It's not a Concrete Block Foundation DI. It's a DI for concrete block (CMU) and concrete construction. As in, the whole house was built with concrete.
-
Welcome to TalkWeather! We see you lurking around TalkWeather! Take the extra step and join us today to view attachments, see less ads and maybe even join the discussion. CLICK TO JOIN TALKWEATHER
tornado examiner
Member
Oh. I'm guessing that could be a bit of weird Di for violent tornadoes.
It's very much worth noting the church was already observed by Tim Marshall, the ASCE, HAAG, SEI, and AMS and their consensus was 170 mph, so a re-rating would require some pretty monumental "going against the grain" by NWS Paducah.
Here's the full paper
Here's the full paper
Last edited:
tornado examiner
Member
Ah…well…they’re using the wrong DI in retrospect. So, maybe it doesn’t count too much?
Very true. However, it's also unlikely any of these institutions will come back and amend their 170 mph estimate, so it'll be up to the meteorologists at NWS Paducah to override it. Will they do it?
I think it's safe to say, while I'm optimistic, I still have a healthy amount of skepticism about this whole situation. Is one small, mostly irrelevant office's decision to go against precedent and rate a tornado appropriately going to lead to a reversal of a whole decade's worth of terrible judgements? Not on its own I don't think. We still have a ways to go. The new EF scale is still years away as well. Vigilance is the key.
Union
Member
Im quite certain this is saying what the *minimum* windspeed of a religious building fully collapsed is, so what was at the time the LB max DOD. They said 170, the current (not 100% up to date but the most recent the public has), is 175mph. Still pretty accurate.
tornado examiner
Member
So no EF5 still…
Excellent point. This is how NWS Paducah should approach it if/when they upgrade as well. Again, seriously, well done.
This isn't the one with the rusted bolts is it @buckeye05?
Union
Member
The number that correlates with the *lowest* possible windspeed needed to completely destroy a CARB does not equal the windspeed needed to destroy a CARB with significantly better construction. Also with information known to us that is newer than the Marshall paper, First Presbyterian is a very solid EF5-plausible indicator.
Union
Member
Based on the imagery from Tim Marshall, yes some bolts did seem to be rusted but I'm not sure this significantly affected the building integrity
Attachments
Jacob Aden
Member
I understand why everybody is talking about Mayfield, but I think the much bigger offender getting underrated was that Bowling Green storm. Especially considering he dividing line between violent and strong on the EF scale. That is a tornado prime for re-evaluating
joshoctober16
Member
for now what we know about the religious building is this.
there are 2 types of religious buildings , and we have only seen a bit of the DOD from one.
also note some one ask how DI3 looks (for now) like its this.
joshoctober16
Member
after relooking at the source video i was sort of able to find more DOD for DI3 , sadly i couldnt find more DOD for any other DI.
however this is only for DOD number along with a bit of the damage description. (image slide part).
unsure what DOD9 is as the presentation scrolled to fast past it.
here is a shot of how it looks like.
again could only be seen in a few frames per second , so it was hard to see.
however this is only for DOD number along with a bit of the damage description. (image slide part).
unsure what DOD9 is as the presentation scrolled to fast past it.
here is a shot of how it looks like.
again could only be seen in a few frames per second , so it was hard to see.
Union
Member
This conversation is referencing CARB, which in the image you sent is partially incomplete like u said, I'm just going off what Nick Krasz has said about the (complete) DI, DODs and correlating windspeeds
Union
Member
Yeah lol the duplex that was swept away and rated EF2 was pretty rough, and that's not even to mention the completely collapsed duplex down the road that never got surveyed despite likely being EF4/170 damage (and that's only if you believe the swept duplex isn't worthy of EF4 for any reason already, it also did EF4 damage to an MBS that was actually rated as such for only an hour before being downgraded)
Yes I acknowledge this vehicle impact. But if you look at the video the physical distance between the vehicles starting location and the house it is literally a couple of meters.
I don't know what kind of speed it takes for a vehicle to completely slab a house - but you can go online and look at even some of the most horrific crashes of vehicles into homes where they are travelling 80-100mph+ and the houses are dented and damaged sure, but not slabbed. Using basic SUVAT equations, for a car to accelerate that much in such a short distance you would need around 3.1 million Newtons of Force (and that's not even to completely compromise the structure). If that was the force of the tornadic wind speeds I'm pretty sure the home would beyond swept regardless.
More realistically the vehicle impacted the home but the home and the car would then have been swept and thrown simultaneously. Just imagining mentally the proximity of the truck to the home I genuinely don't believe it would have compromised to the point you should dismiss the rest of the surroundings. Its clear the contextuals are supportive of EF5. So why ignore the obvious. EXP to below EXP to construction combined with UB context can result in an EF5 rating, in my personal opinion.