The Space Needle, the Jetsons, and what today’s futurists see for tomorrow

It looks like a flying saucer, perched atop spindly, upward-swooping legs. It’s as if a UFO and its exhaust trail were frozen mid-takeoff. Like something out of a sci-fi movie. And that’s the point.

In case you missed it, the Seattle Space Needle recently turned 55—old enough to get the senior discount at Old Country Buffet. Much like the Eiffel Tower in Paris, the Space Needle was built for a World’s Fair; attracted its share of criticism; and is now a landmark that defines its city’s skyline. And while this Space Age artifact may seem a tad dated now, its influence has rippled across the decades and perhaps—if a company called Arconic fulfills its vision—will continue to alter skylines in 2062.

Speedy in Seattle

The Space Needle was conceived as the centerpiece of Seattle’s Century 21 World’s Fair, a showcase of tomorrow’s technology. It was vintage midcentury: can-do optimism, tinged with Cold War urgency. The Soviet Union had shocked Americans when it sent the first satellite into orbit in 1957, kicking off the international space race. But in the JFK era, with federal dollars flowing to scientific research, and finned automobiles speeding down superhighways, anything seemed possible.

Rising 605 feet high—then the tallest structure west of the Mississippi—the Needle was built in just 400 days, at a cost of $4.5 million. The foundation, which was 30 feet deep and 120 feet across, took 467 cement trucks about twelve hours to fill. It was the longest continuous concrete pour attempted in the West at that time.

fivethings1_0_0-1

Work on the Space Needle’s immense foundation. (Photo courtesy of the Museum of History & Industry)

1024x1024

The Needle’s top house under construction. (Photo courtesy of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer)

Including 250 tons of rebar, the foundation weighs 5,850 tons; the Needle structure itself weighs 3,700 tons. This means its center of gravity is just five feet above the earth’s surface. The Needle is fastened to the foundation with 72 thirty-foot bolts.

Not only can the Needle survive earthquakes (e.g., one in 2001 that measured 6.8 on the Richter scale), but it was designed to withstand winds of up to 200 miles per hour—double the code requirements in 1962.

But what struck most was the daring design of the tower and its bulbous top house. The spacecraft look was deliberate. Initially, the building was painted with colors “Astronaut White,” “Orbital Olive,” “Re-entry Red,” and “Galaxy Gold.” As the building seemed to reach for the stars, it signaled a nation’s upward progress.

Construction was completed in December 1961. The Needle’s signature rotating restaurant held an opening gala on March 24, 1962. The Century 21 World’s Fair officially opened on April 21.

Seattle_Space_Needle_CropUnlike other architectural relics of the period—e.g., unloved Brutalist exemplars such as Boston’s City Hall and the Salk Institute in La Jolla, California—the Space Needle appears on T-shirts and postcards, earned official Seattle landmark status at age 37 (in 1999), and remains one of the city’s most popular tourist destinations. While many Sixties buildings raised eyebrows, the Needle prompts smiles as well. It may be that, along with its aspirational spirit, the tower’s very cartoonishness is what makes it so endearing—and enduring.

The Jetsons connection

That drawn quality quickly translated into actual cartoon form when The Jetsons debuted on TV in September 1962. The series imagined a family in 2062. The Jetsons and their contemporaries drove flying cars, employed robot maids—and lived in high-rises that looked a lot like the Space Needle. In case you were deprived of re-runs as a child, here’s the program’s opening:

The resemblance of the Jetsons’ home to the Space Needle was no accident, animator Iwao Takamoto told the New York Times in 2005. The “skypad” on stilts took direct inspiration from the Seattle tower.

Art imitates life, and vice versa. A new engineering company called Arconic—spun off the aluminum giant Alcoa—has taken inspiration from The Jetsons to reimagine the world of 2062. Arconic’s updated Jetsons drive flying cars and live in skypads that make use of technologies currently in development or, in some cases, available already. The company hired filmmaker Justin Lin (Star Trek Beyond) to illustrate their vision with this video:

Arconic’s futurists predict that three-mile-high skyscrapers will be built using 3D printing. The technology will allow for more organic, nature-inspired shapes. “I think you will see less of the square, boxy shape of current skyscrapers,” Arconic’s Don Larsen says in another promo video.

