Slashdot Mirror


Researchers Make Bendable Concrete

karvind writes "PhysOrg is reporting that scientists from University of Michigan have developed a new type of fiber-reinforced bendable concrete. The new concrete looks like regular concrete, but is 500 times more resistant to cracking and 40 percent lighter in weight. Tiny fibers that comprise about 2 percent of the mixture's volume partly account for its performance. Also, the materials in the concrete itself are designed for maximum flexibility. Because of its long life, the Engineered Cement Composites (ECC) are expected to cost less in the long run, as well." Michigan roads must make the perfect test cases for this stuff, and I look forward to their improvement.

399 comments

  1. A keyboard? by James_G · · Score: 4, Funny

    How quaint!

    1. Re:A keyboard? by Punboy · · Score: 5, Funny

      That would be SO much funnier if this were the right time period, if the article had to do with transparent aluminum, and if you had a scottish accent.

      --
      If you like what I've said here, and want to read more, go to http://www.krillrblog.com
    2. Re:A keyboard? by James_G · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      You're right.. it wasn't concrete, was it? Must be tired. Oh well.. the quote struck me when reading the summary, so I figured, what the hell..

    3. Re:A keyboard? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if he throws in a couple of humpback whales? Would that help?

    4. Re:A keyboard? by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Well, I dunno about you, but my keyboard at work starts to feel like flexable concrete at the end of each work day.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    5. Re:A keyboard? by Anti+Frozt · · Score: 4, Funny

      Good God man! He's already at +4, Funny. I dunnaw think I can push 'im much more, Cap'n.

      --
      In C++, friends can touch each others private parts.
    6. Re:A keyboard? by GlassUser · · Score: 1

      "Good God man!" then "He's already at +4, Funny. I dunnaw think I can push 'im much more, Cap'n." I think you're mixing your colorful metaphors.

    7. Re:A keyboard? by operagost · · Score: 1
      Thank God I'm not the only weirdo Trekkie who thought of "transparent aluminum" when he saw "bendable concrete."

      Hellooooo computer!

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    8. Re:A keyboard? by Nutria · · Score: 1

      I love ST:TOS just as much as any married-with-children geek, but how in the heck does anyone associate "transparent aluminum" with "bendable concrete"?

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    9. Re:A keyboard? by Mr+Z · · Score: 1

      Uhm, because both of them are odd composites that seem like improbable oxymorons?

  2. Buildings by antivoid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Now finally we can see buildings that bend and shift better under harsh weather conditions such as wind and rain.

    The benefits of this extend greatly beyond that as well however.

    It will be intresting to see where this goes...

    1. Re:Buildings by kcelery · · Score: 1, Interesting

      But when your house is on fire, those tiny fibres within the concrete block would lost strength when temperature go around 200 C. When the temperature went higher, combustion of the fibre would weaken concrete strength further.

    2. Re:Buildings by Velk · · Score: 5, Interesting

      How do you know that ? The article makes no mention of what the fibres are actually made of, let alone what their temperature response is. And how would they catch on fire if they are inside the concrete ? It would have to crack open to expose them to oxygen before that could happen, presuming that they are even flammable in the first place.

    3. Re:Buildings by Dead+Kitty · · Score: 4, Interesting

      buildings that bend and shift better under harsh weather conditions such as wind and rain

      Although it's good for a structure to have some flexibility under periodic loading (earthquakes, winds, etc.), the U of M article mentions applications like expansion joints and roads. In an expansion joint, the component is expected allow displacement to reduce pressure on other parts. Just think about a simple bridge with 2 expansion joints on both ends. Temperature changes will cause the bridge to expand/contract. Rigid joints on either end would prevent the structure from deforming freely so there would be a lot of added stress. The amount of force to resist this expansion/contraction is huge, (Any second year civil engineering students can back me up with some numbers) thus the need for expansion joints. The joints themselves aren't doing any significant load-bearing.

      Compare this to a building where much of the structure is supporting vertical loads (gravity). Imagine if a column was made from this stuff, nothing could depend on it for structural support due to its inability to resist deformation. So everything this column (or beam) is trying to hold up comes tumbling down. Just look at that video where the beam completely bends under the load.

      Flex in structures is good in hurricanes and stuff, but it doesn't do much good if it can't even hold itself up.

    4. Re:Buildings by travellerjohn · · Score: 1

      You mean like wood.

      The more things change, the more they stay the same

    5. Re:Buildings by wisdom_brewing · · Score: 1

      perhaps increase the composite, instead of having steel rods running through concrete, have steel rods running through the more elastic concrete, which, in turn, runs through standard brittle concrete. this would, perhaps, allow for a more gradual exertion of damaging forces on the various materials. seems to be logical, no?

    6. Re:Buildings by drgonzo59 · · Score: 1

      Having lived through a couple of major earthquakes I can share you excitement. I doubt though the buildings well be able to shift and bend like rubber, in other words it might not be obvious visibly but as long as they don't crack that'll help. I wonder though if the flexible concrete has a wider range of resonant frequencies, because if the earthquake or a strong wind hits one of those frequencies then the structure will easily fail.

    7. Re:Buildings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Now finally we can see buildings that bend and shift better under harsh weather conditions such as wind and rain.

      Tall buildings already bend and shift in the wind. Large sky scrapers even have stabalizers at the top so people don't get motion sick.

    8. Re:Buildings by CastrTroy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This will be very useful in Canada for sidewalk and maybe even roads. Which are constantly cracking due to freezing and thawing. Not that they ever replace the sidewalks, but now they wouldn't have to replace them because they wouldn't get cracked so much.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    9. Re:Buildings by Andy+Gardner · · Score: 1

      During the 9/11 attacks I believe the temperature was high enough to actually melt the steel embedded in the reinforced concrete which contributed to if not caused the structural failure. I doubt these fibers have a higher temp threshold than steel.

    10. Re:Buildings by ThePromenader · · Score: 1

      ("Scotty welsh" accent) "Ay seem te recall ma grea-grea-grea-grandaddy mentionnin' somethin' about mixin' horsehair wid 'is mortar. T'was when I was but a wee laddie, 'bout the twel'th century or so."

      --

      No, no sig. Really.

      ThePromenader
    11. Re:Buildings by Dayflowers · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The joints themselves aren't doing any significant load-bearing.

      Yes indeed. It is as you say.

      Imagine if a column was made from this stuff, nothing could depend on it for structural support due to its inability to resist deformation

      This however is not quite true. The article mentions the fact that this new cement is more flexible and resistent to bending. As it happens, cement is very very weak in such circumstances. The beams in a structure are made of Reinforced Concrete (RC) because of this.The concrete behaves well enough in compression, but has very little tensile strength and so it will crack very very soon. In fact, in a normal structure, there will always be some cracks. Calculations are made in order to keep these fairly small though ( below 0.3mm is what the EC2 recomends, but it depends on what the purpose of the structure is and its environment ).

      Since they say this new composite cement weights 40% less and has alot more tensile strength, I imagine that it is less rigid and thus can more easily have some problems in columns under horizontal loads (e.g. earthquakes) but that is not serious prolem. You just need slightly bigger sections for your columns, and the 40% weight reduction will cetainly compensate for that. Besides, you will only really have to worry about such problems if your columns have a low height/column-width ratio. You should also expect a bit more problems with the deformations of beams, but that can be solved with a little more steel to compensate.

      Worry not, the deformation of the columns under axial loads is NOT serious. Cement in such circumstances has a maximum deformation around 0.35%. It has hardly any significance for common applications.

      please note, I AM a Civil Eng. Student :)

      --
      I am a speak english. Do you not? - Saroto
    12. Re:Buildings by Phisbut · · Score: 1
      But when your house is on fire, those tiny fibres within the concrete block would lost strength when temperature go around 200 C.

      I'm actually more worried about the flexibility of the concrete... Somehow, I like my concrete rigid, cause I like my walls straight. Build a skyscraper out of this concrete, then what happens to the beams and walls on the first floor? Will they simply bend under the weight of the building?

      This thing might be ok for roads and such, but I'm not sure I would trust a building with flexible materials...

      --
      After 3 days without programming, life becomes meaningless
      - The Tao of Programming
    13. Re:Buildings by jellomizer · · Score: 2, Funny

      As the buildings are washing up and down while the sea stays as steady as a rock.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    14. Re:Buildings by big+tex · · Score: 1

      We have that.

      It's called steel.

      No, really, it works just fine.

      --
      I think I need a new sig here.
    15. Re:Buildings by drsquare · · Score: 1

      So, you reword something in the article summary, add a couple of meaningless sentences, and get +5 insightful. Four extra karma points without actually saying anything, or even having an opinion, or telling us anything. Is karma-whoring really that easy?

    16. Re:Buildings by drsquare · · Score: 1

      Concrete is a lot different to steel. Steel can be used for a skeleton for a building, concrete is the actual building itself. Also it's a lot cheaper. Concrete is just cast in place to form the building, steel has to be (expensively) processed into shape. Can you imagine making a cast-iron building, using iron where you would have used concrete? That's the sort of thing you're talking about.

    17. Re:Buildings by Nos. · · Score: 2, Insightful
      please note, I AM a Civil Eng. Student
      Cool, your miles ahead of me in understanding this.

      Here's a question for you then. Where I live (Saskatchewan, Canada) a serious problem in homes today is cracking of basement walls. As we live in one of the most widely varying temperature areas in the world (easily -40C to +40C every year), the freezing and thawing of the ground puts a lot of stress on basement walls. The city I live in is also built atop what used to be a swamp, so there tends to be a fair bit of moisture in the ground, which when it freezes, puts a lot of pressure on basement walls.
      Would this cement be the godsend I'm thinking it would be? In the last year I've seen two houses on my street that were jacked up to have their basements repoured (these houses are around 25 years old). Is this something that these companies should be looking at for future projects, especially if the cost is not significantly more?

      Thanks!
    18. Re:Buildings by why-is-it · · Score: 1
      Build a skyscraper out of this concrete, then what happens to the beams and walls on the first floor? Will they simply bend under the weight of the building?

      Skyscrapers are built out of steel. Concrete in and of itself has poor load-bearing characteristics. It is the steel inside the concrete that supports all the weight.

      --
      *** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
    19. Re:Buildings by alexhohio · · Score: 1

      Maybe I have been watching too much History channel- But I wonder how this stuff would be for creating bunkers, at least the the outer shell- Any type of structure that needs to not crack-
      As the parent said about Michigan roads- In Ohio we sure could use roads less succesptible to frost heave- And any time you can make concrete cheaper without lowering strength for roadways, gets an A+ from me- the main readon you see asphalt roads around here is due to cost savings.
      The Concrete Superhighway!!!

      --
      Almost every Harvard student was High School Valedictorian- After a year of college, half are in the bottom of the class
    20. Re:Buildings by why-is-it · · Score: 1
      Not that they ever replace the sidewalks,

      I'm way OT here, but we can thank the neo-conservative governments who transferred money from public infrastructure into tax cuts before the budget was balanced for that mess.

      I am not sure where you live, but here in Toronto , the streets and sidewalks are in rough shape from 10 years of not being properly maintained...

      --
      *** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
    21. Re:Buildings by big+tex · · Score: 1

      concrete is the actual building itself.
      No, in a steel-frame building, the concrete is just flooring. Buildings are systems; no component is 'the actual building'.
      Steel frame buildings use concrete decking, usually poured in place over steel pans, with the exterior cladding applied in panels.

      steel has to be (expensively) processed into shape.
      Buildings are really pretty simple to fabricate.
      Rolled shapes (Wide flanges, channels, angles) and HSS (tubing and pipes) don't really cost much more than plate stock. Once you have these beams, the expensive processing you speak of is really pretty simple: Cut to length, punch holes, weld on tabs for connections.

      The real economics of steel come about in two areas:
      Smaller frame and structural volume = more rentable space;
      Prefabricated steel frames and pans reduce the construction time and onsite labor, which is usually much more expensive.

      --
      I think I need a new sig here.
    22. Re:Buildings by walt-sjc · · Score: 1

      Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the WTC steel issue was not steel encased in concrete, but steel without enough sprayed-on fireproofing to handle the intense heat. Furthermore, if it were not for the extra 20,000 gallons of Jet fuel, there wouldn't have been a problem either. A normal fire would not have caused that much damage / weakening of the steel...

    23. Re:Buildings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thermite or something similar did that. That jet fuel melting steel is a dodge they use to get away with that insider coup attack. Burning jet fuel did not melt that steel and keep it molten for days and days. I defy anyone to provide any other example in history where burning kerosene kept steel melted like that in some building fire.

    24. Re:Buildings by Gumpmaster · · Score: 1

      Sorry to get all engineery on you, but I would guess that the modulus of elasticity of this material is comparable to regular reinforced concrete. It's the geometry of the cross section that actually determines how much a member will bend under load (assuming the elastic moduli are about the same). The picture in the article shows a very thin sheet which would have a low moment of inertia and thus would bend easily. The fibers and the chemical makeup of the concrete simply keep it from breaking when it bends.

      --
      Pod Six was jerks- Capt. Murphy
    25. Re:Buildings by Gumpmaster · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This concrete would probably help, but there are other solutions to reducing cracking in concrete members. -Post tensioned reinforcement in basement walls would eliminate cracking -Better conventional reinforcement would reduce the width of cracks. Other options are exterior applied fiber reinforcement and prestressed concrete walls.

      --
      Pod Six was jerks- Capt. Murphy
    26. Re:Buildings by Andy+Gardner · · Score: 1

      Forgive me the WTC was an incorrect example of the point i was trying to make. I believe the WTC was of hollow steel construction, however even without the extreme temperatures present during the WTC failure hollow steel structures are susceptible to sustained elevated temperatures over prolonged periods. Probably a moot point though as a normal fire could have been dealt with before causing failure.
      The point i was trying to make (albeit poorly) was that a reinforcing material encased within concrete does not necassarily need to be exposed directly to flame to be weakened. Normal reinforced conrete under low/moderate load typically only has a fire resistance of about 2 hours.

    27. Re:Buildings by afidel · · Score: 1

      You are wrong, the primary problem was that the force of the impact removed a significant amount of fire protectant from the beams in the area of the fire. The jet fuel probably threw a large amount of thermal energy into the mix, however it would have been long burned off by the time the towers fell. The best guesses at this point are plastics and paper from the office fueled by high speed winds from the large holes in the building were what caused the beams to weaken and ultimatly pull from their moorings.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    28. Re:Buildings by SupremeTaco · · Score: 1

      Sorry to bust your bubble here, but steel CANNOT be made molten from burning jet fuel in open air. Also, steel buildings have stood up to much more abuse, and haven't collapsed.

      Yes, I'll probably take a karma hit on this one, but this myth has gone on long enough.

      --
      You have a constitutionally protected right to be wrong, and I the right to ignore you.
    29. Re:Buildings by Leroy_Brown242 · · Score: 1

      I think, in a logical world (I know, don't laugh), it's be an easier sell to penny pinching governments a material that will last a lot longer and not require replacement so quickly.

    30. Re:Buildings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes!

      (+5 Insightful! Gogogo!)

    31. Re:Buildings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      are you familiar with the fucking term "blast furnace"

      fucking conspiracy nut

    32. Re:Buildings by SuprCzr · · Score: 1

      doesnt have to melt... all you need to have is for it to become plastic (in a materials sense)... just because it does not liquify, doesnt mean that it doesnt change properties... if youre gonna argue, at least know your subjects. I recommend a class on metal working, you could use some education on grain growth and crystalline structures.

      --
      SUPRCZR
    33. Re:Buildings by Type-R · · Score: 1

      But steel loses a LOT of it's strength long before it's molten. Many buildings have taken more physical punishment, but few have had that much fuel burn inside of them for that long.

    34. Re:Buildings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was just about to post something like that. It was so damn obvious, and I hate how fucking garbage like that post get modded up.

    35. Re:Buildings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then why didn't the Pentagon burn as hot as the WTC?

      Just asking a question, and hopefully I won't get flamed (no pun intended) like the GP did.

    36. Re:Buildings by SidV · · Score: 1

      My understanding of some of the problems in areas of Canada is beyond the freeze/thaw problem you discuss. Though that effects it.

      I was just speaking with someone in Canada aboutthis two days ago. Part of the problem is an AAR (Alkaline aggregate reaction) wherby the minerals in the water re-combine in the concrete causing it to grow, and increase stress. this combined with the freeze thaw creates the cracks, and it is a particular problem in Cnada based upon the materials used to make the concrete.

      therefore, while this might be a solution, it would take long term testing to confirm.

    37. Re:Buildings by kent_eh · · Score: 1

      Especially the roads.

      Here in Winnipeg the city budgets 1.1 Million per year just to patch potholes caused by freeze/thaw in the concrete road surface*. That is just for patching, not replacing or doing proper repairs to the road.

      * The temperature is only one contributing factor, the other is the soil conditions... There's nothing "solid" under the roads. It's all a silt-clay material under the surface. To build a road they dig down as much as 12 feet, and fill it with crushed rock, in thin compacted layers. Even with that, the roads still shift and crack within a couple of years.

      --

      ---
      "I can't complain, but sometimes still do..." Joe Walsh
    38. Re:Buildings by shawb · · Score: 1

      Incorrect. Politicians look for cost savings DURING THEIR TERM. As long as it looks good long enough to keep the job or help them get a promotion (alderman -> mayor -> governor -> president or whatever) they're all for it.

