MOBILE STRUCTURES COVERING CIRCULAR AREAS.

By Sánchez, José School of Architecture of Sevilla

Escrig, Félix School of Architecture of Sevilla
Valcárcel, Juan School of Architecture of La Coruña

ABSTRACT 2. FLEXIBLE ROOFS.

Mobility and Deployability are characteristic that are
requested for many purposes and mainly an Architectonicas
requirements.
Many cultural and sports buildings have a circular plan
that is very attractive to be covered with deployable roofs.
This paper is related with the subject.
1. INTRODUCTION.
2.1. TENSIONED.
We include examples in wick the roofing textile can be
packed in a parcel.
They are basically two solutions. Folding to a central
suspensed point or folding around a radial edge.
From the first one we have very important achievements,
so early as the sixties. Several desings where builded by
Tailibert and Otto (Fig. 1). The Montreal Stadium in 1.976 is
the most representative of this type (Fig. 2, 3 and 4).

During the last years a lot of research and constructions

have been done to cover spaces with systems that allows to be
extended or folded in a short time. They are the movable roofs.
At the same time papers, books or articles in Journals
have been published making the subject avalaible to the
architects or engineers that have used the mobility to solve
sports and cultural facilities in the most examples upon a
rectangular area [Ref. 1 and 2].
Therefore in this text we want to study different types
of roofing for every perimeter, specially with radial plan by
systematizing and catalloging builded and proyected structures.
We only include in this selection movable roofs with
the restriction of being polygonal or circular in plan and without Fig. 2. Roof of the Montreal Olympic Stadium.
interior mast or supports. Then we propose the next
classification.

Fig. 1. Retractable membrane roof by Frey Otto. Fig. 3. Roof of the Montreal Olympic Stadium.

Fig. 4. Roof of the Montreal Olympic Stadium.
In the next years have been builded other roofs like
these. The Zaragoza bull-ring by Bergerman 1.995 (Fig. 5, 6
and 7) is a recent realization.
Fig. 5. The Zaragoza bull-ring.
Fig. 6. The Zaragoza bull-ring.
Fig. 7. The Zaragoza bull-ring.
Fig. 8. Proyec of cover the Innsbruck Stadium.
Fig. 9. Proyec of cover the Innsbruck Stadium
If we use circular trusses or arches that slides upon the
perimeter we can package the roofing in a line (Fig. 8 and 9).
2.2. INFLATED.
With inflated roofs the solutions are varied and
interesting innovations have been presented in recent
Conferences, as the idea introduced by Wagner and Kröping
in 1.994 [Ref. 3] that is shown in Figs. 10 and 11. In this case
22 cones filled with helium close the roof stayed with cables.
Figs. 10. Helium-supported hanger by Wagner and Kröping.
Figs. 11. Helium-supported hanger by Wagner and Kröping.
3. DEPLOYABLE STRUCTURES.
3.1. X-FRAMES.
The first proposal was introduced by Pérez Piñero,
student of last course of Architecture as a participation in the
VI International Competition of UIA in London in 1.961. Fig.
12 shows this deployable mesh with 32 m. in span, 11 in height
and a weight of 3 tons. able to be transported on a truck [Ref.
4]

Fig.15. Sequence of the ploying of a hexagonal deployable structure.

After several experiences in reduced scale model we
concluded with other proposal by sliding the deployable
structure below two arches to expand and fold it (Fig. 15.).
This solution was proposed to cover the Innsbruck Stadium
[Ref. 6] with 120 span and 30 m. height. We obtain two
advantages. To support the roof during the deploying process
hanged of three not alliguet points and to store the parcel hidden
at the ground where arches are clamped (Figs. 16. 17. and 18).

Fig. 12. Deployable Structure by Pérez Piñero

The authors proposed in 1.990 a deployable roof with Fig. 16

60 m. span, 15 m. height to shadow a swimmingpool, [Ref. 5].
The parcel could be stored suspended from the central arch.

Fig. 17

Fig. 18

Figs. 16 to18. Cover the Innsbruck Stadium by

Fig. 13. Cover of swimmingpool by Escrig. Fig. 14 Valcarcel and Escrig.
3.2. DIAFRAGMA TRUSSES.
Their behaviour is similar to the diafragma of a lens
camera. Theis are circular or polygonal roofing that deploys
from the key apex. to the border.
Fig. 20 shows a patent
from Emilio Pérez Piñero Fig. 21. Iris Dome by Hobermann.
called «diafragma dome» based
on elements like shown in Fig. Sánchez-Cuenca corrected this problem with two
19. innovations. Struts with transversal sttitres and a sophisticated
joint.

Fig. 19. Element of Pérez Piñero Diafragma dome.

Fig. 23. Iris Dome by Sánchez-Cuenca.

