Millennium Tower, San Francisco, leaning more than predicted

  • Thread starter Thread starter Astronuc
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Tower
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The Millennium Tower in San Francisco is sinking at an alarming rate, settling 1 inch in just three months, which exceeds the predicted rate of 1 inch per year. Currently, the tower is leaning 22 inches from vertical, primarily at the top. This situation raises significant concerns regarding potential catastrophic outcomes, especially in the event of an earthquake, as the building's instability could lead to a domino effect, impacting adjacent structures. The lack of a geotechnical review during the tower's construction process has been identified as a critical oversight, as it did not assess the soil conditions beneath the building.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of structural engineering principles
  • Knowledge of geotechnical engineering and soil assessment
  • Familiarity with earthquake risk management
  • Awareness of building safety regulations and oversight processes
NEXT STEPS
  • Research geotechnical engineering best practices for high-rise buildings
  • Explore earthquake risk mitigation strategies in urban environments
  • Learn about structural integrity assessments and peer review processes
  • Investigate case studies of similar building failures and their resolutions
USEFUL FOR

Structural engineers, geotechnical engineers, urban planners, and safety regulators involved in high-rise construction and earthquake preparedness will benefit from this discussion.

Astronuc
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
2025 Award
Messages
22,504
Reaction score
7,433
I just happened to stumble across this new video.

Millennium Tower is Sinking Faster Than Rate ‘Limit' Set by Fix Engineers - Yoiks!​



Interview with Rune Storesund, UC Berkeley Center for Catastrophic Risk Management

It apparently settled (1 inch) in three months what was predicted in one year. And earlier predictions had settling the core region, not to one side. According to a report, it's leaning 22 inches (from vertical), ostensibly at the top of the building!
 
  • Wow
Likes   Reactions: Ivan Seeking and berkeman
Engineering news on Phys.org
Astronuc said:
I just happened to stumble across this new video.

Millennium Tower is Sinking Faster Than Rate ‘Limit' Set by Fix Engineers - Yoiks!​



Interview with Rune Storesund, UC Berkeley Center for Catastrophic Risk Management

It apparently settled (1 inch) in three months what was predicted in one year. And earlier predictions had settling the core region, not to one side. According to a report, it's leaning 22 inches (from vertical), ostensibly at the top of the building!

They had better sling some big ropes around it and the adjacent buildings so it doesn't fall over. :olduhh:
 
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: Astronuc
Ivan Seeking said:
They had better sling some big ropes around it and the adjacent buildings so it doesn't fall over.
If it topples, it'll take other buildings with it. Just image a M6 earthquake or stronger. If they get liquefaction in an earthquake - I wouldn't want to be nearby.
 
  • Wow
Likes   Reactions: Ivan Seeking
Astronuc said:
If it topples, it'll take other buildings with it. Just image a M6 earthquake or stronger. If they get liquefaction in an earthquake - I wouldn't want to be nearby.
Indeed! That could be catastrophic.
 
Ivan Seeking said:
Indeed! That could be catastrophic.
Rune Storesund, UC Berkeley Center for Catastrophic Risk Management, so much said so. It seemed an understatement.

Back in 2017
https://sf.curbed.com/2017/2/3/14500782/millennium-tower-peer-revie
The developers behind the sinking Millennium Tower paid for an independent review of the tower itself before it was built, but not of the site it sits on, according to new testimony at City Hall on Thursday.

The Government Audit and Oversight Committee quizzed Jack Moehle, a professor of structural engineering at UC Berkeley, whom Millennium Partners and its engineer consultants hired to conduct an independent peer review of the building design while it was being entitled.

“The interest was to do an internal review to ensure that the structural system selected was suitable,” Moehle told city lawmakers at Thursday’s hearing. “[So] that if there was a formal peer review for the city later that most questions would be dealt with already.”

Moehle says he inspected the high-rise’s design from top to bottom—but no lower than the bottom. A geotechnical review—i.e., an assessment of the condition of the soil under the building site—wasn’t part of the process, because no one ever hired a geotechnical engineer.
This last part is fundamental to such projects. I don't know if they did or did not hire a geotechnical engineer. That requires different expertise than a structural engineer who looks at the building structure within the building envelop.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Wow
Likes   Reactions: Rive, russ_watters and Ivan Seeking