Announcement Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Mixed Use Building in NYC Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    When i see it i immedately think of Ken Yeang projects, so perhaps it would be an idea for you to study more the use of bioclimatic architecture and focus on creating a good indoor climate (or see what he has tried to do). You said yourself you wanted grass roofs so perhaps make it a part of an exciting experience for the people in the building. The problem about green roofs is that alot of times they are purely aestetical not contributing to anything (they do not make the building sustainable). I wonder if your facades are tucked in, i mean the glass facade if it is. Is it like a tight skin like a mies van der rohe project almost, or are they tucked a fex meters in the facade giving for balconies and applying sunshading which i think is crucial with big glass facades. As i can see from your pictures they are put a bit into the facade, have you tried to vary the sizes of the floor slaps or overhangs to create a bigger variation. The big hole in the high-rises has to have a good reason?

    IF you utilize the sun coming from its strongest orientation (south I guess it is where I am from ), I think you can optimize the building to make the best use of it and do something great.

    The mass in the middle that is connecting the two hiugh-rises seems to me abit misplaced? Perhaps it could be integrated better.
    Last edited by therkelsenmeister; 28-02-2012, 18:56.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by spadestick View Post
      Yes Spadestick is going nuts!
      I disagree with this comment, and partly with Simon's.

      We are creative folk, that's one reason why we are in the business, yes? So in a setting where there are no implications, why hinder creativity? An arguement could be raised about students graduating from uni with no structural knowledge, but as long as there is basic structure, then I see no issue. Architects go to school for 5 years to push the boundaries in design, we design. Structural engineers go to university for 5 (or so, not sure) years to make things work. So if you don't know how the building will be held up, chances are there is an engineer who does, or will at least try and figure it out. A design in uni may not be possible to build now, but with advancements, in 5 years it could very well be possible.

      I don't think architecture students should have so much structure shoved down their throats, or marked down because they aren't entirely sure how their building would work. I repeat, basic structure is vital, but for 60 storey + high buildings, or just insanely large floor space buildings, it's not our job to figure how it will be built/hold up.... I now await everyone attacking this saying structure is the most important part of architecture

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Richo View Post
        Architects go to school for 5 years to push the boundaries in design, we design. Structural engineers go to university for 5 (or so, not sure) years to make things work.
        Structural engineers learn all about structure, and then they learn how to push boundaries as well, as you intimate re advancements.

        Comment


        • #19
          I agree that architects should not be masters in structural engineering but I see no hindering in understanding the basic structural concepts and also dimensioning it a bit realistically, you see too many architectural drawings from something dimensioned 1/10th of what it would be in reality I mean if it is 1m thick not 300mm it certainly make a difference to the outcome, autodesk robot is a great tool for such if it is not too complicated. Likewise when structure is a aestetic part of the final work it often creates a better tectonic result which is seen is most of the best works that exists.

          I come from a study where they try to make us do a mixture of engineering and architecture (integrated design though mostly architecture), christ i have even tried to calculate ventilation pipes dimensions and how to optimize them in size and such, in such a case I find it a bit too much as I think it is adequate to have a conceptual idea of how it is implemented in a building. Right now i am learning about how to make energy efficient passive houses and such and this is very usefull architecturally especially as it is possible with relative simple calculations and logic to get great results energy wise and still good architecture which i believe is the main task for the future.
          Last edited by therkelsenmeister; 29-02-2012, 20:10.

          Comment


          • #20
            As much as I would rather not focus as much on the structure than teh design I still have to. I have to make a structural presentation soon that shows how the building stands up and functions. I know it takes away from my design time but it is still something I have to do and consider when I design. Also thanks everyone for their imput on the design of the building. If anyone else has more opinions on the design I would love to here them.

            Comment


            • #21
              Heres an update on the design so far built in Revit.
              Attached Files

              Comment


              • #22
                The ideas and forms are looking good - Revit massing?

                Is there a reason you're expressing the structure (columns) on the exterior? I think it might look a little nicer if those vertical elements are concealed within and the horizontal elements (floor plates) accentuated, although that may mess with your floor plans a little. Also, what's driving the form, the location of those public spaces/voids and the sloping tops etc.?

                I must've missed it somewhere, but are the towers also mixed-use? If so, how are you planning to arrange the functions?

                Anyone know of any good examples of how mixed-use, in particular, residential and office space, has been dealt with, in terms of separation/integration and circulation, in the past?

                As mentioned earlier, maybe try pushing the ideas a bit more and being a little more artful in the form - there's definitely potential there. . . and Have fun!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by archiboi09 View Post
                  The ideas and forms are looking good - Revit massing?
                  Yes its revit massing

                  Is there a reason you're expressing the structure (columns) on the exterior? I think it might look a little nicer if those vertical elements are concealed within and the horizontal elements (floor plates) accentuated, although that may mess with your floor plans a little. Also, what's driving the form, the location of those public spaces/voids and the sloping tops etc.?
                  There are columns on the exterior because the balconies are cantilevered out 15 feet so there needs to be something there to support the weight. I decided on the voids in the towers to proved an tower observatory that will frame the views of things like the World Trad Center building built, central park, the Hudson River, etc. I also decided on the sloping top because I thought a tower going straight up would be boring and by cutting it, it also allowed for larger terraces for the penthouses.

