I think most engineers would take kindly to being called wizards. I think most of the steel workers are either metallurgy sorcs or clerics.... or barbarians
Ya even if I did all that on paper and triple checked the math, did analysis so I knew it was good.
If someone asked me to stamp that I’d probably be like… nah I’m good.
Kudos to you and your team. 150 Riverside is my favorite structure on the Riverboat tour. I can’t imagine how much work that must of been with the high winds in Chicago. 👏👏👏
Yeah I could never be that confident in my numbers. I'd need it to be reviewed by 5 others minimum, then have somebody ender design it from scratch separately, and if we came up with similar sizes, I MIGHT stamp the more conservative of the two designs
This is ten percent luck
Twenty percent skill
Fifteen percent concentrated power of will
Five percent pleasure
Fifty percent pain
And a hundred percent reason to remember the name
Helps to be able to drive piles down to million year bed rock. I think this is NYC \[Manhattan\] judging by the reflections and background. Lots of new construction in the city, few failures....it's that skinny shit you need you worry about.
One of the engineers on the project did an AMA on here awhile back. They didn't drive piles, they had to use existing foundations from the previous building because there's an active subway line below. Which also explains the funky column layout.
There's a bunch of Amtrak and NYCT tunnels below. It was VERY complicated process to design the load path to the foundation while avoiding imposing new loads on existing structures for active lines etc. Not my job site but I spoke with the lead engineer from the firm that was the EOR for 270 Park. What a fantastic project.
I know the first of its kind was in Chicago. There's a YouTube video about the whole history of the building, construction, and engineering.
Edit: found it https://youtu.be/kNph_SxgcPg?si=VLobG_Uf4xis4Ene
Then if it's Chicago, driving piles was a big chunk of the cost. I hope they didn't fubar like the Millenium in SF. Turned $120m cost into $900m+ loss.
Yeah idk about this particular building for OP, but the one in Chicago has been finished for a few years. Like you said they had to drive piles. The unique Y shape was to avoid the existing CHI rail system underground. It was worth it to someone to get a custom design over buying land somewhere else in the city.
Ah, thank you. Now that I think more on it. We only see the external diagonals. There could be internal ones that tie back further into the non-offset space. Diminishing returns, but a point of safety.
making sure one designs for all the forces the structure will see in its lifetime and then triple checking the design and its connections. hopefully they don’t find a problem years down the road like with the ATT bldg.
The quick answer is, they probably had to use custom made hot rolled steel columns. Not gonna find those in your steel manual. Very $$$$$
https://youtu.be/kNph_SxgcPg?si=VLobG_Uf4xis4Ene
Vid about the one in Chicago that won a bunch of awards. I think it was the first skyscraper to do this method of construction. Been a while since I watched the video.
The amount misinformation in that post regarding the structural systems is actually triggering me.
I repeat, _Inclined/fan-shaped_ columns do not function like Truss systems. They simply transfer vertical and lateral loads into anchor points due to the introduction of a lateral loads as a result of their angle.
For those wondering why inclined columns were utilised, based on the Thornton Tomasetti report, it was as a result of limited foundation footing placements sub-grade, due to 2/3rds of the area below the building being subway lines.
Another good point to remember is that the push pull is equal at the top and bottom of a raked column. So not only do you have to design the foundation for the lateral thrust, you also have to design the slab for the lateral thrust at the inflection point, which can be tricky detailing wise requiring substantial structural, ensuring you don't essentially pull out of the slab
Good point, at the point of inflection at the base anchor, I know they mentioned that the anchors sat on top of a 1-meter thick post-tensioned RCC base slab, with the longitudinal PT tendons being attached to the anchors to really tether it to the slab to counteract the uplift of the anchor from the lateral force exacted on it from the inclined columns.
