Galileo was wrong: the geometrical design of masonry arches (Q871639)

Unter Hinweis auf klassische Beispiele der Architekturgeschichte fragt Verf., wie man denn früher baute: ``The master builders used a theory of a different kind, based in the critical observation of masonry building processes. This `non-scientific' theory must have been rich and complex, because its application resulted in the Pantheon, the Gothic cathedrals and the Hagia Sophia.'' (p. 26) In ``Proportional design of arches, vaults and buttresses'' zitiert er aus einem Manuskript der Gotik: Vom des Chores Mass: ``The building follows precise laws and all its parts are ruled, in such a way that all its elements are related with the whole building and the whole building is related with each one of its parts. The Choir is the fundament and the origin of all the rules \dots'' (p. 27), und er folgert: ``Rules of the same kind, arithmetical or geometrical, were employed in other periods as well'' (p. 29), wobei: ``It is a `geometrical design', which was considered to be correct for a building of any size.'' (p. 29) Kapitel ``Galileo and the `square-cube law'\,'': Galileo Galilei (1564--1642) veröffentlichte 1638 die \textit{Discorsi e Dimostrazioni Matematiche} \dots; ``Galileo was trying, for the first time, to draw scientific conclusions about the strength of beams \dots However, just from the beginning he exposes the result of his researches and mounts an attack on medieval proportional design.'' (p. 30) In ``The strength of beams'' heißt es: ``Galileo \dots considers only the case of simple bending \dots chooses the simple case of a cantilever beam.'' (p. 30) Nachdem Verf. den Fehlschluß Galileis -- ``he forgets the necessary horizontal force to establish the equilibrium of horizontal forces: a member in bending must have both tension and compression areas'' (p. 31) -- und entsprechende statische Erkenntnisse des 18. Jhs. aufzeigte, diskutiert er das sog. square-cube law: ``Galileo was right about the form of the equation: for a given material and a certain cross--section, the bending strength is proportional to the product of its area by its depth. Galileo, then, applies himself to a comparison of the strength of beams of the same material and section but of different sizes.'' (p. 31), wodurch laut seiner Überzeugung ``a structure becomes `weaker' as it grows in size, the reserve of strength diminishing linearly with size'' (p. 31); Zitat Galilei: ``From what has already been demonstrated, you can plainly see the impossibility of increasing the size of structures to vast dimensions either in art or in nature.'' (p. 31) Gemäß ``A contradiction.'': ``[1] The great master builders of the past used proportional design rules, which are essentially incorrect. [2] Using these rules they built the masterpieces of architecture and engineering of the past.'' (p. 33) konstatiert Verf.: ``It is not reasonable to believe that the masterpieces of historical architecture, which have survived for centuries or millenia, were designed following an incorrect approach. So, perhaps, the matter should be reconsidered.'' (p. 33) Im Kapitel ``The design of masonry arches and vaulted structures'' erläutert er die Ableitung der Kräfte in Bogen ``as an inverted chain'' (p. 34) und Kette -- die Horizontalkraft bleibt konstant --, diskutiert die Festigkeit verschiedener Baustoffe: ``1) Masonry has an infinite compressive strength; 2) Masonry has no tensile strength; 3) Sliding is impossible.'' (p. 36) Verf. erklärt nun gemäß der ``Limit Analysis of Masonry'', inwiefern Bögen Konstruktionsfehler aufweisen, denn es ist erforderlich, ``to draw a line of thrust within an arch'' (p. 37), d. h., die Kräfte -- er demonstriert dies anhand von Bildern -- müssen jeweils innerhalb der damaligen massiven Bauten verlaufen: das ``Lower Bound Theorem'' (p. 37). Die Frage nach ``The limit arch'' beantwortet er mit: ``Thus, the limit arch forms the point of departure for the design of a safe arch: we will obtain geometrical safety by `thickening' the limit arch.'' (p. 37) und ``There are two approaches for the design of a safe arch: the `strength' approach and the `stability' approach. In both approaches the limit arch is the point of departure.'' (p. 37) Laut ``Masonry arch design'': Strength versus Stability wird man wohl den geometrischen Sicherheitsfaktor 2 oder 3 wählen. Hinsichtlich der Limit spans for masonry: ``For a certain span, the thickness by strength will coincide with the thickness by stability and this point will mark the limit of the span of the arch.'' (p. 39) wird die Standfestigkeit origineller Brücken aufgrund unterschiedlicher Materialeigenschaften -- Stein, Ziegel, Beton -- diskutiert, auch von Gebäudekonstruktionen: ``In conclusion, it is a fact that for historical masonry structures, the stresses are an order or two orders of magnitude below the crushing strengths of the masonry and, therefore, the problem of masonry design is not governed by strength but by stability.'' (p. 41) In ``Geometry and structural economy: two case studies of arch design'' spricht Verf. Wirtschaft\-lichkeit bzgl. Materialaufwand bei Rund-- und Spitzbögen an: ``This was well known by the Gothic master builders and the heavy, sometimes richly sculpted, keystones of pointed arches and cross vaults serve a structural as well as a decorative function.'' (p. 44) Bezogen auf die Kathedrale von Palma de Mallorca mit ihren schlanken Säulen: ``The unknown master used a typical Gothic device: buttressing by loading. The weight on top of the columns is increased extraordinarily so that the thrust of the lateral aisle only deviates slightly the vertical direction of the loads.'' (p. 47), und er zitiert: ``The key to the understanding of masonry is to be found in a correct understanding of geometry.'' (p. 47) Im Kapitel ``Conclusion: The `error' of Galileo and `Navier's straitjacket'\,'' folgert Verf.: ``Galileo was the first to provide a theory which permitted the strength of a certain type of structural element -- the simple beam -- to be checked. He was the founder of the theory of structures \dots'' (p. 47); das square-cube law bezieht sich aber nur auf die erste der drei ``fundamental structural criteria: strength, deformation, and stability'' (p. 48), so faßt er zusammen: ``In modern structures strength is usually the governing criterion.'' (p. 48) und er verweist auf Claude-Louis-Marie-Henri Navier (1785--1836): ``The resolution of the three structural equations, those of equilibrium, of the elastic material and of compatibility, will give a unique solution for the internal forces within the structure.'' (p. 49) Der Beitrag wird durch eine Reihe von Skizzen und Abbildungen geschickt aufgelockert. Ein Register ist beigegeben; Literaturhinweise sind nicht immer verläßlich (pp. 36, 38, 41).