Masonry

Theory Imposed on Reality

by Don Friedman on December 15, 2017


That’s a fine, very-short-span bridge in the Ramble in Central Park. Honestly, it feel ridiculous to call it a bridge when the space below it resembles, more than anything else, a door, but what else could it be? One pedestrian path crosses over another, and a wall of large ashlar blocks has a hole in it. The Ramble is my least favorite feature in the park – its complex and picturesque tangle of paths, ravines, and miniature streams feels forced and cutesy to me – but I love the way the masonry of the wall is simply laid up next to and on top of the boulder on the left.

How does the heavy masonry span across the opening? Any way it wants.* There’s a true arch of carefully-shaped voussoirs defining the opening. There’s plenty of masonry wall above the opening and to either side, which means we could define arching action at many different locations and it would work. and the span is so short that the stones will work in bending. For example, the horizontal band of large stones right above the arch keystone could consist of corbels holding up the center stone, with that stone working in bending.

Here’s the trick to reading a structure like this: it doesn’t matter which of those analytic mechanisms is correct because they all work. They may very well all be true simultaneously. If we could examine the state of stress in each stone and each joint, from a distance, in 3D,** we’d probably find that it doesn’t exactly match the model for any of the mechanisms I mentioned above because all are working together. The various mechanisms are the physical inverses of boundary conditions in calculation: they show what is possible. For example, if there wasn’t enough masonry to the side of the opening for gravity to counteract the arch thrust, the masonry arch and arching action mechanisms would fail in theory and the masonry would have to be working in bending. If the stones were smaller, the bending mechanism wouldn’t work. If the voussoir stones were shaped the wrong way, the formal arch mechanism wouldn’t work but arching action would.

My point, other than thinking too much about a very small bridge, is that all analysis is modeling and all models are imperfect descriptions of reality. If we analyze the masonry arch as an arch and it works, we can say with confidence that we know the arch is capable of carrying the load. We can’t say we know the actual state of stress, because all the parts of reality that our model ignores, including specifically the presence of other possible load paths, may change the stresses.

 


* Yes, it is an old joke. It’s been carefully maintained and preserved.

** But that state of perfect knowledge does not exist.

Form Follows Function

November 19, 2017

The 1896 window sill in the picture above may be the most perfectly designed piece of architecture in the city. It’s there to provide a base for the wooden window frame, to protect the relatively porous brick from water infiltration from above, and to shed water. It had to be built into the solid brick […]

Read the full article →

Arching Action Index

October 31, 2017

I’ve been caught up in writing about arching action recently, and I thought it might make sense to collect all of the posts on this topic in one place. So: What Is Arching Action? Arching Action, Too Not Amenable To Easy Analysis Arching Action Visible Jack Arches Are Arching Action If I post again on […]

Read the full article →

Physically Impossible

October 31, 2017

That’s the north facade of 390 Fifth Avenue, the Gorham Building, at its east end where it meets the Fifth Avenue facade. It was built in 1906 and the avenue storefronts were modified in the late 1960s or early 70s. Where the newer glass curtain wall ends, just to the left of the truck, you’ve […]

Read the full article →

Telegraphing Through

October 20, 2017

Another artistic photo, this time of one face of a party wall in a rowhouse. If you look closely (click on the picture to expand it), you’ll see that the plaster is well-adhered to the brick. The plaster didn’t fall off in that one area, it was removed. Why? Because the presence of that long, […]

Read the full article →

This Is Ungood

October 18, 2017

From a few years ago, some rotting wood beams and a failing brick pier. In 1989, I performed a long and difficult site visit to check on a structure I won’t name (confidentiality is still in place, even after all these years) that had to be reviewed once per year. The fellow who had been […]

Read the full article →

Road Trip: An Orphaned Wall

October 16, 2017

Seen on the street in Ottawa… I’ve mentioned orphans walls once before. They are what’s left when old walls are incorporated into new buildings in a manner that makes it difficult or impossible to demolish the wall when the original building is demolished. In this case, the light-red wall with white trim obviously belonged to […]

Read the full article →

Intentionally Tilted Masonry

October 6, 2017

That’s a photograph taken in an attic of a mid-1800s house. The good news is that the wood is dry as a bone, so it’s not rotting. The maybe bad news is that brick chimney…isn’t quite straight. The reason for the chimney running diagonally is, simply, fakery. The fireplace below didn’t, for whatever interior layout […]

Read the full article →

Inverted Arch Foundations Are Upside-Down Fun

October 5, 2017

Every once in a while during design, I remind myself of what various types of structural member do, as a way of thinking about what I need done. For example, the simplest definition of a “beam” that I can come up with is “a linear structure that carries load at right angles to its long […]

Read the full article →

Blatant and Odd Fakery

October 4, 2017

The entrance to a garage in a late-1980s, maybe early 1990s apartment house is dead center in that photo. I can’t stop staring at the “flat arch” above the opening. Someone went to a lot of trouble to make the stone veneer (which is most likely in front of concrete block back-up) look like this […]

Read the full article →