Structural design for achitectureallowed to determine completely both the
overall form of a building and the nature of the
architectural vocabulary which is adopted. It is
a method which is normally used for reasons
of necessity, when the limits of what is pos-
sible structurally are being approached.
Obvious examples of this are the very tall
building and the very long-span enclosure. In
the case of the former, the principal structural
problem is the resistance of lateral load, in
which case the systems required to accommo-
date this become prominent features of the
design." The achievement of a long span
requires that a highly efficient type of structure
be adopted, such as a steel cable network or a
reinforced concrete shell. These form-active^12
structure types have distinctive geometries
which therefore dictate the overall form of the
building.
Another example of a building type in which
the highest priority must be given to structural
matters is the portable building. Here there is
a requirement for demountability and also a
critical need to save weight and therefore to
adopt an efficient form of structure. Form-
active structures are therefore frequently speci-
fied for this type of building. The tent, in all its
manifestations, provides an example of this.
Demountable buildings for travelling exhib-
itions (Fig. 1.12) and any other type of tem-
porary accommodation are further examples.
With this type of building very few concessions
are made to style, and none which conflict with
efficiency.
The 'true structural high-tech' approach can
be applied to the design of any building.
Architects rarely favour it, however, and will
rarely use it unless technical necessity makes it
unavoidable, because it leaves them with little
to do other than administrate the construction
of the building. It leaves, in other words, little
scope for artistic statement. The methodology
requires that no concessions be made with
regard to the design of the structure and the
resulting architecture might be described as a
type of vernacular. For the majority of build-
ings, in which spans and loads are modest and
there are no special requirements which favour
the adoption of a highly efficient form of struc-
ture, the best structural solution is likely to
involve the use of a very simple type of struc-
ture such as a post-and-beam form composed
of basic elements such as masonry walls or
reinforced concrete slabs and columns.
The 'true structural high-tech' approach is
the most straightforward of the possible
relationships between structure and architec-
ture. The preliminary design of the building
becomes simply the design of a structural
arrangement which is appropriate for the span
and load involved. In most cases this will
favour the selection and adaptation of one of
the basic forms of structure outlined in the
following chapters. Aesthetic, space-planning
and other considerations are given a secondary
role and are not allowed to compromise the
integrity of the structural solution.332.2.6 Conclusion
The various possibilities concerning the
relationship between structural design and
architectural design have been reviewed in this
section. The distinctions considered have only
been possible in the twentieth century follow-
ing the development of the structural
technologies of steel and reinforced concrete -
the strong materials which released architec-
ture from the constraints imposed by the
technology of structural masonry. It was not
until this had occurred that the methodologies
of 'structure ignored' and 'structure symbol-
ised', which have a tendency to generate struc-
tural geometries which are far from ideal,
became possible.
The distinctions between the four
approaches outlined above to the relationship
between structure and architecture are
frequently misunderstood, by both architects11 In all of the very tall buildings the structure which is
required to resist wind loading is concentrated on the
exterior of the building and therefore affects its appear-
ance.
12 See Appendix 1 for an explanation of the term
'form-active'.