Posted by Per Corell on February 15, 2003 at 07:52:31:
In Reply to: Re: Structural Ceramics - Key to Terror-Resistant Skyscrapers? posted by Gary R on February 14, 2003 at 10:34:22:
One of the first things I wa told about the difference of building types in Europ and Us. back at public school was, that with stones you can build houses that is better fireproveen but becaurse of the weight not as high as steel beam bases structures, --- "but" becaurse steel expand in a fire and will twist when parts are heated "we" don't use steel beams as in Us. unless these are either filled with concrete or fireprotected with aspestos".
I think that the scale of building frames and type of, is a very important issue when talking about fire proving, as a bigger frame or tube, will be easyer to protect ------- to protect each beam in the pre. WTC would be an impossible task, but to combine two 3D-H structures in each scale will offer the oppotunity to have a big scale structure handle the strength and a smaller scale one handle the building structure functions. ---- beside what failed with wtc seem to be the cheap fire proving, being the alternative, beside the fact that corner assemblies in the 3 plane construction seem more as a "patch repair" , somthing that will caurse problems in extreme situations, but true -------- somthing develobed for decades to solve the tradisional problems of rigid 3 plane structures.
------- Guess you remember that with 3D-H there are only two planes and that hangers and bolts is not any part of a 3D-H so they can not break.
But all in all , ------- do anyone doubt that a row and collum structure will react with a pancaking as soon as the collums are not vertical anymore, 3D-H as you know will react very different as each part are suported by all other parts. and even a card house you never build row collum vise but angled.
Sorry I need to mention all these simple facts, but you must remember that the tradisional structures and the way these are produced, is not a world of oppotunities ; up-side-down 0-90-180-270 these are the numbers allowed ,then try your creavity with this producing a rigid boxwork of steel frames ,where each corner will produce a problem under extreme condisions.
Now you say what about 3D-H ,as that seem to gather unknown problems under the same condisions ; I do not think so, I think the problems are different and I think that as simple a step, as to combine frameworks of different scales, will eliminate the most obvious problems.
Now a structure need to be able to hold it's own weight, and you can make a steel wire so long, that it's own weight will eventualy break it, but I am quite sure that you can not judge one technology from the weakness of a compleatly different one. The weakness of 3D-H in this opposision is that if you try make it with the same technology that you use making steel beams it _will_ be extreamly xpensive and your choice in scale will be limited , ------- as you know water filled steel tube building structures have been produced, but if these showed a tendency to start to leak in the corner assembly weldings how can this be taken as an argument of water filled 3D-H frameworks that is _not_ welded at the already weak corners , where dry protected structures carry the problematic bolt connections.
--------- Don't this indicate, that the trouble you put forth, is a structure type problem, and isn't 3D-H very different than this.
When producing building materials from nature you tradisionally make timber and planks, when producing building materials, you proberly say ,what else, as then you can place timbers 90 deg to eachother and produce a timber construction 0-90-180-270 deg. ( except when you want to add some true resistance you maneage both 60 and 120 deg V supports as these hold ) , but this is the way we got the trees to make building materials and by doing it so, making circular saws and planers make sense , ---- as long as there are corner assembly methods the manufactored materials can produce furniture and houses ; still the 0-90-180-270 deg angles seem to show everywhere.
Now for me a dowtail or a boat rib is no problem ,a circular saw or planer is no problem and I produced loads of furniture and boats, but allway's with these limited materials that ask you to focus on the assembly corner types and bound in the charecter and idear of the material.
To compensate from the limitations of manufactiring mashines and flat face of your plane, you can focus on quality and make yourself a master carpenter or boatbuilder, but your efford will allway's be limited of the way the materials are produced and these almost allway's have a lot of 90 deg faces.
Now 3D-H is no different as there _must_ be 90 deg between the two planes that create the framework assembly as othervise you will se problems assembling with not flexible materials but 3D-H still offer a much greater flexibility in terms of design, as basicly 3D-H is not restricted to weak corner assemblies since there are no corner assemblies.
My point is, that to judge 3D-H from the bad experiences of the tradisional methods that even been fiddled to overcome the build in weak points during centuries is not fair.
Still steam all over the place would have saved a few lifes and when it is possible to stand a 100 meter high steelbeam on it's own footprint an interconnected structure will be easy to project, so each member will carry a much better distribuated load.
-------- Now this define the 3D-H as an automated generated interconnected structure where the right design of the frames, will even make a building structure flex an earthquake as each frame is allowed to move, where a rigid row collum boxwork will explode internal due to buils up stress, followed by a pancaking of the intire structure. 100 walls all in one direction and with very low resistance to tip in just that direction, can not tell anything about a 3D-H where the "walls" are _not_ all in one direction.
True Pony's never fail, this one either.
Any structural double resistant building framework allway's work best interconnected, and flexibility within building frames can produce one kind of earthquake safe structure, that's why structure is important, ---- If you want light fall into the structure or building structure from one direction, 3D-H will have one total open direction, and othervise a very closed surface structure.
Please check the graphic, that I must note is just an example.
Placing restored original early highrise buildings within a city structure is no problem, as the free spaces on one level this will create will only make the building arear worth more, unless you want to go bankrupt, with the obvious wrong project.
Water filled proberly is a problem with very big scaled structure. as the water in this could have a hollow core asking less water, and more structural strength this is just doubling the structure with a layer of water between, water can be directed to flow however, why shuldn't you be able, automaticly lead water. Put water in a piece of paper and try boil it you know that the paper will _not_ burn aslong as water can boil the heat away. To provide right, a structure must restand that parts collapse, 3D-H do this trick better then row and collums. maby it even add flexibility to restand earthquake, but fire resistance Is not from my oppinion a better or vorse option, when you even are taking the options ,now offcaurse buisness deal about doing nothing, maby my point about a stepstone for the realised future progress jobs and a better and different buisness than pyramides, as sure you get everything just opening the mouth, this is how I feel about loosing the vision of the emty towers as huge catedrals, open one side and emty lofted two emty towers carved within the lower structure would meed the demands ,now it's there you don't want it.
If you find the right wind directions, you could build N.Y from plywood this is how flexible 3D-H is, you can produce a structure, that protect the sheet material. ------ this is within my defination of eco materials . Anyway last time I discussed about 3D-H would or the impossible would not produce an offest of itself inside the frame structure, this is easy and each and every single element, can be produced this much cheaper than you think, The impac issue and destroyed structures, will then be depandant of structural integrity.
About escapes the design is obvious not in detail to be done by a master architect, as detail allway's must have a different quality. Terror like the WTC and Pentagon terror disapear out of history when very obvious things change, laser and water cutters are allready challancing a lot of heavy cast iron mashines that don't need to be produced as doing Digital with much cheaper and handy equipment challance the tyrani of materials avaible to form a building structure, --- the vision will be there and in that respect it is already here with 3D-H that will perform way more than my emagination, --- so I can not be the master architect anyway. A better buisness than Pyramides shuld be easy to establish, just realising the workabouts in these ,alway's triggered you Romans, now I am here to tell you, they are no use for Pyramide they are easy to escape but you can't enter it. Pyramides are simply useless.
Free 3D Models