DUBAI | Burj Khalifah (Burj Dubai) | 828 M / 2,716.5 FT - Pinnacle | 162 FLOORS [Archive] - Page 16

STR

Oct 2, 2006, 1:17 AM

Does anybody know why there are floors where the concrete slab has been significantly thickened? I was curious if they made some kind of refuge floors in this building because of the immense height and difficulty they would have evacuating it during a catastrophe.

Thicker floors are used in any of the following circumstances:

*Load transfers (moving the load of one or more coumns to others that are not directly beneath the upper coumns.
*Mechanical: A/C plants, elevator drives, and electrical transformers are all extremly heavy and dense, meaning a thicker floor is need to support their weight.
*Tenant/user improvenents: Items such as vaults, paper archives, computing centers, kitchens, anything like that.
*Public areas: Certaiun uses like skylobbies, restaurants, obs. decks, and indeed refuge floors need to deal with the greater weight of a large mass of people walking on them. Even the way people move have to be considered. 100 people rushing for the emergency doors creates a lot of sideways force (Newton's equal and opposite reaction). Tons of it in fact.

Most of the thicker floors in the BD are mechanical floors. Some might be load transfer floors, but I doubt it. There might also have been some tenant/use related increases in the floor slabs. There are no refuge floors in the BD.

graham

Oct 2, 2006, 1:20 AM

Thats facsinating about the CF wraps on the too thin column!!

Please forgive my ignorance but...Why are they not feasible if cost is of no concern??
Were probably talking about the last 200 meters plus a spire.
When considering the thiness of the building at this height its not that much cost.

Your signature text mentions " imagination to visualize the need of society" but in this case "needs" are not the issue. It's what the customer WANTS. And since the customer is paying the bill I'm thinking the engineers could provide the imagination or risk becoming employed on a slightly less interesting project.

Slugbelch

Oct 2, 2006, 1:44 AM

Thanks Altin. You have a special "eye" for this thing. Great angles. Looks like facade mounts are still stuck at level 15. Going to be interesting to see how those next round of noses are going to be made. Maybe by the weekend, setback 2's yellow (now brown) panels will get removed.

By looking at those newer green screens to the others, it needs a bath.

.....hhmm could that contribute to glass start/delay?

kalmia

Oct 2, 2006, 2:10 AM

COME ON GUYS WHERE'S THE CLADDING?!?! I'm going crazy waiting for the cladding to start going up.

I think it will be another month or two before that.

STR

Oct 3, 2006, 11:29 PM

Cut the crap people. If you don't like each other, PM each other, don't ruin threads with your flame wars. Thank you very much.

My new diagram. I got sick of the rehashed Nightsky drawing, which is good, but is just a blown up version of the design that's obsolete by 3 years.
http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/images/42755.gif

LWR

Oct 4, 2006, 12:14 AM

:previous: On your drawing, at what level is actual construction now? (Great drawing, BTW.):cheers:

AZheat

Oct 4, 2006, 12:16 AM

STR

Oct 4, 2006, 12:28 AM

I believe it was around 3 meters, IIRC. The top will definately sway a lot.

Slugbelch

Oct 4, 2006, 12:59 AM

Burj Dubai tower soars to 75 floors (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/8/story.cfm?c_id=8&ObjectID=10404145)
Wednesday October 4, 2006

Developers of the Burj Dubai are making rapid progress in their bid to create the world's tallest skyscraper.

Builders have reached the 75-storey mark and a new level is being added every three days, reports say.

The tower, in the United Arab Emirates, is due to be completed in 2008.

Details of its final height remain secret but conservative estimates say it will reach just over 700m.

That would make it 200m taller than the present skyscraper title holder, Taipei 101, and over twice the height of Auckland's Sky Tower, which stands at 328m.

Details released by a subcontractor working on the project suggest the Burj Dubai could even top 800m. It is being built by Emaar Properties for about US$1 billion ($1.5 billion).

It has been designed as the centre of a large-scale, mixed-use development that will include 30,000 homes, nine hotels, 2.4 hectares of parkland, 19 residential towers, and a 12-hectare lake.

The complete district is expected to cost up to US$20 billion. Emaar will also spend US$27.2m to have a Metro rail station built nearby, the Gulf News said.

The Burj Dubai is expected to have around 162 floors, with the initial 37 levels occupied by the world's first Armani Hotel.

