T\NO Way Deployable

Spherical Grids
Félix Escrig*, José Sánchez" and Juan Pérez Valcarcer*"

• Professor of School of Architecture of SevilIe (Spain)

•• Lecturer of School of Architecture of SevilIe (Spain)
••• Professor of School of Architecture of La Coruña (Spain)

AB8TRACT: Crosspiece deployable grids are assemblies formed by

groups of bars with two joints at their ends and one or more that are inward
and that can vary their angular position with each other. This variation is
meant in practice that assemblies change their form from a folded position
where they occupy very little space to another wider that is usable as
encIosure or covering.
The evolution between the two extreme positions of this geometry is
determined by compatibility limitations.
In this paper it is studied the perfomance of spherical grids constituted
by two way crosspieces, and the way of generating them from webs that
subdivide the surface of the sphere.

1. INTRODUCTION

Figs. 1 and 2 show two deployable

assemblies that are built by groups of bars
which main characteristic is to have an inward
joint that allows the rotation of the bars as it is
shown in the Fig. 3 and so they can be packed
or extend as Figs. 1 and 2 show.

Figure 2

"-
""

Figure 1

,,
(o) (e)
" (b)
Figure 3

1
 The introduction and basis for the
construction of this kind of grids can be found
in Ref. (1), (4) and (5).
Necessary conditions to cause these pliable
grids are that, according to Fig. 4.
l'¡+k'¡ = 1¡+I+k¡+1
2 3 4
or what means the same, conditions [1]
must be complied in each inset.
If the two levels are conected by continuous
bars (Fig. 7) conditions will be [3] and also it
should be complied that every two inset also
complied them. (Figs. 8 y 9).
[1]

Figure 4

If instead of studying a plane figure, we

study a space one as in the Fig. 5. Figure 7

l'¡+k' 1 = 12+k2 = l)+k) [2]

Figure 5

We can also use assemblies of several Figure 8

levels (Fig. 6) and conditions in this case
would be:

l'¡+k'¡ = li+l+k¡+1
k+m·
1 1
= k' 1'+m'·1 [3]
m'¡+n'¡ = m i+1+n¡+!

CAPA 1

CAPA 2

Figure 9
1
MODULO 2 MODULO 3
This condition can be proved that is
Figure 6 sufficient, and we will be able to get grids like
in the Fig. 10.
Due to these concepts we can create bent

2
 With 'n' as number of knots and 'b' as
number of bars.
This condition is necessary but not
sufficient:
When 3n < b+6, there are overabundant
bars.
When 3n > b+6 bars are lacking.

F = 3n - b - 6 [5]

With F as the number of coerciolls that

lack.
In the case of the Fig. 12.

n = 25 b = 40
F = 3·25 - 40 - 6 = 29

This grid has 12 external coercions, from

which, 6 are used to imrnobilize it as stiff
Figure 10 solido Afterwards 23 links remain to be added.
The Fig. 13 shows the sufficient1y stiffed
structure with three hyperstatic degrees.
grids that share the same mechanism of folding
of isolated elements as we have described
before.
In the particular instance of two way grids
we have problems of angular stability due to
not be triangulated. If we want to use them as
structures we must complete the number of
elements that are needed to guarantee this
stability.
To make it easier we are going to make
their study resemble one layer grids in such a Figure 12
way that elements of the Fig. 11b resemble
Fig. 11 a ones.

