Seymour Cray down in the tunnels, communing with the Machine Elves.
So you want to build a tunnel
21–30 of 119 posts
Re: So you want to build a tunnel
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of my sisters had four boys (and no girls) and during summers they would drive her crazy with their boredom. When they were about ages 8-14 one summer she said: go in the back yard and see how big of a hole you can dig. Wide-eyed they said: really? She said yes, dig as much as you want, but the only rule is it all gets filled in before school starts in the fall. 30 years later they say it was the best summer ever…
How deep did they get? Hope she kept an eye on it, unsupported holes quickly get dangerous, people underestimate how much weight is in the soil if the sides give out and just how dangerous that amount of weight moving can be.
It was more sprawling than deep. It was a series of trenches connecting "rooms". I know they also had "water features" at some points, but the water would soak into the ground pretty quickly then be a mess for a few days, so they didn't do that.
No collapses happened and everyone is still alive. :-)
Re: So you want to build a tunnel
#23This article/video really rubs me the wrong way. These strawmen who are being torn down for the most part aren't building "tunnels". They're building glorified 8-10ft foundations and basements with dirt over the top instead of structures, 1970s hippie "underground homes" basically. They're calling them tunnels and bunkers for clicks and views. To then take that naming at face value and pontificate about code and engi…
As they say, the rules are written in blood. I don't think we should be disqualifying projects because they are not Mponeng-scale or complexity.
I am not a civil engineer, but I did spend a bunch of time looking into building an underground range. Way more relaxed life safety reqs, smaller bore, etc. However, when you start reading, it is clear that much of the work is empirical, heavily localized and based on a great deal on the experience of the builder. I found very little in the way of solid theoretical modeling, but lots of measure, adjust, etc.
I think Grady does a reasonable job highlighting the dangers and risks.
Re: So you want to build a tunnel
#24Great content for the upcoming drone wars and the inevitable tunnels that will be built for troop and matériel movements
Re: So you want to build a tunnel
#25Brings to mind this woman's efforts -- very impressive indeed: https://www.youtube.com/@engineerkala/ Edit: reading is hard -- I only skimmed and did not realize she was mentioned.
We love engineer Kala. She decided to do a thing, while marking progress on her "technology tree" of skills gained by (very arguable) necessity. Dealing with permits and city beuaracracy seems like one of the hardest parts!
Re: So you want to build a tunnel
#26This article/video really rubs me the wrong way. These strawmen who are being torn down for the most part aren't building "tunnels". They're building glorified 8-10ft foundations and basements with dirt over the top instead of structures, 1970s hippie "underground homes" basically. They're calling them tunnels and bunkers for clicks and views. To then take that naming at face value and pontificate about code and engi…
As they say, the rules are written in blood. I don't think we should be disqualifying projects because they are not Mponeng-scale or complexity. I am not a civil engineer, but I did spend a bunch of time looking into building an underground range. Way more relaxed life safety reqs, smaller bore, etc. However, when you start reading, it is clear that much of the work is empirical, heavily localized and based on a grea…
>As they say, the rules are written in blood
Basically nobody ever died from leaky pipes or substandard weatherproofing. The code is as much about a) homogenizing the industry so big business can statistically reason about it at scale b) turning the subjective into the quantitive so that things can be done, checked, sight off on, etc, etc, without anyone using "judgement" as it is about protecting life and limb. Just about every professional has a laundry list of complaints about their area of code that boil down to it being theoretically useful but at great "not worth it" expense or a similar "not worth it" expense being incurred in lieu of very basic judgement. Arc fault breakers, and engineering requirements for small retaining walls come to mind as oft cited examples. And of course there's the myriad of wrangling that goes on wherein things get looser/stiffer requirements depending on whether their use is deemed worth incentivizing (this stuff usually lives in local addendums to the code).
I'm not saying there isn't value in there, but this habit people have of acting like it's all relevant to safety and screeching about "written in blood" is exactly what creates room for unrelated stuff to exist in the code.
>However, when you start reading, it is clear that much of the work is empirical, heavily localized and based on a great deal on the experience of the builder. I found very little in the way of solid theoretical modeling, but lots of measure, adjust, etc.
Which is a point very much in favor of the amateur.
Re: So you want to build a tunnel
#27Brings to mind this woman's efforts -- very impressive indeed: https://www.youtube.com/@engineerkala/ Edit: reading is hard -- I only skimmed and did not realize she was mentioned.
We love engineer Kala. She decided to do a thing, while marking progress on her "technology tree" of skills gained by (very arguable) necessity. Dealing with permits and city beuaracracy seems like one of the hardest parts!
That was a big part of Christo's art.
Re: So you want to build a tunnel
#28Obligatory shoutout to Engineer Kala
Re: So you want to build a tunnel
#29Great content for the upcoming drone wars and the inevitable tunnels that will be built for troop and matériel movements
What makes you think a tunnel would be safe? Just need to re-purpose this little guy:
https://blog.sintef.com/digital-en/inachus-project-robot-sea...
Re: So you want to build a tunnel
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
As they say, the rules are written in blood. I don't think we should be disqualifying projects because they are not Mponeng-scale or complexity. I am not a civil engineer, but I did spend a bunch of time looking into building an underground range. Way more relaxed life safety reqs, smaller bore, etc. However, when you start reading, it is clear that much of the work is empirical, heavily localized and based on a grea…
>As they say, the rules are written in blood Basically nobody ever died from leaky pipes or substandard weatherproofing. The code is as much about a) homogenizing the industry so big business can statistically reason about it at scale b) turning the subjective into the quantitive so that things can be done, checked, sight off on, etc, etc, without anyone using "judgement" as it is about protecting life and limb. Just…
> Basically nobody ever died from leaky pipes
I know you're probably intending to only remark on leaky water pipes, but:
The New London School explosion was caused by a leaky pipe. It killed 295 students and teachers, and led to the inclusion of smelly thiol in natural gas, as well as the Texas Engineering Practice Act.