Forum SubscriptionsSubscriptions DigestDigest Preferences   FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups  RegisterRegister FAQSecurity Tips FAQDonate
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log in to websiteLog in to websiteLog in to websiteLog in to forum 
Warning: Make sure you scan the downloaded attachment with updated antivirus tools  before opening them. They may contain viruses.
Use online scanners
here and here to upload downloaded attachment to check for safety.

Sir Ove Arup and Sydney Opera House- Interesting Storey!

Post new topicReply to topic Thank Post    www.sefindia.org Forum Index -> Engineering Marvels
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Dr. N. Subramanian
General Sponsor
General Sponsor

Joined: 21 Feb 2008
Posts: 5430
Location: Gaithersburg, MD, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Thu Jun 26, 2014 3:15 pm    Post subject: Sir Ove Arup and Sydney Opera House- Interesting Storey! Reply with quote

Sir Ove Arup and Sydney Opera House- Interesting Storey!

Sir Ove Arup
A key figure in 20th century engineering, Danish-born Sir Ove Arup is widely considered to be the foremost engineer of his era in Britain. His is one of the few modern engineering names known to the public at large, not least for the extraordinary Sydney Opera House, one of the world's iconic structures.

No project highlights the dramas, conflicts, successes and failures of Arup's vision for the architect-engineer relationship more than Sydney Opera House. The story of the building of this extraordinary structure and the nature of its revolutionary design cemented his reputation. It is hard to overestimate the importance of this project to Arup personally, to Australia politically, and to architecture internationally.

The building took many years to construct and its Danish architect, Jørn Utzon (1918-2008), left the project before its completion. How the story began was telling, given what was to follow. Utzon entered the design competition with no more than a sketch on a scrap of paper. The judging panel didn't include a single engineer.

The sketch, with its ambitious soaring sails, or shells, impressed the panel. But construction began before the design had been fully researched and so the problems started. If present-day computer technology had been available at the time the sketches might have been put aside and the shell design resolved. As it was, the only hope for resolving the incredibly complex geometries of the roof structure was through an intensive collaboration between architect and engineer, which is why the Opera House is one of, if not the, greatest symbol of 20th Century architect-engineer collaborative achievement.

The personal similarities and differences between Arup and Utzon were almost on a par. They were both passionate, both Danish but each very determined and not always in agreement when it came to their opinions on beauty and practicality. Unlike Arup, Utzon was neither a scholar nor an intellectual. However, at first it seemed that Arup's dream of a deeply collaborate architect-engineer relationship was about to be realised. His initial opinion of Utzon was favourable in that direction.

Their first meeting took place in early 1957, soon after Arup had sent one of his congratulatory letters to Utzon asking him if he wanted to work with another Dane and gain specialist advice from his company. Arup's partner, Ronald Jenkins, was, he pointed out, a "leading authority on the calculation of shell structures".

By late February 1957 Ove Arup & Partners' appointment as engineer was confirmed. By 1958, Utzon and Arup had visited Sydney together. Hopes for what seemed a perfect union were high. Amazingly, this was the young architect's first major project to be built. He had won many other competitions but not a single one of the winning designs had been commissioned. His consequent lack of experience and political naiveté were to cause great difficulty.

In 1958, Ove Arup & Partners engineer Jack Zunz, who had joined the company in 1950 and would later take over as chairman, took over the running of the project together with Michael Lewis. The excitement Arup felt about Utzon's design at first overrode the practical problems of construction.

However, the state government of New South Wales soon had a crisis of confidence in the roof structure and called in Zunz and Utzon to convince them that it could in fact be built. In spite of ill-health, Arup stepped in. He was instrumental in convincing the government that the project was viable, and that his engineering solution for the shells was sound enough for it to continue.

The shells, each specified to a different curvature in the original design, took Ove Arup & Partners six frustrating years to resolve and the project tested the concept and practice of Arup engineer-architect relationship ideas to the limit. Arup tried to convince Utzon not to insist on smooth surfaces for the shells in favour of ribbed structures that could be more easily realised.

The concrete 'sails' that make up the roof are clad in ceramic tiles that were manufactured in Sweden. Between the concrete and the tiles is a layer of polystyrene insulation.

Tension mounted unbearably as the struggle to resolve the roof structure brought out the defensive and competetive sides to Utzon's character. It took all Arup's energy, as well as endless research, to reach the eventual breakthrough. Utzon eventually conceded that the shells should have a uniform curvature, making it possible to use repeated precast units. Precisely who made this decision is still disputed but Arup was generous in attributing the idea to Utzon.

Collaboration-wise another major difficulty was distance, plus working between offices in Denmark and London. Neither engineer nor architect had an office in Sydney in the early years of the project. The building itself had other challenges besides the shell roofs. These included the approach steps and concourse, the acoustics of the performance spaces, disputes about the seating capacities, and Utzon's focus on the exterior rather than the interior of the design. Space was being sacrificed on the interior in favour of the resolution of other issues, while for the exterior finances were being stretched beyond all reason. Utzon wanting his shells to be realised no matter what the cost.

Sydney Opera House
from the harbour [source: Wikipedia].

By 1963, relationships were seriously deteriorating both between the engineer and architect and between Utzon and the Australian government. In 1965 Utzon built a brick wall — literally (he had the connecting doorway bricked up) as well as metaphorically — between his office space and that of the engineers. In 1966, utterly overwhelmed by how complex the project had become, Utzon resigned.

However, the project still gripped Arup. Determination to fulfil a dream kept him from turning away from what he knew was no ordinary building. Sydney Opera House was totally unprecedented and is still one of the world's most talked-about structures. Utzon's name is of course synonymous with it, but the perseverance of Arup and his partners has became just as strongly linked to its story and ultimate success.

In a 1964 BBC interview Arup described the project as by "far the most difficult and almost too exciting". The Opera House wouldn't be finished for another nine years, yet this quote neatly sums up his relationship with it. He took no part in detailed design after the roof structure was resolved but he was in great demand to explain the stormy story. Less obvious to the outside world was the effect the project had on him personally. It seems he lost his unihibited enthusiasm for architects in general and his ability to trust those outside his own team.

Identified as one of the 20th century's most distinctive buildings and one of the most famous performing arts centres in the world,the Sydney Opera House became a UNESCO World Heritage Site on 28 June 2007.

The sculptural form of the Sydney Opera House has stimulated a richness of imagery and metaphors in popular culture and architectural history. It invites both playful and serious comparisons with all manner of things. American architectural historian Charles Jencks has analysed the ‘superabundance’ of the building’s
metaphorical associations, varying from the sublime to the humorous. These include not only sails and shells, but also clouds, space ships, fl owers unfolding, turtles making love, barnacles, the glistening skin of fish-scales, a scrum of nuns and a dish rack full of crockery!


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topicReply to topic Thank Post    www.sefindia.org Forum Index -> Engineering Marvels All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1


Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum

© 2003, 2008 SEFINDIA, Indian Domain Registration
Publishing or acceptance of an advertisement is neither a guarantee nor endorsement of the advertiser's product or service. advertisement policy