Page 134 of 968 FirstFirst ... 3484124130131132133134135136137138144184234634 ... LastLast
Results 1,996 to 2,010 of 14513

Thread: WTC Tower One - by Skidmore, Owings & Merrill

  1. #1996
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    1,752

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stern
    You don't arbitrarily pick that number, this number will be marked in someway, whether the top of the occupied space or otherwise.
    True. Probably observation deck.

  2. #1997

    Default

    That's great news!!!Becasue even with 15ft floors, that's over 80 floors!.


    Also, we don't know if that'll be the exact height. For that much, Childs could push for 90 floors at 1350. Then the observation deck could be at 1,365, which is the average height of the Twin towers.



    Can you say COOOOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  3. #1998
    Chief Antagonist Ninjahedge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Rutherford
    Posts
    12,781

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alex ballard
    Here's some of my thoughts on Skyscraper saftey:

    Structures should be designed to be stronger at the bottom while weaker at the top:

    This allows for better, more stable flexing in a major hurricane or earthquake. Also, if this we're implemented in the twin towers, then maybe only the top floors would have collapsed. Each floor should be designed to hold the weight of all the floors above.
    They are. That is teh way buildings are designed right now.

    As for wanting it to be more flexible at the top, meaning more deflection for the loads that are imparted on them for the same loading (the same wind blowing on the building), that is not such a good idea as there are problems with servicability (windows cracking, drywall splitting) and human comfort (nausea etc).

    The WTC collapsed for two reasons, one is that the system that was holding up most of the building was destroyed. A good 1/2 of the columns were obliterated or significantly damaged.

    Second, the fire that ensued softend and weakened what was left, causeing the remaining structure to fail as the P-Delta effect magnified due to increased deflection of the softer, heated steel. (P-Delta just means the moment/torque that is generated in a column or beam when the load that is applied is no longer passing through a strait member. Once the beam bends a little, it takes less to bend it more by pressing on both ends...)

    As a result, the floor failed, causeing 20 odd stories to be dropped on an already weakened structure below.

    That is a LOT of weight and a LOT of energy.

    I forget what movie it was, but it involved a team going in to blow up a dam during WWII. When the charge went off, the one guy was dissapointed that nothing seemed to happen. The one who knew better told him that it is not the charge that destroys the dam, but the water behind it. The charge just gets it started.

    Gravity destroyed the WTC, the planes just helped it.



    109 can hold 110
    108 can hold 109 and 110
    107 can hold 108,109, and 110

    And so on and so forth.


    Use of steel bracing helps, as well as a think concrete and steel core. The floors should have been squares of braced steel anchored, not riveted, to the outer wall and core.


    And possibly, a ramp stairwell for disabled access.

    Are these good ideas?

    Um, you need to read up a bit more on how it was built. there are too many inconsistancies in the rest of your question to give you a good answer.

    Suffice to say that yes, the WTC could have been built stronger.

    No, that would not guarantee it being able to survive such an extreme event.

    AND it also means that it might not have ever been built if it cost so much more for an act that was not anticipated.

    You can build a tank, you can build a skyscraper. You can build a skyscraping tank, but noone will want to pay for it.

  4. #1999
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    New York, Las Vegas, LA
    Posts
    182

    Default

    If you could give a name to the new project to be built on Ground Zero, what would it be? Freedom tower, hmm, Freedom doesn't really exist. My choice would be STARSTOUCHER, where stars represent the lost lives in the tragic 9/11 event. What name would you give it?

  5. #2000
    Chief Antagonist Ninjahedge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Rutherford
    Posts
    12,781

    Default

    "Are We There Yet"

  6. #2001

    Default

    The World Trade Center name should continue to be used; maybe add a "New" to the beginning.... New World Trade Center. (...Aldous Huxley and William Shakespeare, please call the office...)

    "Freedom Tower" is a hokey name which should be retired, hopefully when the new buildings are assigned their WTC "numbers", if not sooner. ...One World Trade, Two World Trade, etc.

  7. #2002

    Default

    By the way (though this is off point), Ninjahedge, that movie is Force 10 From Navarone....starring Harrison Ford.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0077572/

  8. #2003
    Moderator NYatKNIGHT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Manhattan - South Village
    Posts
    4,240

    Default

    1325 is just shy of the height of the old observation deck - why not go the extra 40'? Like the rest of the tower, it just misses.

  9. #2004

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ninjahedge
    I forget what movie it was, but it involved a team going in to blow up a dam during WWII. When the charge went off, the one guy was dissapointed that nothing seemed to happen. The one who knew better told him that it is not the charge that destroys the dam, but the water behind it. The charge just gets it started.

    Gravity destroyed the WTC, the planes just helped it.
    I believe the movie was "Force 10 From Navarone". Harrison Ford and Carl Weathers are in this 1970's flick... Great analogy by the way...

