Simulations are always limited since the foundation is not being considered here. Foundation can help propagate the energy before it enters the building. Also, earthquakes don't just shake horizontally...
the building is braced in every single bay and the frame itself seems moment resisting, the floor loading's can't be actual loads. and the characteristic of lateral loads are not clear, also the ground factor has been deleted here, some grounds intensify the earthquake, like what happened in Mexico
:- Yes! The ground moment and intensity is very abnormal. It is not considered here. The COST factor to construct this type of Building will be very high. The actual construction and further mentainance will not be user friendly with the Masons and work force.
This building although strong looks like it has so much internal bracing that it may be difficult to actually use. The result is a building that will never fall down but one that no one wants to rent.
I believe it’s just a smaller version of a thirty-story building? Or perhaps just the framework? Idk, though. In the words of Zoolander: “what is this?! A skyrise for ants!?”
And yes the prefabricated buildings is build and in used nonetheless Not sure how many of such buildings are ordered Unless huge damage to many places, & 30 storey buildings Builders may then turn to buying the prefabricated buildings or create more of such earthquake resistance buildings. They are preassembled according to order & design and then can quickly put together still be very solid
ua-cam.com/video/_BfA67dsPZw/v-deo.html The building in real life However Is believe are a couple of improvement in later on years. And the compartment is all pre-made and put togetger
If all engineers on the comment section will be united, i think we can have the strongest and most earthquake resistance building in the world. Come on guys.
Look at the left corner of the building, when there is a vibration with an increasing magnitude, the column in the left corner of the building is lifted, this indicates that there is a large tensile force on the foundation. It is possible that the superstructure of this building can withstand a strong earthquake, but what about the foundation?
While the 22/2/2011 quake was mostly vertical, the 13/6/2011 quake (mag 6.4) also had a pga of 2g, but mostly horizontal. I'm pretty sure this building would survive a strong earthquake well, but I wouldn't want to be in ANY city during a catastrophic earthquake!
The measured acceleration of the ground in the Northridge earthquake was 1.8 gs. This was a 6.7 magnitude earthquake. The vibration tests shown here are very gentle by comparison.
They were probably taking into consideration the size of the miniature 30 story building and shrinking the shaking down to something that a miniature structure could handle.. Therefore mimicking a 9 pointer on a small scale
I THINK THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH UNITS....THE ACCELERATION IS m/s², as for the vertical components, it's ruled by the code, e.g the EC 8 oblige it for the cantilevers of 5 m and 20 m spans, now to me, the connections have the key of the ductility of the structure which is not properly taken care of , the dimensions of the screws used here has a huge ratio comparing to reality ....which will really influence the results
the building is smaller ins cale, but is the steel gauge thinner proportionately? if you scale up this gauge of steel to the size of the actual building, it would be 1 m thick. thats not realistic.
The reason why this is not realistic, is because the frame is free to shake, flex, absorb and release energy. If walls are added, the frame becomes stiffer; thereby making the building more rigid.
Every Engineer who's understands how the forces are transferred from two points would understand why this guy is saying this, his making a valid argument, Take into consideration the foundation and the soil which is the base of the building which can have different results depending on the moisture content and also the temperature of the day. So this factors should also be considered while doing such Tests.
I wonder if in the testing weight is added to each floor to simulate the furnishings and structure found in a finished building ? as the weight per floor increases I would think that would affect the flex and rebound
I think; This test is so wrong? 1. No vertical movement 2 Steel must be scaled in value. Material ratio = Material / 10 2- The grounds are very rigid. Regardless of the actual ground motion.
why? I think vertical movement is more dangerous.In practically,vertical movement rarely occurs because earthquake motion is horizontal .So, No calculating design with vertical movement.Other weak point is that we cannot see the action of between soil and building.
I think the frequency content of the input is too high and is not exciting the building bending modes. Severe damage can occur to a building when it is driven at the first mode frequency for several minutes if the Q of the first mode is high enough.
Unfortunately, in the 7.8 magnitude earthquake in Turkey, acceleration values of up to 0.7 g were reached due to the bad ground effect and the fault being very close to the surface.
Scale-model shake-table tests are an economical way to simulate earthquake effects. Not perfect, see the literature that shows how to improve the validity.
Indeed. It would be interesting to know what the resonant frequency is on the model and compare this with the driving frequency. When they are close to each other the displacement of the structure increases dramatically but it you stay away from resonance then you’re shaking in safe territory. Cool model though.
diagonal horizontal combined with vertical accelerations? Scale of steel members would affect buckling resistance . What is period of vibration of model?
