From 81f9e4919134cfd43ec57437c69f143f269667d4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: phoebe jenkins <pjenkins@tula-health.com>
Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2024 02:06:25 -0400
Subject: lil fixes and appendix 1 to communists must

---
 extra/communists_must.tex | 128 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 127 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

(limited to 'extra/communists_must.tex')

diff --git a/extra/communists_must.tex b/extra/communists_must.tex
index 89d2af6..9cd2acf 100644
--- a/extra/communists_must.tex
+++ b/extra/communists_must.tex
@@ -454,6 +454,132 @@ I have so far limited myself to the present period, but I would like to make one
 
 \clearpage
 \section*{8}
-\fancyhead[LE]{\textsc{Communists Must Give Revolutionary Leadership in Culture (1965)}} \fancyhead[RO]{\textit{8888888888}}
+\fancyhead[LE]{\textsc{Communists Must Give Rev. Leadership in Culture (1965)}} \fancyhead[RO]{\textit{8888888888}}
 
 If the bourgeoisie could keep control indefinitely of the world's most productive economies, the U.S. and West Europe, then all cultural leadership, no matter how revolutionary, would come to nothing.
+
+\section*{Appendix \textsc{i}}
+\fancyhead[LE]{\textsc{Communists Must Give Rev. Leadership in Culture (1965)}} \fancyhead[RO]{\textit{Appendix \textsc{I}}}
+
+The-present Soviet housing program, using automated production of prefabricated concrete components in 440 plants,  was started on a large scale in 1953, and by 1960 was producing about 3,000,000 dwelling units yearly, more per capita than any other country. The program is thus proven in practice. It is the most efficient mass housing program in production in the world today.
+
+%ref
+The Soviet program's efficiency is not a matter of having the least absolute cost, or requiring the least initial investment. A program which used tents would be much cheaper, but tents give very little performance for their low cost, as table \ref{capbs} details.
+
+Efficiency is giving the most performance for the least cost. The Soviet system builds a 300 sq. ft. apartment, which performs as the table details, for \$1,500, the cost in the U.S. of an average garage. The unit cost is proven reasonable in practice.
+
+%ref
+Maciunas' system (not in production) requires a developed chemical industry and a unit cost 10 to 15 per cent higher than that of the Soviet system, but is even more efficient, as table \ref{capbs} demonstrates. A 300 sq. ft. unit can be transported on a one-ton truck, while the Soviet system would require seven 5-ton truck-trailers to transport each dwelling unit. 
+
+\newcolumntype{C}{>{\centering}p{2cm}}
+\newcolumntype{I}{>{\small}r<{\hskip 0.25cm}}
+\begin{sidewaystable}
+\begin{tabular}{ I | C | C | C | C | C | p{2cm} }
+\textsc{Objectives} & tent & \small Levitt house & \small Fuller's Wichita house & \small Fuller's geodesic dome & \small Soviet housing system & \small Maciunas system \\\midrule 
+Protection from rain  & yes & yes & yes & yes & yes & yes \\
+\ldots vapor & no & no & no & no & yes & yes \\
+\ldots dust & no & no & no & no & no & yes \\
+\ldots head \& cold & no & yes & yes & yes & yes & yes \\
+\ldots sunlight  & yes & yes & yes & no & yes & yes \\
+\ldots sound & no & no & no & no & yes & yes \\\midrule
+Servicing: traffic \& communication  & yes & yes & yes & yes & yes & yes \\
+\ldots temperature control & no & yes & yes & yes & yes & yes \\
+\ldots light \& air control & no & no & no & no & no & yes \\
+\ldots storage facilities & no & yes & no & no & yes & yes \\
+\ldots hygiene  & no & no & yes & yes & no & yes \\
+\end{tabular} 
+\caption{Comparative Analysis of Prefabricated Building Systems \textsc{i}: Workability}
+\label{capbsw}
+\end{sidewaystable}
+
+\begin{sidewaystable}
+\begin{tabular}{ I | C | C | C | C | C | p{2cm} }
+\textsc{Objectives} & tent & \small Levitt house & \small Fuller's Wichita house & \small Fuller's geodesic dome & \small Soviet housing system & \small Maciunas system \\\midrule 
+minimum use of material & yes & no  & yes  & yes & no  & yes \\
+use of abundantly available material & yes  & yes & no  & yes  & yes  & yes (except alum.) \\\midrule
+minimum number of components & yes  & no & no  & yes  & yes  & yes  \\
+simple method of fabrication & yes & no & no  & yes  & yes  & yes \\
+simple tooling requirements  & yes  & yes & no  & yes  & yes  & yes \\
+adaptability to automated fabrication  & yes & no  & yes  & yes  & yes  & yes \\\midrule
+minimum use of labor on site  & yes & no  & yes  & yes  & yes  & yes \\
+more productive use of labor in plants  & yes & no & no  & yes  & yes  & yes \\
