[Biff]

I thought this was interesting and might cause some discussion from our engineering types.



B.C. architect touts plans for first timber skyscraper

By: Randy Boswell
Posted: 03/8/2011 1:00 AM

A study funded by the B.C. government to help promote the province's forestry sector will conclude that buildings as tall as 30 storeys could be made almost entirely out of wood, says an award-winning Vancouver architect leading the research.

Read More.......
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/bc-architect-touts-plans-for-first-timber-skyscraper-117569813.html

[drew]

^ interesting. I wonder if they mean timber as in solid wood, or if they are thinking engineered lumber like LVL, Paralam, etc.

If they are thinking solid timber, there will need to be pretty massive sections at the base of 30-storey buildings... Some of the old warehouses here in Winnipeg (6-stories or less) have 16" square timber columns in the basements - do we even have trees that big anymore?

[Reesonov]

What does the fire chief have to say about this idea?

[drew]

^ solid timber has a surprisingly high fire resistance rating.

Those huge sections require a huge fire to get involved (think about it, how long do you think it would take to burn throw a solid foot or more of wood?).

With heavy timber construction, fire resistance is generally not much of a factor, and either way, you can clad it in fire resistant drywall if required.

[Reesonov]

^ Thanks for the info. I happily admit that I am completely ignorant about these sorts of things. That was just the first concern that came to mind.

[Reesonov]

Incidentally, one of my favourite buildings on earth might be described as a "timber skyscraper":

http://cubeme.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/russia-skyscrapper.jpg

http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/08/500x_WoodenHouse.jpg

The Russian gangster who built this awesome building call it “the eighth wonder of the world,” while others dismiss it as an abomination. But one thing is certain: Nikolai Sutyagin’s building is not something you see everyday.

What is believed to be the world’s tallest wooden house dominates the skyline of Arkhangelsk, a city in Russia’s far north-west. It soars 13 floors to reach 144ft and is built to last according to its owner, but it’s under threat of demolition from city authorities determined to end the former gangster’s crazy 15-year project.

[MolsonExport]

reminds me of Barad-Dur.

[Coldrsx]

With advances, as drew mentioned, in composite or para composite construction... you never know.

I would concur about the relative lack of fire concerns, however I would worry that following a large fire the structure would be compromised.

That said, I think there are some great applications in taller structures for timber.

LVLs and glulam are such wicked things to build with, we use both extensively.

[CorbeauNoir]

^ Thanks for the info. I happily admit that I am completely ignorant about these sorts of things. That was just the first concern that came to mind.

Applied properly heavy timber can be more fire-resistant than steel, which loses its structural integrity easily when exposed to heat

[davidivivid]

I do wonder if they intend to built the said skyscraper in solid timber or in engineered wood because the latter is more common. If I'm not mistaken, in North America, the highest building whose structure is made entirely of engineered wood with great bearing capacity is in Quebec City. It is a 6 story office building inaugurated last year. The height was restricted not by structural concerns but by city regulations...:yuck:


http://www.cecobois.com/repertoire/images/realisations/csn/csn_a.jpg

http://www.cecobois.com/repertoire/images/realisations/csn/csn_d.jpg

http://www.cecobois.com/repertoire/images/realisations/csn/csn_o.jpg

http://www.cecobois.com/repertoire/index.php?option=com_rea&view=fiches&id=224&Itemid=100

[Reesonov]

^ Seems a bit of a shame to have so much wood on the inside, and yet so little on the outside, no?

[drew]

^ cool. Thanks for posting those pictures.

Isn't the new Quebec arena design going to incorporate some sort of wood-truss system?

[whiteford]

^ interesting. I wonder if they mean timber as in solid wood, or if they are thinking engineered lumber like LVL, Paralam, etc.

If they are thinking solid timber, there will need to be pretty massive sections at the base of 30-storey buildings... Some of the old warehouses here in Winnipeg (6-stories or less) have 16" square timber columns in the basements - do we even have trees that big anymore?

