this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2025
278 points (80.6% liked)

Technology

71897 readers
5261 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Previously, a yield strength of 5,000 pounds per square inch (psi) was enough for concrete to be rated as “high strength,” with the best going up to 10,000 psi. The new UHPC can withstand 40,000 psi or more.

The greater strength is achieved by turning concrete into a composite material with the addition of steel or other fibers. These fibers hold the concrete together and prevent cracks from spreading throughout it, negating the brittleness. “Instead of getting a few large cracks in a concrete panel, you get lots of smaller cracks,” says Barnett. “The fibers give it more fracture energy.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Darrell_Winfield@lemmy.world 200 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Holy nothing burger, Batman!

First off, this article is from 2022, re-released to farm clicks from the current hype cycle.

Secondly, this is conjecture on top of conjecture. They discuss that we can't know the current damage from satellite, and Iran down plays the damage. Then they go on to say "concrete is strong and can be stronger".

Articles like this annoy me. It's all based on lots of unsubstantiated claims, and then one guy's theoretical research. We don't know the strength of the bombs. We don't know the strength of Iran's bunkers. We don't know how much damage was done. None of this has changed. I doubt we'll ever really know. But throw whatever political spin on it you want, and now you've got a click worthy news article.

[–] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 37 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

There's also the fact that the majority of Iran's nuclear facilities were built before UHPC, the concrete discussed in the article, was available!

[–] Saleh@feddit.org 8 points 14 hours ago

In the late 2000s, for instance, rumors circulated about a bunker in Iran struck by a bunker-buster bomb. The bomb had failed to penetrate—and remained embedded in—the surface of the bunker, presumably until the occupants called in a bomb-disposal team. Rather than smashing through the concrete, the bomb had been unexpectedly stopped dead. The reason was not hard to guess: Iran was a leader in the new technology of Ultra High Performance Concrete, or UHPC, and its latest concrete advancements were evidently too much for standard bunker busters.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fordow_Fuel_Enrichment_Plant

Construction on the facility started in 2006, but the existence of the enrichment plant was only disclosed to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) by Iran on 21 September 2009,[6][7] after the site became known to Western intelligence services. Western officials strongly condemned Iran for not disclosing the site earlier;

Seems to fall into the same timeframe.

[–] Darrell_Winfield@lemmy.world 8 points 23 hours ago

I was suspicious of that as well, but I'm not knowledgeable enough on that subject to speak on it, so didn't include it. But I doubt any country can build that extensive of a nuclear factory in so few years.

[–] tyler@programming.dev 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I thought we do know the depth of the bunkers though. And that American bombs can’t go that deep, even multiple of them

[–] Darrell_Winfield@lemmy.world -4 points 23 hours ago (3 children)

I can't speak to that aspect. But I firmly believe that if our military planned and carried out this strike, then we had very good evidence that their bunkers were at a depth these ordinance could reach.

[–] Coyote_sly@lemmy.world 19 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago)

Consider who actually makes this decision, in this case. It's highly likely our intelligence assessment here is very accurate orr flat out denied by the dipshits actually making the call if it's not what they want to hear.

Like they did publicly. On this conflict. To the press.

[–] Saleh@feddit.org 9 points 14 hours ago

The US intelligence community kept asserting that Iran is not pursuing a nuclear weapon as late as Spring 2025.

Nothing of this was based on consistent intelligence.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago

Why would we bother with that level of analysis just to distract people from ICE raids?