Even if the building don't collapse you will be thrown around like a ping pong ball in the upper levels causing serious damage.Nevertheless I'm not sure if there is any isolators used in this experiment looks like a rigid connection between building and foundation.
The scaled model is obviously too rigid for a knee brace connected building. As a result, these test performances are at best for commercial propaganda and not for scientific application. Also, using the bolted connection for all the column splices at high-rise building is a questionable construction method. The column joints would become discontinuous and could fail first in extreme load conditions, bringing down the whole building similar to the WTC Towers.
Side to side but I know eathquakes work like a wave, Would they have a simulation of an actual earthquake and not just the shifting from side to side? Quakes have an up and down motion while moving horizontally.
I would like to see the effects of corrosion and hydrogen embrittlement once the building is over 20,30, 50 or 80 years old. Have they simulated that? In addition what about adding the weight to the top of building for people, furniture, AC and water tanks, etc. The building needs some sort of smart system to provide information on structural integrity as it gets older. The ductility is questionable. The anchoring is also questionable.
I am not an engineer, but I believe a structural integrity system could work using built in resistivity sensors that could detect the conductivity of bolts in the building. When bolts rust, their conductivity decreases. This hypothetical sensor could be used in conjunction with deformation sensors to calculate the integrity of said structure. :)
How about if the frame was reinforced concrete? It able to resist from M7 to 9 or it will failed? Hope u will test in sample of RCD. By the way thanks for your video.
If the latest earthquake in Syria and Turkey has taught us is that the world needs properly engineering skyscraper apartments now more than ever. Well done to BSB for focusing on durability and longevity of structure life in its design...
Weight is always the problem...reduce it by using frp's for everything in the building structure including furniture and that will truly be earthquake proof.
Simulations like this don’t reflect the corruption in the as built building. I will never travel to China again - I wouldn’t feel safe in any building there. Cheap price = low quality.
i hope they are playing it right not over and over . because everytime they test a certain magnitude a specific debris keeps on flying the same direction . again and again
@asia911 So long as it's built in the same way, with 1/10 of the weight, and with 1/10 the amount of energy shaking it (as compared to a real earthquake), then it will be an accurate test.
i didnt realize this was going to be a scale model test. i didnt put alot of faith in this when i started watching. and even less faith after reading the comments.
Personally, I don't believe in a building that can withstand a 9M earthquake. Designing a building that collapse during 9M as safe as possible is the most realistic thing for me.
[1] Where are Walls??? Buildings get damaged due to the impacts of brick or any other material’s walls, which are moved due to earthquakes. Here walls are not shown. [2] Disagree with the Impacts and Magnitude factor, since the waves and movements of earthquakes are not only horizontal but vertical, inclined and in any abnormal directions. ABNORMAL factor is missing in this example. Do not compare artificial earthquakes with actual earthquakes. [3] Is the material used and open structure useful and feasible in actual building? Not at all....
Cool stuff, but judging from the rigidity i would not want to be on the top flor even when the 6 or 7 magnitude quake hit. Even if a rigid structure would hold up, there is bound to be significant stress related damage. The entire building would be damaged even if it was still standing.
@asia911 I see that u haven't got a clue about structural engineering. This 1/10 model was calculated adequately to its scale (all conexions, beams and poles). In this way we can say, that the model is appropriate to its ten times bigger oryginal structure. Doing this without any calculations would be sensless. I'm truely immpressed seeing this test. Unfortunately i did not have this kind of research on my university:( btw. asia911 are u the old asia9092 from wykop?:>
@aluminox..my comment was about the whole thing being built in a short amount of time with workers working non stop.. It has nothing to do with structural engineering. If u think about it of course the model passed but the real thing will fail because how do you know 100% if everything was bolted correctly in that short time..
:- Absolutely Right.... There are Horizontal, Vertical and abnormal direction abnormal movements during any Earthquakes. This quake is manipulated only for vertical movements.... Hence TEST not acceptable.
Of course, the interiors and all the inhabitants will be pulverized, but the exterior beautiful and intact. A lovely mausoleum! About the only thing it can do is fall over in one piece.
did anyone checked the damage on the building services? the more rigid a building the higher the acceleration on the building services which can often cost equally or more than the structure it self. Building services can also cause fatal accidents.. in any case I have to agree with some other commenters this does not look like a good simulation. Just take the ratio of the bolts over the breadth of each bay. Sorry. Not convinced.
