Quote:
Originally Posted by Human Scale
I have not studied structural engineering but I imagine since the core is the core it can stand on its own, being the strongest part. If anything, the steel would be an impediment to the core, although it is not.
|
The most important property of concrete is that it is a "compressive" material. That is, concrete performs well when other stuff (like more concrete!) is stacked on top of it but fails easily when placed under what is called
tensile stress, stress that occurs when it is pulled apart instead.
Steel, by contrast, performs extremely well under tensile loads. That's why bridges' structural members -- trusses, girders, cables and the like -- are often made of steel. It performs reasonably well under compression, but where it truly shines is under tension.
Reinforced concrete is concrete poured around a steel mesh. The trick with reinforced concrete is that the concrete's compressive properties and steel's tensile properties have to counterbalance each other; go too far one way or the other and the whole structure will fail. Reinforced concrete performs well under tension as well, which is why incredible structures like the
Tunkhannock Viaduct could be built out of it a century ago, and bridges like the
Oresund today.
The major structural mechanism for modern steel skyscrapers grows out of the "tube" design, such as was used for the original WTC and
Sears Willis Tower. In this design, the floorplates effectively act not unlike bridge decks, their loads being transferred into the reinforced-concrete core and along the building's outer facade. In early tube designs (particularly during the Brutalist era) the outer facade was also concrete and could be used as structural element as well; these days, the steel skeleton itself seems to be more than enough.