mxleader on 27/11/2023 at 21:27
Quote Posted by heywood
Exactly. The examples on the right require an engineering team to design and build, and are full of unique one-off structural and aesthetic elements. There is a cost associated with their uniqueness.
It's cheaper to build with standardized and mass produced building materials, and structures with regular shapes can be safely built based on codes and formulas.
The pics on the right can be designed with an erector set, legos, a hammer and a microwave. I don't see the expense.
heywood on 27/11/2023 at 22:21
If it's OK for something to fall down and kill people, then yeah. The buildings on the right need an engineering company to model it in detail in CAD tools and perform static and dynamic analyses of various loadings, using computing clusters, iterating the design until it's safe. The process can take years for an unconventional looking design. They also need to design and build forms for all the concrete pours, and there will be many of them, a lot of one-offs to avoid visual repetition. Custom steel work is a lot of more expensive than framing and brick laying. It's also a lot cheaper to produce windows in smaller, regular sizes than huge glass panels in irregular shapes.
Assuming the buildings on the left are as regular inside as they look outside, they can be designed mostly by architects following established rules, worksheets, tables, etc. with part-time support from a structural engineering consultant. And there will be many construction companies who can do the work.
mxleader on 27/11/2023 at 22:57
Quote Posted by heywood
If it's OK for something to fall down and kill people, then yeah. The buildings on the right need an engineering company to model it in detail in CAD tools and perform static and dynamic analyses of various loadings, using computing clusters, iterating the design until it's safe. The process can take years for an unconventional looking design. They also need to design and build forms for all the concrete pours, and there will be many of them, a lot of one-offs to avoid visual repetition. Custom steel work is a lot of more expensive than framing and brick laying. It's also a lot cheaper to produce windows in smaller, regular sizes than huge glass panels in irregular shapes.
Assuming the buildings on the left are as regular inside as they look outside, they can be designed mostly by architects following established rules, worksheets, tables, etc. with part-time support from a structural engineering consultant. And there will be many construction companies who can do the work.
I believe that I may have been making a joke....
heywood on 28/11/2023 at 16:18
DOH!
Nicker on 28/11/2023 at 18:48
Quote Posted by mxleader
I believe that I may have been making a joke....
There's nothing funny about modelling dynamic loads, Padewan.
mxleader on 28/11/2023 at 19:55
Battleship Brutalist architecture because that building reminds me of the superstructure of a battleship or aircraft carrier.
heywood on 28/11/2023 at 20:19
As I recall, my favorite thing there was the big CO2 laser described here:
(
https://markcsele.ca/other-interests/my-science/) https://markcsele.ca/other-interests/my-science/
Learning all the steps it took to start it up and then watching it cut through wood boards was pretty impressive to this kid.
It's also where I met my first chat bot. They had an ELIZA program (or derivative) running on a DEC PDP-11 or VAX with a bunch of video terminals for people to use. On my second visit, the program crashed and dropped me to a prompt so I got to poke around a bit. It's where I got hooked on computers. It was also where I saw (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powers_of_Ten_(film)) Powers of Ten for the first time. And so on..
Azaran on 28/11/2023 at 21:52
It should be preserved, but there's a bit of poetic justice here, considering how many nice 19th century buildings were destroyed without a second thought, to be replaced by brutalist ones in the 1960s
