Any after pics? I’ve seen this everywhere but no after pics.
this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2024
509 points (98.5% liked)
hmmm
4618 readers
131 users here now
Internet as an art
Rule 1: All post titles except for meta posts should be just plain "hmmm" and nothing else, no emotes, no capitalisation, no extending it to "hmmmm" etc.
I will introduce more rules later and when I finish doing that I will make an announcement post about that.
For overall temporary guide check out the rules here: https://www.reddit.com/r/hmmm/wiki/rules/
I won't be moving all of them here but I will keep most of them.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Yep! It made it.
Good for them!
Worth a try. If it does not work, it did not cost a fortune, if it does, good for the owner.
Unless there's a footing these straps are being anchored to that I'm not seeing, I doubt it'll do very much besides potentially acting as very dangerous whips.
You'd be surprized how strong an industrial screwed-in ground anchor holds. And it has to be anchored at the correct angle towards the load.
So, most likely, they will not just rip out, and they have a good chance to add a significant force holding down that roof.
If done properly, of course.
If the roof doesn't crack from the added pressure points.
There seems to be an extra bar/pole at the top to distribute the load, though.
There is a news video about it, it's anchored to concrete and rebar 8 feet deep or something like that
I’ve seen these deck strap things that you push way down into the ground and as you pull them up a little the flatten out and turn sideways. Really easy to install and harder than hell to pull out. I think it’s called an earth anchor maybe. I bet that’s what he used here.
yeah these look like footings to me, i see what looks to be a small concrete protuberance right out of the ground. Also these would likely just pull out of the ground if they weren't anchored, and they wouldn't be whips, just very odd debris.
Yeah I watched a short news clip with him in it and he said they are attached to concrete that goes 8 feet down.
With all these experts in the comments, I now want the original sauce and to follow up to see what actually will happen.
YouTube recommended a video of this to me yesterday. The straps are anchored with cement. Seems like it buys him X additional mph of wind speed compared to his neighbors. We'll see if the winds are in that "more than a regular roof can handle but less than the straps can hold" range.
Yyy, I've heard all the theoretical arguments. I now want to witness the experiment live. Or on camera.
I’ve heard all the theoretical arguments. I now want to witness the experiment live. Or on camera.
you can do a pretty simple small scale test, with something like popsicle stick houses, and instead of wind loading, static loading against the wall. It won't scale perfectly, but it should demonstrate the concept.
Seems like a plausible strategy. If the roof is lashed down it can't catch the wind and therefore is less likely to weaken over time and go flying. Certainly better than doing nothing.
I hate that my first thought is insurance will use this as a way to avoid paying out
+10 for holding the roof on the house
+5 for holding the house on the foundation
-7 for creating a large strong web effectively doubling the surface area where flying things can destroy your house.
I don’t know if this stupid or genius. Now I’m curious.
ok so. This isn't going to stop a tree, or a large rock from flying through the side of you wall, but if you home isn't mounted to the foundation (common in old homes) or very well mounted, or just not very wind load capable, this could actually be beneficial.
You could still experience "wall buckling" but since the roof is relatively secured, you're acting from a separate point of leverage. Which is essentially going to be in the middle of the wall, rather than at the top of the wall.
This is all assuming that these anchor points are as strong or stronger than the straps and mounting hardware. And the fact that your home doesn't disintegrate between the staps.
view more: next ›