3 ms·
I think the material point is that, as engineers, we have to all concede that modern concrete has that fatal flaw. People are being hyperbolic here when they ar
by bilbo0s 6y ago
I think the material point is that, as engineers, we have to all concede that modern concrete has that fatal flaw. People are being hyperbolic here when they are saying these buildings won't last 60 years. In my opinion, most will definitely last 60 years, even with no maintenance. At the same time, I'm intellectually honest enough to concede that few reinforced concrete structures will last 500 years with no maintenance. And I'm confident that zero reinforced structures will last 1000 without maintenance.
People on this thread claiming a collapse in 60 years are probably not civil engineers. People claiming that reinforced structures will outlast the Pyramids at Giza are definitely not civil engineers.
- marcosdumay 6y agoOh, agreed. Concrete itself is not a completely stable chemical compost. Modern civilization is not creating many structures that have a chance of surviving for centuries. What I don't agree is on the classification of that as a "fatal flaw". Looks like we are in serious disagreement on the goal of our constructions.
- bilbo0s 6y agoCorrect. It's not a fatal flaw in terms of building a perfectly serviceable structure. It's a fatal flaw in terms of building a structure that lasts the ages like the pyramids. Like all engineering problems, the solution is greatly dependent on your goals.