Future Campus Framework Discussion | Page 100 | Syracusefan.com

Future Campus Framework Discussion

You’re misreading the diagram. The 188' measurement is for the top of the truss. There's nothing on there that gives a true height for the roof itself. If the drawings are to scale, it looks like the old and new roof heights are very similar. Hence the scoreboard issues.
Rut Roh
 
if the truss is 188 who knows how high the roof is. remember the board at dallas stadium is only at 90 ft.
the existing carrier dome says 165 on cuse,com. this says 155
 
if the truss is 188 who knows how high the roof is.
Again, those drawings look to scale. The roof height will be significantly less than the truss. Someone else mentioned there was only a 6' difference in the old vs new. Don't be shocked when they hoist a panasonic 36" CRT from the roof. If they can misspell Bowie and spray paint lettering in the endzone, they can certainly botch the engineering design and planning for this project.
 
Again, those drawings look to scale. The roof height will be significantly less than the truss. Someone else mentioned there was only a 6' difference in the old vs new. Don't be shocked when they hoist a panasonic 36" CRT from the roof. If they can misspell Bowie and spray paint lettering in the endzone, they can certainly botch the engineering design and planning for this project.

I don’t understand why you keep bringing things up from the prior administration.

Can we at least give this a shot before we complain.

Some of ya’ll complaining are the same people that literally complain about everything in every thread. It gets old and it’s hard to take some of you seriously when you’re never happy with anything.
 
I don’t understand why you keep bringing things up from the prior administration.

Can we at least give this a shot before we complain.

Some of ya’ll complaining are the same people that literally complain about everything in every thread. It gets old and it’s hard to take some of you seriously when you’re never happy with anything.
This is not about speculation or giving the new administration a fair shake. An extra 6 feet is simply not going to allow for an appropriately sized scoreboard. Much like the video boards in the endzones that are too small because of space restrictions.

The question is - how much more expensive would it be to raise the roof another 30-50'? How much more expensive would it be to install supports that would allow for a future third-level concourse?
This is really where we need someone inside the planning process. It'd be nice to know they are at least considering these things and ruling them out versus planning everything on the cheap.
 
the existing roof is 160 ft, scoreboards only have to be in the 80-90 ft range. even if the new roof is 20 ft lower that still leaves 50 ft to play with. the boards now are under 30ft? this is far different than the retro fit boards the dome has now.

just how big a replay board are you looking for?
 
the existing roof is 160 ft, scoreboards only have to be in the 80-90 ft range.
So you think college punters can't kick a ball 70' high? They better get proper insurance for this scoreboard if that's their assumption. Good thing our guys practice rugby style.
 
You never sat in Archbold in November, cold,
and wind on the hill can make it almost unbearable.

First date with my wife was a football game in Archbold. She was hit in the face with an orange thrown into the crowd by cheerleaders. Shortly after that she was with me for a game played in a cold, driving rainstorm against Tulane won 3 - 0 on a last second David Jacobs field goal. My strategy was to set the bar low early on. Must have worked since we will be celebrating our 40th anniversary this Sunday!
 
the nfl requires less than 90 ft off the ground. the one in dallas has been hit twice. if ours hangs at 120 and hangs down 30 ft that would make it twice as big as the ones we have in the endzone.. you could hang one that big in the dome now if the roof could support it. just how low do you think the middle of the dome will be based on these drawings. even if its 20 ft lower its still plenty high.
 
Again, those drawings look to scale. The roof height will be significantly less than the truss. Someone else mentioned there was only a 6' difference in the old vs new. Don't be shocked when they hoist a panasonic 36" CRT from the roof. If they can misspell Bowie and spray paint lettering in the endzone, they can certainly botch the engineering design and planning for this project.
Actually they spelled "Bowie" correctly that was the problem. Hey do you work for SU?
 
the nfl requires less than 90 ft off the ground. the one in dallas has been hit twice. if ours hangs at 120 and hangs down 30 ft that would make it twice as big as the ones we have in the endzone.. you could hang one that big in the dome now if the roof could support it. just how low do you think the middle of the dome will be based on these drawings. even if its 20 ft lower its still plenty high.

