with height comes unbroken wind.

c) cavities generally form where branched die back (as their leaf area is overgrown) leaving a break in the protective bark. Water gathers at the bottom. The holes may be enlarged by ie woodpeckers. Some data of entrance size and location would be good. But remember that apple tree I spoke of earlier in the thread... Bees thrive where they can thrive.

I don't have time now to search for and read the whole thing, but I found the abstract:

"Abstract
In the absence of human intervention, the honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) usually constructs its nest in a tree within a tall, narrow, thick-walled cavity high above the ground (the enclosure); however, most research and apiculture is conducted in the thin-walled, squat wooden enclosures we know as hives. This experimental research, using various hives and thermal models of trees, has found that the heat transfer rate is approximately four to seven times greater in the hives in common use, compared to a typical tree enclosure in winter configuration. This gives a ratio of colony mass to lumped enclosure thermal conductance (MCR) of less than 0.8 kgW(-1) K for wooden hives and greater than 5 kgW(-1) K for tree enclosures. "

Front door factor.... Spherical cow factor...

"This result for tree enclosures implies higher levels of humidity in the nest, increased survival of smaller colonies and lower Varroa destructor breeding success. "

Note that 'implies'. Apply that note to all three claims.

"Many honeybee behaviours previously thought to be intrinsic may only be a coping mechanism for human intervention; for example, at an MCR of above 2 kgW(-1) K, clustering in a tree enclosure may be an optional, rare, heat conservation behaviour for established colonies, rather than the compulsory, frequent, life-saving behaviour that is in the hives in common use."

This approach seems entirely incognizant of the fact that bees are adapted to live in a wide range of climates. In the most southerly things will be very different to the northern limits. Open, again, to the spherical cow charge.

"The implied improved survival in hives with thermal properties of tree nests may help to solve some of the problems honeybees are currently facing in apiculture."

Yeah yeah, 'Implied and 'may' (ok 'may' is standard in scientific discussions - but still pay attention...).

The paper itself might take the sting out of some of these criticisms. It needs to.

 

[Sutty]

ok, interesting: but I think, with apologies, you are on a fool's errand. Wall heatloss ratings simply don't make much difference because of the front door issue. If that were not the case then we'd see a lot more walling around entrances to control the draft. The only time I've seen that happening much at all is in small colonies that need better control over robbing.

I overwinter (daytime) in a sunless valley, with a cold-air catchment of perhaps 10 square miles. The temperature here is generally 2-3 degrees colder than on the higher ground where I sleep. 12 years ago it was a tin-roofed (and cavity-walled) building that was permanently damp in winter, and the same temperature as outdoors. I couldn't work in it, no matter how well dressed for more than a couple of hours before I needed to get in the car and recover. I built a block room inside that was warmable with a fan heater. Much better, but not great. Next I built a small office, and insulated just reasonably well as I went. Much better still, but suffered from a concrete floor and being laden with cold metal. Then I made my new office; a celotex box - not even plaster-boarded - with two modern plastic laminate external doors. Brilliant. But:

If I leave just one of those doors ajar to the unheated damp workspace outside, the heater has to run permanently, and I'm in a cold draft and can't work at my computer.
I have, as you can see, some experience here. And the lesson is: it doesn't matter how good the insulation is, if you have constant ingress of freezing air you might as well not have it.

With apologies again: I think you might have thought about that before setting out to prove that trees make better homes.

As I have said: I've done the matchstick thing - perhaps 30 or 40 hives. I did it for two years running. It seemed to make little difference, but it stands to reason more ventilation will usually lead to less dampness.

You might have a different experience if the doorway was in the floor and the room otherwise well sealed.
Even a snowhole is built with an entrance as low as possible, preferably below floor level

 

[Beesnaturally]

says the guy with a degree in a humanities

Gained in the middle of a lifetime of hands-on in the building trades. Largely designed and built by me, from new foundations, 1992 ish.

 

[Beesnaturally]

You might have a different experience if the doorway was in the floor and the room otherwise well sealed.

Yes, that would be an improvement. But a passing wind would take a lot out.

Surely someone has measured hive/outdoor temperatures at different places in the hive through cold weather?

 

[user 6228]

a) trapdoor above or below?

b) trapdoors can be opened or closed. Bees don't have that capacity, so I struggle to see the relevance.

c) I can see that having an entrance low or high will make a difference, and size and colony location the same.
noteworthy perhaps: bees like high nests (which trees offer) - but with height comes unbroken wind.

c) cavities generally form where branched die back (as their leaf area is overgrown) leaving a break in the protective bark. Water gathers at the bottom. The holes may be enlarged by ie woodpeckers. Some data of entrance size and location would be good. But remember that apple tree I spoke of earlier in the thread... Bees thrive where they can thrive.

