Notices
Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: The ultimate anti seismic system

  1. #1 The ultimate anti seismic system 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    11
    Patent Idea
    The patent is the ultimate seismic system that will change the world's seismic design method of construction .

    We have invented a method and mechanism that joins the roof ( roof ) construction with the ground .
    This pretension between the roof of the structure and the soil becomes world's first time , and stops deformation generated in the building during the earthquake , so ensure absolute durability.
    Comparing with present construction , the invention increases the strength of the structure to an earthquake over 300 % and reduces the cost of construction of over 30 %


    Apply placement in all building projects are under construction , but and in many existing structures , ensuring absolute seismic protection.
    For example, houses, skyscrapers , dams , windmills , bridges , roads.
    Even protects and lightweight construction of tornadoes .
    Use also as anchor for the support of ground slope on highways .

    Brief description of the invention
    The principal object of the hydraulic tie rod for construction projects of the present invention as well as of the method for constructing building structures utilizing the hydraulic tie rod of the present invention is to minimise the aforesaid problems associated with the safety of construction structures in the event of natural phenomena such as earthquakes, hurricanes and very high lateral winds. According to the present invention, this can be achieved by a continuous pre-stressing (pulling) of both the building structure towards the ground and of the ground towards the structure, making these two parts one body like a sandwich. Said pre-stressing is applied by means of the mechanism of the hydraulic tie rod for construction projects. Said mechanism comprises a steel cable crossing freely in the centre the structure's vertical support elements and also the length of a drilling beneath them. Said steel cable's lower end is tied to an anchor-type mechanism that is embedded into the walls of the drilling to prevent it from being uplifted. Said steel cable's top end is tied to a hydraulic pulling mechanism, exerting a continuous uplifting force. The pulling force applied to the steel cable by means of the hydraulic mechanism and the reaction to such pulling from the fixed anchor at the other end of it generate the desired compression in the construction project.

    The skeleton of a building consists of the columns (vertical parts) and the girders and slabs (horizontal parts). The girders and slabs are joined at the nodes.

    Under normal conditions, all loading is vertical. When an earthquake occurs, additional horizontal loading is placed on the skeleton.

    The resultant effect of horizontal plus vertical loading puts strain on the nodes. It alters their angle from 90 degrees, creating at times acute and at other times obtuse angles.

    The vertical static loads equilibrate with the reaction of the ground.


    The horizontal earthquake load exerts a lifting effect on the bases of the columns. In addition, due to the elasticity of the main body of the columns, the earthquake acts by shifting the heights of each plate by a different amplitude and a different phase. That is, the upper plates shift more than the lower ones. The modal shifts of the skeleton are many, so many that the differing, shifting directions of the earthquake deform and destroy the skeleton.


    The ideal situation would be if we could construct a building skeleton where, during an earthquake all the plates would shift by the same amplitude as the ground without differing phases. In this way the shape will be preserved and we would not have any deformation of the frame, hence no damage.


    The research I have carried out has resulted in the creation of an anti- seismic design for buildings which achieves exactly this result.

    I have succeeded in doing this by constructing large elongated ridged columns shaped -, +, Γ or T to which a pulling force is applied from the roof and from the ground, applying bilateral pressure to the entire column. This force acts to prevent bilateral shifting of the columns and curvature at their bases so preventing the deformation which occurs throughout the whole structure during an earthquake.
    In an earthquake, the columns lose their eccentricity and their bases are lifted, creating twisting in all of the nodes of the structure. There is a limit to the eccentricity, that is, there is a limit to the surface area of the base which is lifted by the rollover moment.
    To minimise the twisting of the bases, we place strong foot girders in the columns.
    In the large longitudinal columns (walls), due to the large moments which occur during an earthquake, it is practically impossible to prevent rotation with the classical way of construction of the foot girders.
    The following result occurs with this lifting of the base in combination with the elasticity. When one column of the frame lifts one end of the beam upwards, at the same time the other column at its other end moves violently downwards.
    This stresses the beam and has the tendency to twist it in different directions at the two ends, deforming its body in an S shape.The same deformation occurs with the columns also, due to the twisting of the nodes and the differential phase shift of vertical plates.
    In order to prevent the lifting of the base, we clamp the base of the structure to the ground using the patented mechanism.
    However, if we want to prevent the lifting of the whole columnar structure which stems from the lifting of its base as well as from the elasticity of its main body, then the best point for enforcing an opposing, balancing force is the roof. This opposing tendency on the roof must come from an external source and not applied from within the structure. This external source is the ground underneath the base. From here the external force is applied.
    Underneath the base of the structure, we drill a hole into the ground and clamp it with the patented anchor. With the aid of a cable which passes freely through a pipe in the column, we transfer this force which we obtained from the ground up to the roof.