Let's get some exterior siding on here let's put flooring partitions desk and lights and then test it because it didn't seem to have a lot of sway factor into it and not all earthquakes or horizontal sometimes you get a vertical you never can tell what it'll do so this miniature 30 story miniature structure did not impress me at all
This test is totally wrong! You can not scale down the Gravity, so you must scale down also the stiffness of all members. You should scale also the Modulus of Elasticity of materials and how rigid are the connections between members.
If this was in realife, the stiffness of this building would send thing flying around on an intense earthquake! FRAMES only doesnt make a building. In realife concrete would surely break under intense vibrations demonstrated here. If they do, you better not be on the wrong time at the wrong place my friend!
Very interesting.. it is okay to sustain 9M EQ under the present imitated ground condition. That part is not described or known... A simulation of ground response is the primary part to be checked and shall be run and monitored / recorded simultaneously. I can save lots of money by investigating the ground. condition. Unfortunately one will not like to experience even a 6 M EQ. Under certain ground conditions we can witness resonance nodes and pitches traveling on the ground at a natural wave period. The frequency and amplitude of seismic waves will be complex in an anisotropic geological environment where the subsurface boundary condition will be also an important factor to assess. Well there are not many places in this world where we should expect super great earthquakes.. appreciate this try for performance based observation.
This test gives people false confidence. The movement will be greater and more varied. It is great that they are researching this but they should not fool themselves or others about how large sky scrapers are going to handle a major earthquake.
BellinghamsterTrail we had Northridge quake and visiting Japanese engineers toured the damage ( sections of freeways coming down etc . They boasted that if it had happened in Japan no damage would have happened . Then one year later Japan had one and there freeways tipped the fuck over . The haughtiness of man is unbelievable " God Himself couldn't sink theTitanic "
While you can learn a lot from this kind of experiment, its just not fully realistic. There was a shake table in Japan which I think is the largest in the world, and they tested a 6 or 7 story wood frame building with all of the available components to retrofit, and they did a real 7.5 magnitude quake shaking up and down and side to side. There were cameras inside the building showing a table that overturned. The experiment was hosted by Simpson which makes the strong ties, anchors, and displays how effective the components all work together to keep the building not only standing, but habitable. The maker of this building (Broad) was planning a 200 story building at one point. While I believe they can make a resistant building, I dont think they can building something so huge based off of what they learn from these experiments. The sky is the limit and it IS possible to build buildings now that can withstand a magnitude 9 quake. They just retrofitted the Space Needle in Seattle to withstand up to a 9.2, and most well build towers built from the 60's and on should be able to remain standing even when taking a good deal of damage. But the point is for people to get out of the buildings alive. ua-cam.com/video/9X-js9gXSME/v-deo.html Finally, the intensity of the quake is what matters the most. A magnitude 7 can push over 2 G's of accelleration, but so can a magnitude 6 as displayed in Christchurch. The difference is with lower magnitude, the duration of shaking is not as long, and the waves are shorter.
First this is not working with a wave earthquake, 2e also by a stress slip, so for me it's not realistic, there are differnent Eartquake types, and not one is Earthquake is the same. Visit my side nick310548.wix.com/earthquake-designer more info about Eartquakes.
Good luck paying for the that steel cost. Literally 8 year olds can manage to create structures exactly like this, The problem and the entire point of research and development is to actually be able to "develop" it. In other words make it a reality that is feasible for society. These people live in a fairy tale land.
taking away the entirely emotional bullshit of complaints you gave, I wonder what is the price comparison between steel and concrete, defenitely if the steel based buldings are something really worthy, the price is just a detail easy to overcome, but like your deadass said, if you actually want to disrupt an industry, the affordability is fucking important
Everything shown in the video is completely illiterate: from the explanatory text and linking the magnitude with acceleration, to the modeling of the frame without taking into account the wall filling, partitions and stiffness core.
Simulations are always limited since the foundation is not being considered here. Foundation can help propagate the energy before it enters the building. Also, earthquakes don't just shake horizontally...
the building is braced in every single bay and the frame itself seems moment resisting, the floor loading's can't be actual loads. and the characteristic of lateral loads are not clear, also the ground factor has been deleted here, some grounds intensify the earthquake, like what happened in Mexico
:- Yes! The ground moment and intensity is very abnormal. It is not considered here. The COST factor to construct this type of Building will be very high. The actual construction and further mentainance will not be user friendly with the Masons and work force.
