Presented by:

Syed Abdul Rahman

 Concept
The concept “dynamic architecture” is designed by the
Italian architect David Fisher. The main idea behind this
concept is: the building of the future.

Dynamic Architecture is not related only to style and

design, it involves new approach to construction:
Buildings As completely re-endowed with movement and
are able to change their shape over time.

For all these reasons, David Fisher thinks and designs

his buildings with four dimensions, not only height,
width and depth, but also “Time”.
 Objective
We will see the feasibility of the Structural design for
Rotating Tower.

These Structural design must be tuned with Architectural

design : Mainly the dimensions of the storeys, functions
and concept (rotating storeys) of the tower must remain
unchanged.
Intentions:
Intention was to build an 80-story skyscraper in Dubai. It
featured revolving floors, some of which could have moved
on command, providing the building with an ever-changing
shape along with a changing view for the residents. It is
Fisher's first skyscraper design
The Suite Vollard is a rotating
residential building in Curitiba, Parana,
Brazil.

 This Apartment Building was

Designed by a team of Architects,
headed by Bruno de Franco & David
Fisher.
 This building is the only one of its kind
in the world, as each of the 11
apartments can rotate 360º.
 Each apartment can spin individually
in any direction. One rotation takes a full
hour.
 The apartment rings rotate around a
static core used for building services,
utilities, and all areas which require
plumbing.
 Each apartment was sold for
 Dynamic Tower Advantages
These types of buildings provides the possibility to orient
the own space:
- According to the moments of the day (sun & light).
- In relation to the seasons.
- In relation to the surrounding environment (views).
- Or simply to own pleasure.
•Wind turbines & Solar panel.
•Over 70 Wind Turbines will be fitted on each rotating floor.
They could generate upto 1,200,000 kilowatt-hours of
energy.
•30% faster in building process.
 1 floor in 3 days (Dynamic tower)
 1 floor in 3 weeks ( Traditional

buildings)
Specifications Of Rotating Tower Dubai
(architectural
design)
Many of these specifications are based on assumptions and
need to be engineered before they can considered to be realistic.

Specifications Magnitude Unit

Height tower 435.3 m
Average storey height 5.4 m
Number of floors 80 -
Floor area per storey 1142-1826 m2
Rotation speed 1 rot/h
Diameter core:
Floor 0-37 30.5 m
Floor 38-70 27 m
Floor 71-80 20 m
 Challenges
Dynamic architecture is a very ambitious concept which has
a lot of challenges that need to be solved.

One important aspect of the tower is not designed yet: the

structural system (for overall stability).

The design of the main structural system is a governing

factor for the feasibility of the tower. When the structural
system can’t be fitted into the architectural design, the tower
can’t be built in the way it was intended.

Major challenges are:

Water supply
Human comfort in the tower
Driving system of the floors
Structural system (for overall stability)
 Reference project
There are no existing projects which can be compared to the
Rotating Tower. But some projects where taken for
comparisons,
The most important comparisons with the Rotating Tower are:

Comparable height
All buildings are at a location where strong (typhoon) winds
and earthquakes occur.

Three reference projects where analyzed:

• Taipei 101(Taiwan) – 449m, floors 101
• Burj Khalifa(Dubai) -828m, floors 163
• Shanghai World Financial centre(China) -492m, floors 101
Main parts of Structure

Foundation Central core Steel structure

Driving System
All storeys in the Rotating Tower rotate
around the central core connected by
rails.
Rotation will not have an effect on core.
Approximately 600 to1000 tons per
floor rests on the wheels.
Each wheel carries 50 ton (500kN).
 Load cases
The different loads considered in design are
Dead load (with both Eurocode and UBC97)
Live load (with both Eurocode and UBC97)
Wind load (Eurocode)
Earthquake load (UBC97)
Dead load
•Steel structure storey
• Architectural part storey (cladding, ceiling etc.)
• Water tanks
• Driving system
• Core (incl. internal walls and floors)
• Foundation slab

Both deformation and maximum stresses are far outside the

range of realistic values for an tower with this height.
 Optimization analysis
• Deformation and Stresses acting on the core are too high
• Solutions to lower both values are taken into account

Deformations

Moment of Height E-
inertia(increase) (decrease) modulus(increase)

Higher Pre-
Broader Thicker Steel Constant Other
Concrete stressin
core core structure dia core materials
grade g
 Stresses

Moment of Height Materials Area (increase)

inertia(increase) (decrease)

Broader Steel Constant Thicker Broader

Thicker core core
core structure dia core core
Conclusions from optimization analysis
 Reduced height
Good solution for lowering both stresses & deformations

 Broader core
Its very effective solution to make the core stiffer

 Thicker core
Making the core wall thicker reduces both deformation and stresses.
Disadvantage is high dead weight.

