Structural

Vanity Height: How Much of a Skyscraper is Usable Space?

http://www.archdaily.com/425730/vanity-height-how-much-of-a-skyscraper-is-usable-space

Dubai’s Burj Khalifa, which is measured at 828m (2717ft)

The Burj Khalifa’s total vanity height is 244m (39%)which, on its own, would stand as Europe’s 11th tallest skyscraper. 

BURJ KHALIFA VANITY HEIGHT = 800 FT = 39%

http://www.emirates247.com/news/how-1km-high-kingdom-tower-stacks-up-2013-06-12-1.510014

Kingdom Tower height: 1000 plus metres (to surpass Burj Khalifa by at least 173 metres)

1,008 m (3,307 ft) 
-Highest occupiable floor: Level 163

167 (2 below ground) (252 including uninhabitable "floors" in the spire) ^[4]

KINGDOM TOWER VANITY HEIGHT = 89 FLOORS * 13.12 FT PER FLOOR = 1,168 FT = 35%

The global number of buildings taller than 200 metres has almost tripled since 2000, increasing from 263 to 756 at the end of 2012. In total, 35 buildings taller than 200 metres were completed in Asia in 2012 and 16 in the Middle East. On the contrary, six were completed in North America, including only two in the United States, which once dominated tall building development.

Of the projects under construction, 59 will join the list of the 100 tallest buildings in the world; eight will likely make the top 10. There are also 10 buildings taller than 500 metres under construction, including three mega-talls, over 600 metres.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_the_world

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_the_world_by_height_to_roof

Taller: How Future Skyscrapers Will Beat the Burj Khalifa

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/design/a7807/taller-how-future-skyscrapers-will-beat-the-burj-khalifa-8893983/

The Engineering Tricks Behind the World's Super Tall and Super Slender Skyscrapers

http://www.curbed.com/2015/9/24/9917752/the-engineering-tricks-behind-building-slender-taller-towers-and

According to Bill Baker, the structural engineer for Skidmore, Owings & Merrill responsible for the Burj Khalifa, the trend towards taller, thinner buildings has presented new spins on old engineering challenges. When the ratio between the height and width of a building goes beyond 8 :1 or 9:1, it becomes increasingly more expensive to construct, since it requires thicker walls and more sophisticated technology to reduce the amount of swaying and shaking caused by the wind (Baker compared today's thinner supertalls to a fishing rod, and making one stand up straight requires much more reinforcement). The height-to-width ratio for 432 Park Avenue is 15:1; to put that in perspective, if you place a standard ruler on its end, it has a ratio of 12:1.

Michell Truss

http://www.grasshopper3d.com/forum/topics/parametric-mitchell-truss-geometry

http://www.grasshopper3d.com/forum/topics/curves-intersecting-a-surface

How Flowers Help Us Understand Why Bridges Collapse

http://gizmodo.com/how-flowers-help-us-understand-why-bridges-collapse-1775500894


https://www.arraysolutions.com/Products/windloads.htm

Force, F = A x P x Cd

A = The projected area of the item

P , Wind pressure (Psf), = .00256 x V^2  (V= wind speed in Mph)

Cd , Drag coefficient,  = 2.0 for flat plates. For a long cylinder (like most antenna tubes), Cd = 1.2.
Note the relationship between them is 1.2/2 = .6, not quite 2/3.

https://books.google.com/books?id=aOHpAwAAQBAJ&pg=SA6-PA1&lpg=SA6-PA1&dq=design+prevailing+wind+lateral+load&source=bl&ots=UNtcYZHlsq&sig=dx896BdbNe69KqBsJvYnMHg-k7Y&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj93t-Muu_KAhUFNiYKHTYPAwYQ6AEIJjAC#v=onepage&q=design%20prevailing%20wind%20lateral%20load&f=false