Over 3000 workers are on-site and more than 200,000cu m of high-quality concrete and 38,000 tonnes of steel have been used so far.

Construction began in April last year.

Designed by Chicago-based Skidmore, Owings & Merrill (SOM), Burj Dubai is based on the shape of a desert flower native to the region.

It is being constructed by South Korea's high-rise construction experts Samsung Corporation and managed by Turner Construction International.

Corbin Dalus

Oct 4, 2006, 2:33 AM

Sorry. Though I'm impressed by this immense and majestic project, I cannot mate the renderings, like the one by STR above, with the current progress photos. (Nothing against your renderng STR, it's a beauty). I must be missing something but I don't see how that current building will become that picture(s). The pictures or renderings make it appear stretched out taller. Otherwise, the next sections are going to be extremely skinny. How far up can it be occupied? I would think not past the fifth setback. And those must be like single offices or maybe two small ones, max. Perhaps I'm not grasping the scale or something. Also, why are the setbacks on the right side of the renderings higher than the left? In the progress pics theyare even. Is it the angle?

kenratboy

Oct 4, 2006, 2:41 AM

Artist request - take one of the under-construction pics and superimpose a final rendering over it.

Like Corbin - I don't have a clue what this thing will look like. I guess the top floors will just be VERY small.

STR

Oct 4, 2006, 3:29 AM

:previous: On your drawing, at what level is actual construction now? (Great drawing, BTW.):cheers:

Roughly at the third machinery band.

Bergenser

Oct 4, 2006, 11:16 AM

Nice diagram! :tup:

Slugbelch

Oct 4, 2006, 2:05 PM

Oct. 2:
http://img82.imageshack.us/img82/8253/bd1002062tu6.jpg
http://img82.imageshack.us/img82/3868/bd100206fz4.th.jpg (http://img82.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bd100206fz4.jpg) http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/7995/bd1002063il3.th.jpg (http://img228.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bd1002063il3.jpg) http://img82.imageshack.us/img82/7684/bd1002064hf8.th.jpg (http://img82.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bd1002064hf8.jpg)
selectworldtravel

M II A II R II K

Oct 4, 2006, 4:21 PM

Just a reminder we shall not permit any crap in this thread.

And any more name calling or offensive insults will result in suspensions or worse.

Jasonhouse

Oct 4, 2006, 5:22 PM

Tom_Green

Oct 4, 2006, 5:41 PM

I really like the Burj Dubai.
How much you ask?
Very much!!
You don`t believe me?
How about i say that i booked my next trip to Dubai to see this building rising?
I am nuts but i don`t have a problem with it :D

Pics are nice but i want to see it with my own eyes.
I can go to Dubai and visit the completed Burj Dubai my entire life but to see this building under construction i need to go in the next 1,5 years.
So i will go in the first week of April.
Why did i write this? Because i want you to remember that time is running out. Go to Dubai ;)

STR

Oct 4, 2006, 5:52 PM

I'm still trying to figure out why the massing of the constructed portion still doesn't seem to jibe with the renderings... All of the setbacks seem to be occurring several floors shorter than they appear to in the renderings.

I don't know if it's the viewpoint or what, but it is odd to me nonetheless.

Setbacks #2 and 3 (on the main tower, not the podium which hasn't been built yet) have remained at the level of setback #1. Not sure why. Probably just isn't part of the critical path. It kinda screws up the whole assymetrical look of the building.

dougtheengineer

Oct 4, 2006, 6:00 PM

I was wondering if any calculations have been made regarding the amount of movement that could be experienced on the upper floors in strong winds. The concrete portion of the building must be pretty rigid due to the nature of the material but the steel frame at the higher levels must be a little more flexible. I realize that the building will be very thin towards the top and that should reduce the amount of surface exposed to the wind but this height will be so extreme that I can't imagine that the very top floors shouldn't have a considerable amount of movement.

I would imagine there is some plan for a damening system, if the high floors are going to be occupied.

