Engineering humanitarian steel, by Roel Gijsbers, TU/e

Part of TU/e is the Shelter Research Group whose goal is to actively support the humanitarian aid world with the development of innovative solutions for post-disaster sheltering. The TU/e developed this presentation for the conference upon request of the IFRC SRU. The goal of the presentation was to focus on engineering of steel in humanitarian disaster response contexts, versus best practice approaches as often practiced on the field.

The presenter gives an overview of engineering methods; those based on intuition, rules of thumb, basic and detailed calculations. Five vital structural elements are given (material quality, stability, connection stiffness, foundation, risk reduction and hazard resistance) and elaborated upon. The audience is presented with the question: What level of risk is acceptable and which standards are applicable? In Western countries, acceptable risk is set quite low and comes with high cost. This issue is quite crucial and the challenge is to reconcile acceptable risk with the reality of humanitarian sheltering that is often low-cost and for temporary use.

Several common problems related to engineering for humanitarian shelters are presented, such as a lack of appropriate structural norms and calculation methods. To demonstrate some of these issues, examples of research done by the TU/e in Pakistan and Haiti are given. Some suggestions, (such as different risk profile for different types of loadings) are given as suggestions for solving the problems presented.

Consult the full presentation on: http://issuu.com/shelterresearchunit/docs/ifrc-sru-sd-tue-engineering-humanitarian-steel#embed

Safer construction through incremental improvements, by Bill Flinn, Cendep and Oxford Brookes University

This presentation focuses not on the needs of populations who have shelters provided for them by humanitarian organizations, but rather on the great majority of the affected who are not helped and have to rebuild on their own.

At the core of his presentation was a call for less building and more facilitation. The presenter maintains that the humanitarian sector (and those partnering with them) can do this through small but significant improvements to help people build better, before and after disaster. One example given is that of hurricane strapping. The case of roof retrofitting in Cuba is given as one way this concept could work in practice.

Another example given is reinforced concrete; which is the single most building method responsible for people being killed in disaster. Better design of concrete structures could prevent many damages and loss of life. Cases from Pakistan and Bangladesh are given as examples. The challenge given to all of us is to implement small interventions that could make a big difference.

Consult the full presentation on: http://issuu.com/shelterresearchunit/docs/ifrc-sru-sd-bill-flinn-safe-construction-through-i#embed

Retro-fitting before and after disaster, by Michal Sládek, independent researcher

For the purpose of this presentation and research, retrofitting was defined as “the intervention on shelter that decreases the vulnerability towards natural threats”. This presentation starts off by presenting some of the technical practices of retro-fitting of structures. It points out the particular usefulness of steel as a material for retro-fitting purposes.

To be relevant for disaster responses, Michal states that retrofitting needs to be based on local technical knowledge, simple technologies, local materials and be driven by the affected people. Through a couple of brief examples, some of the complexity of retrofitting is further documented; what about urban populations for example, or the risks in quality of non-engineered retrofitting?

But, many houses can be reinforced to increase their structural strength and resistance to disasters. Retro-fitting is relevant in many contexts, and throughout the disaster management cycle. Main advantages that are pointed out include sustainability, avoidance of displacement, self-driven and stepwise process and reduced need for resources. Possible disadvantages, that can be mitigated, are time consumption, knowledge introduction, lack of dedicated funding and upkeep after humanitarian intervention.

This presentation goes alongside a written paper. Both documents are the result of a research assignment conducted by an independent researcher, Michal Sladek, under the guidance of the IFRC SRU team.

Consult the full presentation on: http://issuu.com/shelterresearchunit/docs/ifrc-sru-sd-michal-sladek-retrofitting-before-and-#embed

Ultra light weight architecture: foldable and expandable shelter, by Roberto Maffei, independent researcher

This research was not presented during the conference, but was nevertheless done in preparation of it. The IFRC SRU asked Roberto to give a clear overview of what state of the art ultra light weight architecture is, and to investigate how that could be linked to and introduced in the humanitarian sheltering sector.

“This article explains how and when lightweight architecture has developed, how it works and which are its basic principles. Structures that come ready to assemble, that can be erected and disassembled in a matter of hours and have the least impact on the natural environment, while providing adequate shelter and modern amenities, are the preoccupation of several architects whose ambitions are not only toward the micro but also to the autonomous. Most of these features are not known and that’s why, in this article, foldable and expandable architecture is shown and its features highlighted. The article continues explaining how this kind of solutions can be adapted to suit the needs of the disaster affected and some of the few applications are presented. The conclusion focuses on the weak points about the application of such structures in emergencies to foresee possible fields of improvement. A detailed bibliography about the topic is provided in annex.”

There exit many discrepancies between what the academic, design, producer and humanitarian sectors consider good sheltering. Each of these actors has expertise in a different area. If we want to address these discrepancies, and bring the different expertise together in a more profitable manner, we need to lay them open on the table. This research is one step towards rendering the state of the art in light weight architecture insightful, and enabling migration of knowledge to the humanitarian sheltering shelter.

A flexible and integrated shelter approach, by Caroline Henrotay, VUB

 

The Free University of Brussels (VUB) presented the development of a flexible and integrated shelter approach. The underlying goal was to develop a system of compatible components, in different materials, that can be matched and re-matched to offer both emergency and transitional shelter. Having such a system, humanitarian agencies could intervene in a number of contexts in a similar manner, while still catering to the specific needs of that context. Also the process from relief to recovery could be done more smoothly, as the same sheltering system would be used for both phases.

VUB used the Open Meccano approach as basis. A lot of effort went into the development of component connections, which have a massive impact on the flexibility of the system and the structural strength that can be obtained with the system, in different designs. The system was prototyped, tested, adjusted and prototyped again – both in bamboo as in steel and aluminium. The system could be pre-fabricated, but equally produced locally.

In a following stage, VUB tested whether the system could be used to replace the current structural elements of the IFRC UNHCR ICRC family tent (research conducted by Heikki Vanderlinden). The design brief was turned upside down. An existing design, and canvas, was the limiting parameter the system tried to work within. This exercise was very useful to see how the family tent design should be changed to allow for a more modular structural system in it. If such a structure could be developed, then the tent could become the first step in a transitioning process. Part of this research was funded by the IFRC SRU, and we hope we can bring it even closer to an applicable system in the future.

Consult the full presentation on: http://issuu.com/shelterresearchunit/docs/ifrc_sru_sd_vub_flexible_and_integrated_shelter_sy#embed

and about the tent: http://issuu.com/shelterresearchunit/docs/ifrc-sru-sd-vub-frame-for-family-tent-feasibility-#embed