 So, I read through the microarchitecture as the idea of Gothic theory and style by Francois Boucher, and essentially the whole reading focuses on the term of microarchitecture. And so, the term was first coined by the author in 1976, where microarchitectures now are more commonly used to denote a more broad category of western medieval monuments and objects who sort of design incorporates more miniaturized architectural elements. So, from left to right, you have spires, you have the cupolas, the budgerises, and pinnacles also. So, microarchitectural forms were back then most frequently applied to, I guess, more like church furniture. So, on the bottom, you know, you have the reliquaries, you have the statue canopies. The third image is a little hard to find, but I think that is the altar of Siboria, if I'm not mistaken. The sort of like entrance, like canopy thing, right? And then on the right, you have the choir screens. And so, you know, granted onto the structures, microarchitecture could sort of more aestheticize certain religious discourses, you know, provide theatrical frameworks for programs of images or gematize more of the performance of rituals. So, most of these architectural furnishings were often visually calibrated to evoke biblical buildings or monuments where the author, Francois Boucher, gives the example of heavenly Jerusalem. And so, something that interesting that happened was that looking at microarchitecture versus structure itself. So, and you know, he describes that even the most literate people of the Middle Ages took architectural descriptions quite lightly and sort of just, I wouldn't say ignore them, but just pass them. Instead, they were more fascinated by the microarchitecture itself, which, for example, you know, the reliquaries and other mementos in the building itself. So, there was this almost more religious way of experiencing microarchitecture rather than the full scale only architecture itself. It said that to medieval churchgoers and pilgrims, sacred objects offered a more or infinitely more valid, transcendental experience. And he, and he goes like a vicarious identification, rather than the cathedrals themselves who structural arrogance, only if you could appreciate and even less would comprehend. So, in a strange way these smaller objects are misjudged and could be neglected in a time where bluntly put size matters in a way, because from 1160s onwards, the construction of churches will no longer be separate from the drive of the cities with their ambition for or scale or, or height. So where the cost of structures increased until the end of Gothic gigantism around 1300. So here I'm showing the example of, forgive the pronunciation is Saint Etienne. Saint Etienne. Etienne. It means Saint Stephen and French. I see. So this was in 1060. So from here and on the competition for high and structural daring was restricted to more identifiable, you know, mighty towers which symbolize this almost holy power and civic pride. But then it was around the mid 13th century where the discovery of less extravagant trend setting. So this is an example, developed into challenges the more modest project so the right it gives an example on the left of saint chapel and the Santa Maria de la Spina. So this is where we started to see. Obviously, I'm comparing the left to the right you see more of a static vocabulary in the world of you know, two stalls funds and just micro architecture in general. So according to Boucher was. Yeah, so according to Boucher was the over heightened emotional needs of the population. And the need for new and inventive complexities that increase the market for small structures and so working at a, you know, much more smaller scale. This allowed architects to perform more sophisticated model experiments. And that were, or just like more imaginative ideas that were beyond the capabilities of any builder were sort of now, now possible because of the scale. So there was this ability for, and he's this term here called structural forgiveness. So this brings me to my next comparison of the poetic and the realizable building. So the dilemma between the two is now almost resolved with micro architecture so poems that describe complex tombs, a domed star started vault. I'm in a grand cantilevered mirror so the these are also all books and poems on the left on the left. So, and he says that these are like verbal buildings. And the most of them sort of rest on slender supports are made of precious Polish materials and are covered with jewels and ornaments. So since there's a lot of these fantasies cannot be carried out to scale structures became smaller and more gadgety. So the author gives the example that you know this sort of antiret, antirational constructions became almost so extravagant that they could only be realizing a structurally forgiving realm of buildings whose extraordinarily daring elevations required much smaller size. So, oops. So the complete, you know, to two tower church facades in the ball the team of the Louvain tabernacle indicates its true immensity and therefore results dilemma between the poetic and the realizable building. So, when Gothic theory had sort of stabilized by 1300 AD it simplicity in the combinations of squares, you know triangles and polygons led to this quick exhaustion of basic variations. Bearing the always logical design combination with therefore invented and applied first to smaller structures. Micro architecture and then to vaulting. So this is images of the base of tabernacle by Lechler. I actually searched the definition for a tabernacle and it seems it's, it defines as like a as a meeting spot in a more of a religious way. But I'm not sure how that's translated to micro architecture itself. Well, and yeah, and in a Christian church tabernacle is often where they keep something precious, namely the, the, the hosts for the sacrament for communion so it's the thing on top of the base is really a kind of box a container. Okay. So, micro architecture, I stated before is sort of being used as experiment experimentation to. But, and I think this is quite relevant to sort of like what we're going through now towards the end of the 13th century we saw a lot of events. For example, he gives examples of the, of the collapse of the of the bouvet in 1284 on the Babylonian exile of the prophecy. And then the start of the hundred years war in 1337, the catastrophic monetary devaluations of between 1285 and 1314 which were followed by the failure of the Bardi and peruzzi banks in 1345 and then of course, you have the black death shows plague between 1347 1350. So that brought a lot of reduction major patronage. So, you know, parish churches, civic projects and more privately finance architectural environments became the source of revenue for the architect. So the sort of reduced size was almost counterbalanced by the enrichment of details on this sophisticated treatment of materials and more daring design. And so because of their attractiveness and manual cost the small monuments quickly moved outdoors and into the city itself. And so they would become innumerable on candidly but Orioles, all the chains over memorials fountains wells. And they even said galleries for Percival clubs. So he also mentioned banisters tracery and small vault design, and it's stated by 1400 that these small commissions are kind of for about 50% of output in northern workshops. So, in addition to these