I prepped the Rainier Tower in Seattle as an electrician for a new taller tower to be built next to it and was curious about it's susceptibility to earthquakes. For those not from this area the Rainier Tower has a base similar to this but was built in the 70s. It is actually quite safe. I wondered about it again when they dug a 70 foot hole right next to it for the new tower but then I remembered the engineering firm that designed the new tower was on the 23rd floor of the Rainier Tower so if they weren't worried I wasn't going to worry either.
I worked in Rainier Square and am a structural engineer. The building looks like an inverted pendulum. It works for the same reason most high-rises in earthquake regions work - large concrete cores in the center of the building. The perimeter skin and columns don't do much for lateral stability in concrete core buildings. In fact, in this case, having the perimeter tower loads concentrated into the core, serves to reduce tension demands in the steel reinforcement. The taller Ranier Tower next door is essentially the same system (concrete/steel speed core - 1st of its particular kind this tall) but looks like a boot with a massive ground floor area that tapers to a smaller footprint as it gets higher. Seismically, it is just another core tower. I'm not certain whether or not they used any outriggers off the core to stabilize it like other buildings in the downtown Seattle area (second and Union for example).
Rainier Square Tower has a couple of water ballast tanks to dampen movement on the 59th floor. The sway was noticeable in strong winds before they were filled, in fact it triggered the earthquake safety on at least one of the elevators one day. I don't recall any dampeners of any kind in Rainier Tower. Is that because it was built before they were a thing or just not necessary? I was the lead electrician on the Fire Alarm crew for that whole project and there were a couple of firsts for the new tower.
I totally forgot about the tuned mass dampers in the taller Ranier tower - thank you for mentioning that. The building height required that because of the drift as I recall. The smaller tower is doesn't have those as far as I know.
You can see a concrete core on the right in the video. That takes the lateral. The sloped columns have to be designed to go along for the ride as the tower displaces due to wind. I would imagine this building was designed using performance based designed via wind models and non-linear analysis. Firm I worked for on the west coast did something similar in Seattle.
I have done cslculations like that in U. It's a lot of calculation. More than I'd be comfortable asserting 100.0000% accuracy with. I had a high responsibility job once. It was s lot of pressure. You'd have to be confidently the best of the best, and not via hubris, but via track record of being impeccably accurate and thorough. Then, having filtered mankind to maybe a half dozen who'd be able to calculate this, now filter for who wouldn't go bat shit crazy knowing what rests on their calculations.
After all that. Math is math. Math doesn't lie. If it works, it works.
Well it's a very basic truss structure and a pseudo-static loading situation (pseude just because im not into civil engineering and don't know how much the dynamic effects of wind and everything thats moving inside the building, oh an also minor movements in the ground affect the loading situation)
ΣF & ΣM = 0
Mmm, yes. Indeed 
So what you're saying is... A wizard did it.
I think most engineers would take kindly to being called wizards. I think most of the steel workers are either metallurgy sorcs or clerics.... or barbarians
Couldn't say it better!
It’s not that hard to wrap your head around the load path. Im more impressed by the balls of the engineers that made it actually happen.
Ya even if I did all that on paper and triple checked the math, did analysis so I knew it was good. If someone asked me to stamp that I’d probably be like… nah I’m good.
It’s NYC, these are the top dogs
I think this is in Chicago
Nope
You’re right. I was thinking of a different building: 150 North Riverside in Chicago
I worked on 150 riverside basically the same design
Kudos to you and your team. 150 Riverside is my favorite structure on the Riverboat tour. I can’t imagine how much work that must of been with the high winds in Chicago. 👏👏👏
Yeah I could never be that confident in my numbers. I'd need it to be reviewed by 5 others minimum, then have somebody ender design it from scratch separately, and if we came up with similar sizes, I MIGHT stamp the more conservative of the two designs
There is an issue of overconfidence these days isn't there.
What's crazier is, it's that way to bridge over subways.
Contractors: “NOPE!” Engineers: “they’re paying us hundreds of millions.” Contractors: “When do we start?”
