Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday May 18 2019, @07:29PM   Printer-friendly
from the it-will-work-because-I-said-so dept.

Major outlets report on the passing of I. M. Pei, known for spectacular buildings around the world, The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2019/may/17/im-pei-architect-audacious-daredevil-who-built-the-impossible mentions some of his better known successes like the pyramid Louvre extension in Paris and Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Old gray lady is similar, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/16/arts/design/im-pei-buildings.html

Since I was in college in Boston in the 1970s, I'm more inclined to comment on his ego, which let him (and his firm) ignore their engineers and build the Hancock tower in downtown Copley Square. The first time the wind came up, large glass panes fell to the plaza below. For several years it was the "plywood tower" until multiple engineering fixes were applied. This Wiki article describes some of the work required: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hancock_Tower#Engineering_flaws Pieces of fallen glass were kept as souvenirs by many Bostonians.

I believe that Pei's engineers knew in advance that the vertical "blade" shape of the tower was close enough to an airfoil shape that it was going to have large twisting forces in the wind, but the architect convinced the customer (John Hancock Insurance) to go ahead without a full study in advance. Some of your submitting AC's back story came from a detailed personal conversation with the lead engineer for the retro-fitted dynamic dampers added at the top of the building--just one part of the repair process. He recalled carrying lead bricks up the elevators (on low wind days) to fill the two 300 ton weight boxes of the damping mechanism.

This building is rumored to have gone well over double the original budget.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Saturday May 18 2019, @08:45PM (3 children)

    by Phoenix666 (552) on Saturday May 18 2019, @08:45PM (#845130) Journal

    He's probably the most famous architect of the post-WWII era, but his modernist style never appealed to me. Zaha Hadid's organic designs always seemed more creative.

    The summary does make me wonder which of the two had the more durable designs. If I.M. Pei's buildings did pull bonehead stuff like that how have Hadid's fared? Anyone know?

    --
    Washington DC delenda est.
    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by MostCynical on Saturday May 18 2019, @09:48PM (2 children)

      by MostCynical (2589) on Saturday May 18 2019, @09:48PM (#845139) Journal

      Most [wikipedia.org] of Zha Hadid's buildings seem to be aging okay - but not necessarily nice to use. [theguardian.com]

      It seems governments are good at mucking up large projects, and Zaha Hadid Architects have been done over by the Japanese. [architectmagazine.com]

      Problems with large amounts of glass seem to affect many architects.

      Converting buildings designed for 'one off' events like the Olympics to make them useful afterwards seem to cause many issues [treehugger.com]

      Pei did mainly 'fixed use' buildings, so really has less excuse, other than ego, for getting things wrong.

      --
      "I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
      • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday May 18 2019, @11:02PM (1 child)

        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Saturday May 18 2019, @11:02PM (#845147)

        Without ego, you don't get innovation... not saying the Hancock Tower was a triumph or anything, though we should all bear in mind that I.M. Pei alone did not sign off on those construction plans, but without a strong personality driving risk taking, what you get is bland regurgutation of proven formulas - like most of what comes out of Hollywood and Disney these days.

        If you wanted bland repetition, you didn't hire an architect like I.M. Pei. It's unfortunate when a building costs twice what it was projected to cost, or takes an additional 5 years to complete, but, again, one man did not approve the plans, and all the post-construction mitigations could/should have been discovered by the engineers certifying the construction plans before construction proceeded. In the end, even failures like the Hancock Tower were their own kind of success, and it's not like glass clad steel has disappeared in the last 50 years.

        --
        🌻🌻 [google.com]
        • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 19 2019, @08:10AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 19 2019, @08:10AM (#845203)

          >but without a strong personality driving risk taking

          maybe you meant: cluster b personality disorder, histrionic.

  • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 18 2019, @09:28PM (10 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 18 2019, @09:28PM (#845133)

    I feel disappointment whenever I'm at the Louvre. Such a disconnected eyesore. Never could figure out why anyone thought that was a good idea.

    • (Score: 4, Interesting) by zocalo on Saturday May 18 2019, @09:58PM (7 children)

      by zocalo (302) on Saturday May 18 2019, @09:58PM (#845141)
      Have to agree on the visual disconnect, but maybe that was the point? It does however open up some interesting juxtapositions, especially if you don't limit yourself to keeping the horizon horizontal, which can be a fun way to pass the time if you are not at the Louvre early enough to avoid the worst of the queues. On it's own though, while The Pyramid is certainly an interesting piece of architecture, I'm not so sure it would be all that interesting, let alone as controversial; glass on steel frameworks are everywhere, and pyramids are not exactly uncommon either. Were it transplanted to an open plaza or something, I don't think many people would spare it a second glance.