new crafts, the introduction of double curves and branch work had started. So, these were more a forest gothic and from boiling gothic as an organic abstraction, which represented this more anti structural theme. And so this is where we see the example of what's called open work spires. And so you can find them, it says, most notably in in freeberg cologne and the Indiana, and these are seemingly so vulnerable that they had to be heavily reinforced by iron. And this proves to be an excellent example of, you know, the expression of the intersection of, I guess, micro and macro architecture. So they sort of reflect the spirit of contemporary tower reliquaries. And then the example on the left, which is the custodial Toledo Cathedral, contracting 1515. And this represents sort of as seen through the eyes, which see in, and this is a quote, the visible world images of heavenly things so one of the most stunning constructions dedicated to the apotheosis of Christ. And this is, you know, the flyer, the flyers the crown like dome, the tabernacle around the risen savior, etc. A part of this sort of immensely sophisticated architectural entity. So, if we view the buttress figurines as a man hide the structure would measure, you know, 300 feet in height. So, and these are all the examples in the reading itself. And I thought this could be more over discussion based thing where, you know, we, it's sort of a hard sometimes to identify what each thing is I'm not sure if it's the, you know, a lot of detail or it's just a bad quality of the image. But through, you know, in light of, you know, all the examples and points that the author made our microarchitecture can be seen as scale less anti rational and sort of understood by all so within such a small space that has a potential to express systems of decoration complexity and then daring. What is this anti structural elements that are still based off theoretical principles. So to end with a quote from the text talking about microarchitecture. It says dazzling structural dexterity intensely geometric complexity and a hypnotic dissolution of the structure through light. Excellent. Yeah, you definitely got to the heart of this particular article by the shade. And these examples are wonderful. What do we make of them. What about what what attributes of these indicate structural daring. I mean, for example, the thing that just these examples here. So, can you see my my cursor. Sure. So, you see this sort of, it almost looks heavy and extremely, you know, ornamental and then you get these sort of gaps here that you that you can see past. And you can see through that part of the of micro of microarchitecture. And then here in this example, you know, you have such sort of what seems to be a light base and the heavy top. In terms of structural daring, I think it had many more capabilities that we see more or that we can explore more on the computer, whereas their exploration was microarchitecture. Yeah, and the microarchitecture that we're seeing here would have been oftentimes can be made of wood carved out of single blocks not really built up of individual ashlar blocks as a real building would be So they're, they're able to do things at the smaller scale that couldn't be done full architectural scale. Yeah, the top heaviness of that last example that you were just pointing to. I mean a base has very slender supports. And we see about mid mid height there. There's a kind of arches that land on nothing right so sort of like a column less arcade, creating a great overhang, and then the superstructure on top being of course a combination of just a big top heavy and then further up again not only just a slender tower on top but the tower itself was made of even more slender element so it's that thing if you just wanted to express a daring thing where if that were really made of individual pieces you would not want to shift the base at all. Right, it would just the whole thing would just topple over. Yeah, it seems the one on the. Yeah, go ahead. I was going to say it seems like this. So this piece is one with this piece here and then that the sort of over extending overhang is like an add on. Right. It's almost it's like a sleeve that has been like put on this structure here. And what's great also about that image is the juxtaposition with the actual arcade behind it or around it. And how, in a sense, by comparison undaring it is those two peers on either side of it, an arch that does not have a very great span. Of course we don't see what it's holding up above. But yeah the we'll look at these buildings and try to think of what the desire of the builders will was and whether those desires were met or not met and again because we don't really have any historical documentation. It's not before the Renaissance people are not writing about architecture yet. It's really the micro architecture that we can start to see what they probably would have liked to have done at the full building scale and just we're not able to. So we brought up the open works fires be having the tensile, the steel in it. Because there again there's a desire for a slender thing that's dematerialized, but for it to statically support that load or resist wind they have to start going to tensile structure so that is. That is sort of harkens to the article by Trachtenberg last week about Gothic as you know proposing it's it's it's renamed medieval modernism because they were trying to do. In a sense the aesthetic becomes driven by the the technology and a few stone in a way that it just can't really do until you start adding some sort of tensile structural elements. So here we do see a sort of at this moment these late Gothic buildings. Just prior to the Renaissance war and some and some depending what you call the Renaissance that's what you call the Gothic medieval period. There's overlap and we're sort of seeing a similar steel is where iron is starting to be used and that stone just on its own is having a hard time achieving some of the desires that we're seeing in the micro architecture. Are there any details of the the metal work within in the stone structures. Are there any details that we can access or yeah yeah in terms of drawings. Well, yeah so in the late Gothic period there there's no drawings from most of the Gothic period in the late Gothic we we do see a couple of elevations and things but in detail detailed design drawings. No we don't have anything like that. Most of these buildings have been renovated renovated multiple times over the the 19th century there was a big boom and got the renovation. And so a lot of these buildings are actually quite well documented now. But of course what goes on deep inside of this the stone we don't know in terms of clamps and and any kind of steel that was being used inside so you have clamps in Greek architecture Roman architecture. Helping out a little bit in terms of shifting of blocks and things like that but not really not not really providing any kind of tensile support. So the the the metal that we're seeing in here or that we saw with the example of St. Paul's the dome of St. Paul's Cathedral that is using metal in a in a in a tensile way. Are any of the things the the micro architecture examples made I missed this but was where any of them made out of an iron. Oh sure yeah and summer made out of gold the reliquaries are often made of precious metals. Yeah so with these photos that are from