    At this point in the roof, we insert a stop with a screw to prevent the raising of the roof of the longitudinal columns which happens during an earthquake and deforms all the plates.

    In this way, we control the oscillation of whole structure. That is, the deformity which the structural failure causes. With this method, we do not see changes in the form of the structure, because it maintains the same shape it had prior to and during the earthquake.
    The reaction of the mechanism to the raising of the roof of the longitudinal column and the opposing reaction of the at the bottom part of the base, divert the lateral load of the earthquake into the strong vertical section.
    With this diversion of the lateral load of the earthquake to the vertical columns, the twisting of the nodes is abolished because the lateral loadings of the earthquake are 100% borne along the length of the columns, so it is impossible for them to twist in their main sections.
    In the experiments I have carried out in actual scale earthquake acceleration of 1.77g and amplitude over 0.11 in a two story building model to scale 1:7.14, the difference in the model with and without the patented mechanism can clearly be seen.



    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    11


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    11
    experiments
    1) With the seismic system ΟΝ
    In the experiments I have carried out in actual scale earthquake acceleration of 1.77g and amplitude over 0.11 in a two story building model to scale 1:7.14, the difference in the model with and without the patented mechanism can clearly be seen.

    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    11
    with the patented mechanism but clamped between the base and the seismic base (Not like the first experiment.
    The first is pretension between roof and seismic base.)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    11
    3)Εxperiment Without the seismic system



    4)damage Control
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZkCKY0EypM
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,760
    now that you've set out your shop, how about discussing it with the other members
    maybe you could start by setting out in a few simple sentences what you're trying to convey
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,541
    Quote Originally Posted by seismic View Post
    Patent Idea
    The patent is the ultimate seismic system that will change the world's seismic design method of construction .

    We have invented a method and mechanism that joins the roof ( roof ) construction with the ground .
    This pretension between the roof of the structure and the soil becomes world's first time , and stops deformation generated in the building during the earthquake , so ensure absolute durability.
    Comparing with present construction , the invention increases the strength of the structure to an earthquake over 300 % and reduces the cost of construction of over 30 %


    Apply placement in all building projects are under construction , but and in many existing structures , ensuring absolute seismic protection.
    For example, houses, skyscrapers , dams , windmills , bridges , roads.
    Even protects and lightweight construction of tornadoes .
    Use also as anchor for the support of ground slope on highways .

    Brief description of the invention
    The principal object of the hydraulic tie rod for construction projects of the present invention as well as of the method for constructing building structures utilizing the hydraulic tie rod of the present invention is to minimise the aforesaid problems associated with the safety of construction structures in the event of natural phenomena such as earthquakes, hurricanes and very high lateral winds. According to the present invention, this can be achieved by a continuous pre-stressing (pulling) of both the building structure towards the ground and of the ground towards the structure, making these two parts one body like a sandwich. Said pre-stressing is applied by means of the mechanism of the hydraulic tie rod for construction projects. Said mechanism comprises a steel cable crossing freely in the centre the structure's vertical support elements and also the length of a drilling beneath them. Said steel cable's lower end is tied to an anchor-type mechanism that is embedded into the walls of the drilling to prevent it from being uplifted. Said steel cable's top end is tied to a hydraulic pulling mechanism, exerting a continuous uplifting force. The pulling force applied to the steel cable by means of the hydraulic mechanism and the reaction to such pulling from the fixed anchor at the other end of it generate the desired compression in the construction project.

    The skeleton of a building consists of the columns (vertical parts) and the girders and slabs (horizontal parts). The girders and slabs are joined at the nodes.

    Under normal conditions, all loading is vertical. When an earthquake occurs, additional horizontal loading is placed on the skeleton.

    The resultant effect of horizontal plus vertical loading puts strain on the nodes. It alters their angle from 90 degrees, creating at times acute and at other times obtuse angles.