It would laminate timber. It is much stronger and cheaper than any single beam of wood. Laminated beams are several times stronger. For example, a 12 foot laminated plank will hold, at center, a man of 300 lbs. A 12 foot solid wood plank would snap with a man, at center, who is 130 lbs. Laminated beams are the only way they would build such a structure. It is very strong and the cost would be much lower than using hardwood which beams of the size needed, they probably no longer exist.

[whiteford]

Incidentally, one of my favourite buildings on earth might be described as a "timber skyscraper":

http://cubeme.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/russia-skyscrapper.jpg

http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/08/500x_WoodenHouse.jpg

^^^ i love it!

[Coldrsx]

^ Seems a bit of a shame to have so much wood on the inside, and yet so little on the outside, no?

not if it is exposed on the inside, akin to a brick warehouse with timber beams

[davidivivid]

^ Seems a bit of a shame to have so much wood on the inside, and yet so little on the outside, no?

I completely agree. Even on the inside of the building you can see very little wood. Instead they went for a very generic "office space" look by covering the beams with dry wall. They could have done something similar to the new wood sciences pavilion at Laval University:

http://www.cecobois.com/repertoire/images/realisations/pavillon_kruger/pavillon_kruger_b.jpg

http://www.cecobois.com/repertoire/images/realisations/pavillon_kruger/pavillon_kruger_g.jpg

http://www.cecobois.com/repertoire/images/realisations/pavillon_kruger/pavillon_kruger_h.jpg

[drew]

It would laminate timber. It is much stronger and cheaper than any single beam of wood. Laminated beams are several times stronger. For example, a 12 foot laminated plank will hold, at center, a man of 300 lbs. A 12 foot solid wood plank would snap with a man, at center, who is 130 lbs. Laminated beams are the only way they would build such a structure. It is very strong and the cost would be much lower than using hardwood which beams of the size needed, they probably no longer exist.

You're talking to an engineer here. I am going to need the thickness of these planks, type of wood used and an actual clear span. Otherwise I can't verify these calculations...;)

And what kind of man only weighs 130 pounds?

[Ramako]

When are we going to build the 100ft magnifying glass?

http://images.wikia.com/simpsons/images/7/78/Escalatortonowhere.jpg

[davidivivid]

^ cool. Thanks for posting those pictures.

Isn't the new Quebec arena design going to incorporate some sort of wood-truss system?

I believe the estimated construction costs of the new Quebec Arena are higher than comparable Arenas because they intend to use a lot of engineered wood in the structure. The city is trying to position itself as an expert in these kinds of construction...

[Biff]

And what kind of man only weighs 130 pounds?


.....I spit my water out reading this, very funny :tup:

[Reesonov]

not if it is exposed on the inside, akin to a brick warehouse with timber beams

True, and I take your point. However I am a selfish man, and as it is far more likely that I will see the outside of a building than the inside of a building, my primary concern is to see some of that beautiful wood on the outside.

That Laval University building is beautiful though.

[vid]

I agree that we need more wood façades in this country. Especially in my region, considering wood played such a big role in our economy in the last century. Currently you're more likely to see wood on boarded up buildings than architecturally significant ones. Our hospital won an award for its use of wood but 99% of its façade is stone and glass. Almost everything else new has a lot of metal, stone and glass but never much wood, even in the interiors. It's strange.

This building has a wood frame as well, but its facade will be metal panels:

http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/6610/im002767.jpg
I just noticed that the crane is half inside the building. Everything we do here looks so awkward.

Here is an article from Northern Ontario Business about the Canadian Wood Council's efforts to get Ontario's wood construction height limit moved from 4 to 8 storeys: http://www.northernontariobusiness.com/Industry-News/forestry/Wood-council-wants-to-go-ever-higher.aspx

[Architype]

Wood is possibly also more Nimby friendly.

[blacktrojan3921]

And what kind of man only weighs 130 pounds?

I'm technically a man due to age, but I weigh around 112lbs ;)

[vid]

Wood is possibly also more Nimby friendly.

Yes. When our waterfront project was being proposed, someone said they disliked the presence of "skyscrapers" and suggested instead of building the three 7 storey concrete buildings, to build "the whole thing two stories high and out of wood".

