Pictures of My Machine Room (So Far)

On 16 Jun 2007 at 13:40, Teo Zenios wrote: I'm not sure that I parsed that statement right. Building with wood in an earthquake zone is far easier than building with brick and stone, at least given local codes. Were I to build a house with, say, brick, state earthquake building codes would require me to run rebar through the walls to ensure that they don't disintegrate during a temblor. Wood structures have a lot more "give" and if tied securely to the foundation (required by current code) will ride out most quakes with minimal damage (other than the nails popping out of the sheetrock and cracks showing in plaster). The quakes on the Pacific coast states would probably exact a much higher toll in property damage and human life if structures were constructed of masonry. Codes also require treated lumber where the structure is in contact with the ground or masonry. With adquate maintenance, there's no reason that a correctly-constructed wooden structures in most places shouldn't last several hundred years. Some of the warmer states have serious problems with insects, however. When it comes to adding on to or modifying a structure, it's hard to beat wood. Cheers, Chuck