• dustyData@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    Yes, it’s a weird place for a door-frame but you can see the horizontal steel beams in the inter-floor space (I don’t know what that’s called in English) and the ceiling beams are obviously not floating on top of the brick, they are supported by vertical beams somewhere. The concrete brick is just a covering, none of those walls are structural. Though there’s a way of building with structural brick and steel beam, but this is not it. The thing with steel beam is that it’s deceptively stiff. You might think that it’s too thin to be structurally sound, but structural steel beams can carry a lot of weight and resist deformation rather well. This is obviously not a professional construction, it’s just not up to rich developed world standards, but like I said, that doesn’t mean the building will fall.

    • edric@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      What’s more interesting is how the hollow blocks are lined up. Shouldn’t they be placed in such a way that a block sits in the middle of the two blocks below it? I think it’s what the post is originally pointing at, not the necessarily the one layer thick wall (with the steal beams of course).

      • dustyData@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Yup, like I said, shoddy mason work. Not made by professionals. Perhaps not secure in an earthquake or anything. But, it’s a covering, that’s why they can get away with such incompetence. It still won’t fall easily. I know people who live in worse self-made homes constructed 30 years ago, and those houses are still standing.

        EDIT: and forgot to mention that straight laying is a legitimate bricklaying pattern, it’s usually for decorative reasons, so that’s not what they were going for here. Apparently in English it’s called stack bond.