I was wondering why the United States feels the need to almost always secure towers into solid bedrock when building tall.
Best example is New York City with Lower and Mid-town Manhattan. I realize the bedrock is closer to the surface in these two areas compared to being too far underground in the area inbetween.
However my biggest example against this would probably be Shanghai.
Jin Mao Tower and SWFC for instance are built on marsh/swamp land using a technique involving friction which essentially holds the buildings up straight and creates a solid foundation.
Basically if New York decided to connect the 'two' Manhattan's together with all tall buildings it is possible using similar techniques. If the city continues to expand in the coming decades, I believe similar techniques will be put into motion and eventually combining the two areas into one massive metropolis and nothing but tall buildings.
Best example is New York City with Lower and Mid-town Manhattan. I realize the bedrock is closer to the surface in these two areas compared to being too far underground in the area inbetween.
However my biggest example against this would probably be Shanghai.
Jin Mao Tower and SWFC for instance are built on marsh/swamp land using a technique involving friction which essentially holds the buildings up straight and creates a solid foundation.
Basically if New York decided to connect the 'two' Manhattan's together with all tall buildings it is possible using similar techniques. If the city continues to expand in the coming decades, I believe similar techniques will be put into motion and eventually combining the two areas into one massive metropolis and nothing but tall buildings.