both of these were designed by architects. neither reflects the twin simplicity and laziness that engineering embodies.
If engineers had our way all buildings would look like this
This is the ideal building. You may not like it but this is what peak performance looks like 😆
Why not continue the brick shell at least to eye level? Why does it stop at waist level?
Brick expensive :(
panel cheap :)
The real question is, why is there any brick at all?
(The answer is almost certainly that somebody other than the engineer imposed the requirement.)
Brick waterproof.
Brick termite-proof.
Brick fireproof.
Panel same (probably, depending what kind of panel).
No, panel only as waterproof as the coating protecting it. Brick is rock, takes centuries to wear out.
...masonry wainscots look tacky-as-heck but they provide impact and moisture resistance where it's needed most...
Is masonry really cheaper than using a slightly thicker gauge of steel and a decent epoxy paint for the bottom few feet?
...it's far more durable, mostly...
Dogshit R-factor, poor impact resistance, I mean that's the obvious stuff lol
Peak performance is highly dependent on who's defining it 😝
Brick? Pfft. Concrete elements all the way. There's no equal.
This is what's known in the Midwest as "tornado bait"
As an engineer, I prefer to call it minmalism.
Quick edit: I saw the typo, but it is also an example of what the sentence is supposed to convey.
Look. i's ain't cheap, and half the readers won't even use it.
Leave it out, we'll claim it was a mistake, and if anyone really complains we can add it back later.
Are you kidding. Just slap an extra 20% of the is you think you used on the end in case.
That's positvely genus!ii
I go with "efficiency"
hey! I resemble those remarks!
Surely that second building is AI generated or something right? Surely physics would not allow such a monstrosity, nor would any city approve it... right?
Yeah I didn't think there was any way. Even with like a steel frame and everything else made of Styrofoam and paper mache, I'm pretty sure that thing would still snap off under its own weight.
It’s totally doable with the right structure and balancing. Have you seen the bases of skyscrapers like 150 North Riverside in Chicago or the Rainier Tower in Seattle? Or the One Za'abeel in Dubai, which has a 65 meter overhang in an 90 degree angle.
I don't know what the first building has to do with the original image. But the one in Dubai is much more conparable. But they are not the same. The Dubai building certainly needs strong framing to keep that overhand from falling. But it is also held at one end and the middle giving it strength and stability. And the forces at the attachment points are both vertical (upward or downward at the end depending on weight distribution on the lever and downward in the middle). That makes a huge difference as they don't have to work against lateral forces. The middle attachment holds all the weight and the end attachment counters all of the torque on the lever. The center of mass is also within the footprint of the building(s) bases
The actual length of the overhang for the real building, while impressive, does not compare to the length in the original image. It does not have anything holding the weight in the middle of the lever, meaning that the end attachment has to hold the weight up alone, AND counter the torque. Furthermore, the point at which the hang in the altered image is attached to the main trunk is also at wide angle meaning it will put a lot of lateral forces on the trunk that are not counter balances by the opposite branch which is shorter and less angled. The center of mass of the hanging branch would be well outside the base of the building and so it would want to rotate at the connection point and pull away from the joint. That's if the steel frame itself doesn't just bend under its own weight putting torque on the lever.
I really don't think that there are any materials under Earth gravity capable of creating a rigid structure with this design at this scale. The forces would be tremendous on a single junction point and along the length of the frame of the hanging arm. Something would give.
It’s not that hard to build something like the zipper building. Estimating that each floor is 3 meters high means that the right side of the is maybe 30 Meters in length. And at an angle of 45 degree, that means the overhang is actually just 21 Meters. With the counter lever on the other side this is totally possible. It’s basically like a crane at this point.
The dubai one is much harder at 65 meters length and a literal 90 degree angle.
The first building is relevant, because its an enormous building standing on a tiny base. The wind forces on this building alone are enormous.
yo his work is sick
I'm not sure it exists. I spent three whole minutes on Google and can't find it. I'd expect it to be fairly famous if real.
I'm not sure Y anyone would build it, but I do think we could figure a way to build it safely if someone wanted to throw enough money at it.
Its fictional, I found an article
The first building looks like it's a female connector for a high throughput cable of some kind.
Looks like a German bunker on Omaha Beach to me
Ah yes, I knew I cleared that bunker in SE5
https://images.pushsquare.com/9352b32741dc7/sniper-elite-5.large.jpg
For me it's cylons.
I believe it's in Guernsey, C.I.
ed: it's a German WW2 coastal naval range finding tower. Used for fire control of coastal guns shooting 25 miles out to sea.
Brutalist architecture in a nutshell
What buildings are these?
Can't believe no-one asked yet
The bottom one looks scary as fuck. I don't want to be in or around that thing if it was real.
BUT WITH THE POWER OF FLEX TAPE
RCE entered the chat
For a drainage engineer, he's shockingly bad with sluices in Timberborn, lol.
It was those architecture beavers!
Realcivilengineer is that you?
They're the same picture
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