                  I must've missed it somewhere, but are the towers also mixed-use? If so, how are you planning to arrange the functions?
                  yes, the towers are mixed use with office space below the void in the tower and apartments above.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    [QUOTE=aprince;192213
                    There are columns on the exterior because the balconies are cantilevered out 15 feet so there needs to be something there to support the weight. I decided on the voids in the towers to proved an tower observatory that will frame the views of things like the World Trad Center building built, central park, the Hudson River, etc. I also decided on the sloping top because I thought a tower going straight up would be boring and by cutting it, it also allowed for larger terraces for the penthouses.[/QUOTE]

                    aprince,

                    If you structural system is concrete and you use a post-stressed concrete slabs you can cantilever typically 8 foot. That would allow you to pull the columns back from the face of the towers just inside the buiding envelope, Typically the developer financial performa keep the balcony sizes down. If your building so much area the sale value is based on enclosed area and balcony area are not figured into the selling square footage. Yes the buyers liked it but 15 foot sounds like a lot for the typical floor. However, for the penthouse floor the stepping back I think would really add value to the units, as they aren't typically sold on a s.f. basis.

                    We use to do a lot of high-rise condos along the Gulf Coast and for residential units the system worked well, The less exposed structure the less maintenance over the long term so tucking the columns in helps.

                    Post the final. Looking at the date you've got what...two weeks before the due date? Good luck and let us know with the final crit comments were. It'll be nice to see if some of our comments had any value with your professor was looking for.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by rmlongman View Post
                      aprince,

                      If you structural system is concrete and you use a post-stressed concrete slabs you can cantilever typically 8 foot. That would allow you to pull the columns back from the face of the towers just inside the buiding envelope, Typically the developer financial performa keep the balcony sizes down. If your building so much area the sale value is based on enclosed area and balcony area are not figured into the selling square footage. Yes the buyers liked it but 15 foot sounds like a lot for the typical floor. However, for the penthouse floor the stepping back I think would really add value to the units, as they aren't typically sold on a s.f. basis.

                      We use to do a lot of high-rise condos along the Gulf Coast and for residential units the system worked well, The less exposed structure the less maintenance over the long term so tucking the columns in helps.

                      Post the final. Looking at the date you've got what...two weeks before the due date? Good luck and let us know with the final crit comments were. It'll be nice to see if some of our comments had any value with your professor was looking for.
                      Right now I am using steel beams and columns for the building with concrete beams on the outside supporting the balconies. I was also thinking of covering the exterior columns in a green screen type enclosure to fit in the the garden balconies. And I'm presenting this April 30th so I'll post the final results after I'm done. Thanks everyone for the advice so far.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by aprince View Post
                        Right now I am using steel beams and columns for the building with concrete beams on the outside supporting the balconies.
                        I agree with RM's outline of why you'd locate the structural columns within the envelope and the duel criticism of 3 meter balconies being excessive. I'd add three other reasons why it's not worth doing as well.

                        Structurally you have two systems going on (steel core structure and concrete exterior structure) which is both structurally and economically inefficient. With a strong enough steel structure alone you could probably achieve a similar cantilever but consider having a construction site with two quite different trades working on it at the same time. Coordinating hundreds of workers in one trade is probably a lot easier than coordinating two different trades having to work to the same time line. It could end with a lot of dollars (think hundreds of thousands) paid out in idle wages as one lot waits for the other lot to catch up.

                        The other reason a huge balcony area is a problem is that it creates an enormous extra wind load on the building which would again greatly increase construction costs due to needing much larger foundations. At the sloping top of the building it wouldn't be a problem but all the way up the sides of the building would effectively be hundreds of separate voids, being a lot deeper than they are high, acting like wind catchers, with the long balconies themselves being bent like sails. Just comfort wise, high in the sky balconies are often very uncomfortable as they're so windy and cold that they end up just being used for storage and bird roosts.

                        Finally those wind catcher balconies, being deeper than they are high, present an enormous cooling vane like you see around the cylinder housing of small engines. Due to the sheer amount of thermal mass extended outside but connected to the interior structure and high in the sky, it would be fully sucking the warmth out of the building all the time. The heating costs in the building would have to be enormous as would the extra insulation used to try and keep the heating costs down, which would mean thicker internal walls and this less floor area to sell. In fact if you do a quick calc and add just 50mm (2") of thickness to all internal walls and all structural elements for extra insulation, the loss of floor area might equal the amount of balcony you've given to the birds.

                        You're building would also be visually improved with 1.5m balconies for instance, as I think it would look much the same as now but without those rather severe vertical elements which tend to pull down rather than push up.
                        Best wishes.
                        Last edited by simon seasons; 15-04-2012, 06:53.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          I made them that big to fit platings and small trees while still having room to move around. They are kind of big though. I'll try experimenting with smaller lengths to see how it looks and fits. Thanks

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Well I had my final presentation and it went well. Here are some of the final renderings and floor plans I have.
                            Attached Files

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X