What is the difference between a spire and an antenna

Study now. See Answer. Best Answer. A spire is an architectural feature on a building. It is a tall, tapering peak on a roof.

Some types are tall but the shape depends almost entirely on the signal to be sent or received. Study guides. The Difference Between 20 cards. A survey question that asks you to write a brief explanation is called. Auto correlation and cross correlation. If a married man cheats does that mean there are problems in his marriage.

The nature-nurture question asks whether. Poetry 22 cards. What is figurative language. Why do poets use sound effects. What is the difference between a poetic line and a sentence. How is a simile different from other types of figurative language. Economics 23 cards. What is a sporophyte. What are examples of Prokaryotes. Explain why elasticity of demand is such an important concept to marketers who sell a commodity product.

What is differences between side effect and adverse effect. Q: What is the difference between a spire and an antenna? Write your answer Related questions. How tall is the Chrysler Building? What is the difference between a spire and a steeple? What is the difference between antenna and antennae? What is the difference between transmitting and receiving antenna? What is the difference between an active antenna and a standard antenna?

Difference between hertz antenna and marconi antenna? How tall is the Seattle Space Needle? Below are a few reasons for spires built atop buildings. Increase height Adding spire is a cheaper way to increase height of the building, the cost for a skinny mast is much cheaper than solid concrete core and habitable floors.

Developers build skyscrapers is not only for its functionalities, they also want their buildings higher than others, so that to show prestige and draw more attention.

The developer of Shanghai World Financial Center had ever intended to build spires atop the building to make it higher than Taipei , so that their building will become the tallest building in the world by any measurement by that time. However the plan was not permitted by the local authorities due to the concern of aesthetic aspects. Ornamental purpose Most skyscrapers have spires installed on the top is for ornamental purpose.

The decision by the Chicago-based Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat hinged on whether the tower's mast was a spire, which counts in height measurements, or an antenna, which doesn't. Emanuel forcefully disagreed, defending the supremacy of Chicago's skyline.

It is an antenna. That's number one. Something you can't do from an antenna. Not that I'm competitive. So for all those who want to climb on top of an antenna and take a look, go ahead.

I would suggest stay indoors and take a look. But the council ruled that One World Trade Center's mast is a spire because it will be a permanent feature, its height locked in at a symbolic 1, feet. In doing so, the council accepted the argument of the skyscraper's architect and developers that the mast is part of the building's fixed height of 1,feet. That distinguishes the mast from an ordinary antenna, like the one atop Willis, whose height can be changed.

The council also sided with the New Yorkers in ruling that World Trade Center's bottom, or baseline for measuring its height, should be considered its main entrance facing south toward the National Sept.

Because of the skyscraper's site slopes, the north entrance is 5 feet, 8 inches lower than the main entrance. The council's height standards state a building's height is measured from its lowest outdoor entrance to its architectural top. If One World Trade Center's height was measured from the north entrance, the building would be 1, feet tall—still the nation's tallest, but without the symbolic ring of 1, feet.

Ninety-nine percent of people will be entering One World Trade Center off the memorial plaza, he added. Wood said the height committee's decision was "virtually unanimous. Wood and Weismantle said the committee felt no political pressure to rule in favor of One World Trade Center.