At 12:47 PM 12/26/2014, Warren D Smith wrote:

It is also possible to lay herringbone with L:1 bricks for any L>1, including non-integer L: http://www.mytinyworld.co.uk/images/superpic/brick-12th-0001.jpg Apparently this bricklaying pattern was invented by Filippo Brunelleschi (1377-1446) the architect behind the dome of the great cathedral in Florence (and it was employed in the dome). I believe this still is the largest masonry dome ever built. Quite possibly it will never be exceeded because *** nobody today would be interested in using masonry anymore.***

Actually, this statement isn't true. While rebar-reinforced masonry is stronger, it is _not_ more durable, and structures older than perhaps 100 years are a much greater risk of failure due to the inevitable corrosion and temperature-cycling effects. This is one reason why workmen are running around Manhattan *** tapping at every single brick *** to see if any are loose; this is now required after several people have been killed in the last decade or so from falling bricks. Pure Roman-style masonry is far more durable, assuming that it was properly designed with the strength limitations of masonry in mind. A proper 3-D "printed" structure in which the bricks are mechanically laid, positioned & mortared could be quite strong, inexpensive and extremely durable. The bricks could be delivered to the working surface in a rectangular tube, so long as there was some form of "lubrication", which might consist of small steel bearings which could be recovered with magnets at the point where the bricks "flow" out of this tube. Such a 3-D printer could print "voids" much more consistently than could a human bricklayer, and thereby create strong, lacey "fractal" structures which are much lighter than solid brick & mortar structures.