      --
      I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
    39. Re:Buildings by walt-sjc · · Score: 1

      I did not say it melted. I said it was weakened. When steel gets hot, it gets soft.

    40. Re:Buildings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Roads!!!!...with the freezing/heating situation, we get huge holes. I'm from Montreal and the roads are soooo bad here...and this is the worse time of the year.
      This is for sure a technology that the gouvernment should look into.

    41. Re:Buildings by matt2004 · · Score: 1

      Skyscrapers are built out of steel.

      In fact, the second tallest buildings in the world right now (The Petronas Towers in Malaysia) are made of concrete. Concrete is wonderful as a building material because its flowable nature allows for a nearly infinite variety of shapes, and it does not have "poor load bearing characteristics." It is the most most commonly used structural material, period.

      The problem with traditional concrete is its poor tension strength. This makes applications where bending is likely to take place challenging, which is where the reinforcing steel comes in. Reinforcement in concrete is meant to take tension forces, and the reinforcement used in typical applications is typically less than 5%. The concrete carries the bulk of the load, the reinforcing steel merely helps bridge cracks to provide tension capacity.

    42. Re:Buildings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      steel loses a LOT of it's strength

      "its".

    43. Re:Buildings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I like my concrete rigid, cause I like my walls straight. Build a skyscraper out of this concrete, then what happens to the beams and walls on the first floor? Will they simply bend under the weight of the building?"

      Skyscrapers are designed to bend slightly under loads such as high winds. I think that the WTC towers swayed so much in high winds that they made people on the top floors seasick.

  3. Roads? Hah by nounderscores · · Score: 4, Funny

    How about a concrete jumping castle?

    1. Re:Roads? Hah by kfg · · Score: 1

      How about a concrete jumping castle?

      And I thought living in a castle in the air was a bit inconvenient at times. I don't even want to think about what would happen to the china.

      KFG

    2. Re:Roads? Hah by netcrusher88 · · Score: 1

      Jumping castle? How about a flying citadel?

      --
      There's an old saying that says pretty much whatever you want it to.
    3. Re:Roads? Hah by Forthan+Red · · Score: 1

      I thought they already used this stuff to build the Tacomas Narrows Bridge.

  4. Michigan Roads? You Mean Minefields! by n3v · · Score: 1

    I've bent many a rim here...

    1. Re:Michigan Roads? You Mean Minefields! by kattphud · · Score: 1

      How about Oklahoma roads? This state used to have "the best highway system in the country" (or so it claimed), then the politicians decided "OK, now that we're the best, we can divert the revenue from the toll booths (that we promised to take out when the highways were paid for) to our pork-barrel projects (with the excuse that some of the money will go to education, though it will be pennies if anything), and neglect the highways entirely, because they're the best and will stay that way forever!" ôôOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOklahoma where everything really really suuuucks...ôô

    2. Re:Michigan Roads? You Mean Minefields! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how is that flamebait.. you mods are weird.. his wife does like a fat black one.. I know.. i fucked the bitch homie

    3. Re:Michigan Roads? You Mean Minefields! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Oklahoma roads are not nearly as bad as the crap they call "expressways" in Michigan. Michigan roads are subjected to continual freezing and thawing sometimes in the same week (2 weeks ago it was near 80 on Tuesday and freezing with snow by Sunday). There is virtually no public transportation, so everyone drives... and just to punish the roads a bit more, at 82 tons Michigan's truck weight limit is more than double the national average of 40 tons. Add an underfunded MDOT that outsources most of it's work to 3rd party construction companies and you have a recipe for blown tires and bumpy rides. At least with the 2006 Superbowl coming to Detroit they are pusing the ususal summer road construction into overdrive so they roads are at least halfway decent around here before the press shows up. Of course now if this new concrete tests well on an experimental stretch of highway it will usher in a new 15 year schedule of road construction while they upgrade all the major highways...

      As the old saying goes, there are only 2 seasons in Michigan: winter and road construction.

    4. Re:Michigan Roads? You Mean Minefields! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "at 82 tons Michigan's truck weight limit is more than double the national average of 40 tons"

      Funny thing about Michigan's truck weights. Ever wonder why trucks have so many axles in Michigan? Because in the seventy's the politicians decided to try and fix the road problem by reducing the per axle weight.

      So what did the truck companies do? Add more axles! So now the trucks could not only carry more, but now there were more tires on the road to cause even more damage.

      In reality Michigan's per axle weight limit is lower than most other states, but because the trucks have more axles, they end up being able to carry over twice as much as any other state, nice huh?

      Who couldn't have seen that coming? Politicians!!!

  5. Roads by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Michigan roads must make the perfect test cases for this stuff

    Except that roads crack because water infiltrates under the surface and freezes over. I don't know many material, even 500x stronger concrete, that can withstand the force of expanding freezing water.

    I think the material is more targeted toward seismic-proof constructions.

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    1. Re:Roads by myowntrueself · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "I don't know many material, even 500x stronger concrete, that can withstand the force of expanding freezing water."

      Its flexible.

      It doesn't need to withstand the force, it gives a little.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    2. Re:Roads by DietCoke · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "I don't know many material, even 500x stronger concrete, that can withstand the force of expanding freezing water."

      Clearly you haven't experienced the joys of ice-cube trays.

      Don't ask me how to apply that material to roads, though.

    3. Re:Roads by kfg · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Clearly you haven't experienced the joys of ice-cube trays."

      What have Jell-O shots got to do with it?

      KFG

    4. Re:Roads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem of water under a road is solved by using subdrains consisting usually of clean stone to outlet the water.

    5. Re:Roads by vought · · Score: 1

      It doesn't need to withstand the force, it gives a little.

      Supertramp - Give A Little Bit Lyrics
      Roger Hodgson & Rick Davies
      --
      Give a little bit (of your tensile strength)
      Give a little bit (of your tensile strength) of your love to me
      Give a little bit (of your tensile strength)
      I'll give a little bit of my love to you
      There's so much that we need to share
      Send a smile and show you care
      I'll give a little bit (of your tensile strength)
      I'll give a little bit (of your tensile strength)
      So give a little bit (of your tensile strength)
      Give a little bit (of your tensile strength)

    6. Re:Roads by nippinout · · Score: 1

      The cracking is due to the ice entering cracks and freezing, thawing, and freezing again in the larger and propogated cracks.

      To ensure good freeze-thaw strength, air entrainment is used to allow the ice to expand.

      Cracked concrete is not always a bad thing! Concrete forms, when designed correctly, take into account cracking over its servicable life. When you are driving, look at the bridges you go under, there are cracks and chunks of concrete missing.

      This is not unsafe. The concrete at the top of the beam is in compression (which we want), and at the bottom the concrete is in tension (which is a bad thing). BUT, that concrete in tension is only used as a cover to prevent rebar from rusting. Removing chunks of that tension concrete is not decreasing the overall strenght of the beam, as long as the steel rebar is not exposed.

    7. Re:Roads by vought · · Score: 2, Funny

      Clearly you haven't experienced the joys of ice-cube trays.

      Don't ask me how to apply that material to roads, though.


      Sure as I c'n set a wireless tower in the holler, I c'n say that there a'int no way to freeze the roads south of Virginny!

    8. Re:Roads by nobuzz · · Score: 1

      When you are driving, look at the bridges you go under, there are cracks and chunks of concrete missing. This is not unsafe.

      unless you happen to be driving under when a chunk falls off

    9. Re:Roads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wear a helmet.

    10. Re:Roads by ectospasm · · Score: 1

      Not all roads crack because of freezing water. Take New Orleans for example, which has some of the worst paved roads in the US if not the world. All the roads are built on a swamp, and little if any freezing occurs during the year. In some parts the roads are bad because of old cedar stumps that the swamp pushes up. Roads in New Orleans are in a constant state of disrepair because of this. It is not uncommon to run into troughs in the road that are three feet deep. We sometimes call them "tank traps."

      I think this flexible concrete could help there, too.

      --


      We are the music makers. We are the dreamers of the dreams.
    11. Re:Roads by NotThatKindOfDoctor · · Score: 0

      I guess you didn't read the article. They are using it on roads and bridges. It can be used to form a continuous deck instead of having concrete sections with expansion joints. Also, there already IS concrete out there that is resistant to cracking, it is just expensive. Have you ever noticed that airport runways don't develop potholes as fast as roads do? The runways have rubberized concrete that is much better than the stuff on the roads, but more costly. Maybe this new stuff has a better price/performance ratio.

    12. Re:Roads by hal2814 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "I think the material is more targeted toward seismic-proof constructions." You mean like jigsaw-puzzle-shaped bricks? (Real geeks will get the reference.)

    13. Re:Roads by drunkennewfiemidget · · Score: 1

      Take New Orleans for example, which has some of the worst paved roads in the US if not the world.

      I have two words for you my friend: Newfoundland, Canada. Worst. Roads. Ever.

    14. Re:Roads by Richthofen80 · · Score: 1

      Not to mention, aren't roads paved with a non-concrete material? I'm pretty sure the stuff that is poured into housing foundations is not the same as the stuff they use on the road. as a non-scientific explanation, I often see pavement applied steaming hot, which is kind of a tar like stuff. I only see cement poured from those giant trucks and it never seems hot when poured.

      --
      Reason, free market capitalism, and individualism
    15. Re:Roads by theguyfromsaturn · · Score: 1

      Actually, the main reason for roads cracking is the deformation of the underlying soil. As soil settles unevently, lots of stresses are induced in the surface material. The more brittle the material, the more likely it is that there will be cracks forming. The greater the difference of stiffness between the surfacing material and the underlying soil and the greater the stress concentrations on the stiff material.

      Once a tiny crack is there, water fills is, and during freezing conditions, expands it, then , more water is able to fill the hole and the cycle continues. The question is, is this flexible concrete MORE flexible than asphalt? Because even asphalt is suceptible to this, although at a much lesser degree. And yes, if a crack did form in the first place, water will be able to expand it as it adds stress to an initial stress that was already able to cause the crack.

      --
      I like my dinosaurs feathery, and my pterosaurs hairy (or is it pycnofibery?)
    16. Re:Roads by QMO · · Score: 1

      Pretty much any textile handles repeated freezing/thawing cycles just fine.
      The ice-cube trays in my freezer haven't cracked yet, either.
      It is the inflexibility of the material that causes it to crack when the shape is changed.

      --
      Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
    17. Re:Roads by indy_Muad'Dib · · Score: 2, Insightful

      your thinking of Asphalt.

      the reason the roads go to hell in a few years is because of the way asphalt is designed and manufactured. if they were to use concrete instead the roads would last 5x longer but cost 2x as much.

      your local government (the one who is in charge of maintaining the road systems in your area) only wants to see temp fixes now, they dont care that if they pay more the roads will still be in great shape in 40 years, they wont be in office then. let the next guy take the blame.

      they would rather pay 500,000 now and 100,000 every 2 years in patch work for 20 years than pay 1,000,000 now and have roads that last 40 years.

      you hire the lowest bidder to do the work, you get the lowest quality as well.

    18. Re:Roads by QMO · · Score: 1

      Helmet
      n, 1. tinfoil hat augumented to protect against more things than mind-control rays

      --
      Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
    19. Re:Roads by QMO · · Score: 1

      Some roads are paved with asphalt (tarmac, macadam, blacktop) which basically tar mixed with gravel.
      Other roads are paved with concrete.
      Asphalt has advantages of smoothness, less cracking, less expense, cheaply recyclable, quicker to build the road.
      Concrete has the advantages that it wears much more slowly (requiring high-traffic roads to be repaved much less often) and provides structural strength when building bridges, etc.
      There are probably other advantages and disadvantages that I don't know about, and there are other paving methods too (so no one feels left out because of their bricks/cobbles/dirt/gravel/etc.)

      --
      Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
    20. Re:Roads by JustOK · · Score: 1

      Yah, must be rough for the fish. You'd be better off in Labrador.

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    21. Re:Roads by fain0v · · Score: 1

      One of the main reasons why michigan roads are so bad is due to a lack of weight restrictions for commercial semis. As a michigan driver, if this new concrete withstands weight better over time, I am all for it!

    22. Re:Roads by kria · · Score: 1

      However, I've heard one of the other reasons for horrible road conditions are the quantity of semis that drive I-75 both for the car manufacturers and as one of the major routes to Canada.

      I Am Not a Civil Engineer, so I can't verify that, but that's what I heard growing up in southeast Michigan.

    23. Re:Roads by browngb · · Score: 0

      The first rule of concrete is that no matter what you do, it will crack. That's why you have expansion joints. Things to consider for road use would be how porous the material is (allowing water to enter and crack it as you pointed out), and how resistent to wear it will be. It may be 500x stronger, but not 500x more durable. That's to say it might be able to stand 500x more direct loading, but not 500x more traffic driving over it, accelerating, and braking.

      I imagine this stuff will be used in structual design, like high rises and bridges. Traditional concrete is performs very, very poorly in tensile applications, but it amazing in compression applications. If this material will perform better in tensile applications then steel reinforced concrete, and is cheaper, the construction industry could be revamped overnight. I believe there's been material like this before though, and the cost prohibited it from being used in construction.

      --
      Generally, I get bored with my replies and give up on making sense halfway through.
    24. Re:Roads by plopez · · Score: 1

      water isn't the only thing which degrades roads. If you have ever seen the bouncing tires of a heavy over the road truck as you were passing it, you can imagine the impacts the road is actually taking. A little 'give' could extend the life of the road.

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    25. Re:Roads by Dayflowers · · Score: 1

      I sincerely doubt it is more flexible than asphalt. It would be quite odd if it was. Asphalt is VERY flexible. Concrete on the other hand is not.

      Roads built with cement (rigid pavements) are (structurally) considerably different from roads using asphalt (flexible pavements). They are more resistent than asphalt roads and will usually have less of a problem with the deformation of the soil for they have some tensile strength and are rigid enough to distribute the loads over a wider surface, thus diminishing the stress on the soil and its deformations. They are however more sensitive to the forst-defrost cycles.

      Asphalt roads (flexible pavements) are by nature permeable. They are built in layers and at least the top layer you'll usually want it to be permeable, but down below you'll want the exact oposite, otherwise you'll have problems not only with the frost-defrost cycles, but also because the resistence of the underlying soil wich is supporting the pavement will decrease a great deal and affect the structure's resistence as a whole.

      --
      I am a speak english. Do you not? - Saroto
    26. Re:Roads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Michigan roads must make the perfect test cases for this stuff

      Ha! That presumes that the industrial complex would even allow better roads to be made! If we made roads that lasted 100 years, what would all those road-building companies do? Go under, that's what!

      A

    27. Re:Roads by dhollist · · Score: 1

      The poor condition of Michigan roads is often blamed on our severe winter weather, but one only needs to look at states with similarly harsh winters to realize that something else is to blame. New York and Minnesota have more extreme winters but better roads. Michigan's main problem is that our laws allow trucks to weigh up to 164,000 pounds. Other states limit this to 80,000 pounds.

    28. Re:Roads by Blue-Footed+Boobie · · Score: 1

      In ice cube trays, the top is open which allows the expanding water room to...well...expand.

      --
      DAMN YOU OCTODOG! DAMN YOU TO HELL!
    29. Re:Roads by theguyfromsaturn · · Score: 1

      What I meant to say was that cracking of the surface would be less of a concern than with asphalt, only if the material was MORE FLEXIBLE than asphalt. You are correct in stating that it is very unlikely that concrete would be more flexible than asphalt though.

      That being said, as your asphalt ages, it does lose flexibility, and becomes rather brittle. Some of the volatile hydrocarbons that contributed to its flexibility are long gone. However it is still remains more flexible than any concrete I've seen indeed.

      But usually, the advantage of concrete surfaces over asphalt, is its reistance to wear and tear. You need to have frequent joints to avoid cracking due both to settlement of the soil and heat expansion cycles in any concrete surface because it is stiff.

      Therefore the flexibility of this concrete, may not be so much of an advantage for road construction. It is certainly interesting in construction, though, where ductility of members is important to give timely warnings of imminent failures.

      A brittle beam would only let you know it was failing as it fell on top of your head with the floors above it with it. Hardly useful for evacuation purposes. It is generally preferred in those cases to have a more ductile structural member, even if weaker (in which case you have to increase the number of members or their cross-sectional area).

      As for permeability, the surfacing material is the least permeable part of any road, because you want to avoid water migrating through it to the underlying layers. You also give it a slope so you can get rid of the water which will slide nicely on top of it.

      As a rule the bottom part is very coarse and easy to drain. You don't want water to pond in your earth structures, and water moves downward because of gravity (there is also some upward migration in fine grained soils which is why you can have ice lensing right below the pavement, and why on many roads heavy traffic is forbidden during spring thaw). Like in a bathtub, you drain at the bottom, so there is where you put your coarsest material. Your topmost material is your umbrella, and is the leat permeable of all.

      --
      I like my dinosaurs feathery, and my pterosaurs hairy (or is it pycnofibery?)
    30. Re:Roads by Retric · · Score: 1

      That's one way to look at it. If you look at your numbers and compare them with a simple investment at 6% ROI that 500k costs you around 11,236$ every 2 years anyway so it's not as clear cut as you make it out to be.

