Engineering analysis of a wall

Post Reply
User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 28200
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Engineering analysis of a wall

#1

Post by Foggy » Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:35 am

Ladies and gentlemen, meet Amy Patrick, from my Facebook feed ...
Howdy.

To recap: I’m a licensed structural and civil engineer with a MS in structural engineering from the top program in the nation and over a decade of experience on high-performance projects, and particularly of cleaning up design disasters where the factors weren’t properly accounted for, and I’m an adjunct professor of structural analysis and design at UH-Downtown. I have previously been deposed as an expert witness in matters regarding proper construction of walls and the various factors associated therein, and my testimony has passed Daubert.

Am I a wall expert? I am. I am literally a court-accepted expert on walls.

Structurally and civil engineering-wise, the border wall is not a feasible project. Trump did not hire engineers to design the thing. He solicited bids from contractors, not engineers. This means it’s not been designed by professionals. It’s a disaster of numerous types waiting to happen.

What disasters?

Off the top of my head...
1) It will mess with our ability to drain land in flash flooding. Anything impeding the ability of water to get where it needs to go (doesn’t matter if there are holes in the wall or whatever) is going to dramatically increase the risk of flooding.
2) Messes with all kind of stuff ecologically. For all other projects, we have to do an Environmental Site Assessment, which is arduous. They’re either planning to circumvent all this, or they haven’t accounted for it yet, because that’s part of the design process, and this thing hasn’t been designed.
3) The prototypes they came up with are nearly impossible to build or don’t actually do the job. This article explains more:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.eng ... 17599.html

And so on.

The estimates provided for the cost are arrived at unreasonably. You can look for yourself at the two-year-old estimate that you see everyone citing.

http://fronterasdesk.org/sites/default/ ... 20Wall.pdf

It does not account for rework, complexities beyond the prototype design, factors to prevent flood and environmental hazard creation, engineering redesign... It’s going to be higher than $50bn. The contractors will hit the government with near CONSTANT change orders. “Cost overrun” will be the name of the game. It will not be completed in Trump’s lifetime.

I’m a structural forensicist, which means I’m called in when things go wrong. This is a project that WILL go wrong. When projects go wrong, the original estimates are just *obliterated*. And when that happens, good luck getting it fixed, because there aren’t that many forensicists out there to right the ship, particularly not that are willing to work on a border wall project— a large quotient of us are immigrants, and besides, we can’t afford to bid on jobs that are this political. We’re small firms, and we’re already busy, and we don’t gamble our reputations on political footballs. So you’d end up with a revolving door of contractors making a giant, uncoordinated muddle of things, and it’d generally be a mess. Good money after bad. The GAO agrees with me.

And it won’t be effective. I could, right now, purchase a 32 foot extension ladder and weld a cheap custom saddle for the top of the proposed wall so that I can get over it. I don’t know who they talked to about the wall design and its efficacy, but it sure as heck wasn’t anybody with any engineering imagination.

Another thing: we are not far from the day where inexpensive drones will be able to pick up and carry someone. This will happen in the next ten years, and it’s folly to think that the coyotes who ferry people over the border won’t purchase or create them. They’re low enough, quiet enough, and small enough to quickly zip people over any wall we could build undetected with our current monitoring setup.

Let’s have border security, by all means, but let’s be smart about it. This is not smart. It’s not effective. It’s NOT cheap. The returns will be diminishing as technology advances, too. This is a ridiculous idea that will never be successfully executed and, as such, would be a monumental waste of money. 🤷🏻‍♀️

This is set to public. Have a blast sharing it.

User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 15553
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Engineering analysis of a wall

#2

Post by Reality Check » Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:43 am

How about a link?
"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
Slim Cognito
Posts: 6115
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 8:37 am

Re: Engineering analysis of a wall

#3

Post by Slim Cognito » Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:45 am

I've been waiting for this analysis ever since trump introduced his MS Paint drawing of a *beautiful steel slat wall.* I'm no engineer, but that looked like something I drew in high school with a ruler, a pair of scissors and rubber cement.
ImageImageImage x4

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 28200
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: Engineering analysis of a wall

#4

Post by Foggy » Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:49 am

Reality Check wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:43 am
How about a link?
Facebook app on my tablet is notoriously bad for links. I hope this is it (click the blue Facebook icon):