1f
o
(o)
><::)
(J

~
S:;

1}
Figure 11

In this state, a grid as the Fig. 12 one,

which is clearly unstable, should be completed
by the number of elements that are needed to Figure 13
stabilize it.
The condition (Ref 5) is:

3n = b+6 [4]

3
 2. SPHERICAL GRIDS (a) key in a vertex
(b) key in the centre of a face
The problem of building a crosspiece grid (c) key in the centre of an arris
with its final state on a spherical surface and

Elffi
the folded position in a perfect pack, is that it
requires precisely a layout on the surface of
. crosspieces that are changed into lines as it has
been described in the Fig. 11. This layout can
8±§
(a) (b) (e)
be as arbitrary as we want. But this will imply
the impossibility of finding assemblies of Figure 15
crosspieces to comply with conditions [2] and
so that they are pliable. If every section is equal we can also solve
If we are looking for pliable grids we it with equal crosspieces. Fig. 16.
should generate grids as regular as possible and
to get this we should stablish sorne criterions.
How to subdivide a spherical grid? It is
impossible in equal modules apart from the
case of the small number of spherical regular ,,
polyhedrons. We proprose sorne alternatives ,,
,
that have been tested and that can be options "
" ,,
for grids we describe. ,
,,
,
,,
2. 1. Uniform Rhomboid patterns ,,

In the Fig. 14 we are going to measure the

openings of equal angles in cx in such a way
that every section has the length:
L=cx'R
Obviously, starting from we deviate from
the key, quadrilaterals are distorted.
Figure 16
Both, higher knots, lower ones and crossing
ones will be each group of them on a spherical
[6] surface, in its final state.
The same will happen in the different
intermediate phases of folding although the
radius will increase quickly to make itself
infinite in the folded position.
To introduce simplified geometries in more
complex successions that we will see from now
on, the Fig. 16 would adapt a scheme of work
like the Fig. 17 one.

/'

, ,~",
,, ,/
, ,,,,/' R
,,
, / ' / O< =2B
Figure 14 ",
",~"
" t1ü

We can have this division by three different Figure 17

ways (Fig. 15):

4
 should comes true. The limit position makes
the structure work better due to be bars in line
but precisely due to be a limit, it can start the
folding continuoing the diminution of 8, what
would be catastrophic.
One way to avoid it is by means of
limitings of the angle, knots that are jarnmed in
that position or even better, impediments to
I \ that evolution, for instance one bar A that is
R bound to the higher knot (Fig. 19). The length
I of this bar would be:
I
A = R sen ~ tg 2~
I [8]

Figure 18 It should go placed in every higher knot

TO determinate the length 1 and k that
secions of the crosspiece have once the
opening angle a. = 2~ and the radius R is
fixed, we see the Fig. 18
and if we got it to connect them with lower
ones, we would have a structure that is stiffer
enough.
These layouts that we are discribing, are
mechanisms in base and unless we triangulate
insets, they cannot be used as structures (Fig.
20).

1= Rsenp
cosCo +P)
[7]
k- Rsenp
cos(o-P)

As we see, we have also to fix the final

angle that form crosspieces 28. We can fix this
angle at will and it depends on him that the
grid has more or less edge. However, there is
a minimum that if it is surpassed, it wiIl make
Figure 20
the backing down of the structure non-viable
due to its blockage. That one where bars of a
module and of the next one line up. (Fig. 19) Even so if we use the expression [5].
so 8 = ~ comes true.
n = 25
-_/-"-~---------....... b = 52
.,.,;
_ i _,
~~
__ <'_ . F=75-52-6=17
/'//
Including six supplementary coercions of
,,
,/ supports, we still have 11 degrees of freedom
: to stop being a mechanism.
I
:
The fact of the matter is not like this
actuaIly because we are in a double layer grid
that, what is more, has capacity in flexiono But
Figure 19 if we really want that the assembly do not be
too flexible, is better to introduce those
So, the fact of that in every case 8 ~ ~, coercions into the outline (Fig. 21).

5
 An additional advantage that this kind of
spherical subdivisions has apart fram its
simplicity is that are modulable, that is to say
that the modules can be placed together,
covering completely the surface.
This is caused by the fact of that the higher
or lower kinots of one edge are each group of
the on the same plan. So we will be able to
group them in packs of two (Fig. 23) three
(Fig. 24) or four moduls (Fig. 25).