+use of unskilled labor on site  & yes & no & no  & yes & no  & yes \\\midrule
+light and well packaged  & yes & no  & yes  & yes & no  & yes \\
+building weight per m\textsuperscript{2} of floor area & 0.5kg & & & 8kg & 1,150kg & 30kg \\\midrule
+speedy and simple erection & yes & no  & yes  & yes  & yes  & yes \\
+no heavy equipment required & yes  & yes & yes  & yes & no  & yes \\\midrule
+permanency of materials& no & no  & yes  & yes  & yes (except wood) & yes \\
+efficiency of insulation& no & no & no & no & no  & yes \\
+washability of all surfaces & yes & no  & yes  & yes & no  & yes \\\midrule
+estimated cost per square foot & \$.50 & \$10 & \$30 & & \$6--7 & \$7.50\\
+\end{tabular} 
+\caption{Comparative Analysis of Prefabricated Building Systems \textsc{ii}: Economy}
+\label{capbse}
+\end{sidewaystable}
+
+\begin{sidewaystable}
+\begin{tabular}{ I | C | C | C | C | C | p{2cm} }
+\textsc{Objectives} & tent & \small Levitt house & \small Fuller's Wichita house & \small Fuller's geodesic dome & \small Soviet housing system & \small Maciunas system \\\midrule 
+\textsc{Adaptability} & & & & & & \\\midrule
+function as residential & yes  & yes  & yes & no  & yes  & yes \\
+\ldots institutional& no & no & no  & yes  & yes  & yes \\
+\ldots industrial & no & no & no  & yes  & yes  & yes \\
+\ldots agricultural & yes & no & no  & yes & no  & yes \\\midrule
+flexibility in shape \& size of building& no & no & no & no  & yes  & yes \\
+\ldots climate changes& no & no & no & no & no  & yes \\
+\ldots dweller needs\slash habits& no & no & no & no & no  & yes \\
+\ldots topography and soil conditions & yes & no & no & no & no  & yes \\\midrule
+\textsc{Durability} & & & & & & \\\midrule
+resist aging due to rot& no & no  & yes  & yes  & yes  & yes \\
+\ldots termites& no & no  & yes  & yes  & yes  & yes \\
+\ldots discoloration& no & no  & yes  & yes  & yes  & yes \\
+\ldots corrosion& no & no  & yes  & yes & no  & yes \\\midrule
+resist hurricanes& no & no  & yes  & yes  & yes  & yes \\
+\ldots earthquakes & yes & no  & yes  & yes & no  & yes \\
+\ldots floods& no & no  & yes  & yes  & yes  & yes \\
+\ldots vandalism& no & no & no & no & no  & yes \\
+\end{tabular} 
+\caption{Comparative Analysis of Prefabricated Building Systems \textsc{iii}: Adaptability and Durability}
+\label{capbsad}
+\end{sidewaystable}
+
+\begin{sidewaystable}
+\begin{tabular}{ I | C | C | C | C | C | p{2cm} }
+    Country & number of flats per 1000 persons built in 1960 & total number of flats built in 1960 & total floor area built in 1960 & average area of each flat built in 1960 & average rent in \% of occupant's budget & multistorey building weight per sq meter of each floor area \\\midrule
+    \textsc{u.s.s.r.} & 14 & 2,978,000 & 85,100,000 m\textsuperscript{2} & 29 m\textsuperscript{2} & 4\% & 1,150 kg \\
+    \textsc{u.s.a.} & 7.2 & 1,300,000 & 60,000,000 m\textsuperscript{2} & 45 m\textsuperscript{2} & 25\% & 3,500 kg \\
+    \textsc{u.k.} & 5.9 && & && \\
+    France & 7.1 &&& && \\
+    W. Germany & 10.7 &&& && \\
+    Italy & 6 &&& && \\
+\end{tabular}
+\label{cdhousing}
+
+\vskip 2em
+
+\noindent\textsc{references:}\\
+Maxwell, Robert, ed. \booktitle{Countries of the world,  Informations series} Vol. 1, U.S.S.R., Oxford, 1962.\\
+Tutuchenko, Semyon, \booktitle{Housing in the U.S.S.R},  Moscow, 1960.\\
+Woytinsky, W. S. and Woytinsky, E. S. \booktitle{World Population and Production --- Trends and Outlook}, New York, 1953.
+\caption{Comparative Data on Housing in Various Countries}
+\end{sidewaystable}
+
+\begin{figure}
+    \includegraphics[scale=0.2,angle=90,origin=c]{img/apt_plan}
+    \includegraphics[scale=0.2]{img/scale}
+    \caption{Soviet Prefabricated Building System --- Apartment Plan}
+\end{figure}
+
+\begin{figure}
+    \includegraphics[scale=0.95]{img/type1}
+    \caption{Soviet Prefabricated Building System --- Type 1}
+    \vskip 1em
+    5-ton cranes are used to lift panels in place. When work is completed on one block of flats, tower cranes are not dismantled but run over along their tracks to the next site.
+\end{figure}
+
+\begin{figure}
+    \includegraphics[scale=0.95]{img/type2}
+    \caption{Soviet Prefabricated Building System --- Type 2}
+    \vskip 1em
+    [This configuration utilizes] 15cm thick prestressed cellular concrete floor panels. One method of prestressing panel is to expand steel reinforcement by heating it to 400\textsuperscript{\circ}C, to cast and cure concrete around steel, then to cool steel, contracting it and thereby developing compressive stresses in concrete.
+\end{figure}
-- 
cgit v1.2.3

