Slashdot Mirror


Hurricane Simulator to Destroy Full Size Building

Anonymous Coward writes "This is a shameless plug, but I thought Slashdot readers might be interested in the hurricane simulator system the company I work for (Cambridge Consultants) helped develop for the University of Western Ontario. The BBC article is light on the kind of technical details Slashdot readers enjoy, so here are some titbits. The servomotors for the 100+ valves are controlled over an IPv4, gigabit Ethernet network connected to an Athlon dual-core AMD64 PC. The entire real-time control system runs on this machine, utilizing well above 90% of each processor core, and roughly 30% of the network capacity. The sampling frequency of the control system places a huge demand on the machine, with about 70,000 context switches taking place every second. Yes, it runs Linux. "

162 comments

  1. Yes, But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does it run on Lin...

    Dammit, you stole my line!

    1. Re:Yes, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, But slowly, and with all the eye candy turned way down..

    2. Re:Yes, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Does it play the guitar while people are dying ?

    3. Re:Yes, but... by minginqunt · · Score: 4, Funny

      No, but John C. Dvorak has heard rumors that it will run Mac OS X.

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

      Along with video of cops beating up hippies!

    5. Re:Yes, but... by akunkel · · Score: 0

      Thats what makes it blow.

    6. Re:Yes, but... by ronz0o · · Score: 1

      Yes, it can. The only problem is that they couldn't tell when it would crash...

    7. Re:Yes, but... by [ella] · · Score: 1

      If specs for Vista don't change, this machine might just be up for it!

      --
      Mike
    8. Re:Yes, but... by blake3737 · · Score: 1

      sure it will, but the hurricane will crash about 10 minutes into the presentation, i mearn.. erm... storm.

    9. Re:Yes, but... by fobbman · · Score: 1

      RTFA, man! Apple is going to BUY it!

    10. Re:Yes, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why run Vista? They're already simulating one disaster.

    11. Re:Yes, but... by PCeye · · Score: 1

      ...and Rockbox is going to hack it.

    12. Re:Yes, But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26, @07:59AM (#15604532)
      Does it run on Lin...

      Dammit, you stole my line!

      How can an Anonymous Coward steal a line from ... himself! :-)
      btw, it's not stealing, it's sharing.
  2. Yes, but... by LoonyMike · · Score: 5, Funny

    does it run Vista?

  3. Yeah... by insanarchist · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yeah, but can it run... er... nevermind.

    1. Re:Yeah... by rwven · · Score: 2, Interesting

      To me...it just sounds like an article full of buzz-words. None of that makes a bit of difference as to the outcome. Who, frankly, gives a crap that the simulator uses utilizes "well above 90% of each processor core, and roughly 30% of the network capacity." I do this with my home computer on a daily basis. I'm interested in the core story but trying to win over /. users by using a bunch of words that are "supposed" to mean something just seems lame to me.

    2. Re:Yeah... by Retribution · · Score: 1

      Actually, that's really important, but it's talking more about the software than the hardware.

      For most problems, it can be very difficult to find a way to write the program so that it efficiently utilizes many processors at once. Typically, a poorly-written MPI (or PVM, or whatever distributed computing model you use) program will leave many CPUs idling much of the time. For some problems the division of labor is fairly straightforward, but for most it's not.

      Now, this comment implies that the code is well-written for a cluster. It could also just have CPUs spinning around on redundant calculations. If the size of sending a chunk of data outstrips the cost of computing it (for example), you might recompute it locally, even if that would be redundant work. Note that this isn't necessarily a bad thing, it just means that this is only related to parallel efficiency, not equivalent.

      Anyway, I'm babbling, but sorry, I live and breath this stuff these days. In short, a point like "well above 90% of each processor core" is commonly taken to imply that the parallel efficiency is pretty damn good. To summarize even further, sexy!

      --
      -- That tickles!
  4. Listen by Provocateur · · Score: 5, Funny

    If you guys in Western Ontario want a hurricane so bad why don't you just come live here in Key West, Florida?
     

    --
    WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
    1. Re:Listen by houghi · · Score: 5, Funny

      Because they still want to be able to vote.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    2. Re:Listen by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      Voting in florida is easy, regardless of whether or not you're a US citizen, or even alive for that matter....

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    3. Re:Listen by fobbman · · Score: 4, Funny

      Canadian votes are just as valid as South Florida votes in our election process. Cmon down.

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

      Tell that to the thousands of black voters who were purged by Katherine Harris just before the 2000 election for being convicts. Problem was, they weren't convicts.

  5. Those CPU stats in full... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    10% idle
    89.95% kernel (switching threads)
    0.05% user (generating 70,000 "blow" commands per second)

    Hurricanes may blow, but abusing thread-level concurrancy definitely sucks.

    1. Re:Those CPU stats in full... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Hi, I'm the guy who submitted the story, and the engineer who designed the control system and wrote the software. Your CPU stats are hopelessly wrong. The control system is much more than the issue of "blow" commands. It's actually a sophisticated adaptive and predictive controller that requires millions of floating point operations per second, in addition to the overhead of network I/O and context switching. I don't remember the exact breakdown of idle/user/kernel, but I don't think kernel was above 10%. Far from being an abuse of threads, it's actually a conceptually simple and effective way of designing the software.

    2. Re:Those CPU stats in full... by MrFlibbs · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes, but this doesn't change the fact that your system *blows* ...

    3. Re:Those CPU stats in full... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's actually a sophisticated adaptive and predictive controller that requires millions of floating point operations per second

      Millions? Better fire up that 8087!

      in addition to the overhead of network I/O and context switching

      Ahhh. Overhead.

    4. Re:Those CPU stats in full... by Provocateur · · Score: 1

      Hate to rain on your parade Mr Engineer Sir, but that whoosh whoosh sound isn't coming from your hurricane machine, but the joke flying over...never mind.
       

      --
      WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
    5. Re:Those CPU stats in full... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work for Cambridge Consultants.

      So I am really getting a kick out of most of these replies.

      Some of you guys are very good at making it sound like you know what you are talking about.

      But trust me... you don't.

      I think you just want to make yourself sound smart, when in reality you don't know what you are talking about.

      This is how bad info gets passed around.

      If you dont know about the topic....dont make yourself sound like you do.

      Because some Slashdotters believe anything they hear.

    6. Re:Those CPU stats in full... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A proper reply, Dr. Engineer, would be "That's a good joke, but for those interested the actual loads are...". Way to alienate the public!

    7. Re:Those CPU stats in full... by Kenshin · · Score: 4, Funny

      If you're so smart, maybe you can reprogram it to *suck*.

      --

      Does it make you happy you're so strange?

    8. Re:Those CPU stats in full... by rrohbeck · · Score: 2, Funny

      Reminds me of a training I held in Germany at HP years ago. When we discussed the cooling of the box and the fan, a young female HP employee asked "Does it blow or suck?" It was really hard to keep my face under control.

    9. Re:Those CPU stats in full... by Valdrax · · Score: 1

      Wow! With that kind of horsepower, can it emulate a sense of humor?