the article they're black and white it's it's it's hard to tell what the materials are but like this stuff right. Yeah so you can imagine that a goldsmith working architecturally can do all sorts of things, not only in terms of the fact that it doesn't really have to support against gravity, but the fact that it's so much more easy, easily worked than stone. And so these are architectural fantasies in a way that they're being rendered in a medium that that is not necessarily architectural and so just like some of the contemporary artists works that we've seen the fantasy artwork also as a kind of an expression of taking dematerialization of structure to a limit. These things can happen in the in mediums like this that that can't really happen at full scale. And what were the limitations of using say iron and what were the technological limitations of using iron and the large scale. Well you know that the iron and the medieval period wasn't really very strong compared to today's steel so I don't think there's a lot that went on in terms of experimentation what's really interesting is the do you remember the iron chains and the medieval. Let me bring up an image of that. So that is my yeah I'll go ahead and share my screen. So, yeah so this is, if you recall this video. So the flying into the building like this does give a sense of the sort of dramatic vertiginousness of the structure from looking down and now we're looking up and we're seeing the pros and peers of them. Which are greatly deflected. And there's a good chance that it would have collapsed if they hadn't put in these, these iron chains these long iron chains that anchored to the far western to the far front is peace and walls and were then anchored into the peers themselves so when you're there when you go there today you can still see these iron chains. So this this was not planned right this. This is something that happened a couple of hundred years after the, the so called completion of the cathedral. And this is not the kind of iron you'd want to be building cantilevers with or doing any kind of heroic structures. So this is, and here we can see the modification where it's been, oh sorry, it's been holes have been cut to create a channel to go to the, to the far pier. So can you imagine these pins here, trying to, you know, hold up this this building and how, how scary that must be. So, yeah, this image that we saw at the beginning of the semester kind of indicates that that people were aware of collapses they were aware of the fragility and we discussed how this is actually what this rendering on Amiens Cathedral is quite accurate in terms of how these arches would fail. And so this is kind of like a micro architecture. Also, isn't it where it's, it's trying to describe something that at least this particular sculptor had some some familiarity with the way that structures work. So, this is the kind of collapse that people would have known about. They would have seen such collapses. Yeah, so today when we look at things at the architectural scale and so now you may remember sauce cathedral from our side by side comparison that people had to figure out which which slide was being described to them. This is, this is how contemporary visitors experience these buildings as you know sort of soaring and serene. And then even today though we have, let's see, there have been buildings in Christ Church New Zealand and so forth that have collapsed from earthquakes. So we see that. But we also see these the deformation of these buildings you know the the heroic structures that have to be added since this is Boba Cathedral which Alex mentioned collapsed had a major collapse here. And interventions had to happen where you can see that here this used to be the, the, the, the span of this arcade arch was twice as big. And after the collapse they added peers in between. So, that was one intervention to keep it from collapsing again. This is a more modern intervention these wooden trusses with with these colors put around and then another trust going across here. We just don't know if this is needed. There's just no way for us to be able to calculate what's going on in here. So, and as we've discussed before the big problem is this dematerialization of the walls. And the sort of very top heavy mass of the vaulted ceiling, being supported by by increasingly narrow slender structure. And it's the opposite of what we see in Roman architecture where you've got more of the heaviness down below. You've got the heaviness kind of up above and in the simulation app that's what the design goal of precarity is all about where it's the weight of the stone up high so it's the the weight of each block times the height. If you really think of it that way. You know the Gothic desire is very much about precariousness. So, just also continuing on the theme of micro architecture. This screen is basically a bridge. Where we have. We have supports for these arches that are just hanging in midair so a column list arcade, and then it's repeated on the even more micro architecture here so these spires are. These spires are a kind of open work form and open work structure here. And so to be able to literally walk underneath this and thinking that this is stone now to Jonathan's question I don't know if there's steel holding this up, it's possible that it's somehow all masonry. Probably got steel in there this is a this is a very late Gothic building. But the intention there is certainly manifested in micro architecture and then sort of made architectural here. But of course people just can't do it. Builders just couldn't do it at the real architectural scale, but you get the sense from looking at something like this, if they could they would have. St. Teresa and extra ecstasy by Bernini again a very heavy stone piece of sculpture with a very narrow base and overhanging cloud formations and dangling foot. Again this idea of suspension and of levitation is something that can be done at the scale of a sculpture but not not at a real architectural scale. And as we've also looked at a sort of levitation of these canopies again with columnless arcades above sacred figures, whereas the profane figure is bearing the weight of the of the thing on its back. And yeah so this idea of a fear of buildings collapsing is not only represented sculpturally and in painting but also in in written text so as we discussed when we did the reading with Procopius. In his panjiric one of the things he said was that the dome is suspended apparently by nothing. Much to the peril of all those beneath and so the idea of peril as a sublime fear as a sublime generator is something that seems to be thematic. And even desired in terms of what the patrons of these buildings were were looking for. Yeah, so isn't this the really the central problem of gothic it's doing everything that could be done. Before the modern movement before you start getting industrial production of high quality steel. This is almost a kind of modern desire. And they certainly by the late gothic it's taken to an extreme. And this extreme of course we we see with all of these collapse and certainly the ruins of the churches and Cyprus. And what we looked at with the shell fire at Swiss on France Cathedral. And the fires are, you know, dangerous, and have failed many times. And so here's the outside of a cathedral with the, the tie rods to keep the these amazing daring buttresses from