| Kris Krieger 2005-06-16, 2:34 pm |
| "gruhn" <gruhn@deletehwb.com> wrote in
news:oJ1oe.33$RQ3.1808@news.uswest.net:
quote:
>
> They don't need to be all that flat in aspect. They only need the flat
> top and bottom for stacking (unless you're an Inca stone god. They
> could probably corbel spheres ;-). Be that as it may...
>
> http://fincher.org/Misc/Pennies/index.shtml
>
> Coin stacking.
Hey, Thanks! This is fun and educational  And I just happen to have a
whole jar full of pennies that I've been too lazy to roll...
Instructive re: structure/balance and that sort of thing. And more
entertaining than television.
Good practice, too, before working with things that can pulverize one's
toes ;)
quote:
>
> It does appear to be. I wonder how much cantilever they get per layer.
> I'd think "not much" but maybe it's one of those "no, you'd be
> surprised" things.
It seems off-hand that it'd depend upon the strength of the sandbags, and I
personally wouldn't want to rely on the longevity of those...
That's the main problem I have with looking at this as viable method of
building a functioning structure - as far as I saw, to fill the bags, they
were simply using loose sand, not something like wet cement.
IOW, cement would itself harden into a structural material, if I'm saying
that correctly (and I'd think adobe would also...?), but with loose sand,
what happens when the bags age and lose their integrity? I'm not convinced
that just putting stucco over the surface would adequately compansate...but
that's just my impression, I could of course be wrong...
In any case, it'd be an interesting thing to try (such as, build a tool
shed this way), but I'd be leery of just using loose sand. Looking at the
size of the sandbags, if you did use concrete, the thing would be like a
bunker, wouldn't it?
--
- Kris M. Krieger
|