      --
      If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
    10. Re:Those CPU stats in full... by TubeSteak · · Score: 3, Funny
      Ways to make it suck:
      • Make the plus signs negative
      • Port the software to JAVA
      • Change all the 0's to 1's and the 1's to 0's
      • Put the source code on wikipedia
      • A million monkeys with a million typewriters...
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    11. Re:Those CPU stats in full... by bedessen · · Score: 1

      +1 Spaceballs

  6. Linux doomsday device by kestasjk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The disturbing thing is that this isn't the first Linux installation on a machine which is designed to destroy buildings..

    --
    // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
    1. Re:Linux doomsday device by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still, I would've figured that if they're going to build something to destroy buildings and terrorize society in general, it would have run on Windows.

    2. Re:Linux doomsday device by JimXugle · · Score: 0

      A little voice inside my head is hinting that the NK Missile runs Windows ME. Assumming that's correct, we all know that North Korea poses no threat... just need to plug in a scanner.

      That same little voice is telling me that ours run Linux.

      --
      -jX

      Don't you just love politics? It's like a comedy of errors.
  7. Nearly 100% by JonathanR · · Score: 0, Redundant

    At well above 90% CPU load, there wouldn't be too much more room to move eh?

  8. Doubts... by Aladrin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have doubts that you can accurately simulate a hurricane without the space around the house. Some damage is done directly by the wind, yes, but there's a LOT of damage that is done by the wind blowing things into other things and weakening them.

    Do you randomly throw in pieces of tin roof and stop signs to simulate that? And trees? I doubt it, since there isn't enough space in your simulator for that.

    As for being "perfectly repeatable", I have doubts for that as well. That assumes that you could build the exact same house over and over. The article even states that the placement of the nails in the house matters, and I can't see anyone being that perfect.

    Overall, I think it's a neat project, but unlikely to really provide more insight than 'yeah, wind fscks shit up.'

    --
    "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    1. Re:Doubts... by MrSquirrel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, flying debris can punch holes in houses and such, but WIND is what will completely tear the house down (remember seing roofs blown off on your t.v. and whole houses collapsing?). The point is, they're NOT going to be able to do a goddamn thing about flying debris (well, they could build all houses out of 10" of tempered steel), what they are trying to do is make houses designed to be as hurricane resistant as possible.
      FTA:"This is relevant because most of the damage to houses occurs in places where there are sudden changes in pressure, such as at the corners and edges of the building.
      "You get swirling and rapid changes from positive to negative pressure," said Mr Wilkinson.
      "If you were going to pull a panel off a roof you wouldn't just heave on it, you'd try to waggle it, and that's the most destructive thing for the wind to do.""

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing.
    2. Re:Doubts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah, I'm pretty sure the guys doing the experiments didn't think of that, good thing you happened to be here to set them straight.

    3. Re:Doubts... by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      I think it might help get rules of thumb, but they do need to simulate objects being thrown at them, of random types and at random locations from random angles.

      I saw a Science Channel show that showed that the biggest weakness of any structure is the windows. The biggest improvement can be had by just using a plastic film over both sides so they can hold the wind out once it's been hit by a large object. Once it lets wind in, the wind tends to gut a building.

    4. Re:Doubts... by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I found the article to be pretty fascinating, but I'm really curious as to how they've modeled hurricane winds. The hardware details are pretty mundane, but the algorithms they've used to model a hurricane would be a very interesting subject.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    5. Re:Doubts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's ironic: the test hangar is known as the "three little pigs" facility, yet they've all missed the point of the story. Don't build your house out of sticks.

    6. Re:Doubts... by gameguy1957 · · Score: 1
      We had three storms last year that knocked out power and two that damaged the house. The wind itself does cause damage but not enought to mention. However, if you add in the raid that comes from the storm then there's lots of damage. I think that after you get 20" - 30" of rain over a few hours it tends to soften things up for the wind. Trees that would withstand the wind force are pushed over once the ground is water logged. Same goes for the house. If you start getting plywood wet it will seperate and blow apart.

      -JM

    7. Re:Doubts... by saider · · Score: 2, Interesting


      The point is, they're NOT going to be able to do a goddamn thing about flying debris (well, they could build all houses out of 10" of tempered steel), what they are trying to do is make houses designed to be as hurricane resistant as possible.


      A cement brick house (standard in Florida) is able to stop any debris hurled at it by a hurricane. The standard test is usually a 2x4 at 120mph or somesuch. One weak spot is the connection between the roof and the wall. If these are not properly secured, the roof will be lifted up into the windstream, and you've seen the video of this happening. Protecing the openings of the house (windows, doors, etc) is important because of this same effect. As long as you protect your openings and your house was properly constructed, hurricanes are not a problem. And we have known how to build hurricane proof houses for a long time. People just like being cheap and want to know how much they can get away with.

      --


      Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
    8. Re:Doubts... by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the purpose is not to faithfully recreate the damage caused by a hurricane but to experiment with the hurricane itself.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    9. Re:Doubts... by KarmaMB84 · · Score: 1

      Especially for owners of quarter million dollar beachfront property. The government provides insurance at lower than market rates even for inland properties and will rebuild the same (up to) $250,000 property an unlimited number of times. Owners would probably rather just build a brand new one rather than repair one left standing (nothing is like new like BRAND NEW!) so they build them as if hurricanes were a myth and just evacuate when one comes anywhere near. Afterall, these particular bastards have an inland house somewhere and will simply spend government tax dollars to rush construction so their new beach house is ready by the time they want to vacation there...

    10. Re:Doubts... by Smeagel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      $250,000 in the miami area? They can probably rebiuld their front porch with that money...nice theory though. It's quite a bit more likely that they want a beautiful house that they can show off, rather than a cheap house that they can rebuild. Nothing quite says "waste of beach front" like a cement/brick house without many windows.

    11. Re:Doubts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't it just great how there are so many experts here ready to give their useless advice?

    12. Re:Doubts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The government provides insurance at lower than market rates even for inland properties and will rebuild the same (up to) $250,000 property an unlimited number of times.

      Thats a laugh. FEMA flood insurance is a waste of money, even at the lower-than-market rates. It's easy to claim you'll rebuild a property an unlimited number of times when it takes over a decade to get around to doing, as some of the Hurricane Andrew residents (who sank thousands into government insurance and got the trailer they're still living in a decade later to show for it) can tell you. Now my question is, does Trent Lott have his house yet?

    13. Re:Doubts... by saider · · Score: 1

      The government provides insurance at lower than market rates even for inland properties and will rebuild the same (up to) $250,000 property an unlimited number of times.

      I don't know what government you speak of, but Citizen's Insurance (the FL owned provider) has to charge (by law) above the highest rate for a given property. It is about 20-50 percent higher than a private provider.

      The private providers *must* provide coverage for homes if they want to sell any other insurance in the state. But the way the insurance companies get around that requirement is by limiting their exposure and writing the minimum number of homeowner's policies to keep the regulators at bay.

      For high risk properties, the insurance can be a significant (about 30%) amount of your monthly payment. If you don't pay the insurance then the bank can forclose on your house because one of the items in your contract is maintaining homeowner's insurance. So while your mortgage payment is set in stone, your insurance rates can price you out of a home. Your house may be rock solid and not in a flood zone, but some accountant in St Louis sees a Florida zip code and decides to raise the premium by another 10% this year.

      --


      Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
    14. Re:Doubts... by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      If you could seal the windows like you say, you'd have to start worrying about overpressure separating structural members. Better the windows break and the furnature gets pushed around than the whole house explodes.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    15. Re:Doubts... by nuOpus · · Score: 1

      There are other things they can't test with this method. What about the aerodynamics of the house when being hit from different angles. If you were to look at it in a wind tunnel, im sure that you would see the winds swirl and produce lift and down force depending on how the wind hits certain angles of the house. Roof angle? How can you test the wind vortex produced in a storm with this kind of "simulator"? Pressure fluctuations on the INTERIOR of the house which can also damage substructure?

      They are testing only one small portion a storm ... the DIRECT effect of wind on the structure. Unfortunately I can't see how this will test the other factors.

    16. Re:Doubts... by AJWM · · Score: 1

      Especially for owners of quarter million dollar beachfront property.

      In south Florida that'd be slums. In the Keys you probably can't even get an empty lot for that. My inlaws have some property there (bought about fifty years ago) and I'm sure they could get easily double, maybe triple, that from someone who just wants to scrape the existing structure off and rebuild. (Hey, it'd be worth more after a hurricane destroyed the property -- which it won't, because it's a concrete and steel structure.)

      Just wait until the sea level rises above US 1, though...

      --
      -- Alastair
    17. Re:Doubts... by AJWM · · Score: 1

      I somehow doubt that plastic film is going to help a window much if it gets hit by a piece of 2x4 blown by a 120 MPH wind...

      Which is why folks in frequent hurricane country (eg, Florida Keys) just put thick plywood shutters over the windows. Quite likely the ones already made to fit the windows and attach to the fittings for them. When you get two or three hurricanes coming through in a season, you start getting serious about planning for them.

      --
      -- Alastair
    18. Re:Doubts... by Ardipithecus · · Score: 1

      Fluid dynamics, lots of number crunching

  9. The real questions..... by dedeman · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    "Yes, it runs Linux."

    Yes, but the real ques.......Damn!!

    "The BBC article is light on the kind of technical details Slashdot readers enjoy...."

    You must be new he......oh, you said technical details, never mind.

  10. What about the hurricane? by Attila+the+Bun · · Score: 3, Interesting
    BBC article is light on the kind of technical details Slashdot readers enjoy

    ...but not so light as the Slashdot article. Are you telling me that you've built a hurricane machine capable of destroying a building, and the most interesting part is the office PC which controls it?

    1. Re:What about the hurricane? by Joebert · · Score: 1
      "In 2008, we expect to break it in a way that will make it unusable any further," said Professor Kopp.

      This doesn't seem like the right case to mention burning their house down if they don't video tape it for us.
      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    2. Re:What about the hurricane? by tomknight · · Score: 2, Insightful
      To the standard /. reader the only interesting parts are:
      • 90% load
      • Athlon
      • Runs Linux
      --
      Oh arse
  11. I feel a great disturbance in the force... by insanarchist · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...as if millions of nerds suddenly cried out, "yeah, but does it run...", and were suddenly silenced.

    1. Re:I feel a great disturbance in the force... by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 0, Redundant

      No worries, we can still imagine a beowulf cluster of these things.

  12. Take it to Texas by doobie22 · · Score: 3, Funny

    New form of Execution for when it's all televised.

    1. Re:Take it to Texas by SlowMovingTarget · · Score: 1

      "...electric chair? Shoot. You remember Earl three cells over? They blew 'im to death."

  13. I for one .... by fernandoh26 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I, for one, welcome our hurricane-simulating, house-destroying, Linux-running overlords.

    --
    Chums up, let's do this!
    1. Re:I for one .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Soviet Russia, hurricanes simulate YOU!

      Now if only we had a beowulf cluster of hurricane-simulators...

  14. You make a good point by technoextreme · · Score: 2, Informative
    I have doubts that you can accurately simulate a hurricane without the space around the house. Some damage is done directly by the wind, yes, but there's a LOT of damage that is done by the wind blowing things into other things and weakening them.

    Yes but scientists have all ready been firing 2X4s directly into different structures in order to test this. Its a lot easier than trying to directly test the effects of wind.
    As for being "perfectly repeatable", I have doubts for that as well. That assumes that you could build the exact same house over and over. The article even states that the placement of the nails in the house matters, and I can't see anyone being that perfect.

    Yeah. Its odd how some scientist can say a measurement can be perfectly repeatable when one of the major tenants of science is that there will always be variance. Perhaps what he meant is that the experiments will be repeatable within housing code because out in the real world the houses will be met with some variance in building quality.
    --
    Ooo man the floppy drive is broken. No wait. The computer is just upside down.
    1. Re: You make a good point by hahiss · · Score: 4, Funny


      Well, what I want to know is when science can evict variance; what are tenant's rights in scienceland?

      --
      "Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under." - H.L. Mencken
    2. Re: You make a good point by Dare+nMc · · Score: 1

      >Yeah. Its odd how some scientist can say a measurement can be perfectly repeatable when one of the major tenants of science is that there will always be variance.

      "In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is." -Yogi Berra

    3. Re: You make a good point by Tony-A · · Score: 1

      "In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is." -Yogi Berra

      Theory is always a gross oversimplification.
      Assumptions are made, not because they are valid, but because without them computation is impossible and they seem not to cause too much error in at least some of the cases of interest.

  15. Hurricane simulaiton in Canada by kaufmanmoore · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hurricane simulation in Canada, The Carolina Hurricanes in North Carolina winning the Stanley Cup, the world is coming to an end.

    1. Re:Hurricane simulaiton in Canada by bohemian72 · · Score: 1

      No. It's just the beginning of that pole reversal you've heard tell about.

      --
      The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and be loved in return.
    2. Re:Hurricane simulaiton in Canada by christian.elliott · · Score: 2, Funny
  16. What titbits? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He said there were titbits, but I haven't seen any..

  17. all i want to know is... by Connie_Lingus · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...is the source GPLed? It would be fun to add some random hacks, like simulating a pickup truck smashing through the roof, on this puppy.

    --
    never bring a twinkie to a food fight.
    1. Re:all i want to know is... by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Ooooh, the next Rekkaturvat!

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  18. Real-time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Runs on Linux? RTLinux, then? Or some other RTOS? I'm just curious what people are using out there.

  19. This seems not good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you want to know what a hurricane does, study the effects of hurricanes. One of the best studies was done after Hurricane Andrew and the results were published in Fine Homebuilding Magazine.

    What they found that the building code was pretty good. There were a couple of issues.

    The rain of an actual hurricane was responsible for a lot of the destroyed homes. Rain would get up under the shingles and soak the fiberboard sheathing. The sheathing would swell and the roofing staples would then cut into the sheathing and the sheathing would blow off. Once that happened, the house was toast.

    Another issue was that builders didn't always build to code. They found a lot of nails that missed the lumber they were aimed at.

    This experiment misses a couple of things that caused most of the destruction during Hurricane Andrew.

    If you state what winds you want a house to withstand, you can reliably build the house to withstand those winds. I am skeptical that this experiment will turn up anything we didn't already know.