Figure 21

The problem of having introduced these

triangulations is that their length is shorter in
its final state than in intermediate phases. That
PERSPECTIVAS
makes impossible the unfolding of the
structure, if bars are stiff. If instead of bars we
have flexible cable, the only thing that will
happen is that the assembly will pass by an
incompatible phase, that once is surpassed, will
keep it raised preventing it from falling again. Figure 23
If afier that, we add stiff bars, we will be in
the presence of a true structure that has
stopped being a mechanism. That is what the
Ref. 13 calls 'c1icking scissor-link Deployable
structure' .
The Fig. 22 shows a pattern of this kind of
grid including stiff diagonal bars in comer
modules.

Figure 24

Figure 25

The use of crosspieces of multiple joint is

not aH in aH possible in this cases due to not
Fig.22 be sections in line but we always can reinforce
~

6
the structure in those assemblies of crosspieces This geometrY is a mechanism that 1S
that are holded in a plan. That is possible in independent of conditions of support since:
the Fig. 26 in both plans of symmetry.
A
n = 41
8 Q
~ .'!.
o b = 72
F = 3-41 - 72 - 6 = 45

~
~ ._',-'- '-'l"'~--
.... I __ ' .'_ .... ,,--- ..... ~
A r FlLAA .~.
The eight jointed low points (Fig. 28) result
.-~.-~~~... ~ 24 conditions, from which 6 are the solid stiff
I8
~--;,:-;--~ anes. We have still 45-18 = 27 degrees left of
freedom that we can onIy coarce triangulating
9
every rhombus, what would result 32
Figure 26 coercions. The problem is that these bars that
triangulate, are working in compression, so
2.2. Rhomboid patterns with centre they cannot be cables.
We say again that crosspieces structure has
The rhomboid pattems with centre is not exactly these determinant due to work in
another that can solve the subdivision of the flexiono But this criterion is the most suitable
spherical surface in equal sections. We if we want it no to be too deformable.
designate this to that one that results from The Fig. 29 shows a semisphere with this
letting down from the key of the sphere an solution and the Fig. 30 a built model.
always equal number of rhombus for each
paralel. It is also called Lamella rhomboid
subdivision (Fig. 27).

Figure 27

;¡-c
Figure 28 Fig.29

7
 It does not seem to be an excessively
suitable solution if we compare it with other
sort of quadrangular or triangular. However, it
has an advantage that we have not still applied
in great size but that makes it irreplaceable.
That is because instead of folding at the centre,
it can fold at the edge how it is observed in the
Fig. 31.

That makes it be particularly suitable for

retractable covering of circular ground plan.
The Fig. 32 shows a model and the Fig. 33
shows an application over a bullring.

Fig.30
x

Fig.33 ~
This solution works much better and results
more attractive geometries if we do not use
constant lengths and so the edge of crosspieces
also turns into variable (Fig. 34).

Figure 34

2.3. Quadrangularpatterns ofMeridians

It is got by intersection of two families of

meridians that are generated by two
perpendicular polar straight line and were
Fig.32
* placed on the same equatorial plan.

8
6
 It is a question, then, of once known the
reticle of a j , to fix angles ~i that are able to
satisfy former criterion to be able to apply
conditions [7] that once generalized result.
I Rsenp¡
l.=l¡ 1
I - cosCo +p¡)
[9]
I Rsenp¡
k¡=kj-1
cosCo -p)
Is there any uniform quadrangular grid that
complies with these conditions?
Let us suppose that we start fTom separated
meridians by a constant opening 8. The grid is
taken is what is showed in the Fig. 37.