    The vertical static loads equilibrate with the reaction of the ground.


    The horizontal earthquake load exerts a lifting effect on the bases of the columns. In addition, due to the elasticity of the main body of the columns, the earthquake acts by shifting the heights of each plate by a different amplitude and a different phase. That is, the upper plates shift more than the lower ones. The modal shifts of the skeleton are many, so many that the differing, shifting directions of the earthquake deform and destroy the skeleton.


    The ideal situation would be if we could construct a building skeleton where, during an earthquake all the plates would shift by the same amplitude as the ground without differing phases. In this way the shape will be preserved and we would not have any deformation of the frame, hence no damage.


    The research I have carried out has resulted in the creation of an anti- seismic design for buildings which achieves exactly this result.

    I have succeeded in doing this by constructing large elongated ridged columns shaped -, +, Γ or T to which a pulling force is applied from the roof and from the ground, applying bilateral pressure to the entire column. This force acts to prevent bilateral shifting of the columns and curvature at their bases so preventing the deformation which occurs throughout the whole structure during an earthquake.
    In an earthquake, the columns lose their eccentricity and their bases are lifted, creating twisting in all of the nodes of the structure. There is a limit to the eccentricity, that is, there is a limit to the surface area of the base which is lifted by the rollover moment.
    To minimise the twisting of the bases, we place strong foot girders in the columns.
    In the large longitudinal columns (walls), due to the large moments which occur during an earthquake, it is practically impossible to prevent rotation with the classical way of construction of the foot girders.
    The following result occurs with this lifting of the base in combination with the elasticity. When one column of the frame lifts one end of the beam upwards, at the same time the other column at its other end moves violently downwards.
    This stresses the beam and has the tendency to twist it in different directions at the two ends, deforming its body in an S shape.The same deformation occurs with the columns also, due to the twisting of the nodes and the differential phase shift of vertical plates.
    In order to prevent the lifting of the base, we clamp the base of the structure to the ground using the patented mechanism.
    However, if we want to prevent the lifting of the whole columnar structure which stems from the lifting of its base as well as from the elasticity of its main body, then the best point for enforcing an opposing, balancing force is the roof. This opposing tendency on the roof must come from an external source and not applied from within the structure. This external source is the ground underneath the base. From here the external force is applied.
    Underneath the base of the structure, we drill a hole into the ground and clamp it with the patented anchor. With the aid of a cable which passes freely through a pipe in the column, we transfer this force which we obtained from the ground up to the roof.

    At this point in the roof, we insert a stop with a screw to prevent the raising of the roof of the longitudinal columns which happens during an earthquake and deforms all the plates.

    In this way, we control the oscillation of whole structure. That is, the deformity which the structural failure causes. With this method, we do not see changes in the form of the structure, because it maintains the same shape it had prior to and during the earthquake.
    The reaction of the mechanism to the raising of the roof of the longitudinal column and the opposing reaction of the at the bottom part of the base, divert the lateral load of the earthquake into the strong vertical section.
    With this diversion of the lateral load of the earthquake to the vertical columns, the twisting of the nodes is abolished because the lateral loadings of the earthquake are 100% borne along the length of the columns, so it is impossible for them to twist in their main sections.
    In the experiments I have carried out in actual scale earthquake acceleration of 1.77g and amplitude over 0.11 in a two story building model to scale 1:7.14, the difference in the model with and without the patented mechanism can clearly be seen.

    Have you already filed a patent application for this? Because if not, then by publishing it here you have just destroyed any chance of patenting it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    4,436
    That's what I was thinking, I'm no expert but I would have thought seismic's posts would count as "prior art" and invalidate any subsequent patent application.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    11
    my friends. Ι come and live in Greece

    Opinion of the International Patent Office for Hydraulic tractor
    Has a very positive opinion for hydraulic tractor.

    From what the examiner says that I have something patentably new and useful. Improved anchoring means comprising expansion anchors in combination with hydraulic tensioning means to keep the building tightly tethered to the ground. This would also be good for hurricane country, like the US Gulf Coast.
    View image: 008
    View image: 002
    View image: 003
    View image: 004

    in Greece I have two patents
    a patent for soft ground. and another patent for foundations on rock
    I had filed for international patent in pct
    passed Research Report (A)
    Filing in Αmerica at the patent office.
    I have not gotten a patent in america yet .... expected

    Patent publication in America. View image: US20130111828 Lymberis (1) page 1
    Last edited by seismic; October 4th, 2014 at 12:49 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    I don't really understand what's going on in those videos. The structures don't seem to have an anchor going down through the middle of the structure like the illustration showed. What is the difference between the experiments where the structure failed and the one where it did not fail? They look the same to me.