    1. Re:This seems not good by m0nstr42 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This experiment misses a couple of things that caused most of the destruction during Hurricane Andrew.

      From the BYLINE of TFA: "A family home in Canada will be deliberately destroyed by scientists to understand how buildings react to hurricane force winds." Not the rain, not the building code, THE WINDS. That's how a controlled experiment works.

      I am skeptical that this experiment will turn up anything we didn't already know.

      I'm sure the researchers didn't do any literature review. At least not a thorough one if they didn't contact you, since you appear to be a leading expert.

    2. Re:This seems not good by yabos · · Score: 1

      Exactly. The students doing the experiment are Civil Engineering students. I go to UWO, and all they're trying to do is to see how they can make the building stand up to the wind better. Such things like cross braces in the walls may help and better anchoring of the floors above to the ones below. They expect that the top floor will tear off at least once. The house is being built by students at Fanshawe College.

    3. Re:This seems not good by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      Yes, but that's not the point. As the grandparent poster pointed out, excess water was what made the houses significantly more vulnerable to the winds.

      If this thing is simulating anything, it's a tornado.

      I'm also concerned about the fact that the house looks like it takes up just about the whole entire building. Air currents can do some funky things when given enough room and enough objects to bounce off of. Likewise, as another poster pointed out, the simulator doesn't consider the fact that there will be debris, trees, and cars all flying around in a severe hurricane. From my knowledge of physics, it would seem to me that the structural integrity of the house becomes significantly more vulnerable once the exterior is compromised.

      I know that winds obviously play a significant role in hurricane damage, but it seems to me that these guys are missing the forest for the trees, and wasting a lot of time and money in the process.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    4. Re:This seems not good by toomz · · Score: 1

      > Air currents can do some funky things when given enough room and enough objects to bounce off of.

      From TFA: "It's not the wind speed we're simulating; it's the actual force the wind exerts on the building."

      That's exactly what they're trying to do. Nowhere did anyone say "So, we're gonna point a big fan at a house in a tiny hangar and..."

      --
      If a chair is thrown in a forest, and there are no witnesses, did Ballmer still do it?
  20. Storm Surge by NorthWestFLNative · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They're forgetting the most destructive part of a hurricane. Granted strong winds can and will do a significant amount of damage (I still remember what my parents house looked like after Ivan), but the most damage is done along the coastline where they get hit by storm surge. That's not something that can be replicated by a wind tunnel on a full scale. I drove along the southern Mississippi coast about 3 weeks ago. There is wind damage for miles inland, which I would expect, but it's nothing major. However the coastline is devastated. The first floors of buildings are completely washed out, destroying most of the buildings completely. The ones that were multi-story are collapsing in on themselves because their support is gone. Testing building construction in a simulator is a good place to start, but I hope it doesn't give people a false sense of security.

    1. Re:Storm Surge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Send a patch!

    2. Re:Storm Surge by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 0

      How about the very real sense of security that comes from living in Canada far away from Hurricanes.

      Of course we get blizzards but that's something else entirely.

      Don't look at it as Canadians getting to big for their britches look at it as someone steping into the hole that should contain GW.

      We'll step in feet first though.

    3. Re:Storm Surge by m0nstr42 · · Score: 1

      They're forgetting the most destructive part of a hurricane. Granted strong winds can and will do a significant amount of damage (I still remember what my parents house looked like after Ivan), but the most damage is done along the coastline where they get hit by storm surge.

      That's how a controlled experiment works. If they wanted to study flood damage they would have done something completely different. Don't use criticism of someone's hard work as a launching point to tell anecdotes. If this gives anyone false hope it's because the media is portraying it as something it's not.

  21. it's no big deal by Kalinago · · Score: 0, Troll

    No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.

  22. Learn how to link by p3d0 · · Score: 0, Troll

    "light on the kind of technical details"... That must be the most random, arbitrary hyperlink I have ever seen.

    --
    Patrick Doyle
    I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
  23. Winds vs. Water by digitaldc · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "As a result, there is great interest in making buildings safer and more resilient to the damaging effects of extreme weather."

    Well the winds could potentially destroy the home, but the mold and rot that comes from the standing water could render it worthless.

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
  24. The research has been completed, the results are: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  25. In a related News: CompTIA by Coeurderoy · · Score: 4, Funny

    In a related News CompTIA warns governments against Linux: Runing Linux is proved to destroy Full sized buildings under various usage situations.

    This proves that Linux can be used by Terorists, drug dealers that want to push competitors out and various other nefarious evildoer.

    A member of CompTIA Steve B. indicated that Linux can even get chairs to fly around.

  26. Obligatory... by VorpalRodent · · Score: 1
    I'd love to see a beowulf cluster of those...but not just the PCs, the whole setup. It's just that, if we can learn something from knocking down a building, how much more could we learn by knocking down an entire city. My greatest fear would be to be the guy that wrote the code and to find a bug, or an incorrect parameter, after the building was destroyed.

    To paraphrase Dave Barry, "Everything should go well, provided the researchers remember to change the settings from 'Biblical Flood' to 'Hurricane'."

    --
    Take it to the limit, everybody to the limit, come on, everybody fhqwhgads.
    1. Re:Obligatory... by einnar2000 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but how are you going to sneak up on a city with a cluster of these machines and install them?

  27. Can you imagine a beowulf cluster of these? by p00ya · · Score: 1

    But seriously, how large can it scale before it gets tagged a WMD?

  28. NEWS FLASH from the MS FUD Dept. ! by Ihlosi · · Score: 4, Funny

    Linux destroys buildings (and drowns kittens and puppies, too) !

  29. This would be much more interesting.... by 15Bit · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...if it was the Big Brother house.

  30. Not needed... by Frightening · · Score: 1

    My neighbors run a daily simulation. Just give me a 'ring and I'll have them over in no time.

    House has stood up so far, but I'm living life on the edge, ya know?

  31. Woah by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Imagine a Beowulf clus....

  32. Your overlords? by beaverfever · · Score: 1

    "I, for one, welcome our hurricane-simulating, house-destroying, Linux-running overlords."

    You mean Canadians?

  33. Thank you! by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 1

    Awesome project, I think I might have heard about it on "Discovery" channel a while ago. (Or maybe a similar one.)
    It's not every day that a house can be constructed just for the purpose of testing it with such strong winds.

    I live in Nebraska, and I'm sure that some of the findings from projects like yours will find their way into our homes to protect them from tornadoes.

    --
    If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
    1. Re:Thank you! by yabos · · Score: 1

      Yeah it was on Daily Planet last week but may have been on before that. The Professor Mike Bartlett who was interviewed on the show is bald under his hard hat :D and he's about one of the most "to the book" guys I've ever seen.

  34. Re:Doubts... (and how they were addressed) by Froster · · Score: 5, Informative

    I figured I'd chime in here as a Western Engineering Student, who had Prof. Kopp last year, let you know what he was up to in the Fall. Kopp only taught the second half of my course because the first half of the year (during Hurricane season) he went to New Orleans to study the devistation.

