_______ __ _______
| | |.---.-..----.| |--..-----..----. | | |.-----..--.--.--..-----.
| || _ || __|| < | -__|| _| | || -__|| | | ||__ --|
|___|___||___._||____||__|__||_____||__| |__|____||_____||________||_____|
on Gopher (inofficial)
URI Visit Hacker News on the Web
COMMENT PAGE FOR:
URI The Hidden Engineering of Liquid Dampers in Skyscrapers
rkagerer wrote 13 hours 57 min ago:
Toward the end, he suggests water dampers serve a dual purpose to meet
fire codes (having a reservoir of water atop your building).
Does this create additional risk when firefighting operations draw it
down?
i.e. Do the dampers contribute meaningfully to short term structural
integrity of the building (particularly in gusty weather), or are they
mainly just for comfort and materials longevity?
Has any building architected its liquid pool damper as a bonafide
swimming pool?
xhkkffbf wrote 3 hours 4 min ago:
What are the odds that an earthquake could hit at the same time as a
fire? What are the odds?
Havoc wrote 15 hours 5 min ago:
Cool video. I love the practical attempts at demos. Even if they
donât always work 100% itâs so much better than talking plus some
semi relevant animations
nosrepa wrote 14 hours 24 min ago:
Grady loves his models.
ggm wrote 16 hours 2 min ago:
The non liquid active tuned damper in Tapei 101 is a delight. Sprayed
gold like a funky futurist nugget, set amongst massive hydraulic
actuators.
I'm not sure you could make a liquid tuned damper be a tourist
attraction.
mook wrote 14 hours 4 min ago:
I wonder if it would be possible to use it as an indoor swimming pool
instead? People should get out when it starts damping least they get
tossed around quite a bit, of courseâ¦
pishpash wrote 12 hours 7 min ago:
But they wouldn't get tossed around, that's the whole point?
(Unless they are close to the pool boundary.)
chiph wrote 16 hours 28 min ago:
I don't recall him mentioning how the viscosity of the fluid changes
it's effectiveness, but I imagine it would. For reduced maintenance
costs (prevent algae growth) they probably use mineral oil, not blue
water.
bluGill wrote 12 hours 42 min ago:
They want something that isn't a fire hazzard. And water can be
connetted to the fire control system thus serving an additional
purpose.
giantg2 wrote 15 hours 49 min ago:
Fill it with electro-ferric shock fluid
imglorp wrote 12 hours 39 min ago:
That's a great idea. The Action Labs guy just demonstrated how some
of those fluids can vary their viscosity in response to a magnetic
field, used in some vehicle active suspensions. Similar
application!
kllrnohj wrote 15 hours 56 min ago:
Surely some biocide or glycol or whatever is going to be a lot
cheaper than using mineral oil? This is solidly north of a hundred
thousand gallons after all, right? Especially since they're already
going to have plumbed water in the building anyway, so they wouldn't
need to transport drums and drums of whatever liquid is chosen if
it's not water?
exmadscientist wrote 11 hours 42 min ago:
300-400 tons of mineral oil is not expensive on industrial scales.
And biocides are not as effective as you'd hope (look up biofilms
for one particularly annoying example). So mineral oil is
definitely a viable option. But its lower density means that water
is probably going to win anyway.
kllrnohj wrote 10 hours 44 min ago:
Quick search says around $1,600 USD per ton for mineral oil?
Taipei 101's damper is 660 tons. No idea how that compares to a
fluid damper, but if we assume similar tonnage requirements
that'd work out to somewhere in the range of $1M USD in mineral
oil. Granted that's, what, 0.05% of the building cost? So in that
sense "not a lot", sure, but compared to the almost nothing that
it'd cost for an equivalent amount of industrial water, that
still affords a lot of alternative solutions. Especially since it
just needs to slosh around, does it even matter if stuff grows in
it? It's not like there's going to be sunlight, either, so there
wouldn't be much growth regardless right?
DIR <- back to front page