    How do you know the anchor won't pull out of the ground in an actual earthquake?

    In the first video, what is happening immediately after the earthquake. It seems to show the building rocking back and forth. Why does that happen?
    Last edited by Harold14370; October 4th, 2014 at 02:29 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    11
    All the answers are in this forum My anti seismic systems - SkyscraperPage Forum
    The seismic base represents the foundation soil.
    In experiments there is no anchor.
    There is a screw which is screwed with screws bolts on top of the roof and below the seismic base.
    The lower bolt (represents) is like the anchor
    The first experiment has screws and is screwed above the roof and and below the seismic base.
    In the second experiment have screwed with screws the base of the model with the seismic base. ( This is not very effective )
    In the third experiment, not screwed at all with the seismic base. This makes the difference.
    The first video is another method of fixing.
    Τhe anchor won't pull out of the ground in an actual earthquake because the hydraulic system of the mechanism of the patent retains the tendon always stretched. In rocky ground no problem, because we know that the hard rocks not recede from the pressure
    If you have a moly bolt, and screw it to the wall you can not push through or pull it out.
    The same system with the screw of the wall is the patent system.
    Last edited by seismic; October 4th, 2014 at 08:59 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by seismic View Post
    The first experiment has screws and is screwed above the roof and and below the seismic base.
    In the second experiment have screwed with screws the base of the model with the seismic base. ( This is not very effective )
    In the third experiment, not screwed at all with the seismic base. This makes the difference.
    But if you screw the screws to screws that aren't screwed then you're screwed.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,789
    Earthquakes don't kill people. People's houses in the midst of earthquakes kill people. Look at the statistics—or the photographs—and you'll know that the vast majority of fatalities from earthquakes large or small come from buildings, or parts of buildings, falling on people.

    What better way to avoid tragedy then, but by tossing a house in the air when an earthquake comes?

    That's the general idea behind the levitating house developed by the Japanese company Air Danshin. The product of inventor Shoichi Sakamoto, the house sits, during more stable times, on a deflated air bag. When sensors feel a tremor, they switch on a compressor within a second. The compressor pumps air into an airbag, inflating it within a few more seconds, and ultimately lifting the entire house a good three centimeters off its supposedly earthquake-proof concrete foundation. There the structure will hover, its inhabitants able to casually go about their business, for the duration of the quake. Then the airbag deflates and the house gently settles back down.


    https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=...12522309405911

    It is easiest to see this principle at work by referring directly to the most widely used of these advanced techniques, which is known as base isolation. A base isolated structure is supported by a series of bearing pads which are placed between the building and the building's foundation.(See Figure 1) A variety of different types of base isolation bearing pads have now been developed. For our example, we'll discuss lead–rubber bearings. These are among the frequently–used types of base isolation bearings. (See Figure 2) A lead–rubber bearing is made from layers of rubber sandwiched together with layers of steel. In the middle of the bearing is a solid lead "plug." On top and bottom, the bearing is fitted with steel plates which are used to attach the bearing to the building and foundation. The bearing is very stiff and strong in the vertical direction, but flexible in the horizontal direction.



    https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=...12522309405911


    An upstate New York manufacturer has developed dampers, or shock absorbers, which increase the earthquake resistance of a building by threefold; the patented dampers are based on technology first developed by the military to protect U.S. missile silos against Russian attacks during the cold war



    https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=...12522309405911
    When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
    Jimi Hendrix
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seismic View Post
    The first experiment has screws and is screwed above the roof and and below the seismic base.
    In the second experiment have screwed with screws the base of the model with the seismic base. ( This is not very effective )
    In the third experiment, not screwed at all with the seismic base. This makes the difference.
    But if you screw the screws to screws that aren't screwed then you're screwed.
    This pretension between the roof of the structure and the soil becomes world's first time , and stops deformation generated in the building during the earthquake , so ensure absolute durability.

    I make myself clear ... you get it now?

