Can this structure stand without internal support?

Discussion in 'Architecture & Engineering' started by Oystein, Jan 30, 2017.

  1. Oystein Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    890
    I saw this on a geology forum and everyone there seems to think this is free-standing, balanced rocks.

    I say no way. This collection of rocks cannot stand without either being cemented/glued or some sort of metal rod/bar inserted thru each piece. The upper arch has no lateral supports to keep it from collapsing.

    What say you?


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. origin Trump is the best argument against a democracy. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,445
    No. The arch can hold together but the bottom of the structure (art?) cannot.
     
    Russ_Watters likes this.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,435
    It doesn't need them. An arch is self-supporting.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Oystein Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    890
    Of course that's true. Structures 101, high school or college freshman.

    So, you must think that the entire structure could stand as it is. I know it can't.
     
  8. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,435
    The UPPER arch (the part you asked about) can free stand. The lower part - the part that is not an arch - cannot.
     
  9. Oystein Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    890
    • Inappropriate Behavior: Assuming the worst of other posters when contradicted by plain reading
    WTF. I'm conversing with Mr. Contraire.
     
  10. karenmansker HSIRI Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    593
    It IS standing, is it not? So OF COURSE it can stand (how long is another issue). Details of its construction are not given - only a photo - if it is a real depiction, then of course it can stand - because it IS sstanding!
     
  11. Dr_Toad It's green! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,752
    Artifice. The top can hold unless there's a breath of wind. I suspect glue or an armature.

    Y'all's bullshit meter must be defective...
     
  12. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,401
    I dout that even the top half coud suport itself wit-out "glue".!!!
     
  13. spidergoat Speak of the Devil Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,222
    Google Andy Goldsworthy:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Dr_Toad likes this.
  14. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,401
    It looks like he knows what hes doin... an if so he woud agree wit me

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  15. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,662
    I suppose you will lay down the pieces on a wood mold then burn the mold and it might stand
     
    zgmc likes this.
  16. Dr_Toad It's green! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,752
    What are you responding to?

    @ clueluss: Yep, He got it right. Probably..

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  17. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,435
    Or just remove it. People have been building arches out of stone for about four thousand years now, so they've figured out how to do it.
     
  18. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,662
    Roman construction was based on arches I am not sure it was done before. The Greeks did not have it ?
     
  19. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,435
    The city of Ashkelon (now in Israel) had a big arched entry gate, built around 1850BC.
     
  20. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,640
    I think there has been a bit of signals crossing in this thread.

    The upper arch could stand on its own (as Andy Goldsworthy is fond of doing).

    The lower half cannot.

    Is there anyone that disagrees with this?

    Simply put, the centre of mass of any given rock in the lower half is not over the base. The forces of the rocks above it are pushing each rock outward. There is no constraining force to stop lower arch rocks from toppling. (Remember, the rocks in the top half of the arch are also pushing the rocks in the lower half outward - with considerable force.That's why flying buttresses were invented.)
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2017
  21. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,640
    The OP's question is
     
  22. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,662
    Interesting since those people in the area probable were Egyptian , then the occupant were Menoan later called Phonesian . By any chance the 1850 BC can be in error ? do you have any site. Perhaps the arc was made by excavation , but I doubt made of brick.
    Perhaps if we look into India ( Harappan culture ) they developed backed brics earlier than in the mediterranean area
     
  23. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,401
    I dont thank the upper arch coud stand on its own.!!!

    Id guess that some very good glue was used.!!!
     

Share This Page