Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Indeed. 

 

I'm sure it has been written up and analyzed as to why, but this building will basically take 3 years start to finish. The Empire State Building took a little over 16 months from excavation to opening (January 1930 - May 1931).

 

Five workers died during that buildings construction (which would shut down a modern building for months - maybe longer).  Also during the Great Depression.  The building was in a race too with Chrysler down the road - which in my opinion is a FAR superior design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Five workers died during that buildings construction (which would shut down a modern building for months - maybe longer). Also during the Great Depression. The building was in a race too with Chrysler down the road - which in my opinion is a FAR superior design.

Also, this was during the Depression, as already mentioned. There was a large pool of cheap labor available, willing to do anything, even if unsafe.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking about Dubai as I typed that actually.

 

Anyway, here's more nearly real time photos of the last days of the Texas Tower. In the third pic you can see the flying bobcat that was hoisted up to roof way back when they started has worked its way back down to the 3rd floor. 

 

ng9cid.jpg

 

 

16m40bd.jpg

 

 

2h4jj8x.jpg

 

 

1174tac.jpg

Edited by Nate99
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe Hines does care about Historic Preservation, they kept the Texas flag pole so far (:. Does anyone know if this Dec there will be Christmas Trees on the tops of these under construction buildings, seems like I remember seeing that before.

The Texas Flag poles are a theme for Texas Ave in downtown. Not unique to or owned by this building.

And as for "Christmas trees" on the roof of skyscrapers, that happen after the last structural support beam is in place/the building is officially "topped out".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe Hines does care about Historic Preservation, they kept the Texas flag pole so far (:.  Does anyone know if this Dec there will be Christmas Trees on the tops of these under construction buildings, seems like I remember seeing that before.

 

The Christmas tree has nothing to do with Christmas. they typically put a Christmas tree on top of the building once it has topped out. Since most of our new downtown buildings haven't even broke ground yet..there will be no way we'll see "topped out Christmas trees" this December. Maybe December 2015.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This HAS to be the most photographed demolition in Houston history... right? Not by the amount of people like with the Macy's demo, but at least the most photos taken over time.

 

 

you're probably right, but the Astrodome may beat the record.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Binz building garage across the street would also give some nice aerial shots of what this block now looks like.  The roof/top floor is accessible to the public and even has an elevator. I've gotten some nice shots from this location.

 

Why didn't I think of that?

 

24y8jrc.jpg

 

2u6n581.jpg

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why didn't I think of that?

 

24y8jrc.jpg

 

 

 

 

Is that guy using a blowtorch? I will say this, our great-grandparents knew how to build. That building was effing solid. Reminds me of what they say about the Academic Building at A&M, that since they didn't know too much yet about the characteristics of reinforced concrete in 1910, they just used twice as much as they thought they needed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is that guy using a blowtorch? I will say this, our great-grandparents knew how to build. That building was effing solid. Reminds me of what they say about the Academic Building at A&M, that since they didn't know too much yet about the characteristics of reinforced concrete in 1910, they just used twice as much as they thought they needed.

 

 

He was using a cutting torch. I'm guessing that he would go through the beam nearly all the way with the torch and then they cable it up to the crane once it is about  to let go. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is that guy using a blowtorch? I will say this, our great-grandparents knew how to build. That building was effing solid. Reminds me of what they say about the Academic Building at A&M, that since they didn't know too much yet about the characteristics of reinforced concrete in 1910, they just used twice as much as they thought they needed.

 

 

Ehh.. I disagree respectfully for reinforced concrete structures of that era. Generally I have found them to be under-designed. Reinforced concrete steel structures from that era run into two problems. The steel they use was around 18 KSI-33KSI (kilopounds per sqaure inch)  in yield capacity, or less and there was wide variety of bar design, which could allow for shear slippage of embedded reinforcement. Here's an image of some historic reinforcement used that I have at my office.  

 

http://i.imgur.com/zMGq0lA.jpg

 

All of the bars shown above, I've pulled off of projects in Houston, Chicago, or New Orleans. They added more, and not proportionally, because the steel was significantly weaker in tension in that era. Today, standard rebar has a yield capacity of 60 KSI. The concrete mix design is another factor which isnt being addressed. Modern reinforced concrete structures, for just about every element are significantly stronger, and better built. 

 

 

Now, that being said... based on the most recent pictures, this looks like a composite beam. An I - beam (more correct term is W-Section) encased in reinforced concrete. In this instance, the I-beam is the primary structural component and the reinforced concrete is likely acting as a form of fireproofing, or strengthening from later structural modifications.--- I can't really tell without looking at the drawings. The guy is probably using a plasma torch to cut through the steel beam and/or rebar.... which is way faster than using a grinder or bandsaw. 

/edit: Correction on KSI values.

Edited by Purdueenginerd
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ehh.. I disagree respectfully for reinforced concrete structures of that era. Generally I have found them to be under-designed. Reinforced concrete steel structures from that era run into two problems. The steel they use was around 18 KSI-33KSI (kilopounds per sqaure inch)  in yield capacity, or less and there was wide variety of bar design, which could allow for shear slippage of embedded reinforcement. Here's an image of some historic reinforcement used that I have at my office.  

 

http://i.imgur.com/zMGq0lA.jpg

 

All of the bars shown above, I've pulled off of projects in Houston, Chicago, or New Orleans. They added more, and not proportionally, because the steel was significantly weaker in tension in that era. Today, standard rebar has a yield capacity of 60 KSI. The concrete mix design is another factor which isnt being addressed. Modern reinforced concrete structures, for just about every element are significantly stronger, and better built. 

 

 

Now, that being said... based on the most recent pictures, this looks like a composite beam. An I - beam (more correct term is W-Section) encased in reinforced concrete. In this instance, the I-beam is the primary structural component and the reinforced concrete is likely acting as a form of fireproofing, or strengthening from later structural modifications.--- I can't really tell without looking at the drawings. The guy is probably using a plasma torch to cut through the steel beam and/or rebar.... which is way faster than using a grinder or bandsaw. 

/edit: Correction on KSI values.

 

I'm sure our understanding of reinforced concrete is much more advanced now; my point about the Academic Building was that because they realized they didn't understand it well yet, they compensated by making the walls twice as thick as they thought they needed to be.  Supposedly they are around four feet thick around the base.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure our understanding of reinforced concrete is much more advanced now; my point about the Academic Building was that because they realized they didn't understand it well yet, they compensated by making the walls twice as thick as they thought they needed to be.  Supposedly they are around four feet thick around the base.

 

The interior is much smaller than you think it should be, that's for sure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...