To give you an idea of movement, Tapei 101 can move up to 2m in any direction. There is a large dampening system inplace in that structure.

malec

Oct 6, 2006, 9:55 AM

New facade testing

(pics by Imre)

http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/3630/img4671uq6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/8638/img4671ik3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/8293/img4673qn4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/9084/img4674yd1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/181/img4675rm8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img220.imageshack.us/img220/4674/img4677tz8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/8595/img4677fs8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/3509/img4678of3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/2371/img4679fl6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/4426/img4680xh9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img223.imageshack.us/img223/9075/img4681sy4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/7193/img4682wc2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img93.imageshack.us/img93/9251/img4683kr6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/5585/img4684wt7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/9224/img4685jg4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img93.imageshack.us/img93/5802/img4686xu3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/8590/img4687yh0.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img157.imageshack.us/img157/2947/img4688yx4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img157.imageshack.us/img157/475/img4690ju7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img224.imageshack.us/img224/9362/img4691di0.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img157.imageshack.us/img157/766/img4693ft6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/1646/img4694wi4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img157.imageshack.us/img157/3484/img4695rz8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/5228/img4695ys5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Sky Tower

Oct 6, 2006, 7:13 PM

:previous: Nice pics by Imre!

Does anyone know if there is glass bridging the gaps between floors like they will be doing on the Freedom tower, or is it going to be alternate glass/aluminium panels?

If so, wouldn't a delay on one, setback work on the other?

NYC2ATX

Oct 6, 2006, 10:47 PM

ooooooooooooooooooohhh glaasssss!! :eek: the next chapter of burj dubai begins!

Slugbelch

Oct 7, 2006, 12:48 PM

Yesterday (Oct. 6):

http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/7906/bd100606szalontaifamilyli9.jpg
szalontaifamily

-UPDATE-
Arabtec update for Sep. here:
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showpost.php?p=2371641&postcount=210

LWR

Oct 7, 2006, 2:11 PM

:previous: WOW !!! Best shot yet.:cheers:

WonderlandPark

Oct 7, 2006, 4:03 PM

75 floors, must easily be over 300m/1000 ft by now.

Bergenser

Oct 7, 2006, 4:25 PM

amazing shot! :D

This building wil soon top 300 metres.

Now I am waiting for the glass.

http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/7906/bd100606szalontaifamilyli9.jpg

malec

Oct 7, 2006, 4:30 PM

According to Altin over on SSC there are more glass panels on the other side.

norman

Oct 7, 2006, 9:22 PM

size is definately everything!!!!!!!

Slugbelch

Oct 8, 2006, 3:34 AM

http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/8823/historyrisingburjdubaivk8.jpg

BINARY SYSTEM

Oct 8, 2006, 5:50 AM

Is THIS NIGHTMARE GOING TO BE 700, 800 or 807...

robertaas

Oct 8, 2006, 7:55 AM

:previous: WOW !!! Best shot yet.:cheers:
I agree. If someone is capable of taking photos like this could we please get one taken from a high altitude straight above the tower? It should look like a flower from that angle...

Eddy_A

Oct 8, 2006, 3:39 PM

Is THIS NIGHTMARE GOING TO BE 700, 800 or 807...
Is that a question???

I think it looks alright, maybe a little out of place in setting, but still a great building.

neverdone

Oct 8, 2006, 4:02 PM

http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/7906/bd100606szalontaifamilyli9.jpg

What building is in the backround to the upper right side with the exterior exposed triangular structural system?

malec

Oct 8, 2006, 4:39 PM

^^ Millenium tower:

http://i9.tinypic.com/29yf2ut.jpg

Thskyscraper

Oct 8, 2006, 4:53 PM

:previous: Spectacular building. But from the previous photo it seems not to have any road connections. When is this area going to be fully operating?

robertaas

Oct 8, 2006, 5:13 PM

An is there a stadium being constructed in the lower left corner of the panoramic picture? Would it not be disturbing to have such a tall tower visible from inside a closed stadium?

malec

Oct 8, 2006, 5:24 PM

^^ Nope that's the atrium of the dubai mall.

BINARY SYSTEM

Oct 8, 2006, 5:39 PM

Beyond 1000

Oct 8, 2006, 5:41 PM

If the Millenium Tower is 280m to the spire, then BD is not yet 300m. By looking at the photo BD is probably no more than 280m itself. Soon enough it will hit 300.

Beyond 1000

Oct 8, 2006, 5:46 PM

EDDY PLEASE... IT'S IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DESERT, DUBAI HAS A MAX OF ABOUT 2 MILLION PEOPLE. WHO NEEDS THIS RETARDED SKYSCRAPER DESIGNED JUST TO BE THE TALLEST IN THE WORLD. THE B.D. IS TWO STEPS AWAY FROM BEING A GIANT ANTENNA WAVING IN THE AIR TO SHOW THE WEST TO INVEST IN THE UAE. nO thanks

Agreed that it is not in the world's most ideal setting, but cities grow from somewhere, they don't just pop into existence.

