skyscraper

China is successfully replacing a 19th century industry with drones: skyscraper window cleaners

by

When we think of skyscrapers, the Western culture in which we have grown up makes us inevitably associate them with the United States and iconic skylines in cinema such as New York or Chicago, but the current reality is very different: China is the country that breaks the cord, according to the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitatthe world’s leading authority on the classification of tall buildings: it is home to more than half of the world’s tallest skyscrapers. This architectural explosion has created an unprecedented maintenance challenge: having to clean millions of square meters of glass and metal facades. What started as a need for manpower has become a testing ground for advanced robotics and unmanned aviation thanks to a state plan called “Robot+” that automates tasks to compensate labor shortage. One of the most striking recent examples: automated cleaning from Nanchang Railway Station. Goodbye to human window cleaners. The traditional Spider-Man of buildings is disappearing and it makes perfect sense: the risk of accidents and the climatic conditions of cities like Shanghai or Guangzhou have made this profession increasingly less attractive for new generations, so cleaning companies it is difficult for them to find relief: the perfect scenario for automation. Furthermore, the data from cleaning drones is compelling: going from being able to clean 200 square meters a day to 10,000 with a cost between 10 and 20% less, according to the Wuhan startup Aero Technology collected by China Daily. Drones are best suited to difficult outdoors such as corners and nooks and work even on rainy or windy days without risk. And when finished, the drone uses its camera to capture images of the clean surface, which it transmits to ground personnel for review. If it doesn’t comply, give it a review. Why is it important. We have already glimpsed some of the advantages of automating cleaning at height, but one is truly essential: safety. According to the WHOfalls are the second global cause of death due to unintentional injuries, only behind traffic accidents, with about 684,000 deaths annually. In the specific workplace, they constitute one of the main risks in sectors such as construction or industry. especially dangerous are the falls in height. In the United States, OSHA data They return that falls represent between 35 and 39% of construction-related deaths. In Spain, falls from height represented in 2024 12.2% of all work-related deaths during work hours in all sectors and this year alone they cost the lives of 79 people in the Spanish state alone. The other big advantage is price: less labor, less operating time because they clean faster, lower equipment costs, and lower insurance premiums. Aero Technology quantifies savings between 10 and 20% compared to traditional methods, although the drone company Apex is more optimistic for your business, raising the range of savings up to 30 or 50% (although the reason is probably that you consider assemblies like scaffolding). Regarding water consumption, a study by Shanghai University of Engineering has shown which spends 21.8% less. Context. China faces the worst possible scenario in this framework: it is the country with the most skyscrapers in the world, it has a lot of air pollution that quickly dirtys its facades and it also suffers labor shortage for manual jobs. Although if we are looking for pioneers in the drone cleaning segment we have to go to the North American one. Surname born 2014, the Elevation from the Swiss Aerotain AG back in 2015 or the Norwegian KTV Working Dronethe owner and mistress of drone window cleaning is China. China had been preparing the ground for years, as demonstrated by different academic research papers on glass and facade cleaning robotsas this of cable-driven parallel robots from Tsinghua University or this other of fan-powered cleaning robots from the Harbin Institute of Technology. The Asian giant has the academic ecosystem, state financial support and an obvious need. Said and done: China was the one who democratized technology, moving from prototypes and more or less “artisanal” devices to large-scale production with scalable industrial systems and companies like DJI, UAEAV and Foxtech. Today they already produce between 80-90% of the world’s commercial drones and lead an industry that in 2024 was valued at 248 million dollars and has a projection of 1,257 million by 2033. according to Growth Market Reports. The substitutes. China has developed a complete industrial ecosystem that is essentially divided into two major technological aspects. On the one hand, high-pressure cleaning drones that are connected to water pumps that are on the ground, such as the DJI M400 or the solutions of Foxtech Robotics. On the other hand, autonomous climbing robots with sensors and AI navigation (such as robot vacuum cleaners) such as those from OneMovecapable of detecting and adapting to variations in façade surfaces. In between, variants in the form of projects with hybrid platforms such as that of Skybotics Technology Limited or wired parallel systems that offer high precision, such as this from the Faculty of Engineering of Shanghai University with three degrees of freedom. Some of the technologies that can be found in this type of robots are adaptive joints to reduce wind discomfort or “zero distance” spraying to increase pressure, both present in the DJI M400one of the most popular in the sector. Yes, but. Although facade cleaning robots are a revolution for the sector, they are not a panacea: they work best on flat surfaces, they have height restrictions (typically between 60 and 120 meters for wired systems) and although they have more margin than human labor to operate in worse weather conditions, they are not infallible. Finally, the initial cost is significant, which constitutes a barrier to entry for smaller companies because it is not only the drone, it is also extra auxiliary elements such as pumping stations, batteries, software or safety certifications. For example, only the complete Lucid Bots Sherpa kit It costs $75,000.which leads to opting for solutions such as renting or leasing. In any case, and … Read more

