Architect and Builder December 2016 | Page 19

Figure 3: Structural schemes (3a) (3b) The core could have been designed to be strong enough for this torsional load, but that would have meant that the reinforced concrete (RC) walls of the core would have had to be two metres thick; therefore a clever structural scheme needed to be devised to eliminate or balance this load and thus reduce the core wall thickness. Figure 3 shows the three schemes considered. In the first scheme (Fig. 3a) all the structural columns slope away from or towards the centre of the building. All lateral components of the axial forces in the columns therefore intersect in the centre of the building, and consequently no torsion is generated. This scheme thus eliminates the torsional load completely. Unfortunately it detracts from the architectural spiralling form of the tower and was not pursued any further. In the second scheme (Fig. 3b) the columns are arranged in an internal spiral, countering the twist of the building. By placing the columns at the right slope it would be possible to generate a countering torsional load equal to the primary torsional load. Architecturally, this scheme was acceptable. Unfortunately, it did not perform well from a space-planning point of view. The internal ring of columns are not identical on each floor, implying a unique space planning strategy on each floor. The third scheme (Fig. 3c) is similar in strategy, but instead of placing the columns internally, they are pushed out to the faces of the building, thus clearing the floor plates for a flexible space planning strategy. Calculating the slope of the columns in the scheme was however not easy. In reality, to conform to the concave, warped façade geometry, the columns could not have a fixed slope. This is where parametric modelling came in. Using parametric modelling software, we were able to construct the tower’s geometry in such a way that certain variable input parameters determine the eventual geometry. In other words, the slope of the columns are not fixed in the model. Instead, the parametric model sets a rule for the column geometry, and by varying the input parameters, various column arrangements could be explored. In this way, the Parametric Modelling (3c) structural performance of the columns could be evaluated and an optimal and aesthetically pleasing column arrangement could be chosen. In the final chosen geometry, the columns generate a sufficiently large counter-torsion to reduce the core wall thickness from 2m to 450mm, resulting in significant cost savings and added floor space. Parametric modelling was also used in a smart way to devise a practical façade scheme to the warped, twisted faces of the building. A number of factors had to be considered, including glass utilisation, façade maintenance access and integration of Figure 2: Gravity-induced torsional loads 17