Re: Stadium Site pictures : Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:48 pm  

h-bomb wrote:

I think a good number of the "claddinggate" complaints were down to the stadium looking unfinished and so from an aesthetic point of view the semi-permiable cladding will do the job nicely.

From reading the design statement, it would appear that the Club is taking the view that had the concourses remained uncladded, fans would have been exposed to the elements while ambling around the stadium, which is a bit of a bad idea really. I can't quite understand why that didn't occur to whoever designed the stadium in the first place? Still, it looks like Saints are putting it right and hopefully the aesthetic issue and the practical one will be resolved by this fancy sounding holey cladding.

(And I notice that the West Stand is included in the new cladding proposals too!)

Re: Stadium Site pictures : Wed Oct 12, 2011 7:52 pm  

They're here!



[That would be the floodlights at the new stadium!]

Re: Stadium Site pictures : Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:07 pm  

Amazing pictures ! Maybe I will travel next year in UK to watch a Catalan game against mighty Saints !

Re: Stadium Site pictures : Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:11 pm  

SaintsFan wrote: They're here! [That would be the floodlights at the new stadium!] Simply awesome. But geez it's bright. We'll be banned from playing after dark now because of those lights. Mate of mine reckons you can see the glow from the M62, but I reckon he's a fibber.

SaintsFan wrote: They're here! [That would be the floodlights at the new stadium!] Simply awesome. But geez it's bright. We'll be banned from playing after dark now because of those lights. Mate of mine reckons you can see the glow from the M62, but I reckon he's a fibber.

Re: Stadium Site pictures : Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:18 pm  

Northampton_Saint wrote:

I might be being naive here, but if the point of the new cladding is to make the concourses more sheltered then what's the point of putting up stuff that's full of holes exactly? Might as well use the money to build another statue...

Must admit that I'm a bit puzzled as well by the hole cladding idea (no pun intended).

Re: Stadium Site pictures : Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:28 pm  

saint at wire wrote:

Must admit that I'm a bit puzzled as well by the hole cladding idea (no pun intended).

They are very, very small holes. From a distance the stuff looks solid apparently but it lets air through and so eases the pressure on the structure. However, it doesn't let rain through, which appears to be the problem with the current arrangement!

Re: Stadium Site pictures : Wed Oct 12, 2011 10:08 pm  

Some examples of sizes. http://www.kalzip.com/PDF/uk/perforated ... erview.pdf

Some examples of sizes. http://www.kalzip.com/PDF/uk/perforated ... erview.pdf

Re: Stadium Site pictures : Wed Oct 12, 2011 10:19 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

:DRUMMER:

They are very, very small holes. From a distance the stuff looks solid apparently but it lets air through and so eases the pressure on the structure. However, it doesn't let rain through, which appears to be the problem with the current arrangement!

Something with 5mm holes cannot be waterproof.
If you doubt this get a sieve and poor water into it while placing said object over your head. If you are right you will remain dry. If you are not you will get a soaking.

What the cladding should do, when combined with the roof overhang and 4 metre wall, is make it less likely that water infiltrates in any significant quantity to the concourses.

I suspect the biggest impact will be psychological as people will feel that they are now indoors.

The proof however will be in the pudding, and it will be interesting to see how this innovative solution not only looks but works in real life. If it works well then we may see it used on other new stadium developments.

Re: Stadium Site pictures : Wed Oct 12, 2011 10:53 pm  

The Chair Maker wrote:

Something with 5mm holes cannot be waterproof.
If you doubt this get a sieve and poor water into it while placing said object over your head. If you are right you will remain dry. If you are not you will get a soaking.

What the cladding should do, when combined with the roof overhang and 4 metre wall, is make it less likely that water infiltrates in any significant quantity to the concourses.

I suspect the biggest impact will be psychological as people will feel that they are now indoors.

The proof however will be in the pudding, and it will be interesting to see how this innovative solution not only looks but works in real life. If it works well then we may see it used on other new stadium developments.

Didn't realise that the original plans had not only the concourses open to the elements but also the rear of seating/standing areas in all stands apart from the south stand.
The cladding appears to cover /screen most of the rear sections of the stand as well as concourse areas unless I've got the plans upside down?

It's not very much of a shock that the rain was coming in but is a surprise that this was not covered in the original design when you are spending cicra £16M..
Hope it works .

Re: Stadium Site pictures : Thu Oct 13, 2011 8:50 am  

The Chair Maker wrote:

Something with 5mm holes cannot be waterproof.
If you doubt this get a sieve and poor water into it while placing said object over your head. If you are right you will remain dry. If you are not you will get a soaking.

Where does it say the holes will be 5mm? Aren't there 3mm options? Also, the degree of waterproofing will also be influenced by the angle of the cladding won't it? If it lays flat then surely the chances are higher of water getting through than if it is vertical? I can't tell from the photos whether the breeze block wall is lined up directly with the back of the stands. If it is then presumably the cladding would simply link the top of the wall with the base of the back of the stand?

Obviously, if the two are not lined up then there would need to be a roof between the wall and the cladding. Would a solid flat roof between the wall and the cladding influence wind resistence or does that just apply to vertical surfaces? I'm no engineer or physicist so I don't know.