    This project isn't meant to make a perfectly hurricane resistant house (though, you could try based on the results). As far as I know, the aim is to find what little things can be done to the average house to improve the chances of survival for the house, or at least the people in it. In the example of nailing trusses to the walls of the house, anyone who's actually been there to see or nailed a truss can attest to how weak that connection can be, and one possible change is to mandate exactly how the trusses need to be nailed, and perhaps develop a new nailing plate to ensure that the placement of the nail is exact each time (if there is a steel plate on each truss with only one hole, you know where the nail is going).

    Also, for anyone wondering "why Western Ontario?", UWO is home to a very well respected wintunnel lab, which has tested many very well known buildings (Athens Olympic Stadium, CN Tower, numerous tall buildings in China to name a few). You can take a look here: http://www.blwtl.uwo.ca/Public/Home.aspx

  35. Cows... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't forget flying cows. They gotta do the most damage.

    1. Re:Cows... by nuOpus · · Score: 1

      No they don't. A flying elephant will do more damage .... or a flying rhinoceros.

    2. Re:Cows... by redcane · · Score: 1

      Jumanji!

  36. Sorry in advance! by ArthurDent · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Imagine a Beowulf cluster of those things!

    1. Re:Sorry in advance! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or a big bad wolf cluster!

      We'll huff, puff and blow the house down...

  37. Next Simulation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rumor has it that the company is also working on a simulated volcano that will destroy a full size building. It looks to be powered by a Dell laptop.

  38. So, what you are saying ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    is that you designed a gigantic hair dryer that instead of an on/off switch uses a powerful and expensive computer? That is the kind of thinking we like at Microsoft! We need people like you! If you have no problem in waking up in the morning knowing that 50 milion people hate you and you share the same passion as we do, that is listening to the tormented screams and howls of our products' users, drop us a line or two. A glorious career awaits! We might even overlook that unhealthy linux thing you had ... allthrough we'd prefer if you turned out to be a sick, children molesting bastard instead.

  39. robot by Z80a · · Score: 1

    now Airman can be done
    anyone here know how to make a time stopping machine that does some sparkles in the process or at least some bubbles that rolls in the ground?

  40. IAAE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I stand by what I said. We have enough knowledge to build a structure that will withstand any wind you want to name. So what are we trying to do here? Are we trying to get more knowledge so we can reduce the cost of building such a structure by 10%? That is bad engineering. If you engineer something to close tolerances then you have to build it to close tolerances. From experience we know that builders cut corners and you can't rely on all the nails being exactly in the right place etc. The experiment itself seems like an attempt to get around the problem of not having a huge wind tunnel. I'm really skeptical there. They do have something to prove. Any data they get will be suspect because we can't have confidence in their method until it is proven.

    The National Research Council of Canada has been studying structures vs. high winds since forever. If you want to build something in the arctic where the winds are high and there's not much rain, Canada is the place to get the information.

    It occurs to me that the kind of second order effects that may trip this experiment up include turbulence. Turbulence occurs on the lee side of a structure and can produce quite a bit of vibration. You also get a vacuum on the lee side. So, you have wind pushing on the front and a vacuum pulling on the back. As far as I can tell, the experiment won't produce this effect which substantially increases the load on the structure.

    I am an old goat with, as far as I can tell, a lot more experience than you. I have designed structures to withstand the wind forces experienced in the arctic. You, on the other hand, seem like a bit of a wet behind the ears troll.

    1. Re:IAAE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > by Anonymous Coward
      >
      > I stand by what I said.

      Do you see the irony?

    2. Re:IAAE by m0nstr42 · · Score: 1

      Easy, killer.

      If I could mod up what you just said, I would. It was informed, informative, and appropriate.

      I appologize if my previous comment was too abrasive. You just hit a nerve for me. I make a living doing research and experimental work; I know how much work goes into it and I know how it takes lots of "baby steps" to acheive the kind of results that people seem to expect from every single experiment. Mostly my beef is with the media's role in this process. Honest work tends to get publicized as something it isn't, and then people are all-too-ready to provide harsh criticism based on what was an impressionistic portrayal to begin with. This happens to an extreme degree on slashdot, where you have lots of people with generally no journalism experience, some technical experience, and who seem to all feel that they're qualified to pass judgement.

      Your first comment hit this nerve for me, since your criticisms were all mostly irrelevant to what appears to be the actual task (it's research, or maybe even an undergraduate project, not the end-all solution to hurricane damage). The second comment was spot on relevant, though I still imagine that the people in question have done their homework, considered the basic concerns, and still have a pretty good reason to do what they're doing and expect that it will be in some way helpful.

      If you want to compare the size of our professional/intellectual dicks, then we can do that, but I'll go ahead and admit that I'm a little wet behind the ears (though not so wet that I don't expect a little more respect than that). I hold in high regard the wisdom of engineers, technicians, machinists, and other "old goats"; I didn't get where I am today by being naive and ignoring what everyone else has to say. That is to say, I'm no troll. I am, however, critical and defensive of people who share my profession and receive (seemingly) uninformed/misinformed criticism.

  41. I love when legitimate questions get modded down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    -1 Offtopic?

    The term Hurricance was used twice in the OP and doing a Google search, I found quite a few references to the term.

    At first, I thought it might be a typo, but "c" isn't located near "n" or "e" on the keyboard, so it's a rather random typo to be seen multiple times in a post, or even several times on the web.

    Alas, no searching came with the answer, so I asked Slashdot.

    Instead of an answer, my question gets modded down to -1.

    Thanks.

  42. Simulations not needed. Yet. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    You don't need to run simulations yet. There are still plenty of real world data to collect before you can adequately simulate any hurricane. There are tens of thousands of buildings of every type here on the Gulf coast that can be assessed right now. Damage runs the full gamut, from light to catastrophic.

    I live in a FEMA trailer. The western eyewall of Hurricane Katrina passed over my house. Various official guesstimates of wind velocity at the time were high Category 3 to low Category 4 - roughly 130mph or 210 kph. In my neighborhood, houses suffered everything from light roof damage from wind and felled trees, to complete destruction; nothing left but a pile of 2x4's. A few houses were swept away entirely, along with cars, boats and anything else that was not tied down.

    My house is an ordinary 25 year old, rectangular, brick clad, single storey building with a simple hip roof and traditional construction. There are no hurricane straps anywhere in the house. The house structure survived just fine. Not a single window was broken, though most had water infiltrate between the panes. Roof damage was minor, it never sprung a leak, but it has been re-shingled since the storm. What put me into a trailer was the storm surge of 15 feet, over four feet of water in the house for several hours. The interior is still entirely gutted.

    Between damage to the wiring, flooring, drywall, insulation, kitchen and bathroom cabinets, appliances, HVAC unit, furniture and all the rest of the contents of the house and garage, I'd just as soon build a brand new house from scratch. There would be a lot fewer headaches, and not much more expense.

    So what's my point? It's simple. If you'll spend a few month in this area, you'll learn more about hurricane hazards than decades of laboratory simulations. There are too many parameters to get right before simulation results will yield much knowledge.

    IANAE, but from my observation of damage from New Orleans to the Mississippi Gulf Coast there are several points to be made.

