{"id":527,"date":"2022-01-05T16:17:02","date_gmt":"2022-01-05T16:17:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cubipod.ohla-group.com\/laboratory-tests\/robustez-estructural\/"},"modified":"2025-10-29T16:02:36","modified_gmt":"2025-10-29T16:02:36","slug":"structural-robustness","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.cubipod.com\/en\/cubipod\/laboratory-tests\/structural-robustness\/","title":{"rendered":"Structural robustness"},"content":{"rendered":"\r\n
\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\r\n

Comparative drop tests were conducted to assess the structural robustness of Cubipod. These tests involved the freefall of prototypes using conventional 15 t. cubic blocks and 16 t. Cubipods. Two extreme drop tests were also carried out with satisfactory results. Blocks and Cubipods are massive pieces that can withstand falls from much greater heights than bulky<\/i> units.<\/p>\r\n

The drop and freefall tests on prototypes were carried out on reinforced-concrete platforms in the Port of Alicante (Spain) in March 2008. The same concrete was used to manufacture prototypes for the various drop tests. Cubipod prototypes withstood, without breaking, falls from heights 50% greater than conventional cubic blocks, and extreme Cubipod drops ranging fro m 8.5 m. to 9.5 m. were tested. The geometrical shape of Cubipod caused slight damage to the edges, which served to slow down the impact rate of the central body and reduce the degree of internal fracturing that causes the overall breakage of the piece. Therefore, the risk of a major failure in situ when handling and placing pieces is lower for Cubipod than for a conventional cubic block of the same size and made of the same concrete.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n
Cube<\/strong><\/td>\r\nCubipod<\/strong><\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n
<\/td>\r\n<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n<\/tbody>\r\n<\/table>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\t\t\t\t\t\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

\r\n