- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Any Alex Box workers/architects in the know
Posted on 12/15/08 at 11:09 pm
Posted on 12/15/08 at 11:09 pm
Why are the windows on the first floor of the new Alex Box (1st photo) not installed as designed (2nd photo/rendering)? If you compare the first 2 photos you will notice a major architectural detail is missing; the I-beam headers (which split the glass just below the arch). They are actually there, but behind the glass, as seen in the 3rd photo. Why the change? Or was their a mistake somewhere which didn't allow the glass and beam to match up? Anyone know the answer? I am not trying to bash anyone. I have just been really curious since they installed the glass back in October.
5
Posted on 12/15/08 at 11:15 pm to mikethetiger
Who cares about that? What I want to know is if they're going to do something to cover up those open beams. That looks ugly.
Posted on 12/15/08 at 11:30 pm to The Boat
quote:
Who cares about that? What I want to know is if they're going to do something to cover up those open beams. That looks ugly.
Obviously I do and you are obviously NOT in the know. Please don't hijack this thread. Someone who posts here works on the project and he might know the answer.
By the way, who cares about those beams?
Posted on 12/16/08 at 6:41 am to mikethetiger
Look at the 2nd pic and you can clearly see in the window thats open, the beam is behind the window.
Posted on 12/16/08 at 7:17 am to mikethetiger
The renderings are very rarely the final design of a project. I know if I was on the project, I would much rather have the beam detail inside the building then try to have a waterproofed detail through the brick and in front of the glass, when I think the beam on the inside is more aestetically pleasing.
Things like this get changed all the time when the team brings a contractor on board and they provide their experience about details and waterproofing elements such as this.
Things like this get changed all the time when the team brings a contractor on board and they provide their experience about details and waterproofing elements such as this.
Posted on 12/16/08 at 7:35 am to mikethetiger
Look like they also effed up that little area at the bottom of the top windows too.
Do over!
Do over!
Posted on 12/16/08 at 8:12 am to The Boat
quote:
Who cares about that? What I want to know is if they're going to do something to cover up those open beams. That looks ugly.
agreed but it wont look as bad once they add the additional suites.
Posted on 12/16/08 at 8:19 am to bbap
quote:
agreed but it wont look as bad once they add the additional suites.
So they are going to do something to fill in those open beams? That's good. That's what I was hoping.
Posted on 12/16/08 at 8:21 am to The Boat
well i dont know for sure but thats whats been said on here. extending the suites all the way down after this season.
but like i said i dont know for a fact.
but like i said i dont know for a fact.
Posted on 12/16/08 at 8:25 am to RoJeaux
quote:
The renderings are very rarely the final design of a project. I know if I was on the project, I would much rather have the beam detail inside the building then try to have a waterproofed detail through the brick and in front of the glass, when I think the beam on the inside is more aestetically pleasing.
Yeah...I agree that rendered details don't always make it to the final product, but, in this case, that is a major architectural detail, not a structural detail. That beam is not necessary, at that location, from a structural standpoint. They could have taken that beam out and saved a few bucks. I agree about the difficulty in waterproofing such a detail, but you would think, if it is the case, they would have thought about that before putting that steel in place.
So, either they took the easy way out, or the glass people, or brick people messed up somewhere. Any other place I could see them changing details. But, again, this was one of the major architectural details that tied a lot together. For instance, those vertical beams in between the windows are purely decorative. They serve no structural purpose whatsoever. It's an architectural detail, similiar to the horizontal beams in question. Look at the 2 photos below showing the before and after of these details being installed. Notice they were well into building the rest of the structure before they installed those architectural horizontal beams (and vertical beams).
Posted on 12/16/08 at 8:27 am to mikethetiger
honestly i dont have a preference one way or the other. dont see the big deal. but thats just me.
Posted on 12/16/08 at 8:33 am to mikethetiger
Let's just pack it up, tear this one down, and build a new one.
I think the unexpected placement of the horizontal beams inside the windows is a bad omen for this season. shite we're screwed...
I think the unexpected placement of the horizontal beams inside the windows is a bad omen for this season. shite we're screwed...
Posted on 12/16/08 at 8:49 am to bbap
quote:
honestly i dont have a preference one way or the other. dont see the big deal. but thats just me.
Again, I am not asking anyone's opinion of if they like it or not (most won't even notice). I am trying to figure out why they did what they did, thus the thread titie "Any Alex Box workers/architect in the know". I agree, it's not the end of the world. But something did change or they wouldn't have installed those beams to begin with (they are not structural). There has been someone in the past who is/has worked on the project and I am hoping they respond to this thread.
To everyone else, if it's not important to you, then don't respond. LSU construction is a topic I am very interested in. If they had a constrcution board I would post it on there, but there isn't, thus I post in the unforgiven realm of the RANT.
Posted on 12/16/08 at 8:49 am to mikethetiger
quote:
Again, I am not asking anyone's opinion of if they like it or not
yeah you made that clear already. i gave it anyway.
Posted on 12/16/08 at 8:50 am to The Boat
quote:
think the unexpected placement of the horizontal beams inside the windows is a bad omen for this season. shite we're screwed...
I am glad you are entertained. I stay up, night and day, thinking of topics for your entertainment.
Posted on 12/16/08 at 8:52 am to mikethetiger
quote:
that is a major architectural detail, not a structural detail. That beam is not necessary, at that location, from a structural standpoint.
How do you know this? Those beams, at a minimum, reduce the "unsupported length" of the columns and thus reduce the 'slenderness ratio' of them.
I have not seen any calculations, but would not dismiss their structural value out of hand.
Posted on 12/16/08 at 8:53 am to bbap
quote:
yeah you made that clear already. i gave it anyway.
Why am I not surprised.
Posted on 12/16/08 at 8:55 am to mikethetiger
quote:
Why am I not surprised.
why would you be. you're not the only one who is interested in the new stadium and likes to comment on it. no one really gives a shite that you asked only those "in the know" or "working on the project" to respond.
Posted on 12/16/08 at 9:04 am to BlackHelicopterPilot
quote:
I have not seen any calculations, but would not dismiss their structural value out of hand.
Yeah...it's possible they are, but based on the rendering they are definitely an architectural element too. Otherwise, they would have put them behind the glass from the beginning.
I have an engineering background, which doesn't necessarily mean anything with this project, but based on my experience and observation over the years, the way the structure was built, the beam not fire-protected and thus not boxed-in to hide the fire protection, I deduce that it wasn't really a structual component. Either way, the main question is why is it not showing to the outside world (as rendered). The waterproofing point from earlier is probably the correct answer.
Can anyone involved with the project shed some lgiht?
Posted on 12/16/08 at 9:13 am to bbap
quote:
why would you be. you're not the only one who is interested in the new stadium and likes to comment on it. no one really gives a shite that you asked only those "in the know" or "working on the project" to respond.
Actually, because I saw that you were as interested in the on-going stadium construction as I was, I figured that you, and others, would have some input and may have noticed this too and wondered the same thing.
A similar thing happened earlier in the project when the light standards suddenly dissappeared from the grandstand after being installed. I came on here and asked a question about them and we got an answer from someone involved in the project and found out what the issue was and why they are no longer part of the project.
I just want to know why. Not because I am going to admonish LSU over it. I am very curious about stadium construction and noticed something that was a little peculiar. Simple enough.
Page 1 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News