Cob:

[Darel Henman]

Presumably even posts have to be interconnected horizontally.  This is
what I am talking about.  It would interrupt a vertical wall.  The cob
will, no matter how have less contact with other cob around the beam.
The strength of cob holding together under stresses depends to some
degree on this thickness and interconnectedness.

The wall I-beam posts themselves interrupt and prevent a full
interlocked monthilic cob wall. 

example top view of 12" thick wall:

 .cob.....................................    3"
 .[I beam]......cob......[I-beam]....... cob. 6"      <--- here posts
interrup the wall twice.
 .cob.....................................    3"           1/4 cob wall
thickness on either side of beam.

This does not show horizontal beams attached to the posts midway between
foundation and top of ceiling or second floor if ones necessary.

The depth of the hollow of the beam might be sufficient if the cob is
well keyed in to keep the wall steady. depending on the orientation of
the hollow.   For example, an (I) shape would work for walls is the
hollow was sufficient, but (H) wouldn't.

One also must handle walls broken into to parts, upper and lower by a
horizontal beam between posts.
 
Regarding compatiblity of the two materials:
Anybody have any data out there regarding possible rust problems with
this material conbination?

Darel 

> Frances Grill wrote:
> 
> Presumably the discussion is about walls not ceilings (hence my
> reference to studs and post and beam) also presumably, the cob walls
> would be thicker than the width of the posts so they would key into
>  the H-posts and since the wall is thicker than the posts, the cob
> would cover both the interior and extrior faces of the posts.