    What does this invention achieve which is not achieved with the current technology?
    Current technology simply secures the structure to the ground. My invention unites it with the ground making these two as one (like a sandwich). For me, this uniting of the structure with the ground beneficially changes the direction and type of forces which act upon the structure dynamically during an earthquake.

    Influences which cause failure in buildings:
    a) Shearing stress
    b) Moment of the nodes

    How these are created:

    A) SHEARING STRESS
    a) Shearing stress is created mainly on the vertical supporting components during earthquake acceleration due to the inertia of the mass.
    Question: Is the shearing stress the same in all of the supporting components?
    Answer: No. The shearing is greater in force in the ground floor components
    Question: Why?
    Answer: For two main reasons
    - They have to handle (in movement) a greater mass which necessitates greater inertia, thereby creating greater shearing on the cross section plan.
    - The ground floor components are more rigid.
    All of the other supporting components (except for those of the ground floor) have a certain amount of elasticity in the nodes and supporting components which is beneficial in that they absorb the force of the earthquake due to transfer of this force into heat.

    However, this beneficial absorption of energy is cancelled to a greater degree by the components of the ground floor for one main reason. Underneath the components (columns) on the ground floor the base is inflexible (because it is usually under the ground). It therefore transfers wholly the acceleration of the earthquake (and in this way shearing stress is also increased).
    At the components (columns) of the upper floors the same does not occur because the components of the ground floor have already absorbed part of the force and less energy is transferred upwards to the more elastic components.

    Because of this and due to the increased mass load which has to be handled we see greatly increased shearing stresses on the ground floor components. This explains why the majority of failures happen on the ground floor.
    This issue can be resolved by increasing the cross section plan of the components of the ground floor. But if we do this then another problem occurs; we lose the elasticity in the components (and in this way we also lose the damping of the acceleration).



    B) MOMENT OF THE NODES
    Moment of the nodes also acts to create stress on the horizontal and vertical supporting components by shearing stress and occurs for the following reason.
    During the acceleration of an earthquake we know that there is inertia of the load bearing elements but in addition inertia of the bearing mass has to be handled. These burden the vertical components with horizontal shearing stress.
    In a high rise building, the vertical components are united from the first up to the top floor. The structural integrity of all the components of the load bearing elements (columns, girders, slabs) is improved when these are joined at the node points.

    During the inertia of the bearing elements, these node points react with moment which taxes the vertical and horizontal supporting elements with shearing stresses. If the design is not correct, this results in failure of the vertical elements which are brittle but not the horizontal.
    The reason for this is that the vertical elements (columns) have a smaller cross section by comparison to the girders. The girders mass along the length forms a structural unit with the slab so that it is considered a unified body stronger than the vertical element.
    If we consider that each column bears at least two girders, we understand the difference in endurance (with regards to the shearing) between the column and the horizontal bearing element.

    During oscillation of a tall building, there is the tendency for it to lift up off the ground on one side due to moment, creating a gap underneath the back foundations. That is, the front columns try to lift up the back ones due to the structural unity that they have. This unity is provided by the girders.
    This gap cancels the resistance which is present between the ground and building base as the base which was securing the building is now in mid-air.
    Of course, this event never really happens in reality because the static load of the structure during the lifting of one side immobilizes the column with the base to the ground creating moment of the nodes.

    These moments create slanted shearing of the cross section of the vertical element which cannot withstand the load and we have cancelling of the structural unity of the building.

    This explanation can be clearly seen during the first minute of the experiment which I have carried out:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJIsx1sKkLk
    In the first minutes of the experiment, we see a wooden structure (building skeleton) which, during inertia oscillates and lifts up on one side and then on the other alternately. This occurs because it is light and the nodes withstand the moment which is created from the static weight of the unsupported side of the structure.
    As soon as we place the static load of the two bricks, it still oscillates but the base does not lift up on either side. In this situation the nodes can no longer withstand the additional load of the bricks.
    Considering the analysis I have done above, we see why a structure fails when the limits of the design are surpassed.
    There is no absolute anti-seismic design.
    Current Greek anti-seismic systems have a certain amount of endurance but from this point onwards, the truth is that they are fragile. In my opinion the endurance here has particular limits due to my reasoning above. This phenomenon can be resolved by increasing the cross section plan of the ground floor components. If we do this though, another problem emerges; as stated before; we lose elasticity of the components (and the depreciation of the acceleration).
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    11
    MY PROPOSED SOLUTION
    The solution can be seen in the continuation of the experiment shown in the link above as well as in the explanation below.

