ThatStinksWeAllLikePicklesAndBananas
71803
1090
43
Mar 18, 2019 7:44 PM
ThatStinksWeAllLikePicklesAndBananas
71803
1090
43
HsuDoNihm
"New"
apbadogs
The bottom up one seems terrifying to me.
MelodyLightfoot
I thought for sure method 3 would be someone's mom being dropped on the building from a supply helicopter
Maldraek
Count me out for standing under any of these processes.
godfatherdontl
We should put rockets under em...let them live up to their sky scraper name. Then when we finally go to mars we have buildings... sorted
Silmarilcrown
Clearly we need to strap rockets to a building after we cut it off from its foundations and then launch it into space, next to Elon's car
MajinXenu
How about, if you must post it at all, you cut that Facebook garbage up in a way that makes sense? Jesus fuck what a mess.
delpharseven
You missed one @OP: put an excavator on the roof and work down: https://farm1.static.flickr.com/184/391514854_5139b6f3be_b.jpg
The701
Just build buildings on top of big trapdoors. Demolition is real fast and easy.
DigitalLoptr85
100% expected to see the 9/11 crash.
KidKarless
Bush light did 3/11
littlewongkid
I am here to see the face on those buildings
MarkPenrice
The first one seems like the building has to be specially designed to allow unbuilding when it's no longer needed... the second a rather >
MarkPenrice
> inefficient alt to the existing method of ripping it apart with "brontosaurus" cranes, useful only where there's no clearance for them.
CraftedLine
Do you not know how to make a gif so we can read it. 1 second to read the text. Try again.
TheRealAtticus
Interesting +1
IMayOrMayNotHaveTroubleFindingAndOrChoosingAUsername
Shown in #2 is the Akasaka Hotel in Tokyo, which had a _fantastic_ view. RIP https://youtu.be/i-2Y2MYpl2g
daddytroopa
Better than trying to get resources by invading neighboring countries, that didn't work.
lividlazan
Where's that Toyota pick up?
AutoFox
Frankly, I think a lot of high-rise buildings are demolished unnecessarily. It may cost a lot, but refurbishing them would be preferable.
MarkPenrice
The implosion one is essentially how most explosives based demolition has worked for at least the last 10~15 years if not longer, though.
MarkPenrice
And if it's in any way "new" I wonder if it's inspired by 9/11 because it's not a million miles away from how the towers fell.
MarkPenrice
(or if you believe the conspiracists, it's *exactly* how they fell ... rather than it being the weight of the upper floors impacting lower)
92642941514
911 was an inside job
moeojelly
7/11 was a part time job
midrealmknight
Yeah yeah, moon landing, anti-vax, flat earth, grassy knoll, Marilyn Monroe, Elvis, studio 54, green cheese, pumpernickel, blah blah blah.
echonite
So was your mom, but we don't keep on talking about her.
labtob
also father
TanithRosenbaum
I disagree with #7. They're not aging faster than anything else, which ages at the rate of 1 day per day.
NomadUniverse
A bit of engineering for you, things deteriorate faster the older they get.
ilhares
I don't need a degree for that, I can just witness my body falling apart.
Elnauriel
That's also, coincidentally, the same speed on my time machine!
scoundr3l
Is that a real time machine? No, it's a real-time machine.
TlalocTemporal
They measure is maintenance cost increases. As such, most everything ages faster as it gets older.
Ancientmariner52
I know I certainly do.
commentsivehadafew
What about explosion? Much more of a crowd-pleaser.
toasteheh
https://imgur.com/RJGKHtO
shadetee
Where's the kaboom? There's supposed to be an earth-shattering kaboom!
Hubb
I say we take off and nuke it from outer space. Its the only way to be sure
lolwutface
PokemonNumber351
Megumin demolition service, offers daily free structure removals
TheDivineUsersub
Idk, making things go boom is sooo industrial era. Playing engineering Jenga is the way of the future.
EmperorWiggles
Surely there must be some technical limitations to this? I'd think some buildings might be too tall and slender for this.
TheDivineUsersub
Idk, but it's a good question.
kohrah
Not sure which method you mean, but many skyscrapers just stand on pillars as is, think of garages etc.
IMostlyCommentInGifs
Or just throw jet liners at them.
BenSnow97
Or, in case it's Japan, throw things out of jets
ChrisWsrn
Twice!
ItsRainingOutsideAndiDontWantToAdult
Why do it bottom up, instead of top down?
onecowboytoo
Face down ass up, that's the way I like to EFFF.
bamblebimble
Bottom up is also safer, much less chance of stray damage causing a collapse because that's the entire point. Complete structural collapse
onecowboytoo
Yeah I just want to work under a 70+ story building that is suspended on jacks. Sounds super duper safe.
bamblebimble
Controlled perfectly with a bunch of special charges around the building.
FlefasaurusRex
Then there's the George Bush method where you have a passenger jet fly into it...
MyFirstTwoChoicesWereTaken
This is exactly why I came to the comments.
samsneed
Muffyns
I thought it was terrorist way
Drewtendo64
Wake up sheeple
Joechip3110
It was men of faith that brought it down
AbsolutelyNotTheNSA
There were fine people on both sides.
