Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: 30,000 foot Skyscraper.. .......!!!!!!

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
OK, here's the non-practical, (whew), design:

     Double helical planes at least one story thick but as thin as possible
with axial columns to handle the compression.  The tension would be taken by
cables on the outside of the diameter at the ends of the cantilevers formed
by the "stair stepping" of the compartments (fill in the triangular areas as
cantilever beams).
     Back to the practical - this thing would have to go into the ground a
thousand feet or more.  They might want to call Paolo Soleri.

-----Original Message-----
From: Fountain Conner <fconner(--nospam--at)>
To: seaint(--nospam--at) <seaint(--nospam--at)>
Date: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 12:40 AM
Subject: Re: 30,000 foot Skyscraper.. .......!!!!!!

>I did the same calculation.  If you step the structure enough times, you
>have a better chance with unit stresses.  Spread the load far enough and
>you have a chance.  Look at the Empire State Building; you can bet (with
>the value of the rental space) they didn't step the building because of
>Someone earlier suggested 75 feet of drift.  If you assume a cantilever and
>an allowable deflection of l/360, you get 167 feet.  Not to worry tho; I'd
>die of heart failure long before the building swayed that far.
>Fountain E. Conner, P.E.
>Gulf Breeze, Fl. 32561
>> From: Paul Meyer <PMeyer(--nospam--at)>
>> To: 'seaint(--nospam--at)'
>> Subject: RE: 30,000 foot   Skyscraper..  .......!!!!!!
>> Date: Tuesday, May 11, 1999 3:55 PM
>> 10 km high (ballpark)
>> stress due to self-weight of steel column that high - 77. 0 kN/m3 x
>10,000 m
>> = 770 MPa.
>> So, for a building with 50% net column area at ground floor, (yeah
>> you need a steel yield strength of about 1700 MPa.
>> We're talking 4340 steel, heat treated and everything, and 50% coverage
>> ground level.
>> Any other thoughts?  anti-gravity machine?
>> Subject: Re: 30,000 foot Skyscraper.. .......!!!!!!
>> chances are, it may collapse under its own weight.
>> errm, well it is getting late *yawn*.
>> Regards,
>>   Andrew
>> On Mon, 10 May 1999 Rbengrguy(--nospam--at) wrote:
>> > Attention fellow Structural Engineers.
>> >
>> > This message is just in from the WORLD's Tallest Building website
>> >
>> > Maybe you have some thoughts on trying to build a 30,000 foot