the history of the Torres Colón, the Madrid skyscraper built upside down

by

Around here we love megastructures (and who doesn’t), but there are also curious stories in buildings that do not hold records of any kind and that even seem everyday to us. An example are the Columbus Towersin Madrid (Spain), whose architecture and construction posed certain challenges at the time and which almost made the saying “start the house with the roof” literal. There are 23 floors above and six underground, and its construction was possible thanks to the suspended architecture attributed to its architect Antonio Lamela (died in 2017). Or what is the same, the floors hang from each other, so that the upper floors do not rest on the lower ones. Not one tower, but two, and built from top to bottom This popular saying was already stated by Antonio Lamela, its architect, who maintained that towers could only exist if they were built from top to bottom. The reason: the irregular 1,710 square meter plot on which they were going to settle was too small and the municipal ordinance required many parking spaces, as explained in The Country. For this reason, the foundations would have to occupy a small space, hence Lamela began the construction in the opposite direction, something that in the end would cement (pun intended) an architectural work with a unique building in the entire world. and the decision to do two towers and not a single building as the City Council proposed, it was due to the fact that the architect and his staff confirmed that building a single tower would have deteriorated the urban image “due to the implementation of an element of enormous proportions.” Building them there was by no means a coincidence. The site was in the heart of the city and the City Council established that “the building must be an architectural unit of marked verticality”, as explained on the Estudio Lamela website, and there were numerous changes of criteria regarding a project (as we will see later) that had to adapt to a predictable urban framework, but that could never become a reality because of this. Image: Estudio Lamela And why build them? from the top to the base? As the study itself explains, they found a problem that could not be solved with the usual systems: the adaptation of the needs of the building (residential and with commercial spaces on the ground floor) was incompatible with traditional means, in addition to the irregularity of the site. Hence the idea of ​​”hanging” the towers, so that a double structure could be proposed with the two parts independent and in the end there would be a set of three almost independent buildings: the two towers and the one that acts as a base. Thus, the method consisted of raising a narrow pillar in the center (the core), on which to place the hanging platform (that is, the large concrete head). From there the floors were built downwards, the weight of which falls partly on the central pillar and the rest on the side braces. The pressure of the platform was in turn transmitted by these lateral braces, thanks to the tension of steel cables, thus compressing the soles against the head. “It’s like the building was turned upside down.” Antonio Lamela, architect. A project that was changing in its development The design of the Colón Towers, 116 meters high, was planned from the beginning, differentiating itself from what was usually done in “hanging” buildings, starting from steel structural heads. What was done is a design completely in reinforced concrete, using high-resistance post-tensioned concrete and making the slabs of the typical floors rest on their perimeter on the external tie rods, thus not being in tension but compressed against the post-tensioned concrete structure as we have explained before. In this way, the upper structure (in which the installation machinery would be located) receives the load from the 21 suspended slabs, transmitting it to the core, through which it descends to the ground foundation. For the façade, in principle folded sheet metal was used. anodized aluminum bronze color, although as we will see later this was not what was left in the end. They also count in The Country that this green crown art deco so particular, that it has been popularly known as “the plug”, that the reverse construction of this building baffled those who were watching the progress for years. The Colón Towers began to be built in 1967, but in 1970 the Madrid City Council stopped the works due to “political interests”, according to the architect in numerous interviews. With this (and the lawsuits), the City Council’s compensation allowed the initial use for luxury residences that had been planned to change to house offices, restarting the works and finishing them in 1976. A spectacular ending, but it was not the desired one either. The Colón Towers were considered the “building with the most advanced technology in building construction until 1975” made of prestressed concrete at the World Congress of Architecture and Public Works. It was a pioneering work in its construction, although there were already suspended structures (especially bridges) and over time we have seen more examples of both suspended architecture like this way of building them, like the corporate building of the Nykredit bank by Schmidt Hammer, the Media Tic building by Enrique Ruiz Geli or Hovenring, a suspended platform by ipv Delft that we saw talking about When buildings adapt to bicycles (and not the other way around). The project began being called Torres de Jerez, although it was named after Columbus as its construction took hold and was promoted, in the early seventies and by the construction company Osinalde. After deciding that they would be offices and once built, they were acquired by the family Ruiz Mateosbeing later expropriated to finally be bought by the British group Heron International. The construction company decided to change the aesthetics with a glazed exterior skin to avoid revocation, so that there was a double layer that increased … Read more

Mexico touches the sky with a new and elegant skyscraper of 484 meters and 99 floors. It will be the highest in all of Latin America

