Famous Page Posts “Building Cracks” Are Not as Bad as Thought and “Tougher Than Hard” When an Earthquake Occurs.
Following the earthquake with its epicenter in Mandalay, Myanmar this afternoon, which caused damage to Thailand and caused great panic among those who directly experienced it,
the latest Facebook page, Curiosity Channel, has over 14,000 followers, and the admin has a bachelor’s degree in civil engineering and a master’s degree in earthquake-resistant buildings, has come out to share knowledge from many netizens who have asked the question: When faced with an earthquake, why do old buildings not crack at all, but new buildings do? Are new buildings not strong? The full text is as follows:
“I’ve seen many people post that when an earthquake occurs, why don’t old buildings crack at all, but new buildings do? Are new buildings not strong? No, that
‘s not true.
The new earthquake-resistant building design standards since 2007 have required engineers to design buildings to be “tough” to withstand earthquakes.
Before talking about toughness, let’s talk about the opposite, which is “hardness.”
Hardness will always be followed by brittleness. In other เล่นเกมคาสิโน UFABET ทันสมัย ฝากถอนง่าย words, if it breaks, it will break suddenly, without any warning. It’s like when we try to break a pencil, the pencil breaks immediately, without any cracks first, or what engineers call “instant failure.” This is very dangerous, without any warning. From a perfectly still building, if it can’t withstand the force, it will collapse suddenly, causing the occupants to “not be able to escape in time.”
But a tough building, according to modern design standards, if it encounters an earthquake, it will sway more easily, bend more easily, but it will not collapse or collapse, like we are trying to twist a plastic ruler, which causes cracks in various parts of the building, especially the walls. These cracks are a warning signal for residents to escape from the building.
And having cracks does not make a building weaker than having no cracks. In fact, it may be stronger because it can sway back and forth. It will break down the earthquake force into swaying force instead. On the other hand, a rigid building will accumulate the earthquake force into stress in the building members. If it accumulates more and more until it can’t stand it anymore, it will collapse suddenly without any warning (imagine a coconut tree leaning in the wind. It won’t break. But if it stands still, it will break more easily).
Therefore, having cracks after an earthquake is “good” and correct. It meets the earthquake design standards.
If there are no cracks at all, it’s worth thinking about, especially old buildings that have been built for a long time. Most of them are designed to be “rigid”.
How come the admin knows this? I’m an ordinary civil engineer with a master’s degree in earthquake-resistant buildings, which is directly related to this topic. I am also a building inspector with license number B.2879/2560, an ASEAN engineer with license number 2664/2022, and an APEC engineer with license number THA-01-00029.
(I don’t really want to say what my job positions are. It’s just that when it becomes popular, there will be people who say “Who are you? If you don’t know the truth, don’t mess with me.” So I have to give some credit.)
P.S. But “cracked” does not mean it’s not damaged and you can go back to sleep. Cracked is a “warning”. Cracked means “damaged”, but it just “hasn’t” collapsed. The goal of cracking a building is to warn users to flee. It is important to put people’s lives first, not to mean that cracked means the building is safe to be occupied. In any case, an engineer needs to assess the damage and repair it.
A severe crack is still dangerous.
And there are no cracks, it doesn’t mean it’s not strong. It’s strong, it just might not have any early warning cracks, or it’s so strong that it hasn’t reached the point where it’s going to crack as designed. If it’s going to crack, the earthquake would have to be stronger than this. An earthquake like this is nothing.”