X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Date:         Wed, 30 Sep 1992 23:41:21 -0400
From:         "(Agnes Kruchio)" <kruchio@EPAS.UTORONTO.CA>
Subject:      Andrew's wake (fwd)
Comments: To: words-l@uga.cc.uga.edu

Seeing that so many on this list are in hurricane-prone areas...
Agnes

Forwarded message:
> From @UBVM.cc.buffalo.edu:DAVEP@ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU  Wed Sep 30 22:33:45 1992
> Message-Id: <9210010233.AA27292@epas.utoronto.ca>
> Date:         Wed, 30 Sep 1992 14:32:56 PDT
> Reply-To: "(John Martinson)" <marty@EQUINOX.UNR.EDU>
> Sender: List Owner <davep@acsu.buffalo.edu>
> From: "(John Martinson)" <marty@EQUINOX.UNR.EDU>
> Subject:      Andrew's wake
> X-To:         BIOSPH-L@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu
> To: Multiple recipients of list BIOSPH-L <BIOSPH-L@UBVM.cc.buffalo.edu>
>
> In response to the Dugan/Whitlock correspondence on hurricane damage and
> what to do in the future, I'd like to point out that it is possible to
> build structures that withstand hurricanes--and do so at competitive
> building prices. In fact, such structures have been erected for quite
> a few years by a company named "Monolithic Constructors, Inc." in Italy,
> Texas where they are involved in the Superconducting-Supercollider project.
> But they've built these structures all over the West and overseas.
>
> One of their warehouses in Galveston has been through, not 1 but, 2
> hurricanes with negligible damage. Seismic analysis indicates very
> strong resistance to earthquakes as well, but so far they haven't been
> "lucky" enough to have a structure in an area with active faulting.
>
> What's the secret? Well, there isn't any. Early in this century the Germans
> were experimenting with thin-shelled reinforced concrete structures. And
> thin shelled arched dams are classic in Switzerland. And we all know that
> it's virtually impossible to crush an egg shell in our hands, pressing
> directly along the long axis of the shell.
>
> What Monolithic (and Prof. Arnold Wilson at BYU in Provo, UT) have taught
> the world is how to fabricate thin-shelled reinforced concrete domes in
> a fast, cost-effective manner using airform techniques (balloons),
> polyurethane structural foam, and concrete ejected from hoses (shotcrete)
> instead of being poured in laboriously fabricated (and then torn down)
> wooden forms.
>
> The problem isn't technological--it's social and institutional. How do you
> get the people of Florida, Hawaii (or any other disaster suffering area) to
> accept innovations? Most people will resist strongly the idea of living in
> a dome (though Monolithic has done domestic architecture). It's
 understandable.
> What isn't so understandable is the rebuilding of public structures,
 hospitals,
> schools, police and fire stations etc. with a technology unlikely to
> withstand the next hurricane and continue functioning.
>
> I have not now, nor have I ever had, anything more than personal acquaintance
> with the people at Monolithic, i.e., I've been in their domes. And I have no
> idea (sitting here in Reno) who in Florida or Hawaii is concerned enough
> about the problem to at least consider thin-shelled reinforced concrete dome
> construction in preparation for the next hurricane (or earthquake). But if
> anyone reading this is so acquainted you might urge them to at least give
> Monolithic a jingle at (214) 483-7423 - FAX (214) 483-6662.
>
> If there's other information I might provide, I'd be pleased to do so. It's
> so terribly (and often tragically) frustrating to know that life enhancing
> solutions to technical problems are in existence--but not be able to find
> the people interested, willing and able to use them. John Martinson
>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU