SF Millenium Tower Again

much the elevators jam? Looks like the original design group didn't get bo gged down in too much math.

nd

ile hole with an instrumented auger, load it with a steel reinforcing cage and then fill with concrete slurry. Then all these piles should be evenly d istributed around the existing concrete frame they have for a foundation.

k. From what I've seen, 70 meters is at the limits of what the auger techno logy can do. At two inches of new lean development every six months, and th is rate of lean is picking up, they don't have much time left. Lean begets more lean because the structure naturally bears down on the lean side with more weight. Look at the equilibrium of moments at the base, that astronomi cal mass acting through that astronomical moment arm, the force imbalances are huge. Then the internal forces on fasteners and beams are probably ines timable. Generally rigid structures can only take minuscule deflections bef ore stuff starts to break, and breaking begets more breaking.

This is structural engineering territory. CE is quite broad, they run stuff like water treatment plants too, but you wouldn't want those guys working on fixing the tower.

Reply to
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred
Loading thread data ...

That explains why they already have a $200M lawsuit in process against the owners.

Reply to
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred

would be a shame to let a good lawsuit go to waste ;)

Reply to
Lasse Langwadt Christensen

You do understand that jacks requires footers to spread the load? Not even close to being possible.

Reply to
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred

Nothing that we do is likely to cause injury or great expense if it fails. No legal action against us has even been hinted at in my company's history. The last time we had a bug in a product, the customer wanted to pay us to fix it.

Most CE's have to be licensed and tested and certified and continually-educated and tedious stuff like that.

Most big construction projects end up in a flurry of lawsuits.

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com 
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Reply to
John Larkin

[about subsiding Millenium Towers]

Subsidence of the tower in Pisa, the city of Venice, and Mexico City, all are relevant examples to study. Cortez did, however, kinda suppress the records before about 500 years ago, as far as Mexico City is concerned.

When Schlieman gleaned enough hints from the Illiad to go to the site of ancient Troy, he dug up a real city. The one that caught his attention, though, predated Troy by centuries... there were that many layers.

Darwin's work on earthworm action notes that it doesn't take unstable soil to swallow up the garden statuary. The little annelids account for about two inches a decade...

It'd be a nice present for archaeologists, if we just put time capsules on the ground floor of that Millenium tower, and repeated every half century when a new ground floor is established...

Reply to
whit3rd

Seems like those guys tried.

Reply to
krw

I rather like the ancient attitude that those responsible for bridges and arches should stand under them when the supports are removed.

My understanding is that after the building is nominally completed, "desnagging" occurs. All companies blame each other and whichever company can't avoid a pay simply goes bust.

Reply to
Tom Gardner

What effect has this had on the valuation and insurance premiums of adjacent properties?

Reply to
Tom Gardner

Buyers typically write incomplete specs, and contractors bid low to get the job, knowing they can fight or sue for enough change order money to make a profit. I've been close to this process in New York City, and it's ugly.

We do the opposite: add features and hooks that we think the users may need, and don't charge for them. Upgrades and bug fixes are always free. And we get business without being the low bidder.

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

lunatic fringe electronics
Reply to
John Larkin

Could be worse:

formatting link

Reply to
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred

So, how the hell are they going to do this, without breaking something they can't fix? You can't just put in one piling all the way to bedrock and tying it to the basement, and then move over and do the next one. That seems a recipe for catastrophe. And, since the building already has a tilt that is causing things to malfunction, they must be planning to stop the sinking of the low side and then let the high side come down to even it up.

I'd love to know how they are planning to do this in a bit more detail. Seems to be a really ambitious project.

Jon

Reply to
Jon Elson

I am sure there will be a documentary on this, or more than one. Probably already in the works.

Reply to
Taxed and Spent

ven

ey

lt

p.

Spending up to $150M is what's called pulling out all the stops. This is th eir last shot at avoiding demolition of the tower, which won't be cheap eit her. On another note, the obvious liquefaction of soil beneath the tower me ans it has no earthquake rating at all! If they get a bad one, it very well may topple.

Reply to
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred

Aren't they the owners? Otherwise they'd have no damages to claim.

--

Rick C
Reply to
rickman

snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote on 7/22/2017 7:16 PM:

Sounds like a very slot motion version of a landing by one of the Space X rockets.

--

Rick C
Reply to
rickman

I found an article talking about the design of the building not being analyzed adequately in 2005 to find a problem with earthquake resistance. Seems the building may suffer significant damage and be uninhabitable in an earthquake.

--

Rick C
Reply to
rickman

the article says it is leaning 14 inches. i assume that means a 14" HORIZONTAL displacement at the top of the building.

that's got to be a small fraction of an inch VERTICAL displacement of one side at the base?

m
Reply to
makolber

the article says it is leaning 14 inches. i assume that means a 14" HORIZONTAL displacement at the top of the building.

that's got to be a small fraction of an inch VERTICAL displacement of one side at the base?

m ===================================================================

Wikipedia article:

formatting link
says it is

58 stories tall and was completed in 2009. "An examination in 2016 showed the building had sunk 16 inches with a two-inch tilt at the base and an approximate six-inch tilt at the top of the tower." Whatever that means.
--
Regards, 
Carl Ijames
Reply to
Carl Ijames

Who would worry about an uninhabitable building in the event of an earthquake, when the building is located in San Francisco?

Reply to
Rob

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.