by

For decades, it seemed that “the sky is the limit” applied to architecture was a maxim that only Asia and the Middle East reached. In fact, in recent times the world has witnessed a frantic race to see who has the biggest (skyscraper) between Dubai and Saudi Arabia. But there are some notable exceptions like the one that is about to premiere in Monterrey: the Tower Risea skyscraper that will not only be the tallest in the Central American country, but will also lead the skies of all of Latin America. If we open the range to the entire continent, it is only overshadowed by the mythical One World Trade Center in New York. The project. The Rise Tower is a mixed-use skyscraper that is being built in Monterrey (Nuevo León). It will have a height of 484 meters, of which 408 make up 96 residential floors and the remaining 76 make up the architectural spire that crowns the structure. More specifically, it will house residences, offices, a hotel, commerce and leisure facilities in a single structure, as is usual in skyscrapers of these characteristics, thus turning it into a city within a building. It will be located in the Obispado neighborhood, on Constitución Avenue in front of the Santa Catarina River, in one of the densest and most representative urban corridors of the city. The project is in charge by Nest and Ancore Group, has been designed by the Ancore architecture team and Mexican architect Esteban Ramos. Pozas Design Group and Next are responsible for its luxurious interior. Rise Tower layout diagram. Rise Why is it important. The Rise Tower will surpass the Torres Obispadowhich is also in Monterrey and is still the tallest skyscraper in the country. But once completed, it will officially be the tallest building in Latin America, a title that gives Mexico symbolic and technical leadership in the urban and architectural sector. Without going any further, it also moves the Great Santiago Tower in Chile. The building also positions Mexico in the world leagues of vertical architecture, a race dominated by Asia and the Middle East. For Mexico it is also a demonstration that the region can conceive, finance and execute projects at the scale of the world’s large urban centers and at the metropolitan scale, it can function as an engine for the repopulation of the urban center that favors investments in infrastructure. Context. Monterrey has been consolidating itself as the laboratory of vertical urbanism in Mexico for two decades. Without going any further, the construction of the Obispado Towers in 2020 had already surpassed the 300-meter barrier that defines it as “supertall.” The Rise Tower itself has been evolving since its first plans, when he aimed “only” 350 meters. The project is part of the trend of mixed-use supertalls that began to emerge in Asia and the Middle East since the 2000s and is now beginning to materialize in Latin America. Monterrey is in an area with wind and seismic activitywhich adds a layer of technical complexity to any potential design. In figures. Some numerical data of this stratospheric construction: 484 meters high: 408 habitable meters and 76 meters from the spire It will be the 13th tallest skyscraper in the world 35 levels of offices, 22 floors of apartments, 10 levels of luxury hotel 4,300 square meters of green areas and 8,000 square meters of leisure spaces. In detail. The tower has a rectilinear shape with a reinforced structural core and a perimeter framing system designed to withstand lateral loadssomething essential given that Monterrey is in a region where there is seismic activity and a lot of wind. The building envelope consists of a modular aluminum and glass curtain wall system, an aesthetically striking and effective combination for thermal control and management of dynamic wind pressures at high altitude. The concept of the façade is quite reminiscent of the architecture of mid-20th century skyscrapers. Points out The Civil Engineer The initial sketches suggested a more robust metallic aesthetic inspired by the historic Torre Latinoamericana in Mexico City (the grandfather of Mexican skyscrapers, built in 1956), but with the progress of construction, a greater presence of glass has become evident. In terms of sustainability, the project already has LEED Silver, Green Globes, Building EQ and Well certifications from the International Well Building Institute. For when? Construction began in 2023 and by March of this year the Rise Tower exceeded 306 meters and reached the 52nd floor, but there are still 170 meters left. The construction pace is high and in accordance with the governor’s statements from Nuevo León, Samuel García Sepúlveda, the inauguration is projected for the summer of 2026, before the FIFA World Cup. Nevertheless, other specialized sources They suggest that it will be delayed until the end of 2026 or even 2027. In Xataka | If the question is whether a skyscraper can be erased without demolishing it, Paris has the answer: yes, in exchange for a fortune In Xataka | Cancun has a huge bottleneck in its tourist area: Mexico is going to solve it with a megabridge Cover | Chorizowithegg and Rise Tower

The ugliest and most hated building in Paris is its only skyscraper. Since they cannot demolish it, they have come up with another solution: make it invisible.

by

For more than half a century, the Paris skyline has remained practically frozen. You may not have realized it, but in the historic center practically no building can exceed seven floors. This norm was born after a controversial construction of the seventies that provoked such public rejection that it changed forever the urban rules of the city. Today, that architectural experiment is once again at the center of the debate. And they have found a solution. The tower that should never have existed. In a city famous for its uniform horizon of six or seven-story stone buildings, the dark silhouette of the Montparnasse Tower It has been breaking the visual harmony of Paris for more than 50 years. Inaugurated in 1973 with 59 plants and nearly 210 meters high, the mass was born as a symbol of progress in a capital that was trying to modernize after the post-war period and transform the deteriorated Montparnasse neighborhood into a business district. The project had the political support of President Georges Pompidou and the Minister of Culture André Malraux, and had to demonstrate that the city could hug “the modernity of electricity”, fast trains and telecommunications. However, the result was an enormous monolith of dark brown steel and glass that stood out brutally above the urban fabric of the 19th century, almost immediately becoming the building most hated in the capital. Aging too quickly. As usually happens in hyperbolic projects that do not end well, the problem started even before that the tower was finished. The plan had been conceived in the fifties, but could not be started until the end of the sixties due to lack of technology, money and experience to build a skyscraper of those dimensions in Europe. When it was finally built, its late modernist aesthetic already seemed dated, and its dark color (compared by some critics to a nicotine stain) contrasted violently with classical Parisian architecture. It almost instantly became a crooked line of the capital. The black sheep. The public reaction was so negative that just four years after its inauguration, the City Council prohibited building buildings of more than seven floors in the city center, pushing out the skyscrapers towards the business district of La Défense. Since then, the tower has remained an urban anomaly or, if you will, a reminder to avoid: the only skyscraper in historic Paris. The most repudiated building in the most photographed city. Over the decades, many controversial buildings in Paris ended up being accepted and even lovedfrom the Eiffel Tower itself to the Louvre pyramid or the Pompidou Center. The Montparnasse Tower, on the other hand, never achieved reconcile with the Parisians. Jokes about its presence became part of popular culture: many say that the best view of Paris is from your viewpoint because it is the only place from which the tower cannot be seen. Others describe it as the box in which the Eiffel Tower arrived packaged. Even local politicians have called the building of “urban catastrophe”and for years proposals arose to tear it down completely. However, despite widespread rejection, the skyscraper has also maintained a curious cultural life. For example, the famous “French Spiderman” Alain Robert climbed the towerand has also appeared in movies and continues to attract tourists who climb to its observation platform to contemplate the city. An impossible demolition. You may be thinking about it. If Paris hates its own creation, why the hell hasn’t it been knocked down? As tempting as the idea of ​​removing the tower from the Paris skyline is for many, tearing it down was never an option. a realistic option. The reason? The building still houses offices, has a huge commercial infrastructure at its base and its demolition would involve a gigantic cost in addition to enormous logistical and environmental problems. Even those who would like to see it disappear acknowledge that it would be financially unviable. The tower is too big, too complex and too integrated into the neighborhood to simply erase it from the map. This reality forced the city and the promoters to look for an alternative solution: If the most hated skyscraper in Paris could not be destroyed, we would have to try to transform it. EITHER directly delete it. The solution: make it disappear. From this paradox was born one of the most ambitious urban renewal projects in the city. Because the strategy is not to demolish the Montparnasse Tower, but to radically alter your appearance so that, in essence, it is not “seen” and stops dominating the Parisian horizon. The plan, promoted by a consortium of French architects and accompanied by the remodeling of the surroundings designed by Renzo Pianoaims to replace the dark façade with a kind transparent crystal leather crossed by garden terraces, balconies and vertical gardens that visually fragment the volume of the building. The idea is quite clear: lighten its presence to the point that the gigantic brown block stop imposing yourself about him skyline. A “trick” worth 700 million. The transformation of the tower and the entire urban complex that surrounds it will exceed 700 million of euros and aims to convert a degraded environment (marked by an almost abandoned shopping center and an unwelcoming concrete platform) into an open space with squares, pedestrian walkways, green areas and new connections with the neighborhood. In this way, the tower will retain its structure original plan to reduce carbon emissions during construction, will incorporate more efficient energy technologies and add high-rise gardens and a rooftop greenhouse. The project has been caught for years between political debates, neighborhood concerns and architectural discussions, but the closure of the building to evict the tenants now opens the door to start of works. The strange fate of the Montparnasse mass. In short, more than fifty years after that giddy inauguration, the Montparnasse Tower is still being an anomaly repudiated in the city that banned skyscrapers after their construction. Paradoxically, that same singularity has also turned it into a species of unintentional icon … Read more

