Compendium

8 Build Back Safer Key Messages

Title

8 Build Back Safer Key Messages

Publisher

admin

Date

Sunday, January 1, 2023

Filename

8_key_messages_posters_final_v1.1_light.pdf

Source

Shelter Cluster

Group

Compendium

Language

English

Tags

Other Timber / Wooden poles / Coco lumber Reinforced concrete Wire / Rope / Strapping Corrugated galvanized iron sheets (CGI) Disaster New construction Upgrade / Repair / Retrofit Poster / Flyer / Image (compilation of them) Construction Settlement level intervention Access to assistance Landslide / Mudslide Flood Cyclone / Storm (wind and rain) Design and construction principles Foundation Walls / Frame Openings Joints / Bracing Roof Philippines

Download

Scores

Adaptability

- Many elements from this document could in principle be translated to other contexts however as a whole the key messages prioritises its messages around the Philippines context and imagery is a little too confusing to read. It may be better to take elements from this document and redraw / re-conceive for a new context, including newly contextual prioritisation of key messages.

- The schematic shelter location, structural layout and wind bracing are useful for different contexts and locations where raised timber frame construction techniques are used. Bearing in mind there are no floor or wall details shown

- Appropriate for any context with similar typology and areas exposed to high wind.

Text Clarity

- In general supports the diagrams however refers to a lot of unexplained technical terminology that may make understanding of some cations difficult (e.g. 'eaves', 'trusses'). Some of the text simply denotes the technical name for certain techniques without adding anything to the understanding of the diagram (e.g. 'Timber Cleats' 'Fishplate')

- The text language and descriptions are clear. Problems may occur by the large number of choices presented to the builder and home owner which can lead to different results in wind stability and life span and cost of the finished building. Although the presentation could indicate a staged approach to building allowing the householder to gradually increase the structural integrity of the whole house, the drawings do not show how to design and build a progressive shelter.

- Text is clear

Context Appropriateness

- This was largely contextually appropriate to the Philippines however rather a lot of the messaging focused on expensive or locally unavailable features such as hurricane straps, reinforced concrete foundations. While it's good to identify the strongest techniques a little more space should have been given to affordable, locally attainable building techniques

- The shelter solutions presented gives a broad set of details to build a shelter that has built in wind resistance and flood locations. The design solution and materials presented are close to what is used in many rural contexts in different locations. The details lack sufficient details to build a safe shelter.

- IEC is contextually very appropriate and versions of it were used in several other responses in Asia. I am not sure if this is the one of the first IECs to present comprehensive lightweight construction IEC for areas with high wind but it did have very large impact on Haiyan response as well as other Asian responses.

Technical Complexity

- Conveys the right type of technical messages, though some of it appears more technical than the audience requires e.g. how forces travel through the structure, how pressurised wind forces act on a building. Main problem is the density of the messaging and the overly technical presentation style.

- There are 8 pages of details. The posters give a number of solutions for each detail, including different quality suggestions which may complicate the decision making process at household level. There are no floor construction details. There are no wall covering details shown. Connection details are schematic leaving the detail to the builder which can lead to poor quality connections.

- Messages are complex but most of them is easy to understand in the community used to self building. As this messages were also accompanied with trainings, verbal messaging in different languages they were well understood.

Image Clarity

- The messaging is very dense with little sense of hierarchy making it difficult to know where to look. The images are drawn (almost in monochrome) as if they are architectural/engineering diagrams including the use of isometric projection, plans, sections. To an untrained eye many of these diagrams may be difficult to understand obscuring their message. This could be improved with fewer styles of drawing and perhaps larger clearer and textured images that read more like illustrations and less like diagrams.

- The graphics are very schematic leaving detailing to the builder. As noted above some details give rise to possible confusion as to the strength provided by some suggested connections, eg wire and rope compared to steel straps. Images are clear but require more construction knowledge to actually be able to build a safe shelter.

- Most of the images are very clear and easy to understand but there are few that are confusing. Section - Tie down from bottom up - first image is really difficult to understand Section - Brace against the storm - image G is very confusing as it is not apparent that it shows bracing around the door Section - What can i use to brace my house - can be interpreted as bracing needs to be placed on the windows In regards to the bracing some additional detailed images may be needed (like in the section of strong joints) as it was observed that in several occasions bracing was installed in wrong way (not secured properly - braces under the flooring or in the ceiling fell off) Section - good house - good roof : it may be good to include note on CGI thickness as using very thin CGI was a problem Section - site your hose safely (typo in the title) - Image D resulted in some families cutting down remaining trees close to their new/fixed shelters to avoid trees collapsing. This image is reasonable but if trees did not already collapse in the typhoon would they really present immediate danger?

Technical Accuracy

- The information is accurate and there are lots of good individual technical details in there. The problem is there are maybe too many and that they are presented in a way which looks a little too technical.