There are also people here who advocate abandoning the internet so that demand for paper will increase and jobs will come back.

[MolsonExport]

And what kind of man only weighs 130 pounds?

http://tonova.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/05/10/charlesatlas.jpg
Charlesatlas tickletrunk

[renthefinn]

I'm technically a man due to age, but I weigh around 112lbs ;)

Sorry, you do not meet the requirements.... Try harder!

JK couldn't resist...

[madmigs]

ugh no thanks! For all we know they could get infested with pine beetles or something...

But seriously, i've lived in a few wooden lowrises, yuk, yuk, and yuk. Lots of noise transfer from below and above, smells from below(cig smoke - bleh!), etc. I'll stick to my steel and cement building which aren't capped at such a little tower height. I would think the higher density of the taller cement buildings would more than outweigh the downsides of the cement and steel production(which they are working to improve anyways). And in any case, isn't logging, transporting, and processing timber an energy intensive process in itself, not to mention all that destruction of forests, rivers, animal habitats? And just think of all the extra timber we would need to build these plyscrapers, if the timber industry is supposedly sustainable now, building towers out of it will certainly change that equation.

[jlousa]

Cement is one of the worst contributes to ghgs on the planet. Trees also have the amazing ability of replenishing themselves and capturing carbon during that process. Noise/smell transfer issues are not cased by wood, they are caused by poor execution, and can just as easily happen during steel construction. With proper construction they are a non-issue. Just take a look at some of the examples posted above of what's possible. I think there is tremendous potential in this, there will obvious be a few mistakes made along the way before they get it perfected though.

[mylesmalley]

plyscrapers

Whatever happens, I hope this name sticks :D

[madmigs]

Cement is one of the worst contributes to ghgs on the planet. Trees also have the amazing ability of replenishing themselves and capturing carbon during that process. Noise/smell transfer issues are not cased by wood, they are caused by poor execution, and can just as easily happen during steel construction. With proper construction they are a non-issue. Just take a look at some of the examples posted above of what's possible. I think there is tremendous potential in this, there will obvious be a few mistakes made along the way before they get it perfected though.

But the thing is, if we start building a whole bunch of 20+ storey plyscrapers, we are going to need a lot more trees than what we are harvesting now. Which implies having to go into areas we haven't yet logged and destroying the local habitats. Yes trees can replenish themselves, but it takes many many years for a tree to grow to a decent size for harvesting. And as I have doubts how sustainable our current forestry practices are, this would certainly make our forestry practices unsustainable.

As for concrete and GHG's, they discovered a new technique for making cement with excess C02.
The turbines at Moss Landing power plant on the California coast burn through natural gas to pump out more than 1,000 megawatts of electric power. The 700-degree Fahrenheit (370-degree Celsius) fumes left over contain at least 30,000 parts per million of carbon dioxide (CO2)—the primary greenhouse gas responsible for global warming—along with other pollutants.

Today, this flue gas wafts up and out of the power plant's enormous smokestacks, but by simply bubbling it through the nearby seawater, a new California-based company called Calera says it can use more than 90 percent of that CO2 to make something useful: cement.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=cement-from-carbon-dioxide

And here's a similar cement manufacturing process from a British company - http://greenbuildingelements.com/2010/09/03/new-cement-absorbs-carbon-dioxide/

[Architype]

This may not be a skyscraper, but this six-storey project indicates a new direction for wood construction under the building code changes.


Timber line reaches new height with wood condos
Remy project in Richmond is one of the first to go beyond four storeys using timber instead of concrete (http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Timber+line+reaches+height+with+wood+condos/4495057/story.html#ixzz1HpUb9vc9)


METRO VANCOUVER - A new three-building condominium project in Richmond is taking wood to the max — maximum height, that is.

Taking advantage of building code changes introduced in 2009, the Remy project on Cambie west of No. 4 Road is one of the first developments in B.C. to go more than four storeys high using wood, rather than concrete.

It’s a new concept in B.C., where the building code was changed in 2009 to permit six storeys of wood frame construction as part of the B.C. government’s wood-first initiative. As well, the 2009 Wood First Act requires wood to be considered as the primary building material in all new publicly funded buildings.

...

The elevator shafts are wood, rather than concrete blocks, and the lower storeys are built more solidly because of the additional pressure the buildings face because of their height.



Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Timber+line+reaches+height+with+wood+condos/4495057/story.html#ixzz1HpUb9vc9

[Fairbanks]

YEAH Let's build a worrdframe skyscraper in earthquake zone...this guy proves you dont have to be intelligent to get a degree in architecture.

[Architype]

YEAH Let's build a worrdframe skyscraper in earthquake zone...this guy proves you dont have to be intelligent to get a degree in architecture.

You could take it a bit farther by saying that wood floats. Wood does however, have a built in flexibility that concrete doesn't.

[jlousa]

Wood is more desirable in an earthquake zone as wood has elasticity and can sway with the earths movements during a quake. As long as proper building code is followed and the frame is bolted to the foundation a wood frame building will do very well during even a large quake. The guy with the degree knows what he's talking about.

[whiteford]

china is filled with really tall wooden skyscrapers. thousands of them. will this tower be as tall or taller than what can be found in a city such as Chongqing? because i was looking at a photo thread that featured many very tall wooden structures in that city. very, very tall wooden buildings all over the city and many in what appeared to be the city center. very cool looking city and unique looking with those.

[isaidso]

I'm technically a man due to age, but I weigh around 112lbs ;)

Most Canadian men are 'heavier' than they should be. I'm only 135lbs and play football, so it doesn't really matter. ;)

[habfanman]

Wood is good! I often wonder why we moved from proven methods in the first place. The post-war desire to rid ourselves of everything traditional is probably to blame.

[Spocket]

Wood is good! I often wonder why we moved from proven methods in the first place. The post-war desire to rid ourselves of everything traditional is probably to blame.
It has nothing to do with tradition and everything to do with practicality .
Iron and steel are every bit as proven as wood is . Up until recently I can't imagine that anybody would have been able to build anything significantly tall using a simple timber frame . It simply doesn't have the load-bearing capacity and that's all there is to it . There's no conspiracy of convenience to rid ourselves of anything traditional , it's simply a matter of necessity .

With that said , while I find this interesting , I don't think it's a particularly good idea . Even if wooden skyscrapers are feasible from an engineering standpoint , that doesn't make them a great idea otherwise . We have to get this wood from somewhere after all .

[Canadian Mind]

It has nothing to do with tradition and everything to do with practicality .
Iron and steel are every bit as proven as wood is . Up until recently I can't imagine that anybody would have been able to build anything significantly tall using a simple timber frame . It simply doesn't have the load-bearing capacity and that's all there is to it . There's no conspiracy of convenience to rid ourselves of anything traditional , it's simply a matter of necessity .

With that said , while I find this interesting , I don't think it's a particularly good idea . Even if wooden skyscrapers are feasible from an engineering standpoint , that doesn't make them a great idea otherwise . We have to get this wood from somewhere after all .

Probably around 10 000 trees on this planet for every living human being. Look at the province your in, and look at the destroyed lumber industry do to a significant decline in demand over the past 50 years. We have the resources and the historical knowhow. We just gotta put guys back to work. :cheers:

[Spocket]

Probably around 10 000 trees on this planet for every living human being. Look at the province your in, and look at the destroyed lumber industry do to a significant decline in demand over the past 50 years. We have the resources and the historical knowhow. We just gotta put guys back to work. :cheers:

Uh ... well I understand what you're saying here but even if your tree/people guesstimate were right on the money you have to remember that the sapling growing in your backyard may be a tree but it's not useful for major construction .
Imagine how many trees it would take to build just one skyscraper . Now , forget about North America or Australia . Most of the world builds hi-rises to house the population . I live in China right now and my neighbourhood alone (about three city blocks in area) is nothing but highrises . I figure there's about 20-25 of them and the average height is about 15 floors . It would take literally millions of trees to build this neighbourhood out of wood .

