Have the worlds biggest super computers ever been used to try to figure out new concrete mixtures for roads/buildings?

[Space Lynx]

I know of only a few use case scenarios that super computers have been used for, mainly climate modeling, etc.

I was wondering with that kind of compute power, would it be possible to code a program to utilize all that power to test out various plants/herbs and traditional concrete mixtures, to see if you can make something more long lasting or solid (I don't know transportation terminology here sorry)... but I think you are getting my overall question here.

Or so super computers simply not work this way? Any thoughts at all welcome, was just thinking about this tonight and curious... what if we could solve all the road repair problems overnight, what if it is some sort of combination we simply haven't tried, I know things have been tried, but a super computer would be able to try everything... rather quickly I imagine. There are so many variables at play, I wonder if its just something humans have been missing... some ingredient we are missing to make roads withstand the freezing and unfreezing weather, the giant semi weight, etc.

There has to be some kind of combo of things from the periodic table of elements or plants or something we are missing... and since the variables are infinite, do you think there is any kind of coding that could be created to figure this out? We figure out concrete we kind of solve climate change, cause a green long lasting concrete would also allow for the expansion of other green energies, etc.

 

[plastiscɧ]

well i am not a construction engineer or architect. but in germany research is being done on concrete that consists of a different composition (e.g. carbon in part) in order to be more durable and climate neutrality will become the main focus.

sooner or later, the sand from which concrete is largely made will run out.

you don't need a supercomputer to figure this out. but i'm very curious to hear what the next speakers have to say, because one thing is for sure: we're all learning something new here every day. and other countries are also pursuing partly different strategies to make concrete even "smarter".

 

[Space Lynx]

well i am not a construction engineer or architect. but in germany research is being done on concrete that consists of a different composition (e.g. carbon in part) in order to be more durable and climate neutrality will become the main focus.

sooner or later, the sand from which concrete is largely made will run out.

you don't need a supercomputer to figure this out. but i'm very curious to hear what the next speakers have to say, because one thing is for sure: we're all learning something new here every day. and other countries are also pursuing partly different strategies to make concrete even "smarter".

pretty sure I read one time that ancient Rome mixed some kind of plant in with their concrete, which is part of the reason it was so strong, but that plant/knowledge have been lost to history. I don't know if that is true or not... but yes concrete/soil based transportation is not sustainable unless we figure out something soon.

that is why I was thinking hyperloop might not be a bad idea, everything has plastic shielding in a hyperloop, so no wind/rust/water entropy, much longer lifespan. but no one seems interested in that other than Richard Branson billionaire, and I don't know how serious he is taking it. /shrug

 

[plastiscɧ]

pretty sure I read one time that ancient Rome mixed some kind of plant in with their concrete

it was not a plant but volcanic ash that produced a special strength together with salt water.

the video is german but the researchers of the university of california have solved this "mystery" maybe you can post an english video.
then it will be better understandable for almost everyone here...

 

[bonehead123]

Well, think of it along these terms:

1) Don't you think that if we could cure cancer/diabetes/alzheimers or any number of other serious illnesses, we would have ? We COULD have, but then big pharma would stand to lose gazillions of $$, and we can't have that now, can we ?

2) We COULD have had electric cars/trucks/planes ect 40+ years ago, but the petrol czars and car makers would have also lost gazillions of $$ too, and we surely can't have that now can we ?

Soooo, coming up with some super-duper, eco-friendly road surface materials would put a hurtin on many other big name industries, therefore those options will go unutilized, at least until it becomes absolutely necessary, and the above mentioned industries can find a way to profit from it......

suks but it's the truth

 

[Space Lynx]

Well, think of it along these terms:

1) Don't you think that if we could cure cancer/diabetes/alzheimers or any number of other serious illnesses, we would have ? We COULD have, but then big pharma would stand to lose gazillions of $$, and we can't have that now, can we ?

