The Number of Natural Disasters - Case Study Example

This point is made against the backdrop that in most cases of natural disasters such as earthquakes and tsunamis, almost all types of buildings collapse including short buildings and skyscrapers alike. What this teaches us that natural disasters perhaps have a worse effect or impact on building collapse. Having said this, it would also be appreciated that even when an ordinary building and skyscraper all fall, the impact that will be created in the two can never be said to be the same. This is because the extent of loss that will be recorded with the falling of a skyscraper in terms of lives and property will certainly be more than what will be recorded with a shorter building.

What this teaches is that as far as natural disasters as the cause of building collapse are concerned, it is important to ensure that areas that are noted to be disaster-prone will not be clustered with skyscrapers and other tall buildings. Using the 27 February 2010 Chile tsunami as an example, Palermo et al (2013) made a new revelation on the extent of resilience that different buildings endure in the case of natural disasters such as tsunamis. The outcome of the tsunami revealed that there are two major types of buildings which are engineered buildings and non-engineered buildings.

These categories are found in both high-rise buildings and shorter buildings. In the case of engineered residential buildings, natural disasters such as tsunamis are found to have very minimal impact. This is because such modern engineered buildings generally exhibit high levels of resilience to the disasters, being affected only in areas of non-structural components. On the other hand, not the same can be said of non-engineered buildings, especially residential buildings. This is because, with such buildings, the impacts of natural disasters are not only experienced with non-structural components but almost all aspects of the structural component of the building.

As expected, engineered buildings are found to be resistant to most forms of natural disasters because they incorporate the right forms of hydrodynamic forces and impulsive loadings which help to ensure that building failures and faults are minimized to the barest minimum. This confirms the important role that professional engineering plays in ensuring that buildings are generally protected against collapse due to the application of the right building principles. This also confirms the relationship between the impact of building collapse and building failures.

This is because where there is a higher risk of building failure the impact of collapse becomes very high.ConclusionIn conclusion, it will be reemphasized that just as with the case of design, reliance on technology could be abused when it comes to the loading of structures. This makes technology in the hands of less competent engineers a major risk when it comes to the cause of building collapse. This is because as much as the importance of advanced technology will be appreciated in contemporary construction, it is very important to draw a clear distinction between what is desirable and what is permissible.

What this implies is that engineers must always bring their competence to play when using advanced technology for the purpose of designing structures and actually building structures. As much as possible, it is important that the engineers will control technology rather than make technology control them in engaging in faulty design which results from design deficiency, and overloading of structures. When it comes to natural disasters, it has been noted that almost all types of buildings have a risk and stand the chance of collapse when there are natural disasters such as tsunamis, earthquakes, and volcanoes.

This, however, should not be a basis for natural disasters to always cause calamity to humankind. In effect, where emergency contingency plans have not been put in place, the building of high rise buildings should not be encouraged in disaster-prone areas.