We need to multiply this number though because here , just in my city alone , they build housing for probably a hundred thousand new residents each year . Everywhere you look there are cranes building highrise apartments . Not just one or two either but ten , twenty at a time , repeated in at least fifty areas of the city .

So that's one city , in one year , in one country (albeit an extremely big country) If even a sizable fraction of new construction here was of timber , China would have no trees left in a very short amount of time . Remember too that North America constitutes maybe %10 of the world's population (and I'm being very generous here) The rest of the world simply can't afford to build in timber . Yes , trees are renewable but technically so is oil .

[whiteford]

Uh ... well I understand what you're saying here but even if your tree/people guesstimate were right on the money you have to remember that the sapling growing in your backyard may be a tree but it's not useful for major construction .
Imagine how many trees it would take to build just one skyscraper . Now , forget about North America or Australia . Most of the world builds hi-rises to house the population . I live in China right now and my neighbourhood alone (about three city blocks in area) is nothing but highrises . I figure there's about 20-25 of them and the average height is about 15 floors . It would take literally millions of trees to build this neighbourhood out of wood .

We need to multiply this number though because here , just in my city alone , they build housing for probably a hundred thousand new residents each year . Everywhere you look there are cranes building highrise apartments . Not just one or two either but ten , twenty at a time , repeated in at least fifty areas of the city .

So that's one city , in one year , in one country (albeit an extremely big country) If even a sizable fraction of new construction here was of timber , China would have no trees left in a very short amount of time . Remember too that North America constitutes maybe %10 of the world's population (and I'm being very generous here) The rest of the world simply can't afford to build in timber . Yes , trees are renewable but technically so is oil .


Pine beetles destroyed more trees in one year, than man has in his entire existence in Canada.

[vid]

There is a difference between "this species of tree died because of an invasive species" and "we removed all the plants and turned this ecosystem into a wasteland to make asswipe".

[Spocket]

Pine beetles destroyed more trees in one year, than man has in his entire existence in Canada.
See above .

All the same , you're just not picturing the scale here . Even if the Pine beetle kills more trees in one year than have been logged since colonization (sorry , that's entirely untrue although I admit the insects do do a lot of damage) this being Canada , we have both and abundance of trees and lack of people to use the trees (including through trade) On a good day Canada accounts for what , %0.3 of the world population ?

As I explained in my last post , you need to stop thinking of this in the vacuum of North American home construction . Just ONE of the kind of neighbourhood I currently live in would probably require us to harvest trees in an area the size of your average subdivision .

Have you ever seen a map showing the contraction of forested areas of the Earth since industrialization began ? Clearly we go through trees much more quickly than they can be replenished . The only reason the decrease has slowed is due to conscious effort and (most importantly for the purposes of my point) the development of other construction materials on a practical scale . Add to that that even if we did decide to clear cut the country , it would be a one shot deal . Responsible tree harvesting dictates that we don't just start cutting somewhere and keep going until it's all gone . You can only take a fraction of the trees in any given area so that the ecosystem remains intact . Doing otherwise results in extreme soil degradation . So either we limit ourselves or use up our trees once and for all . Okay , yes , the trees would eventually grow back but we would have had to switch back to concrete or steel construction while we were waiting (which would take centuries) In other words , what's the point ?

There's no inherent advantage in using wood to build skyscrapers except perhaps from an engineering standpoint . If we plan to limit it completely to parts of the world with relatively low populations and densities then okay , it might be feasible . If the idea ever caught on though , we'd find ourselves living in a world-wide desert before too long .

[simoleons1988]

This may not be a skyscraper, but this six-storey project indicates a new direction for wood construction under the building code changes.


Timber line reaches new height with wood condos
Remy project in Richmond is one of the first to go beyond four storeys using timber instead of concrete (http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Timber+line+reaches+height+with+wood+condos/4495057/story.html#ixzz1HpUb9vc9)






Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Timber+line+reaches+height+with+wood+condos/4495057/story.html#ixzz1HpUb9vc9
well ironically, I saw Remy burnt down last night lol
like a giant campfire in the middle of the city.