    There are three issues which need to be addressed in order to apply pre-stressing between the ground and the structure (the clamping of the ground with the structure)
    a) bending
    b) durability of the materials
    c) durability of the ground

    For the pre-stressing or clamping of the structure with the ground to operate beneficially during an earthquake, a large cross section plan of the supporting components is necessary as well as very durable materials if it is to provide additional benefits.
    Pre fabricated houses offer these two necessary components as they are constructed completely from fortified concrete.
    The problem of loose ground (c) is resolved by using Radiere together with the specialised hydraulic traction mechanism. This improves the durability of the ground and provides additional support to the foundations.

    See what happens to conventional houses:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hgc19...eature=related

    Imagine PREFABRICATED houses which are made of fortified concrete and secured (screwed) at their four corners with this seismic base … even if they are turned upside down, nothing can happen to them.
    Question:
    When we do not screw down the base, what will happen?
    Answer:
    If we have tall buildings completed constructed from fortified concrete, these will withstand the shearing stress but their nodes will have increased load due to the gap (discussed above) which is created under the base during second moment of the area as well as the greater static load which they bear. The combination of moment and static load creates slanting cracks in the walls.
    Because of this prefabricated houses are suitable to be built only a few stories high. If we make the prefabricated house from fortified concrete ONE with the ground though:

    View image: 2010 06 20 12 25 26 0014

    …. It cannot lift up on one side during second moment of the area and in this way we avoid moment of the nodes.
    THE FINANCIAL ASPECT

    I believe that with this method, prefabricated houses can be placed in towns. Until now these houses have only been suitable for rural areas. The main reason for this is that the law does not allow them to be built more than two stories high.
    If they become invulnerable during an earthquake and they can withstand the force with many stories then their construction will be permitted in towns.
    At this moment, they are not permitted in towns because if, in a town ten story buildings are allowed and prefabricated ones can only be constructed up to two stories, financially it is not feasible to lose the possibility of another eight stories.

    If I enable them to withstand earthquakes, then conventional methods of construction will be dispensed due to the fact that prefabricated structures are 30-50% cheaper because they are industrially produced. This way the manufacturers will profit from this change.

    Apart from being for anti-seismic use, my invention can be used as a pre-stressing anchor for the improvement of the ground:

    For example: View image: 001

    That is, it can improve the density of loose ground as well as not allowing the structure to move upwards (during oscillation) or downwards (during subsidence of the ground).

    I have already mentioned the placement methods in existing and buildings under construction as well as other types of structures such as dams and bridges etc.

    The patent is also appropriate also for the protection of lightweight buildings during tornadoes which are seen mostly in the United States .
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmictraveler View Post
    Earthquakes don't kill people. People's houses in the midst of earthquakes kill people. Look at the statistics—or the photographs—and you'll know that the vast majority of fatalities from earthquakes large or small come from buildings, or parts of buildings, falling on people.

    What better way to avoid tragedy then, but by tossing a house in the air when an earthquake comes?

    That's the general idea behind the levitating house developed by the Japanese company Air Danshin. The product of inventor Shoichi Sakamoto, the house sits, during more stable times, on a deflated air bag. When sensors feel a tremor, they switch on a compressor within a second. The compressor pumps air into an airbag, inflating it within a few more seconds, and ultimately lifting the entire house a good three centimeters off its supposedly earthquake-proof concrete foundation. There the structure will hover, its inhabitants able to casually go about their business, for the duration of the quake. Then the airbag deflates and the house gently settles back down.


    https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=...12522309405911

    It is easiest to see this principle at work by referring directly to the most widely used of these advanced techniques, which is known as base isolation. A base isolated structure is supported by a series of bearing pads which are placed between the building and the building's foundation.(See Figure 1) A variety of different types of base isolation bearing pads have now been developed. For our example, we'll discuss lead–rubber bearings. These are among the frequently–used types of base isolation bearings. (See Figure 2) A lead–rubber bearing is made from layers of rubber sandwiched together with layers of steel. In the middle of the bearing is a solid lead "plug." On top and bottom, the bearing is fitted with steel plates which are used to attach the bearing to the building and foundation. The bearing is very stiff and strong in the vertical direction, but flexible in the horizontal direction.