Figure 35

The drawback is that sections of subdivision

that are got, have not a constant length and
that, force to use several kinds of crosspieces
that, to be pliable must comply with conditions
[2].
i
We had seen in [6] how to determinate
lengths of bars that form crosspieces when
every section was the same. When sections are ! /
different (Fig. 36) we will base ourselves on
the same deductions.
I I1/,
I
Ir/
!I..o
.__P-:
¡~/
---- I

Figure 36
'l
/
/
We will adopt next criterions:
n
/1
a) As crosspieces have different edge, due
to be variable, we will adapt as geometrical
place on the spherical surface, intersecting
points one, and will refer the radius R to
them.
b) Conditions [2] are complied once from I¿~~--'/--
//
/
left to right of every pair of points A; B¡,
angles ~i are equal. Figure 37
c) To obtain the maximum regularity, the
tangent to the arch of the circle in the
To fix the length of sections, we just make
crossing point bisects the angle 28 that
the most of trigonometrical formulas of
forms crosspieces.
spherical rectangular triangles where lengths b 1
d) We will measure spherical sections In
and b2 are given by expressions:
radians a j so their length will be Raí'

10
 In matrix form:
tanb l tanb2 =sennosenmo
[10]
cosb l cosmo a¡
1 1 o o o oo O OO
cosb2 cosno P u a2
O 1 100 oO O oO
P¡2 a3
oO1 1 O OO O OO
where m and n are the number of sections P13 a 4
O 100 1 OO O OO
with a value 8 in every direction. P14 as
O O 100 1 O O OO
With that, we find out that values a of
every section, in the case of the Fig. 38 there
OOO 1 O O 1 O OO P22 = a 61
[12]
OOOO 1 100 OO P23 a7
are twelve different ones.
OOOOO 1 1 O OO P24 as
OOOOO 1 O 1 OO
P33 a 9
OOOOO O 1 O 1 O
OOOOO O O 1 1 O
P34 a lO
P 44 a ll
OOOOO OO O 1 1
a 1.2

11 12 ex, \130< 3 \14 [A] -[x] = [k] [13]

ex,
.• " ......,
0<0
0<.
ex.
Systems of this kind are also called high
rectangular and they have not evidently any
solution except for the aforementioned case.
However, we have already seen previously
that we even accepted approximate solutions at
the expense of inserting little flexions in bars.
One may ask then if the system admits sorne
Figure 38 approximate solutions that satisfy equations
with the minimum possible error.
Our problem consists now on find out It can be proved that this system have a
values Pi in accordance with the Fig. 38 and better approximation and is the only one in
attached criterions. To do this, as values Pi that Hilbert's space (the space is unique for being
open round each knot, are the same in the four strictly stablished norms for it).
directions, for each one of them, we will The pseudosolution is got from the system
designate Pi with the same subscripts than Ax = K multiplied by the transposed of A, AT.
knots.
Due to the symmetry, this must be AT A x = A T K [14]
complied:
With this we have got a square system and
PI1+Pl2 = al P22+P23 = a7 the pseudosolution x is solution of the new
Pl2+P13 = a 2 P23+P24 = a8 system (that can be unique or not depending on
P13+PI4 = a 3 P23+P33 = a9 the rank of AT • A).
Pl2+P22 = a 4 P24+P34 = a lO [11] If the rank of this matrix is equal to the
P13+P23 = as P33+P34 = a ll number of unknown factors Pi' the reached
P14+P24 = a 6 P34+P44 = a l2 pseudosolution is a 'better approximation' and
what is more, is unique. Nevertheless, that
System of 12 equations with 10 unknow pseudosolution has an error that is calculated
quantities, so they are incompatible unless two like this:
of the equations are linear combination of
former ones. (JI) = [A] (x) -(k) [15]

11
 (V) is the error vector ,A.
(x) is the pseudos01ution
Equations [15] are stated like this:

PII + PIZ - al = VI PZZ + P2J - a7 = V7

PI2 + PI3 - a z = Vz PZJ + P24 - as = VS
PI3 + PI4 - a J = v3 PZJ + 13JJ - a9 = V9 [16]
PI2 + P22 - a 4 = v4 13z4 + 1334 - a lO = VIO
PIJ + P23 - as = VS 133J + PJ4 - a l ¡ = VII
PI4 + PZ4 - a 6 = v6 PJ4 + 1344 - a l2 = VIZ