  10. #2005

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan_Hakala
    Stern makes a great point. Maybe 1325 feet will be the height of the proposed observation deck in the so-called "Freedom" Tower.
    Probably. Its more than likely though that the 1325 ft number came from subtracting 75 ft from the 1,400 ft height of the balloon given on one account.

    Meanwhile, the press can never get an accurate height:

    Quote Originally Posted by NY1
    Meanwhile, developers are using a balloon to attract tenants to the Freedom Tower, even though construction hasn't even started yet. A camera suspended from the balloon lets developers give prospective tenants what the view would look like from different floors.

    The balloon was sent up about 1,500 feet and took several 360 degree panoramic photos. The shots will be used to help sell office space.
    We only have a week left in this month. Has anyone seen Pataki?

  11. #2006
    The Dude Abides
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    NYC - Financial District
    Posts
    4,418

    Default

    A follow-up to the recently-issued skyscraper safety report:

    Time for Drastic Changes in Tall Buildings? Experts Disagree

    By ERIC LIPTON and JIM DWYER

    Published: June 24, 2005

    The day had been one of utter confusion, panic, even death. Terrorists had attacked the largest buildings in New York. And for months afterward, a task force of senior government officials met to reflect on the event, and to study how to make tall buildings safer. In the end, they produced a document calling for fundamental change in how they are built and operated.

    The date of their report was Feb. 22, 1995, two years to the week after the first attack on the World Trade Center. More than six years later, on the morning of the next attack, very few of the recommendations had been put into effect. "It just didn't happen," said Patricia Lancaster, now the city buildings commissioner.

    Yesterday, a federal agency released a 10,000-page draft final report on the collapse of the World Trade Center, including a set of recommendations for fundamental changes in the next generation of skyscrapers, and for emergency response. Having been struck twice, New York City has already passed Local Law 26, which anticipates and surpasses many of the federal recommendations. But faced with opposition from the real estate industry, the city has not required wider staircases.

    Elsewhere, some of the early reactions to the new recommendations, from the National Institute of Standards and Technology, recall the history, if not the fate, of the reform effort after the 1993 attacks. Many structural engineers argue that the events of Sept. 11, 2001, were so unusual that they should not propel drastic change.

    "Tall buildings are extremely safe today, one of the safest places you can be," said W. Gene Corley, a structural engineer who led an earlier investigation into the World Trade Center attack, as well as an inquiry into the bombing of the Murrah Federal Office Building in Oklahoma City.

    He and William F. Baker, a structural engineer at Skidmore, Owings & Merrill in Chicago, said that as a result, changes in building codes will likely be modest. "I expect it will be more a case of refinements than wholesale changes," Mr. Baker said.

    Leaders of the National Institute of Standards and Technology say that they have an ambitious program of meetings with building code experts and industry officials to push for changes that they believe will improve the safety of buildings faced not only with terrorist attacks, but also more routine hazards like earthquakes, fires, and hurricanes. The agency plans to hold a conference in September on how the building industry can reduce the risk.

    "We already have begun working with the organizations that will be responsible for turning the recommendations into action," said Hratch Semerjian, the acting director of the institute.

    Nationally, between 1989 and 1999, no more than five civilians were killed in 6,900 reported high-rise office building fires, according to statistics complied by the National Fire Protection Association. Those numbers - which do not include the attacks at the World Trade Center - are not large enough to produce wide-scale change in building codes, several engineers said.

    "You can do anything you want, but you can't change a number that is already extremely low," Dr. Corley said.

    In presenting the findings yesterday, S. Shyam Sunder, who led the federal investigation, rejected suggestions that the events at the trade center were too rare to provide useful lessons for other skyscrapers. The investigation used two approaches to study risks, he said. One was based on historical records. The second was "scenario driven," an effort to anticipate unusual events that could cause serious injury or death.

    Dr. Sunder said that fully equipped firefighters - carrying nearly 100 pounds of gear up stairs - begin to reach their physiological limits about the 15th or 20th floor, and that it takes about two minutes to climb per floor. For people on the 60th floor of a building that has lost power, Dr. Sunder said, "help is actually a few hours away. We did not look at other buildings, but we are very confident in our recommendations."

    Historically, major revisions in building codes have often followed catastrophes or spectacular fires, such as the Chicago Iroquois Theater fire in 1903, the Triangle Shirtwaist fire in New York in 1911, two major skyscraper fires in New York City in the early 1970's, and a deadly fire in 1980 at the MGM Grand Hotel in Las Vegas. All told, hundreds of people died in those fires. Even so, the debate over code changes often drags on for years, as groups with competing interests attempt to influence the process, debating costs and benefits.

    Jonathan Barnett, a professor at the Worcester Polytechnic Institute Center for Fire Safety Studies, said that many recommendations the standards institute has made would require extensive research before code standards could be drafted.