- Sheet 1 Foundations The foundation drawings shows two concrete block shapes plus from a simple cut off pyramid, to one with two different square sections with sloping connections. The cut off pyramid is more simple to construct and position plus has more volume weight ratio to its shape. The foundation blocks show inconsistent ground levels for flooding. Sheet 1 picture A shows that the concrete column has 1/4 height below ground and 3/4 above (drawing actually shows 1/2 and 1/2), the remaining details B to F show ground level at top of foundation block. Timber posts positioned into the ground are misleading on their strength grading. Sheet 2 Tie down The drawings are show the need for strong connections between each structural element from roof down to foundations. Examples shown show possible incremental steps for connecting building components, foundations to columns, floor, walls and roof. The main set of connection details show the use of steel straps, and timber cleats which join structural sections to maximise the shear force on nails. The detail showing cord and rope connections is misleading in its effectiveness and strength grading. I question the validity of the drawing showing additional tying down of the roof in anticipation of strong winds. Sheet 3 Bracing The details suggest nailed connections. None of the drawings presented show physical construction details or give technical specifications for materials proposed. Diagonal bracing position is shown on vertical panels and roof elevation. There is no horizontal diagonal bracing shown to resist building twist at eaves level. Wire and used re-bar bracing needs to show connections to frame otherwise it will not work. Nail timber and galvanised steel straps is misleading. Sheet 4 Strong joints Nails only work in shear, not pull out (as far as I am aware there is no benefit of putting nails in at an angle, it just adds to the possibility of splitting the timber). Cut timber joints are shown in simple details, these joints require a more advanced degree of carpentry skill to avoid weakening the cross section of the timber frame. There is a minimum timer size for using cut joints in structural timber components. Sheet 5 A good roof Simple to follow details. No purlin to rafter connection details. Nails shows regular wire nails as an option, this is incorrect, not too weak Sheet 6 site your house safely Taken from multiple shelter IEC documents. Sheet 7 Simple shape will keep your house safe As sheet 6 Sheet 8 Be prepared Preparedness planning based on household knowledge. Needs to be part of a community approach in reality. Good to indicate what should be known. The details presented are missing: Floor construction details, the post construction suggests that the floor is raised above ground necessitating a suspended timber floor construction with boarded floor. There are no wall construction details, the post construction suggests a sheet construction is necessary for walls. Many of the bracing details will not be compatible with a sheet wall construction

- IEC is technically accurate with some smaller discrepancies. For example foundation in images A-F are different than foundation shape on the image showing concrete foundations just below. It is really good to see that several different options of foundations were explored the same with tie down methods and also used in response by beneficiaries and NGOs.

Potential Risk

- Construction details and material specifications for all building components. Wall and floor details. The position of jointed structural components. Jointed timber components have to be positioned to avoid creating weak planes within the building structure. That means care must be taken to avoid joints being positioned in the same plane. People could choose to focus on one element of the structure and forget another which would have a dramatic impact on how the house performed in the event of a storm, for instance building the timber frame with posts below the ground and focussing on the roof construction leaving the potential for a weakening foundation structure which will fail and destroy all other investments. There needs to be some information that shows priorities for investment, and or reduction of all components for a more economical less resistant house.

- Consider re-drawing few images

Additional Explanation

No, it needs additional explanation

Unsure

Yes, it is enough

Rollout

Shared Nationally in the Shelter Cluster and widely circulated / used in shelter projects.

Not known

If i remember correctly this IEC was accompanied with several trainings as well as the audio messages, T-shirts and banners with messages and several organizations providing shelter assistance used this IEC as well as trainings developed by Cluster.

Overall

This is a classic piece of IEC material that was used widely in the Philippines. The technical content was well considered however it also demonstrates that classic problem of too many messages and too technical a presentation.

The IEC indicates a full range of structural solutions for shelter/house construction from emergency response to full house. There are insufficient details to enable either a family or an organisation to design a reconstruction programme. The IEC needs to be supported with a full scale PASSA type community approach to be fully useful.

Very good and influential IEC. It would be good to make it available to be adjusted for other context (have just images that can be selected and recycled)

3 reviews

Review #1

Adaptability

Text Clarity

Context Appropriateness

Technical Complexity

Image Clarity

Technical Accuracy

Potential Risk

Additional Explanation

No, it needs additional explanation

Rollout

Shared Nationally in the Shelter Cluster and widely circulated / used in shelter projects.

Overall

Review #2

Adaptability

Text Clarity

Context Appropriateness

Technical Complexity

Image Clarity

Technical Accuracy

Potential Risk

Additional Explanation

Unsure

Rollout

Not known

Overall

Review #3

Adaptability

- Appropriate for any context with similar typology and areas exposed to high wind.

Text Clarity

- Text is clear

Context Appropriateness

Technical Complexity

Image Clarity

Technical Accuracy

Potential Risk

- Consider re-drawing few images

Additional Explanation

Yes, it is enough

Rollout

Overall

Very good and influential IEC. It would be good to make it available to be adjusted for other context (have just images that can be selected and recycled)