      The other problem is roads need to be cut up for many reasons such as underground power, phone, gas, or water lines. At which point spending less money up front starts to look even more appealing.

    31. Re:Roads by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 1

      My computer is dreaming...

    32. Re:Roads by HiThere · · Score: 1

      The Viliancourt Fountain?
      After the last earthquake the army almost hauled it away as rubbish, before some fool informed them that it was supposed to look like that.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    33. Re:Roads by John+Harrison · · Score: 1
      Ask the state of Utah about the super-strong Syncrete that it put on its roads in the 1980s. It was cheaper and stronger than normal concrete. It turns out that it was a spectacular failure and didn't handle cards passing over it well. Chips of it would fly up and go through your windshield. But it proved to be very durable when they tried to remove it. It cost millions to jackhammer away that layer of roadway.

      Moral of this story? Do a long term pilot on a short strech of road that sees some use. Plan to be able to remove it if need be.

    34. Re:Roads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then just constantly bake the roads warm and dry with microwave satellite. Also tilt the road for faster rain water drainage as seen on the German autobahn

    35. Re:Roads by hal2814 · · Score: 1

      At least one person got it.

    36. Re:Roads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Judging by the illustration accompanying the article, this stuff would flex over bumps in the material beneath it, which might make it humpy after a while, but wouldn't necesarily crack it.

      Humpy roads can be a problem. In DC, they use a particular hot asphalt mix that softens so much in hot weather that it gets pushed into hills and valleys. At speed, these are almost as bad as broken pavement.

    37. Re:Roads by jweage · · Score: 1

      There are definately other causes:

      • quality of material
      • reinforcement
      • paving depth
      • truck traffic/weight

      and so on. There are a couple of state highways between MI and WI that go from crap (MI) to rather nice (WI) as you cross the border - can't claim that this is due to the weather or traffic patterns.

      I heard some mention that Germany builds the autobahn with approximately twice the paving depth that is used in the U.S., which is why it stays so smooth.

    38. Re:Roads by bluGill · · Score: 1

      If you are intested in Michigan roads, have your legislators look into the results of MnRoad[1]. Minnesota is spending a lot of money on road research, and our climate is at least as bad as yours.

      If you look at road research in the last few years, the vast majority are primary reports based on data from this project. Nobody else has spend 25 million to gather data on roads in real world situations. This means that any new roads built to modern standards will be built based on the assumptions of a Minnesota climate. (Since ours is one of the harshest climates overall[2] this means you are getting better roads than you need)

      [1]The plane that took the picture on their homepage almost had to fly over my house. Though a good pilot could have avoided it if he cared.

      [2]Most places in the world can claim to get something more extreme than MN, but the grand total of it all puts MN as one of the most extreme climates.

    39. Re:Roads by shawb · · Score: 1

      But once those cracks are there, the freeze-thaw cycles of water IN the cracks will increase the cracking (Your ice cube trays are open at the top. Try putting a can of soda or even a closed bottled of water in the freezer for a couple days and see what happens.) The underlying shape of the soils will change a lot more with freeze-thaw cycles. Just google for frost heave to find out.

      --
      I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
    40. Re:Roads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This research dovetails nicely with Detroit automakers' efforts. Over the past century they've been working diligently to develop vehicles that emit chemicals into the atmosphere to produce chemically-enhanced raindrops that won't freeze.

    41. Re:Roads by RomanD · · Score: 1

      Perhaps this is a little sort sighted after all its possible that the original cause of water penetration is the fact that concrete can't flex. In other words if concrete does not develop cracks than it won't have to face water expansion forces.

    42. Re:Roads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No weight limits on Michigan roads??
      What planet are YOU living on? Michigan, as well as most other contigious 48 have a weight limit of 16,000 lbs per axle. Some roads in Michigan have even less, especially during the freeze/thaw cycle of the cold months. The REAL reason(s) Michigan has terrible roads, especially in SouthEast Michigan (You know who you are) can be answered in two ways:
      Michigan is situated on either swamp or sand dune. Bedrock is tens of meters below the surface in most places.

      Contractors have constructed roads in the past to fail early, it is called JOB SECURITY.

      There ARE a few examples of "Good Roads" in Michigan though.
      US127 South of Jackson was paved using the old concrete as a base (crushed and compacted) and paved with multiple layers of asphalt 10 inches deep.
      US131 between Plainwell and Grand Rapids, built the same way.

      10 years later (or more) these roads are as smooth as the day they were completed.

      A Michigan Truckdriving geek type

    43. Re:Roads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would you want to go back to steel wheels?

  6. Springs made out of concrete by LemonFire · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I remember reading an article that talked about differenct concrete compounds, for example they had made a spring out of concrete.

    -- Error: SIG not found.

    1. Re:Springs made out of concrete by MacroRex · · Score: 4, Informative

      There is also translucent concrete which works by having optical fibers mixed in.

    2. Re:Springs made out of concrete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahh Flexible Transparent Concrete..now thats the future...

      Hmm you could build prisons out of it.
      Prisoners get sunlight(sort of) and gaurds can see in(sort of)

    3. Re:Springs made out of concrete by hotdiggitydawg · · Score: 0

      With optical fibers, what are the odds of the information superhighway actually being a highway in future?

    4. Re:Springs made out of concrete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think I remember seeing a spring made of very pure concrete on the BBC (Tomorrow's World) about 15 years ago. I don't remember any fibers being involved, just highly refined cement.

      Presumably it suffered from the curse of Tomorrow's World

      O

    5. Re:Springs made out of concrete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great idea! Instead of fibre to the curb, it's in the curb!

  7. concrete submarine by nounderscores · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wonder if this new concrete may enhance the concrete submarine programme for deep submersibles.

    Being in something with a bit more toughness, and better tensile strenght might be more reassuring. A little less like going to sea in an eggshell.

    1. Re:concrete submarine by goonies · · Score: 1

      Acc. to your link, the subs already use kevlar reenforced concrete... like it says in the article above, this is not really new technology... we can do this for years... (breaktrough could be, to make it as cheap as or even cheaper than normal concrete)

      --
      .sigh
    2. Re:concrete submarine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats the coolest sub idea I've seen in a while

      I'll take two.

    3. Re:concrete submarine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder how well those would hold up against ADCAP torpedoes?

    4. Re:concrete submarine by nietsch · · Score: 1

      Why more tensile strenght? if you are down below, all that watere is trying to crush your boat together, not trying to bend it (like what happens on the surface with big waves)

      this bendy concrete will be no good for sub, as it contains even more air in the mix. That is fine for dry environments, but bad in marine environments. Or would you like a porous submarine?

      --
      This space is intentionally staring blankly at you
    5. Re:concrete submarine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Even more scary, a couple hundred atmospheres of pressure.

      The pressure in the ocean increases by about 1 atmosphere for every 10 meters of depth. The average depth of the ocean is about 4 km, so the pressure on the sea floor is about 400 atmospheres.
      from here

      Does that torpedo you're talking about generate 1000 ATM of pressure? (10,911.5 m of water at the Challenger Deep in the Marianas Trench)
    6. Re:concrete submarine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      You're misinterpreting the Popular Mechanics article. These are not deep submersibles. The advantage of a concrete submarine, like the advantage of a WWII Liberty ship, is that it is cheap. That's it. Cheap. It doesn't perform better, it doesn't last longer, and if you're a civil engineer, you'd probably laugh at the idea of crawling into one and diving into the deeper depths of the ocean.

      The WWII Liberty ship had a design life of 5 years and a "positive" ROI if it managed to survive its first (outbound) trip to deliver cargo to Europe. The entire vessel could be completed in an average of roughly 60 days. You could build them quickly using forms, you could build a lot of them using cheap materials, and they couldn't be sunk quickly enough to cut off the British from the American industrial complex. Now imagine the concrete submarine. Same principle, different wartime purpose.

      Now the nerdly part. From a materials perspective, you're dead wrong.

      To start with, the nit: Concrete has practically no tensile strength in comparison to steel - reinforced concrete design assumes that all tensile strength is provided by the embedded steel rebar.

      Next, the myth: Concrete has good compressive strength - high strength varieties can have crush pressures exceeding 140 megapascals. Steel has much better compressive strength - high strength varieties can have crush pressures exceeding 2500 megapascals. Steel is stronger, but vastly more expensive. Concrete is weaker, but, literally, dirt cheap. Reinforced concrete is a practical compromise that optimizes economy versus loads for a particular design envelope (notice that modern skyscrapers do not have loads of reinforced concrete incorporated into their design).

      Next, the mechanical nit: unless you've designed a perfect sphere, your concrete submarine will not only have to resist compression. Various parts of the structure will experience "tension" in response to bending moments and shear forces that resist the spreading tendency that will occur in a non-spherical, hollow form subjected to a pressure differential (tension is in quotes because I'm referring to subelements that are being pulled apart, not to the entire cross section as is normally the case). You can mitigate this problem by using pre-stressed concrete, so that the entire structure is under compression, but you will have spent a portion of your compression resistance to eliminate that problem. Steel makes your life much, much easier.

      Finally, the materials problem: Concrete is porous and breaks down in marine environments as the salts attack the calcium hydroxide matrix, dissolving the cohesive minerals, depositing non-cohesive minerals, and splitting the crystalline structure like ice and the Old Man of the Mountain. Concrete is used in marine environments, but it deteriorates comparatively quickly. Now cycle your concrete though tens or hundreds of atmospheres of pressure in a marine environment. Your concrete will deteriorate even more quickly. Coatings will help, but they will have to be inspected frequently because of the frequent depressurization.

      In conclusion, it would be a bad idea. The depth limitations of current deep submersibles are not caused by the pressure hull, but instead by more practical considerations like transport and life support. See http://www.unols.org/committees/dessc/replacement_ HOV/new_hov_brochure.pdf (PDF link).

    7. Re:concrete submarine by robertjw · · Score: 1

      (breaktrough could be, to make it as cheap as or even cheaper than normal concrete)

      Yeah, like for my driveway. No more cracks - Woo Hoo.

    8. Re:concrete submarine by chrisnewbie · · Score: 1

      What about all that pressure down there? wouldnt flexible be a little bit dangerous!

    9. Re:concrete submarine by twiddlingbits · · Score: 1

      Concrete lasts longer than steel in a marine environment, thats why it is used to build bridges over water instead of steel pilings. Why it does break down it takes longer and it takes more breakdown to affect it's structural integrity. Eventually the entire underwater portion becomes coated with barnacles and the effect of the salt water corrosion slows down. Steel has to be thicker, and it has to be kept painted and any hints of corrision stopped quickly. An example is many bridges over salt water (such as the Golden Gate) are under constant maintenance to keep the steel sound. They paint the bridge from one end to the other and when they reach the other end it's been long enough they have to start over again.

    10. Re:concrete submarine by bdcrazy · · Score: 1

      Concrete Submarines on the other hand work.

      http://concretecanoe.org/

      Its fun watching them build and race them.
      UIC has a concrete canoe club and its fun watching them build and race them.

      --
      Tonights forecast: Dark. Continued dark throughout most of the evening, with some widely-scattered light towards morning
    11. Re:concrete submarine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And of course i meant canoe, i even previewed it.

    12. Re:concrete submarine by CyBlue · · Score: 0

      The article says: "Because concrete is strong in compression, C-subs could sink well below the 1800-ft. 'crush depth' for steel". I don't see how that could be misinterpreted. It directly says that these subs can go deeper than a steel sub. I'm sure other hurdles such as water-tight coatings will be dealt with. How much other information in your reply did you make up? Unless you're an engineer specializing in concrete composites I would have to wonder.

    13. Re:concrete submarine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know what, you're right. I only took classes in mechanics, materials, design in concrete, design in reinforced concrete, design in steel, participated in a concrete canoe team and a steel bridge team, obtained both a bachelor's and master's degree in civil engineering, worked for 5 years in the field, and bothered to include actual figures in my reply.

      How much did I make up?

      Why didn't you google for the compressive strength of concrete? Why didn't you google for the compressive strength of steel? Why can't you explain the ten fold difference in those figures?

      Oh, and then there's that obviously made up link to an obviously made up PDF about obviously fictional DSVs.

      Why didn't you notice that Alvin has a rated depth of 4,500 meters, that it's replacement will have a rated depth of 6,500 meters, and that neither vehicle is made of concrete?

      Oh, and in case you still doubt and are still too lazy to research this issue that you obviously care enough to post about, try this:

      http://www.whoi.edu/marops/vehicles/alvin/alvin_hi story.html

      The meat is in the third paragraph.

      But Popular Mechanics says that any steel submersible will crush at 1,800 feet, so it must be true. [oral cursing omitted]

    14. Re:concrete submarine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think that GP was blasting you for giving the figures. He was saying that you were posting a position contrary to the article. You posted anonymously with no credentials. In most people that really pushes the troll button.

      And he had the decency to say "well, you may be an engineer specializing in concrete composites" admitting that there is a chance that you were, indeed, right, and that the original article was a load of dingo's kidneys.

      He wasn't singling you out, just overly cautious due to the number of idiot trolls out there.

    15. Re:concrete submarine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are jumping to the conclusion that concrete subs cannot go deep---you are presuming a constant hull thickness. Steel pressure hulls are usually of order 1-2 cm (plus structural ribs); the concrete hull could easily be two feet thick all over.

    16. Re:concrete submarine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't dispute the basic facts that you're describing, but I'll note that you're talking about fixed structures that are not easily protected by electrical means, and that there are many more factors involved in the selection of concrete for caissons (which frequently are used to transmit loads to geology other than bedrock).

      On a vessel, you do not want the additional weight and drag created by the growth of barnacles. Corrosion is commonly prevented by a combination of marine coatings and sacrificial anodes or active cathodic protection. From a technology standpoint, anti-corrosion resistance is better understood and developed with respect to steel vessels than is salt resistance with respect to marine concrete structures (e.g., Florida Department of Transportation research concerning bridge pilings).

      http://www.farwst.com/fwst/anodimpr/elg04.htm

      Caissons have the significant advantage of being absolutely frikkin' huge and static. What I suspect, but I do not know, is that high pressure cycling of concrete in salt water will significantly speed the aging process due to chemical reactions and physical stresses within the surface layers of the porous concrete. It would have made for an interesting graduate thesis, assuming that there isn't already a body of relevant academic work.

    17. Re:concrete submarine by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
      As a funny aside, the U.S. did experiment with concrete ships in WWI and WWII.

      Most of the ships were deliberately sunk to make peirs, breakwaters, etc. You can actually see how well (or poorly) concrete weathers in a marine environment about 100 yards off of Cape May, New Jersey.

      The vessel "Atlantus" ran aground there in 1926 and remains to this day.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
  8. flexible Roads by nounderscores · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Maybe a flexible road may not be able to stop the water penetration, but might be able to return (or be pounded) back into its original shape? A small crack stays small, even after many ice expansion cycles, rather than turning into a massive pothole?

    1. Re:flexible Roads by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

      But potholes are often caused by snowplows, when a plow's blade catches on a small crack, gouging it out bigger and bigger each time another plow passes over it.

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    2. Re:flexible Roads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "A small crack stays small"

      Someone once told me that the southern part of I275 was an experiment with some concrete that only expanded on one axis - laterally. They laid the road as one giant long piece. Problem was that cracks would propagate on the other axis. We saw some cracks over half a mile long. There's just got to be a better material, maybe this it.

    3. Re:flexible Roads by Andy+Gardner · · Score: 2, Informative

      Potholes are infact caused by the freeze thaw cycle. During the winter water seeps into the ground freezes and hence expands, pushing the road surface up. When ambient temperatures rise the ground thaws returning to its normal level but the pavement often remains raised, this creates a cavity under the pavement. The action of cars passing over the cavity causes the road surface to crack and fall into the cavity, the rest is history. This wear could be caused by a snow plough but i doubt it is the cause in the majority of cases.

      As an iteresting side, damage can also be caused during the frozen period and occurs on motorways due to the increased speed and use. As a wheel passes over a raised frozen 'bump' the supension compresses. There is then a period when the wheel is airborne as the rebound of the suspension and weight of the car pushes the wheel back onto the surface. The repeated action of this leads to a spot on the road after the raised section that suffers increased wear. This promotes uneven wear of the road surface, thats why sometimes you will find a section of motorway that is rr eea llyy bb umm p p ppyyy.

    4. Re:flexible Roads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes it all makes sense now. Or wait a minute!!! Why the hell does Southern California have potholes? I know, cause you people are talking out of your ass.

    5. Re:flexible Roads by big+tex · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That is one of the causes of potholes.

      However, the large numbers of potholes in Gregory, TX (where it has snowed once in the last 25 years) seem to indicate that there are other causes.

      Poorly compacted subbase, drainage problems, poor quality asphalt, and so on.

      --
      I think I need a new sig here.
    6. Re:flexible Roads by jafac · · Score: 1

      THe question is, for the Michigan case, how bendable is this concrete at 20 degrees below zero, farenheit? It may be bendable at room temperature, but most of Michigan achieves room temperature for a period of about 1 week in May and late September. The rest of the year - you better know your thermal properties. . .

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    7. Re:flexible Roads by TopShelf · · Score: 1

      The real question in the Michigan case is whether such technology would ever make it into a road - I remember about 15 years ago there was a similar proposal to use materials that would have made for more durable roads. The union that represented the road workers successfully fought that off on the argument that it would cost them jobs...