I don't have time now to search for and read the whole thing, but I found the abstract:

"Abstract
In the absence of human intervention, the honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) usually constructs its nest in a tree within a tall, narrow, thick-walled cavity high above the ground (the enclosure); however, most research and apiculture is conducted in the thin-walled, squat wooden enclosures we know as hives. This experimental research, using various hives and thermal models of trees, has found that the heat transfer rate is approximately four to seven times greater in the hives in common use, compared to a typical tree enclosure in winter configuration. This gives a ratio of colony mass to lumped enclosure thermal conductance (MCR) of less than 0.8 kgW(-1) K for wooden hives and greater than 5 kgW(-1) K for tree enclosures. "

Front door factor.... Spherical cow factor...

"This result for tree enclosures implies higher levels of humidity in the nest, increased survival of smaller colonies and lower Varroa destructor breeding success. "

Note that 'implies'. Apply that note to all three claims.

"Many honeybee behaviours previously thought to be intrinsic may only be a coping mechanism for human intervention; for example, at an MCR of above 2 kgW(-1) K, clustering in a tree enclosure may be an optional, rare, heat conservation behaviour for established colonies, rather than the compulsory, frequent, life-saving behaviour that is in the hives in common use."

This approach seems entirely incognizant of the fact that bees are adapted to live in a wide range of climates. In the most southerly things will be very different to the northern limits. Open, again, to the spherical cow charge.

"The implied improved survival in hives with thermal properties of tree nests may help to solve some of the problems honeybees are currently facing in apiculture."

Yeah yeah, 'Implied and 'may' (ok 'may' is standard in scientific discussions - but still pay attention...).

The paper itself might take the sting out of some of these criticisms. It needs to.

There's an easy precise of it in "The Lives of Bees" around page 227 by Thomas D Seeley you might of heard of him.

 

[Beesnaturally]

theres an easy precise of it in "The Lives of Bees" by Thomas D Seeley you might of heard of him.https://www.amazon.co.uk/Lives-Bees-Thomas-D-Seeley/dp/0691166765/ref=asc_df_0691166765/?tag=googshopuk-21&linkCode=df0&hvadid=258321964452&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=14202201297822991316&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9045743&hvtargid=pla-702126712477&psc=1&th=1&psc=1

I came across him 20 or 25 years ago. I've corresponded with him.

Since you've read it you could summarise it for us...

You have yet to respond to the front door criticism...

 

[user 6228]

I came across him 20 or 25 years ago. I've corresponded with him.

Since you've read it you could summarise it for us...

You have yet to respond to the front door criticism...

We would have to establish your level of competence first as I dont want to commit the sin of "mansplaining" or lead myself open to accusations of "techobabble". You could instead come to one of the BKA lectures I do.

 

[Beesnaturally]

We would have to establish your level of competence first as I dont want to commit the sin of "mansplaining" or lead myself open to accusations of "techobabble". You could instead come to one of the BKA lectures I do.

First, you seriously need to look up 'mansplaining'.

Leave out the fancy math and technical nomenclature; we'll all be fine.

I haven't accused you technobabble. Please be careful about putting words into my mouth.

I'm too busy looking after 60 odd hives and building a business from scratch to go to lectures by people who can't respond to good points raised against their claims.

Btw; at about the same time I was building that fine farmhouse, I made a couple of hives from polystyrene board insulation. I've made hives from thick cedar, thin cedar and cheap chinese play. I've experimented (lately) with celotex cover boards. Its not as if I haven't given all this a bit of thought.

You deal with my critiques, then I'll give you the next bunch.

 

[colinc]

I haven't accused you technobabble. Please be careful about putting words into my mouth.

“Yeah, that's either over-techical language, or gobbledegook. I think I can see what you mean but I suspect you are trying to blind us with sciency language.”

I think this may be the reason for derekm’s comment from post #13 in this thread. Sounds like you accusing him of “technobabble” to me.

 

[user 6228]

First, you seriously need to look up 'mansplaining'.

Leave out the fancy math and technical nomenclature; we'll all be fine.

I haven't accused you technobabble. Please be careful about putting words into my mouth.

I'm too busy looking after 60 odd hives and building a business from scratch to go to lectures by people who can't respond to good points raised against their claims.

Btw; at about the same time I was building that fine farmhouse, I made a couple of hives from polystyrene board insulation. I've made hives from thick cedar, thin cedar and cheap chinese play. I've experimented (lately) with celotex cover boards. Its not as if I haven't given all this a bit of thought.