Arconic skyscraper

Furthermore, Arconic hopes those skyscrapers will employ their products such as Bloomframe. This is a motorized window that transforms into a balcony in less than 60 seconds.

hofmandujardinwelcomebloomframe03tileMoreover, those windows would clean themselves—and the environment—if coated with EcoClean, an Arconic product already on the market. This titanium dioxide coating absorbs light and water vapor, activating free radicals (the atom-sized variety), which suck up and eliminate dirt as well as pollutants in the air around a building.

Will Arconic’s vision come to pass by 2062? Nobody can answer that. But the company is making a big bet on it, investing millions in advanced materials and technologies. At a time when much of the talk nationally is about fear of the future and a return to the past, Arconic’s embrace of a bright tomorrow is refreshing. So it’s no surprise we can trace the roots of this campaign to the audacious tower that rose over Seattle to celebrate and imagine the 21st century, back in 1962.

This post was written by Suffolk Construction’s Content Writer Patrick L. Kennedy. If you have questions, Patrick can be reached at PKennedy@suffolk.com. You can connect with him on LinkedIn here or follow him on Twitter at @PK_Build_Smart.

Our preference for detail? It’s by design

The case for basing buildings on biometrics

A developer caused a minor uproar late last month when he criticized the Boston Seaport’s “uninspiring architecture.” Of course, it’s common for ordinary citizens across the country to air complaints about plain, boxy towers—for example, Curbed readers rated their choices for the ugliest buildings in San Francisco and New York. But in the February incident, an audience of architects found it jarring to hear an industry insider speak ill of their work.

Yet nobody seemed to notice back in November when architect Ann Sussman made even stronger comments about the corridors of glass boxes built lately in the Seaport, which is sometimes called the Innovation District. People just don’t like sheer walls, Sussman said in a talk at last fall’s ABX conference. “That’s one reason why the Innovation District fails. Too many blank facades.” The district’s streetscape even poses a “health issue,” she said. “Our cortisol level goes up” in such bland environments.

Maybe builders and designers should start paying attention to this argument. Sussman wasn’t merely expressing an opinion. A growing body of research suggests that humans are hard-wired to prefer lush details over clean lines, thanks to millennia of evolution in the wild. And Sussman says there’s nothing architects can do about that preference, except design to it.

Mind over matter

When she lived in Paris for a time, amidst the Mansard roofs and street-level cafés, Sussman noticed that her fellow visiting Americans walked everywhere. Back in the States, the same people would rather drive everywhere. She began to wonder: Why is that, really?

Sussmann sought real data on why people seem to prefer some kinds of buildings over others. Last year, relying on biometric-measuring software, Sussmann and co-researcher Justin Hollander analyzed eye movements and unconscious response to a variety of images. Their findings were eye-opening.

In one test, two sets of volunteers were shown two different photos of the Stapleton Library in Staten Island, New York—one with the windows Photoshopped out, and one unretouched. See the images side by side below. The dots indicate what parts of the building one subject looked at in each. (The human eye can make four to five rapid movements between fixation points per second.) Notice that the de-windowed walls got hardly a glance.

Stapleton Library

The researchers found the same preference in test after test. Subjects barely registered the blank or sheer walls of a library in Queens and a museum in Brooklyn, focusing instead on billboards, cars, and pedestrians.

This raises two immediate questions: First, how the heck does the eye-tracking software work? And why do people unconsciously avert their gaze from plain facades?

Programs that measure people’s reactions to images have been around for years, Sussman pointed out in her ABX talk and in a later e-mail exchange. At multi-billion-dollar companies, the designers of packaging and automobiles use the insights they gain from biometric testing to determine a look that will have mass appeal.

Fortunately, the cost of such software has come down recently, to the point where curious architects can get in on this research. For her study, Sussman used a program called iMotions to measure eye movement as well as facial recognition—e.g., picking up on our barely perceptible lip and forehead movements that indicate joy, fear, or surprise. (Other features of iMotions include tools to measure heartbeat and electromagnetic activity in the brain.)

As a test subject looks at an image on a computer, an infrared light shines on her eye. A high-resolution camera records the eye’s rapid movements, capturing the flashes of infrared as the light bounces off the eye. If the eye is looking up and to the left, a burst of red will appear on the lower right part of the eye. (At least, that’s the broad-strokes explanation.) That data is linked to the photo being shown, and the software spits out a graphic representation. For example, the below video shows the gaze path of one subject viewing an image of the Villa Rotunda in Italy.

Continue Reading ›

High tech, low bar

No learning curve with these AEC innovations

Your workload is big enough already. You don’t want to spend a lot of time learning how to use a new tool. Of course, the up-front investment of time should translate into time savings down the road. Yet the reluctance to learn something new, along with other factors, can pose a big barrier to tech adoption.

So it’s welcome news when an innovation promises to improve practices or workflow without requiring a day to figure out how to use it. In that vein, we take a look at some new products with potential. These advances in familiar technology aim to improve upon things you already use, whether in the office, trailer, or job site.

A VR vision, easy to view

“For a technology to crack the mainstream,” wrote the New York Times in January, “there is an unspoken understanding: It shouldn’t make the people who use it want to throw up.” And yet, the Times reported, at the International CES trade show in Las Vegas, the presenters of one 3D headset made barf bags available to users, just in case. It seems that wearing virtual reality goggles can be not only disorienting but sometimes literally nauseating.

A new app called Building Conversation removes these barriers by putting virtual and augmented reality on a tablet or smart phone. Imagine an architect and a developer standing at the edge of an empty lot. The architect simply hands over an iPad; the developer aims it at the site; and a 3D vision of the tower appears on the screen, overlaid atop the real-life view. If their meeting takes place instead in a boardroom, the tablet can be pointed at the table, where, through the screen, a holographic model of the building appears. A contractor and subcontractor can use the app to virtually walk through a model of the building. In whichever mode users select, they can pan through or around the image as they move. No goggles—or barf bag—required.

There’s less of a “wow” factor than with an immersive headset, but the image is clear enough and the ease of use can’t be beat. Plus, by allowing stakeholders to literally share the vision, passing the tablet back and forth and looking at the same 3D image together, this twist on VR/AR technology brings back the human interaction that is essential in project development.

Continue Reading ›

Throwback Thursday: Proof testing bridges with living subjects

It sounds crazy now. In an era when iron bridges routinely collapsed under the weight of marching soldiers, the builders of a high-profile exhibit hall chose to prove the sturdiness of their elevated iron walkways by . . . marching soldiers across one. And running them across it. Oh, and having 300 construction workers jump up and down on it, in unison, “for some time.”

Why did they think this was a good idea? And what was the result?

To illuminate this historical nugget, we spoke with Henry Petroski, an expert in failure analysis. A professor of civil engineering and history at Duke University, Petroski included the anecdote in his book To Engineer is Human: The Role of Failure in Successful Design.

A cathedral to progress . . . but would it hold up?

To be clear, the exhibit hall in question was quite innovative in many ways. The Crystal Palace (below) housed the first World’s Fair, in London in 1851. Its soaring glass-and-iron design was like nothing ever seen then. (Almost a horizontal skyscraper, it continues to influence design today.) Cutting-edge tools such as circular saws and steam-driven drills were used in the palace’s construction.

crystal_palace_-_interiorBut as impressive as the Crystal Palace appeared, contemporary Britons raised questions about the strength and stability of the temporary structure, especially its elevated walkways. “After all, during this time iron railway bridges were failing at a rate of almost one in four, and suspension bridges were collapsing under marching soldiers,” wrote Petroski. “The safety of the Crystal Palace galleries had yet to be demonstrated.”