    That research would cost tens of millions of dollars, he said, far more than the $16 million that the institute invested in the study. "There will be no significant change unless Congress throws money at this," he said. "It is not going to come from the private sector."

    Ms. Lancaster, of the New York Department of Buildings, cited the example of using glow-in-the-dark paint in staircases, a feature of the trade center stairs that a number of people said had been helpful in their evacuation, and which the city recently required for all tall buildings. Deciding where and how much of the paint should be applied took nearly two years, Ms. Lancaster said.

    Ms. Lancaster said that the city was determined not to let reform efforts fall into a bureaucratic torpor, and that it had already adopted a number of the recommendations called for by the federal inquiry. These include such changes as reinforced walls for staircases and elevators, more sprinklers, smoke control measures, and inspection of fireproofing. The question of expanding the width of staircases continues to be debated in New York because of cost concerns.

    Dr. Corley, Mr. Baker and Dr. Barnett each agreed that many of the recommendations could work their way into model codes adopted by organizations like the National Fire Protection Association and the International Code Council, which local and state governments use as templates for their own codes.

    Jack Murphy, an adviser to the National Fire Protection Association on high-rise safety, said that firefighters could provide powerful voices on the need for change, but that they are rarely involved.

    The new standards will likely result in an immediate adjustment in the development of certain major skyscrapers, if they have not already been made. Mr. Baker, for example, is working on the structural design for the Trump Tower in Chicago. The Freedom Tower, which is to replace the World Trade Center, is also likely to integrate many of the recommendations, the engineers predicted.

    The changes Mr. Baker is incorporating into these kinds of buildings include wider stairwells that have more robust walls, and refuge areas for the disabled to await assistance or for tired tenants to rest during an evacuation. He also is designing these towers with stronger connections between columns and beams, addressing one recommendation in yesterday's report.

    "What we might do on a high-profile building or a building with special tenants is one thing," Mr. Baker said. "But if you want to do that in all tall buildings, I am not sure that is appropriate."

    Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

  12. #2007
    Chief Antagonist Ninjahedge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Rutherford
    Posts
    12,781

    Default

    Stronger connections between columns and beams?

    For what?


    That was not what failed in the WTC. That is usually a provision for ectreme seismic where the moments due to lateral motion could force a failure of the joint before a failure of a member.

    I hate some of these studies. Noone is going to reat all 10,000 pages and be able to see it for what it's worth. Noone is going to apply the right solutions to the right situations.

    they are going to look at the summary and say "we have to make this all law to save countless lives" without realizing that in doing so they are killing countless projects that may help countless lives in the process.



    Fear is not the right emotion to design for or with.

  13. #2008

    Default

    NEWSDAY

    New WTC tower plans to be unveiled next week

    By staff reports
    June 24, 2005

    A new design for the Freedom Tower at Ground Zero will be unveiled next week and it will be, "arguably the safest building ever built," Mayor Michael Bloomberg said Friday.

    He said the tower, the linchpin of the Lower Manhattan redevelopment, would be built to meet the same construction standards as American embassies.

    "Nobody has ever built a tall building to an emgassy standard -- anything remotely more than probably three or four stories high," the mayor said on his weekly show on WABC-770AM radio.

    He said new buildings should take advantage of improvement in building materials and technology to built safer buildings, although the Freedom Tower would be made safer than other because of its "icon" status.

    Gov. George Pataki ordered a redesign of the Freedom Tower last month to address security concerns raised by the Police Department.

    Although the mayor gave no details of the new design, previous reports have said the tower would be set farther back from the street to limit damage from a bomb-lader vehicle, and the structure would be harded to resist the force of an explosion.

  14. #2009
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    New York, Las Vegas, LA
    Posts
    182

    Smile

    It sounds good

  15. #2010
    Forum Veteran krulltime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Manhattan - UWS
    Posts
    4,208

    Default

    Good I can't wait for this 'New Freedom Tower' (uh that name..)

    "Nobody has ever built a tall building to an emgassy standard -- anything remotely more than probably three or four stories high," the mayor said on his weekly show on WABC-770AM radio.
    emgassy standard? Whats that?

Similar Threads

  1. New 51-story tower Downtown
    By NYguy in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: January 17th, 2006, 09:20 PM
  2. Renderings CIBC Tower
    By NoyokA in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: July 19th, 2003, 07:17 PM
  3. 3 Buildings From 1830's Threatened By a Tower - Downtown
    By Kris in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: March 29th, 2003, 11:08 AM
  4. A Home Depot in the Bloomberg Tower?
    By NYguy in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: March 15th, 2003, 03:16 AM
  5. Special Issues for Merrill, the Landlord
    By Edward in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: January 23rd, 2002, 12:04 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software