Calling this building "retarded" makes no sense at all. New York or Chicago would have been so lucky to have had it. It is, I feel, the most beautiful building going up and the vast majority of people seem to think of it as a 9 to 10 out of 10 in looks. Giant antenna? :rolleyes:

BINARY SYSTEM

Oct 8, 2006, 6:02 PM

BEYOND
The BD DESIGN REFLECTS THAT THE UAE ONLY WANTS THE WTB. ITS LIKE PENIS ENVY, THE SEARS TOWER, TAIPAI 101 ETC... NEEDED A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR OFFICE AND RETAIL SPACE THAT MADE THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING IRRELEVANT. PEOPLE DROOL OVER THIS BECAUSE OF ITS HEIGHT.......WHY? THIS BUILDING FROM MIDWAY UP WILL BE MORE SKINNY THN MANY ANTENNAS AROUND THE WORLD.

I WILL SAY THAT FORDHAM-(UNICORN )-SPIRE WILL LOOK WORSE ..LO

vanhenrik

Oct 8, 2006, 7:26 PM

i wonder haw tall burj dubai is right now

malec

Oct 8, 2006, 7:34 PM

There's one big difference between this and other supertall towers that people always forget, this tower is part of a much bigger complex unlike the sears or taipei 101. Emaar have one purpose and that is to make money, with this development they'll make their money with all the surrounding res towers, lowrises, mall, hotels, etc. while the tall tower is there to raise prestige for the whole development. Without it there wouldn't be half as many who know the project exists so that means a lot less potential customers aswell :). Also it wouldn't be nearly as interesting without the tower
I still wonder though, why didn't they put the offices at the bottom and the hotel on top?

Also what's wrong with skinny buildings? If only fat towers are allowed to be supertall then we wouldn't ever get supertall res towers. I don't think there'd be many willing to buy condos without windows ;)

Nowhereman1280

Oct 8, 2006, 7:54 PM

^^^

I agree, I mean it is legitimate that this is there only to be tall, but so what? If the demand to buy condos near/in a tall building is there, then it should get built, no matter how much this building is being built to be tall, that tallness is still a result of demand, just as the tallness of the Sears and Taipai 101 was a result of tallness.

Its not like the United States isn't just as guilty of penis building anyhow *cough cough, EMPIRE STATE BUILDING, cough cough*. The Empire State building (and most of the other tall buildings in NY) were build with only the goal of tallness in mind. In fact at the time they were built, the middle of the great depression, there was virtually no demand at all to fill them. I don't hear you bitching about how much the ESB sucks and is a giant antenna (which the top litterally is).

By the way, you keep the unicorn horn out of this, that building is on a completely different scale than BD. I mean its not going to be the tallest and is in a completely different environment, Chicago. Nonetheless, the demand for FS is there due to high demand for ritzy condos in Chicago. Its a practical building, the extrvangance of design is there to appeal to the taste of the extravagant, there's nothing wrong with that.

BINARY SYSTEM

Oct 8, 2006, 9:05 PM

Keep drooling over the antenna in the desert, they need the water. I prefer good architecture like fosters WTC tower and Shanghai's Jin Mao Tower over height, either way the world is becoming more capitalist and western. By the way as i posted before the BD is in the desert... no need for skyscrapers. (In Manhattan the only way to build is up...ESB)

Like Federico Lorcahe said- The only things that the United States has given to the world are skyscrapers, jazz, and cocktails. And in Cuba, in our America, they make much better cocktails.

Atlas

Oct 9, 2006, 2:52 AM

Yep, Dubai doesn't need it at all but there is nothing we can do to stop it.

H-man

Oct 9, 2006, 4:21 AM

i heard the only reason dubai is building so much is beacsue theyre gonna need tourism after their oil runs out in the next 10-15 years

Nowhereman1280

Oct 9, 2006, 5:11 AM

Thats true H-man, they are going to need something other than oil to make money once it runs out.

Obviously they do need tall buildings or else no one would invest in building them. They need tall buildings because there are obviously people who want to buy condos in tall buildings or stay in hotels in them or no one would buy them and there would be no money to build them with. If the ESB was build because they needed it because there was not enough space, then why did it remain virtually empty until after WW2?