2) We COULD have had electric cars/trucks/planes ect 40+ years ago, but the petrol czars and car makers would have also lost gazillions of $$ too, and we surely can't have that now can we ?

Soooo, coming up with some super-duper, eco-friendly road surface materials would put a hurtin on many other big name industries, therefore those options will go unutilized, at least until it becomes absolutely necessary, and the above mentioned industries can find a way to profit from it......

suks but it's the truth

I disagree with your assessment, the reason electric cars never took off was range issues, and the Model-T just obliterated them. Even in 2022 the reason I bought a Corolla instead of a Nissan Leaf, was range issues. 127 mile range is not much, and those batteries will need replaced every 7-10 years, and the mining for those batteries is just about as bad as mining oil, less carbon I admit, but still.

As far as medicine goes, I agree mostly, but also medicine is such a massive field, if some random genius in a random country figured something out, I am pretty sure it would be hard to stop that kind of momentum, especially if said scientist posted their findings in detail and the word got out.

 

[bonehead123]

I disagree with your assessment, the reason electric cars never took off was range issues, and the Model-T just obliterated them. Even in 2022 the reason I bought a Corolla instead of a Nissan Leaf, was range issues. 127 mile range is not much, and those batteries will need replaced every 7-10 years, and the mining for those batteries is just about as bad as mining oil, less carbon I admit, but still.

As far as medicine goes, I agree mostly, but also medicine is such a massive field, if some random genius in a random country figured something out, I am pretty sure it would be hard to stop that kind of momentum, especially if said scientist posted their findings in detail and the word got out.

And the reason those batteries have range issues ? Because the car companies and the petrol czars refused to allow the necessary research to take place to make better batteries a reality.. same reason for the lack of medical progress.... if somebody, ANYBODY, comes up with cure for any serious diseases, big pharma immediately crushes it, and also writes some moar big checks to the scumbuckets in Washington to make sure it never reaches the FDA for approval....

Hell, we had rechargeable batteries in the early 60's that took us to the moon & back, but no real significant advances since then......except for maybe in laptops & cell phones

 

[robot zombie]

Well, think of it along these terms:

1) Don't you think that if we could cure cancer/diabetes/alzheimers or any number of other serious illnesses, we would have ? We COULD have, but then big pharma would stand to lose gazillions of $$, and we can't have that now, can we ?

2) We COULD have had electric cars/trucks/planes ect 40+ years ago, but the petrol czars and car makers would have also lost gazillions of $$ too, and we surely can't have that now can we ?

Soooo, coming up with some super-duper, eco-friendly road surface materials would put a hurtin on many other big name industries, therefore those options will go unutilized, at least until it becomes absolutely necessary, and the above mentioned industries can find a way to profit from it......

suks but it's the truth

People like to argue that the American way drives innovation by pushing competition. But I think that what ends up happening is that all of the 'athletes' quietly agree to do the minimum they can to still be considered 'mobile.' They kinda figured out that it's not about actually shooting way past everyone, but doing the NASCAR thing where everybody stays in a cluster and all of the fans get excited for the car that's nosing 3 feet in front of the rest. Just watchin em go around like that for over an hour at a time. Why else do we get a new version of each model car every year with just slightly tweaked features and maybe a new line of colors and aesthetic accents? That's all they have to do to keep selling them. They need to sell a new car, so they do things that make it a little newer and people trade in their 2-year old, half-paid vehicle with good mileage in to get it. Doing more starts seeming nonsensical for them because further innovation adds further cost and it turns out the profit scaling on research spending is atrocious. The more you spend there, the less you can make on the finished product. Also worth noting, how good your innovation is won't matter if you can't market it. Gotta spend the marketing money regardless. The research? Ehhhh.... what's marketing for then?

