Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Perhaps a lesson for Puna from Mexico Beach, FL
#1
"The seaside community of Mexico Beach, Florida, was demolished by Hurricane Michael -- but one family's newly-built concrete home survived virtually untouched. "

https://abcnews.go.com/US/mexico-beach-h...d=58505662

".... For Lackey and his uncle, the goal during construction just last year was to go "overboard to preserve the structure." He said they often went the extra mile to add more concrete -- especially in corners.

Making small accommodations as they went, he said they often "went one step further" beyond the building codes, like when they added 1-foot thick concrete walls as well as steel cables to hold the roof steady/"


These folks were aware, as I am, that the building codes are only the minimum standard allowed by law.
Assume the best and ask questions.

Punaweb moderator
Reply
#2
It seems like it's just a matter of time before we get a direct hit. I want to be the smart little piggy that built his house out of bricks...or concrete. I'm working on my storm shelter now.
Reply
#3
Historically owner built homes have stood up better than spec/ mass produced houses.
Reply
#4
I saw a Hurricane Mike picture of a roof over a large structure where the trusses had simply laid down like dominoes. Relatively minor and cheap diagonal bracing would have prevented that. Also amidst all the flattened houses there are many still standing. I do not suggest that building to resist a 14' storm surge is easy but such examples do stand out. Showing a poor family crying beside the wreckage of their 1960s vintage termite eaten mobile home after a storm is more a statement about society than it is about the storm.
Reply
#5
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/us/pg...ornia.html

So power companies are choosing to shut down power to avoid starting fires during high wind events. First, given that many fires have in fact been started by arcing power lines, this makes perfect sense. I kind of wonder how nobody has threatened to sue them for NOT doing so yet. Second, my brother and sister-in-law are spending what it takes to put solar with battery back-up on their house in Honolulu, essentially installing a whole-house UPS with solar PV charging (they are going with the Tesla PowerWall which strangely charges only from solar, not by grid or generator). Granted my brother and I are outliers in terms of our fondness for alternative energy and more generally in our willingness to look at alternative solutions for problems but it just seems weird to me that families would have a new car before they would have a power system that would keep them safe in the event of a major storm or fire.
Reply
#6
Perhaps a lesson?

But what percentage of the people living in Puna can afford to upgrade their home or rebuild entirely to adhere to a new even more expensive standard in order to protect themselves from powerful natural disaster?

I'm guessing it's a low percentage. Probably under 20%

But to those of you that can afford it. Probably a good idea if you have the extra time and money to make adjustments to their home or build an even more sturdy structure than the law calls for.
Reply
#7
From the ABC article: "Lackey said the additions weren't very expensive and called them "totally worth it."

Upgrading a house is not remarkably expensive. For wood frame it basically involves adding steel connections and strapping.

For new home construction I would suggest abandoning wood frame altogether.... which I have done on my home and I am a master carpenter.

My home is owner built of reinforced concrete. Cost me about $80 psf.

It is less a factor of expense than it is a factor of simply doing things "differently" and using materials that are durable over time.




Assume the best and ask questions.

Punaweb moderator
Reply
#8
Cost factor: Thanks, good to know Rob.

I remember some threads in the past where you talked about how you won't build out of wood anymore simply because it isn't a good investment here in Puna.

I agree. I'm already on "board" (irony pun intended) for all future structures I build, to abandon pine studs as the standard for house framing simply because of the termite factor we face in this tropical environment.

The other fact of steel framing being more sturdy is just icing on the cake as far as incentive for alternative framing here in Hawaii.
Reply
#9
There are a couple of basic facts about steel framing that I think are worth remembering....

1. No defects, less waste
2. screws are way more stronger than nails.

Also to consider:

Ever since Hurricane Andrew and the Northridge Earthquake engineering simply doesn't trust wood joints at all. So steel connectors are increasingly required (Simpson). At this point wood has become a infill material between steel connectors. So why use wood at all?
Assume the best and ask questions.

Punaweb moderator
Reply
#10
So why use wood at all?

Availability. When I can buy steel for a project that I'm making up as I go along, then I'll do that.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)