Just because they are in a dessert doesn't mean they don't need tall buildings, I mean whats the logic between Flat=no tall buildings? You mentioned how they needed the Sears tower. Well, in case you didn't notice, Chicago is built on a friggin swamp, lots and lots of flat land to build on, why didn't they just build a bunch of 30 story buildings with all of that space? A dessert does not say anything about demand for tall buildings.

What all this comes down to is that they are building BD because they want to and in a capitolist economy, what people want is what they make, so it would logically follow that it makes perfect since that a capitolist economy (dubai) that wants (demands) a tall tower would build a tall tower (BD). So these theories about no need for one are rediculous, they want so they need.

Finlay (Portland Or)

Oct 9, 2006, 6:01 AM

It's so funny how about every 30 pages or so, the same conversations arise.

Viva La Burj Dubai....Bravo....Bravo

robertaas

Oct 9, 2006, 3:30 PM

With no mountain to climb a tall building would help getting an overview of the area.

robertaas

Oct 9, 2006, 3:34 PM

UNICORN
http://i12.tinypic.com/4idlo3p.jpg
Looks more like a nose to me...

Pandemonious

Oct 9, 2006, 5:30 PM

I actually really like the Burj Dubai and many of the other towers going up there. The problem with Dubai is that their idea of planning is "hmm, lets build a whole bunch of tall buildings over here." many of the decisions they have made recently will never lead to a walkable urban environment, and I think in years to come they will grow to regret their pathetic excuse for city planning. This isn't just my opinion. I know that some of the leaders at SOM tried to encourage the UAE to rethink the way they are trying to plan all these ridiculously large and poorly integrated developments, but they really just wouldn't listen. I have nothing against Dubai, but I honestly think they are making a lot of decisions they will regret in the future.

As for the Burj itself.. I can't wait to see this baby completed. It should prove to be quite a beautiful building. I think it will be pretty sweet to walk around the completed plaza, embracing the tower's soaring height from the ground up.

malec

Oct 9, 2006, 10:10 PM

^^ My thoughts aswell. Some projects over there seem pretty well planned (well to me it seems anyway, maybe in reality they're not but I don't know), the business bay area combined with the burj dubai looks like a place I'd like to walk around but a lot are built in completely random locations in the middle of the desert.

AltinD

Oct 10, 2006, 1:40 PM

tanzirian

Oct 10, 2006, 5:59 PM

^^ Very true. Most people complaining of lack of walkability have not tried to do so in the Gulf daytime :D .

21bl0wed

Oct 10, 2006, 6:22 PM

I would like to see this building when complete. It's too bad i'll never visit a country like U.A.E. that still allows stoning as a means of legal execution.

graham

Oct 10, 2006, 6:22 PM

Yep, Dubai doesn't need it at all but there is nothing we can do to stop it.

What Dubai needs in your opinion should have nothing to do with wether you can or can not stop it.

It's interfering "we run the world" attitudes like this is why so much of the world can't stand americans.

Oops sorry - I got into politics there. My apologies.

BINARY SYSTEM

Oct 10, 2006, 6:39 PM

graham

Oct 10, 2006, 6:56 PM

Graham
Americans Do Rule The World...thats Why Your Using A Computer Talking About Skyscrapers Being Built In A Westernized Arab Country, That Is Building A Skyscraper Designed By Skidmore Owings And Merrill Out Of Chicago. Lol... And The Only Reason Its Being Built Is To Attract American And Western Corporations To Invest In The Desert. (white Elephant Anyone?!)

You misunderstand brother.
It's Atlas's attitude that suggests that he would stop it if only he could.
That is the issue.
The attitude.
He of course would have no right to stop it if he could.
That's what's causing your great country so much trouble.
Of course your not all like that. Just most of you.
Americans rule the world you say?
How is the rule making coming along in the other countries in that area?

Try to get a grip on reality maybe.

This is not the right place for this discussion.
Let's celbrate the engineering achievements and try to resist the urge to talk politics.
Not always easy but I'll stop now. Sorry.

robertaas

Oct 10, 2006, 7:35 PM

IIt's too bad i'll never visit a country like U.A.E. that still allows stoning as a means of legal execution.What? You live in the US state when they execute the most people and that is home to the biggest war criminal of our time, a president that twice has won the election through election fraud.... and you are having moral scruples about visiting the U.A.E.?

