If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   Apparently, building two houses on poles over your factory is just too unsafe for China   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 39
    More: Ironic, mountain top, Guangdong Province, Kings, roofs, apartment block  
•       •       •

10481 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Sep 2013 at 11:22 PM (45 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



39 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-09-12 08:01:44 PM
He was just trying to be prepared for the global warming sea level rise.

That's all.
 
2013-09-12 08:29:44 PM
Just as it would be unsafe building a house on chinese in Poland.
 
2013-09-12 08:31:22 PM
They should have used more lead.
 
2013-09-12 08:32:31 PM

I_Am_Weasel: Just as it would be unsafe building a house on chinese in Poland.


images.sodahead.com
 
2013-09-12 09:08:33 PM
Almost, subby, but you missed a few commas:

Apparently, building two houses, on poles, over your factory, is just too unsafe, for China.

Now, granted, there are Grammar Nazis out there who will jump down your throat while proclaiming that the word "too" must also be followed by a comma. Don't listen to them, their sad little people.
 
2013-09-12 10:10:42 PM
He didn't pay off the right official.
 
2013-09-12 11:23:36 PM
Other than being on top of a factory they don't look too much unlike the houses-on-stilts that are fairly common in beachfront areas along the Gulf Coast.
 
2013-09-12 11:29:25 PM
Pocket Ninja:  Now, granted, there are Grammar Nazis out there who will jump down your throat while proclaiming that the word "too" must also be followed by a comma. Don't listen to them, their sad little people.

cdn.instanttrap.com
 
2013-09-12 11:29:26 PM

TuteTibiImperes: Other than being on top of a factory they don't look too much unlike the houses-on-stilts that are fairly common in beachfront areas along the Gulf Coast.


Apparently the big issue is that those columns aren't concrete columns or something. Maybe they mean like freeways have, which I'll admit does sound like something not totally unreasonable.
 
2013-09-12 11:31:18 PM
It's not really any unsafer than any other typical dwellings in China.
i.telegraph.co.uk
 
2013-09-12 11:31:46 PM

TuteTibiImperes: Other than being on top of a factory they don't look too much unlike the houses-on-stilts that are fairly common in beachfront areas along the Gulf Coast.


It's the factory part. If those beach houses go down, they go into the water. If these villas go down, they crash into a factory that's probably working 24/7.

It's too bad, really, the villas look nice.
 
2013-09-12 11:36:35 PM
Terrible design. Use dozens of strong steel poles. Bonus: after factory work is done invite all your labor (probably all women) over. Daytime factory. Nighttime strip club.
 
2013-09-12 11:36:40 PM
Lots of earthquakes in that part of the world and that is a very non-seismic looking design.
 
2013-09-12 11:37:22 PM
Makes one wonder how safe this structure in China is, and what the human cost was.
 
2013-09-12 11:38:36 PM

bdub77: Terrible design. Use dozens of strong steel poles. Bonus: after factory work is done invite all your labor (probably all women) over. Daytime factory. Nighttime strip club.


Why do you hate the third shift?  You don't want them to have fun on their off-hours?
 
2013-09-12 11:52:52 PM
Holy shiat did you see that cannibal pedophile dungeon at the bottom of the page? WTF
 
2013-09-12 11:58:46 PM
Looks comfortable and practical, with a nice eye-level view of some high-tension wires.
 
2013-09-13 12:11:14 AM

whatsYOURname: Holy shiat did you see that cannibal pedophile dungeon at the bottom of the page? WTF


It's the Daily Fail. They have a whole section dedicated to cannibal pedophile dungeons.
 
2013-09-13 12:17:24 AM

Danger Avoid Death: whatsYOURname: Holy shiat did you see that cannibal pedophile dungeon at the bottom of the page? WTF

It's the Daily Fail. They have a whole section dedicated to cannibal pedophile dungeons.


Like, how come nobody told me?!
 
2013-09-13 12:19:07 AM
He'll be known as 'No Houses' then?
 
2013-09-13 12:22:16 AM
That just looks like it needs some buttresses and a support connecting the two houses at the front so they don't splay apart.
 