Figure 40
The physical sense that every component of
the error vector has, in this case, is the
repercusion that the pseudosolution, which is
got for Pj , has on every a j •
This mathematical posing provides sorne Rsenp¡
l,~ +1¡~*
s01utions that are very adapted to the real cosCo +P)
physica1 perfomance of the structure, as errors
in the unfolded state, if they are small, have
k.*I +k**
¡ -_ Rsenn..
1",
very little repercussion on the functioning.
However, in the folded state, it does not admit cosCo -Pi)
the slightest error. And in this position the on1y
thing that counts is that values of Pi in every p.
Rsen-'
knot i are all of them exactly equal. This 2
z.**
comes true because we start from that. I

Why to use grids of unequa1 bars when the cos(o+~)

2
rhomboidal cutting patterns has not this
drawback and the final appearance is similar?
One of the main reasons is that in this case p¡
Rse n-
crosspieces are in line in plans and that makes k.** 2
I
the use of multiple grids.
We already saw in [9] how to obtain cosCo _~)
2
1engths of sections of the simple crosspiece. In
the case of multiple grids of total lengths of p.+n.
supplementary bars are got by the same . en I P¡~I
Rs
procedure bearing in mind respective Pi and 2
m¡* +m¡** [17]
cos(o+ P¡+P¡+l)
2

Rsen P¡+P¡+l
2
n¡* +n¡**
cos(o- P¡+P¡+l)
2

Figure 39
m.*1-1**
- 'I

that the opening of these new crosspieces also

is 20 (Fig. 39). However, bars are of four n.*I =k**
¡

sections now and usab1e expressions to fix thir

lengths are, around the knot i (Fig. 40).

12
 p.+n.
Rsen / P¡-I
2
m¡* +m¡***
cosCo +P¡+P¡-l
2 )

p.+n.
Rsen / Pi-I
2
n¡* +n¡***
cos ( u
~ -
P¡+P
---
i- 1)

2
With this relation can be got every length
of sections of bars, as the complet length of
them.
This kind of crosspiece grid has had its
brightest application into the Sport Centre in
Mexico by Félix Candela although in this case
is applied to a stiff and deployable one. (Fig.
41).

Figure 42
F

Anyway we are in a field where it can be

Figure 41
2.4. Quadrangular by Projection Pattern
Another procedure to obtain quadrangular
grids by means of a division of a spherical
surface, consists on projecting on it from any
focus an square flat retic1e (Fig. 42).
Starting from that we will get values <Xi
from the retic1e of the surface and by it we
will adjust values 13i by means of equations
[13] and if it is necessary, by means of the
adjustment by square minimums [14].
As the focus can be arbitrary we can find
very distorted grid, which will produce, in
general, big errors into the expression [15],
what will obstruct the solution.
found fortunate solutions that minimize errors
and each one of these singular solutions is a
grid to inc1ude into the catalogue of solutions
to the problem this is an open field where we
have reckoning very few altematives so we
recommend an exhaustive study. We have
neither found any reference that means a
novelty in a bibliography that is specialized in
spherical grids.
One of this grids that produces less errors
is the one that we got projecting from the
opposite pole of the perpendicular axis of the
grid (Fig. 43).