flapping in the wind. So those tie rods needed are the interventions that we saw inside the choir of bobe needed. We just don't know. And so modern engineers have tried to come up with a way to talk about these structures. And none of it seems to be that accurate in terms of predictive quality. And so, as architectural historians, we're really sort of left without understanding. What we can see what the builders desires might have been but we can't necessarily know what how they went about thinking about making things taller. And at what point are they just not structurally stable. Yeah, so anyway, so with the simulations kind of leading into the simulation work. I think in some ways you guys just playing with the simulation app already have a better intuitive understanding of arched and vaulted and domed masonry structure then perhaps even engineers working with finite element models and so it's in a sense it's kind of like micro architecture, but, but still as an even easier to make than a reliquary or tabernacle. And not the materials are not as expensive as as gold. So we've got our digital blocks here. And so to be able to go through an iterative design process thinking about masonry is something that the medieval builders certainly did not have access to. So if we look at the buildings that are on the ground this is a this is a mapping gothic France project that we worked on in the art history department and a couple hundred cathedrals with high res photographs and nodal images 360 images and so forth. And if we start thinking we what we talked about was Jean Boni. Last week, June presented. So in these theory that rib vaulting was used here, pointed arches were used in North African Islamic architecture and migrating through Italy, and that's, it's because they converged in France. That's why France sort of invented gothic or medieval modernism. They have these two building elements of constructional and structural superiority of the ribs and the pointed arches coming together geographically and collaborative and making gothic and then it explodes and gets re exported to other areas. So there's a lot of ways that we can sort of model and analyze this transformation this evolution from more Roman like or Roman architecture to what we think of as gothic and it's spread. And I think a lot of the historical analysis of gothic that the dangerous desires of light and height and slender dematerialized structures was kind of a French thing, and that it was exported relatively successfully to Germany, Spain, England, Netherlands, and so forth. And that when you get to the gothic in the eastern Mediterranean, namely the buildings built by the crusaders and the kingdom after the crusaders were forced out of the Levant, they started building very sort of gothic looking buildings in Cyprus. And these buildings are not as, as, as elegant as French models, even though they may have had French Masons there, they were a French dynasty Latin dynasty in Cyprus. The buildings are more muscular and smart squat to the ground, sometimes as, as elegantly decorated not in these cases this is a monastic church this one would have been a little bit austere by intention, but we can see that certainly there's a lot of elegance here and so the, the historians of Cypriot gothic architecture have talked about Cyprus as being provincial form of gothic that's so far from the center of production that you've got sort of hand handed versions of gothic. Images from buildings and showing a little bit where they are in terms of seismic hazard this is more site this is less seismically hazard this is more seismically has hazard and these are degrees of seismic hazard. What's interesting is this becomes kind of a laboratory to see that the buildings that are in the eastern part of the island fared much better than the buildings in the western part in fact we have these are almost totally ruined these are partially ruined. And so we might get a sense of the challenges that were being faced by these builders to maybe present a different story than center and periphery from Paris from ill de France but that here we can see that the the builders built this church. The church of St. Peter and Paul and something happened you can see that this wall has been replaced. These buttresses are almost certainly newer than the original. These might have come in different phases and not a product of careful engineering analysis of what this building needs for static or dynamic loading in an earthquake, but just more a sense of fear, you know how much mass they put here is more an idea of how they are. So it's, for example with the simulation model you can just go through different earthquake scenarios and keep changing the parameters of how things are, but these guys had to do it on the ground. As buildings were deforming and collapsing so here we see that this pier was originally a smaller diameter and they, they widen the pier. This is the main church of the Greeks and famigusta things like this gap here so that there's a lot of stresses around an opening during an earthquake and this keeps the lentil from cracking during a tremor. So a lot of inventive things happen happening and just a lot of, we are just really scared of the next earthquake and so we're just going to put buttresses on buttresses. This is the, the cathedral in Nicosia. One of the interesting things here, this is this sort of trapezoidal buttresses are in plan. They're actually sort of hollow in the inside so it's kind of like a corrugated buttressing of this wall and this wall is done very well. There's definitely some deformation in the, in the arches here but it has survived many earthquakes. So, as an evolutionary process. The buildings are subjected to different seismic zones. And so the builders and the people are maintaining these buildings are learning a lot sort of as they go, even though earthquakes are happening intermittently. So, this is the cathedral in famigusta. Some people think it's the church of St. Francis. It's not sure which it is. But anyways, grand plan is huge and there's nothing left of it and really there's nothing left of these over here either. So, so here are the earthquakes in the Mediterranean. The red ones are in Cyprus. The yellow ones are in the Levant through the medieval period. So you can see that, you know, there might be several decades go by and people are, what we actually see in the buildings is people started getting really daring again. And then the daring level of daring and construction goes down after a new series of earthquakes. So this heat map. This is the kind of sort of final thing I wanted to talk about in terms of, you know, why we would want to have earthquake in the simulation. Because the evolution of Gothic form. So, you know, these jumboneses theories, the forms come together, the components come together, they arise in Paris and then they're exported and the exports to Cyprus just lose a lot in translation because it's so far away. But if we really look at where things are seismically active and think about the types of buildings that are aware, well, certainly Cyprus is very seismically active. And so we have to sort of think about these buildings as not static things that are glued together, like micro architecture, but as kind of spring loaded systems that have their own resonant frequencies. And the joints between these blocks, there's mortar, but the mortar