When it comes to economic expansion, new attractions and to new skyscrapers there is not all that much going oin in the US any more. It's Asia that has taken the lead now.

graham

Oct 10, 2006, 7:42 PM

What? You live in the US state when they execute the most people and that is home to the biggest war criminal of our time, a president that twice has won the election through election fraud.... and you are having moral scruples about visiting the U.A.E.?

WOW! Well, I guess that rules me out as " troll of the day". :yes:
Forgive him - Maybe he was dropped on his head as a baby! :shrug:
You never know! :koko:

robertaas

Oct 10, 2006, 7:53 PM

Here is some more "trolling" for clueless US citizens only exposed to sensored local media:
http://web.amnesty.org/library/eng-usa/index

The rest of us can get back to skyscrapers, preferably from regions of the world where such are still being constructed.

Atlas

Oct 10, 2006, 11:49 PM

What Dubai needs in your opinion should have nothing to do with wether you can or can not stop it.

It's interfering "we run the world" attitudes like this is why so much of the world can't stand americans.

Oops sorry - I got into politics there. My apologies.
I don't want to stop it, I just meant that if I wanted to stop it, there would be nothing I or anyone (excluding the owners) would be able to do to stop it. I don't want to start an arguement like what happened in the Aqua thread.:tup:

P.S. How do you even know I'm an American?

willcrazyiii

Oct 11, 2006, 3:16 AM

http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/8823/historyrisingburjdubaivk8.jpg

How did you do this?

This picture is so beautiful

arcite

Oct 11, 2006, 9:24 AM

I was in Dubai 2 months ago and it was over 45C outside. I thought I would be brave and walked OUTSIDE about 2 city blocks... I felt I was about to pass out it was so hot! Like an oven.

For the disbelievers such as BINARY guy, well I can only assume that you have never been to Dubai, or you wouldn't say such ignorant things. Dubai is a metropolis rising out of the desert. Its not quite there yet, but it will be in about 5 to 10 years.

I don't think there is a shopping mall in the US that is packed with international shoppers on a weekday at 12 midnight --every night. Dubai is a happening place.

rds989

Oct 11, 2006, 8:00 PM

Four comments:

(1) Burj Dubai is really beautiful and I'm very impressed by what Dubai is doing in general -- it is the result of undeniable guts and vision.

(2) It makes sense to me that "walkability" is perhaps not such a big goal when it is 100 degrees Fahrenheit a lot of the time during the day.

(3) Robertaas is grotesquely misinformed in a way that only a real kook could let himself/herself become, and his/her disingenuous plea to "get back to skyscrapers" after spewing insulting political nonsense is seriously annoying. It should be a subject of shame that at least 2 of his grand total of 7 posts have done nothing but raise the blood pressure of otherwise happy forumers.

(4) Graham's anti-American reflexes are annoying too, but showing the decency to distance himself from robertaas is nice.

robertaas

Oct 11, 2006, 9:30 PM

(3) Robertaas is grotesquely misinformed in a way that only a real kook could let himself/herself becomeMisinformed? Then please inform me what political leader in our time is responsible for bigger genocides than your belowed leader! He is responsible for nearly 700.000 deaths only during the last oil war in Iraq. And please also inform me who is responsible for more blatant violation of human rights in more countries.

, and his/her disingenuous plea to "get back to skyscrapers" after spewing insulting political nonsense is seriously annoying. It should be a subject of shame that at least 2 of his grand total of 7 posts have done nothing but raise the blood pressure of otherwise happy forumers.If your reading skills were as good as your writing skills you would see that I only responded to other postings not related to skyscrapers.

I understand that you are used to not having anyone questioning the truth of US propaganda and that the easiest way to handle this is to classify the person as insane. The USA may still have the military and economical power to impose your "truth" to most of the world, but history and the rest of the world will be quite brutal with you as your powers run out.

rds989

Oct 11, 2006, 10:56 PM

^3 of 8.

I just noticed, robertaas -- are you joking that your location is Pyongyang? If you really are based there, then that's remarkable:

robertaas
Registered User Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pyongyang
Posts: 8

Welcome! Express your fondest hopes for American decline. It's good for the soul!

And it will happen. Private property, free enterprise, religious freedom, and republican democracy are decadent and structurally doomed . . . just you . . . wait . . . just as soon as the Ryugyong Hotel is completed . . . .

Oh. But isn't Dubai capitalist? With private property? Doesn't the UAE trade with America and have good political relations with it? Why is the UAE doing so well? Why do North Koreans lack grain, among other things? Hm.