This building although strong looks like it has so much internal bracing that it may be difficult to actually use. The result is a building that will never fall down but one that no one wants to rent.
I believe it’s just a smaller version of a thirty-story building? Or perhaps just the framework? Idk, though. In the words of Zoolander: “what is this?! A skyrise for ants!?”
#IF_YOU_WANT_TO_BE_SAVE_AND_SECURE_YOU_HAVE_TO_COMPROMISE
This is the precursor of the prefabricated building that can stand 9 magnitude of earthquake
And yes the prefabricated buildings is build and in used nonetheless Not sure how many of such buildings are ordered
Unless huge damage to many places, & 30 storey buildings
Builders may then turn to buying the prefabricated buildings or create more of such earthquake resistance buildings.
They are preassembled according to order & design and then can quickly put together still be very solid
ua-cam.com/video/_BfA67dsPZw/v-deo.html
The building in real life
However Is believe are a couple of improvement in later on years. And the compartment is all pre-made and put togetger
If all engineers on the comment section will be united, i think we can have the strongest and most earthquake resistance building in the world. Come on guys.
Look at the left corner of the building, when there is a vibration with an increasing magnitude, the column in the left corner of the building is lifted, this indicates that there is a large tensile force on the foundation. It is possible that the superstructure of this building can withstand a strong earthquake, but what about the foundation?
Yes, it would severely compromise the foundation if not destroy it
While the 22/2/2011 quake was mostly vertical, the 13/6/2011 quake (mag 6.4) also had a pga of 2g, but mostly horizontal.
I'm pretty sure this building would survive a strong earthquake well, but I wouldn't want to be in ANY city during a catastrophic earthquake!
The measured acceleration of the ground in the Northridge earthquake was 1.8 gs. This was a 6.7 magnitude earthquake. The vibration tests shown here are very gentle by comparison.
They were probably taking into consideration the size of the miniature 30 story building and shrinking the shaking down to something that a miniature structure could handle.. Therefore mimicking a 9 pointer on a small scale
The text at 1:26 is wrong. 0.05 g is an acceleration (dv/dt) not an amplitude, and 1.76 km/h is a velocity (dx/dt) not an acceleration.
:- I agree....
agree
Yes. These are faulty.
That's what I was thinking about
it is an acceleration, but it should be 1,76 km/h² . I dont know why km/h² is better than m/s², it is little bit strange.
I THINK THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH UNITS....THE ACCELERATION IS m/s², as for the vertical components, it's ruled by the code, e.g the EC 8 oblige it for the cantilevers of 5 m and 20 m spans, now to me, the connections have the key of the ductility of the structure which is not properly taken care of , the dimensions of the screws used here has a huge ratio comparing to reality ....which will really influence the results
the building is smaller ins cale, but is the steel gauge thinner proportionately? if you scale up this gauge of steel to the size of the actual building, it would be 1 m thick. thats not realistic.
The reason why this is not realistic, is because the frame is free to shake, flex, absorb and release energy. If walls are added, the frame becomes stiffer; thereby making the building more rigid.
you think people who make these kinds of tests arent smarter than you?
@@TheLegend-yb4ok LOL
Every Engineer who's understands how the forces are transferred from two points would understand why this guy is saying this, his making a valid argument, Take into consideration the foundation and the soil which is the base of the building which can have different results depending on the moisture content and also the temperature of the day. So this factors should also be considered while doing such Tests.
I wonder if in the testing weight is added to each floor to simulate the furnishings and structure found in a finished building ? as the weight per floor increases I would think that would affect the flex and rebound
Sweet! I think that if we made all the joints round and all the windows round, it would likely stand up to even higher forces.
I think; This test is so wrong?
1. No vertical movement
2 Steel must be scaled in value. Material ratio = Material / 10
2- The grounds are very rigid. Regardless of the actual ground motion.
why? I think vertical movement is more dangerous.In practically,vertical movement rarely occurs because earthquake motion is horizontal .So, No calculating design with vertical movement.Other weak point is that we cannot see the action of between soil and building.
@待化的冰 It does. The earthquake has always two accelerations. The vertikal component like a horizontal brings additional load to the deadload.
How about your house, office etc have been vertical test?
