Question PHY 05

PHY-05 What weather and damage should each type keep working through, shut down safely for, or be moved away from?

Start here · Questions · Progress · People decide

Why this matters

Specific conditions give everyone a shared meaning for all-weather performance and a fair way to test it.

What to bring back

Make a test table for wind, driven rain, dust, salt, heat, smoke, flooding, flying debris, damage and fire exposure. State strength, direction and duration where evidence supports them, test preparation, what counts as passing, who reviews it, and the conditions still to test. Separate everyday weather, the chosen design event and more extreme events.

What we know so far

• Straddie Disaster Kiosk Pitch.pdf — reviewed source; public copy can be added through the evidence process
• GPT Straddie Disaster Kiosks.pdf — reviewed source; public copy can be added through the evidence process
• Professional review and comparison of proposed improvements (When this work overlaps professional or public-authority responsibilities, compare the proposal and Luke's research with applicable industry/global best practice and relevant legal-engine sources. Record differences, reasonable improvements and deficiencies, with the responsible reviewer and response. Routine authorised drafting and wiki work can advance.)

AI-generated potential answers

For discussion and review · research checked 2026-10-20. These are AI-generated options and transfer assessments. The user's request and research method identify the source of this work. The source catalogue states what the references establish. The decision and approval record retains its own status.

Choose an explicit operating envelope for each physical type, followed by safe closure and withdrawal conditions. Treat the assembled kiosk, its openings and mounting as the test article. Separate weather operation, structural survival and availability of the information people need elsewhere.

Layered weather qualification

AI-generated adaptation of an existing pattern. Compare canopy-plus-cabinet protection with a more enclosed public face. Commission a test plan covering driven rain, salt, heat, dust and impact; have structural and electrical reviewers define site-specific wind and flood requirements.

Research basis: Storm tide mapping information · Rittal protective roof SZ 2475000.

Forecast-assisted protective state

AI-generated future concept. Develop a shuttered public screen and retractable exposed accessories that enter a reviewed protective state before deteriorating conditions. An independent local controller would retain a closure notice and report whether movement actually completed.

Examples and local differences

• Rittal protective roof SZ 2475000: AI transfer assessment: Rittal explicitly distinguishes IP water tests from real outdoor exposure. Local difference to check: No enclosure rating establishes whole-kiosk cyclone, debris, smoke or flood performance.

Evidence to bring back next

• Agree separate operation, survival and withdrawal criteria with relevant specialists.
• Test the complete assembly after all display, cable and service openings are fitted.

People and connected choices

Who reviews: Proposed qualified structural/mechanical hazard reviewers with service owner; role and appointment awaiting confirmation

Connected questions: OPS-01, PHY-02, PHY-04

Work state: open. Assigned person or AI assistant: Ready to be assigned.

Research and alternatives can move ahead while connected decisions develop. Before acting on a choice, check the people, evidence and approved scope in People decide.