You deal with my critiques, then I'll give you the next bunch.

Surely issuing a critique based solely on the abstract goes against the principled deep faith you have in the scientfic paper peer review process. It would be very remiss of me to conspire with you to transgress the principles you hold so dear.

Mansplaining: the explanation of something by a man, typically to a woman, in a manner regarded as condescending or patronizing.

I thought you would be very familar with that definition?

 

[Erichalfbee]

Gentlemen please.
I put this thread up because Laurence has been trialling every type of beehive he could get his hands on and it was a look into one of the off the wall types. I thought it was interesting.
The poster with the next condescending ad hominem attack gets a months holiday. I’m not joking.

 

[Beesnaturally]

Surely issuing a critique based solely on the abstract goes against the principled deep faith you have in the scientfic paper peer review process. It would be very remiss of me to conspire with you to transgress the principles you hold so dear.

Critiques based on reason are fine.

Statement: "The house is on fire, so I'm not going to call the firebrigade even though I want them to come"

Critique" "That makes no sense." (I could add "because..." but I hope I'm quite certain I don't need to.)

I have faith the the system of science. I read papers critically. That is what I have said

I have no wish to conspire with you either. I don't know what that's about?

Not being a woman, not so much

Mansplaining: the explanation of something by a man, typically to a woman, in a manner regarded as condescending or patronizing.

I thought you would be very familar with that definition?

Not being a woman, not so much

 

[Beesnaturally]

Critiques based on reason are fine.

Statement: "The house is on fire, so I'm not going to call the firebrigade even though I want them to come"

Critique" "That makes no sense." (I could add "because..." but I hope I'm quite certain I don't need to.)

I have faith the the system of science. I read papers critically. That is what I have said

I have no wish to conspire with you either. I don't know what that's about?

Not being a woman, not so much

PS Checked for condescension and ad hominem. Score: Cond.: 2/10; Ad Hom. 1/10 at most. I'm going to chance my arm.

 

[Sutty]

To return to the initial topic, those concrete walls looked to be about 4cm thick, with the perlite in the concrete mix their insulation properties may be similar to a wooden national hive. It would be interesting to know the R-value of a perlite-laden concrete.

 

[Erichalfbee]

PS Checked for condescension and ad hominem. Score: Cond.: 2/10; Ad Hom. 1/10 at most. I'm going to chance my arm.

I’ll add arguing with a moderator to that.

 

[user 6228]

Gentlemen please.
I put this thread up because Laurence has been trialling every type of beehive he could get his hands on and it was a look into one of the off the wall types. I thought it was interesting.
The poster with the next condescending ad hominem attack gets a months holiday. I’m not joking.

Back to the subject concrete hive It is an interesting development. Possible as an outer (WBC style). With a bit of top insulation it will be not much different to a wooden hive, but that nots a compliment more an indictment of wooden hives. There was an experiment that showed sheltered wire mesh hives performed nearly the same as wood hives where they had large colonies and copious stores. That the bees manage to survive is such a low bar that it is not a testament to the hives or indicative that bees should be put in them. When the bees go to so much complexity to chose a nest , it seems such hubris to think we know better after applying so little diligence to the problem.

 

[Gilberdyke John]

To return to the initial topic, those concrete walls looked to be about 4cm thick, with the perlite in the concrete mix their insulation properties may be similar to a wooden national hive. It would be interesting to know the R-value of a perlite-laden concrete.

I spent a part of my career at the Lytag plant in Tilbury. The product was a lightweight aggregate sintered from power station fly ash and the pellets contained a lot of distributed air space. Apart from its weight advantage over natural aggregate it had an insulating value (not very much if I can recall correctly but I don't know the R value of Lytag concrete). Doncaster Racecourse stand and the British Sugar silos at Newark were built using Lytag because the canopy weight was critical and the sugar silo foundations weren't so heavily loaded. Maybe a Lytag beehive would be easier to move than traditional concrete?

 

[colinc]

I am moving all my brood boxes to poly this year. I am told better insulation than the older wood ones but I only hope that my back will thank me too. Not sure even “lightweight” concrete is actually a good idea on this front. derekm worded it better than I could, but as beekeepers we hear “survive” used far too freely when we should be aiming for the bees to thrive. I do enjoy watching Laurence’s experiments at Black Mountain Honey though.

 

[Ian123]

but as beekeepers we hear “survive” used far too freely when we should be aiming for the bees to thrive. I do enjoy watching Laurence’s experiments at Black Mountain Honey though.

Bees do indeed thrive in wooden hives!!!!!

 

[SWEET]

I run both, not much difference observed bar the far better protection in these crazy summers of late.