Now, maybe just maybe you go all in and come up with something truly game-changing. That's reputation, market hegemony. Or your quick death, because a lot of it won't be your money and the true certainty of a return is nonexistent when dealing with a fittingly ambitious idea. Doing good things often doesn't pay all that well, sadly. Sometimes you have to spend a long time working and yet producing nothing at all. That's why a lot of times the real way-pavers are simply people of passion. We built a society that rewards profit-driven actions above pretty much anything else a person could do with their time and energy and still, we wonder why things stay like this. You have to be willing to give that all up to even see fit to think differently. But then, you won't have the money to do anything. So you play the game, and at some point at least some of your efforts to innovate will be absorbed into that big machine. Or so it seems for most people out there. It all hinges on capital. To have capital, you gotta adopt profit-motives. And to adopt profit-motives, you have to shed some of the values that compel you to innovate in the first place. Human behavior is like water downhill.

 

[Deleted member 24505]

Arabs control a lot of oil. A lot of countries suck Arab dick because they want the oil. UAE is a powerful country because of this, so has a lot of control over the production and sale of oil. this country does not want people to stop buying it. Without oil Arabs would be in trouble, unless they can sell sand. Until oil has gone it will continue to be sold and used.

Don't you think that if we could cure cancer/diabetes/alzheimers or any number of other serious illnesses, we would have ? We COULD have, but then big pharma would stand to lose gazillions of $$, and we can't have that now, can we ?
There will never be a "cure" for cancer. There is too much money and jobs in the "cancer cure" industry for them ever to release a cure to the public even if they did find one.

 

[Space Lynx]

And the reason those batteries have range issues ? Because the car companies and the petrol czars refused to allow the necessary research to take place to make better batteries a reality.. same reason for the lack of medical progress.... if somebody, ANYBODY, comes up with cure for any serious diseases, big pharma immediately crushes it, and also writes some moar big checks to the scumbuckets in Washington to make sure it never reaches the FDA for approval....

Hell, we had rechargeable batteries in the early 60's that took us to the moon & back, but no real significant advances since then......except for maybe in laptops & cell phones

I mostly agree with you, but would need evidence that battery research was directly targeted and hindered... I know there is evidence that Congress was bribed basically to make sure corn syrup and sugar did not let Stevia compete in the 70's or 80's whenever that was, so I am not saying I disagree with you, cause yes our situation as a society has been shit for a long time. I still would like evidence though before agreeing fully with that statement.


Let's try to get back on topic though if we can mates... I don't want this thread to get closed down, cause I genuinely think it is an interesting question, I want someone who knows coding to answer me if possible... cause maybe my question isn't even valid if I knew how coding works for a super computer?

lol I don't know

@R-T-B you are a coder if I remember correct, thoughts?

 

[witkazy]

Short answer is no cos it is bad for business

 

[Deleted member 24505]

There are far better and more money making things to use Super Computer cycles for that concrete.

 

[Space Lynx]

Short answer is no cos it is bad for business

I am sorry but I just don't buy this answer, there are some universities that have access to super computers, I find it hard to believe big corporation bought them all off to not study it.

There are far better and more money making things to use Super Computer cycles for that concrete.

Perhaps, but what is the point of climate modeling, to predict our doom? Why not use that compute to prevent the doom.

 

[Deleted member 24505]

I am sorry but I just don't buy this answer, there are some universities that have access to super computers, I find it hard to believe big corporation bought them all off to not study it.



Perhaps, but what is the point of climate modeling, to predict our doom? Why not use that compute to prevent the doom.

Because my friend, we are doomed to destroy ourselves. We are hate filled destructive, vindictive greedy beings. Look at something as daft as hate filled messages because someone has a Intel chip and the other person a Amd for example. Why does such a simple thing cause so much vitriol? because it is human nature. I wish there was a "cure" for this but i fear it is too late. We are already on the brink of going too far with the destruction of our atmosphere and i just cannot see it stopping. Will the millions of people give up their cars, even if told they had to do it tomorrow or that would be it for our planet. Ho many of them millions would be still blindly driving their cars without a care in the world? Too many, which says it all.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Because my friend, we are doomed to destroy ourselves. We are hate filled destructive, vindictive greedy beings. Look at something as daft as hate filled messages because someone has a Intel chip and the other person a Amd for example. Why does such a simple thing cause so much vitriol? because it is human nature. I wish there was a "cure" for this but i fear it is too late. We are already on the brink of going too far with the destruction of our atmosphere and i just cannot see it stopping. Will the millions of people give up their cars, even if told they had to do it tomorrow or that would be it for our planet. Ho many of them millions would be still blindly driving their cars without a care in the world? Too many, which says it all.