And so, “a 24-foot-square section of gallery was constructed just off the floor on four cast-iron girders,” Petroski wrote. Queen Victoria and the press were invited to witness a proof test. The project’s 300 tradesmen and laborers were assembled, along with a company of sappers and miners (the British military’s engineering corps).

Let’s pause here a moment. Petroski has studied design failure for decades, and he has many thoughts on pedestrian walkways. “I think they’re not taken as seriously, perhaps, as they should be, because the load is considered lighter” than vehicles, he told us. “But when you jam people shoulder-to-shoulder on every square foot of a bridge,” as happened, for example, during the 50th anniversary celebration on San Francisco’s Golden Gate Bridge in 1987, “it’s actually far heavier even than bumper-to-bumper [auto] traffic.” In that case, he said, “the bridge visibly sagged in the middle.”

As to the temporary walkways inside the Crystal Palace in 1851, here’s what happened, according to the London Illustrated News:

The first experiment was that of placing a dead load of about 42,000 lb., consisting of 300 of the workmen of the contractors, on the floor and the adjoining approaches.

The second test was that of crowding the men together in the smallest possible space; but in neither case was there any appreciable effect produced in the shape of deflexion. So much for dead weight.

The third experiment—which was that of a moving load of 42,000 lb. in different conditions—consisted in the same party of workmen walking first in regular step, then in irregular step, and afterwards running over the floor, the result of which was equally satisfactory.

The fourth experiment—and that which may be considered the most severe test which could possibly be applied, considering the use to be made of the gallery floors when the Exhibition is opened to the public—was that of packing closely the same load of men, and causing them to jump up and down together for some time: the greatest amount of deflexion was found to be not more than a quarter of an inch at any interval.

The third experiment was then repeated, substituting, however, the Sappers and Miners engaged at the works, for the workmen of Messrs. Fox, Henderson, and Co.; and this last trial, which was quite as satisfactory as the others to all present, is represented in our illustration [below].

testing-the-galleries

Girding for success

So the walkway held up. How had the palace’s structural engineers been so sure they would avoid embarrassment—and their men would avoid injury—in the presence of their queen and London’s reporters?

As it turns out, the engineering team had tested, individually, all cast-iron girders to be used in the palace and walkways, with a brand-new machine invented specifically for the project. “The ordinary means of testing girders, by loading them with weights, would have occupied far too much time,” according to the fair’s official chronicle. A Mr. C.H. Wild devised “an ingenious apparatus” to accomplish the task in a few minutes (per girder).

hydraulic-pressWild’s apparatus (above) built upon technology developed by Joseph Bramah in the 18th century, and prefigured today’s universal testing machines. It was a hydraulic press that used pistons to squeeze girders “precisely at those points, and in the same manner, as the load from the gallery or the roof would do.” Using the press, Paxton’s engineers calculated that the gallery girders would withstand a pressure of 15 tons, while they estimated that the girders would only be subject to a pressure of 7.5 tons.

Making a circus out of it

The proof test with the jumping and the sappers and miners, then, was done largely for the benefit of the press, said Petroski. And if that sounds risky, get a load of this: “Sometimes bridge designers would walk elephants across them,” Petroski said. For example, in 1874, a test elephant lumbered across the Eads Bridge, over the Mississippi at St. Louis. A decade later, the famous Jumbo did the honors at the Brooklyn Bridge. “It was a mixture of publicity and practicality and superstition.”

The more common way to test bridges back then evokes a classic Calvin and Hobbes strip.  “Once the structure was completed,” said Petroski, “very heavy railroad engines or something equivalent would be driven across the bridge to, quote-unquote, ‘prove’ it would handle the load. That’s a long tradition in bridge-building. And in fact, in Eastern Europe, the engineer who designed the bridge would stand under it—sometimes even with his family—to show this was a solid design that he had all the confidence in the world about.”

But lest you think such stunts are wholly outdated, Petroski pointed to the Millennium Bridge in London. The pedestrian bridge across the Thames opened in June 2000. It swayed noticeably, and was closed three days later. After shoring up the bridge, engineers held a successful test with a hundred volunteers walking over it in 2002.

Lock and load

Nevertheless, in 2017, you probably won’t see human (or elephantine) subjects proof-testing a new structure. Today’s engineers test individual girders and other structural elements before assembly and use the results to calculate the maximum load—as the Crystal Palace team did. But if the public demanded further proof after assembly nowadays, engineers would conduct a load test with simulated human weight.

“They often do ‘drop tests’ with elevators,” said Suffolk Northeast Regional Safety Director Martin Leik, “to test that they can handle the weights they are to be loaded with when in full use.” These are “artificial weights,” noted Leik. “No one would even think about using real human beings for something like this now.”

Well, that is a relief. You might even call it a weight off the shoulders.

Final note: want to learn more about failing bridges? Petroski’s latest book, The Road Taken: The History and Future of America’s Infrastructure, was just released in paperback last week. It’s more timely than ever now.

This post was written by Suffolk Construction’s Content Writer Patrick L. Kennedy. If you have questions, Patrick can be reached at PKennedy@suffolk.com. You can connect with him on LinkedIn here or follow him on Twitter at @PK_Build_Smart.

Can you tell which roof has hidden solar panels?

Would you believe all of them? Meet integrated rooftop solar.

In the dark of winter, when days are shortest, those of us in northern climes long for the sun. What better time to think about capturing and storing that sun’s energy? Solar electric power has been around for decades, and advances in the technology keep making it more efficient and practical. But for many, the desire to cut the household carbon footprint is tempered by aesthetic concerns. Rooftop solar panels don’t exactly look pretty, unless you’re going for Wall-E-meets-Windows chic.

Enter Tesla Motors. Not just a car company anymore, Tesla recently acquired SolarCity, the nation’s largest solar service provider. And the combo’s flagship product? A solar roof. It’s an array of photovoltaic panels, custom installed, that looks pretty much just like an ordinary roof. It will come in styles including slate and Tuscan tile. And with the star power of CEO Elon Musk, this product with curb appeal just might do for solar rooftop panels what Tesla has done for electric cars—make them cool. All part of the company’s professed mission: to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy.

Musk unveiled the roof last fall at a shareholders’ meeting held in Universal Studios’ backlot. Investors gathered on a street that has served as the generic suburban setting for TV fare from Leave it to Beaver to Desperate Housewives. To hit the market some time this year, the panels are printed with the shingle-looking designs in a process called hydrographic coloring. They’re made of exceptionally durable tempered quartz glass. See how the material holds up compared to conventional roofing tiles:

Hidden underneath the glass are photovoltaic cells that will harvest the sun’s rays, feeding the energy to Tesla’s Powerwall 2 battery. The company says the battery can power an average two-bedroom home for a full day.

“It looks viable,” said Josh Rollins, LEED AP BD+C. “If it is, it’s a total game-changer.” A senior manager of marketing at Suffolk Construction, Rollins is also a leading member of the company’s Green Committee. “Elon Musk reminds me a bit of Steve Jobs in the way that he hypes his products, but this one is particularly exciting for anyone who’s passionate about reducing their carbon footprint,” Rollins said.

Musk’s presentation lacked some details, but flurries of informed speculation on the part of industry professionals help fill in the blanks. The biggest question to many is the roof’s cost. Musk says Tesla’s system will be cheaper than a traditional roof, when you factor in projected savings on your utility bill over the Tesla roof’s lifetime (50 years).

tesla-solar-roof-2

Image courtesy of Tesla

How could Tesla achieve that lower price tag? For one thing, the quartz glass is a fifth as heavy as typical roofing materials; meaning lower shipping costs. For another, Musk hinted that he’ll cut out middlemen in the current roofing supply chain, with Tesla doing the installations itself.