 Different concrete grade

Doesn’t have big effect on properties of core

 Active steel structure

Using the steel structure in the overall stability structure will be a
big challenge considering the dynamic nature of the storey
 Non feasible designs
Concept design Reason of non feasibility

1. Broader core Less (valuable) space in the storey

2. Hammerhead walls Using hammerhead walls makes

it impossible to rotate the storey

3. Improved outrigger Too much limitations on the

structure concept

4. Extreme stiff foundation Too small effect on the

deformation considering the extra
material and work demanded.
 Alternative designs
Alternative 1: Architect’s
design

Alternative 2: Higher concrete

grade

Alternative 3: Increased wall

thickness

Alternative 4: Outrigger
braced concrete
core

Alternative 5: Perimeter 5 alternative designs - (1) on the left,

columns with (5) on the right
stiff floors
Architect’s design (alternative 1)
• Small decrement in the height of tower
• Height of tower 243m, 45 storey
• Storey height 5.4m
• Concrete used is C50/60 (highest normal concrete
strength)
• Foundation slab with round drilled piles is used.
• Thickness of slab 5m
• Lighter and smaller foundation can be made
 Higher concrete grade (alternative 2)
• Higher concrete grade is used (with the
highest concrete strength available)
•Height of tower 270m, 50 storey
• Storey height 5.4m
• Concrete used is C90/105
• E-modulus increased to 1.4 times
• Thickness of slab 5m
• Design of slab can be adopted same
like alternative 1
Increased wall thickness (alternative 3)

• Wall thickness is increased

• Its almost same as alternative 2, only has a core
with increased wall thickness
• Concrete used is C90/105
• Height of the tower 286m, 53 storey
• Core wall is made thicker to the inside core
• Thicker core creates an increase in dead weight
 Outrigger system (alternative 4)
• In this a wider base is created for outrigger braced
columns.
• It can resist wind & EQ loads to the greater height

• Height of tower 376m, 70 storey

• The most important additions are the outriggers
and perimeter columns

• The foundation in this is different from the

previous ones

• Foundation slab is extended with 12 “extra” square

slabs.
Continue…
• The perimeter columns will be
in a disconnected mode when
the storey rotate and are
connected when the storey do
not rotate.
•6 perimeter columns are placed
with an angle of 60 degrees with
respect to each other

structural system structural

Foundation slab static position system when
Continue…

Connection of perimeter column

Perimeter columns with stiff floors
(alternative 5)

• First 37 storey (containing office and hotel

space) are partly non rotatable.
• The core is surrounded by 12 steel/concrete
columns
• 12 perimeter columns are permanently
connected to the foundation
•Height of tower 405m, 75 storey
Continue…

Foundation slab

structural structural system

system static when rotating
 Pros and cons (comparisons)
Alternatives pros cons

Alternative 1 • Architectural design Height of just 45 storey

(Architectural design) unchanged (loss of valuable space)
• Concept of rotating
tower unchanged

Alternative 2 • Architectural design • Height of just 45 storey

unchanged (loss of valuable space)
Higher concrete grade
• Concept of rotating • Very high concrete grade
tower unchanged

Alternative 3 • Architectural design • Height of just 55 storey

Increased wall thickness unchanged (loss of valuable space)
• Concept of rotating • Very high concrete grade
tower unchanged
• High self-weight:
increased sensitivity for
second order effects. The
increased stiffness can’t
be used to full capacity.
Continue…
Alternatives pros cons

Alternative 4 • Height of 70 storey • Static (parts of) floors:

Outrigger system (valuable space): change of concept
economic
value • Perimeter columns take
up valuable space
• Dynamic concept also
present in structure • All floors must rotate in
the same direction
• Good representation of
the original exterior
design(height/broad
proportion)
Alternative 5 • Height of 75 storey • First 37 storey
Perimeter columns (valuable space): contains static part:
with stiff floor economic small adaption to the
value architectural design
• Small adaption to the • Perimeter columns
architectural design take up valuable space
• Possibility to decrease
storey height: tower
containing 80 storey can
be made with decreased
 Conclusion
At the end all the alternatives were compared with each other
concerning advantages disadvantages.
3 alternatives were selected at the end. The choice for final design
of the structure will be made by the architect.
3 Alternatives which are most promising:
Alternative 1(architect’s design)-
No changes are made in concept ,except height.
Alternative 4(Dynamic outrigger system)-
Most ambitious design made compared to all. It contains the high
risk of all designs, but also most similarity with the concept of
project.
alternative 5 (Perimeter columns with stiff floors)-
It is (just like alternative 4) a design with the most similarity to the
original exterior design. A big advantage of this structure is the
lack of “extra” risks in comparison with the original design.
Alternative 1

Alternative 5

Alternative 4
The achievements in the new limits in
architecture have been written in the history
as reminder to the new generation…
“Don’t wait for the future to
come to you, face the future”
New limits and prospects are now opened,
buildings are now able to change their shape
and be a part of environment…

THIS is the ERA of

DYNAMIC ARCHITECTURE…
 References
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_Tower

uuid:6e366f3b-fbf8-48c4-aba5-9daa150ba961

https://youtu.be/JKE_U_wcKgU

www.dynamicarchitecture.net