I think the frequency content of the input is too high and is not exciting the building bending modes. Severe damage can occur to a building when it is driven at the first mode frequency for several minutes if the Q of the first mode is high enough.
Unfortunately, in the 7.8 magnitude earthquake in Turkey, acceleration values of up to 0.7 g were reached due to the bad ground effect and the fault being very close to the surface.
@@hughdismuke4703 Unfortunately, the whole reason for the demolition is poor quality construction.
Conclusión: él acero es él mejor material para la construcción de edificaciones sismo resistentes. Saludos desde Argentina.
What, no upthrust motion?
Does a scale building accuracy withstands a true building in an earthquake?
Scale-model shake-table tests are an economical way to simulate earthquake effects. Not perfect, see the literature that shows how to improve the validity.
They only use short wave lengths on the building short wave lengths doesn't affect tall building to much
Even atrong ones
Indeed. It would be interesting to know what the resonant frequency is on the model and compare this with the driving frequency. When they are close to each other the displacement of the structure increases dramatically but it you stay away from resonance then you’re shaking in safe territory. Cool model though.
0.7g? Christchurch experienced more than 2.0g (1.2g in CBD), and our quake was "only" a magnitude 6.3!
diagonal horizontal combined with vertical accelerations? Scale of steel members would affect buckling resistance . What is period of vibration of model?
pls tell me about water tank
Even if the building don't collapse you will be thrown around like a ping pong ball in the upper levels causing serious damage.Nevertheless I'm not sure if there is any isolators used in this experiment looks like a rigid connection between building and foundation.
The scaled model is obviously too rigid for a knee brace connected building. As a result, these test performances are at best for commercial propaganda and not for scientific application. Also, using the bolted connection for all the column splices at high-rise building is a questionable construction method. The column joints would become discontinuous and could fail first in extreme load conditions, bringing down the whole building similar to the WTC Towers.
the stiffness of the foundation is too strong
Side to side but I know eathquakes work like a wave, Would they have a simulation of an actual earthquake and not just the shifting from side to side? Quakes have an up and down motion while moving horizontally.
I would like to see the effects of corrosion and hydrogen embrittlement once the building is over 20,30, 50 or 80 years old. Have they simulated that?
In addition what about adding the weight to the top of building for people, furniture, AC and water tanks, etc.
The building needs some sort of smart system to provide information on structural integrity as it gets older. The ductility is questionable. The anchoring is also questionable.
I am not an engineer, but I believe a structural integrity system could work using built in resistivity sensors that could detect the conductivity of bolts in the building. When bolts rust, their conductivity decreases. This hypothetical sensor could be used in conjunction with deformation sensors to calculate the integrity of said structure. :)
this is purely lateral force ..what if there is vertical force?
Lastima que no muestra detalle del sistema resistente a momento
How about if the frame was reinforced concrete? It able to resist from M7 to 9 or it will failed? Hope u will test in sample of RCD. By the way thanks for your video.
Concrete is not flexible so it would not be able to withstand an earthquake due to it being bent and cracked
anyone else notice how Super Magnitude seems like its speed up? watch the cables!
Why is the amplitude measured in grams?
If the latest earthquake in Syria and Turkey has taught us is that the world needs properly engineering skyscraper apartments now more than ever. Well done to BSB for focusing on durability and longevity of structure life in its design...
In the Northridge earthquake, the ground experienced an acceleration of 1.8 times the acceleration due to gravity..
Weight is always the problem...reduce it by using frp's for everything in the building structure including furniture and that will truly be earthquake proof.
Shale table
Better build the building and have it tested by Godzilla, all of your doubts will be answered
Simulations like this don’t reflect the corruption in the as built building. I will never travel to China again - I wouldn’t feel safe in any building there. Cheap price = low quality.
i hope they are playing it right not over and over . because everytime they test a certain magnitude a specific debris keeps on flying the same direction . again and again
So long as it’s made in China idk how much I would trust it
wow！so many experts & engineers on the internet！
Of course. You realize the entire civilized world is on the internet. Right? Including experts and engineers.
The size might be to scale for a real building, the weight does not seem like it
If they're using 1/10 scale building then they should use much weaker materials. Not hard steel and big metal screws.
@asia911 So long as it's built in the same way, with 1/10 of the weight, and with 1/10 the amount of energy shaking it (as compared to a real earthquake), then it will be an accurate test.
This is still a poor example of the power of an earthquake because it only covered horizontal movement. Remember some earthquakes travel vertically.