China is so clear that the future of pork lies in ‘skyscraper farms’ that it is doing something: taking them to other countries

by

When you think of pig farms, what comes to mind are large farms with pig pens, breeding areas, silos with feed… All of this (of course) horizontally. Things change if we are in China. There they have been thinking vertically for years and betting on farms in buildings of various heights, including authentic skyscrapers, such as the two 26-story towers raised in Ezhou (Hubei) and that are capable of breeding 1.2 million pigs every year. Now China has started ‘international’ model. What has happened? That China has begun to export its model of macro farms pig verticals. Although a few years ago the ‘farm towers’ sounded like science fiction and there were even foreign ranchers who raised their eyebrows reading about them, the bet seems to have worked for Beijing. At least enough to consider take her to Vietnamwhere the Chinese firm Muyuan Foods has joined forces with the local BAF to build a complex in the province of Tay Ninhin the southeast of the country. Its main peculiarity: breeding at altitude. What do they want to do? The idea is to develop a high-rise complex dedicated to pig farming, an infrastructure that will be carried out with an investment of just over 450 million dollars and will integrate a farm of 64,000 pigs with a factory capable of producing close to 600,000 tons of feed every year. In September Vietnam Investment Review pointed out that the project has received approval from the authorities of the province of Tay Ninh, where the complex will be built, and from the state authorities. What does it have to do with China? That one of the promoters of the project is Muyuan Foodshe greatest breeder of pigs from China and a heavy weight of the sector at an international level. In addition to his enormous capacity of production, the firm stands out for its commitment to raising pigs in buildings of up to six floors. “We have replaced traditional single-story pig farms with multi-story ones to improve efficiency and land use, promote recycling of manure and waste and ensure biosecurity,” the company explained during its IPO in Hong Kong, a few weeks ago. What is China doing? Although in other countries macro pig farms in towers may be shocking, in China they have been implementing the model for some time. To understand it, you have to go back to 2018, when the country saw how swine fever undermined its herds. The American Society for Microbiology estimates that in total the outbreak killed or forced the sacrifice of 225 million of pigs. The country is the largest producer and pork consumer in the world and it is estimated that before the 2018 outbreak it housed half of the planet’s pig population. In 2019, the Government formally allowed the use of multi-story buildings for livestock farming and just a year later Muyuan opened its doors. a macro complex in Nanyangwith twenty blocks of various plants capable of producing more than two million pigs each year. Little by little, China has been moving from a model in which pig farming was a common practice in homes (it still is in part of the country) to one based on commercial farms in which it is easier to manage waste and diseases such as swine fever. Why farms in skyscrapers? a few years ago The New York Times I was chatting with an expert of the US pork market that acknowledged that US farmers “look at photos of Chinese farms and just scratch their heads and say, ‘We would never dare do that.’” The truth is that buildings like those of Muyuan or the 26-story towers driven by Hubei Zhongxin Kaiwei Modern Farming in Ezhou have their advantages. This is what its promoters defend, at least, who present it as another step towards industrial agriculture. The same one that has also opted for the vertical farming farms. By thinking vertically, instead of the traditional horizontal model, they basically seek greater biosecurity and more efficient management. Why’s that? In the Ezhou skyscrapers, for example, they boast of incorporating thousands of automatic feeding points and a system capable of collecting, analyzing and using livestock feces. Not to mention that by betting on high-rise models, macro farms such as those in Muyuan, Zhongxin or Guangxi Yangxiang make it possible to address one of the sector’s biggest problems: the availability of land is limited, especially in populated areas. Of course, the tall model also has significant risks. The main one: that diseases spread more quickly through ventilation systems. Now, as Beijing tries stabilize the livestock herd China to avoid surpluses and prop up prices, the country is considering taking vertical macro farms beyond its borders. Images | China-Singapore Kaiwei Modern Animal Husbandry WeChat In Xataka | The new Spanish farmer no longer lives in the town: his name is John, he studied at Wharton and manages olive trees from New York

