MKH Construction (by hakhaimo)

[hakhaimo]

Originally Posted by Panzer_18

these bridge will surely an iconic one for cebu... the designs are really superb and elegant... at talagang pinag.isipan ng maayus...
I hope meron ding night pics over the bridge perspectives...

Thanks for liking this bridge... Afterall of the detailings are done, I'll start trying night renders...

Originally Posted by ausie

um for the bridge theres something missing. between where the arches connect there is a section of road that is not well supported. i was wondering if you were considering making some support underneath the section, maybe some slim angled columns to not be as noticebale. also the aproach spans to the bridge are not supported well. in any good bridge it is not just the main span that is important but the aproach spans too. they need some form of support, whether it is more smaller arches underneath with small bits rising above the road neck or just plain columns. would be nice to see this properly complete

The general bridge structure is not yet done. The most recent render is just a picture of how will the bridge's super structure looks like. I am not yet adding the support for the approach and the middle sections because I don't want to put generic vertical columns below them, I want a support that will be cohesive to the overall structure.

Originally Posted by xdexina

what? non suportable? you don't know much things about bridges...
check out calatravas one, they are also not suportable?

---
btw Hakhaimo excelente work dude!

Glad you like it, Thanks! .hmm.. I didn't have any idea about that too...

[hakhaimo]

Some progress on the Grand Gramercy Residences:



Any comments & suggestions on the roof top feature and the color of it?

[thryve]

The colours are great and the roof feature is simply amazing.

My only complaint is that the parking garage is a bit harsh for pedestrians and life at the street level. Could you clad it to look like an inhabited part of the building, but only leave the parking ramp exposed (because it is indeed a cool shape ) like the Trump Tower in Chicago and other projects?

I really do like the parking ramp feature, I just don't like having the rest of the parking decks exposed.

Brilliant work . This design has progressed wonderfully.

[ugoki09]

Originally Posted by hakhaimo

Some progress on the Grand Gramercy Residences:



Any comments & suggestions on the roof top feature and the color of it?

wew ang ganda nmn.,
luv the paarking

[Jude12]

Nice work!

[ausie]

Originally Posted by xdexina

what? non suportable? you don't know much things about bridges...
check out calatravas one, they are also not suportable?

---
btw Hakhaimo excelente work dude!

well i do know a fair amount about bridge design and i was not saying the central section between the two arches would collapse i was saying it was not well supported. it is weak when compared to the rest of the span. i know of calatravas work and am a big fan, i find the work very inspirational. the approach spans for the bridge have no support above, below or anywhere meaning that unless the road deck is somehow self supported and rigid enough it would collapse. simple columns underneath as i said before would fix the problem. the design is still good, hakhaimo, but it could do with a few very minor adjustments to supports.

[hakhaimo]

Thank you for your kind comments!

Originally Posted by thryve

The colours are great and the roof feature is simply amazing.

My only complaint is that the parking garage is a bit harsh for pedestrians and life at the street level. Could you clad it to look like an inhabited part of the building, but only leave the parking ramp exposed (because it is indeed a cool shape ) like the Trump Tower in Chicago and other projects?

I really do like the parking ramp feature, I just don't like having the rest of the parking decks exposed.

Brilliant work . This design has progressed wonderfully.

Currently, I am still working in the facade and general design of the two towers, after that I'll be working in the roof design then followed by the base part (Where the parking decks are located including the commercial part of it.)

Originally Posted by ausie

well i do know a fair amount about bridge design and i was not saying the central section between the two arches would collapse i was saying it was not well supported. it is weak when compared to the rest of the span. i know of calatravas work and am a big fan, i find the work very inspirational. the approach spans for the bridge have no support above, below or anywhere meaning that unless the road deck is somehow self supported and rigid enough it would collapse. simple columns underneath as i said before would fix the problem. the design is still good, hakhaimo, but it could do with a few very minor adjustments to supports.

Ohhh ok... Currently, I am still thinking of how will be the support for the approaches would look like.

