4 ms·

I find it fascinating the feats that they managed back in when there were no computers, no powered heavy equipment, and mostly just ambition and sweat. We too o

I find it fascinating the feats that they managed back in when there were no computers, no powered heavy equipment, and mostly just ambition and sweat. We too often forget that they had an incredible understanding of construction techniques and math we hide in our design programs was worked out on paper, not discounting a bit of gut feel when actually putting the structure up. This of course was not limited to the Middle Ages but stretches back through Roman times, Egypt, and the far East of China and more. note : the site wants flash for some activities so it may limit what you can view

kevin_thibedeau 8y ago
There is a survivorship bias in ancient structures. Those that wern't up to snuff, collapsed. Most did.
- Luc 8y ago
  I don't think it's right to apply survivorship bias in this case. I mean, it's trivially true that anything unmaintained will collapse over a long enough time-frame, but I don't think >50% of buildings built to last collapsed before their time. If anything the damn things were overbuilt and hard to get rid of, even while being plundered for building materials.
  - alejohausner 8y ago
    Actually medieval designers did not use conservative design. Many cathedrals were not overbuilt. There was a push to make the walls and pillars thin, the ceilings tall, to create a sense of ethereal beauty. As a result, many buildings collapsed during construction, because they were pushing things too far.
    - Luc 8y ago
      But not most, I don't think.
      - kevin_thibedeau 8y ago
        Cathedrals were 100+ year endeavors and sufficient care was taken in design so that relatively few failed completely. Most buildings were not cathedrals and didn't benefit from such care.
WalterBright 8y ago
> math we hide in our design programs was worked out on paper The Boeing 747 was worked out with paper and slide rules. The 757 was in transition from paper calculations to CAD. See "Slide Rule" by Nevil Shute.
heavenlyblue 8y ago
>> We too often forget that they had an incredible understanding of construction techniques and math we hide in our design programs was worked out on paper, not discounting a bit of gut feel when actually putting the structure up. What kind of understanding are we talking about here? Before Newton there was none of the understanding that is needed to build a Cathedral. The only thing they had were models and previous attempts - there’s no way they could use paper to infer whether a particular shape will be stable under conditions.

kevin_thibedeau 8y ago

There is a survivorship bias in ancient structures. Those that wern't up to snuff, collapsed. Most did.

Luc 8y ago
I don't think it's right to apply survivorship bias in this case. I mean, it's trivially true that anything unmaintained will collapse over a long enough time-frame, but I don't think >50% of buildings built to last collapsed before their time. If anything the damn things were overbuilt and hard to get rid of, even while being plundered for building materials.
- alejohausner 8y ago
  Actually medieval designers did not use conservative design. Many cathedrals were not overbuilt. There was a push to make the walls and pillars thin, the ceilings tall, to create a sense of ethereal beauty. As a result, many buildings collapsed during construction, because they were pushing things too far.
  - Luc 8y ago
    But not most, I don't think.
    - kevin_thibedeau 8y ago
      Cathedrals were 100+ year endeavors and sufficient care was taken in design so that relatively few failed completely. Most buildings were not cathedrals and didn't benefit from such care.

WalterBright 8y ago

> math we hide in our design programs was worked out on paper The Boeing 747 was worked out with paper and slide rules. The 757 was in transition from paper calculations to CAD. See "Slide Rule" by Nevil Shute.

heavenlyblue 8y ago

>> We too often forget that they had an incredible understanding of construction techniques and math we hide in our design programs was worked out on paper, not discounting a bit of gut feel when actually putting the structure up. What kind of understanding are we talking about here? Before Newton there was none of the understanding that is needed to build a Cathedral. The only thing they had were models and previous attempts - there’s no way they could use paper to infer whether a particular shape will be stable under conditions.