If the question is whether they forgot the elevator shaft in the tallest residential skyscraper in Spain, the answer is simple: it was much worse

by

For many years, the Mediterranean horizon was the canvas on which Spain projected its most audacious ambitions, including some extremely difficult to catalog. In times of prosperity, the sky seemed limitless. Then, each silhouette in height began to count a different story about risk, pride and collective memory. The vertical dream born of euphoria. He Intempo building started to get up in 2006at the exact moment when credit was flowing without brakes and Benidorm continued to feed its obsession with growing towards the sky as if there were no tomorrow. We are talking about two tower-shaped monsters of almost 200 meters joined by a golden diamond, a hyperbolic architecture that promised mark an era and become the new icon of the Mediterranean “Beniyork”. The project was born with generous financing from a Galician box and with a ridiculous social capital compared to the magnitude of the work, a disproportion (and a nonsense) that today sums up better than anything the climate of that Spain that believed that the cranes would never stop turning. From the symbol of the future to the monument to the bubble. But the crisis of 2008 changed the script suddenly. The loan skyrocketed above 100 million, the financial institution went bankrupt and the debt ended in hands of the Sarebthe bad bank. The works were paralyzed, the developer entered into internal conflict and the building was left with its structure practically finished but trapped in a legal and financial limbo. For years, his shadow threatened to add to that long list of phantom monsters, in fact, it was the golden skeleton that dominated the Poniente beach, a mass visible for kilometers that summarized the collapse of a model economical based on brick and easy financing. The reality was worse than the myth. Then came the stories and legends, one turned into a meme and repeated a hundred times even in media reference. It happens that, it is not that in the tallest residential skyscraper in Spain they forgot the elevator shaft, it is that the reality it was much worse. The work accumulated erratic decisions, changes in construction, salary delays, serious accidents and chaotic management in which floors were concreted without having definitive plans for the upper ones. The project was at 93% with 100% of the loan consumed, there was physical risk due to the deterioration of the structure and a bankruptcy of creditors that left the fate of the giant in the hands of judicial administrators and investment funds. The problem was not a cartoonish technical detail, but rather a chain of incompetence, financial strain and poor planning that jeopardized the building’s entire viability. The elevator hoax that went around the world. Impossible to ignore it. The story that the architects “forgot the elevator shaft” was born of an ambiguous phrase and it became the perfect headline summer 2013. The image was irresistible: a skyscraper of almost 200 meters incapable of climbing its own neighbors. However, elevators existed, of course, and They worked and were planned in the plans. The photographs and subsequent media visits clearly demonstrated. It didn’t matter, the hoax was amplified in international media that they added layers fiction, from cables that didn’t fit to impossible redesigns. That anecdote overshadowed what was truly relevant: the problem was never technical, it was structural in business and financial terms. Rescue, redesign and change of owners. Years passed, and the bad bank promoted the necessary competition to prevent the tower from deteriorating and facilitated liquidity to complete the work. Later, an investment fund acquired the assetremodeled interiors that had become obsolete and corrected questionable decisions, such as hideous finishes that obscured the homes or layouts that did not take advantage of the sea views. Finally, the top diamond was reconfigured to offer more attractive apartments and the complex was relaunched, now as a luxury residential with thousands of square meters of common areas, hotel services and international marketing. From ghost to icon. Thus, and after more than a decade of delays, the Intempo residential skyscraper finally opened its doors and began to hand out the keys to his first clients. In total, 256 homes, 11 elevatorscomplete technical plants and a structure that rested on piles designed to support both towers. From that moment on, the colossus stopped being a simple media skeleton and became a building with neighbors and real activity. Its golden silhouette left behind the stories to keep you awake, it no longer represented only the bubble and failure, but also the resilience of a city that had made verticality its hallmark. That is why it is worth saying it once again: Intempo was not the skyscraper that forgot the elevator, it was the skyscraper that survived its own time. Image | Enrique Domingo, Diego Delso, Tim Rawle In Xataka | Matalascañas is an example of a major architectural failure: thinking that the beach of your childhood was going to be how you remember it. In Xataka | Parking lots were the goose that laid the golden eggs for bricks in Spain. Until someone created the tomb of Las Teresitas

In 1976 Boston built its most amazing skyscraper. Until its windows became lethal guillotines