      Not at all surprised about the Hancock Tower either. In my experience, while architects might be very good at thinking about the grand vision of a structure, they're often woefully bad at the practicalities of lighting the resulting spaces (e.g. excessive use of matt black finishes, or overly reflective ones), general maintainance of the structure once complete (e.g. large public spaces with no easy way to access high-level lighting or air vents), and interactions with the environment (eg.g. wind sheer, or acting like a giant lens to fry cars and pedestrians).
      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Saturday May 18 2019, @11:09PM (6 children)

        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Saturday May 18 2019, @11:09PM (#845148)

        visual disconnect, but maybe that was the point

        I have never given the Louvre the time it deserves, which is to say that I haven't spent a week+ there solely dedicated to contemplating its contents, but in the brief time I did tour it, it seemed to be a collection of disconnected antiquities, much like the Smithsonian taken as a whole, and isn't that the larger art museum experience anyway? Diversity?

        If the Louvre is to represent "Old France" perhaps in her glory days, then, sure, a glass pyramid is gauche. However, as a living vessel of historical significance, I do believe that a glass pyramid makes that statement: Paris did not stop evolving after Notre Dame was completed.

        If you want to bitch about an anomalous eyesore, how about the Eiffel Tower?

        --
        🌻🌻 [google.com]
        • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 19 2019, @12:44AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 19 2019, @12:44AM (#845157)

          > Paris did not stop evolving...

          That's right. The kebab stand next to Pei's pyramid is meant to represent the modern French caliphate.

        • (Score: 2) by zocalo on Sunday May 19 2019, @09:26AM

          by zocalo (302) on Sunday May 19 2019, @09:26AM (#845209)
          I actually quite like the juxtaposition; as a photographer it certainly presents some interesting compositional possibilities and I've spent some time in the square first thing in the morning purely to explore those. I just don't think the Pyramid on its own is particularly special, and certainly wouldn't use it as an exemplar of Pei's work unless as part of a larger context that includes the juxtaposition and/or the controversy over his designs. Utimately, it's just a cap to a light well over the entrance lobby below to allow natural light rather than requiring artificial like you would with a solid structure - given that requires a supporting frame and clear panels, there's not really a lot of other beyond how many faces it has and what shape they are.

          The Eiffel Tower at least has some historical context for its existance - a demonstration of what was possible for the 1889 World's Fair - that was left standing afterward. It was also controversial back in the 19thC, yet is now an iconic part of the Paris skyline, so give it another century and the Pyramid will quite likely be held in the same regard. Paris certainly didn't stop evolving with the construction of the Louve, let alone Notre Dame, and neither did the opinions of those who live there. Besides, if you think the Pyramid or Eiffel Tower are controversial, take a look at some of the proposals for the new roof of Notre Dame...
          --
          UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday May 20 2019, @02:31AM (3 children)

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 20 2019, @02:31AM (#845389) Journal

          If you want to bitch about an anomalous eyesore, how about the Eiffel Tower?

          What's wrong with it? Particularly when compared to glass pyramids?

          • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday May 20 2019, @12:06PM (2 children)

            by JoeMerchant (3937) on Monday May 20 2019, @12:06PM (#845485)

            How about: non-traditional, non-sequitur, excessively large, excessively useless? Ugly is in the eye of the beholder, but it certainly is a style that wasn't repeated.

            --
            🌻🌻 [google.com]
            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday May 20 2019, @01:35PM (1 child)

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 20 2019, @01:35PM (#845501) Journal

              How about: non-traditional, non-sequitur, excessively large, excessively useless?

              Not feeling it over here. It's a great tourist trap (supposedly over 250 million visitors since it was made) and used also as a broadcasting tower - so definitely not useless, much less excessively so. Non-traditional is a fair cop, but already granted by you to not be a bad thing (concerning your discussion of the glass pyramid). As to "non-sequitur" what is the relevance against which to compare irrelevance?

              And excessively large? What is the right size for the Eiffel Tower in the first place?

              Ugly is in the eye of the beholder, but it certainly is a style that wasn't repeated.

              Wikipedia has counted numerous replicas [wikipedia.org] three of which are actually slightly taller than the original (sans broadcasting tower) - perhaps you can point out which of the ones on that list are in the right size range. And there are a number [wikipedia.org] (list is rather haphazard) of other steel-lattice towers in the world (some which have a artistic component like the Eiffel Tower does).

              So sure, we can say that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but there apparently are a lot of beholders who think it's beautiful.

              • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday May 20 2019, @07:22PM

                by JoeMerchant (3937) on Monday May 20 2019, @07:22PM (#845601)

                It's unique. A radio tower / tourist trap is about all it's good for - and this function with different form has been repeated many times in major German cities. Exact-ish replicas aren't a continuation of the style in the way that glass encased buildings are a continuation of Pei's style.

                I'm not saying it should be demolished, I am saying that it is completely out of place in the Paris skyline, a huge reminder of a one-off event - like many worlds' fairs have done since, but in my opinion the later versions had more style and less stretch to achieve max height at the expense of basically everything else.

                --
                🌻🌻 [google.com]
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 18 2019, @10:25PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 18 2019, @10:25PM (#845145)

      You remember it!