    1) Straight line winds are just one hazard. The level of damage varies with wind direction, velocity and duration, amount of rainfall, height and velocity of storm surge, duration of inundation, distance from open water, barriers both natural and man-made, proximity and height of neighboring structures, and tornadoes (there were lots of those embedded in the storm). And maybe other factors too, including luck.

    2) No doubt, building codes play a role in preventing or mitigating wind damage.

    3) Those fancy, intricate gabled roofs that are so popular on all the new McMansions? They suck. I don't care how many metal brackets hold them together. They're mincemeat in a real storm.

    4) You can't do much against flood. High Base Food elevation is the only thing that will prevent flooding. Build high to remain dry.

    5) Most of the stuff you own is located below a line four feet above the floor. The cost of a house's structure is relatively small compared to its contents, equipment, and interior finish.

    6) If you're in the storm's bull's eye, like Pearlington, Waveland and Bay St. Louis MS were, there's not much to be gained by expensive reinforcement of an ordinary house structure. You just can't fully protect against the massive energy that a Katrina-sized storm carries onshore.

    7) Don't trust the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to protect you against anything.

    8) Don't trust your insurance company.

    9) When a hurricane's bearing down on you, don't worry about the house, get the hell out of town.

  43. Residential Code in Florida only for Cat 3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where I live, houses only have to be designed to withstand a Category 3 hurricane. This means if a category 4 or 5 comes along, all guarentees are off.

    Still, the best bet when building in Florida is just to go with concrete block masonry. With steel rebar reinforcement inside concrete filled cells every 4-8 feet, the walls are going to be able to withstand a ton of force. If you ever look at hurricane damage sometime, take a look at what the majority of those houses are made of. Its wood! In fact with hurricane Katrina, often times entire houses would be demolished except the solid brick chimneys!

    Roofs have gotten better as well. Any respectable builder nails his shingles in florida these days, no staples. Its also a considerable amount of nails per strip.

    One big problem is this. When roof pressures are calculated, it is assumed the building is enclosed, such that pressures from the hurricane will not reach the interior of the home and push up on the roof (or down?). So if your window or doorgets smashed from either a projectile or the pressure buildup, then your roof will be blown off easily. UNLESS, you order your trusses designed for partially-enclosed construction, which then you shouldn't have to worry unless there is a category 3.

    Still paranoid? Ok, make yourself a wannabe bunker. Use concrete masonry, pour filled cells every 4 feet, and get a concrete roof. Make all your interior walls bearing, and have steel doors. Finally, ask for impact resistant windows, and get yourself some of those steel hurricane shutters!

  44. Re:Yeah right... by xerxesdaphat · · Score: 1

    Spelt?

    --
    The Shoes of the Fisherman's Wife Are Some Jive Ass Slippers
  45. But does it... by ickeicke · · Score: 1

    Yes, but does it make coffee?

    --
    Firehed - Unfortunately, thanks to medical breakthroughs, common sense is not as common as it once was.
  46. Re:Simulations not needed. Yet. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Straight line winds are just one hazard. The level of damage varies with wind direction, velocity and duration

    And on top of that, you can have the winds shift 180 degrees over the course of an hour without ever letting up. I didn't see anything in the article that suggested the simulator did or didn't account for that, but it's something that definitely happens.

    I agree that while this sounds like an interesting experiment, it's very unlikely that we're going to learn anything that structural engineers don't already know. There are so many tropical storms that hit the southeastern U.S. that there is a lot of abstract scientific knowledge of the beasts, but more importantly a lot of practical hands-on knowledge in the construction industry regarding what works and what doesn't.

  47. CCL + BRE - 20 years = Big Bad Wolf Project by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    20 years ago, when I worked for CCL, I wrote a proposal for Building Research Establishment in Watford. The CCL-internal codename was "Big Bad Wolf", since the equipment was to simulate simulate wind loading on building materials by sucking and blowing until the materials fell apart. The BRE actuators look remarkably similar to those pictured, so far as can be seen.

    So, is this an up-scaling of that project?

  48. Why simulate? by pw9272 · · Score: 1

    Computer-controller simulators? Bah. If you want to learn something about building hurricane-proof homes, take a trip to Bermuda instead.

  49. Re:Yeah right... by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Informative
    Spelt?

    Yes, spelt.

    spelt
    n.
    A hardy wheat grown mostly in Europe.
    [Middle English, from Old English, from Late Latin spelta, probably of Germanic origin; akin to Middle Dutch spelte, wheat.]

    spelt
    v.
    A past tense and a past participle of spell.

    Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

    It's both tasty, and correct. (I eat a lot of stuff made with spelt flour, I'm told I have a wheat allergy.)

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  50. Not to mention construction defects by wsanders · · Score: 1

    TFA discusses a meticulously built, meticulously inspected model home. Ha! Your real simulation needs to evaluate the effects on a house built by the usual motley crew of drug-addled, untrained, dunderheads who were probably herding sheep 3 weeks before they were hired at minimum wage by cheap-ass contractors to work on the house.

    Flying debris aside (which punches huge holes in houses and allows wind to get inside), many homes destroyed by Andrew were found to have substandard construction, some with the roofs not even nailed to the frame of the house.

    If you can make the house immune to flying debris (big heavy EXPENSIVE builtin window shutters), build the house well, and of course build it high enough above sea level, you can easily make a house hurricane-proof. Maybe it will add 20% to the cost of the house.

    Making homebuilding idiot proof is a big topic right now, and if I wanted to go back and get my PhD, I'd study the role of construction defects in structural integrity. And I'd probably want to use the facility in TFA.

    --
    Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
  51. Re:I love when legitimate questions get modded dow by fmoliveira · · Score: 0
    Instead of an answer, my question gets modded down to -1


    You must be new here.
  52. But... by s7726 · · Score: 0

    Does it play Doom?

  53. Re:Simulations not needed. Yet. by zippthorne · · Score: 1

    point (9) should be point (1).

    The absolute cheapest thing that can be done is improve the infrastructure around the city to allow rapid
    evacuation in an emergency. (cheapest doesn't mean cheap though...)

    In any event, every municipality should have some estimate of how long it will realistically take to evacuate and what resources are needed to do so. (for example, don't let the bus drivers leave town first, with an entire motor pool of school busses just sitting there because it's beneath your citizens to travel by school bus. Comfort should be the last priorty in a situation like that) And most importantly, bring those resources online before they are needed since when they are needed there will be too much panic to START a plan.

    --
    Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  54. Amazed by CanadianRoark · · Score: 1

    I'm amazed that an Ontario, Canada company developed this. It's not there's a lot of Hurricanes in Ontario.

    1. Re:Amazed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must not live near Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario. Every five-ten years or so, you get 70-80mph winds, sometimes more, with 30 foot waves. That's what sank the Edmund Fitzgerald thirty years ago.

  55. input by thinsoldier · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I really have to ask. You North Americans, why the hell do you build your homes out of toothpicks?

    Look at the photo from the article:
    http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41805000/jpg /_41805420_001842788_house_getty300.jpg

    Every hurricane or every news report about tornado alley showing the damaged homes looks like this. This looks like a pile of toothpicks! You really spend thousands of dollars to build and live in these wooden things?