All the new scoreboard needs to do is pass the: Hofrichter Test
 
First date with my wife was a football game in Archbold. She was hit in the face with an orange thrown into the crowd by cheerleaders. Shortly after that she was with me for a game played in a cold, driving rainstorm against Tulane won 3 - 0 on a last second David Jacobs field goal. My strategy was to set the bar low early on. Must have worked since we will be celebrating our 40th anniversary this Sunday!
I was at that game too...the first half wasn't too bad but the temperature kept dropping...brrrr
 
You never sat in Archbold in November, cold,
and wind on the hill can make it almost unbearable.
i remember one game in the mid 1960's really don't remember who we played. it was sunny and high 50's at 1pm kick off, second quarter it became real cloudy third quarter very cold with freezing rain falling turning to snow by the end of the game. rain was worse as it flowed relentlessly down the concrete and there was no escape. i always carried a shower curtain in a bag if it was cloudy just for that catastrophe
 
611214697.jpg


I originally thought the steel cables from the outer truss support ring (the part that looks like a roller coaster) to the roof would hold the inner ring up as well as holding up the PTFE/ETFE material to be used to cover the inner part of the new roof. I thought the bubbles on the PTFE/ETFE material were going to be formed by steel cables attached to the material that ran to the outer truss support ring. Like Olympic Stadium in Montreal.

934565.jpg


But it looks like that isn't the case. It looks like the bubbles are pre-formed. Interesting.

I understand it much the same way you do. In fact there is a good deal of similarity between the new roof design and Olympic Stadium here. The idea as I understand it is that the outer portion is the rigid portion and the inner portion is a "flexible" portion. PTFE that we will use is a teflon coated fiberglass woven (for structural rigidity/strength) fabric. My understanding is there is a rigidity to the fabric, but its loading capacity will obviously have its limits. This is one of the reasons it is portioned into smaller squares (balance rigidity with transparency). The bubble shape of them is so each panel can carry a load (support it's own weight plus a snow load). The tension wiring is holding a portion of these preformed panels at the farthest span so that they can "bridge" the gap between the rigid roof's span capability and the PTFE's self supporting capability. I also believe the bubble shape is for runoff so that there is no pooling for leak protection and more so so the loading is minimized (which in turn maximizes the materials panel size). This is the guesswork of an under-informed architect.
PTFE Fiberglass - Fabric Membranes | Birdair, Inc.
 
First date with my wife was a football game in Archbold. She was hit in the face with an orange thrown into the crowd by cheerleaders. Shortly after that she was with me for a game played in a cold, driving rainstorm against Tulane won 3 - 0 on a last second David Jacobs field goal. My strategy was to set the bar low early on. Must have worked since we will be celebrating our 40th anniversary this Sunday!
So you're saying she only agreed to a second date with you because she was suffering from a concussion??
 
First date with my wife was a football game in Archbold. She was hit in the face with an orange thrown into the crowd by cheerleaders. Shortly after that she was with me for a game played in a cold, driving rainstorm against Tulane won 3 - 0 on a last second David Jacobs field goal. My strategy was to set the bar low early on. Must have worked since we will be celebrating our 40th anniversary this Sunday!
Happy 40th Anniversary!!
 
This is not about speculation or giving the new administration a fair shake. An extra 6 feet is simply not going to allow for an appropriately sized scoreboard. Much like the video boards in the endzones that are too small because of space restrictions.

The question is - how much more expensive would it be to raise the roof another 30-50'? How much more expensive would it be to install supports that would allow for a future third-level concourse?
This is really where we need someone inside the planning process. It'd be nice to know they are at least considering these things and ruling them out versus planning everything on the cheap.

Just stop. Post after post after post.
 
Wildhack is a details guys I have complete faith in. Dr. “2 Cell Phones” Gross not so much, but he did convince the university to increase athletics & facility spending so he wasn’t all bad.
 
Any chance the press box will get moved upstairs at some point during the renovation? A little concerned that the new shell will restrict opportunities for an improved configuration - not to mention an upper-level concourse which seems like a fantasy as it has never been mentioned or taken seriously.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,603
Messages
4,714,819
Members
5,909
Latest member
jc824

Online statistics

Members online
59
Guests online
2,037
Total visitors
2,096


Top Bottom