Sign in to follow this  
Roger Hill

An incredibly perceptive idea for strong arches............

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Roger Hill said:

From none other than Leonardo da Vinci.   Everywhere I look at this drawing I see similarities to the Cremonese arching  structure. 

 

8 minutes ago, Wood Butcher said:

I often think the same, every time I see a banana.

Oh, [BLEEP!!!].  Here we go again............  :ph34r:  :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Wood Butcher said:

I often think the same, every time I see a banana.

D3F3715C-AEE4-4022-A82F-61A3F0616267.jpeg.d151fd0f0c23a65a9a6bb6e7f5c45472.jpeg

 

Evidence that Andrea Amati may have been a monkey?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Violadamore said:

 

Oh, [BLEEP!!!].  Here we go again............  :ph34r:  :lol:

To  quote Don Henley, "get over it"     :P:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Roger Hill said:

To  quote Don Henley, "get over it"

Whatever.  You did, I hope, notice that the post following yours waved a banana in our faces.  The lines are being drawn as usual, and despite your innocent fascination with Leonardo's brilliant bridge design, this shows every sign of becoming yet another multi-page dispute between those who calculate or geometrically construct, and those who freehand.  You'll also have flak coming in from everybody who knows that little of Da Vinci's work was publicly known in his lifetime. :rolleyes:

Thanks for posting the link to Live Science, BTW, it's a great site which more people should read.  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Violadamore said:

Whatever.  You did, I hope, notice that the post following yours waved a banana in our faces.  The lines are being drawn as usual, and despite your innocent fascination with Leonardo's brilliant bridge design, this shows every sign of becoming yet another multi-page dispute between those who calculate or geometrically construct, and those who freehand.  You'll also have flak coming in from everybody who knows that little of Da Vinci's work was publicly known in his lifetime. :rolleyes:

Thanks for posting the link to Live Science, BTW, it's a great site which more people should read.  :)

Don't make me pull out George Hersey...AGAIN!  :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Violadamore said:

  You'll also have flak coming in from everybody who knows that little of Da Vinci's work was publicly known in his lifetime. :rolleyes:

 

I assume that means you  :D  I admit it, I'm just an ignorant, ill-educated redneck Okie injuneer from near Muskogee who loves curves in all the right places.  I find the side arches  supporting transverse stress and the end arches supporting compressional stress very stimulating, but I must admit that I am getting old   :(.  da Vinci died in about 1520, the Amati's came along in about 1540.  Do you know if there was any influence of his work passed to the luthiers of that era?  Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Julian Cossmann Cooke said:

Don't make me pull out George Hersey...AGAIN!  :lol:

[Swiftly winds her cloak about her left arm, and slips her right hand behind her, whatever she's grasping concealed by the skirts of her gamurra.  The LIW behind her flicks her eyes downward an instant, then smoothly backs up 3 feet or so, smiling like a certain Da Vinci painting.].

Yup.  As you're aware, I know my Renaissance stuff too.  Let's not, OK, Julian?  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Violadamore said:

Whatever.  You did, I hope, notice that the post following yours waved a banana in our faces.  The lines are being drawn as usual, and despite your innocent fascination with Leonardo's brilliant bridge design, this shows every sign of becoming yet another multi-page dispute between those who calculate or geometrically construct, and those who freehand.  You'll also have flak coming in from everybody who knows that little of Da Vinci's work was publicly known in his lifetime. :rolleyes:

Thanks for posting the link to Live Science, BTW, it's a great site which more people should read.  :)

I'm sorely tempted to use photoshop to show how bananas could be used to design a proper Cremonese violin for the other thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Roger Hill said:

I assume that means you  :D  I admit it, I'm just an ignorant, ill-educated redneck Okie injuneer from near Muskogee who loves curves in all the right places.  I find the side arches  supporting transverse stress and the end arches supporting compressional stress very stimulating, but I must admit that I am getting old   :(.  da Vinci died in about 1520, the Amati's came along in about 1540.  Do you know if there was any influence of his work passed to the luthiers of that era?  Thanks.

No, not from me.  I'm trying to prevent discord.  The short answer is, we aren't at all sure, but his notebooks, etc., weren't published at all until over 50 years after his death, and then piecemeal.  His modern fame comes from archival work. What might have been passed around among his contemporaries via correspondence and bull sessions is pure speculation.   :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Violadamore said:

[Swiftly winds her cloak about her left arm, and slips her right hand behind her, whatever she's grasping concealed by the skirts of her gamurra.  The LIW behind her flicks her eyes downward an instant, then smoothly backs up 3 feet or so, smiling like a certain Da Vinci painting.].