    I'm from the Bahamas. Although I'm the least patriotic person I know, I have to admit that our buildings hold up pretty damned good under hurricanes. A hell of a lot better that the photos we see coming out of florida. We build everything with CINDER BLOCKS reinforced with steel rods. They work, trust me.

    I tried googling for some photos to illustrate but none of them show enough steel rods to be accurate.

    And what is with you people and sheetrock walls? I've heard crooks in ft. lauderdale getting in through people's walls. Try breaking through cinder blocks. Actually I remember something from a guiness book of world records where a karate teacher and his young students totally demolished an entire home by just karate chopping everything. If a dozen 14yr olds can destroy a house built out of the same material as so many american homes, what the hell did you think a hurrican (or tornado) would do!?!

    steel rebar...
    http://www.caed.calpoly.edu/polycanyon/ncbs_galler y/full/Post-Tension-Rebar-Closeup.jpg ...reinforcing cinder blocks...
    http://www.proptek.com/dbfiles/products/17/carrier 15.jpg

    and held together with cement.

    versus 2x4's, nails, and sheetrock!

    I for one could not get a good nights sleep knowing my home is held up by this crap.
    http://www.yournextbroker.com/uploaded_images/Home %20construction%20for%20web-716493.jpg

    1. Re:input by jofi · · Score: 1

      If we already spend thousands of dollars for toothpicks and new homes started using the same thing as yours, then they are probably going to want "thousands of dollars * 5" for the house. It's the American way.

      --
      Blame the user, not the software.
    2. Re:input by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they come in through the drywall in Ft. Lauderdale, but here in Louisiana the crooks are a lot smarter. They come in through the doors or windows.

    3. Re:input by ultramk · · Score: 1

      It's actually somewhat more complex a situation that you might think by watching TV.

      For one, hurricane/tornado damage is self-selecting. i.e. well-built homes aren't damaged, and don't get shown on TV because who wants to see a bunch of wet houses? Same thing with tornados and trailer parks. That kind of construction takes damage incredibly easily, so it always seems like that's where tornados strike. Nope. It's just where the most damage is donw, so it's what gets on TV.

      Secondly, those "toothpick" houses. The majority of that flimsy type of construction was done in the early part of the 20th century. Housing codes were later introduced, and improved upon to a degree which would never allow those types of houses to be built today (unless they are on trailers, but I digress). The local term is crackerbox houses. The thing is, since they were built they were grandfathered in, so they stay up until a big storm coms along and knocks them down.

      Last of all, 2x4s, nails and sheetrock. That's not really a complete picture of how modern building techniques work. There's a lot more cross bracing, insulation and heavy reinforcement involved. Where I live, (California), the building codes are extremely strict to compensate for seismic activity. How strict? well, the house that was built across the street from me 5 years ago was hit by a 5-ton garbage truck last month moving at about 15mph, and the truck pretty much bounced off. The flower garden was ruined, and 2 windows were broken, but there was no structural harm.

      Believe it or not, but cinder blocks suck for seismic regions. They pretty much just crumble after a few years of micro-shocks, and develop cracking that causes moisture problems. Not sure if they use them in the south, but you can guarantee that new construction has to meet minimum standards.

      m-

      --
      You catch enchiladas by picking them up behind the head and holding them underwater until they don't kick anymore -VeGas
    4. Re:input by cr0sh · · Score: 1
      Last of all, 2x4s, nails and sheetrock. That's not really a complete picture of how modern building techniques work. There's a lot more cross bracing, insulation and heavy reinforcement involved.


      I'll believe it when I see it. Maybe you might get "garbage truck repelling" construction on a new home that is custom designed and built, but I can guarantee that you won't get the same in your standard suburb tract-housing.

      I can't speak for California construction, but I know that here in Phoenix, if you are lucky, you get an 8 inch thick pad with 2x4 construction on top (2x6 if you pay a lot more). That is, base plate, uprights on 18 inch centers with horizontal firewalls (they may tell you "cross bracing", but its not - its meant to contain a fire and preventing it from spreading to attic space), upper horizontals, then top plate. Inside is finished with drywall, some form of insulation in between (generally pink fiberglass blanket), and then tyvek wrapping, chicken wire, then stucco. Sometimes it seems the cheapest houses don't even have the tyvek wrapping. Also, in many of the newer tract housing sections in Arizona (especially Anthem), the pads are cracking due to the soil not being prepared properly, causing sinking and lifting during rains - eventually causing the house to crack in half if it isn't repaired (several people in Anthem, a "tract housing" suburb north of Phoenix which isn't exactly cheap to buy into, have been stuck with busted houses as of late).

      Block construction for cheap tract housing stopped sometime in the 1980's - I currently live in a block house built by Continental Homes in 1973. When I was in the market for a house, I explicitly stated to my realtor what I wanted - the combination of my budget, want for concrete block construction, and no HOA meant that my choices were limited to roughly pre-1980's constructed houses. Everything else in my price range was el-cheapo construction otherwise (sure, it was "brand new", with gestapo HOA fees thrown in).

      In the Phoenix market, it seems if you want anything beyond standard "stick frame" construction you need to either have it custom built (using block, or steel/alluminum framing, among other options), or spend more than $300,000.00...

      --
      Reason is the Path to God - Anon
    5. Re:input by zipn00b · · Score: 1

      They build a LOT of cinder block houses in Florida and they don't hold up quite as well in the sandy soil as I would like. I live in one that's 3 years old and there are a number of cracks in the walls and the sliding patio door no longer mates properly to the frame due to the frame shifting as the concrete pad seems to have settled a bit as well. The house HAS stood up so far to hurricanes quite well with not even losing shingles but a lot of that is due to the building codes and not the cinder block construction. Under the right circumstances in hurricane force winds, especially Cat 3 or better, a 2x4 coming end-wise would come right through the cinder block like an artillery shell. In fact I've seen air cannons rigged to fire 2x4s at cinder block walls to simulate debris damage from hurricanes and tornadoes. If you fill the core with concrete and do several layers of cinder block thus building a bunker then you start getting some protection. But when you're building on what's essentially a swamp and you get some settling then you get all those minor cracks and such and I wonder what the long term integrity of the structure really is going to be although the homeowner's manual states that it's nothing to worry about unless the cracks get to be more than 1/4" in width..... But I'm seeing enough cracks and warps that I'm seriously starting to wonder about these houses that have nearly tripled in value in the past 3 years.....

    6. Re:input by thinsoldier · · Score: 1

      Well, where I'm from, we have enough sense not to build on sand. It's that simple. The only people in the last 5 years in Nassau to build on sand are some really really really expensive beach front homes the had foundation problems less than a year after they were built. Just don't build on sand. It's dumb. If you've ever gone to church or knew one Christian growing up you MUST have heard of some sort of parable or old saying about not building your house on sand.

      If a 2x4 can go through a cinderblock, imagine what it'll do to a toothpick house.
      The Bahamas has been hit at least to some degree by almost every hurricane there ever was, including the most destructive ones. I've never heard of or seen a picture of any major damage to a cinder block built house other than roof damage and cracked windows.

      Can you describe what goes into the foundation of homes in your area?

    7. Re:input by thinsoldier · · Score: 1

      can u give more details on what goes into creating the foundation of one of those homes? like how deep/tall is the foundation made before the house is built on it? fyi, the foundation on my aparment building starts about 1 foot under the lawn and ends about 2 1/2 feet above ground... at least thats how it seems to me, i might be wrong

    8. Re:input by cr0sh · · Score: 1
      You are probably right about your apartment building - basically, you have to factor in the height of the building plus the soil composition. Here in Phoenix metro area it seems like (almost) that they just lay out some boards and pour the concrete right on the ground. I know this isn't the case, but you would be amazed at some of the things contractors have done.


      I am not an expert on pouring a foundation (so google up on it for real-world instructions), but I would imagine that for a house your foundation would be about a foot thick, total - probably a dug down 8 inches or so, four inches of gravel, then concrete with aggregate mix poured on top of this. Maybe with a reinforcing steel mesh (made from thick wire for a house, thin rebar for bigger or taller structures) embedded in the concrete.

      I would expect this to be close to what would be needed for residential structures - but as I said before, I am not an expert on this (hell, I am not even an amateur - just basing this on what I have seen done)...

      --
      Reason is the Path to God - Anon
  56. News from the future ... by smoker2 · · Score: 1
    Hurricane Simulator Destroys Full Size Building

    The BBC is reporting that the much vaunted Hurricane Simulator experiment in Ontario has surpassed expectations by not only destroying the test subject but also the building it was housed in. While some blame the catastrophe on the Big Bad Wolf, more reasoning minds have posited that "maybe they should have used more nails to hold it down".

  57. Re:Simulations not needed. Yet. by booch · · Score: 1

    Your points are valid. But so are the wind tunnel experiments.

    The experiments can provide a lot of things that cannot be seen in the hurricane-damaged houses. They can monitor in real-time how the buildings get damaged. They can isolate wind damage from rain, debris, and flood damage. Most importantly, they can quickly test several different construction methods to see how well they fare against the winds. Does a nail at a 10 degree angle hold together against 50% more wind than a nail straight in? These are the kinds of things that can help improve housing codes and save a few people's homes.

    No this won't help figure out how to prevent flood damage. (As you said, we already know the best way to do that.) But it will play a small part in helping people survive future hurricanes with their homes intact.

    --
    Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
  58. Hurrican Simlator--Not Wet Enough by Buck'sBlog · · Score: 2, Informative

    Linux, Sminux. I hate to spoil your fun but the simulator won't work--at least, if you really want to simulate the effect of a hurricane on the structure. The simulator may work for a light tornado, but most of the destructive force of the hurricane would be due to the momentum of the entrained water droplets, not the wind. At about 1/1000th the density of water, air would have about 10 times less force for the same velocity. Good Luck!

  59. Re:Simulations not needed. Yet. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And for cryin' out loud, move to a different area! How long will people face the same problems, year after year, just to move back!

  60. Re:Simulations not needed. Yet. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hi, I posted the original thread. Thanks for the comments.

    While I realize that the lab is a good place to test the strength of building materials and techniques, don't we already know, for example, the difference in holding strength between a ring shank vs. smooth nail? Or the resistance of a plywood reinforced stud wall?

    The point I was trying to make is that there are a lot of failure modes for structures in a hurricane. I'd bet that you could find every one of the known modes by examining the buildings that went through Katrina. I'd further bet that you'd discover more failure modes that we previously didn't know about, or haven't documented. As pointed out above, there's a lot of practical hands-on knowledge about what works and what doesn't.

    As for-

    "And for cryin' out loud, move to a different area! How long will people face the same problems, year after year, just to move back!"

    Sigh. If I only had a buck for every time I've heard that since the storm...

    One word answer- Jobs. The jobs are tied to location. Let me explain-

    Transportation: The Greater Port of New Orleans is the largest port in the country, measured in bulk tonnage. Wheat, petroleum products, cement, coffee, cotton, you name it. Those are jobs. Gulfport, MS imports the bulk of the nation's bananas and exports huge amounts of things like frozen chicken. Yes, chicken. Hey, those are jobs.

    Energy: The oil and gas industry supports a huge workforce in the Gulf and on shore. This region supplies a large share of the energy this country uses to power our generators, to fuel our vehicles, to heat our homes. Those are jobs.

    Food: This part of the country has the largest commercial fishery in the country. The region has farms that grow everything from sugar cane to citrus. Those are jobs.

    Hospitality: New Orleans and the Gulf Coast have large tourist industries. You come, we entertain and serve. Those are jobs.

    All these primary industry jobs support a large number of other jobs: neighborhood dry cleaners, physicians, schoolteachers, shop owners, gas station attendants, lawyers, garbage men, waitresses, etc., all the usual stuff.

    In a word- jobs.

    Me? Personally? I work for a government agency that was located here because of the barge transport that the Gulf allows, combined with the physical isolation to test large systems for extraterrestrial propulsion. That was over 40 years ago. Now, it's just about the only place you can find both the necessary transportation and the isolation. I can't move away and keep my job. And I like my job. I could move further inland, but then I'd just sell my home to someone else who'd be in harm's way. And I'm not going to just abandon the equity in my property. Would you?

    BTW- The Gulf Coast had homes that had stood for over 130 years before being destroyed by Katrina; most infamously, Sen. Trent Lott's home in Pascagoula. Why not abandon Galveston, Houston, Miami or Charleston? They've all had hurricanes, haven't they? If we follow your logic, are you implying that we should abandon San Francisco because of the devastating 1906 earthquake? It's "due" for another one, isn't it?

    Please send me a buck. I'll dedicate a new wall outlet to you.

  61. Concrete anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Just build the homes out of concrete for Christ sake. It worked here, where over 95% of structures are concrete. There were only 3 deaths (which weren't even verified as directly related) and almost no structural damage among concrete structures (aside from windows without storm shutters) despite gusts approaching 200MPH. On the other hand, the majority of wood structures are gone. Yeah, concrete is more expensive, but not as expensive as building your home twice. They also happen to stand up very well in earthquakes too, which we tend to get every once in a while.

    Not that they don't do stupid things here too.. the utility lines are all still above ground.

  62. How about a new "Survivor" Series? by Proud_to_be_Pinoy · · Score: 1

    I hear there are a lot of out there who may have previous experience with this kind of thing

    --
    no sig = no personality(?)
  63. Pfft, I saw this in Superman 3! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Also with this great scheme to rip off my company by gathering all those percentages of a cent and putting them into my account!

  64. Imagine a beowulf cluster of... by SonicSpike · · Score: 1

    ...nevermind.

    But seriously, in Soviet Russia, simulator blows you!

    --
    Libertas in infinitum
  65. Pfft, I saw this on Superman 3! by Scoldog · · Score: 1

    along with this great scheme to rip off my company by putting all the fractions of a cent from finance into my own special account!

    --
    This space for rent
  66. Re:Doubts... (and how they were addressed) by RobertB-DC · · Score: 1

    Also, for anyone wondering "why Western Ontario?", UWO is home to a very well respected wintunnel lab, which has tested many very well known buildings...

    Unfortunately, the "wintunnel" doesn't include hardware support for the buildings, and depends on Windows to supply such things as nails and sheetrocks.

    (obligatory WTF? link.)

    --
    Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.