Heavenissize17socks
Just to clarify, you can worship the Devil and still be a man of faith.
cantspellmanslaughterwithoutlaughter
Thanks Obama.
ParadoxicalSheep
Thanks Osama
whiskinputwarbles
I wonder how much thought is given to the dismantling process when designing a building.
whoisyourdaddy
Exactly zero.
james25000
If the designers were paid for it they would. I used to curse engineers for shitty design till I realized they were under a fiscal gun.
james25000
Here's my design for your can opener.......owner says nice but make them cheeeeeper.
whoisyourdaddy
Why pay you to design for disposal in 50 years, when I am going to sell the building in 15? Plus, likely 35% more expensive...
DavidBrooker
The 187-meter Singer building is, to-date, the tallest building ever demolished. There are 120 buildings taller than that in Manhattan 1/2
LooseyGooseyBrett
I dont know about that, the World Trade Center was 417 meters
DavidBrooker
Even entertaining conspiracy theories, I wouldn't exactly call that an economically viable option for demolition either.
talenphillips
How many other buildings were damaged or destroyed when WTC 1 and 2 fell? Something like 13?
DavidBrooker
Other than WTC 1 and 2, I believe five buildings were directly destroyed, and three had to be demolished. Damage was many, many more.
StewedTomaters
Cool edge, bro. Fuck off. I never even got that worked up about 9/11 but this is in poor taste.
ReaperCDN
Get over it. It's almost 20 years ago now and jokes are a part of life. Eat a barrel of dicks.
StewedTomaters
2edgy4me. If you're going to make crass jokes don't cry and whine when you get called for them. "Eat a barrel of dicks," are you fucking 13?
ReaperCDN
Oh good grab. When you grow up and get a sense of humor, people will eventually like you. No need to be mad at the world because you suck.
StewedTomaters
Plus, we're still in a war that resulted from the GOP's reaction to this. Sounds like you didn't know anyone who signed up to go over there
StewedTomaters
and had a kid who's now 18 going over there again. 18 years my ass
RepostFromLastWeek
Reaction? There was an active plan to go after Saddam, 9/11 was just a convinient excuse to do it.
ReaperCDN
I know plenty of people who've fought overseas. You're talking to one. Doesn't change the fact that humor is perfectly fine following /1
DavidBrooker
alone. Demolishing very tall buildings is actually an incredibly tough engineering challenge with no great solutions. 2/2
onecowboytoo
You can always fly a plane into them.
MajorTom0101
I guess the hard way would be to demolish it the reverse way it was built.
andsy
Just like with lego
DavidBrooker
"Deconstruction" - dismantling a building as you describe - is actually the preferred method for tall buildings.
DavidBrooker
The 143-meter Ocean Tower was the tallest building ever imploded. It was not even a skyscraper, the formal cutoff for which being 150m.
FartyMcDumpstein
For some somewhat tangential info, they were finding WTC debris a decade after 9/11 in buildings in lower manhattan. Impractical solution.
thewiggins
to be fair, the beams were melted by jet fuel
captmcneil
I'm not a conspiracy crackpot, but what's your take on the WTC? Was it luck in collapsed on itself?
arocktrucker777
Twice
DavidBrooker
To make two points: it only sort-of collapsed on itself. It fell far enough North that the building adjacent to it had to be torn down 1/n
DavidBrooker
as unsalvageable. But that it fell *mostly* down is to be expected. Skyscrapers can weigh half a million tons, and all that weight 2/n
DavidBrooker
points down. Columns - though they might look like beams - aren't meant to take bending loads. They're meant to take compression. Once 3/n
MarkPenrice
If you look at the design, it's actually pretty flimsy outside of the central stair/elevator core. Once one floor gave way it was doomed.
MarkPenrice
Essentially the struts holding one of the floors to the core gave out, it fell ~10ft onto the next and sheared it off... and so-on & so-on.
DavidBrooker
I don't believe that's an accurate description of the WTC collapse or the building design. The exterior structure of the WTC bore a 1/n
ElbowDeepInAPoliceState
Not really any other way for it to collapse. To topple over would require titanic outside forces, well beyond what an airplane could cause 1
ElbowDeepInAPoliceState
6/ base
ElbowDeepInAPoliceState
4/ huge, and there's quite a bit of horizontal spread, owing both to pieces falling from the top of the pile and the force of the building
DavidBrooker
*If* columns could carry a substantial bending load, then the buckling of columns on one side (as happened on WTC7) would induce a 2/n
DavidBrooker
bending moment, prompting a 'toppling' rather than a fall. The main point is that columns aren't designed to take a large bending 3/n
ElbowDeepInAPoliceState
5/ collapsing throwing stuff and shoving it away. Dust cloud radius was over 4.5km, debris field from each tower was much larger than their
ElbowDeepInAPoliceState
3/ collapse downwards. Buildings are mostly empty space remember, and then look at the piles of debris left after the collapse. They're
ElbowDeepInAPoliceState
2/ and falling upwards is right out for obvious reasons. An explosion would require explosives, and quite a lot. Only other way to go is to
captmcneil
Thanks very much, that is what I thought. Also putting explosives and wires where planes hit... but you know, "arguments" everywhere.