User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 15553
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Engineering analysis of a wall

#5

Post by Reality Check » Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:59 am

Thanks! Shared it.
"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
Volkonski
Posts: 22090
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2013 4:44 pm
Location: Texas Gulf Coast and North Fork of Long Island
Occupation: Retired Mechanical Engineer

Re: Engineering analysis of a wall

#6

Post by Volkonski » Fri Jan 11, 2019 12:01 pm

I spent most of my career involved with large engineering projects and Amy Patrick's analysis is spot on.
Image“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.”
― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace

User avatar
pjhimself
Posts: 140
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 3:25 am
Location: Back Nine

Re: Engineering analysis of a wall

#7

Post by pjhimself » Fri Jan 11, 2019 12:20 pm


User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 28200
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: Engineering analysis of a wall

#8

Post by Foggy » Fri Jan 11, 2019 12:31 pm

pjhimself wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 12:20 pm
A relevant link perhaps:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigr ... ed-n956856
Yeah, and if you google "portable plasma cutters" you'll find that you don't even need a saw to cut through a steel barrier.

User avatar
Danraft
Posts: 779
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:45 pm

Re: Engineering analysis of a wall

#9

Post by Danraft » Fri Jan 11, 2019 1:20 pm

Foggy wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 12:31 pm
pjhimself wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 12:20 pm
A relevant link perhaps:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigr ... ed-n956856
Yeah, and if you google "portable plasma cutters" you'll find that you don't even need a saw to cut through a steel barrier.
Drones already are used for drugs, and, one of the first comments on the shared twitter thread (wee hours this morning) pointed out that we are only years away from short flight high powered drones capable of carrying a person and returning- almost silent and undetectable.
I believe it's on the MT twitter feed.
The Mercury Project

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 21027
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Engineering analysis of a wall

#10

Post by RTH10260 » Fri Jan 11, 2019 1:53 pm

The first link in Foggys post (https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.eng ... 17599.html) reditrects to this article we must have missed back then, an insight into a GAO report:
Writing on the Wall :shock: : Report Suggests Border Project Is Off-Track and Over Budget
Emily Pollock posted on September 07, 2018

The border wall prototypes, immediately after their construction ended in 2018. A new government watchdog report suggests that the construction and decision process for the wall might be flawed. (Image courtesy of Elliott Spagat/AP.)

A recent report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office(GAO) documents how the Department of Homeland Security(DHS) tested its eight border barrier prototypes for the U.S.-Mexican border. The report found that many of the prototypes are “extensively” or “substantially” flawed, and that Customs and Border Protection(CBP) has likely underestimated the actual cost of the project.

Between October 2017 and June 2018, the GAO audited the DHS’s efforts, including how it evaluated the prototypes, how they determined location for new barriers, and how the department is managing acquisitions for the project. To do this, the GAO talked to officials and engineers, reviewed paperwork, and observed the DHS as it tested the prototypes.

For fans of the wall, the news is not good. The question now is: how did this happen?


https://www.engineering.com/BIM/Article ... udget.aspx
mucho more nasty details at the link

such as
According to CBP, it is not planning to use any of the prototypes wholesale; instead, it will be incorporating successful elements from several of them. Still, the question remains: how could a process that solicited the best designs the world had to offer have turned out such flawed prototypes?
But dotus is building them :blackeye: :brickwallsmall:

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 21027
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Engineering analysis of a wall

#11

Post by RTH10260 » Fri Jan 11, 2019 1:58 pm

another quote from above article, could also go into the Fractally Clueless Administration thread
engineering.com wrote:One possible answer is the chaos surrounding the bid submission process. CBP opened its call for proposals in March 2017, and gave potential bidders just 12 days to submit their proposals (in comparison, the industry standard is 30 days). During those 12 days, CBP added seven amendments to its original requests for proposals, and extended the deadline just hours before the original deadline.

The confusion meant a loss of possible bids: Some contractors gave up on bidding because of confusion over the request for proposals document, while others declined to bid because they weren’t sure if there was actually funding for a wall. And among those who did submit bids, not everyone was willing to put their full effort into it. "I’m willing to go with the process, but we might not spend as much money as they envision us spending,” Michael Hari, of Crisis Resolution Security Services, told azcentral."Some of the things they're asking—it's not worth it for prototypes. For $300 million? Yeah, sure. But just for a prototype? Eh, it’s probably not worth it."