13
 O.O.R

~O.O,-

Figure 44

xj=acos8 =Rsen2&los8

yj =asen8 =Rsen2&¡en8
Coordinates of the knot j will be (xj, yj' Zj)'
Coordinates of the knot i (xj , y¡, zJ
The distance between the two points will
be:
Figure 43
d=J(XFXl+(Yj-Yi+(Zj-Z¡)2 [19]
If we want to find out the angle that it
Once we get the points of the spherical forms a maximum circle that pass through
reticle, we will adjust sections of maximum those two points:
circle arnong them and we wiIl find out values
d
(Xi' a=2arcsen- [20]
This process is easy if it is done with a 2R
programme of Computer Assisted Drawing. Although points of this reticle are in planes
If we want to do it analyticaIly, we will get according to the way of proj ection, once we
cartesian coordinates of points of the grid on adjust crosspieces, due to be in maximum
the surface. circles and their centre do not coincide with
According to Fig. 44: the projection focus, the group of crosspieces
that corresponds to points of the reticle in line
a are on a warped surface.
tanyj = R+h
This means that we cannot adjust multiple
crosspieces so the objection to have to use
Zj=2RcosYj-R=R(2cosyj-l) crosspieces of different lengths is not
compensate for the advantage of being able to
a=2RsenYlosYj=Rsen2Yj [18] reinforce them.
So, this system of division is structural and
constructively less convenient than the three

