[Cob] cob and earthquakes

[Bill&Julie]

Amen Shannon,,  ~¿~.......  Here is yet another way to look at the problems
of designs. For, IMHO,, it is how a matterial is used, and not the
matterial,
that is where all of the problems lie.

When we look at Vector Analysis and the Focus of energy, we can see how
proper design can mend more than just concerns.
If all of the energy was focused down to " ONE " square inch,,, then 250LBS
is all that it would take to cause a failure. But let us hope that a
structure was
not designed that way..And if it were to be focused down to one square foot,
then 250lbs times 144 square inches is 36000 lbs... So if you were to build
a wall that was not connected to anything else, and was connected on one
point.
It would only take 36000 LBS to brake a one square foot connection,,, But
now
say it was connected by a square yard,, that would be 324000 lbs,, or 162
tons
to cause a failure.. Now, that is saying that the Vectors and Foci are even
to all
of the square inches.  (My Dump Truck only hauls 15 tons at a time...)
But with that said,, poor design can make things worse. Just as a glass
cutter uses
a scratch to focus the energy to cause a brake...A Poor or misconceived
design
can do the same...

Not to be morbid,,, but if we were to get alot of pictures of failures.. and
deduce
by what is still left standing the parts of the buildings that  were the
stronger...
But that would only show a relative picture,,, because we could only assume
that all of the structures were under that same stresses.

Ok,, where is the Jar???  * drops in 2¢ *     bill


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Shannon C. Dealy" <dealy at deatech.com>
To: "Kyle Towers" <ktowers at locl.net>
Cc: <coblist at deatech.com>
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2004 11:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Cob] cob and earthquakes


> On Thu, 19 Feb 2004, Kyle Towers wrote:
>
> > 1)    Even if your assumptions are correct and you assumed 5 times more
> > straw would give 5 times the tensile strength, 250psi is still puny for
> > something so heavy.
>
> Puny or not (which is an extremely relative term), it only has to be
> sufficient to hold the wall together under the criteria it is designed to
> meet, earthquake or otherwise.   It is important to keep in mind how
> other common building materials are used when comparing them with cob,
> materials like steel and wood are generally used in much thinner walls,
> and as frameworks rather than monolithic which makes meaningful
> comparison virtually impossible in any direct manner since this type of
SNIPPEDEDEDEDEDEDEDEDEDEDEDEDEDEDEDEDED