2013-09-13 12:29:20 AM

whatsYOURname: Danger Avoid Death: whatsYOURname: Holy shiat did you see that cannibal pedophile dungeon at the bottom of the page? WTF

It's the Daily Fail. They have a whole section dedicated to cannibal pedophile dungeons.

Like, how come nobody told me?!


Is there a sign-up sheet or what?
 
2013-09-13 12:34:58 AM
That is pretty stupid. Crap tlke that would never be allowed in a western country. Oh wait.....

www.designbuild-network.com
 
2013-09-13 12:36:45 AM
The problem is probably in the design of the factory, not the houses per se. The factory wasn't built to support anything of that mass or weight so the houses could induce structural failures in the factory and if it, as the de facto foundation for the houses fails...


/his original, approved, design was probably more conservative or included reinforcing elements he didn't subsequently build
//or the planning office official didn't stay bribed in the face of higher disapproval
 
2013-09-13 12:38:51 AM

EdNortonsTwin: Makes one wonder how safe this structure in China is, and what the human cost was.


Modular/wall up construction is perfectly safe. It took WAY longer than 15 days to build that building, it just took 15 days to assemble.

Though, since it's china, they had all the time in the world to build it correctly I still wouldn't step foot in it.
 
2013-09-13 12:44:29 AM

EdNortonsTwin: Makes one wonder how safe this structure in China is, and what the human cost was.


it is a prefab and looked like it had adequate bracing. according to one of the text panels it had been tested for earthquakes.
 
2013-09-13 12:54:36 AM
So that's were they draw the line.  At least it's a start.
 
2013-09-13 12:59:44 AM
A tycoon would not need to build a home over a tiny factory.

Sounds more like some business owner who had to economize his living quarters.
 
2013-09-13 01:07:48 AM

Pribar: The problem is probably in the design of the factory, not the houses per se. The factory wasn't built to support anything of that mass or weight so the houses could induce structural failures in the factory and if it, as the de facto foundation for the houses fails...


/his original, approved, design was probably more conservative or included reinforcing elements he didn't subsequently build
//or the planning office official didn't stay bribed in the face of higher disapproval


Those columns MIGHT be strong enough.  But there's just no way of evaluating it if he didn't submit this sort of plan.

It COULD be seen as cool and innovative.  It's definitely not slummy by itself, but many high-dollar projects ultimately produce shiatty urban sprawl.
 
2013-09-13 01:37:18 AM
I don't know about China building quality, but I have seen that done with steel framed buildings before, where they have added additional floors later. Most steel framed buildings could be added on to as long as the foundation can handle the extra weight.
 
2013-09-13 03:30:28 AM

Pointy Tail of Satan: That is pretty stupid. Crap tlke that would never be allowed in a western country. Oh wait.....

[www.designbuild-network.com image 620x451]


Hey, I like the Alsop.
 
2013-09-13 03:37:42 AM

whatsYOURname: Holy shiat did you see that cannibal pedophile dungeon at the bottom of the page? WTF


Yeah that was pretty farked up - he certainly put in a lot of planning (the Solyent Green and V videos provided me a bit of a giggle though.)
 
2013-09-13 03:49:47 AM

Curious: EdNortonsTwin: Makes one wonder how safe this structure in China is, and what the human cost was.

it is a prefab and looked like it had adequate bracing. according to one of the text panels it had been tested for earthquakes.


Sure it's been "tested". Maybe it didnt "pass" [Chris Farley Airquotes.jpg]

Perhaps the building is safe now. No way would I get into it 20 years from now.
 
2013-09-13 05:06:24 AM

EdNortonsTwin: Makes one wonder how safe this structure in China is, and what the human cost was.


There is no way that video is real. A Chinese construction would never wear PPE.
 
2013-09-13 06:12:50 AM

Pointy Tail of Satan: That is pretty stupid. Crap tlke that would never be allowed in a western country. Oh wait.....