All that said, the cost of a traditional roof plus the cost of grid electricity is quite steep, so even a figure smaller than that sum will likely still be large. Consumer Reports put the total as high as $70,000, too much for many homeowners to bear up front. Will the company offer financing? What if a homeowner defaults on the loan? Will Tesla rip the roof off and take it back? Unclear as of yet.

But Tesla’s entry into the residential solar market can only be a good thing if you’re rooting for the environment. As many as five million roofs per year need to be replaced. If you need a new roof anyway, why not make it one that will save you money on utilities? At least a certain segment of homeowners will be able to afford the premium Tesla product. And for those who can’t, Tesla’s announcement should bring more attention to other, relatively affordable integrated rooftop solar products.

That’s right, Tesla has competitors in this niche—companies like SunTegra and CertainTeed. Though none of their solar products are quite as invisible as Tesla’s, many are pretty darn unobtrusive, especially compared to the standard rack-mounted panels. (Check out the examples below.) These companies welcome the new publicity. “I have to agree with Elon Musk: the future for roof integrated solar is bright,” wrote SunTegra CEO Oliver Koehler in a trade publication. “It’s going to be an exciting next couple of years.”

certainteed_apollo-west20coast20houselarge

Image courtesy of CertainTeed

suntegra_stifton3-min

Image courtesy of SunTegra

What we really look forward to is learning whether the integrated technology can be scaled up to apartment complexes, and perhaps to even bigger projects—maybe even high-rises. After all, said Rollins, “Why stop at the roof?” Rollins recalled a previous Build Smart blog post about harnessing solar energy with windows, something a skyscraper in Australia plans to do. “Why not cover the skin of the entire building in solar panels? That’s another whole surface area that could be generating electricity,” Rollins said.

Perhaps we can yet break our addiction to supply-limited fossil fuels, thanks in part to visionaries such as Musk. Heck, the last time a Tesla release made us this optimistic, it was an awesome late-1980s power ballad. Here’s to solar finding a way.

This post was written by Suffolk Construction’s Content Writer Patrick L. Kennedy. If you have questions, Patrick can be reached at PKennedy@suffolk.com. You can connect with him on LinkedIn here or follow him on Twitter at @PK_Build_Smart.

A building’s skin and bones—literally? The coming world of engineered living materials

When lightning strikes, a tree can often repair the damage by generating another layer of bark to cover the gash. But if that same bolt from above lashes a wood-frame house instead, call the remodelers. Even though the house’s exterior walls are essentially made of trees, the material lost its adaptive quality when lumberjacks felled those mighty pines or oaks.

In the words of scientist Justin Gallivan of the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), wood is “rendered inert” when a tree is chopped down. That neutralizes all the advantages of a living material. In their natural state, trees react and adapt to wounds and the weather. So do coral reefs—not to mention your own skin.

What if living materials, with those same self-healing properties, could be grown artificially to the size and strength required to construct a house? Or a skyscraper? Is that possible? That’s what DARPA wants to find out. The agency is soliciting research proposals aimed at the creation of what it calls “engineered living materials (ELM).”

elm_composite

DARPA envisions walls that fix themselves, non-fading surfaces, and driveways that absorb oil spills without a trace. (Source: DARPA)

“Imagine that instead of shipping finished materials, we can ship precursors and rapidly grow them on site using local resources,” Gallivan said to the press in August when announcing the ELM program. “And, since the materials will be alive, they will be able to respond to changes in their environment and heal themselves in response to damage.”

Today, a building’s envelope is often called its “skin,” while the steel frame of a building is known as its skeletal structure, or even its “bones.” In DARPA’s imagined future, these terms will cease to be merely rhetorical. And the sustainability benefits of bio-building might be substantial, when you consider the carbon emissions generated in the production of conventional materials such as concrete.

But DARPA didn’t pull this sci-fi-sounding concept out of thin air. Biochemists and engineers around the globe are already tinkering with limited forms of biomimetic (or life-imitating) materials, as you’ll see below. Gallivan’s vision of self-healing living walls is perhaps the logical extension of these various technologies, and the ELM program might prove the catalyst needed for skin-and-bone to replace brick-and-mortar.

Bacteria brickyard

One inspiration for the ELM program is a start-up that grows bricks in a lab. Yes, grows. The idea occurred to architect Ginger Dosier when she learned that coral polyps—tiny marine animals—create the hard, rocklike substance sandstone naturally. She co-founded the company, bioMASON, with her husband, Michael—like her, an architect and a self-taught scientist. (They have help from a staff of college-taught scientists.)

bio-bricks-image

The lab-grown bricks. (Source: bioMASON)

In their lab in North Carolina’s Research Triangle, the bioMASON team places sand into molds and injects it with trillions of microorganisms (Sporosarcina pasteurii, if you must know), which they feed water and a calcium solution. The bacteria bind with the grains of sand, generating a natural cement that becomes heavy and hardens. The bricks are ready in two to five days.

Compare that with the way traditional bricks are manufactured, by digging up clay (which could be better put to use in agricultural soil) and firing it in a kiln at 2,000 degrees for three to five days. This process uses up lots of fuel and releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere—800 million tons of it per year, by some estimates. Keep in mind, brick is still the most common building material worldwide, with Asia alone making 1.2 trillion bricks a year.

According to Acorn Innovestments, which provided bioMASON with seed funds, third-party testing determined that the bio-bricks have a strength comparable to traditional masonry, though for now, the start-up is only selling the bricks for use in paving. The bioMASON lab can produce 1,500 bricks a week, and they’re moving next month to a larger facility that will enable them to make 5,000 bricks every two days.

But the Dosiers hope to truly make an impact by shipping the bacteria solution—just one hand-held vial can make 500 bricks—across the globe to builders who can mix it with local sand, whether from nearby deserts (looking at you, Los Angeles) or quarries. Continue Reading ›

Best of the Build Smart Blog 2016

Before we pop the bubbly and close the book on year two of the Build Smart Blog, let’s take a look back at some of our favorite posts of 2016. In case you missed them the first time around, here are five stories that captured our imagination, revealing ways that tomorrow’s built environment might take shape, and delving into the advances in architecture, engineering and construction that make these visions attainable.

Super Bowl shuffle: Stadiums of the future will feature interactive and civic spaces: Putting the brakes on your tailgate party to go watch the game? So early 21st century. Future fans will enjoy tailgating inside the stadium. That stadium, by the way, will expand and contract depending on the size of the event, for year-round use.

Screen Shot 2016-02-03 at 4.02.48 PM

Office space of tomorrow: Millennials and “accidental encounters” drive future of office design: Say goodbye to static rows of cubes. Open plans, smart technology, and greater attention to collaboration and wellness are driving changes in the corporate workplace. What does this mean for designers and builders?

Screen Shot 2016-04-14 at 10.01.06 AM

Throwback Thursday: Turning the first sod: For a new twist on an old ceremony, Suffolk set the bar high with its “virtual groundbreaking.” But what’s the story behind groundbreakings? When we dug into it (no pun intended), we discovered the ancient roots and colorful past of this familiar construction tradition.

MIT students win Hyperloop competition: Elon Musk’s audacious Hyperloop—a magnetic transit system taking passengers between Los Angeles and San Francisco in 35 minutes—will require a massive infrastructure build. And when it comes to making the Hyperloop train go, the smartest engineers in the room might be a team of students from MIT.

MIT featured image

High-tech timber erected at UMass: This ain’t your great-grandfather’s wood construction. Cross-laminated timber makes for a building that is sustainable, fire resistant, and versatile. See why this story remains one of our most popular.

1. UMA IDB_exterior_View from across NPleasant

We look forward to bringing you more stories about cool stuff happening in the construction industry in 2017! Got your own story ideas? Send them to Patrick L. Kennedy at PKennedy@suffolk.com.