Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
alan2here

Tri radio tower building?

Recommended Posts

Could three buildings of this type be constructed to form a triangle, where the inner support wires connect between the towers instead of to the ground?

http://www.thebigtower.com/live/SandyHeath/Index.htm

 

Floors could then be inserted and thick fabric sheets be wrapped around the structure.

 

To deal with wind the structure could be fragmented, such that only every other floor was used, the wind blowing though the thiner empty stories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could three buildings of this type be constructed to form a triangle, where the inner support wires connect between the towers instead of to the ground?

http://www.thebigtower.com/live/SandyHeath/Index.htm

 

Floors could then be inserted and thick fabric sheets be wrapped around the structure.

 

To deal with wind the structure could be fragmented, such that only every other floor was used, the wind blowing though the thiner empty stories.

That could be, but that would change the purpose of the structure.

 

this is a mast which purpose is basically to bear its own weight until a specific height. The antenna at the top has negligible weight, it is not a "building", it is a structure, like a bridge of some sort. IOW it is done in order to put at the least cost an antenna high above the ground.

 

The triangle you propose would change dramatically the structure.

 

First of all the mast is vertical and the metallic structure is almost entirely in compression along its vertical axis.

When you put the "mast" under an angle, it will not be under compression only but will start to bend since it will stop to be a mast and become an inclined beam.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bending.svg

 

So the beam should be designed thicker than the mast.

 

Secondly, if one wants to introduce floors, it means that the structure must bear much more weight.

 

Third, if you intend to make it a building, you cannot accept deformation as in a mast or even a bridge. A building is much more rigid

than a car or an airplane that has some elasticity. Only very tall buildings have to deal with some elasticity and that is a huge problem in the conception and in the realization.

 

Fourth, you would need all that stuff you see and cannot see in building:

staircases, elevators, emergency staircases, windows, separation walls (even if only for fire protection), plumbing, heating, climate control, wiring, false ceilings, etc etc.

And of course: people.

 

As for the wind, yes that would be nice. But that would be an awful way to multiply the outside surface of the building. And that would make the building very expenxive to build and to maintain: not environnementaly correct.

 

But I have seen more outrageous ideas than that.

Edited by michel123456

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be very tall for a very minimal price, this must more than make up for loosing some space for wind.

 

I imagine the insides of the masts themselves could be used, for example one for a lift, one for stairs and one for pipes and wires.

 

Other disadvantages, worthwhile given the advantages may then include it being more difficult to heat or cool and weight restrictions for each story. A good location could alleviate both of these potential problems.

 

There is still tension in opposite (3 total) directions on each mast, I'm having difficulty imagining the bending. Even if it's the case can't the cables be adjusted in position and tension to compensate, extra cables could also if required be added between each mast and positions along it's ground-ward cable directly or though small solid intermediate parts.

 

You mention flexibility, this is desirable in the worlds tallest buildings.

Edited by alan2here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flexibility is unavoidable not desirable.
Imagine your own house or appartment. Half an inch movement from flexibility would produce cracks everywhere. Huge cracks.
Most regular buildings accept no flexibility at all.

Say you are the engineer and discuss with an architect about your design.
The architect would tell you that yes the triangle structure is stable but produces a triangle floor which is not very good for architectural organization. Why not do it on a square plan?

Then the architect would agree putting staircases and lifts in the inclined beams.
Then in order to increase the solidity, make the beams in an already curved scheme.
And finally decide to replace the cables with a more solid structure able to withstand compression as well as traction.

And you would obtain something like this:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dimensions_tour_Eiffel.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol

 

No cracks in the walls issues with the Tri design, however you have caused me think of another potential issue, sea sickness.

 

Can an ifell tower like design really be as tall or cheap as the masts approach? I'm not sure as the ifell tower was built years ago.

 

This is the tallest I can find, it is however really solid looking.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Ta

 

Compaire to this, and other only slightly shorter ones.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Radio_Mast

 

 

The thing I don't know that really would matter is carrying capacity of the three together, for floors, contents and the fabric walls.

Edited by alan2here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.