Seems quite a long time since I posted about Our Lady of Paris (:the Big Mama:)
A couple of weeks ago
I gave a talk about open BIM. My thesis was that we should keep an open mind about
what BIM is “for”. I used Project Notre
Dame as an example. Using the super-powers of the BIM pencil to explore history
and tell stories about Humanity.
Last weekend I began
to prepare for AU and decided to make a simplified model of Notre Dame, like a
children’s toy: colourful wooden blocks. A series of view filters allow me to
present this as a sequence. This is not a sequence in time. It is simply a way
of explaining the overall form of the cathedral. (by the way, 3 and 4 are in the wrong order at the moment)
The striped appearance
is achieved by half-toning alternate bays and is just a way to make the divisions
clearer, as you might do with the rows of a spreadsheet.
The model is full size,
and I took the opportunity to try out a revised grid. This is based on comparing
various floor plans and moves the crossing slightly towards the west compared
to our current detailed model. I don’t think it’s worth the effort of modifying
this until we receive more definitive information such as a point cloud.
The apse is probably
the most intriguing aspect of the setting out, divided into 13 bays on the
outer ring, and diminishing inwards to 10 bays, then 5. My guess is that 13 was
chosen to match the bay width to adjacent straight bays, (around 5.8m)
But why is the centre point
displaced eastwards by almost half a bay? I decided to study this.
Equal divisions with a
common centre result in a rather strange configuration. Some of the triangular
vaults are heavily skewed. More seriously there are no longer any continuous
lines for the buttress alignments.
But if you restore the
hierarchy, the end segments become very squashed as they progress to the inner
ring. This appears to be a justification for the offset (to allow that inner
ring to become wider at the ends.)
I am left wondering about
a third option. If we ditch the idea of 13 outer bays and opt for 15 (5 groups
of 3) we would have slightly narrower bays, but would that be a deal-breaker? The whole arrangement would seem to be more
rational, but is that what mattered to a medieval master Mason?
It would be great to look
at the apse geometry of several Gothic cathedrals and do a comparative
analysis.
But AU beckons. So I added
some cylinders and floors to my Revit diagram, to represent maintenance access
routes.
More view filters were
used to fade back the building and highlight the access skeleton in bright
orange. Below is the relevant page from my open BIM talk. Memories of how
exciting it was to discover the access routes in the first place, a couple of
months ago.
Another weekend. Need
to fix up the model a bit ready for another VR export
Francois has been busy
on the external stone balustrades so I load up a couple of new tyres. The one
above the row of statues on the West Front is very tasty with a bit of chevron
decoration looping over narrow arches.
The second Railing
type is for the outer sides of the chapels that run down either side of the
nave. I had to move these back a bit in an attempt to avoid a gap between
balustrade and buttress. I couldn’t move too far because the bottom rail not
quite covering the wall below now. I suspect that both buttress and railing need
further development.
Next I dived into the triforium
gallery, on either side of the nave at the upper level. I adjusted the levels
on outside and inside walls so they match up, and the arches of the vaults fit
snuggly over the wall hosted archway/window families. Next came little clusters
of colonnettes against the wall to support the ribs coming in from 3
directions.
Adjust proportions and
add detail.
The apse. Some
discussions on Slack with Alfredo, who later loads up a couple of updates to
the vaults. Plenty still to do, but we are moving forward as a team.
And I do my bit by
adjusting the meeting point for the radial vaults, high above the altar. They
meet in line with the columns, rather than at the true centre, which is offset,
as discussed above. My placeholders for these vaults are clumsily hacked
together, and I do hope that Alfredo will find time to upgrade them eventually,
but for now they will have to do.
More discussions on
Slack because the end points of Marcel’s roof timbers are popping through the
ceiling. He explains how he extracted Z coordinates from the Leica TruView
site, and I finally get to grips with this, during the week. There will need to
be some vertical adjustments at some point, but I need a full weekend to tackle
that.
It’s just a reminder
of how BIM-centric historical research proceeds. Like design, it’s an iterative
process. You jump in and bash out your first rough model. It’s full of half-truths
and conflicts, but it helps you to understand the nature of the problems you
have to solve to move it forward.
And so it goes on,
Step by step, sometimes it may be one step back and two forwards. Sometimes it’s
confusing and frustrating. But always it’s exciting and illuminating.
Closing slides from my
open BIM talk. A nod to the global team, to software tools used and their
interconnections. My take on the coming knowledge economy is that more and more
people will be earning their way in life doing things we now regard a
self-education, research, leisure pursuits, creative endeavour.
20 years from now, as automation and AI trim down the staffing levels needed for
construction projects, the kind of work we
are doing on Notre Dame may well become mainstream.
Thanks For your perseverance
ReplyDelete