    https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=...12522309405911


    An upstate New York manufacturer has developed dampers, or shock absorbers, which increase the earthquake resistance of a building by threefold; the patented dampers are based on technology first developed by the military to protect U.S. missile silos against Russian attacks during the cold war



    https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=...12522309405911
    These systems you presented are very good.... but can not stand up to my seismic base with 10 g acceleration

    My is a cheaper and safer for large structures... good view around for very large windows.
    It has a rigid central fiery
    and horizontal insulation.
    Is a building, in another building.
    Separated by seismic joints.
    The outside building is elastic.
    The main building is rigid and prestressed with Earth
    Listen to the voice in the video
    The system I suggest you do the following
    a) Strong foundation
    b) There is no phase difference on floors.
    The first, the middle and the LAST plate have the same amplitude.
    This stops the moments at the nodes
    Stops bending of structural elements
    Stops the deformation and failure.
    In fact this method is better than the elastic theory applied today
    A more practical and inexpensive method into the link
    http://s5.postimg.org/rllh3dhzb/002.jpg
    Another method without horizontal seismic isolation
    http://postimg.org/image/r1aadhj8/

    An effort of this kind would help to speed up the research into low-cost, earthquake-proof, anticyclonic, so that work can begin on building cheaper housing that can withstand any unforeseen happenings.
    Last edited by seismic; October 4th, 2014 at 05:05 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by seismic View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seismic View Post
    The first experiment has screws and is screwed above the roof and and below the seismic base.
    In the second experiment have screwed with screws the base of the model with the seismic base. ( This is not very effective )
    In the third experiment, not screwed at all with the seismic base. This makes the difference.
    But if you screw the screws to screws that aren't screwed then you're screwed.
    This pretension between the roof of the structure and the soil becomes world's first time , and stops deformation generated in the building during the earthquake , so ensure absolute durability.
    I make myself clear ... you get it now?
    /golfclap
    I'll leave you to it.

    To others in this thread, here is what we have to look forward to:
    My anti seismic systems - SkyscraperPage Forum
    "Civil Engineering Forums" by thecivilengineer.org • View topic - Anti seismic systems
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seismic View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seismic View Post
    The first experiment has screws and is screwed above the roof and and below the seismic base.
    In the second experiment have screwed with screws the base of the model with the seismic base. ( This is not very effective )
    In the third experiment, not screwed at all with the seismic base. This makes the difference.
    But if you screw the screws to screws that aren't screwed then you're screwed.
    This pretension between the roof of the structure and the soil becomes world's first time , and stops deformation generated in the building during the earthquake , so ensure absolute durability.
    I make myself clear ... you get it now?
    /golfclap
    I'll leave you to it.

    To others in this thread, here is what we have to look forward to:
    My anti seismic systems - SkyscraperPage Forum
    "Civil Engineering Forums" by thecivilengineer.org • View topic - Anti seismic systems
    Why not speak clearly.
    Tell me where you disagree.

    Greek technical journal for metal constructions
    http://metalkat.gr/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=828:2 014-07-13-17-48-38&catid=39:2010-02-10-15-45-09&Itemid=102

    Greek TV
    http://www.zougla.gr/greece/article/...i-evresitexnia

    Panagiotis Karidis, emeritus professor Earthquake Engineering at the National Technical University of Athens, met with John Liberi and had the opportunity to watch his experiment. "It has performance and can be applied to many structures for protection against earthquakes! Could be incorporated in the studies. Suffice to accept this system from the wider scientific community, "said, commenting on this patent. "The welcome and I hope to see it in practice," concludes ...
    Last edited by seismic; October 4th, 2014 at 02:37 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Seismic
    By MB in forum Earth Sciences
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: August 23rd, 2010, 04:51 PM
  2. ultimate theory = ultimate mind-wipe ?
    By theQuestIsNotOver in forum Physics
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: September 28th, 2008, 04:20 AM
  3. What amplitude range for seismic P-waves?
    By flash_os in forum Earth Sciences
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: July 24th, 2008, 12:15 AM
  4. Seismic Waves (P,S,R,L)
    By kingwinner in forum Earth Sciences
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: September 15th, 2006, 08:21 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •