To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The study of metaphor provides valuable insights into the workings of technology and how technology brings about change. This paper considers some current influential thinking about metaphor and how this impinges on understandings of technology and design.
The purpose of the research project described in part here was to inform strategic environmental and architectural issues in the design of three buildings for Potsdamer Platz, Berlin. The design team consists of Richard Rogers Partnership (architects), the Martin Centre (research consultants), RP+K Sozietät (environmental engineers), debis Immobilienmanagement mbH (client), and Drees & Sommer AG (project manager). The research element of the project was funded by the European Union's JOULE II Solar House Programme (JOU2-CT93-0436) and the Mitsubishi Corporation Fund for Europe and Africa. Our role in the design development was as daylighting and sunlighting research consultants with the aim of informing building form, façade design and the interior to improve environmental performance. This paper focuses particularly on the research and development of the façade, briefly describing the role of research activities in design. The purpose of this paper is thus not to describe new or pure research, but rather to investigate the architectural potential of environmental issues and analysis techniques.
Interactive rendering combines the geometrical precision of classical computer graphics with the representational freedom of a paint program. It is more sympathetic to the ways in which designers use images, and overcomes many of the frustrations experienced in rendering from CAD models. The scene is generated in a standard viewing application, but saved as a specially enhanced raster image. The extra information allows the interactive renderer to apply brushed-on rendering effects which are sensitive to the perspective of the image. Effects can be applied locally or overall, and may be overlaid, blended and erased to create complex combinations. A huge range of treatments is obtainable, both photorealistic and not.
As funding for research in British universities is now dependent upon an assessment of research productivity (made every four years), departments of architecture are finding that design, which used to be considered as the equivalent of research for architectural teachers, may not be regarded as such for the purposes of this assessment. The arguments both for and against considering design as a research activity are discussed, as is the need for a recognised way of grading the quality of work. Suggestions are made for the direction in which design as research in schools of architecture might take.
A concise report about the landform, architectural, and detail design concepts for the recently completed modernisation of the Bishopsfield Housing Estate in Harlow, Essex. The objective was to develop proposals for new interventions which are directly based on, and give emphasis and new life in a contemporary way to the architectural and urban design conceptions of the original architects and town planner.
In February of this year an exhibition of the work of Hans Scharoun devised by Nasser Golzari and Peter Blundell Jones was put on at the RIBA in London, in connection with which was held a Scharoun Symposium on 17 February. This included two German speakers sponsored by the Goethe Institute. Günter Behnisch spoke as the leading practitioner in what could be called a Scharounian direction. Also invited was Alfred Schinz, one of the most articulate of Scharoun's assistants from the rich period of the early 1950s, when Scharoun devised the prototypes for all his later work. Schinz's health unfortunately let him down, and he suggested that his place be taken by Friedrich Mebes, an architect friend from Essen who had been a student of Scharoun in Berlin in the 1940s and who still practises rather well in a Scharounian direction. With some help from Schinz, Mebes prepared what turned out to be an inspiring and informative paper, and it is printed below slightly shortened and with some tidying of the translation. Peter Blundell Jones
This paper is based largely on a document presented at a conference celebrating the 25th anniversary of the Martin Centre, held at the University of Cambridge in October 1992. It takes as its point of departure Sir Leslie Martin's essay, ‘Architects’ approach to architecture' (Martin, 1967). Commencing with his argument that ‘intentions and processes’ in architecture are more fundamental than form, this paper questions past attempts at relating history to architectural process, and outlines the potential offered by more recent advances in technology – especially, photogrammetry and the computer – for achieving a more objective and broader base for architectural criticism and consensus.
A masonry spire is usually octangular in cross-section; the square tower is converted by squinch arches or other means near its top into a regular octagon, from which the spire springs. Such a spire surmounts the church of St Mary at Hemingbrough (Yorkshire, East Riding), which is surprisingly large for a small village; it was in fact a collegiate church under the Prior and monks of Durham. The height of the thirteenth-century central tower, about 18.5 m, is in keeping with the general mass of masonry, but the total height to the top of the spire is 54.4 m (fig. 7.1). The spire itself was added in the second quarter of the fourteenth century, and springs from slightly below the parapets of the tower; it measures 37.5 m, and thus forms two-thirds of the total height of the church. The visual impact is curious, although Pevsner believes that the composition ‘happily breaks all rules of harmonious proportion’.
The ‘diameter’ of Hemingbrough spire at its base measures 5.50 m. A diameter is rather an imprecise measure for a spire whose horizontal cross-section is an octagon, but, as will be seen, some insight into the behaviour of spires can be obtained by treating a spire as a right circular cone, at least in the first instance.
The double roof system of the typical Gothic great church — a stone vault surmounted by a timber roof — is both decorative and functional. The steep external roof provides the necessary weather proofing dictated by northern climates (shallow pitches were used for Greek temples); indeed the stone vault, perhaps cracked and in any case not waterproof, itself needs the protection of the outer roof (in Cyprus the Crusader churches hardly need this cover). However timber burns well, and one function of the stone vault is to provide a fire-resistant barrier between the outer roof and the church. There is thus a symbiotic action between the two coverings of the church; the timber roof protects both the stone vault and the church from the weather, and the stone vault protects the church from the potential fire hazard of the timber roof.
The stone vault, functionally installed in a great church, at once became integrated as an architectural element of the internal decorative scheme. Thus the simple quadripartite vault, lierne and tierceron vaults, net and star vaults, and the fan vault, were all developed as ‘solutions’ to the vaulting problem. As will be seen, these vaults, so different from each other visually, have structural actions very much in common.
The barrel vault
Figure 4.1(a) shows a straightforward ‘voussoir’ construction of a barrel vault — the resulting tunnel can clearly be extended to any desired length. This type of construction will need temporary formwork to support the masonry.
The sketchbook of Villard de Honnecourt (c. 1235 and later) gives the lie once and for all to any idea that cathedral building was an amateur occupation. The book is written for skilled professionals. Figure 8.1, for example, shows one of the pages. The centre caption at the bottom refers to the survey under way: Pa(r) chu p'ntom le hau tece done toor – Par ce moyen on prend la hauteur d'une tour (how to take the height of a tower). The standards of lining, levelling and plumbing employed in the construction of Gothic cathedrals were outstanding. On the right of the figure, an arcade is being set out – how to set up two piers at the same height without plumbline or level. On the left one can find a big medieval joke: Par chu tail om vosure pendant – Par ce moyen on taille une voussure pendante (how to construct a hanging voussoir). Villard was a master. Why then has he had no public recognition? Why are no streets, or satellites, named after him? The answer is that Villard was in fact a minor architect, like Vitruvius. The only thing that they have in common is that some of their precious manuscripts accidentally survived; nothing is otherwise known of any of their work. Even Villard's written legacy has suffered attrition; in the fifteenth century there were forty-one leaves, recto and verso; now only thirty-three remain.