doesn't really provide like an adhesive that keeps things together from splitting apart like this. So in this case we made the arch a little bit taller and actually behaved a little bit better during the exact same earthquake so it's not necessarily things that are taller or more susceptible to earthquake. It's just really about the form itself so you really have to just play with different forms to understand the resonant frequencies, while at the same time keeping an eye to aesthetics. And as we've been talking about the theme in this class, you know, the generators of the sublime does something look more daring but it's not really more daring does something more daring but it actually doesn't look more daring. The only way we can say, is it more really more daring versus looks more daring is by testing it. So the builders in the Eastern Mediterranean would have sort of understood intuitively, I think that the number of stories in a building makes a difference how big the wall openings are makes a difference in terms of seismic resistance. Things that are not symmetrical so so many Byzantine churches are bilaterally symmetrical, then the Latins come in and try to build their long names and these wobble during ground movement, flying buttresses do horribly because they can wobble so much out of plane and and lentils crack like crazy, but they still the Latin builders wanted to have their, their tympanums they just Byzantine builders with Islamic builders would not have tympanums here like this they'd either leave a grill a wooden grill or, or are more open and the Latin builders want to have their sculpted tympanums which ended up cracking the lentils a lot so we see lots of cracked lentils and snipers. This is the cathedral in Ecosia again, the one with the cascading buttresses on buttresses outside. So yeah they've put, they've put tensile members here wooden tie beans, which are common in Islamic and Byzantine architecture and the Latins just didn't want to do it. So I think that they had larger clear story windows up here which have been reduced. Quite significantly. So, slowly but surely they evolved to be more like Islamic or Byzantine buildings, but they sort of went kicking and screaming. So, here we see noion cathedral. And the cathedral in Ecosia so the cathedral in Ecosia is really almost as tall as noion in France. And you've got shafts as much bigger and then when you get to Amiens and Beauvais they go even taller, but there's also something here about the number of stories. If you have just one more story about the, the aisle arcade level. There's like a breakpoint here and you might think of that this force with that lever is less than when you go higher up and you've got, you've got more stories, and even where you've got the same height but three distinct stories. So you've got a gallery on top of an aisle. And you have this kind of vulnerable breakpoint here and so these two buildings, noion, noion and Ecosia are about the same size, but this has a less top heavy mass, because it has a stronger base. Really you don't want a top heavy mass because the same ground shift will be harder on a building that has a more precarity, a mass, the same mass but higher up because the length of the lever is longer. So the buildings in Cyprus start out being a bit bigger. And then after 1350 when there's a huge earthquake, the bases the aisles and proportionally seem to get greater to there so there's kind of an evolution even a new construction. And if we look at this map. So here the yellow is two story churches and the red is three or four story churches. And so sure enough the French cathedrals have you know multiple stories and are very tall. But we see that in Italy everything is two stories. Even if the church is quite large. Like the Duomo and Florence. It's still two stories. And so you might say okay Gothic was exported to Germany, Spain and England. But you see the two stories are in the more seismically stable areas. When you start getting into the Wales massive already start having some two story buildings. And certainly the grand Spanish Gothic cathedrals are all in this area which is also pretty seismically stable. So here in Lisbon you can see, you know, terrible tub earthquake 1755 or so destroyed the city. So, it doesn't mean that you can't have a taller or multi story cathedral because some people would just keep trying and rebuilding and hope that something bad doesn't happen again. But here we see that the distribution of structural daring is not so much how far you are from Paris. It's really a hand handed and ground hugging and two stories. It's really, it's really mapped to seismic hazard. So it's interesting to think of buildings as being designed, and many architectural historians will talk about this as an aesthetic thing that the French love and the site and the French liked skinny structures and, but maybe the desires as we see in the micro architecture are kind of pervasive, but they're curtailed by seismic hazard. So yeah the other desire of light. So that was height we were talking about this desire of light in Cyprus you know the windows are small and the ones that were large have been largely filled in, which makes the building more seismically stable. resistant to seismic movement. But historians have said well maybe the French love light but in the eastern Mediterranean is just too much light so they had to start to start pulling the shades down. I don't know we just don't know no one's written about this from the can every time we don't even know when this was filled and it could have been filled in, you know 30 years ago. But regardless of when it was filled in, it is more structurally sound for an anti seismic now. So then taking a look at the seismic map again. Here we've got three colors yellow is small windows. Orange is medium sized Claire story windows they almost fill the space or about half the space. And then red is clear story windows that pretty much span the whole space. So once again we see that. Okay yep the French love light. It's translated well to England Spain and Germany, but in Italy, the windows are smaller and they're almost always in the Claire story oculi. So, which are also very seismically resistant circles circular aperture and a wall is much better than anything with corners. And so we see a very interest similar pattern of small of small windows. In seismically active areas medium size and transitional areas and then read in areas that are not seismically active. So it's it's one thing for us to use the simulation model try to get an intuitive sense of Gothic buildings for earthquake but then we've also got this to think about these buildings were built before. They were invented and as we saw with World War one many of the got the cathedrals had a terrible time with shell fire. And, but even a medieval buildings this was these kind of balls they're still stuck in a wall of of St. George of the Greeks and found a goose to from Ottoman bombardment. Attacking the besieging the city. So we don't know if St. George of the Greeks was destroyed from this bombardment or as all the other 50 gothic buildings and Cyprus, it was destroyed by successive earthquakes. Okay, so. Yeah, hopefully that gives an idea of the what we're thinking about here is to think like builders designers of gothic buildings dealing with struck with static forces and then having to think. Well the French probably