by

The John Hancock Tower It was conceived in the late 1960s as the great coup of authority of modern Boston: a minimalist, elegant and almost “invisible” skyscraper, designed to reflect the sky with enormous panels of lightly tinted blue glass, with reduced mullions to a minimum and without elements that would break its purity, topped by a plant that visually sharpened the corners and a vertical slit that further stylized the mass. But there was a mistake fat. The modernist dream of a glass needle. The skyscraper was the type of building I wanted seem inevitableas if it had always been there, and at the same time had to demonstrate that “corporate architecture” could be a piece of urban art. In other words, a clear aesthetic ambition was sought, but it implied an enormous risk: betting everything on glass and geometric precision, where any failure ceases to be a defect and becomes a dangerous spectacle. The first shock of reality. From the beginning, the project lived under the spotlight because it in the Back Bay neighborhood and very close of Trinity Churcha historical milestone that already had a symbolic and emotional weight in the city, and that threatened to be dominated by the shadow and presence of the new colossus. Was protests and design adjustmentsbut the real conflict soon arrived below ground: the excavation and temporary retaining walls were deformed and gave way before the mud and clay fills characteristic of the area, damaging sidewalks, services and even nearby buildings. Trinity Church ended up claiming and won a million-dollar compensationand the skyscraper, before it even existed, was already seen as a work that was too ambitious for the terrain that supported it. The glass scandal. The episode that turned the tower into a black legend of architecture occurred when it was still unfinished: with the Boston winds, the panels began to crack and fall awayand the glass fragments began to fall to the street like some kind of lethal rain. The authorities even cordoned off areas and closed streets when the wind rose, and the image of the “brilliant” building was replaced by another. much more humiliating: windows covered with plywood sheetsa partially bandaged tower in the center, which earned nicknames like “Plywood Palace” and jokes like “the tallest wooden building in the world.” In a skyscraper that was intended to represent absolute control, the failure was not only technical: it was a reputational blow direct, one where the symbol of its modernity (glass) had become a meme and a threat… Why it failed. At first you knowsuspected the wind as the main actor, of the suction and channeling effect around the building, and tests were reviewed in wind tunnels with models of the environment, but the core of the problem was in the window itself. Apparently the system it was too rigid: the reflective layer and its connection to the metal frame did not allow bending, and in a structure subjected to vibrations, oscillations and continuous thermal cycles, this lack of “play” became the breaking mechanism. The stresses were transmitted to the glass instead of being absorbed, the cracks propagated, and the result was inevitable: enormous and very heavy panels, weighing hundreds of kilos, failing repeatedly until the unthinkable was assumed in a newborn corporate icon: it was necessary to replace them all. The tower at the time the windows that had fallen out were replaced with plywood The expensive remedy. The solution It was shocking.: remove and replace the entire glazing with a more robust, tempered and heat-treated glass, in an operation that cost several million and that prolonged the ordeal for years. The project, announced with grandeur and reasonable budgets, ended up becoming a spiral of delays: the inauguration was postponed, the numbers skyrocketed and the tower went from promise to public embarrassment. Even so, mass glass replacement was the only way outbecause it was not about fixing a few defective pieces, but about correcting a façade idea that had been born with a structural fragility incompatible with the climate and real loads of Boston. The building today The final twist. And when it seemed like the worst had already happened, came the most disturbing blow: Later calculations suggested that, under certain wind patterns, the building could have a stability problem more serious than assumed, with unforeseen twists and dangerous behavior on its narrower sides. The tower also moved enough to cause dizziness to occupants in tall plants. The city discovered that the beauty of minimalism had a physical price. The answer it was double: on the one hand, install a huge damping system with tuned masses, two gigantic weights mounted with springs and shock absorbers to oppose the swaying and “return” the building to its center. On the other hand, reinforce with tons of bracing steel diagonal. It was, in essence, reengineer an icon already built so that it would continue standing with the dignity that had been promised from the first render. The paradox: from shame to object of desire. The most fascinating thing is that, after such a disastrous start, the tower ended up establishing itself as an admired piece and recognized, until receiving prestigious awards and becoming an inseparable element of the Boston skyline. As they counted then architectural experts, it was the kind of redemption that only happens when a building survives to his own crisis: the public ends up remembering its silhouette and its reflection, not the panic of the closed streets or the wooden planks covering the absent glass. The Hancock went from being a historical lesson for modern architecture (a reminder that aesthetics does not negotiate with physics) to be, precisely because it has overcome this technical hell, a work with a certain aura of resistance, almost a monument to the obsession with fixing the irreparable. One more thing. Over time, the tower maintained its place as the tallest skyscraper of New England, but its story continued to move in the practical terrain of money, tenants and identity: … Read more

In 2013 London announced its most impressive skyscraper. Back then, no one could imagine the danger that their crystals had.