And plan B is?, not sure how you got so negative but as a matter of fact loads of research has gone into reducing the carbon footprint of concrete, increase it's durability etc, I saw something about self healing concrete the other day.

And I think you're short sighted, yours only perspective about everything clearly has you confused, there's over 30% of all co2 emissions each year are from concrete.

 

[Space Lynx]

Because my friend, we are doomed to destroy ourselves. We are hate filled destructive, vindictive greedy beings. Look at something as daft as hate filled messages because someone has a Intel chip and the other person a Amd for example. Why does such a simple thing cause so much vitriol? because it is human nature. I wish there was a "cure" for this but i fear it is too late. We are already on the brink of going too far with the destruction of our atmosphere and i just cannot see it stopping. Will the millions of people give up their cars, even if told they had to do it tomorrow or that would be it for our planet. Ho many of them millions would be still blindly driving their cars without a care in the world? Too many, which says it all.

I understand your pessimism, but regardless, I do my best to focus on the positive with this stuff now. That road leads only to headaches and not feeling well. Try to stay positive mate!

And plan B is?, not sure how you got so negative but as a matter of fact loads of research has gone into reducing the carbon footprint of concrete, increase it's durability etc, I saw something about self healing concrete the other day.

And I think you're short sighted, yours only perspective about everything clearly has you confused, there's over 30% of all co2 emissions each year are from concrete.

There is a lot of hope for the future imo as you just mentioned, a lot of innovation, a lot of young people majoring in STEM that want to live in a better world, etc.

 

[R-T-B]

@R-T-B you are a coder if I remember correct, thoughts?

Never coded for a supercomputer, but my understanding is it works well for highly parrelizable problems that can be batched across multiple machines or cpu threads (that form said super computer).

I am unsure how concrete forumulations fair there.

 

[plastiscɧ]

I am unsure how concrete forumulations fair there.

i think this only makes sense in connection with material specifications that are to provide scaled results, such as the swinging of a skyscraper during a heavy earthquake, perhaps.
this is why i wrote i am curoius about the speakers of other nations with different experiences and expectations to the concrete.

 

[Frick]

The biggest obstacle is that computers IRL don't work like they do for Tony Stark.

 

[Shihab]

I think you're putting the cart before the horse here. You need to construct your model(s) first before coding them.

For climate, we have had a conceptual understanding of climate processes before we started simulating it. We have modelled fluid flow, water phase changes, GHGs generation and decay, heat and energy transfer, etc. We have equation(s) for energy/mass balance, and we figured out techniques to solve them. Some of those techniques require a significant amount of repetition and iteration, and this is where computers come to play.

So, first you need to conceptualize how you'd go about solving the problem you're looking at, convert this concept into equation or set of equations, figure out how to solve them numerically (assuming that you have no better choice), THEN you look into whether you need a Cray or can simply run this model on a chromebook's browser.

That said, I don't believe, in this case at least, computers would be the silver bullet you're expecting. Can't say much about the chemical part of this problem, but from what little I recall of undergrad days, wear modelling of structural material is nearly-always carried out physically (i.e. physically make your mix/pavement/beams/whatever and impose forces in the lab). Can't say you can't simulate it numerically, but I'd wager you'll still be limited by how fast you can do the physical tests (for verification/calibration).

 

[TheLostSwede]

No need for a super computer, this woman has figured out how you can grow cement.

