daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Forums > Architecture

Architecture news and discussions on all buildings types and urban spaces
» Classic Architecture | European Classic Architecture and Landscapes | Public Space | Shopping Architecture | Design & Lifestyle | Urban Renewal and Redevelopment



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old June 27th, 2006, 10:14 PM   #61
Heusdens
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 23
Likes (Received): 0

Tallest structure will be defined by the pressure forces on the basement. It can be calculated what height is ultimate. This defines also maximum heights of mountains.

For building very large structures, the building should have a shape like a trumpet, having the large surface at the basement, and decreasing surface sizes higher up. This directs the strong forces for holding up the heavy structure from vertically directed to horizontally directed near the basement.

This kind of structure was already proposed long time ago by Japenese, it's called X-SEED : height of 4 km (!).

X-SEED (emporis)
X-SEED (wiki)
Heusdens no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old June 28th, 2006, 04:30 PM   #62
vince_rilian
...
 
vince_rilian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Los Baņos, Laguna
Posts: 417
Likes (Received): 0

you've got to look at the economic feasibility... sure, anything above 400m would not be economically feasible to build, based on the income of the tower alone... but wouldn't you consider the effect of a really tall tower on the economy on a larger scale, lets say:
- probably within a mile radius from the tower, land would significantly increase in value
- visitors will flock and pay to climb the tower and take a view (whaddya think those viewdecks/skybridges were for?)
- increased tourists in the city where the tower is located, thereby increasing spending within the city, increasing business and income, though not that significant at all

By the way, having a large base for a building would spread the stress to a larger area, lessening the load to the material, apart from directing the "weight" of the building sideways (but only a component of that wieght not all of it would be directed)
__________________
TO EVERYONE @ SSC: BE WARNED
I have been informed that someone's claiming to be "vince_rilian" through chatting @ YM. Please be warned that whoever that is, it's not me.
vince_rilian no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2006, 03:18 PM   #63
Heusdens
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 23
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by vince_rilian
By the way, having a large base for a building would spread the stress to a larger area, lessening the load to the material, apart from directing the "weight" of the building sideways (but only a component of that wieght not all of it would be directed)
That's true, but due to the (partial) horizontally alligned forces, this type of building would be very earthquake resistent. All forces are directed along the lines of the outside construction, in fact one could construct the building as nothing but this outside structure (it would create a very massive inside space).
Floors could be attached to this outside structure in such a way that they would damp the building, making it even more earthquake proof.

This construction type (the trumpet like shape) building has more advantages.
Not only it would allow for very high, strong and stable buildings (1 km would not be a problem), but also the transport would not be a problem.
Part of the transport could go along a spiraling railway (perhaps a maglev system which can takes slopes up to 10% and a radius of 500 m) near the outside structure, reducing the need for elevators.
Only the top floors would need elevators (where the radius is too small and the slope is too high).
For emergency exits, the tower shape would be perfect, since one could create gliding lanes that allow a controlled fast exit from the tower.
If the outside of the structure would be perfectly smooth, one could in principle survive a fall from any height of the tower, since the motion would be directed horizontally.

Perhaps also the tower design would allow it to have it's own electricity system from the principle of an energy tower, which underneath it's outside shell would heat up air that flows up to the top and would drive turbines to create electricity.
Heusdens no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 03:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu