Safety in Building

Dominion, Volume 27, Issue 59, 2 December 1933, Page 9

Safety in Building

Sir, —My attention has been drawn to a letter by Mr. John Crowley which appeared in "The Dominion” of November 28, in which Mr. Crowley desires to be informed if building in the pyramidical form gives good results during earthquakes. I am able to tell him that this form is the ideal, because it provides a low centre of gravity; nevertheless, it is not practical in the greater number of buildings. However, a low centre of gravity, though not so low as the pyramid, is attainable in almost every building if properly designed—and constructed. This feature is but one of the essentials in building in earthquake-affected countries. The means in use for making buildings earthquake-proof will not provide that desirable result. It is especially stressed of these means that their purpose is “to resist” shock, and that they do, but even the layman will readily understand that tlie practice is wrong. "Resistance” is tlie antithesis of the correct way, which is “avoidance of shock.” This is attainable by separating the building from the earth or otherwise the placing of a “buffer” between the building and the earth. Other considerations are, a building of good materials, well built of strength to withstand the forces of gravity, and as aforesaid a low centre of gravity in its design and construction. All the above is available to the world now, when it can certainly be said that in a catastrophe of the magnitude of the February earthquakes of 1931 in the Hawke’s Bay district, every building designed and constructed on the principles stated would remain intact. A ship of 25,000 tons is not made of a strength in order to “resist” the greater or lesser strength of a wharf ; a very small object, ridiculously small in the case of the large ship, is placed between the ship and wharf, and safety to both is assured. —I am, etc., „ , R. W. de MONTALK. M ellington, December 1.