      In today's world of budgets that are stretched to the limit, hopefully a cost-concious attitude would prevail.

      --
      Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
    8. Re:flexible Roads by Geekboy(Wizard) · · Score: 1

      not always. it hasn't been freezing in san francisco for a long ass time (I want to say the last time was in the 40's), but there are a fair amount of potholes.

    9. Re:flexible Roads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More importantly... why the hell does Southern California have snowplows?

      Those things do not cause ALL potholes, they just make the roads much shittier in the areas with a real winter.

  9. freezing water by Soulfarmer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the material won't bend/stretch at all, it might shatter, this new elastic concrete supposedly kand bend at least a little, so it could withstand the freezing expanding water. At least I think that the freezing expansion is not enough to stretch the new concrete to it's limits.

    --
    -Is the meaning of life vanity, or is vanity the meaning of life?
    1. Re:freezing water by SilkBD · · Score: 1
      At least I think that the freezing expansion is not enough to stretch the new concrete to it's limits

      Really? What makes you think that?

      --
      00101010
    2. Re:freezing water by drsquare · · Score: 1

      Maybe it will expand one way, and not the other. Here's how it might happen:

      Water gets into crack in flexible concrete. Water freezes. Concrete is pushed outwards. Water melts and evaporates. Concrete is left with small crevices and canyons etched into it where the conrete has opened up.

    3. Re:freezing water by Kirkoff · · Score: 1

      Yeah, sounds just like Michigan roads...

      --
      There are exactly 42,935,718 letter sized sheets in a square mile.
    4. Re:freezing water by line.at.infinity · · Score: 1

      The elastic nature might not allow that many cracks to be made in the first place that could later become potholes.

  10. Forget architecture. by Blacken00100 · · Score: 1

    Imagine the BSDM^H applications! Seriously, though--interesting stuff. Curious as to how well it'd stand up under pressure.

    1. Re:Forget architecture. by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 1

      Imagine the BSDM^H applications!

      So it's a dead concrete?

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    2. Re:Forget architecture. by geekboy642 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, it runs on toasters.

      Concrete is just the next logical step.

      --
      Just another "DOJ fascist authoritarian totalitarian bootlicker" -- Zeio
    3. Re:Forget architecture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagine the BSDM^H applications!

      Could you elaborate on these BDSM applications?

    4. Re:Forget architecture. by Deltaspectre · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure he meant BSD applications :D

      --
      My UID is prime... is yours?
  11. In the long run... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    means this is going to be really fucking expensive.

  12. Remember asbestosis? by elucubra · · Score: 0, Troll

    Tiny fibers in concrete seem very similar to compounds that used asbestos.
    As the concrete is degraded these fibers will be released to the environment, and tiny fibers tend to make very good respiratory tract irritants (to say the least).
    BTW, I bet demolition crews will hate the stuff...

    1. Re:Remember asbestosis? by Blacken00100 · · Score: 1

      Mesothelioma ambulance chasers will have a new field, then. Good for them. Capitalism in action.

    2. Re:Remember asbestosis? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, the only reason asbestos is damaging to lungs is that it
      tends to form particles 0.5 to 1.4 microns in diameter, which is the range in which any paticulate matter is lung damaging and carcinogenic in nature. Asbestos is not mutagenic; any particles that form mainly in that size will cause lung cancer. It is a strange twist of fate that asbestos fibers disintigrate to particles that size, but it has nothing to do with fibers in general or their chemistry.

    3. Re:Remember asbestosis? by krypticide · · Score: 1

      Every breath you take is filled with micron-sized dust and more; just look at the dust in a typical carpeted house. The asbestos risk came more from its carcinogenic effects, than anything else.

    4. Re:Remember asbestosis? by Skadet · · Score: 1, Informative

      Concrete is already a very harmful substance in mix form, or when it gets dust-i-fied thru demolition, breaking, what have you:


      Caution:
      CONCRETE MIX contains cement-itious materials and may cause irritation to lungs, eyes and skin. Avoid contact. Use only in adequate ventilation. Do not breath dust. Wet mixture may cause burns. Wear suitable gloves, eye protection and protective clothing. In case of skin contact, wash thoroughly with soap and water. In case of eye contact, flush immediately and repeatedly with large quantities of water and get prompt medical attention. In case of difficulty breathing, remove person to fresh air. If difficulty breathing persists, seek medical attention

      http://www.rapidset.com/ConcreteMix_data.asp

      If anything, it'll encourage those who are at risk to use the protection they should be using anyway.

    5. Re:Remember asbestosis? by King_of_Prussia · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Why is this modded up?

      Fiber reinforced materials have been around for years. Carbon and glass fiber reinforced polymers are used in many everyday applications without harm. The problem with asbestos was its crystal structure and cleavage planes, which enabled it to break down into very small (micrometer scale) fibers that were easily inhaled.

      The above comment is about as insightful as saying "Cotton fiber? That seems eerily reminiscent of asbestos, better not wear clothes!" or "AIDS medicine? Wasn't thalidomide also orally available in pill form? Better not give it to pregnant women..."

      --

      Making the moon less necessary since 1998.

    6. Re:Remember asbestosis? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its carcinogenic because of its particle size, not for any other reason.

    7. Re:Remember asbestosis? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cleavage! On asbestos!

      What cup size?

    8. Re:Remember asbestosis? by deimtee · · Score: 1

      Asbestos is nasty because of the shape of the particles. Its crystalline structure breaks down into tiny needles that are very difficult to cough up, and which just keep puncturing one cell after another.

      --
      I'm guessing that wasn't on their radar screen...
    9. Re:Remember asbestosis? by DeadChobi · · Score: 1

      That's from all the lime, isnt it?

      --
      SRSLY.
  13. concrete trampoline? by wcitech · · Score: 5, Funny

    why? because nobody makes the first jump. (shameless matrix refrence)

    1. Re:concrete trampoline? by sik0fewl · · Score: 1

      Is a shameful Matrix reference when you reference one of the sequels?

      --
      I remember when legal used to mean lawful, now it means some kind of loophole. - Leo Kessler
  14. Earthquake-proof buildings by Red+Pointy+Tail · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Doesn't say in the article, but wouldn't this be useful in making buildings that would fare better in absorbing the shocks of an earthquake, instead of crumbling down?

    1. Re:Earthquake-proof buildings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Either that or they'd be so flexible, downtown would be a mass of skittles swinging into each other.

    2. Re:Earthquake-proof buildings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meh, I want concrete golf shafts!

    3. Re:Earthquake-proof buildings by Aqua+OS+X · · Score: 1

      Agreed. That's the first thing I thought of. Flexible concrete sounds like a God send for CA.

      --
      "Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
    4. Re:Earthquake-proof buildings by mikael · · Score: 1

      The problem with tall buildings is that they do have a certain amount of flexibility, which allows them to sway in an earthquake. The worst case scenario is when the building sways at the same frequency as the earthquake. Then the amplitude gets higher and higher until the building falls down. You're better off having an intelligent vibration dampening system by having a computer automatically move a large weight around near the middle of the building.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    5. Re:Earthquake-proof buildings by wisdom_brewing · · Score: 1

      different ground firmness leads to different earthquake frequencies, you can analyse the ground and ensure that buildings are built which would not resonate. earthquakes in mexico city have a very different effect to those in cali.

    6. Re:Earthquake-proof buildings by drunkennewfiemidget · · Score: 2, Funny

      What the hell is flexible concrete going to prove when CA is under water? ;)

    7. Re:Earthquake-proof buildings by mathmathrevolution · · Score: 1

      You don't need "a computer automatically move a large weight around." All you need is to make sure the primary modes of vibration are critically dampened. This is a simple matter of good civil engineering.

    8. Re:Earthquake-proof buildings by Mark+of+THE+CITY · · Score: 1

      Or, make sure the structure resonates at frequencies that a quake or windstorm would not drive.

      --
      The clearance system sounds logical. It is not. It is completely arbitrary. -- John Bolton
  15. Like most of life's problems... by Your+Pal+Dave · · Score: 5, Funny

    this one can be solved with bending - Bender Bending Rodriguez

  16. Origional News Source at U of M by Kelerain · · Score: 4, Informative

    Why not link to the source at the U of M News Service:

    U-M researchers make bendable concrete

    Technocrat.net had this article earlier today, and without the extra advertising.

    interesting stuff!

    1. Re:Origional News Source at U of M by biobogonics · · Score: 1

      To me, the most interesting point is that this material is being tested as a replacement for expansion joints. This would allow more bridges to be paved with concrete instead of being covered by asphalt.

      Michigan is in fact the ideal place to test this stuff. We have

      1. Two seasons, winter and road construction.

      2. State government that neglects roads and bridges until past the point of needing repair.
      See recent news stories about chunks of concrete falling down on traffic under freeway overpasses, etc.

    2. Re:Origional News Source at U of M by goneutt · · Score: 2, Informative

      A real civil engineering paper on this
      http://www.engineeredcomposites.com/publications/2 005-2006/Keoleian%20J%20Infra%20Systems%25
      I've read over this, and it gives loads of info, but more for the CE, and as an ME student I'm looking for its Youngs Modulus, Tensile strength, cyclic lifespan. And I know they have real numbers for at least two of those, the pic physOrg uses is a UTM, a familiar machine.

      --
      Bacardi + slashdot = negative karma.
  17. Concrete Roads by nmb3000 · · Score: 1

    Michigan roads must make the perfect test cases for this stuff, and I look forward to their improvement.

    Does anyone else here hate highways that are made with concrete? They have them here around Salt Lake with asphalt segments every now and then. Every time I go from concrete to asphalt I realize just how much quieter the car is and smoother the ride feels. It's almost painful to go back to concrete.

    I guess concret must have some advantage if it's used all over, but it seems like asphalt is better for roads. It expands and contracts easier, and when a pothole forms in concrete it always seems to get real big and deep a lot faster than with asphalt. Not sure, but maybe all the salt they dump on the roads around here in the winter is bad for asphalt?

    --
    "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
    /)
    1. Re:Concrete Roads by inflex · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Concrete roads are far more resiliant to wear than asphalt/tar roads, this means (generally) less repair work. This is a major factor when you're dealing with a massive arterial system.

      Overall concrete roads and asphalt tend to work out the same in terms of costs (over a period of years), concrete being more expensive to lay but lower repairs and vice-versa for asphalt.

    2. Re:Concrete Roads by inflex · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I forgot to note that the "noise" that you're suffering is from the grooving they put into the concrete road. Without this grooving people would be crashing everywhere when it starts raining from aquaplaning (even the smoothest asphalt road will not be as slippery as a wet smooth concrete one).

      Paul.

    3. Re:Concrete Roads by SB5 · · Score: 1

      I live in Pennsylvania, which has the second worst roads in the country. I can tell the difference between asphalt and concrete.

      Concrete is usually smooth, but noisy.

      Asphalt has tends to get potholes from people just spitting on it. And from the "unique" weather we get in Pennsylvania, although New York, Ohio, Maryland, and the Virginias don't have a problem, with similar weather patterns.

      They lay nothing but asphalt here and yes, when it is freshly laid, its nice and smooth, but it is the worst solution, since they have to relay it every 5-10 years on even the lightly used roads.

      --
      If what you are reading sounds funny, or sarcastic, lame, or stupid
      it is because it is supposed to be. just laugh
    4. Re:Concrete Roads by TheFlyingGoat · · Score: 4, Informative

      There's an alternative they're trying out in certain areas of Wisconsin. It's basically asphalt, but with a very high rubber content. They grind old tires into the asphalt. The net result is that it costs about the same to lay, and it can "heal" itself to some degree. The main concern is how safe it is when completely frozen, which is why it's only being tested in certain sections of freeway.

      If it does prove to be a viable material to replace basic asphalt, it'll be great for Wisconsin drivers... we deal with slippery roads all winter then road construction in the spring, summer, and fall. If this can at least eliminate pothole patching, it'll pay for itself many times over.

      --
      You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. --Winston Churchill
    5. Re:Concrete Roads by spectrokid · · Score: 1

      In Brussels, they just put a new kind of concrete instead of asphalt on one of the bussiest highway stretches. The manufacturor claims ith will hold maintenance-free for... thirty years.

      --

      10 ?"Hello World" life was simple then

    6. Re:Concrete Roads by RipTides9x · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Concrete was the first material that was used in the construction of mass use roadways back in the early days of the automobile as asphalt hadn't been discovered yet. Theres a very good chance that the concrete roads you drive on today were laid back in the 40s and early 50s. But concrete was always expensive to use, and required extensive preperation of the ground in order to pour it. So it was a slow and tedious proces, and not many cities could not afford to have more than one crew going at a time.

      When it was discovered that Asphalt, a by-product of oil refining, could be mixed with a small sized aggregate *gravel* and basically smooshed ontop of any roughly prepared surface to create a roadway, well that was the end of using concrete. Most concrete projects were abandoned overnight and roads started being laid at a fraction of the price and at triple the speed.

      The one caveat is that in Northern Areas it was discovered that asphalt roadways were not holding up as long as their concrete breathern. Many asphalt roads were having to be torn up and replaced every other year due to extensive freeze damage. Many cities went back to using concrete for their roads, until better techniques of preparing the roadbeds were discovered. Which were to compress and smooth the roadbed as much as possible, then lay a barrier layer of aggregate *gravel* on top of that to help with drainage and settling, then to finally slope the finished road from the middle to the edges for increased water run-off.

    7. Re:Concrete Roads by QMO · · Score: 1

      When I lived in Salt Lake City area the pavement noise was not from the grooving.
      The concrete had worn enough that there were ruts in it where the agregate (rocks in the concrete) was showing. The agregate wore more slowly than its surropundings, resulting in driving over a surface that was probably like the PFY's face. (think bumps like a basketball surface)

      --
      Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
    8. Re:Concrete Roads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Michigan asphalt is not considered a "permanent structure" by the building code. This means that there is no building permit required to put in an asphalt driveway and should give you some idea as to the material's durability.

    9. Re:Concrete Roads by Leadhyena · · Score: 1
      Does anyone else here hate highways that are made with concrete? They have them here around Salt Lake with asphalt segments every now and then. Every time I go from concrete to asphalt I realize just how much quieter the car is and smoother the ride feels. It's almost painful to go back to concrete.
      Actually, since this bendable concrete stuff is not only malleable but also elastic, it should have a much quieter sound than normal concrete, because it would absorb more of the shock that causes the annoying sound of driving on concrete. It may even be quieter than asphalt.
    10. Re:Concrete Roads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like they need to diamond grind the surface of the concrete there in SLC..

      I was recently to Seattle and I5 was equally as noisy (and very bumpy) in the past,they must have realized this and ground the surface down so it's nice and quiet, at least Southbound that is.

    11. Re:Concrete Roads by protoshoggoth · · Score: 1

      I know that in Pennsylvania, at least, a lot of current-day highway construction is still in concrete.

    12. Re:Concrete Roads by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      Oh, but man is it a bitch to fix when you have problems.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    13. Re:Concrete Roads by RayMarron · · Score: 1

      They are putting rubberized asphalt all over the freeways in and around Phoenix. The main reason is for noise reduction.

      --
      ON DELETE CASCADE
    14. Re:Concrete Roads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Land of the Free" - and you need a permit to pave your driveway?

    15. Re:Concrete Roads by Yazheirx · · Score: 1

      Having driven on these roads on a business trip, I must say they are notably quieterthan even new asphalt.

      I would love to see them in the Chicago area. But I wonder how they stand up to freezing temperatures and thousands of fully loaded tractor trailers. I doubt the unions would put them in any way. They may not break as fast and that would cut into their margins.

      --
      More of my thoughts
    16. Re:Concrete Roads by srmalloy · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The one caveat is that in Northern Areas it was discovered that asphalt roadways were not holding up as long as their concrete breathern. Many asphalt roads were having to be torn up and replaced every other year due to extensive freeze damage. Many cities went back to using concrete for their roads, until better techniques of preparing the roadbeds were discovered. Which were to compress and smooth the roadbed as much as possible, then lay a barrier layer of aggregate *gravel* on top of that to help with drainage and settling, then to finally slope the finished road from the middle to the edges for increased water run-off.

      "Discovered". Feh. Until the cities were willing to cough up the money to prepare the roadbed correctly, a practice which had been in use two millennia earlier, but which fell out of use because of the lack of civic incentive to build and maintain good roads.

    17. Re:Concrete Roads by rahvin112 · · Score: 1
      Concrete was the first material that was used in the construction of mass use roadways back in the early days of the automobile as asphalt hadn't been discovered yet.


      Asphalt concrete has been in use on roadways since 625BC.

      Theres a very good chance that the concrete roads you drive on today were laid back in the 40s and early 50s.


      Early transportation acts did not allow for significant participation financially by the federal government so roadways constructed were mostly two lane rural arterials and urban streets and were often very limited. Intestate construction did not begin in force until the Interstate Highway Act of 1954 and the majority of the interstates that americans drive on were constructed during the 60's into the late 70's (the eastern seaboard saw some construction in the late 50's).

      When it was discovered that Asphalt, a by-product of oil refining, could be mixed with a small sized aggregate *gravel* and basically smooshed ontop of any roughly prepared surface to create a roadway, well that was the end of using concrete. Most concrete projects were abandoned overnight and roads started being laid at a fraction of the price and at triple the speed.


      Portland Cement Concrete is still used in many projects and is often selected for use on the interstates because it's long lifetime allows for user delay costs to be minimized. The lowest cost material is selected during design using amotorized costs and concrete benefits from a design life of 40 years with minimal maintenance costs. Asphalt cement on the other hand has a lifespan of 20 years with high maintenance costs so dollars saved at construction are often used repairing and rehabilitating older pavement in addition to the user costs associated with delay on the highways under construction. With the recent increases in price of oil the price of asphalt has seen a cooresponding increase and even small urban projects may soon see PCCP outpricing them.

      The one caveat is that in Northern Areas it was discovered that asphalt roadways were not holding up as long as their concrete breathern. Many asphalt roads were having to be torn up and replaced every other year due to extensive freeze damage. Many cities went back to using concrete for their roads, until better techniques of preparing the roadbeds were discovered. Which were to compress and smooth the roadbed as much as possible, then lay a barrier layer of aggregate *gravel* on top of that to help with drainage and settling, then to finally slope the finished road from the middle to the edges for increased water run-off.


      I just don't know how to respond to so many inaccuracies in one paragraph. Superelevation of the roadway has been in use since the first roads were constructed. Asphalt in use on major roadways has always required a substantially prepared subgrade and pavement section because the pavement is flexible and transmits its load directly to the underlying material. Concrete on the other hand usually requires less grade preperation because the pavement is rigid and acts to spread the load over a larger soil area reducing stress on the native material.

      The PCCP (Portland Cement Concrete Pavements) constructed in the 60's have far exceeded their lifetime and would have in fact lasted longer had design loadings (from Semi-Trucks) not increased far beyond what was predicted in the 50s. Although nothing matches Asphalt for quietness and smoothness of ride Concrete provides a riding surface that under current construction methods will in all likelyhood last for 50 years with very minor maintenance.
    18. Re:Concrete Roads by RayMarron · · Score: 1

      They probably require more maintenance than concrete. There were some stretches they had to redo because it didn't "stick" the first time & large patches just disintegrated.

      --
      ON DELETE CASCADE
    19. Re:Concrete Roads by DrinkingIllini · · Score: 1

      Isn't rubber one of those materials that (like water) expands when it freezes? This would seem to create a pretty big problem in a place like Wisconsin.

    20. Re:Concrete Roads by DeadChobi · · Score: 1

      The reason Concrete is used as opposed to asphault is because concrete lasts many times longer. There's a segment of concrete road over by McChord Airforce Base on South Tacoma Way in Lakewood, WA that has been around since it was built. You can tell that it's original, because it's about 2 feet narrower than the rest of the road. Lots of bouncing. It used to lead into what was then the main entrance for the base. I know that it's still alive and kickin' because I drive over it on my way to college.

      --
      SRSLY.
    21. Re:Concrete Roads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your right, but you can make concrete as smooth as glass, its "unpossible" to make asphalt that smooth.

      Also the asphalt is a concoction of modified (crappy rocks) , rubbers(like old tires) and tars, which make it more springy than concrete.

    22. Re:Concrete Roads by bluGill · · Score: 1

      Concrete does not flex as much. Thus your car is getting slightly better gas milage when you drive on concrete. The difference is trival, but interesting.

    23. Re:Concrete Roads by Rank_Tyro · · Score: 1

      Several years ago in Lodi, California, there was a businessman who recycled old tires into ashpalt, everyone loved the idea. Until, that is, the huge used tire storage area was hit by lightning, and caught on fire. The fire resisted all attempts to extinguish it, and burned for a VERY long time. The resultant ecological damage,( air pollution, soil, water table pollution.....etc.), was so bad that he was sued into bankruptcy by the state of california, as well as other enviromental groups. The worst part is, the rubberized asphalt was cheaper and more durable, saving millions of dollars in road construction.

      --
      Today's show is brought to you by the number 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0: 25
    24. Re:Concrete Roads by Spangston · · Score: 1
      Concrete would wear car and truck tires out much quicker than asphalt, as it is far more abrasive.

      As well, asphalt is mixed specifically to increase the traction of tires in a variety of climates and weather, so those benefits would be lost with concrete roads.

      One could argue that it should be up to the tire companies to propose a change and a solution, but this is the system we have, and we're probably stuck with it forever.

    25. Re:Concrete Roads by RipTides9x · · Score: 1

      The night i posted my original post i was in the beginnings of a massive chest cold and was hopped up on DM, PsuedoE, and could hardly breathe.I could have clarified my post better but mostly you are splitting hairs and you missed the context entirely of what I posted.

      1. Not all tars are the same. The road grade asphalt used today is a product of oil refining. Naturally occuring tars are not of the same grade as refined asphalt tar. Also without refining there would be little source for the quantity of asphalt needed to pave over a million miles of road. My use of discovery of asphalt was in the context of its being a different grade/type better suited for construction and of its newfound mass availability.

      2. I wasn't talking about Interstate Expressways in my post nor the 1954 act that created the interstate boom. I was referring to earlier projects since automobiles did exsist before the 50's. US Highway projects like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Highway_41 were started back in the 20's. Over the years many of these Highways have been integrated into current expressway systems. And the point stands that its possible the roads you ride on today are some of those original roads.

      3. My final point may be over simplified but is far from innaccurate. Before paved roads only dirt roads and railways existed in rural and most of urban America. The first machines used in mass construction of automobile use roads were of the concrete variety since it was a durable material, readily available, easy to prepare and use and many of the right specialized machines already exsisted. And the first attempts at creating asphalt roads, especially in northern climes was as I described. Better tehniques had to be re-discovered and more specialized machinery built to facilitate asphalt road construction. You back up my point that in certain situations concrete was a better choice since it was a simpler use material as i was trying to explain.

      You would have done better adding context to my post rather than trying to prove it inaccurate.

  18. Plastic or Elastic Bending? by zeromemory · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The article fails to state whether the ductility of the concrete results in elastic (returns to its original shape when load is relieved) or plastic (stays in the shape you bent it) deformation.

    One would hope for the former, since structures made out of this material may look strangely 'bent' over time if it readily undergoes plastic deformation.

    And one last note: is this material going to be more cost-effective than steel?

    1. Re:Plastic or Elastic Bending? by Tomfrh · · Score: 1

      Like other ductile materials, it will be elastic at low stresses, and will become increasingly plastic as stress increases.

      Structures are not generally designed to go fully plastic, and thus there is always additional elastic capacity to prevent unarrested plastic deformation.

      Dunno about the cost-effectiveness. I dont suppose anyone really does yet.

    2. Re:Plastic or Elastic Bending? by zeromemory · · Score: 2, Informative

      Like other ductile materials, it will be elastic at low stresses, and will become increasingly plastic as stress increases.

      True, but the most important factor in this case would be the lower yield strength (LYS), the point at which the transition from elastic to plastic behavior occurs. The article says very little about whether this concrete has a great LYS (deform elastically under everyday stress), or a small LYS (plastically deform even under little stress).

    3. Re:Plastic or Elastic Bending? by nippinout · · Score: 1

      It also fails to mention any study on creep and relaxation. When concrete fails the cement matrix crushes and the aggregate shears and crushes. I doubt such a flexible concrete would be used for a structure for uses such as an office building. Flexing under load may be within the limits of this concrete, but it isn't very comfortable.

    4. Re:Plastic or Elastic Bending? by theguyfromsaturn · · Score: 1

      I would assume that once you've passed the strain at which the unreinforced concrete reaches tensile capacity, you are stuck with plastic behaviour unless the fibres are very very strong and very very elastic thus providing not only reinforcement, but also prestressing of the concrete. Usually, tensile reinforcement is there to increase the stress at which that strain will be reached, and when it has been matched, it allows for a graceful failure, giving people more time to evacuate (a beam that starts sagging is a sure giveaway of problems :) ). Perceptible bending of concrete is likely to be plastic.

      --
      I like my dinosaurs feathery, and my pterosaurs hairy (or is it pycnofibery?)
    5. Re:Plastic or Elastic Bending? by Tomfrh · · Score: 1

      A composite concrete material such as this will not have a clearly defined yield point. The response will be smooth, with elastic at the bottom and plastic at the top.

    6. Re:Plastic or Elastic Bending? by zeromemory · · Score: 1

      I thought that there was a convention for determining the yield point for materials without clearly defined yield points, such as aluminum and it's 0.2% offset calculation.

    7. Re:Plastic or Elastic Bending? by notmuchtosay · · Score: 1

      That is a common offset, but has nothing to do with any real property. Al is ductile (deforms plastically) so the .2% is reasonable, but for other materials it may not be. The yield strength might not go down. The reasons composites are so useful is you can tend to arrange them to get the best of both worlds. The idea here to add ductility to an otherwise brittle material. There are other ways of doing this with concrete, like wrapping it (a column)with fibers.

    8. Re:Plastic or Elastic Bending? by theguyfromsaturn · · Score: 1
      I finally got around to RTFA, it seems clear that it is plastic bending.
      The ductile, or bendable, concrete is made mainly of the same ingredients in regular concrete minus the coarse aggregate, Li said. It looks exactly like regular concrete, but under excessive strain, the ECC concrete gives because the specially coated network of fibers veining the cement is allowed to slide within the cement, thus avoiding the inflexibility that causes brittleness and breakage, Li said.
      The term ductility refers to plastic deformations. It is a slow, gradual form of failure in opposition to brittle failure.
      --
      I like my dinosaurs feathery, and my pterosaurs hairy (or is it pycnofibery?)
    9. Re:Plastic or Elastic Bending? by ishmalius · · Score: 1

      This type of material is not totally new, by any means. Flexible concretes have been around for a couple of decades. When the ingredients are ground fine enough, the resulting crystal structures are small enough to reduce the brittleness greatly. I seem to recall an article in Scientific American long ago, where they toyed with making unusual (for concrete) objects, like bottle caps. The goal of the materials was to allow low energy or "soft energy" manufacturing.

  19. Yes but... by qualico · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...can it withstand the impact of a jet airplane?
    And is it safe to inhale the fibers if said airplane makes a big ol' mess?

    1. Re:Yes but... by cablepokerface · · Score: 5, Funny

      ...can it withstand the impact of a jet airplane?

      No, but because of it's bendability, it can actually dodge incomming plains.

    2. Re:Yes but... by ByteSlicer · · Score: 2, Funny
    3. Re:Yes but... by kieran · · Score: 4, Funny

      Best not use it for runways, then.

    4. Re:Yes but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      its.
      incoming.
      planes.

      And bendability is not a word.

    5. Re:Yes but... by Hiro+Antagonist · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, but because of it's bendability, it can actually dodge incomming plains.

      What, we're worried now about people crashing Oklahoma into buildings as an act of terrorism?

      --

      --
      I Hit the Karma Cap, and All I Got Was This Lousy .sig.
    6. Re:Yes but... by pvaecc · · Score: 1

      They are building a runway in Zurich with only PVA fibers as reinforcement so that they can embed instruments to measure the weight, speed whatever of the incoming planes. The material, polyvinyl alcohol is entire organic and even has FDA approval for use with food. (We make gas tanks and food wrapping and thousands of other products.) Rick McCabe

    7. Re:Yes but... by qualico · · Score: 1

      That is interesting to say the least.
      Technology moving ever onward.

      Although FDA approved, I'm still left wondering what those fibers will do in the lungs.
      Can't see them breaking down cause concrete is poured wet, no?

    8. Re:Yes but... by pvaecc · · Score: 1

      PVA fibers are extremely abrasion and fatigue resistant. 20 years in concrete roof shakes showed essentially no breakdown in the alkali environment. The are also resistant to UV. They are 40 microns and 3microns is the danger zone for the lungs. Even if they got there, they are organic and will break down and be absorbed. If you want to worry about something, the silica sand dust is highly carcinogenic and can be small enough to get into the scilia. Strictly OSHA carbon masks for that stuff.

    9. Re:Yes but... by qualico · · Score: 1

      Great info.
      That should certainly take care of any concerns healthwise.
      Now its time to start building like crazy with this stuff.

      And I do mean "crazy".

      You could design some serious sci-fi looking buildings.

    10. Re:Yes but... by pvaecc · · Score: 1

      Yep. People are. About to start a movie set. Spray it over EPS foam with super thin layers on both sides. Very cool stuff.

  20. Concrete roads? by flubbergust · · Score: 1

    We dont have that here and I never understood why you would rather use conrete than asphalt on roads. Well, I guess it could be that its cheaper but is it really better and safer?

    1. Re:Concrete roads? by Quae · · Score: 1

      Concrete makes a smoother ride.

    2. Re:Concrete roads? by zeromemory · · Score: 1

      We dont have that here and I never understood why you would rather use conrete than asphalt on roads. Well, I guess it could be that its cheaper but is it really better and safer?

      One area where you can't use asphalt is on raised runways, like the elevated sections of freeways. Concrete might be more brittle, but its greatest quality lies in its resistance to compression. Unlike concrete, asphalt can't support tons of weight, so people don't make load-bearing structures out of asphalt.

      This material might make the elevated sections of freeways safer. I don't see much use for it on regular roads, though.

    3. Re:Concrete roads? by goonies · · Score: 2, Interesting
      One area where you can't use asphalt is on raised runways, like the elevated sections of freeways.
      Wrong!
      you use concrete for the bearing construction and put asphalt on the road... thats how they do over here in Switzerland
      --
      .sigh
    4. Re:Concrete roads? by Kamots · · Score: 1

      If there's any sort of heavy traffic, then concrete is a much better material for roads than asphalt.

      Asphalt is a good material for lightly used roads. It'll deform under heavy loads though... go pick up a bit of broken asphalt, and you'll notice that it's not a solid.

      However, the largest problem with a road in poor condition usually isn't what the surface is made of... but lies in poor preperation of the subgrade.

    5. Re:Concrete roads? by mrjb · · Score: 1

      ...which is more important than safety, especially on a rainy day.

      --
      Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
    6. Re:Concrete roads? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Concrete makes a smoother ride."

      NOT

    7. Re:Concrete roads? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't know about where you live, but here in Texas an asphalt road kind of "melts" in the summer. Almost all the roads here are concrete. We also don't salt the roads. When the roads get icy, which is maybe a couple days a year, they just use sand.

      (Yes, I know the asphalt isn't really melting, but it sure does get sticky and messy! Losing the tar or whatever out of the asphalt can't be good...)

    8. Re:Concrete roads? by Dayflowers · · Score: 1

      Its not cheaper. On the contrary, it has a higher initial cost. But it is said that it pays off in the long run.

      --
      I am a speak english. Do you not? - Saroto
    9. Re:Concrete roads? by Quae · · Score: 0

      "NOT" Do you drive? or rollerblade? or cycle? Anyone who uses wheels knows that concrete is smoother than most other things. Get a life, anon.

  21. "Buildings that bend and shift " by Quae · · Score: 1

    Don't go to the loo at the top!

  22. replacing 2% volume reduces weight by 40%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    even if you replaced 2% of the volume with vacuum, you could only make it 2% lighter

    how the hell do they come up with this 40% figure?

    1. Re:replacing 2% volume reduces weight by 40%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      even if you replaced 2% of the volume with vacuum, you could only make it 2% lighter

      how the hell do they come up with this 40% figure?


      Negitive mass ...
    2. Re:replacing 2% volume reduces weight by 40%? by Skadet · · Score: 0

      If I understand TFA correctly, the fibers are 2% of the mix volume. This translates to a much larger percentage of total volume once the concrete dries.

    3. Re:replacing 2% volume reduces weight by 40%? by elliotjo · · Score: 3, Informative

      "Tiny fibers that comprise about 2 percent of the mixture's volume partly account for its performance."

      The fibers are only one part of the improvement. The article also mentions replacing other major components in the concrete, including the bulk aggregate. Presumably the new components are also lighter and would account for the 40% reduction.

    4. Re:replacing 2% volume reduces weight by 40%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      even if you replaced 2% of the volume with vacuum, you could only make it 2% lighter

      how the hell do they come up with this 40% figure?


      This would be true if u assumed the volume remained constant. I have not RTFA but if I remember my high school physics correctly,

      Weight = Mass x Gravity.

      If you add 2% of this stuff its possible the same mass can occupy a larger volume and yet have comparable structural strength. So you'd have the same "size" of concrete but it could weigh a lot less. All this is purely hypothetical to my understanding to this of course.
      Either that or they weighed it on the moon ;-)

    5. Re:replacing 2% volume reduces weight by 40%? by valkoinen · · Score: 4, Informative

      The increased strength makes it possible to use less of it to build structures of similar strength. You need 40% less of the fiber concrete to get the same strength as the traditional concrete.

    6. Re:replacing 2% volume reduces weight by 40%? by OneSmartFellow · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Surely it depends upon which 2% is replaced. If it's the most dense 2% being replaced with a substance that is significantly less dense, then I suppose it is possible.,b.I agree though, unless these guys are using a concrete mix comprised of something other than cement, sharp sand and gravel, I find it hard to understand myself

    7. Re:replacing 2% volume reduces weight by 40%? by b0bby · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They can use less concrete (thinner slabs) so the structure can be 40% lighter; the concrete itself isn't 40% lighter.

  23. What about me? by dauthur · · Score: 1

    They say this concrete is plyable. Can it cushion my face hitting it at roughly 3 metres a second as I accidentally catch my foot in the spokes? Or is it mainly to be used to stand up to Boeing 777's in a 650 knot vertical dive? Either way, I don't want to have my face turn out more useless than Rambus... Ouch.

  24. A little too late by itsmekirby · · Score: 2, Funny

    The architects, contractors, and construction workers of the Petronas towers in Kuala Lumpur simultaneously shout, "D'oh!"

    1. Re:A little too late by zeromemory · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The architects, contractors, and construction workers of the Petronas towers in Kuala Lumpur simultaneously shout, "D'oh!"

      From what I remember of watching a documentary on the construction of the Petronas towers, the primary concern of the engineers was the compressibility of the concrete -- each floor has to withstand the weight of the numerous floors above it. Flexibility was the least of their worries.

      Furthermore, the two towers are located on a relatively 'soft' foundation -- they essentially 'float' on sea of soft land. The towers aren't anchored to the bedrock. Additionally, the bridge that connects the two towers is designed to allow the towers to move towards and away from each other. Thus, the towers stabilize each other and are quite flexible. According to the documentary, if you watch the water in the upper-level toilets on a windy day, you'll see it swooshing around.

    2. Re:A little too late by rwjyoung · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I didnt see the documentary you mention, but I was a civil engineer and I was in Kuala Lumpur when the towers were being built. The rumour was that one tower was built on the bedrock and the other tower was built on clay. From what we experienced of the geology under Kuala Lumpur I would say this was quite feasable. They had different teams of contractors building each tower, One French and one German (I think) and held a race on which tower went up the fastest. The tower on the bedrock won as the other tower had to stop every so often to allow the building to settle. The other rumour going around was that when they came to fix the bridge, the bridge was nearly half a meter to small due to the clay founded tower leaning. Half a meter sounds like a lot to me but I would be very suprised if the bridge fitted exactly as it was supposed too.

      --
      Watch me build my house
    3. Re:A little too late by Dr.Diablo · · Score: 1

      If those are the towers I am thinking of, the contractors in question were Japanese and Korean. The idea being that the natural competitiveness/animosity between the two groups would push them to work harder as it would be a matter of cultural pride/shame to win/lose to the other team.

  25. Ob Simpsons by DarkHelmet · · Score: 1

    Bart: But we want... More asbestos! MORE ASBESTOS!

    --
    /^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
  26. if only I had some bendable steel then i could by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    bendover and start a flappin my wings and a flyin with my flapable concrete wings attached to my flapable steel.

    Chick0en Tonight.

  27. This isn't new... by d474 · · Score: 1

    ...I believe the technical term for this is "Gray Rubber".

    --
    Authority questions you. Return the favor.
  28. Stone bends, too by Zog+The+Undeniable · · Score: 2, Informative

    The columns of some cathedrals - built before people understood roof trusses - are slightly but definitely bent if you sight along them. The percentage strain is very low, so they don't crack.

    --
    When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
    1. Re:Stone bends, too by tomlouie · · Score: 1

      Wait wait wait. Are you saying that because these stone columns are slightly bent, that therefore these columns have bent over time? Wouldn't a more likely reason be that they weren't made perfectly straight to begin with?

      Tom

    2. Re:Stone bends, too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you? An Intelligent Design Apologist?

  29. Highways instead? by helioquake · · Score: 1

    Would it make a better material for building elevated highways and bridges? It needs to tolerate both weak and strong vibrations (small cars and trucks) all day and night. It needs to be water-proof that cracks don't become serious issue, either.

    1. Re:Highways instead? by wisdom_brewing · · Score: 1

      i think the weight issue would be a positive one in this matter as well... if its strength under compression is the same as normal concrete and it weighs 40% less for that same strenght supports wouldnt need to be near as thick. as to vibrations, being more flexible than concrete would only help, unless it happens to have a resonant frequency matching that of most cars or trucks... or marching soldiers...

  30. To add on to the parent post.... by AKosygin · · Score: 1

    Some roads are built with concrete as the foundation and asphalt is then laid on top. On some surfaces, the concrete is necessary to give the road strength for soft ground like areas where it is more sand like or is soft. Also roads that carry heavy trucks tend to have such a concrete base (if not plain concrete). Bridges must be concrete, but asphalt can be laid on top to make it "quieter". When they lay concrete or asphalt or both, the engineers decide based on environmental factors also, not just cost or because it is nice. Another major factor is distance to a major city or repair point. If a particular stretch of road is heavily traveled and is far from a city, concrete might be better as the constant repair costs of asphalt might prove to be expensive, compared to a one time fix.

  31. Like those portable cement dwellings by kafka47 · · Score: 1
    Reminiscent of the "house in a bag" invention by those guys in the UK. Need a shelter? Just add water, and poof! There's your house.

    TFA

    /Kafka

    1. Re:Like those portable cement dwellings by Zog+The+Undeniable · · Score: 1
      Just add water, and poof! There's your house.

      That would be Elton John's house, then?

      --
      When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
  32. demolition by zobier · · Score: 1

    Is bendable concrete going to make it difficult to demolish structures built using it as the main material?

    --
    Me lost me cookie at the disco.
  33. Dynamite, Anyone? by zeromemory · · Score: 2, Informative

    Is bendable concrete going to make it difficult to demolish structures built using it as the main material?

    I don't think buildings made out of this stuff will survive a large enough explosion. Besides, concrete is really easy to break apart and chip (hence why you need to use rebar frames for serious construction), so just whacking away with chisel-tipped jackhammer should work for small jobs.

  34. Whatever happened to ... by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    transparent concrete? I seem to recall something about that in /.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Whatever happened to ... by goonies · · Score: 2, Informative
      --
      .sigh
  35. Re:Concrete Roads: How about brick by StormyWeather · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I see 150 year old brick streets in a lot of towns still. Seems like that's a pretty good building material for slower traffic too :).

  36. Only possible problems I see.. by Ice_Hole · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How much does this road bend, also what kinda of deformation would we see from traffic. The current roads currently get grooves in them. But make a road that actually felxes, wht kind of effect would that have on the surface of the road? This to me would mean MORE maintaining the road, not less.

    Also, what effects would this have on gas mileage of vehicles. If the road was givein way a little as say a semi or large vehicle was driveing over the road, to waht degree would it "sink" into the road? Would you be wanting to run more air pressure in the tires of the vehicle on these types of roads, to compensate for the flex inherant in this road? And over time, what effect would this have on gas. Another valuable resource.

    Also, adding fibers into a road, could effect it's traction. Current roads, are rather random. If (through wear) all these fibers were to orientate themselves one way would this effect the grip these roads provided? Also, now does this fiber react after years of abuse, and oil contamination? If oil were to cause these fibers to swell, or if they were to absord it, I would imagine it would have negative effects.

    But what the heck, it may just work. Imagine, no ccracks in the slab of your home anymore. All for only a few side effects (and probably 3x the cash).

    - Ice_Hole

    --
    "I couldn't give him (Bill Gates) advice in business and he couldn't give me advice in technology." Linus Torvalds
    1. Re:Only possible problems I see.. by wisdom_brewing · · Score: 1

      take a look at the roads in... take malaysia. they have a very high rubber content and are much better roads for it. as far as i can tell there isnt a noticable effect on petrol consumption, and the roads are in amazing condition many years after building. this isnt feasible in the states due to the price of rubber, but over there it is a plentiful and relatively cheap (no shipping costs) material leading to greater use.

    2. Re:Only possible problems I see.. by RobertB-DC · · Score: 1

      Also, what effects would this have on gas mileage of vehicles. If the road was givein way a little as say a semi or large vehicle was driveing over the road, to waht degree would it "sink" into the road? Would you be wanting to run more air pressure in the tires of the vehicle on these types of roads, to compensate for the flex inherant in this road? And over time, what effect would this have on gas. Another valuable resource.

      If the road does tend to allow vehicles to "sink" into it, you'd need to *decrease* your air pressure, not increase it. It's going to be like driving on the beach -- flatter tires are fatter and give you more traction. Nice, hard, taut tires will sink into the surface even worse. Either way, though, the gas mileage will likely suffer.

      OTOH, other posters have suggested that this won't be a problem, YMMV (a remarkably apropos acronym in this case).

      --
      Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
    3. Re:Only possible problems I see.. by BeBoxer · · Score: 2, Informative

      How much does this road bend, also what kinda of deformation would we see from traffic. The current roads currently get grooves in them. But make a road that actually felxes, wht kind of effect would that have on the surface of the road? This to me would mean MORE maintaining the road, not less.

      I think you'll find that the grooves you see are only on asphalt roads. Concrete roads don't get them. Asphalt gets soft when it gets hot, so the cars can sink in a little bit. Concrete roads never get soft. I suppose with huge traffic volumes an old concrete road could have grooves worn into it, but I think the concrete falls apart from cracks and such long before that happens.

    4. Re:Only possible problems I see.. by afidel · · Score: 1

      Concrete roads have grooves built into them because a perfectly smooth concrete road would be about as slippery as black ice with even a little water on it.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    5. Re:Only possible problems I see.. by BeBoxer · · Score: 1

      Concrete roads have grooves built into them because a perfectly smooth concrete road would be about as slippery as black ice with even a little water on it.

      Those are different grooves. Most roads have a crown to them so that water runs off. Some concrete roads do have rain grooves cut into them, but these are not what the original poster was talking about. He was referring to the two grooves formed underneath the tires on asphalt roads, and wondering if bendable concrete would have the same problem.

  37. Earthquakes by nmg196 · · Score: 1

    I wonder if this stuff could be used to make buildings more invulnerable to earthquakes. If the foundations and a couple of lower levels were flexible, maybe the building would just wobble rather than shaking itself to bits - the equivalent to putting suspension in a car?

  38. Flexon my Marchon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    ..can it withstand the impact of a jet airplane?

    Was going to post this infamous "If only all metal were FLEXON"-ad that distraught New Yorkers found in their mailboxes when they came home on 911, but it was nowhere to be found... Good censorship job!

    1. Re:Flexon my Marchon by Wolfger · · Score: 1

      I love when people scream "censorship" for absolutely no good reason... Couldn't find the Flexon ad anywhere? Try Google! Enter the words "flexon ad" (without quotes), and click "I'm feeling lucky". Poof, there it is. Or just click here

  39. Sliding fibres? by icejai · · Score: 1

    The article doesn't mention anything about the stresses this concrete can take. It just says it looks exactly like concrete and cracks less.

    I don't think this kind of concrete is the kind builders would want to make lower-level walls of very tall buildings with. Sure it can handle tensile stresses very well and is extremely flexible, but how will this "concrete" react to compressive stresses? Flexible concrete means less force is required to make it buckle and warp.

    Will this concrete be appropriate for floors of condomunium and office towers? Will the concrete floor warp if a heavy copier is moved into the office, or if someone moves in a piano?

    Maybe because it's lighter, concrete floors can be made thicker, and thus less prone to warping, but I really think something like this would be better suited in bridges, roads, houses, and maybe their foundations.

    1. Re:Sliding fibres? by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      Bridges? Like the Tacoma Narrows Galloping Gertie? I dunno...

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  40. Concrete roads? by tod_miller · · Score: 1

    ?? I think this will have a great impact on space building, reading about crazy plastic/concrete/steel mixtures of materials in sci-fi and you will see.

    This could be the start of pour your own space home!

    rar.

    --
    #hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
  41. Idea Terrorist deterrent by delusrexpert · · Score: 1, Funny

    Headlines Plane hits building....

    Today the newly launched Airbus was hijacked by an unknown group of radical loons just before 3.00pm EST. After the terrorists seize control of the cockpit they flew the plane into the side of the world tallest building 'the humgo ercto 'standing over 675m in height built in 2006 housed in a flexible concrete sheath. The building stood the attack, bystanders claim the plane hit the build folding into a pile of scrape metal. One claimed the building swayed a full football fields length as it took the blow. The bad news is as the ball of molten steel fell from the sky it took out the 3 Skyscrapers below ;(

  42. Concrete overshoes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Great! Now instead of the concrete overshoes the mafia can go modern and use concrete running shoes!

  43. This is about US engineering conservatism by panurge · · Score: 2, Interesting
    If you read the article, you may realise that the point here is that the US lags the rest of the developed world in using engineered cement composites. Back in dead tree days, Scientific American had an interesting article on how restrictive building codes and fear of litigation was causing the US to lag behind in road and building construction because more modern materials could not be used.
    This results in higher build and repair costs for roads and bridges and explains the poor maintenance of many US highways.

    The article is essentially saying that, at last, someone is prepared to experiment with ECCs in the US on a small scale following a test in a difficult area. Meanwhile, advantage has been taken of these materials in the Far East for a number of years.
    This is important because in many ways the US is becoming depressingly conservative. It is no longer a world leader in innovative building. Ford and GM have just seen their shares reduced to junk status as the Japanese and Daimler-Chrysler increase their share of the US auto market. And the whole IP/copyright thing is basically about trying to protect what you have rather than innovate and create new markets. If this little experiment is a sign that someone is getting brave enough to risk trial lawyers (my client tripped over a kerb as a result of using this unproven concrete technology...) perhaps it's a green shoot.

    --
    Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
    1. Re:This is about US engineering conservatism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you read the article, you may realise that the point here is that the US lags the rest of the developed world in using engineered cement composites. Back in dead tree days, Scientific American had an interesting article on how restrictive building codes and fear of litigation was causing the US to lag behind in road and building construction because more modern materials could not be used.
      This results in higher build and repair costs for roads and bridges and explains the poor maintenance of many US highways.


      But if you start laying concrete that is more "permanent" you threaten the jobs of construction workers, and I wouldn't be surprised if labor unions don't support (sorry for the pun) this material.

    2. Re:This is about US engineering conservatism by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      Cost-benefit, baby - that's what its all about. If you have 12B for a road and the new material costs $16B, you're going to build it out of traditional materials. Remeber, that extra $4B isn't just $4B, it's $4B + 4% for $4B a year.

      Oh, you say it will last twice as long? Fantastic. So, will the manufacturers offer a guarantee of this? Will they escrow the cost of removal of the existing road and replacement in traditional materials, including labor and disposal, should the material fail during its promised lifetime? No? That's what I thought. Go guild your own road and get back to me in 100 years with your actual, demostrated lifecycle costs, then we'll talk.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    3. Re:This is about US engineering conservatism by svallarian · · Score: 1

      Ford and GM's sales are just fine. They're just getting put to junk bond status due to the large amount of pension and healthcare they're having to provide to their workers, retirees, and their dependents.

      --
      I patented screwing your mom. But it got revoked for "prior art."
    4. Re:This is about US engineering conservatism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Daimler-Chrysler isn't exactly a golden child itself. They have the same problems Ford and GM have.

  44. "the bridge is 40% lighter..." by Senor_Programmer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    because the concrete is thinner, not because the concrete is lighter. This discerned from RTFA. We poured a pad for a picnic pavilion at the yacht club using concrete that is reinforced with polyethylene fibers. It allowed us to pour a large pad that will not crack without having to use tiebacks. Which brings to mind something I've often wondered about...

    With concrete, when it's pre or post stressed in compression, it's much less likely to crack. Traditionally this is done by tensioning the steel prior to pouring or tensioning cable or rod 'tiebacks' after partial curing. Now this is very nice but... It should be possible to engineer a fiber that will shrink as it ages and bonds well as an aggregate. If the shrink time could be matched up reasonably well with the cure time of the concrete it would simplify many types of construction.

  45. The look... by skander · · Score: 5, Funny

    World Trade Center made of bendable concrete: 262m $US
    747: 5m $US
    Razor Blade to hijack plane: 2.95 $US

    The look on Osama's face as the plane bounces off the building: priceless.

    1. Re:The look... by t_allardyce · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Sounds like a good idea, they really should just re-build the original towers (with new technology etc) instead of all this 'freedom' bullshit and pissy little artists impressions made by companies that really have no interest but to get their name all over it and say they built the cock-sucking-freedom-tower. The way I see it they should just build the original ones or make it into a memorial - no half-way spiky glass 'architectural revolutions'.

      --
      This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
    2. Re:The look... by bad-badtz-maru · · Score: 1

      From what I understand, the original ones are architectural monstrosities that were pushed on the citizens by the arrogant Port Authority. The reaction to their original construction was not "wow, that's neat", it was "WTF are those big ugly things?". I think that is why there isn't much desire to rebuild them.

    3. Re:The look... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Plus, the tower is only going to have 60 floors of usable space.

      Freedom = Half Empty

    4. Re:The look... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, but that is just pretty sick humor. You should be ashamed.

    5. Re:The look... by greywire · · Score: 1

      I know this is way off topic but what the heck!

      They should replace the towers which a gigantic "laser" to be used against the terrorists...

      --
      -- Senior Software Engineer, Attorney appearance services, locallawyerapp.com.
  46. Concrete wheels anyone? Anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Concrete wheels and rubber roads! What next?

    Was the guy who invented the seedless watermelon somehow involved in the project?

  47. It could be a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    if there is some mechanism that puts the fibers into the environment. In this case wear on the road surface would put them into the local environment. So you might have a problem depending on what the fibers were, the article didn't say AFAICT.

    I wouldn't use fiber glass as an example of a safe fiber. People do stupid things with it. When I was looking for houses, I saw more than one house with loose fiberglass dumped all over the attic. I figured it would cost thousands to have it cleaned up. The real estate agent mentioned it was illegal in California. But people do that kind of stuff because they believe anything not illegal and banned must be perfectly safe, even if you ignore the dumbed down safety instructions.

  48. Ack, Adblock Workout! by son_of_rotten · · Score: 0
    Discounting the non-newsworthy nature, this article contains obnoxious, irrelevant, text obscuring pop up doo-hickies.

    FYI: I think the script that makes TFA too irritating to read is the one that comes from

    • uk.intellitxt.com
    ...

    I know that I won't read any crap from PhysOrg ever again.

  49. Earthquake zones by rishistar · · Score: 1

    I'd expect that buildings and roads made of this stuff would be better than normal concrete in earthquake zones. Though thats just a hunch

    --
    Professor Karmadillo Songs of Science
  50. It's not civil engineering or building by Senor_Programmer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    construction, but scaled composites, USA company, has done some rather innovative work. Space ship one, voyager, ...

    Innovative is not always practical. Building construction is about cost. Steel reinforced aggregate is still the least expensive in most applications. Especially when you can pour at 5AM and 24 hours later pull your forms off 3000+ PSI material.

    I know a company in Georgia that puts up chicken coops using a robot. They erect a jig, the robot sprays and trims a foam form and then sprays concrete on the interior and exterior. A friends machine shop makes the spray guns, which were designed in his shop.

    I think the main reason for slow adoption is not so much the codes, as the lobbying against change on the part of established companies. This is changing as the old boys are retiring in droves. Hawaii recently approved bamboo for use in resdential construction...finally. This is old technology that is good, especially where termites are such a big problem.

    1. Re:It's not civil engineering or building by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bamboo is good where humidity is a problem too.

    2. Re:It's not civil engineering or building by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a great material.
      I lived in house in Fiji that had bamboo walls.
      After about ten years you just weave some new ones, untie the old, and replace them. The house was very airy and even in the middle of a rainy mangrove swamp there was no problem with mildew. It's a bit more problematic as a structural material andfor flooring but still cost competitive before one considers that termites don't like it much.

  51. does that mean by macaulay805 · · Score: 0, Troll

    ... fiber-reinforced bendable concrete.

    Does that mean this thing is a load of shit?!

  52. Been reading some more --- by Senor_Programmer · · Score: 1

    Run search on umich and ECC and you'll find all sorts of interesting stuff they've been doing there. Now off to walk dog over tob watch the tail end of a concrete pour on a midrise that's going up about a mile from the house.

  53. English Misusage... by Fitzghon · · Score: 1

    Tiny fibers that comprise about 2 percent of the mixture's volume partly account for its performance.

    Not to be a stickler, but you mean "tiny fibers that compose about 2 percent..."
    Just remember, the whole comprises the parts, and the parts compose the whole.

    Fitzghon

    1. Re:English Misusage... by Echoloc8 · · Score: 1

      Bzzt. Wrong. The fibers comprise the whole of the 2% under discussion.

      The whole does comprise the parts, but the whole is in turn composed of the parts. I've never heard the usage that parts compose a whole.

      It's is comprised of that is the (more) incorrect usage.

      -Echoloc8

      --
      ----- Remove the obvious from the above address to reply.
  54. Not really new. There are concrete boats. by Colin+Smith · · Score: 1

    There have been boats built out of concrete for years, they aren't a new phenomenon, the hull has some flexibility. Replacing the steel reinforcing with fibres is an interesting development.

    To find out more...
    http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=ferrocement +boat&btnG=Google+Search&meta=

    --
    Deleted
  55. Re:English Misusage.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    are you sure you don't mean misuse?

    "misusage" is a US-local redundant neologism, and cannot strictly be referred to as English, can it?

  56. But do states really want good roads? by bulletman · · Score: 1

    The more cynical side of me wonders whether better roads that require less maintenance and have longer life are really what the states want. Highway construction is so full of pork barrel politics.

    I thought Switzerland had high quality, long lasting roads, so it is possible...

    Stephen

    1. Re:But do states really want good roads? by FhnuZoag · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't quite understand.

      Improved roads reduce fuel consumption, and also pollution. Maintaining bad roads is also costly, removing funds that can be used for other purposes, and can be itself polluting. In the long term, everyone gains, and cost is reduced. It's almost a free lunch.

      So long as we are talking about upgrading existing roads, not building a massive new network of roads, I don't see how anyone can be displeased by this.

    2. Re:But do states really want good roads? by ThisIsFred · · Score: 1

      So long as we are talking about upgrading existing roads, not building a massive new network of roads, I don't see how anyone can be displeased by this.

      Stop me if I'm wrong here, but this material probably can't be created in "legacy" concrete plants which, in my state of Connecticut, are seen as profuse producers of pollution. CT has banned construction of new concrete plants, and the environmentalists cheered. So there's at least one party that would be displeased.

      --
      Fred

      "A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
      -RMS
  57. As a resident of Michigan... by Drako2 · · Score: 0

    I can't think of a better test case than Michigan roads for this material.

  58. This stuff isn't new by Zemplar · · Score: 1

    Galloping Gertie was the first large-scale project to incorporate this material.

    http://www.ketchum.org/tacomacollapse.html

  59. More statisitics than a soap ad by gvc · · Score: 1, Redundant
    500 times more resistant to cracking

    The bridge is 40 percent lighter than traditional concrete

    he ECC is 37 percent less expensive,

    consumes 40 percent less energy,

    produces 39 percent less carbon dioxide

    findings are based on the assumption that ECC lasts twice as long as regular concrete, a reasonable assumption given the known information, but it must be confirmed through further study.

    What exactly does "500 times as flexible" mean? How can a bridge be lighter than concrete?

    Read the last point carefully. A self-serving press release based on conjecture. I understand why U. Mich. would write such a thing, but why would physorg.com and /. regurgitate it?
    1. Re:More statisitics than a soap ad by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      500 times as flexible means that ECC tolerates 500 times the vertical give than traditional concrete.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    2. Re:More statisitics than a soap ad by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      Of course, concrete cracking is not a big deal, most of the time. Concrete is not used in tension - that's what steel is for.

      There are several ways to measure cracking in ductile materials, and more for concrete (curing shrinkage is one that is not even service related).

      Most of your energy redutcions are probably from reducing the amount of portland cement in the concrete mix. Portland takes an enormous amount of energy to produce.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  60. Flying Citadel? by QMO · · Score: 1

    Bad idea.
    Some doorknob of a kender would steal it.

    --
    Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
  61. Looks, eh. How does it Feel? by CrazyWingman · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Ok, so they say it looks exactly like concrete. Despite the fact that I don't think it matters what roads look like (as long as their not bright yellow, requiring new traffic markings), I really think looks matter even less in this case.

    The real question is, how does it feel? What kind of texture does the outside of it have? Does it have some grit to it, or is it perfectly smooth? If the latter case, can a grit be ground into it, and will it hold that gritty shape? Smooth-surface roads are a Bad Thing (tm).

    Yes, I know it says that they have already used it in roads, but both examples listed describe small patches of the stuff. Even further, in the replacement of the expansion joints on the bridge, this stuff is replacing steel, which is also slick. Even with the other road patch they talk about, in most places I've lived, that means that it probably replaced a large steel plate.

    Just wondering. Maybe I need to go try to find the actual UofM site that describes it, rather than this news article. :P

  62. Bendable Concrete? by mmarshall · · Score: 1

    Oxymoron?

  63. For road use... by Transcendent · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...will it have the same (or better) coefficient of friction than normal concrete? Sure it might not crack, but if your tires don't stick to the road, then you're going to have more problems...

    1. Re:For road use... by pvaecc · · Score: 1

      Better coefficient of friction than normal concrete. 40 -44 lbs per yard of concrete is a lot of fiber. It is naturally textured unless you pour it into a mold. Then it can come out like glass. Rick McCabe www.kuraray-am.com/pvaf/

  64. MOD parent up! by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

    Out of six replies to the GP post, valkoinen is the only one who has a clue. No wonder Edison has such disdane for mathematicians!

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  65. Possible health risks by psychonaut · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Tiny fibres" embedded in the concrete? Reminds me of the tiny fibres of asbestos, which get stuck in people's lungs and cause cancer. Are we looking at a possible health risk here as this bendable concrete crumbles off unmaintained buildings, and is gradually eroded off highly used roads?

    1. Re:Possible health risks by pvaecc · · Score: 1

      PVA fibers have been used for 20 years as a safe alternative to asbestos. Many (most?) of the old plants have been converted to PVA. Also it is totally organic and the 40 micron size is well over the 3 micron respirable limit. These fibers are highly abrasion resistant and will not break up like asbestos. PVA is even FDA approved for use with food. (We make a food covering, and hundreds of other products.) Check out the web site: www.kuraray-am.com/pvaf/ Rick McCabe

  66. Re:Concrete Roads: How about brick by QMO · · Score: 1

    very slippery when wet
    expensive to maintain (probably few/none of the individual bricks are 150 years old)
    sometimes makes property more valuable, thus paying for itself in higher taxes at the same tax rate

    --
    Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
  67. But asphalt resists cracking better than concrete by godless+dave · · Score: 1

    If this bendable concrete has the flexibility of asphalt with the durability of concrete, it could indeed be a superior road surface to either.

    --
    "If it's real, then it gets more interesting the closer you examine it. If it's not real, just the opposite is true." -
  68. Test Case by duffer_01 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Michigan roads must make the perfect test cases for this stuff

    I got a pothole the size of the Grand Canyon that says Ontario would be a better test case.

  69. RTFA by MikeDawg · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I was two sentences into this article when I thought about the condition of Michigan's roads. I was already thinking about a post on how ironic it was that it was the Univ. of Michigan that developed this concrete, and look at the road conditions. As the article noted, it is perfect conditions here in Michigan to test this new concrete.

    --

    YOU'RE WINNER !
    Another lame blog

  70. Re:Concrete/Rubber Roads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They've had this for years. We have an entire road about 120 miles long here (toll) that did that. I must say the ride is much smoother but they still have to maintain it from time to time.

  71. The site owners are going to kill me but... by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 2, Informative

    Here's a streaming video!

    (And here's the original article from the Univ. of Michigan)

    *already starts to feel guilty about the /. effect* :-(

    1. Re:The site owners are going to kill me but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While we're linking to videos... This whole bendable concrete thing is nothing new - we've had it since the 1940's.

  72. Elastic concrete??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Haven't we invented that years ago?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacoma_Narrows_Bridge

  73. SpaceShips by bigattichouse · · Score: 1

    Ok.. so you build a big "balloon" of this material, laminated with the mylar stuff to make a tough and springy space habitat. assuming you can find water where you are going, it would seriously cut down on your shipping needs.

    --
    meh
  74. Michigan Minefields by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Michigan has some really bad roads. Lifespan should be measured in months here not years.

    Our multiple issues with concrete come from poor installation practices followed by some of the worst maintenance practices known to man. We also have trucks driving around with very high axle loads doing considerable damage.

    We get concrete cracks from stress fractures (bad weight/balance) and then follow that up with lots of salt, snow plows and repeated water saturation with rapid freeze/thaw cycles. The state solution is to dump some asphault on it and smack it with a shovel. Needless to say, within 2 weeks the freezing water boots that "patch" out and the problem grows and continues to grow rapidly over time. Smaller, smarter communities will tar these cracks early resulting in longer road life.

    As for asphault in our environment. It takes the traffic about 3 weeks to carve ruts into it in high traffic areas. Ruts with rain on the freeway can be a freakishly terrifying feeling. Speaking to some Germans at DaimlerChrysler about our road differences, it seems they resurface their asphault annually. That might make asphault viable here in Michigan, if it was laid on clean road rather than on pothole infested, trashed road that crawls up through the asphault like zombies in a horror film within 8 weeks.

    I'll now be watching the construction on that bridge mentioned in the article more careful, as I go under it daily. Maybe they can redo the I-23/I-94 ramps with this stuff if it works... (or Geddes road on the way in to north campus - it's paved but unpaved would be smoother)

  75. Heat dissipation by 5n3ak3rp1mp · · Score: 1

    I don't know how well this would serve as foundation material for weather-resistant buildings, because I have an inkling of a feeling that under that great a weight, flexing concrete would generate a decent amount of internal heat, and is it really designed to conduct that heat away?

    The information that informs this feeling is that that is the same reason why we don't have solid rubber tires, the internal heat generated would melt the tire from the inside out under normal stresses.

  76. French have this beat.. by digital.prion · · Score: 0

    In France they make extensive use of Cobblestone streets. The roads last far longer and the whole pop and crack of the cement during winter is really not an issue..

    Does anyone know why a Cobblestone system isn't used more in US cities?

    --
    Smile.
  77. So when could I use this stuff at my house? by ivaldes3 · · Score: 1

    And would it be really expensive?

    -- IV

    --
    http://www.LinuxMedNews.com Revolutionizing Medical Education and Practice.
  78. Truth by 3770 · · Score: 1

    I'd be more interested if they had invented the bendable truth. ;)

    --
    The Internet is full. Go Away!!!
  79. Damn lawyers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They ruined my Asbestos & BBQ restaurant.

  80. Bendable Concrete? by Luscious868 · · Score: 1

    I'm concrete, your glue, everything bounces off me and sticks to you! Bendable Concrete? Doesn't that defeat the entire purpose of concrete? Further, what does this do to the metaphor? No more concrete ideas. I need to go rethink my life.

  81. MOD GRANDPARENT INFORMATIVE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nt

  82. Re:Looks, eh. How does it Feel? by StyroCupMan · · Score: 1

    The real question is, how does it feel?

    I agree! The most logical use for flexible concrete is a new line of designer clothing!

    --
    If I may say so, life is a game, and there's so much to do and so few turns.
    -Reiner Knizia
  83. You think you look forward to it? by RyoShin · · Score: 1

    Michigan roads must make the perfect test cases for this stuff, and I look forward to their improvement.

    Oh hell yes. I work in Pontiac and go to college in Flint.

    However, it's Michigan, so it's more likely we'll see this being used in Hawaii before here. :/

  84. Is it "softer" than regular concrete? by jcook713 · · Score: 1

    I wonder what this means for concrete skateparks. Would I crack my skull open or shred my knees on this type of concrete just like the regular stuff?

  85. Concrete galoshes... you mean cement overshoes? by scovetta · · Score: 2, Funny

    We can finally make people more comfortable when we toss them off a bridge into the ocean!

    --
    Wer mit Ungeheuern kämpft, mag zusehn, dass er nicht dabei zum Ungeheuer wird. --Nietzsche
  86. Huricane parties by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

    Thus, the towers stabilize each other and are quite flexible. According to the documentary, if you watch the water in the upper-level toilets on a windy day, you'll see it swooshing around. - In the late 1990's (just before Xmas) I was on the 30th floor of a 32 storey building in Melbourne, Australia. We sometimes get small violent dust/thunderstorms at that time of the year and the view can be pretty awesome from a skyscraper.

    We had a clear view over the docks and on this particular day we all started watching what looked like a medium sized dust storm coming our way, it had completely blocked the Westgate bridge from view (eight lane bridge, big enough to fit the huge container ships coming into the nearby Port). When it hit our building you could not see much out of the window except dust, leaves,...wtf...,sticks,...rubbish...,30 storeys up! After a couple of minutes, it felt like the building had turned into a small boat rocking in a gentle sea and I found myself swaying slightly to stay vertical. The blinds were starting to smash against the sides of the window frame and stuff was rolling off the desks here and there.

    Some people got half under thier desks or just started crouching down where they stood, people were letting out "oh shiiiit" type of statements, a few of the women let out short jumpy screams when somthing tipped over near them. This went on for about 5-10 minutes, then it stopped just as suddenly as it started. Turned out to be the strongest winds to hit the city for 100yrs, on the streets around the building it had uprooted several old Elm that were planted in the 1800's.

    During the swaying, I kept watching out the window and tried to keep calm by thinking, "I have seen documentaries where people have huricane parties in tall buildings, they are designed to sway around, sit back, enjoy the ride". Then my head would counter with it's own thinking, "It's starting to feel like the build up to a tornado in a hollywod movie, I have seen documentaries about how fragile buildings can be if the lower floors are open-wall car parks, I am ontop of nine floors of car-park, ok, this is getting out of hand, I want the swaying stop now,...Marge, do something,it's not stopping...". The only conclusion I can come too, is that "hurricane parties" are for adrenelin junkies that find the triple loop rollercoaster is just not enough anymore.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  87. Roads by vandon · · Score: 0

    So if the concrete road is flexible, does that mean we can go back to steel wheels like the very first automobiles?

  88. Ancient Incan Patents? by kupci · · Score: 0
    The first thing that struck me about this article was the similarity between this idea, and the construction techniques of the Incans, who had much concern for earthquakes. (There was a program on PBSBasically they had mud bricks, with a woven fabric inside, that made them perform much better in earthquakes. Then the Spanish came along, bringing their new technologies (bricks), told them they were doing it all wrong, and promptly there was much more devastation when there were earthquakes (in Chile for example). Bricks are very brittle.

    Furthermore, the two towers are located on a relatively 'soft' foundation -- they essentially 'float' on sea of soft land.

    Interesting. There's some architectural info, Flash enabled, at PBS also on some of the new buildings (mainly the one at Shanghai), but not much detail.

    But even that idea isn't relatively new, I believe it was one of the ideas proposed for the foundation of a nuclear power plant in Meehan's excellent book on this subject, The Atom and The Fault

  89. ECC -- ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't resist.

    Since this form of concrete is slightly flexible it will allow a certain amount of movement. This would be useful if the construction company almost gets the pour in the right location or someone changes their mind about where it should go. They can now hook up a dozer and pull the slabs in line.

    ECC == Error Correcting Concrete :-)

  90. answers to many of the questions here by BroadwayBlue · · Score: 1
    ...can be found in the ACE-MRL journal papers available at 141.212.44.81/NewFiles/journals(03-04).html
    (Tempting as it is, no hotlink done intentionally to help avoid the slashdotting.)

    I recommend starting with 03-04 "On Engineered Cementitious Composites (ECC) - A Review of the Material and its Applications" as it includes a nice photo of a bent column.

  91. Tacoma Narrows bridge beat us to it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    New concept? I don't know... that Tacoma Narrows bridge swinging in the wind looked pretty bendable to me, and that was way back when they had old cars and everything was black and white.

  92. Heated Concrete by lazarus · · Score: 1
    What might be very interesting is if this technology could be combined with the conductive concrete developed by the Institute for Research in Construction which is part of the Canadian National Research Council. This technology was awarded a top prize by Popular Science Magazine in 1997.

    These two technologies together might constitue a concrete used for roads that is both very flexible and also featured automatic snow and ice removal!

    --
    I am not interested in articles about life extension advancements.
  93. Isn't this really old? by mwood · · Score: 1

    I recall seeing automobile coil springs made from concrete years ago (as a demonstration, not a production item). Was that in the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago (where they also have a whole roomful of things most people would never dream of doing with glass)?

    Maybe it was these guys, and it took them 30 years to get it right? I should RTFM...okay, I did, and there's no mention of the spring I saw, so I dunno.

    I'll grant that 30 years of research probably makes a significant difference in the result.

  94. Re:Everybody falls the first time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NEO CRATERED!

  95. MAJOR FUD ALERT! by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

    Okay according to TFA:

    "the ECC is 37 percent less expensive, consumes 40 percent less energy, and produces 39 percent less carbon dioxide (a major cause of global warming) than regular concrete."

    That's fanstastic, but my bull-shit-o-meter is going off... Yup, the very next sentense is:

    " based on the assumption that ECC lasts twice as long as regular concrete"

    Okay, so lets get out our calculators:

    (1-.37) * 2 = 1.26, or 26% more expensive in capital

    (1-.4) * 2 = 1.2 or 20% more energy to make and

    (1-.39) * 2 = 1.22 or 22% more CO2 emissions to make.

    Since the claims of double longevity are speculative, I would base any potential of the system on - at best - an eqiuvalent lifespan.

    One item they don't mention is whether they have significantly changed the modulus of elasticity or the yield strength to get their results. I would suspect that the latter is the case, with the tensile allowables getting the only bump.

    Most concrete can withstand 3500-4000psi in practice. I would guess 90% of concrete is "spec'd" at 2500-3000psi, and most ready mix plants pad by 500-1000psi to make sure they get the required struength. At a 3000psi alloable, the tensile stress is about 250psi. Increasing that to 3000 through fibers would make the material act more like a traditoinal material.

    Actually, that's what happens in concrete for buildings. We don't design for that 250psi tensile strength, we design for 3000psi compression, and then embed steel to take the tension stresses. Using high-tensile steel, prestressed concrete effectively "pre-compresses" the concrete to increaee its capacity. Anyone who believes concrete is not flexible has never seen a "double tee" bridge girder after they cut the prestressing steel and take it out of the forms. The fom nive little arcs. The weight of the bridge topping (road surface) then weights the bema down until it is nearly flat again.

    This may have implications in the near term for specialty applications, but I don't really see it as sliced bread for the industry in the near future.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  96. Presaged in 80's Comics! by StCredZero · · Score: 1

    This Concrete was already jumping & bending (as well as winning the hearts of scantily clad hotties) in the 80's!

  97. Re:Concrete Roads: How about brick by soliptic · · Score: 2, Informative
    You Americans are funny ;-)

    In this town, we have cobbled streets, still going strong from the Middle Ages...

  98. Not exactly new by renraw · · Score: 1

    Alternative products have been around for a while. A steel based fiber reinforcement from the same lab @ UofM is commercially available from PolyTorx and offers even better performance in many applications. http://www.polytorx.com/

  99. Countertops by nyquil+superstar · · Score: 1

    Actually, this interests me more for countertops than roads. "Countertops?" you ask. If you've never looked at concrete countertops, you really should. Here are some pics. (I am in no way related to the site.) They seem like they have signifigant advantages over granite, namely cheap, easily formed materials, and can look just as good or better (mix in whatever you want!). However, my concern has always been dropping somehting on them and chipping, because you have to replace the whole slab if you want to fix it. Perhaps bendable concrete would be less prone to chipping.

    1. Re:Countertops by gatkinso · · Score: 1

      It stains like a mofo - regardless of how well you (think) you've sealed it. It also chips easier than other products (as you have stated).

      Quartz (Silestone) performs *much* better, and priced slightly lower than concrete, across most grades.

      I had a job installing countertops back in my college days.

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  100. Popular Science called! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They said to stop passing off their early '90s news articles as new today!

    Look for the article "Concrete that Bends", between 1990 and 1992.

    The concrete was made with lots of nylon fiber inside.

  101. MOD DOWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    im a real geek and i didnt get it.

    perhaps i need to move back in with my mom?

  102. Just like concrete? by WMNelis · · Score: 1

    It looks like concrete. It feels like concrete. But does it taste like concrete?

    --

    Sig free since 2/6/2002
  103. The original paper by randolph · · Score: 1

    You can read Victor Li's paper (PDF). The reinforcing fibers are plastic, which raises a whole host of questions. The work, by the way, has been done at U Mich's Advanced Civil Engineering Material Research Lab.

    1. Re:The original paper by pvaecc · · Score: 1

      That is correct. They are PVA (polyvinyl alcohol) and the company site is www.kuraray-am.com/pvaf/ There is a good third-party site at www.engineeredcomposites.com Rick McCabe

  104. Achtung! by j33px0r · · Score: 1

    ...retrofit a section of the Grove Street bridge deck over I-94...

    Uhmm, yeah, lets test out our new road material on a bridge...couldn't we start on a parking lot or a 35 mph road?

  105. Re:Concrete Roads: How about brick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's amazing how shitty surfaces last for 1000 years.

  106. Good news for Mafia Hitmen... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Concrete less resistant to cracking in marine environments minimizes the embarassment of having your stiffs pop to the river's surface some years later after the "cement overshoes" flake off the corpse...

  107. Re:concrete catamaran by quarkscat · · Score: 1

    I used to wonder about what would drive people
    to built a ferro-cement boat, considering the
    surface area/bouyancy required for the weight of
    it's construction. This advancement in materials
    science makes a smaller (less ark-like) concrete
    boat a viable alternative.

    I no longer have any excuse for not building a
    concrete catamaran, in spite of being nearly 1000
    feet above sea-level. No need to wait for that
    Canary Islands tsunami for it's launch.

  108. Testing in Michigan by retnuh1 · · Score: 1

    We can only pray. But seriously do you really want the road commission guys applying for jobs were you work?

  109. Why do a good job? by vlad_petric · · Score: 1

    If you do a poor one, you're gonna have to do it all over again next year (i.e. more money).

    --

    The Raven

  110. job security by dmf415 · · Score: 1

    Less job security for those who repair potholes =(

  111. Well, I for one want to welcome... by Ocelot+Wreak · · Score: 1
    Well, I for one want to welcome our new concrete overlords!

    --
    "I figure you're here 'cause you need some whacko who's willing to stick his finger in the fan. So who are we helping?
  112. Re:Concrete Roads: How about brick by grassy_knoll · · Score: 1

    In this town, we have cobbled streets, still going strong from the Middle Ages...

    That's Europe for ya... thousands of years of history, unbroken by progress..

    I keed... I keed...

  113. Problem with modern art is that it often looks by crovira · · Score: 1

    like crap (on purpose.)

    Leave it to neo-Ludites to come and smash it up.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  114. New York is a nightmare as far as that goes! by crovira · · Score: 1

    The streets here in downtown are constantly being torn up and whatever surface there might be is, literally, a holey mess. (I walk with a cane and its an exterience, let me tell you.)

    I've often wondered why they bother paving them again when it would probably be smarter to just span the holed with 'arched' concrete segments resting on sidewalk supports that they could just lift out of the way, lay the cables/pipes/whatever and then replace.

    It would certainly mean that the street isn't torn up for weeks at a time.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  115. bah. give me pykrete anyday. by KunstCleaver · · Score: 1

    still not as cool as pykrete

    --
    "The direction controls are the same in Nethack as they are in vi." "Yeah, I hardly ever die in vi anymore."
  116. BCID by mattsucks · · Score: 1

    This sounds too complex to have been made by human researchers, so I hereby posit the Bendable Concrete Intelligent Design theory. There must be a higher power.

  117. Flexible Concrete is Nothing New by Bun · · Score: 1

    I remember the civil engineering students demonstrating a flexible concrete snow sled during Engineering Week at my alma mater (UBC) sometime around 1994. They rolled it up and carried it away. (It took four of them to lift it.)

    --
    "Anyone that has ever gotten an idea based on any of my work and done something better with it-good for you."--J.Carmack
  118. Concrete and global warming by CemeteryWall · · Score: 1
    Concrete accounts for about one sixth of all the man-made carbon dioxide globally. It's about time we used something completely different.


    The snows of Killomanjaro are almost gone
    The dreamy Muldives drowned and overrun
    The polar bears will have no place to roam
    They'll live their listless lives on solid ground

  119. OT: Real programmers by LesPaul75 · · Score: 1
    Real programmers use COPY CON FILENAME.EXE

    I've done that! When I was in college, on an internship, one of the other interns thought it would be a cool contest to see who could crash a PC with the smallest amount of code. (This was back in the Windows 3.1 days.) So he wrote a batch file that called itself (or something along those lines), and sure enough, it eventually blew up the DOS stack and crashed. It was pretty small, maybe 20 bytes or so. Being a real programmer, I did this:

    COPY CON X.EXE
    [Crtl-A][Ctrl-Z][Enter]

    Which creates a one-byte file with ASCII character 0x01, which is the smiley face (just to be cute). One of the wonderful things about Win 3.1 and DOS is that they don't do any sanity checking of EXE files. They just jump right in there and start executing. So trying to execute the single smiley-face character did in fact hang the system.
  120. Limitations. by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

    Seems like the big limitation is the foam they use for flotation. Made me wonder if you could embed the microballons in a matrix of metal rather than epoxy. Yes I can imagine the issues.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  121. But, I'm still waiting for... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...structural grade applesauce.

  122. composites are almost as interesting as computers by gone.fishing · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A couple of years ago my interest in boating caused me to start looking into composites. Eventually I settled on pretty pedestrian epoxy and fiberglass cloth due to it's reasonable cost, strength, and overall characteristics. I built my first boat and found it more than rewarding.

    Learning about composites and their characteristics was far more interesting and rewarding that I would have ever imagined. How and why they do what they do is just cool - and trying to understand what the best composite for the best application is can sometimes involve a lot of research (and even then you will here different opinions from different experts - who are all naturally trying to sell you something).

    Fero-cement boats are actually kind of common and have been in use for many years. While heavier than a comparible fiberglass or steel boat, they have some advantages (easier to make complex curves than steel for instance). Over years a "concrete" boat (and all cement based products are in their own right composites) wear out and require more and more maintenence to keep them seaworthy. One of the hardest things to engineer is the fact that you have to deal with expansion and contraction (this is why roadways and sidewalks have seams in them).

    Flexible concrete that only contains a small percentage of interlinking fibers could revolutionize concrete for boat building purposes. While I am allowing myself to dream here a little bit, I think it is possible that in time concrete could become the matterial of choice to build large ships!

    In larger ships the added weight of concrete would not add so much mass that it would really reduce the effiency of the ship much at all and construction could be a whole lost faster (especially if mass produced in molds).

  123. Asbestos by HermanAB · · Score: 1

    reinforced cement has been re-invented - woohoo...

    --
    Oh well, what the hell...
  124. Rubber cement? by Fortran+IV · · Score: 1

    Reminds me of an old "Beetle Bailey" cartoon:

    Sgt. Snorkel: Zero, go get me some rubber cement.
    Zero: Rubber cement? [long thoughtful pause] Sure would make walking more fun.

    --
    I figure by 2030 or so my 6-digit UID will be something to brag about.
  125. If they'd made the World Trade Center... by VegeBrain · · Score: 1

    towers out of this, then the airplanes would have just bounced off, right? Boingy boingy, but no fallee!

  126. I could have done that if the alcohol was stronger by newpath4comVersion2 · · Score: 1

    Okay, "scientists" eh? All anyone had to do was mix a 2 lb. block of Pillsbury Baker's Yeast with warm water, some sugar, & bigbottleof Metamucil. Wait 20 minutes and dump it into the concrete batch. Geez. hehehehe

  127. Re:Yes but...how fast? by vortexau · · Score: 1

    > No, but because of it's bendability, it can actually dodge incomming plains.

    But how fast can these incomming plains, that you mention, move? . . and is this all due totectonic plate creap?
    http://www.seismo.unr.edu/ftp/pub/louie/class/100/ plate-tectonics.html
    .

    --
    (David Bowman, EVA near HUGE Monolithic Win-PC in orbit around Jupiter) "My God - its full of Malware!"
  128. The fibers are PVA (polyvinyl alcohol) by pvaecc · · Score: 1

    I work for the company that makes the fibers mentioned in this story. This mix is called PVA-ECC and our site is www.kuraray-am.com/pvaf/ . The third party site with all the research is www.engineered composites.com The way it works is that the fibers have low stretch and a free hydrogen molecule that creates a chemical bond with the cement during hydration. So what you get, as concrete shrinks over time, is millions of microcracks generally too small for water to penetrate. Those cracks can heal by themselves from the free, unhydrated lime in the mix. But using a crystal-generating product like Xypex, Kryton or Tegraproof will certainly assist in the healing of the microcracks. These cracks are so small that usually--even without control joints--you have to wet the surface to see them. Because of the molecular bond between the fibers and the cement, and because at 40 microns, 8mm long, you have many millions of fibers at 40lbs/yard dosage, this material is also highly fatigue resistant. Hence the bridge angle. Yeah, that's a lot of fiber, but you can cut your concrete cover way down, cancelling out fiber costs. For many applications you can eliminate most or all of the steel reinforcement. But because of these features, plus chemical, alkali, UV and abrasion resistance, there are a myriad of uses for PVA fibers. Even just a pound per yard cuts long term cracks by 50% in regular old ready mix. Just toss it in the truck. Rick McCabe

  129. Re:Looks, eh. How does it Feel? by pvaecc · · Score: 1

    There is a natural fibery texture to PVA-ECC because we use 40 lbs/yard of 40 micron fibers. You can pour it in a mold and have it come out glass smooth, but generally we use texture rollers to move it around. (The standard recipe is nearly self-levelling.) A good finisher can make it very smooth (no hairs, 1.3 density) but you would probably then want to go back and put a brush finish on it for driveways and sidewalks. I don't know how they are texturing the road work, if at all. Over time the concrete will probably break down and not the fibers. (But with a very high fly ash content, the pozzlanic characteristics will help with aging.) The fibers are enormously abrasion resistant. Where a client had a one inch bump for his heavy forklifts to go over, I put down some PVA-ECC and feathered it down to paper thickness. After months, there were no cracks or damage in the main section. At the paper thin area, the mortar was gone but the fibers were still intact in their molecularly bonded grid. Strange stuff but it works. Rick McCabe

  130. Parent refers, I think, to Zork: Grand Inquisitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (no text)

  131. He's referring to graft by jensend · · Score: 1

    and I for one can see where he's coming from.

    When I see how inefficient the road construction around my town is I suspect the city council members must be getting kickbacks from the construction companies. The street I live on, which gets quite a bit of traffic, was resurfaced and repainted. It took the construction crew only a day or so, and the job was adequate. But (I think it's because the contract and kickback scheme must go by the hour) they came back and spent over a week standing around, putting another layer on top of what they had just done without removing anything, and then drilling through this second layer to reach the manholes they had idiotically cemented over. When they left and reopened my street, there was a dropoff of about an inch from the edge of the road surface to the gutters. I didn't complain to the city because I thought it might prompt another weeklong street closure.

    Even beyond suspicions of graft, it seems a lot of cities are perfectly willing to tear up and redo a street because somebody suggested the street wasn't aesthetically pleasing enough but completely unwilling to spend another cent on education.

  132. Source research website by idust · · Score: 1

    See the website for the research group that works on this.

    --
    "Sometimes I lie awake at night, and I ask, 'Where have I gone wrong?' Then a voice says to me, 'This is going to take
  133. Re:Concrete Roads: How about brick by Zeneris · · Score: 1

    Brick roads make a perfect ice rink in freezing weather i.e. very dangerous, I cursed naive estate designers for this when cycling in icy weather!