Yup.  As you're aware, I know my Renaissance stuff too.  Let's not, OK, Julian?  :)

The reference would not have been for your benefit -- you need no buttressing (no pun intended) on that front -- but for that of the assembled multitude. I will follow your lead, O Cloak-ed One.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I confess that I am baffeled, nay flabbergasted, by this recent «Leonardo’s bridge» hype. Look closely at the original sketch. Then at the CG design. Are they the same? Does every curve match, or are they even remotely similar? Did Leonardo specify the shapes of the stones, or are they a modern approximation? Did he really propose to build a bridge across the strait of Bosporous using stone blocks weighing in excess of 1000 tonnes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Felefar said:

I confess that I am baffeled, nay flabbergasted, by this recent «Leonardo’s bridge» hype. Look closely at the original sketch. Then at the CG design. Are they the same? Does every curve match, or are they even remotely similar? Did Leonardo specify the shapes of the stones, or are they a modern approximation? Did he really propose to build a bridge across the strait of Bosporous using stone blocks weighing in excess of 1000 tonnes?

Leonardo's proposal failed to include any information on materials or methods.  The model design is a very free interpretation.  I suspect that providing the removable scaffolding required for a bridge over 900 feet long and around 150 feet high, more than half of which is over water, in 1502, would have been as big a challenge as the bridge structure itself.  I'll also note that, with the mathematics of the time, Leonardo could not have possibly performed the calculations required to get exact numbers for the project.  :)

http://news.mit.edu/2019/leonardo-da-vinci-bridge-test-1010

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the "CG" design?  I have missed something.  What is "LIW"?  I've missed something else.  If the bridge design is used to  cross a creek 50' wide it is pure genius for structural rigidity.  The side arch structure will tend to oppose any stresses trying to bend it in a horizontal plane.  It can twist along an axis parallel to it's length but not much.  Has to be useful in the event of earthquake.  Load on the bridge is transferred to the end-supports.  The arches at the very ends look much like end-blocks to my eyes.  The side arches and end supports look like triangles which would be the equivalent of a modern truss bridge with a triangular cross-section if looked at from the end.  More rigidity.  The approaches to the center of the structure look like the straight lines seen in some arches, particularly those from Robert Zuger.  I'll try to spend more time casting dry flies rather than pearls.........;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Roger Hill said:

What is the "CG" design?  I have missed something.  What is "LIW"?  I've missed something else.  If the bridge design is used to  cross a creek 50' wide it is pure genius for structural rigidity.  The side arch structure will tend to oppose any stresses trying to bend it in a horizontal plane.  It can twist along an axis parallel to it's length but not much.  Has to be useful in the event of earthquake.  Load on the bridge is transferred to the end-supports.  The arches at the very ends look much like end-blocks to my eyes.  The side arches and end supports look like triangles which would be the equivalent of a modern truss bridge with a triangular cross-section if looked at from the end.  More rigidity.  The approaches to the center of the structure look like the straight lines seen in some arches, particularly those from Robert Zuger.  I'll try to spend more time casting dry flies rather than pearls.........;)

By "CG", I feel that Felefar means the cleaned-up Computer Generated graphic, which does look to me like it came out of a CAD program.  "LIW" was shorthand for "lady-in-waiting".  I agree that the design is very attractive, but anyone knowing a Bailey from a treadway, can't argue for its economic efficiency.  I feel that, turned into a hollow structure using modern techniques, it could be a magnificent idea for a giant multipurpose building arched across a river.  Imagine it in golden glass with a park as the roof.  :)

I also question the apparent MIT assumption that the only material sufficient to the task that Leonardo would have had available was stone.  There's nothing in the surviving documents to suggest that he might not have been considering a wooden truss span with stone approaches, and the lack of external details actually suggests some variation of a box bridge.  :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Roger Hill said:

>

I'll try to spend more time casting dry flies rather than pearls.........;)

What does that mean "casting dry flies rather  than pearls...."  I know about casting dry flies.  What about pearls?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@roger hill

would be interesting to build it from wood and compare it to other central arch patterns of the top to see how it compares in reality. My rough guess is that eventually material properties play a bigger role than the shape itself.

It looks like a normal circular arch and for me the more important question is how to relate the length of the arch to its height.

However, the big difference in the structure of the violin is that the arch of the top is supported by the sound post. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Marty Kasprzyk said:

What does that mean "casting dry flies rather  than pearls...."  I know about casting dry flies.  What about pearls?  

He's calling us swine, of course.  :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Andreas Preuss said:

@roger hill

would be interesting to build it from wood and compare it to other central arch patterns of the top to see how it compares in reality. My rough guess is that eventually material properties play a bigger role than the shape itself.

It looks like a normal circular arch and for me the more important question is how to relate the length of the arch to its height.

However, the big difference in the structure of the violin is that the arch of the top is supported by the sound post. 

I disagree.  The violin's arch is supported by the corner blocks which prevents it from stretching out sideways and collapsing --da Vinci's bridge arch is supported by the bridge abutments that do the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Marty Kasprzyk said:

What does that mean "casting dry flies rather  than pearls...."  I know about casting dry flies.  What about pearls?  

A biblical reference,  explanation from Wikipedia, not intended for you Marty, or for others who respond in genuine interest in what I thought would be obvious.  I must be wrong about what is obvious, my bad.

What does it mean to cast your pearls before swine?
Do not cast your pearls before swine. Do not waste good things on people who will not appreciate them. This proverb is adapted from a saying of Jesus from the Gospels, “Cast not pearls before swine.” Jesus appears to be warning his disciples to preach only before receptive audiences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.