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 21027
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Engineering analysis of a wall

#12

Post by RTH10260 » Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:03 pm

and this what seems to be a sensible approach
engineering.com wrote:Back in 2017, Border Patrol developed the Impedance and Denial Prioritization Strategy, a method to prioritize where to invest in new border barriers. It divided the border into a total of 197 segments across the southwest border, organized those segments into 33 groups, and then ranked the groups. The ranking was based on input from boots-on-the-ground border officials, data on where undocumented immigrants enter the country, and an analysis of how easy it would be to install the border at each location.

What it did not include was an analysis of how much it would cost to build the border in each of the locations.

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 21027
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Engineering analysis of a wall

#13

Post by RTH10260 » Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:06 pm

on hijacking private land, the 2006 GWB project is still in litigation in parts :o
engineering.com wrote:One of the factors that would drive up building costs in specific locations is land ownership. According to the GAO, “federal and tribal lands make up 632 miles, or approximately 33 percent, of the nearly 2,000 total border miles.” That leaves two-thirds of the border that’s owned either by individual states or private landowners. And, while eminent domain laws mean that the government can seize land for public infrastructural projects as long as there’s "just compensation,” land seizure opens the government to lawsuits. According to a 2017 analysis by the Chicago Tribune, President George W. Bush's 2006 land seizure cost the government $78 million in landowner compensation, and the government is on track to spend $21 million on cases that are still pending, with an additional $4 million in litigation costs.

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 21027
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Engineering analysis of a wall

#14

Post by RTH10260 » Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:11 pm

nobody knows what the follow-up costs will be were this brainfart to be implemented
engineering.com wrote:The GAO also disagreed with the DHS's original decision not to go through its usual acquisitions process for part of the border barrier. Normally, DHS reviews any major programs at acquisition decision events, where the department reviews and approves important documents (like the life-cycle cost estimates and testing plans). Initially, DHS was not planning to require CBP to go through the whole acquisition process on the San Diego Secondary Barrier (a major part of the eventual border wall). While that may sound like a boring bureaucratic detail to non-government officials, it would have essentially meant that CBP would be heading into the build process without official documentation of its estimated costs or construction timeline.

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 21027
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Engineering analysis of a wall

#15

Post by RTH10260 » Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:15 pm

Foggy wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:35 am
Ladies and gentlemen, meet Amy Patrick, from my Facebook feed ...
Howdy.
:snippity:
And it won’t be effective. I could, right now, purchase a 32 foot extension ladder and weld a cheap custom saddle for the top of the proposed wall so that I can get over it. I don’t know who they talked to about the wall design and its efficacy, but it sure as heck wasn’t anybody with any engineering imagination.

Another thing: we are not far from the day where inexpensive drones will be able to pick up and carry someone. This will happen in the next ten years, and it’s folly to think that the coyotes who ferry people over the border won’t purchase or create them. They’re low enough, quiet enough, and small enough to quickly zip people over any wall we could build undetected with our current monitoring setup.
:snippity:

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 21027
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Engineering analysis of a wall

#16

Post by RTH10260 » Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:27 pm

Foggy wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 12:31 pm
pjhimself wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 12:20 pm
A relevant link perhaps:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigr ... ed-n956856
Yeah, and if you google "portable plasma cutters" you'll find that you don't even need a saw to cut through a steel barrier.
starting as low as US$250 on Alibaba, will not create any service price hike for narctoic or human smugglers
LGK-40 220V Portable Plasma cutting machine Plasma Cutterhttps://www.aliexpress.com/item/LGK-40-220V-Por ... 039243.htm

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 21027
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Engineering analysis of a wall

#17

Post by RTH10260 » Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:47 pm

a choice of human transporting drones as currently found on Youtube.
► Show Spoiler
► Show Spoiler
► Show Spoiler
► Show Spoiler
► Show Spoiler
► Show Spoiler
► Show Spoiler

User avatar
Danraft
Posts: 779
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:45 pm

Re: Engineering analysis of a wall

#18

Post by Danraft » Fri Jan 11, 2019 3:12 pm

Wow.
The ski video is my fave.
Then the hammock.
Shared the post on twitter and it back links well.
The Mercury Project

Post Reply

Return to “Trump Administration”