14
aforementioned.
The only advantage that can make its study
advisable is that when we can move the focus
at will, we can adjust surfaces to architectural
~~~*-tt:t:~::tt::::::::::f;:J6~__.1J
.,1-+-'-----="'7-1 1
1
1/
demands, sort of functional or aesthetic.
L2;:::J¡~~~:'h::1"'H-;--¡~-R;;;;;;:::~
1/
/11
111

2.5. Geodesic Quadrangular Pattern t-';--l..-4--l..(-i-II-+-l-~'-r-!-~_--f.+-I--H'--_~1111/

11
\ \ \ / /111
' // 1ti
1111 1
It is a particular case of the former one /1/ ti
: 1/11
where the focus coincides with the centre of
the sphere. So, directly, the reticle that is got, Figure 46
is formed by sections of maximum circle.
To speak of geodesic quadrangular pattem
we can just start from the cube as regular
polyhedron (Fig. 45), although froro any other
polyhedron with triangular subdivision we
could group triangles in two to obtain rhombus
that are in our fiel of study.

PROYECCION POLAR

Figure 45

T O not be restricted to the cube, we

consider any plan with a reticle of squares and
projection from the centre as geodesic
quadrangular projection (Fig. 46), the
advantage of these grids are that crosspieces of
every line of sections are in the same plan, so
they can be also solved with multiple
crosspieces, being able to obtain very stiff Figure 47
forms.

15
 Table 1 of the Fig. 47 for a plan that is placed in a
sphere which radio is one and two projections
according to headings 2.4. and 2.5.
P. GEODESIC P. FOCAL
2.6. Grids of Tetrascissors with
Quadrangular Patterns
CX l5 0.3876 0.2706

cx25 0.3614 0.2680 If instead of using crosspieces as the Fig. l

one we use pairs of scissors as those that we
CX26 0.2859 0.2588
saw in the Fig. 2 we can get another kind of
CX36 0.2577 0.2526 structures starting from the same pattem that
have been explained in former headings.
CX 37 0.1951 0.2368
In the Fig. 48 is observed the generation of
CX 47 0.1824 0.2290 this kind of grid.
CX58 0.2971 0.2610

CX68 0.3063 0.2612

CX 69 0.2008 0.2420

CX 79 0.2240 0.2430

CX 81 0.2014 0.2438

CX 9L 0.2527 0.2506

Table 2

P. GEODESIC ERROR P. FOCAL ERROR

13. 0.2230 O 0.1383 O

13> 0.1618 -0.0350 0.1317 -0.0040 Figure 48

13, 0.1132 0.0229 0.1224 0.0056

13. 0.1479 O 0.1090 O To fix vertices of prisms where we delimit

13, 0.1646 -0.0350 0.1323 -0.0040
crosspieces, we can find out starting froms
sections a jj subdivisions Pi as we have done in
13. 0.1313 0.0443 0.1268 0.0077
[13] (Fig. 49).
13, 0.1048 0.0229 0.1200 0.0056

13. 0.1341 0.0475 0.1277 0.0080

J3., 0.1138 0.0443 0.1229 0.0077

13,. 0.1148 0.0475 0.1241 0.0080

I
I
Another advantage is that once we move I
I
the position plan, we can have grids more or I
I
less canted and more or less distorted. I Si 1
To this effect we could say that is the most ¡-----'I
complex of the studied cases. I 1
~ I
However, in front of the quadrangular
domes of projection in the focus in a pole, we
have bigger errors in the application of Figure 49
equations.
Let us see the comparison of two examples

16
 h¡ =/e 2 +R 2tan2 p -2Rltanpcoso
[21 ]
2 2
h 2 =Jk2+R tan p -2Rktanpcoso
If we want to limit distances to the
spherical surface.

d¡ =h¡ +c

d 2 =h2 -c [22]

c=R~ tan2 p +4cos2 p -4tanpcos2 ~

With this obtained knots we fix the solid
quadrangular where inward diagonals are
planned (Fig. 50).
;to
Fig. 51

Grids of tetrascissors neither are specially

useful, nar contribute advantages on previously
studied one although they have more stiffness
than simple ones.
In any case, they open a little explored field
of study.
! , ,7jI 3. References
~/
/ /
\ I // 1. CALATRAVA, S.; ESCRIG, F. &
VALCARCEL, 1.P., Arquitectura Transformable,
\ \I /
\ // E.T.S.A. from Seville, 1993.

\~1 2. CANDELA, F., Una estructura metálica

Reticulada. El Palacio de los Deportes en
Figure 50 Méjico, I Encuentro Internacional Estructuras
Ligeras para grandes luces. Fundación Emilio
Pérez Piñero, Murcia, 1992.
In a general case, every diagonal does not
go through the same point. 3. ESCRIG, F., Expandable Space Frame
But, if the errar is small, it can be admited Structures, Space Structures, Ed. Elsevier, Surrey,
1984.
until a 2 per cent.
A solution we have tried, although is shored 4. ESCRIG, F., Expandable Space Frame
up very soon, is to use equal bars and open the Structures, International Joumal of Space
pack assuming that the two degrees of Structures, Vol. 1 n e, 2, Surrey, 1985.
additional freedom that modules have, make its
opening possible. 7. GANTES, c.; CONNOR, 1. & LOGHER,
In the Fig. 51 is shown a model of this Geometric and Structural Design Considerations
for Deployable Space Frames, Rapidly
kind.
Assembled Structures, Ed. P.S. Bulson,
Computational Mechanics Pub, Southampton,
U.K., 1991.
17
8. HERNÁ NDEZ, C., Es/nlctllrOS Transformables.
&tran 1, Tecnología y Construcción n'" 4,
Caracas, 1988.

9. HOBERMAN, C., Ar/ and Science ollo/ding

s/ructures, Sites Vol. 24, N .Y., 1992.

10. PIÑERO, E., Spanish patents 266.801, 283.201

311.901

11. PIÑERO, E., Estructuras reticulares,

Arquitectura nct 112, Madrid, April, 1968.

12. PIÑERO, E. Estructure reticu/ées,

L' Architecture d'aujourd'hui vol. 141
December, 1968.

13. ROSENFELD, Y, and others, A pr%type

'cliclcing' scíssor-Link Dep/oyable Structllre, Ed.
by Srivastaba, IASS lnternalional Congress,
Toronto, 1992.

14. SHAN, W., Configuration Sludies 01 fo/dable

Slructures. Space Structures, Ed. Parke, Thornas
Telford, London, 1993.

15. VALCARCEL, J.P. & ESCRJG, F., Analysis 01

Curved Expandab/e Space Bar Structures, 10
years of Progress in Shell and Spatial Structures.
Ed. CEDEX-LASS, Madrid, 1989.

18