3 ms·
I must admit, I do like the design, but why don't we get buildings where the crack style extends to the whole structure? I can think of 1000's of artist renders
by Aromasin 5y ago
I must admit, I do like the design, but why don't we get buildings where the crack style extends to the whole structure? I can think of 1000's of artist renders of what the architecture of the future will look like (eg. https://www.yankodesign.com/images/design_news/2020/04/259791/06_TesseractScraper_evoloskyscraper_yankodesign.jpg https://www.yankodesign.com/images/design_news/2020/04/25979...), but I can't think of one building when I've seen it put into practice. I've seen much less feasible designs engineering wise made into reality. Why are these "utopic" buildings left to fiction?
- Arainach 5y agoBecause they're dramatically more expensive than standard rectangular prisms for comparatively little benefit and significantly less usable/sellable square feet per acre.
- Aromasin 5y agoGranted, but there are also countries in the UAE that throw billions at these sorts of projects as little more than a side hobby it seems. I'm not asking why aren't all buildings like that, I know full well. I'm curious why there are NO buildings like tis.
- jazzyjackson 5y agoit’s the Frank Lloyd Wright curse: his houses are beautiful but maintenance nightmares - the first time you build a new design, it’s going to leak. as soon as you get creative, you’ll get seams that settle and crack in unpredictable ways. cubes are not the strongest form (rhombic dodecahedrons are better) but it’s not the weakest form either, you start playing with acute and obtuse angles you might come up with something fragile. best to stick with right angles. I turn my nose up at rectangular buildings as much as the next guy (my house, at least, is an octagon) but we’ve become very skilled at building rectangles that don’t leak / collapse.