I get confuse that it is rcc structure or steel structure
Engr Mushtaq steel structure.
Corner in front is loosely ...
Why stopped at 9M? Show at what magnitude the structure will fail for greater confidence!
i didnt realize this was going to be a scale model test. i didnt put alot of faith in this when i started watching. and even less faith after reading the comments.
If the building can absorb the energy nothing will happen . The hardest is the impact and the duration of shaking .
Personally, I don't believe in a building that can withstand a 9M earthquake. Designing a building that collapse during 9M as safe as possible is the most realistic thing for me.
[1] Where are Walls???
Buildings get damaged due to the impacts of brick or any other material’s walls, which are moved due to earthquakes. Here walls are not shown.
[2] Disagree with the Impacts and Magnitude factor, since the waves and movements of earthquakes are not only horizontal but vertical, inclined and in any abnormal directions. ABNORMAL factor is missing in this example. Do not compare artificial earthquakes with actual earthquakes.
[3] Is the material used and open structure useful and feasible in actual building? Not at all....
Cool stuff, but judging from the rigidity i would not want to be on the top flor even when the 6 or 7 magnitude quake hit. Even if a rigid structure would hold up, there is bound to be significant stress related damage. The entire building would be damaged even if it was still standing.
The idea is to save lives and not the building.
All this fancy engineering and you guys are still typing on a typewriter?!?
The model has a short period and looks to be too stiff. Surely somebody can scale down components to appropriate strength and stiffness?
地震波不是橫波豎波都存在，這個實驗只有一個水平移動沒有上下移動是不是還不夠完善
A scale 1/20 model which takes a Richter 9 grade earth quake is not a guarantee that the real building will this do also.
@asia911 I see that u haven't got a clue about structural engineering. This 1/10 model was calculated adequately to its scale (all conexions, beams and poles). In this way we can say, that the model is appropriate to its ten times bigger oryginal structure. Doing this without any calculations would be sensless. I'm truely immpressed seeing this test. Unfortunately i did not have this kind of research on my university:(
btw. asia911 are u the old asia9092 from wykop?:>
@aluminox..my comment was about the whole thing being built in a short amount of time with workers working non stop.. It has nothing to do with structural engineering. If u think about it of course the model passed but the real thing will fail because how do you know 100% if everything was bolted correctly in that short time..
I seriously doubt the testing methodology... Horizontal-only earthquakes don't happen !
:- Absolutely Right....
There are Horizontal, Vertical and abnormal direction abnormal movements during any Earthquakes.
This quake is manipulated only for vertical movements.... Hence TEST not acceptable.
Of course, the interiors and all the inhabitants will be pulverized, but the exterior beautiful and intact. A lovely mausoleum! About the only thing it can do is fall over in one piece.
i havent seen a 6 degree to shake that little. A real 6 and above will fuck up lots of buildings.
i thought that an earthquake is supposed to behave like a wave, and not like a dog humping a tree stump.
Your unit of acceleration is skewed, makes no sense. You are using the unit of speed.
did anyone checked the damage on the building services? the more rigid a building the higher the acceleration on the building services which can often cost equally or more than the structure it self. Building services can also cause fatal accidents.. in any case I have to agree with some other commenters this does not look like a good simulation. Just take the ratio of the bolts over the breadth of each bay. Sorry. Not convinced.
Let's get some exterior siding on here let's put flooring partitions desk and lights and then test it because it didn't seem to have a lot of sway factor into it and not all earthquakes or horizontal sometimes you get a vertical you never can tell what it'll do so this miniature 30 story miniature structure did not impress me at all
peccato che l'ultimo test l'hanno mandato in velocità!
This test is totally wrong!
You can not scale down the Gravity, so you must scale down
also the stiffness of all members.
You should scale also the Modulus of Elasticity of materials
and how rigid are the connections between members.
If this was in realife, the stiffness of this building would send thing flying around on an intense earthquake! FRAMES only doesnt make a building. In realife concrete would surely break under intense vibrations demonstrated here. If they do, you better not be on the wrong time at the wrong place my friend!
That erector set model can't perform like a real size structure.
ビルの中にいる人と家具はあの揺れで、どうなると思われますか。
All I know they're building while the U.S. Gov fights over petty shit. Now if those government jobs plans were let loose we'd be building too.