Ginger Krieg Dosier - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Biomason: Revolutionizing Cement with Biotechnology

Biomason builds with carbon, the same way nature does. We use microorganisms to grow sustainable structural cement materials for the construction industry. Our technology harnesses the power of biology to reinvent traditional portland cement offering a stronger and CO2 neutral alternative.

biomason.com

 

[Frick]

A recent article about roman concrete:

Noblewoman’s tomb reveals new secrets of ancient Rome’s highly durable concrete

It's a combo of unique volcanic aggregate and unusual chemical interactions over millennia.

arstechnica.com

And here's a paper on it (full version paywalled):

Computer modeling offers a precisely controlled environment for studying material
composition and its relationships with structural performance. Such modeling stands to
play a prominent role in the development of new concrete materials and their structural
applications, complimenting results obtained through laboratory testing. Modeling
supports the necessary shift from materials development based on empiricism to that
based on the materials science of cement-based composites. Variations in the material
composition, production processes, and exposure conditions (and the effects of such
variations on life-cycle performance) can be simulated for large intervals on the length
and time scales. This chapter highlights general concepts and trends in computer
modeling of concrete materials and structures, with coverage of some of the research
needs and challenges.

I have no idea to what extent computer models are used. A computer can't just cycle through stuff though because all a computer does is measuring voltages, so the physical properties of the various elements has to be translated to something the computer can understand, and that is no small task (the preview of the paper ends as it gets into that). And sooner or later you have to put it to a physical test and see how accurate the model was (the paper speaks of "validated models"). And if something is found that maybe could be used to improve concrete, the entire industry has to be taken into consideration. How difficult is it to implement? How much more expensive will the concrete be, and the production of it?

And as everything else in life, it's a lot more complicated than "just add X to it". Computer models help here, but the challanges (I assume anyway, without actually knowing) lies more in crafting accurate models than just raw performance.

 

[xtreemchaos]

no because wet stuff would cause a short sorry couldnt help myself.

 

[KLiKzg]

I know of only a few use case scenarios that super computers have been used for, mainly climate modeling, etc.

I was wondering with that kind of compute power, would it be possible to code a program to utilize all that power to test out various plants/herbs and traditional concrete mixtures, to see if you can make something more long lasting or solid (I don't know transportation terminology here sorry)... but I think you are getting my overall question here.

Or so super computers simply not work this way? Any thoughts at all welcome, was just thinking about this tonight and curious... what if we could solve all the road repair problems overnight, what if it is some sort of combination we simply haven't tried, I know things have been tried, but a super computer would be able to try everything... rather quickly I imagine. There are so many variables at play, I wonder if its just something humans have been missing... some ingredient we are missing to make roads withstand the freezing and unfreezing weather, the giant semi weight, etc.

There has to be some kind of combo of things from the periodic table of elements or plants or something we are missing... and since the variables are infinite, do you think there is any kind of coding that could be created to figure this out? We figure out concrete we kind of solve climate change, cause a green long lasting concrete would also allow for the expansion of other green energies, etc.

Can it be programmed? Yes, it can.
Would it be programmed? Probably not.
Why? Simply, no interest in it.

How you can change?
1. Write to your (or several) professors on University, maybe they can pick the idea into a project. They certainly got some computer power on their own Uni to do so.
2. If the professors do not have enough processor power (or GPU power), they can always use something like WCG or TN-GRID & propose a project on their network.
But you can also suggest to make their project as low heat-absorbent as possible. So that it does not influence the climate so much, as black roads do.

Also, note that one version of concrete is not going to cut it. There are different climates in Mexico & Cali, compared to Canada & Siberia.
So different mixtures need to be made, for different climates.

 

[Vayra86]

I know of only a few use case scenarios that super computers have been used for, mainly climate modeling, etc.

I was wondering with that kind of compute power, would it be possible to code a program to utilize all that power to test out various plants/herbs and traditional concrete mixtures, to see if you can make something more long lasting or solid (I don't know transportation terminology here sorry)... but I think you are getting my overall question here.

Or so super computers simply not work this way? Any thoughts at all welcome, was just thinking about this tonight and curious... what if we could solve all the road repair problems overnight, what if it is some sort of combination we simply haven't tried, I know things have been tried, but a super computer would be able to try everything... rather quickly I imagine. There are so many variables at play, I wonder if its just something humans have been missing... some ingredient we are missing to make roads withstand the freezing and unfreezing weather, the giant semi weight, etc.

There has to be some kind of combo of things from the periodic table of elements or plants or something we are missing... and since the variables are infinite, do you think there is any kind of coding that could be created to figure this out? We figure out concrete we kind of solve climate change, cause a green long lasting concrete would also allow for the expansion of other green energies, etc.

This might be an eye opener. Sometimes its brutally simple, or a matter of trade offs:

Wood vs. Concrete in Construction: Pros and Cons of Each

Wood is lighter and is easy to work with, long-lasting, and results in less thermal bridging. Concrete, on the other hand, allows for the design of resilient and robust buildings.

www.builderspace.com

Note comments on engineered wood. Composites. Etc.

If you are curious about new materials/composites studies:

Materials science - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Rest assured simulations are used and ran on supercomputers for the above!

People like to argue that the American way drives innovation by pushing competition. But I think that what ends up happening is that all of the 'athletes' quietly agree to do the minimum they can to still be considered 'mobile.' They kinda figured out that it's not about actually shooting way past everyone, but doing the NASCAR thing where everybody stays in a cluster and all of the fans get excited for the car that's nosing 3 feet in front of the rest. Just watchin em go around like that for over an hour at a time. Why else do we get a new version of each model car every year with just slightly tweaked features and maybe a new line of colors and aesthetic accents? That's all they have to do to keep selling them. They need to sell a new car, so they do things that make it a little newer and people trade in their 2-year old, half-paid vehicle with good mileage in to get it. Doing more starts seeming nonsensical for them because further innovation adds further cost and it turns out the profit scaling on research spending is atrocious. The more you spend there, the less you can make on the finished product. Also worth noting, how good your innovation is won't matter if you can't market it. Gotta spend the marketing money regardless. The research? Ehhhh.... what's marketing for then?

Now, maybe just maybe you go all in and come up with something truly game-changing. That's reputation, market hegemony. Or your quick death, because a lot of it won't be your money and the true certainty of a return is nonexistent when dealing with a fittingly ambitious idea. Doing good things often doesn't pay all that well, sadly. Sometimes you have to spend a long time working and yet producing nothing at all. That's why a lot of times the real way-pavers are simply people of passion. We built a society that rewards profit-driven actions above pretty much anything else a person could do with their time and energy and still, we wonder why things stay like this. You have to be willing to give that all up to even see fit to think differently. But then, you won't have the money to do anything. So you play the game, and at some point at least some of your efforts to innovate will be absorbed into that big machine. Or so it seems for most people out there. It all hinges on capital. To have capital, you gotta adopt profit-motives. And to adopt profit-motives, you have to shed some of the values that compel you to innovate in the first place. Human behavior is like water downhill.

Diminishing returns might also fit on this whole perception of the world. Maybe, just maybe... we are reaching a point where progress in one area counters the progress in another. Where R&D now serves the final few % of progress thats still left, making it progressively less attractive to keep moving forward. Look at CPU and semicon nodes... its getting borderline retarded for those few extra percent of perf or power use. Marketing carries that now, to keep us buying, but ten year old chips work just the same for most. The real problem is that we keep buying, wanting more. We have been conditioned that way for generations, cradle to grave. Its not strange every company is caught up in the same rat race.

When we collectively start realizing and acting upon 'enough is enough', is the moment we can enforce systemic change to hypercapitalism that is way past expiration date. The new keyword I think is not growth, but sustainability alongside much slower progress. We need to slow down and do less of everything, refine what we have and start talking about global management of growth and decline.

This requires a less competitive and more collaborative approach. .... .... Yeah.