[www.designbuild-network.com image 620x451]


That's an art school in Canada.  The brief was that the new building couldn't touch any of the old ones, and couldn't take up any open space on the lot it was supposed to be built on.

I honestly think the architects submitted that design as a "fark you, what you want is impossible!" to the school, but they loved it so it got built!
 
2013-09-13 06:34:39 AM

SpaceBison: It's not really any unsafer than any other typical dwellings in China.
[i.telegraph.co.uk image 460x288]


Of course they're safe. There's absolutely no doubt about that. They are as strong, solid and as safe as any other building method in this country provided of course people believe in them.

s21.postimg.org
 
2013-09-13 08:42:15 AM

Pointy Tail of Satan: That is pretty stupid. Crap tlke that would never be allowed in a western country. Oh wait.....


Lateral stability against wind and earthquake loads of that would be provided by the diagonal posts (presumably steel) working in tension and compression, which steel tubes are good at.

The Chinese house has thin, vertical, concrete columns that would have to work purely in bending, which is less than ideal. The extension is also built on an existing structure that may or may not have capacity to carry the additional lateral loads. It's possible but I wouldn't bet on it.
 
2013-09-13 09:25:37 AM

Target Builder: Pointy Tail of Satan: That is pretty stupid. Crap tlke that would never be allowed in a western country. Oh wait.....

Lateral stability against wind and earthquake loads of that would be provided by the diagonal posts (presumably steel) working in tension and compression, which steel tubes are good at.

The Chinese house has thin, vertical, concrete columns that would have to work purely in bending, which is less than ideal. The extension is also built on an existing structure that may or may not have capacity to carry the additional lateral loads. It's possible but I wouldn't bet on it.


I also was thinking along those lines.  The Chinese looked nice at first sight, but I cringed when it mentioned concrete pillars.  Concrete can vary a lot by strength and no mention was made of what steel was used inside the pillars.  Was it simple rebar or I-beams?  As you pointed out, PToS's example has the all important engineered triangles, which if the concrete pillars had I-beams inside and angled would've added a lot or strength.  Since the original plans were accepted, I would imagine the factory structure was deemed strong enough for the additional load.  The game changer would be the steel inside those pillars.  The original plans showed I-beams, the actual work used rebar to save money.  Or the original plans showed a single floor and they built two floors.
 
2013-09-13 11:17:22 AM

Pribar: The problem is probably in the design of the factory, not the houses per se. The factory wasn't built to support anything of that mass or weight so the houses could induce structural failures in the factory and if it, as the de facto foundation for the houses fails...


/his original, approved, design was probably more conservative or included reinforcing elements he didn't subsequently build
//or the planning office official didn't stay bribed in the face of higher disapproval


Those concrete stilts would fare pretty badly in an earthquake.  That area is in the ring of fire.

Pointy Tail of Satan: That is pretty stupid. Crap tlke that would never be allowed in a western country. Oh wait.....


Note how all the supports for that are diagonal and no doubt steel.  That's a very different situation than straight columns of concrete.  Concrete is very good in compression, very bad in tension.  Last year I dug a big block of concrete waste out of the front yard and I had to break it up so I could throw it away.  I managed to stick a small hunk under the middle of the big one.  The first blow of the sledgehammer knocked off a bunch of dirt, the second split it.  (And I'm just a middle aged person that works a computer, not a manual laborer.)  This was a block about as thick as the slab our house rests on.

lack of warmth: I also was thinking along those lines. The Chinese looked nice at first sight, but I cringed when it mentioned concrete pillars. Concrete can vary a lot by strength and no mention was made of what steel was used inside the pillars. Was it simple rebar or I-beams? As you pointed out, PToS's example has the all important engineered triangles, which if the concrete pillars had I-beams inside and angled would've added a lot or strength. Since the original plans were accepted, I would imagine the factory structure was deemed strong enough for the additional load. The game changer would be the steel inside those pillars. The original plans showed I-beams, the actual work used rebar to save money. Or the original plans showed a single floor and they built two floors.


Even I-beams would be a bad idea.  There are no triangles.
 
Displayed 39 of 39 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report