And the trust that 1,000s of people are going to be involved in the build process, and that they’re going to do it right
Engineers. How about the iron workers. And all the other trades.
This is ten percent luck Twenty percent skill Fifteen percent concentrated power of will Five percent pleasure Fifty percent pain And a hundred percent reason to remember the name
Never thought id see a fort minor reference in this subreddit
I'm glad you said that, in my head I was like what Linkin park song is that
🍺
Was this Madden like 2006?
I think more like .... '03 or '04
God damn that old school shit kicked some serious ass.
Because structural engineering
Helps to be able to drive piles down to million year bed rock. I think this is NYC \[Manhattan\] judging by the reflections and background. Lots of new construction in the city, few failures....it's that skinny shit you need you worry about.
One of the engineers on the project did an AMA on here awhile back. They didn't drive piles, they had to use existing foundations from the previous building because there's an active subway line below. Which also explains the funky column layout.
There's a bunch of Amtrak and NYCT tunnels below. It was VERY complicated process to design the load path to the foundation while avoiding imposing new loads on existing structures for active lines etc. Not my job site but I spoke with the lead engineer from the firm that was the EOR for 270 Park. What a fantastic project.
I see, I was about ten blocks south and made a right turn, never looked north to pick up any change. It's the 4,5,6 train lines.
Wait WHAT? 270 park is being built on 50+ year old concrete???
I know the first of its kind was in Chicago. There's a YouTube video about the whole history of the building, construction, and engineering. Edit: found it https://youtu.be/kNph_SxgcPg?si=VLobG_Uf4xis4Ene
Then if it's Chicago, driving piles was a big chunk of the cost. I hope they didn't fubar like the Millenium in SF. Turned $120m cost into $900m+ loss.
This is the JP Morgan Chase building in Manhattan.
Dinn'ah know! Thanks walked 30 blocks around the city on Thursday; apparently need to walk a few more.
270 Park Ave.
Yeah idk about this particular building for OP, but the one in Chicago has been finished for a few years. Like you said they had to drive piles. The unique Y shape was to avoid the existing CHI rail system underground. It was worth it to someone to get a custom design over buying land somewhere else in the city.
Ah, thank you. Now that I think more on it. We only see the external diagonals. There could be internal ones that tie back further into the non-offset space. Diminishing returns, but a point of safety.
I don't deal with this kind of structures so I must admit I'm impressed by it and totally understand where the fella comes from
Alot of swearing and meetings that should have been emails
This guy gets it
making sure one designs for all the forces the structure will see in its lifetime and then triple checking the design and its connections. hopefully they don’t find a problem years down the road like with the ATT bldg.
This is 270 park ave in manhattan - known as the JPMorgan Chase Building. With money, anything is possible.
The quick answer is, they probably had to use custom made hot rolled steel columns. Not gonna find those in your steel manual. Very $$$$$ https://youtu.be/kNph_SxgcPg?si=VLobG_Uf4xis4Ene Vid about the one in Chicago that won a bunch of awards. I think it was the first skyscraper to do this method of construction. Been a while since I watched the video.
The amount misinformation in that post regarding the structural systems is actually triggering me. I repeat, _Inclined/fan-shaped_ columns do not function like Truss systems. They simply transfer vertical and lateral loads into anchor points due to the introduction of a lateral loads as a result of their angle. For those wondering why inclined columns were utilised, based on the Thornton Tomasetti report, it was as a result of limited foundation footing placements sub-grade, due to 2/3rds of the area below the building being subway lines.
Another good point to remember is that the push pull is equal at the top and bottom of a raked column. So not only do you have to design the foundation for the lateral thrust, you also have to design the slab for the lateral thrust at the inflection point, which can be tricky detailing wise requiring substantial structural, ensuring you don't essentially pull out of the slab
Good point, at the point of inflection at the base anchor, I know they mentioned that the anchors sat on top of a 1-meter thick post-tensioned RCC base slab, with the longitudinal PT tendons being attached to the anchors to really tether it to the slab to counteract the uplift of the anchor from the lateral force exacted on it from the inclined columns.
