I see steel reinforced concrete with the steel exposed in overhead beams. This thing is gonna have to come down.
Good steel reinforced concrete starts deteriorating before a hundred years. It's no material for a cathedral.
Good steel reinforced concrete starts deteriorating before a hundred years. It's no material for a cathedral.
> He piled empty paint cans on top of one another and filled them with concrete to make columns. He bent corrugated iron rods and fed them through slinky-like springs to create the structure for arches. When the columns he built were too short, he filled the gaps with clumps of iron, piling them up like mismatched books to the height of the support beams. He’d then solder them together.
La Sagrada Familiar uses steel reinforced concrete (though technically it's a minor basilica, not a cathedral)
https://blog.sagradafamilia.org/en/divulgation/construction-...
This is a category mistake, no? A cathedral isn't an architectural term, but a designation granted to the central church of a diocese (i.e., the seat of a bishop, hence "cathedra" which means "seat" in Latin). A basilica is both an architectural term and a designation.
The self-correction was somewhat tongue in cheek, as the real mistake would be from the article, calling a homemade Church a cathedral.
The place has a touristic appeal and will be probably exploited for Mensajeros de la Paz (the quickest to see its potential, appear with some money and take the keys), as another similar Christneylands are, but the fact is that no sane architect wanted to be responsible of it.
I've been told its for tax reasons, something about not needing to pay taxes on a building that is still "under construction"
No, it's way worse. The outermost concrete layer serves multiple purposes, including corrosion protection and fire resistance.
Exposed rebar can and will start corroding immediately if not covered or treated, and in turn it loses grip and resistance.