CHICAGO | 300 North LaSalle | 785 FT / 239 M | 60 FLOORS - Page 58

SolarWind · #**1141** Posted **Dec 27, 2007, 1:32 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryan81

With the Help of SolarWind's picture......

Wasn't overly carefull in accuracy. It is approximate.

Nice! Thanks, Ryan81.

aaron38 · #**1142** Posted **Dec 27, 2007, 2:54 AM**

That is pretty slick work Ryan, nice.

From 12/26

Some new glass, really transparent at night.

harryc · #**1143** Posted **Dec 27, 2007, 3:11 AM**

Vents on the W side.

SolarWind · #**1144** Posted **Dec 27, 2007, 5:41 AM**

December 26, 2007

SolarWind · #**1145** Posted **Dec 27, 2007, 6:10 AM**

December 26, 2007

Dr. Taco · #**1146** Posted **Dec 27, 2007, 6:20 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaron38

From 12/26

WOW. this is gonna look SO amazing!! ahhhhhhh!

thanks for all the great pics, guys

and ryan, very nice photoshopping. now we have a sense for how big this thing is (well, at least i do)

BVictor1 · #**1147** Posted **Dec 27, 2007, 8:08 PM**

12/26/07

As of yesterday, the formwork for the core was up to about the 34th floor (according to the spray paint numbering system on the core). And the decking is up to the 27th floor.

Ch.G, Ch.G · #**1148** Posted **Dec 27, 2007, 8:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1

12/26/07
As of yesterday, the formwork for the core was up to about the 34th floor. And the decking is up to the 27th floor.

It boggles my mind how quickly this chap has gone up!

ltsmotorsport · #**1149** Posted **Dec 28, 2007, 2:24 AM**

I was just gonna post the same thing.

SolarWind · #**1150** Posted **Dec 28, 2007, 2:35 AM**

If you're in the area, check out the glass that recently went up on the south end. It's high quality and very transparent. I’m thoroughly impressed.

Nowhereman1280 · #**1151** Posted **Dec 28, 2007, 4:26 AM**

Comprehensive 300 N. from yesterday:

^^^ New glass Solar is talking about on the southside, it is indeed very high quality.

I need to work on holding the camera steady long enough to not blur it! New camera and nearly no experience with digital!

Dr. Taco · #**1152** Posted **Dec 28, 2007, 4:49 AM**

^

i_am_hydrogen · #**1153** Posted **Dec 29, 2007, 3:56 AM**

Taken 12/26:

jjk1103 · #**1154** Posted **Jan 1, 2008, 1:01 AM**

....why can this one (which is a steel / concrete mix) go up so quickly while TT and WT are all concrete (and much slower) .........why didn't TT & WT use a steel/concrete mix as well ?

Nowhereman1280 · #**1155** Posted **Jan 1, 2008, 1:31 AM**

Concrete is more rigid and was a better choice for the skinny buildings that are Trump and Waterview. It is also a good insulator to sound and it therefore favored for residential buildings. It is also somewhat cheaper than steel these days. There are lots of little disadvantages and advantages that go into making that decision.

Alliance · #**1156** Posted **Jan 1, 2008, 1:38 AM**

...notably floorplate size. Steel columns can be spaced wider than concrete can and they take up less space, giving more wide open floor plades more suitible for office buildings.

jjk1103 · #**1157** Posted **Jan 1, 2008, 3:26 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

Concrete is more rigid and was a better choice for the skinny buildings that are Trump and Waterview. It is also a good insulator to sound and it therefore favored for residential buildings. It is also somewhat cheaper than steel these days. There are lots of little disadvantages and advantages that go into making that decision.

......thanks, makes sense !

honte · #**1158** Posted **Jan 1, 2008, 3:51 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

Concrete is more rigid and was a better choice for the skinny buildings that are Trump and Waterview.

This isn't exactly true the way you have stated it... you might say more accurately that concrete structures generally have more native rigidity than steel due to their necessary bulk and massiveness.

I suspect the decision to go with steel versus concrete in these projects has as much to do with delivery dates and construction costs as it does particular structural demands.

LaSalle.St.Station · #**1159** Posted **Jan 1, 2008, 7:07 AM**

based on the current facade, i'm not getting any hint of the strong verticality displayed in the early renderings..... got a bad feeling.

scalziand · #**1160** Posted **Jan 1, 2008, 7:37 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaSalle.St.Station

based on the current facade, i'm not getting any hint of the strong verticality displayed in the early renderings..... got a bad feeling.

Give it time. There are still only a couple of rows of cladding installed, so how could the verticality be expressed? Currently the only completed lines are horizontal ones, so that's what seems the strongest.