[ausie]

imo the approach spans should be supported similar to main spans. the arches aren't flowing as they meet at a sharp point visible in the design so i think the approach spans should replicate this with large arches meeting at point with only small areas rising above the road deck. the arches getting smaller over time. i did a quick sketch of this in paint, very sloppy but you can get the idea of what i mean, i hope. it shows my idea of how the approach spans and the support in between the arches could look without taking away from the bridges design. hope you like it and understand what i mean

By architectgaga at 2011-01-16

[hakhaimo]

Originally Posted by ausie

imo the approach spans should be supported similar to main spans. the arches aren't flowing as they meet at a sharp point visible in the design so i think the approach spans should replicate this with large arches meeting at point with only small areas rising above the road deck. the arches getting smaller over time. i did a quick sketch of this in paint, very sloppy but you can get the idea of what i mean, i hope. it shows my idea of how the approach spans and the support in between the arches could look without taking away from the bridges design. hope you like it and understand what i mean

By architectgaga at 2011-01-16

Got your point...

Hmm got a question though... The two main archs are actually bending inwards, should the arches in the approaches bend inwards to? And supporting the girders with trusses?

Actually I won't add another arc... because the approach is too small to for an arch that is aesthetically cohesive to the two main arches... Instead I'll use a part of an arch to support the approaches such as this one.



Lupu Bridge, China. The 2nd Largest arch bridge in the world... That arch is bigger than one of my main arches

[ausie]

not quite sure what ur question is but yeah i think the approach arches should stay the same as the main ones. if they lean in a direction the approach ones should to.

[hakhaimo]

Here are some structural diagrams to show how is the bridge supported...

Mid-Section



Approach



As much as possible I don't want to use general vertical columns. Does my structural plan suffice? A

Any suggestion, comments or criticism?

[ausie]

perfect

[t34now]

You are good!

[xdexina]

Originally Posted by hakhaimo

Here are some structural diagrams to show how is the bridge supported...

Mid-Section



Approach



As much as possible I don't want to use general vertical columns. Does my structural plan suffice? A

Any suggestion, comments or criticism?

Awesome!! it's like a Pro working!

[lucianmx_2007]

Great . I've always wondered how the weight is supported at a bridge.

[hakhaimo]

Thanks! For now, I removed the cable stayed support for the Mid-section,

I think the girder's material used for that mid-section is already rigid enough.

[ausie]

i think it would be better if you don't join the bridge and the deck in the middle. cause if they aren't joined it would be free to swing and move during high winds or an earthquake which would release stress on the bridge. but a flexible joint underneath or a few cables above would still give it the strength it needs while giving it flexibility. perhaps less cables in the middle next time. i think it would be better. sorry if i have been annoying to you i just think this is a great design and would like it to be as realistic as possible

[hakhaimo]

Originally Posted by ausie

i think it would be better if you don't join the bridge and the deck in the middle. cause if they aren't joined it would be free to swing and move during high winds or an earthquake which would release stress on the bridge. but a flexible joint underneath or a few cables above would still give it the strength it needs while giving it flexibility. perhaps less cables in the middle next time. i think it would be better. sorry if i have been annoying to you i just think this is a great design and would like it to be as realistic as possible

Actually I remodeled the bridge, The whole span of the deck isn't attached to the bridge, as what you have said it is strong while being flexible. .

There are actually small arches when the two main arches meet at the middle and on the end of the approaches which have self adjusting columns that adjust itself based on the tuned mass dampers located throughout the bridge and the adjustment is made by a computer program located to a command center near the bridge...!

Hmm... actually I won't consider this as an annoyance, but a way on how I will make my structures better, I think you are a structural consultant of MKH Construction (kinda)

[hakhaimo]

Here is the final concept... Detailed version will be on the next post...

[ausie]

haha lol. i can't wait to see updates

EDIT: woops, i spoke too soon. lol. great work. i love the arches inside the arches :P looks wonderful