Or are you a diplomat representing another country in Pyongyang? But then I would at least expect the standard-issue hard-left pap to come with decent grammar.

yangtze

Oct 12, 2006, 12:30 AM

This photograph is nice,
http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/7906/bd100606szalontaifamilyli9.jpg
reminds me a bit of Sze Tsung Leong Shanghai photos, such as this for example,
peoples square, Shanghai
http://homepage.mac.com/szetsungleong/image/0405-023A_shanghai8500.jpg

Is it possible to buy a photo of Burj Dubai above in large format, on the
order of 80 inches at the bottom, at the same quality as the Sze Tsung Leongs
photoes? Would be amazing in my living room.

malec

Oct 12, 2006, 1:50 AM

^^ malec, nothing is build on random location. There's a masterplan for each and every aerea, which is presented to us sometimes even years after being implemented. My biggest problems are the access roads to these masterplaned comunities; huge yes but I see bottlenecks in there, when they instead of 2-4 access points, they should have done 6 or 8 for a better flow of traffic.

As for the "pedestrian friendly' part, who lives here knows very well that the hot weather doesn't allow much for a kind of pedestrian, outdoor life style that is practiced in the cooler climate, urban (not suburbian) West.
OK fair enough. The thing is though, there might be masterplans for the various areas but is there one for the whole city? The projects should be planned so that the distance people have to travel to get to work, etc is the minimum. People shouldn't have to travel to from Sharjah to work in Jebel Ali for example, instead for those people a load of cheap housing needs to be built near there. Jumeirah Village will have a good lot of office towers. I know it's close to residential areas but will most of the people working there be living nearby or will most be living over on the other side?

It's all this sort of stuff I'm talking about. The weather mightn't allow for good pedestrian activity but that doesn't mean the city shouldn't be compacted together for more efficiency. This would mean less distances to travel, less gas consumed, less pollution, etc. Of course so that roads don't become clogged you have to have a good public transport system for a dense city. If it's more compact though, it's much cheaper to build metro lines though since they don't have to be as long, and also reach more people because of the density.

cur_sed

Oct 12, 2006, 2:12 AM

got a point there. I don't think energy efficiency is exactly order of the day in Dubai. Is it true that they're going to pressurise the inside of the Burj because it's so tall, or was that just a rumour?

Atlas

Oct 12, 2006, 3:33 AM

:previous: It's definetly a rumor, it isn't tall enough to actually need to be pressurized. Unless the air is somehow thinner there they don't need it. The elevation here is over 4000 ft and nothing is pressurized.

Nowhereman1280

Oct 12, 2006, 6:12 AM

Yeah, there is definately no way that you would need to preasurize something that is at an altitude of anything less than tens of thousands of feet. Though I do wonder about the elevator issue. The problem with buildings that are much taller than the current worlds tallests seems to be that it becomes A. Inefficiant to do so much up and down when you could just avoid it by making it shorter and wider B. You run into problems with elevators that move 10,20,30 mph or however fast the fastest are where people can't stand the preasure change i.e. sinus' and ears. That I think would be the real issue that may require some sort of preassurization and decompression mechanism. I can't imagine being hurled a half mile into the sky at tens of mph, my ears pop going up and down the elevator in the 18 storey dorm on my campus, can't imagine 2500+feet!

robertaas

Oct 12, 2006, 6:19 AM

2000 meters is still not high enough to make pressurization useful, but at 3000 meters it would have a noticeable effect.

So if they were to build a copy of Burj Dubai in La Paz they should definately consider pressurization.

malec

Oct 12, 2006, 8:59 AM

Until we built the X-Seed then there'll be no need to pressurise

Imre

Oct 12, 2006, 10:20 AM

Burj Dubai 12/10/2006 pics from Al Wasl

http://img224.imageshack.us/img224/931/dsc0001ex2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/1026/dsc0002vh2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/1345/dsc0003nj3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/7959/dsc0004ad1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

AltinD

Oct 12, 2006, 10:37 AM

The elevators that goes on top of Burj Dubai will be presurised.

The building itself will not (really) be, but keep in mind that Sears Towers have a kind of protection against air pressure shock, for example the garagge access to the building have 2 doors and the second one will not open unless the first one is fully closed. I think a similar protection methode is used also on the access to the lobby from the street.

BD might use similar measures.