didn't have to think much about earthquakes they didn't have to think about wind. But the guys down here were being constantly reminded of from tremors and things you know 1020 years apart you might be an apprentice in a Masonic school and never encounter an earthquake and you don't believe it when you're when your mentor says oh no you got to and you got to make those purchases really really fat you might say yeah I don't know let's try making them thinner because you haven't specific experience in earthquake. Also the French, the French scholar in the 18th century. Camille Don La who did a big monograph about the Soviet churches. He was only there for two years he never experienced an earthquake. While he was there it was very seismically inactive around that those decades. And so, all of his, you know all of his theories about why separate architecture couldn't quite match French gothic was a center periphery model. So, yeah so why don't we, why don't we sort of take matters into our own hands here and work through some of the simulations. So. Okay, so we've got 10 by half of you have submitted models so far. Is anybody having trouble submitting a model. My downloads so not working. Okay. Is it, is it same issue is it same issue that log on huh. Has anyone else encountered that that issue that Peter seeing. I mean the jackassin. What's the issue. The file for a Mac. It's the file downloads is something called login and then doesn't seem to load the program. But when you downloaded. Does anybody else have the Mac version. I use anybody download them. Yeah I this morning, I uploaded, I think, from my Mac, and it was fine but it was the, I guess the fourth version. I downloaded the zip, unzipped it and was able to open it. It should just be like a program right. Yeah. Okay. So jack, I would assume it has something can you download the PDFs from the, for the articles. Okay. Yeah, maybe it's just the way something with the download that you're doing the way that it's, I'll, I'll try doing it through like Chrome or something that might work. And after this class I'll try to, I'll put, I'll put both versions of Windows and Mac on another server that on AWS server that and send out that link alternatively. Okay. So, yeah, so in the application. You guys might have noticed that there's this design goal pulled down so. And this is interesting to think about because we've talked about the desires that seem to be apparent in the buildings themselves of height of increasing height, or a sense of height with thinning structure. A sense of precarity is certainly evident in a lot of the micro architecture where you've got top heavy where things are. Just in this particular structure you know where there's a greater mass up above. And that is not good for when the ground starts shifting. So, and yet that particular there's something about this that is different aesthetically, and in terms of feeling sublime than something like this. So, oh, I'm Rory I don't think you're sharing the screen. Okay, let me try to reshare. Yeah. Yeah. Thanks. Sorry, I thought you guys could see the application here. Okay. So can you guys see it now. Yeah. Yeah. Great. Okay, so. Yeah, so in terms of the aesthetics of this so the, the, what the visitor's impression might be. Let's say we're standing under this. We've got something like this going on this reminds me of in a second teacher remember they had that cut away for the clear story passage which made the pier seem very small. So, if you've got something like that, and you're able to just get it to stand. Of course now if I were a medieval builder and I did this I probably have my head chopped off. Okay, so that has a completely different feel than this. And so, we've also talked about how high needs to be high enough so again, we've got the same amount of floor area. But we've got this great, great cost increasing costs for going higher and higher. And then are we trying to make it sort of more precarious or top heavy. So, yeah, so that's the thing about these design goals with height, precarity span and area. Now span is an interesting one, because span talks to utility right in terms of a larger congregation and the church, or a building. And it doesn't use that much more stone a little bit more stone so you know we the difference here is from 253 tons of stone 254 tons of stone and not being stable, we just add a little bit more stone. But of course we have to have the technology of how to cut the wedge shape blocks. Where the center of the circle is eccentric to the center of the arch. So the client says well it's going to be a greater span but we're starting to run out of our stone budget. So, we have to start sending things out a little bit to use the same to be within our stone budget. And then there is still the height thing now that as we go higher with that same span. We have a sort of lever here so the exact same horizontal force generated by the arch is going to be more destructive than if that same horizontal force has a lower lever to go here. So, that's the thing does the, does the Bishop say is our is our our patron our client. In the case of Bovet the Bishop really really really really was desperate and this much we do know from historical documents for the tallest cathedral ever built. And so the span has to give so the span above a cathedral is not not that great, compared to say sans cathedral. But if you really want to go for height, then you've got to reduce the span. So, looking at some of the the models that have been submitted so far. So for height, we've got Jonathan. It's pretty dramatic lead in there, Jonathan. I think it must have something to do with the house how small that is and how pointy that is the keystone so this is just one big keystone here which is pretty cool. And so, Jonathan has a height of 208 meters. And Yan was going for height as well, the two. And, yeah, I was going for height 56. So, for the people competing for the tallest structure, you might say that. Okay, these guys didn't do quite as well because they're in the 50s 60s. And maybe Jonathan won the race for the race for height. However, it's no earthquake. No, you got to test it with your earthquake. It survived. Okay, so it totally, it totally works. No way. So, let's see. Okay, so not as tall and more precarious for that particular earthquake. Looks like it's going to make it. All right, so interesting. So, this particular structure is just hanging in there. Didn't quite make it, but so height is 56.5 and the precarity is quite high at 32,000 so that the precarity is the weight of each block times it's height above the ground summed up with all of that and so that that is the same precarity score. So, Jonathan has a higher precarity as well. But where Jonathan doesn't compete so well, and not that he was trying to is on span. So, 1.4 meter span. 5.3 5.5. Yeah. But in the race for height, I think it's, I think Jonathan kind of took it with that incredibly daring structure. Now, the thing about testing with earthquake is the amplitude in terms of the furthest that the ground moves is is one attribute the frequency is another so it might have a small amplitude but be shaking very quickly. So, this is a high fairly high frequency and a very low amplitude. All right, so let's take a look at. And of course duration is another factor so the, the longer that it's going on and shaking. So I've got this right now in a linear