Structural design for achitecturefeasible. It would be imprudent, therefore, for
an architect to adopt the 'structure ignored'
methodology in the context of large enclos-
ures, long spans and/or a parsimonious client.
2.2.3 Structure accepted
When this type of relationship between struc-
ture and architecture is preferred the objective
is to produce a building in which more-or-less
equal importance is attached to all aspects of
the design. The aesthetic and programmatic
issues must, as always, be brought to a
successful conclusion but the structure must
also be considered to be satisfactory when
judged by purely technical criteria. It must not,
in other words, be regarded simply as a
provider of support which occupies the hidden,
nether regions of a building and which does
not, of itself, have to be well designed.
Buildings in which this type of relationship
between structure and architecture exists have
been constructed throughout the entire history
of western architecture and include some of
the most notable buildings in that tradition
(Figs 5.4 and 5.7). The temples of Greek an-
tiquity, the massive basilicas and bath houses
of the Roman period and the Gothic cathedrals
of medieval Europe are prominent examples.
These have many equivalents in the modern
world: the buildings by Le Corbusier which are
based on reinforced concrete frameworks, for
example (e.g. the Villa Savoye (Fig. 4.6), the
Unité d'Habitation and the monastery of La
Tourette), whose rectilinear geometries are
ideally suited to economical forms of construc-
tion in that medium, are the twentieth-century
equivalents of the Greek temples or the Gothic
cathedrals, in terms of the relationship which
was achieved between structure and architec-
ture. The Willis, Faber and Dumas building by
Norman Foster (Fig. 4.17) is a more recent
example. The majority of buildings constructed
in the present day, though not necessarily the
most famous, also fall into this category.
In all of these buildings the structural and
aesthetic programmes co-exist in harmony.
The structures have not been expressed in an
overt way but their properties, requirements
and limitations have been accepted and visual
vocabularies have been adopted within which
they have been easily accommodated. The
aesthetic and technical issues have, in other
words, been reconciled.
To achieve this type of integrated design
architects and structural engineers have to
work together from an early stage in the design
process. For a given size of building, the range
of structural options which are sensible may be
relatively small and an outcome in which all
aspects of the design are deemed to have been
satisfactorily resolved will be obtained only if a
flexible strategy is adopted with regard to the
building's appearance. The aesthetic strategy
must, in other words, be compatible with the
range of structural options which is most
practical, given the spans involved.
The criteria by which the quality of a struc-
ture can be judged have been discussed
elsewhere,^6 where it was argued that the
primary technical objective of structural design
was the satisfaction of load-carrying require-
ments with maximum economy of means.
Well-designed structures were shown to be a
compromise between complexity, which is
required to economise on material, and
simplicity, which allows economy to be
achieved in the activities of design and
construction. The principal factors which deter-
mine the optimum compromise between
complexity and simplicity were shown to be
span and the intensity of applied load. The
larger the span, the greater was the level of
complexity which was justified, because high
levels of structural efficiency are required to
achieve long spans. The greater the applied
load, the lower was the level of structural
efficiency which could be tolerated and the
simpler therefore the structural form which was
appropriate.
Thus, it was seen that simple structural
forms composed of basic elements (timber
beams or reinforced concrete beams and slabs
with simply shaped cross-sections) assembled
into basic post-and-beam arrangements are
appropriate for short-span structures. These6 See Macdonald, Structure and Architecture. Chapter 6. 29