Atlas

Oct 12, 2006, 3:52 PM

Until we built the X-Seed then there'll be no need to pressurise
I still can't believe that building was planned to reach over 13,000ft!

STR

Oct 12, 2006, 4:40 PM

dubai 1

Oct 13, 2006, 2:46 AM

http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/7959/dsc0004ad1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)[/QUOTE]
WOW!!!!!!!!! that's huge. does anybody now the exact width of 1 of the core wing's. i heard it's only 70 feet? is that really true. but when i look at pic's from the facade testing it looks like 80 or more feet wide? can anybody tell me how wide the wing's are. i know that the wing's get wider when the tier's get closer to the core. so can anybody tell me how wide it is. I'd really appreciate it

Imre

Oct 13, 2006, 12:44 PM

13/10/2006

Burj Dubai

http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/8277/dsc0111wr5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/2104/dsc0113rh3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/2338/dsc0121vi2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/823/dsc0128lo4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/7803/dsc0129mo0.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/6267/dsc0130uc8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/4492/dsc0131an6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img81.imageshack.us/img81/8526/dsc0132ar1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/7941/dsc0133qd6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/4505/dsc0134rh3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/5825/dsc0135kq4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/1391/dsc0136xt7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img81.imageshack.us/img81/8840/dsc0137uv0.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/2554/dsc0138ha5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/4561/dsc0139io4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img165.imageshack.us/img165/280/dsc0140bw0.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/7227/dsc0141wz7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/9620/dsc0146ht1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/7254/dsc0147tj7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/78/dsc0149fa0.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

vanhenrik

Oct 13, 2006, 2:47 PM

onley just 100 storieys moor this is just sooooo funn !

cioloro

Oct 13, 2006, 3:18 PM

hy
the tower seems pretty thin at the last floors...
i cant imagine how the following 100 stories will look like... thinner and thinner?

Fabb

Oct 13, 2006, 3:30 PM

hy
the tower seems pretty thin at the last floors...
i cant imagine how the following 100 stories will look like... thinner and thinner?

The current upper floors are not completed because the wings still have to catch up.

dubai 1

Oct 13, 2006, 9:44 PM

http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/7959/dsc0004ad1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
WOW!!!!!!!!! that's huge. does anybody now the exact width of 1 of the core wing's. i heard it's only 70 feet? is that really true. but when i look at pic's from the facade testing it looks like 80 or more feet wide? can anybody tell me how wide the wing's are. i know that the wing's get wider when the tier's get closer to the core. so can anybody tell me how wide it is. I'd really appreciate it

Fury

Oct 13, 2006, 10:07 PM

:previous: Here is the full size of the tower with the wings - no podium...
You can decide for yourself the size - lots of the Blue Man Group to compare...

http://i10.tinypic.com/2rh1sno.jpg

:cheers:

Kermit Call

Oct 14, 2006, 3:06 AM

Wow, the first few lites of glass shown set on the world's next tallest building looks absolutely pathetic. It looks like it belongs with some lame ass mom-and-pop strip mall storefront.

malec

Oct 14, 2006, 8:10 AM

^^ They're the ones for the mechanical floors which we always greyish

Bergenser

Oct 14, 2006, 8:38 AM

wow amazing shots of Burj Dubai! :tup:

looks very tall, is it over 300m now?

AltinD

Oct 14, 2006, 11:36 AM

^^ Not yet.

mczamalek

Oct 14, 2006, 11:38 AM

Tall- but, uh....nobody bothered to build a city around it:shrug:

Watching it, loving it, but it's quite silly in context.;)

AltinD

Oct 14, 2006, 11:42 AM

Pictures

AltinD

Oct 14, 2006, 11:43 AM

mczamalek

Oct 14, 2006, 11:47 AM

zooms of Dubai- royalmirage al hizzaderizza! (.com)

smussuw

Oct 14, 2006, 12:00 PM

^^ what does that suppose to mean :whip:

arkhagello

Oct 14, 2006, 5:27 PM

Pictures taken from a 20 km distance, courtesy of victorPP, first posted in SSC:

http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l201/victorpp/DSC_1232.jpg

http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l201/victorpp/DSC_1231.jpg

http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l201/victorpp/DSC_1230.jpg

Nice pics, if they only be less darker.

It's amazing how fast they are building BD, just passed some weeks since my last visit to the thread and can't believe what my eyes are seeing!