dampening means that the ground shifting starts out strong and keeps going small and smaller until it's zero. But when you have a higher duration and it's going to go. It's going to just do that much more damage to the structure. Okay, so let's take a look at span. So, so Jen has has generated this span of 35.5 meters. And Alex also went for span, he's got 37.6. Okay, so it's just so Jen versus Alex to who can make their respective cities prouder for the greatest span church. And, sorry. Okay, so that was Alex's. Let's try so Jen's. So kind of similar. Now, I think when you made this, it probably was a taller structure and then when you brought it down the size of the coursing was still big and that that was an earlier version, I think last night's version was still doing that and then I added a fix. And the first version released today, I believe, so that when you make it smaller it tries to also reduce the coursing size. So but that's still an interesting thing too to think of these very large these very long. Okay, so at this, at some point there's an earthquake that one of these would probably stand and the other one wouldn't. And also right now the earthquakes are shaking the ground, you know exactly this way and in plane of the structure. Okay, so Jen's stood and Alex's, but the earthquake could also depending on where the epicenter of the earthquake is the horizontal ground movement could be going this way, which would have a totally different behavior. So there's so much variation just in the test of the quakes. The medieval builder would build these buildings or the ancient builder, there'd be no telling when that building would be put to what test. And so in the case of Hagia Sophia it's very, very don't very experimental dome very high up with a with a great span with tons and tons of buttressings. The Byzantines, one of their solutions was they weren't worried so much about light and dematerializations of walls they just purchased everything, but then the earthquake was just too much, and it hit an earthquake that was just too much for it. Yeah, so span is certainly a precarious thing to to think about. But certainly gives you in the building, the most floor area for for activities. Okay, it seems like we've got four people who went for precarity. So 40,000 Edward 10,000 Eduardo 10,000 Gabriel 20,000 and you then. Which of these is the most sublime. We should add a person here to get to give a good sense of scale. So are the ones with the greater precarious a precarity level, more sublime. What do you guys think I think so yeah. But the difference between the 40,000 one and the 10,000 one, I think in terms of so blind is not that different, but. Okay, so use you on is the 40,000 and Eduardo is also sublime I agree I think I think this is. You know it's funny. It's this little notch here that does it. Without a lot of great height, there's something about this. Now let's say we are this tall. So this, this overhang this cantilever with all this weight on top. And if it goes higher is it. Is it more so long. I think the heavier the top gets the most and more sublime it is right. I'm finding the hard. Yeah, because it's since it's in the virtual sort of like our perspective is is kind of unrealistic in a way, and it's in it. It's true. Yeah, it's it's a sort of abstract, just sort of tectonic thing but it's, I feel like maybe being sublime also has something to do with being well proportioned, instead of just like looking on realistic. Mm hmm. Well, well, well, well proportioned. How do we, how could we qualify that. How could we sort of what would be the characteristics of well proportioned. It's because you might say you might say this is there's proportioning, there's sort of different things that you could do in terms of the, the, the, the, the, you know the various relative sizes, and scales of things that was I think many of them can be beautiful. So is it is a well proportioned a beautiful thing or a ability to generate a little bit more of a sensation of fear of peril. I would say it's probably both. So it's staring away that it's aesthetically pleasant. And then how much of that aesthetically pleasant might be personal preference for each each viewer versus kind of more a priori apprehension of, you know, either the mathematical sublime was like, wow, what is that how many blocks are in that I, I, I'm having trouble sort of, and to also yeah, to the point of that this is an abstract thing. We still can have some mathematical sublime kick in with trying to to apprehend the sort of pieces of these and how they repeat up through a very tall structure, but there's also a dynamics of line in the sense of of engaging with is that you know like what is that is that going to is that going to fall on me. But it's but it's also like in classical architecture, it was sort of cannot come up with sorry. Yeah, you kind of cannot come up with an explanation of why things are proportioned in a certain way, even though you could mathematically analyzing them, but and I sort of believe that if you perceive something to be aesthetically pleasant, then it also means that subconsciously it works in a rational way for you and that's make it to appear to be well proportioned. Because if you see something like this in reality would almost assume that it just would not stand. And for me that it's not pleasant to look at, even though it's really precarious, I guess. But as we as we learned with content doesn't have to be pleasant to be sublime. So sublime means it's you're sort of taken out of yourself, you're, you're, you're becoming engaged with something outside of yourself. And it's not necessarily pleasurable in the sense of just apprehending beauty, it's, it's pleasurable in the sense of I am now outside of myself. So there's that distinct distinction that Kant makes between pleasure and sublime of apprehension of something, you know, like the example of the storm, but you're safe in your armchair. So if you really think the building's going to fall on you, then that's not necessarily sublime and that's just fear. But if it's standing and let's say it stood for 200 years and you're at the base of it, you may not be literally afraid it's going to fall on you, but you can't help but to think of your fearful of it without being afraid. Anybody else. This, this definition also it relates to that that reading that we had about the giants right. That's right. So something that's something that's kind of huge, gargantuan and somehow surreal. But I mean, if you're, if you have something that's that's huge and awful, like you're, you, you feel a sense of awe, but it's like a negative sense of awe. You're saying it's still can be sublime. Yeah, oh, definitely. Yeah, according. Yeah, yeah. Well, and of course, we recall in Dante the giants are it turns out that they're, they're chained so they're, you know, at first there's that, that that misconception of what they were there were towers at first and then it turns out, as he gets closer it's not towers it's giants, but then there's this relief that the giants are changed and chained and can't hurt him so it's, it's that it's that again it's that fear, sort of fearful without literally being afraid so so at first. There was a the author, the narrators afraid, but then that fear gets sort of downgraded to just a sort of fearfulness of the awesomeness of it of its size. In the case of buildings that fear is is