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Massive+fire+engulfs+construction+site+Richmond/4722079/story.html

[whiteford]

btw, i was just saying. i wasnt trying to make it sound ok to kill all the trees that we have killed. lol

[Canadian Mind]

Uh ... well I understand what you're saying here but even if your tree/people guesstimate were right on the money you have to remember that the sapling growing in your backyard may be a tree but it's not useful for major construction .
Imagine how many trees it would take to build just one skyscraper . Now , forget about North America or Australia . Most of the world builds hi-rises to house the population . I live in China right now and my neighbourhood alone (about three city blocks in area) is nothing but highrises . I figure there's about 20-25 of them and the average height is about 15 floors . It would take literally millions of trees to build this neighbourhood out of wood .

We need to multiply this number though because here , just in my city alone , they build housing for probably a hundred thousand new residents each year . Everywhere you look there are cranes building highrise apartments . Not just one or two either but ten , twenty at a time , repeated in at least fifty areas of the city .

So that's one city , in one year , in one country (albeit an extremely big country) If even a sizable fraction of new construction here was of timber , China would have no trees left in a very short amount of time . Remember too that North America constitutes maybe %10 of the world's population (and I'm being very generous here) The rest of the world simply can't afford to build in timber . Yes , trees are renewable but technically so is oil .

I'm going to stand by my statement. Even if just 50% of the trees are usable for construction materials, thats 5 000 trees, which would translate into several million board-feet of construction material, the amount depending on the size of the tree, quality of wood, etc. I'm going to really lowball this and say you only get 1 000 board-feet of wood per tree (some trees on the west coast yield 2 500-3 500), that's still 5 000 000 board-feet of usable wood per person on this planet.

The average 2 000 square foot home, including framing, flooring, paneling, and the cutting boards in the kitchen, will take about 25 000 - 30 000 Board feet of lumber to produce. So, depending on the size of the tree, anywhere from 10 - 30 trees are required to build your average suburban home, say it houses 4 people, so 6 000 - 7 500 board feet of lumber per person used. That is an insignificant fraction of the total amount of wood out there available for people.

I'm just pulling numbers out of my ass from here on out, say there is 150 people living in one of your 15 story highrises in China, that's 750 000 000 board feet of timber available world wide per person, which translates into 750 000 trees. I don't know how much material would be required to build such a highrise, but based on the house example, it would be a far lower amount then the total amount available per person worldwide. These also wouldn't be solid wood structures, but composite-wood structures, meaning smaller "shrubs" could be ground up or cut into thin pieces and used to make larger beams like the roof of the olympic oval. This makes even more wood available for use.

But lets even over-inflate the numbers a bit, and say 10 000 board feet is used per person in this structure. That's 1 500 000 board feet of lumber used. Translates into 1 500 trees. To me the casual observer, to make a 15 storey structure entirely out of wood, that doesn't seem like a ridiculous amount, even if the floor plate is fairly large.

So to get to 1 000 000 trees, you'd have to build 667 of these things. Judging by my property back home on the west coast, you'd get probably 25 good sized trees on an acre. So you'd have to log 40 000 acres. That might sound like a lot, but it's only 162 square kilometers, or a 16.2km by 10km patch of ground logged to provide housing for 100 000 people. Not a huge amount considering BC is just under 945 000 square kilometers, most of which is forest.

[CorbeauNoir]

There are also people here who advocate abandoning the internet so that demand for paper will increase and jobs will come back.

http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2010/10/14/6f38488c-e82f-4de8-afc4-fcebc5f710ab.jpg

[Waders]

IMO, fire risk is one critical issue that needs to be resolved.
A 6 storeys all wooden frame building under construction in Richmond, BC just got totally destroyed by fire.
The towering flames could be seen from more than 30 kilometres away.
http://www.ctvbc.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110504/bc_richmond_condo_fire_110504/20110504?hub=BritishColumbiaHome

A 30-storeys plyscraper on fire could be deadly!

[jlousa]

30 storey skyscraper would be built with engineered wood not 2"*4"s also don't forget the building that just burnt down was under construction and none of the fire systems were active. Had the drywall be up there would've been fire separation t contain the fire, plus the sprinkler systems to stop the fire in it's place.