Very interesting.. it is okay to sustain 9M EQ under the present imitated ground condition. That part is not described or known... A simulation of ground response is the primary part to be checked and shall be run and monitored / recorded simultaneously. I can save lots of money by investigating the ground. condition. Unfortunately one will not like to experience even a 6 M EQ. Under certain ground conditions we can witness resonance nodes and pitches traveling on the ground at a natural wave period. The frequency and amplitude of seismic waves will be complex in an anisotropic geological environment where the subsurface boundary condition will be also an important factor to assess. Well there are not many places in this world where we should expect super great earthquakes.. appreciate this try for performance based observation.
lego is massive if u observe it! yes u can buid a tower with lego ^^
Excellent video
good show..now i know why most project here in the phillippines are using steel...
This test gives people false confidence. The movement will be greater and more varied. It is great that they are researching this but they should not fool themselves or others about how large sky scrapers are going to handle a major earthquake.
They are not fooling anyone. Look at their science papers.
But they are test beyond 9 Richter. To me that is significant.
:- I agree with Bellinghamster Trail
BellinghamsterTrail we had Northridge quake and visiting Japanese engineers toured the damage ( sections of freeways coming down etc . They boasted that if it had happened in Japan no damage would have happened . Then one year later Japan had one and there freeways tipped the fuck over . The haughtiness of man is unbelievable " God Himself couldn't sink theTitanic "
Man it's in scale (I don't think Japanese scientist would make a bad model)though I agree there is no vertical movement which is the most dangerous
While you can learn a lot from this kind of experiment, its just not fully realistic.
There was a shake table in Japan which I think is the largest in the world, and they tested a 6 or 7 story wood frame building with all of the available components to retrofit, and they did a real 7.5 magnitude quake shaking up and down and side to side. There were cameras inside the building showing a table that overturned. The experiment was hosted by Simpson which makes the strong ties, anchors, and displays how effective the components all work together to keep the building not only standing, but habitable.
The maker of this building (Broad) was planning a 200 story building at one point. While I believe they can make a resistant building, I dont think they can building something so huge based off of what they learn from these experiments. The sky is the limit and it IS possible to build buildings now that can withstand a magnitude 9 quake. They just retrofitted the Space Needle in Seattle to withstand up to a 9.2, and most well build towers built from the 60's and on should be able to remain standing even when taking a good deal of damage. But the point is for people to get out of the buildings alive.
ua-cam.com/video/9X-js9gXSME/v-deo.html
Finally, the intensity of the quake is what matters the most. A magnitude 7 can push over 2 G's of accelleration, but so can a magnitude 6 as displayed in Christchurch. The difference is with lower magnitude, the duration of shaking is not as long, and the waves are shorter.
Bravo!
Buildings are much much heavier than that...they have concrete slabs and walls and live loads. C’mon guys 😊.
False information speeding up the video
The connections in between the scale steel girders are too strong if this building was real those welds or screws would have sheared off at the mag 8
First this is not working with a wave earthquake, 2e also by a stress slip, so for me it's not realistic, there are differnent Eartquake types, and not one is Earthquake is the same. Visit my side nick310548.wix.com/earthquake-designer more info about Eartquakes.
this test is hardly accurate of a real world result. granted it does look like a sturdy structure compared to what currently exists
Kết cấu hình tổ ong vẫn là vững chắc nhất
no brick in the building you test
What if the building resonates with the vibration? Then you are fucked.
They should test the finished building & we will see...lolz
Good luck paying for the that steel cost. Literally 8 year olds can manage to create structures exactly like this, The problem and the entire point of research and development is to actually be able to "develop" it. In other words make it a reality that is feasible for society.
These people live in a fairy tale land.
taking away the entirely emotional bullshit of complaints you gave, I wonder what is the price comparison between steel and concrete, defenitely if the steel based buldings are something really worthy, the price is just a detail easy to overcome, but like your deadass said, if you actually want to disrupt an industry, the affordability is fucking important
According to this method, This building strong but System is wrong.
Translate please
Geniale !!!!! Povera italia!!!!!!! Quanto in parere mo noi???? Bhoooooohhhhh
It is a great test
Everything shown in the video is completely illiterate: from the explanatory text and linking the magnitude with acceleration, to the modeling of the frame without taking into account the wall filling, partitions and stiffness core.
actually! this video and others have only a purpose, advertising for BSB.
and is it not a good thing to run the advertisement
I love the dynamite.
Agree..
go up and down too. incomplete test.
Cool!
perfect