perhaps not present for us say, and when we're in a medieval building today because we're so used to still heroic steel stadium ceilings and things like that and maybe there's just a sort of built in assumption that's something that's only 2530 meters wide is just not that going to be that dangerous and nothing to even consider and then maybe then we're just looking at the the the sort of serene, you know qualities of light and material that are also add to a sublime effect, but the fear part of it is not structural daring, maybe not entering into it. But if you're in a world stone only and you've seen collapses and you know it's heavy stone there's no tensile structure supports. If you see enough of even these collapses in the simulation. Then, and you know that all of the buildings that you encounter all the monumental buildings that you encounter excuse me in the world are made of this kind of fabric then at some point your understanding of of the building would probably be different than ours today. So does anybody have any other models to submit? Rory, do you have my model? I tried to upload it but I think I couldn't. Do you see my model? I don't see yours, no. Do you want to share your screen with us? Can I just ask one thing that I was having issues with the Canon actually that it was facing the camera instead of Yes, there's a bug there and the best way to avoid that bug is be far away from the structure when you go into Canon mode. Oh, I see. Okay. I guess that's another thing we should try is for the people who have uploaded or is to try to take a crack at shooting them down. Is it a screen now? Yeah. I don't know why it's super tiny. I see. Yeah, so I guess the your screen resolution is such that the libraries are being cut off. Yeah. Okay. So that's not that interesting, but I mean, I think this is the target area. It's kind of like a balanced span and height and then mostly 100% the quake. I don't know how good it is. Just try that. As long as it's not falling on us, we're happy. Right. Okay. Yeah. So you might say, Hey, that's survived the quake. Maybe I'll just try to increase the area a little bit. Yeah. Not that crazy as Jonathan's, but I just made like a tower like 75 meters. I hope it's live. Yeah, just that. Nice. Good. So actually, yeah, so anybody else have it, maybe you couldn't upload it to the server, but you want to share it. So yeah, the simulation could be improved by, of course, having more elaborate structures that, but even just a simple arch, we can get quite an understanding of the kinds of things that ancient medieval builders were dealing with. And yeah, it's interesting to, you know, so you get used to the simulation, but then it's interesting to reflect on how builders were taking great chances by lost in these buildings and then pulling the centering framework out and seeing if the arch was going to stand or not. So here we can just do that very quickly. And you know, it's, it's my guess is that their greatest concern was will it just stand when you pull the centering away. So for us, we just let go of a handle and we just see right away if it's going to collapse. But the, you know, it is curious to think of how much did they think about, okay, I can't make this thing as tall as my patron would like or as wide, but I want to make sure that it doesn't collapse 50 years from now during during an earthquake. So, you know, it's if you think of what we were seeing with the example of micro architecture that Alex was showing us the desire to do that kind of dematerialized structure with a sense of sort of top heavy vaulting or spires and the reality of trying to build it in stone. And just not really knowing if it's going to work until you let the you let the scaffold scaffolding go. And if you recall in the case of Hagia Sophia Anthemist of Tralys was was worried it goes to Justinian he's worried that the the arches are starting to deform and we're not sure exactly which arches are being talked about in Procopius's text but and then Justinian solves the problem for them by saying oh you need you need more buttressing or weight longer before you pulled the centering out or but there is that moment where you could tell they pulled the centering out and things started deforming and cracking so Yeah, that's just a certainly in the case of Justinian Procopius is able to make him a hero who gets the solution, you know from God and hands it to the architect but Yeah, as you're working with the simulation app just sort of think about that you you're trying to push one of these design goals or maybe a couple of them at the same time and you can't really necessarily just push it to your You can't use all of your stone budget pushing it to that extreme that we were seeing in a micro architecture you have to pull back a little and make the buttressing a little wider which means it's going to be not quite as high and so forth so Okay, so for those of you who who didn't submit anything maybe try to submit something by next week and send me an email if you're having trouble you can take a look at them again for for a few minutes and And Because I think that working with simulation will help you with your final projects in terms of look taking some piece of world architecture Ancient or medieval and Being able to present it to us and describe what is it that appears to be structurally daring is is it generating some sort of a sublime effect in you and And then we can all sort of pipe in and share things that we find Structurally daring about it as well and so yeah remember to talk about things in terms of the slenderness of supports The span and Overhang so those are sort of three crucial elements that we can talk about in terms of structural daring without going into engineering and Yeah, so as you sort of just searching for images of buildings a lot of incredible Indian temples and Japanese shrines and so forth. I mean just amazing things going on in terms of presenting structural daring Yeah, so just just show us something that will kind of get us going on like oh my gosh that thing is really daring That makes sense Okay. All right. Well, you have a question. I have a question. Um, you said it's just gonna be kind of like a quick Presentation of like a fly through of images and stuff to kind of just get a feel from everybody in the room. That's right. That's right It just to just to provoke Conversation and and ideas. Yeah, it's so yeah, no no historical Analysis, it's really just a phenomenological Sort of consumption and way to think about what what you're showing us and And so each person should maybe take so we'll I'll send out a list of who will go next week and probably just alphabetical the following week and so Yeah, so maybe think about 10 minutes or so of You know enough to kind of give us 10 minutes of discussion For each project. All right Okay, so thanks guys. Thanks Alex. That was a great presentation and Yeah, and just continue to work with the model and I'll be I'll be watching to see more models show up in the the service thing there And see if anybody can come up with something just really like we haven't seen yet I know it's a limited structure with limited parameters, but You guys I know you guys are creative and can do it Those design constraints right design in the play instinct. Okay. So that's it for today and we'll see everybody next week. All right. Thank you. Thanks guys Alright, thank you. Thanks guys