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 19 2019, @08:17AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 19 2019, @08:17AM (#845204)

      The Louvre is not a good experience anyway, too much stuff too much people, worse than the British and the Vatican ones. The pyramid does not actually make sense but it's likely some inner joke.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 18 2019, @11:48PM (4 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 18 2019, @11:48PM (#845149)

    Throwing shade on a guy who just died? Bad form, SN, bad form!

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 19 2019, @12:20AM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 19 2019, @12:20AM (#845155)

      I was a little surprised that my editorial comments (I'm the story submitter) made it past the SN editing process. Wouldn't have bothered me if those sections were cut off, perhaps with a note to see "original submission" for further comments.

      Since I was in Boston in the 1970s and interested in architecture at the time, the Hancock fiasco (which did finally work out OK) was an important lesson on big ego, for me personally.

      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by martyb on Sunday May 19 2019, @04:05AM (1 child)

        by martyb (76) Subscriber Badge on Sunday May 19 2019, @04:05AM (#845181) Journal

        First off, I think the final result of the Hancock Tower's construction succeeded in providing a distinctive, non-cookie-cutter, tower.

        Though I was not in Boston at the time of its construction, my local paper carried many stories of the problems with the windows falling out. Large glass panes dropping from great heights do tend to get some attention.

        Further, I, too once had a conversation with someone who described the balancing mechanism just as the submitter did.

        The problems with its construction are part of his legacy. We all make mistakes and, hopefully, learn from them.

        Having worked for decades primarily testing computer software, and doing development, too, I can attest that buildings are not the only intricate constructions which presented with problems upon release. And, just like the Hancock Tower, after a series of corrections ultimately were able to perform their intended function. If anything, I suspect far more large software projects are abandoned after huge financial outlays than is the case with architecture.

        As much as he, or anyone else, would wish his legacy was free of faults and failures, how he handled adversity and ultimately triumphed possibly rivals any of his constructions.

        Far from casting aspersions on him, I think this speaks volumes on his strength-of-spirit and I can only wish that I am able to summon such fortitude when the winds of life place obstacles in my path.

        May he rest in peace.

        --
        Wit is intellect, dancing.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 22 2019, @12:51PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 22 2019, @12:51PM (#846171)

          >The problems with its construction are part of his legacy. We all make mistakes and, hopefully, learn from them.

          uhm... try smaller scale first?

    • (Score: 3, Funny) by Bot on Sunday May 19 2019, @08:20AM

      by Bot (3902) on Sunday May 19 2019, @08:20AM (#845205) Journal

      If you think this is bad, wait for the shutdown of Poettering.

      --
      Account abandoned.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 19 2019, @03:10AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 19 2019, @03:10AM (#845176)

    I M poo referred to his close friend I M shit for reaction.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 19 2019, @01:18PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 19 2019, @01:18PM (#845231)

    nature is the best architect.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 19 2019, @06:26PM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 19 2019, @06:26PM (#845285)

      > nature is the best architect.

      nature doesn't do many straight lines or right angles.

      Have you ever watched a carpenter try to make a curved surface or shape? A few of them are up to it, but not many imo. I asked some good finish carps to make me an elliptical hole, to pass a tube through at an oblique angle. They didn't have a clue, I had to draw the ellipse on paper (two pins & a string) and tack it to the surface, so they could cut the hole with a scroll/saber saw.

      Architect Frank Gehry has made a career out of using 3D CAD (from auto and aero industry) and surfacing software to design "organic shaped" and otherwise not-rectilinear buildings. They all leak and have other construction problems (lawyers delight!) This seem pretty easy to trace to the use of curves instead of straight/square building components.

      Want natural shapes? Expect to get wet inside (or only build in deserts?)

      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday May 20 2019, @03:07AM (1 child)

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 20 2019, @03:07AM (#845397) Journal

        Have you ever watched a carpenter try to make a curved surface or shape? A few of them are up to it, but not many imo. I asked some good finish carps to make me an elliptical hole, to pass a tube through at an oblique angle. They didn't have a clue, I had to draw the ellipse on paper (two pins & a string) and tack it to the surface, so they could cut the hole with a scroll/saber saw.

        It is surprisingly difficult to design around curved shapes, even simple ones. I once had to design some internal sections that were elliptical shaped as well (using the same two pins and string method to trace out) and then determine the circumference for a wrap. Fortunately, there exist simple formulas for the latter that are reasonably accurate because the exact solution requires elliptical functions to describe.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 20 2019, @11:46PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 20 2019, @11:46PM (#845672)

          Surfacing software in conjunction with 3D CAD makes these "organic" curved things relatively easy to design, but unless you are using CAM to make them (CNC cutting molds, 3D print, etc), they are still as hard to make as ever.

          The only craftspeople I know that could deal with curved/warped surfaces easily were pattern makers, and that is because they had to learn how to make curved things from drawings. Having your building built by pattern makers (instead of regular carpenters and other construction workers) could get pretty expensive!

          Amazing, khallow and I mostly agree on this...

(1)