by

There are many stories of skyscrapers with very different endings than those on the plans, some terriblebut in the city of London one is still remembered for its closeness and chaos generated. The history of the so-called like walkie talkie (20 Fenchurch Street) is that of a building that was born wrapped in promises of modernity and ended up exhibiting one of the most unusual and dangerous design flaws in contemporary architecture. An experiment turned into risk. In the summer of 2013, when its glass façade was almost finished, London discovered to its shock that the skyscraper it had so much promoted had a big problem: acted like a gigantic parabolic lens, concentrating sunlight on a narrow strip of Eastcheap capable of melting plastic, deform metal and produce temperatures higher than those of a domestic oven. It was no joke. Parked cars, like the story that went viral Martin Lindsay’s Jaguarsuffered palpable damage, everyday objects began to melt, passersby spoke of softened shoe soles or feeling burns on their skin. You have to give it a name. The phenomenon was such that it ended up being baptized like death rayand it was not an exaggeration: the reflections generated up to 72 degrees Celsius on the street, creating a real danger for anyone passing by. The press documented the episode with fascination and alarmimmediately turning it into a media attraction that placed the building at the center of unprecedented scrutiny. The Walkie-Talkie (20 Fenchurch Street) A failure announced. Far from being an unforeseeable accident, Walkie Talkie It had been conceived with a concave curvature that any student of elementary physics would have pointed out as capable of concentrating light. Its architect, Rafael Viñoly, recognized shortly after the building had initially been designed with horizontal slats to avoid precisely that effect, but they were removed for budgetary reasons. Viñoly admitted also that the team did not have the appropriate tools to model the phenomenon accurately, limiting itself to approximate calculations who predicted a lower risk. The reality was very different, aggravated by the increase in solar radiation in London in recent years. In fact, the problem It was not unprecedented for the architect: already in Las Vegas his Vdara hotel had been accused to concentrate light until they burn the bathers. The skyscraper under construction And more. But in London the error acquired a incomparable public dimensionbecause it affected not a private complex but one of the busiest streets in the City. The urgent installation of a temporary mesh and the subsequent placement of slats on the facade They solved the problem, but they did not avoid the perception that it was a systemic failure, the result of a design process that had privileged aesthetics and costs over urban safety. The Sky Garden Emblem of a city in transformation. Even before the death ray episode, the Walkie Talkie was subject of criticism. Its silhouette, disproportionate and widened upward to maximize profitable views, stood like a sort of “sore thumb” outside the financial cluster, generating a visual impact that the own urban report had described as “significant damage.” However, the real controversy came after its famous Sky Garden: presented as a public contribution comparable to a vertical park. open to all, it ended up being more of a panoramic restaurant complex with controlled access and mandatory reservations. For many Londoners, it represented a symbol of the privatization drift of urban spaces: a supposed “public garden” that responded more to the logic of corporate luxury than to that of the common good. The complaints were so intense that the City even raised a structural reform of space to bring it closer to what was initially promised. A razzie. In 2015, amidst the accumulation of controversies, the building received the Carbuncle Cup for ugliest building of the year in the United Kingdom, a satirical recognition that underlined the extent to which it had become object of rejection collective. Even Sky News tried to fry an egg under his facade and his name mutated into a meme: Scorchie walkie. Over time, its image became associated not only with an aesthetic problem, but with a chain of opaque decisions and urban planning concessions that many consider a paradigmatic example of how not to manage the integration of a skyscraper into the historical fabric of London. The work of the Imperial The rebirth. Despite its rugged origins, Walkie Talkie has undergone a surprising public rehabilitation. In 2025, twelve years after the incident, visitors are lining up to enjoy from the Sky Gardennow fully integrated into the city’s tourist circuit. But beneath that normalization lies a story that could have been tragic. Later studies from Imperial College showed that, in a different meteorological scenario, the death ray could have cause serious injuryfires in nearby homes and even permanent damage to the skin and eyes. Only the chance combination of clouds and the orientation of the beam (which did not fall at its maximum point at street level) prevented major consequences. A reminder. The architecture was a warning about the critical role of climate modeling, professional responsibility, and the need to subject bolder architectural forms to much more rigorous evaluations. If today the majority of tourists who sgo to the Sky Garden They ignore that the building was about to become an icon of the disaster, it is because the city acted quickly and because luck intervened at the right time. In any case, the technical memory persists: Walkie Talkie remains a reminder that, in a dense, vertical metropolis, a miscalculation can become a massive riskand that contemporary architecture (when its interaction with the environment is neglected) can produce both wonders and invisible dangers. An uncomfortable legacy. In retrospect, the Walkie Talkie has ended up occupying a peculiar place in London’s recent history: it is simultaneously a tourist success, a design failurea case study in urban security and an example of the tensions between public interest and the imperatives of the real estate market. Its trajectory shows that a … Read more

China has just completed the world’s tallest dam. And what stands out the least is that it is as tall as a skyscraper

by

China has a beastly capacity to create pharaonic structures. Impossible roadshighways with infernal ‘knots’, very complex tunnels and one ridiculous amount of bridges so functional and essential to connect areas like ostentatious. But among all his civil engineering works, the ones that are most striking to me are the dams. And, after the largest in the world, now They have one that is as tall as a skyscraper. It is the Zhenjiang pumping stationand is key to adding even more renewable energy to your accountant. Figures. The name is “Zhenjiang/Jurong Pumping Station” and, located in Jiangsu province, it has become the latest milestone in Chinese energy engineering. The project began in 2017 and, as is customary in almost all of these infrastructures in the Asian giant, both its dimensions and construction times are surprising. In these eight years, they have built the highest pumping dam in the world, 182 meters high, equivalent to a 60-story building. Apart from the height, its volcano shape is striking, with a reservoir at the top capable of storing up to 17.07 million cubic meters of water. Context? What 6,800 Olympic-sized swimming pools have (okay, it’s equally difficult to imagine the number). Bowels. It’s not just imposing on the outside. Its engine room is 800 meters deep and has dimensions of 250 meters long, 60 meters high and another 25 meters wide. In this room are the six mixed turbines and, in total, the project has established a dozen records in the sector. Its role in renewables. It is estimated that the investment has been about 9.6 billion yuan, about 1.3 billion euros, and all to feed more than 360,000 homes. Each of the turbines generates 225 MW for a total of 1.3 GW of installed power. Thanks to both the dimensions of the turbines and the difference in level and force of the water, it is estimated that it will consume 1,800 million kWh annually during pumping and will generate 1,350 million kWh during discharge. It is a consumption/generation difference of 25% and, although it is not a figure that attracts attention, it is a milestone, since current pumping (or reversible) installations require hydraulic jumps of about 400 meters to operate under the same conditions. The turbines at the Zhenjiang plant do so with a head of less than 200 meters. That is, it is optimized for low gradient conditions, but maintaining a high volumetric flow. In summary, It’s like a giant battery, but with water. During low demand hours, the plant moves water to the upper reservoir and, during peak consumption, releases it, passing it through the turbines at high speed and generating electricity in the process. According to estimates, it will save 140,000 tons of coal per year, which represents 349,000 tons of CO₂. One more in the Yangtze. Despite everything the plant represents in terms of civil engineering and its role in renewablesthe greatest achievement of this plant is that it has been shown that it is possible to build massive storage systems if artificial elevations are created. In flat areas with unfavorable orography, Zhenjiang demonstrates that pumping structures can be created to help achieve decarbonization objectives without depending so much on wind and solar power. Wang Chenhui, director of the Development Department of State Grid Zhenjiang Power Supply Company -responsible for the dam-, assures that “at full operation it will provide approximately 2.7 million kilowatts of bidirectional power regulation capacity, relieving pressure on the electrical grid during peak load periods.” It will be more help for Jiangsu province than this summer consumed 6% more electricity than in 2024, reaching 156 million kilowatts. And also in the Yangtze are the mammoth dam of the Three Gorges and the next largest dam in the world. The one in Zhenjiang is not so huge nor does it generate as much electricity, but it is the highest in the world and, as we said, a demonstration that, if the terrain is not good, you can always build a huge pool at 190 meters high. Image | Ministry of Water Resources of the People’s Republic of China In Xataka | China has built the highest bridge in the world and has done what it must: turn it into a show