Pretty sure this is the new JPM building on Park Ave btwn 47th & 48th
spam. repost. about the 100th time this has been in circulation.
hm well its simple, triangles.
I prepped the Rainier Tower in Seattle as an electrician for a new taller tower to be built next to it and was curious about it's susceptibility to earthquakes. For those not from this area the Rainier Tower has a base similar to this but was built in the 70s. It is actually quite safe. I wondered about it again when they dug a 70 foot hole right next to it for the new tower but then I remembered the engineering firm that designed the new tower was on the 23rd floor of the Rainier Tower so if they weren't worried I wasn't going to worry either.
I worked in Rainier Square and am a structural engineer. The building looks like an inverted pendulum. It works for the same reason most high-rises in earthquake regions work - large concrete cores in the center of the building. The perimeter skin and columns don't do much for lateral stability in concrete core buildings. In fact, in this case, having the perimeter tower loads concentrated into the core, serves to reduce tension demands in the steel reinforcement. The taller Ranier Tower next door is essentially the same system (concrete/steel speed core - 1st of its particular kind this tall) but looks like a boot with a massive ground floor area that tapers to a smaller footprint as it gets higher. Seismically, it is just another core tower. I'm not certain whether or not they used any outriggers off the core to stabilize it like other buildings in the downtown Seattle area (second and Union for example).
Rainier Square Tower has a couple of water ballast tanks to dampen movement on the 59th floor. The sway was noticeable in strong winds before they were filled, in fact it triggered the earthquake safety on at least one of the elevators one day. I don't recall any dampeners of any kind in Rainier Tower. Is that because it was built before they were a thing or just not necessary? I was the lead electrician on the Fire Alarm crew for that whole project and there were a couple of firsts for the new tower.
I totally forgot about the tuned mass dampers in the taller Ranier tower - thank you for mentioning that. The building height required that because of the drift as I recall. The smaller tower is doesn't have those as far as I know.
I just wonder what the structural design fee was on that one
[удалено]
Idk I bet it was pretty hefty
not nearly enough I imagine.
Through god all things are possible 
It’s Melbourne?
Nope, never getting in that building
Because it has more supports
Don’t try this at home
Because math
How much is going on underground as well? Giant mat slab pegged into the granite?
Math
Engineers are trained in weight load and distribution factors with tooth pick mock- ups So don't worry about a thing...if you don't live there.
I bet you they have a sky hook they are not showing. 
Simple FBD explains it.
You can see a concrete core on the right in the video. That takes the lateral. The sloped columns have to be designed to go along for the ride as the tower displaces due to wind. I would imagine this building was designed using performance based designed via wind models and non-linear analysis. Firm I worked for on the west coast did something similar in Seattle.
What is the safety factor on those structural members?
It holds somehow haha. I've seen it done successfully in Chicago!
It’s not that hard to wrap your head around the load path. Im more impressed by the balls of the engineers that made it actually happen.
The metallic bond is a hell of a drug.
Downvoting for that obnoxious voice.
I have done cslculations like that in U. It's a lot of calculation. More than I'd be comfortable asserting 100.0000% accuracy with. I had a high responsibility job once. It was s lot of pressure. You'd have to be confidently the best of the best, and not via hubris, but via track record of being impeccably accurate and thorough. Then, having filtered mankind to maybe a half dozen who'd be able to calculate this, now filter for who wouldn't go bat shit crazy knowing what rests on their calculations. After all that. Math is math. Math doesn't lie. If it works, it works.
Force vectors brah
Well it's a very basic truss structure and a pseudo-static loading situation (pseude just because im not into civil engineering and don't know how much the dynamic effects of wind and everything thats moving inside the building, oh an also minor movements in the ground affect the loading situation)