For decades we rose to this skyscraper in New York without knowing that the screws that held it did not endure

by

The situation was more or less like that. For two decades, hundreds of thousands of people entered and went through the doors of one of the larger skyscrapers in New York City. These people, many of them workers, went up and down in the elevator of others totally to the critical failure that the building had, terrifying in an architectural key, and that No one took into account. Rarely in the history of urbanism of the great cities occurred A similar situation. The story dates back to the early twentieth centurywhen the Lutheran Church of San Pedro was in a field of 53 streetbetween Lexington Avenue and the third avenue, in Midtown Manhattan. By 1960, the Church community went through serious economic problems, which led the City Council to sell the land. The negotiations were not easy and lasted years. Mainly, because the Church demanded the creation of a new separate building from the block of floors in which it could continue with its activities. In the end Green light was given to the project. The promoter accepted the conditions, and Citi Bank commissioned Hugh Stubbins & Associates the design of the skyscraper. The engineering will be in charge of William Lemessurier. The final project consisted of a skyscraper, a church, a public space under the level of the street and landscaping. The most important element was, of course, skyscrapers. The plane marked 46 plants that were going to distinguish from the rest of the city by the polished and anodized aluminum of the facade. In addition, among the panels there were window rows. It did not seem really complicated, at least not like the roof and the base of the building. The happy roof Thus, in 1977 the skyscraper ends up lifting. By then it had become bigger, with 59 plants and A total height of 279 meters. An architectural work that dazzled the city’s Skyline, a colossal tower where its inclined top of 45 degrees highlighted. The top of the roof It resembles an isosceles triangle. The original plan was to build terraces and apartments, but over time the architects decided to install huge solar panels. Lemessurier, a professor and graduate of the Massachusetts Institute, conducted a series of tests to check their efficiency. It turned out that the energy converted by the installation was insufficient. Finally, the idea of a small solar plant was abandoned. However, nothing like the base on which the building was supported. Some “stunches”, as Lemessurier himself described, among which he seemed to float for then seventh larger skyscraper on the planet. We refer, of course, those four gigantic pillars (34 meters each) that are located in the center of each side (instead of the corners) of the base. It also had a single column in the center, in this narrower case, which housed the building’s elevator banks and that provided additional force to the racks. With this design it was made room for the church under the corner of the northwest of the building, and gave the giant structure A brutal effectalmost as if he were levitating. In fact, it was exceptionally “light”, of only 25,000 tons (As a reference, Empire State Building was 60,000). The famous pillars The base became an icon of architecture, since it caused the space in the corners to be empty. Lemessurier caused the scratch weight to be distributed to the outer skeleton. Specifically, in a grid of Marcos in a triangular way hidden under the facade. Interestingly, this structure was visible from the inside. The elements were not completely welded, but only set with screwed joints. Apparently, the steel frame designed in this way was destined to support perpendicular winds. According to engineers, Other types of wind should not suppose a threat. In addition, municipal standards did not force other air bursts in design. The truth is that architecture hid an important mechanism in the upper floors. Citigroup Center had One of the first tuned mass shock absorbers (TDM). It is a 360 -ton concrete sphere embedded in oil. When the vibrations of the soil or the wind moved the building, the mechanism oscillated in the opposite direction to the inclination of the building. The problems begin Said balancing was in turn balanced by hydraulic arms that support the sphere. With this solution, the skyscraper was able to “maintain balance.” As Lemessurier explained in his day, this piece was key, since its function was to cut the balancing of the building by half by converting the kinetic energy of friction balancing. Once finished, the building was praised, but also The first doubts arrived. New York is not a state of great hurricanes, but it occasionally has them, what would happen if, once every 50 years, the winds will blow more than 100 km/h? These winds can blow from different directions. The Citigroup Center was inaugurated in 1977, and only one year later it became evident that it could have A very serious defect structural. A year later, Lemessurier receives the call that no architect expects in life. It was Diane Hartleyan engineering student from the prestigious Princeton University who had studied the construction of the skyscraper for his thesis. The first call was to ask several technical questions about the design. Hartley’s professor had expressed his doubts regarding the strength of an inclined skyscraper where the support columns were not in the corners. Hartley made some calculations of the building’s wind load. He then compared them to Lemessurier’s calculations and discovered that the figures of construction engineers were incorrect. The student asked to be sent the exact load calculations for different types of wind. Only received data related to perpendicular winds and guarantees On the solidity of the structure. Moreover, Lemessurier told him that the teacher had not even the most remote idea and that everything was in order. The geometry of the building frame worked perfectly with the pillars in such positions, allowing him to resist very strong winds, even from a diagonal angle. … Read more

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.