The authors also proposed a new application with X-

Fig. 20. Diafragma Dome by Pérez Piñero.
Hobermann took some success in 1.992 with his Iris
dome shown in Fig. 21 and with applications like in Fig. 22.
[Ref. 8].
Hobermann proposal is very flexible because is a single
layer grid and them is mustable for long spans.
Frames based in a rombic polyhedra [Fig. 24).
The particular advantage is that in this case the joints
on the border are fixed and not change its position. Fig. 25
shows the adaptation to a bull-ring.
Many other researchers and groups are improving joints
and mechanisms to make available these structures [Ref. 8 ]

Fig. 22. Iris Dome by Hobermann. Fig. 24 Rombic Dome by Escrig and Sanchez.
 4.3. SELF SUPPORTED SPHERICAL SEGMENTS.
If we consider three or four segments we can achieve
that every one is self-stable. Fukuoka Dome with only three
segments supported in 125º and lenght span 218 m. and 84 m.
height (Figs. 28 to 31).

Fig. 25. Rombic Dome to cover a bull-ring.by Escrig and Sanchez.

4. RIGID ROOFS.
4.1. RETRACTABLE ROOFS
We can include in this paragraph any structural
systems builded with spherical or plane segments that slide
along the border with bogies or other devices. We can Fig. 28. The Fukuoka Dome by Takenaka.
distinguish between several designs:
4.2. SUSPENDED SPHERICAL SEGMENTS.
Fig. 26 shows the Pittsburgh Civic Arena builded
in 1.961 by Michell & Ritchey with 125 m. of span, 8 spherical
segments overlap in one single hanged from a impressive
cantilever (Fig. 27)

Fig. 29. The Fukuoka Dome by Takenaka.

Fig. 30. The Fukuoka Dome by Takenaka.

Fig. 26. The Dome of Civit Arena by Michell & Ritchey.

Fig. 27. The Dome of Civit Arena by Michell & Ritchey. Fig. 31. The Fukuoka Dome by Takenaka.
4.4. SLIDING SEGMENTS To lighten the weight of this roof the Space
Group of Corea and Ing. Matthys Levy have proposed the Pulsar
If parts of the sphere slides upon the surface we
Dome, a Tensegrity Dome that open the central part 128 m. of
can use varied desings like shown in Fig. 32 build with two
diameter over a global area of 200 m. span (Figs. 34 to 36.)
layer grids covering or lightening the central opening. [Ref. 2
and 8] Fig. 33 shows a design by Yamashita Sekkei and Ing.
Ishii to open central part of the covering on a stadium.

Fig. 32 Sliding Dome by M. Apezteguia and Azkue.

Fig. 34. Pulsar Tensegrity Dome by Levy.

Fig. 35. Pulsar Tensegrity Dome by Levy.

Fig. 33. Komatsu Dome. Fig. 36. Pulsar Tensegrity Dome by Levy.
5. OTHERS. 5.3. TWISTING TRUSSES.
Many other systems have been proposed and we can The authors have proposed a solution that allows
only describe briefly some of them in so short paper. to cover and to open completely the circular area with rigid
trusses that solve termal insulation, drainage and acoustic
5.1. FOLDING TRUSSES.
control (Fig. 39).
Fig. 37 shows radial trusses that evolve radially
to fold on an arch. We can use in this solution rigid of flexible
material for the cover.

Fig. 37. Folding Trusses by Sanchez.

Fig. 39. Twistng Trusses by Sanchez.

5.2. CANTILEVERS
5.4. SLIDING STRUTS.
Santiago Calatrava has done a lot of sketches of
Proposed by Popovic, Chilton and Choo [Ref.
this kind from Kuwait Pavilion in the Sevilla EXPO’92 on a
10] are geometrical devices that need a lot of mechanics
square plant to different circular assemblies like Floating
determination to solve the roofing problem and the structural
Pavilion in Suizerland. Fig. 38 shows the system.
stability (Fig. 40).

Fig. 38. Floating Pavilion by Santiago Calatrava. Fig. 40. Reciprocal Frame by Popovic, Chilton and Choo.
5.5. ARTICULATED RODS.
Santiago Calatrava is a master of the mobile
structures that his experiences intensive (Fig. 41) shows the
cover for a pool in an urban area.
Fig. 41. Cover for a pool in Alcoy (Spain).
[8] HOBERMANN, Ch.
«The Art and Science of Folding Structures»Sites
Architectures Nº24 New York 1992.
[9] YOU, Z. & PELLEGRINO, S.
‘Foldable Structures’ International Journal of Solids and
Structures Stanford University California 1997
[10] MARTINEZ APEZTEGUIA, J. & AZKUE
ARRASTOA J.L.
‘Retractable roof for a multi-purpose center in San
Sebastian’ Mobile and Rapidly Assembled Structure II. Ed.
P.S. Bulson Computational Mechanics Publications. 1996.
ISBN 1-85312.398-6.
[11] POPOVIC, O. CHILTON, J.C. & CHOO, B.S.
‘Rapid construction of modular buildings using the
`Reciprocal Farme`’ Mobile and Rapidly Assembled Structure
II. Ed. P.S. Bulson Computational Mechanics
Publications. 1996. ISBN 1-85312.398-6.

REFERENCES:
[1] ESCRIG, F. & VALCARCEL, J. P.
«Cubiertas rígidas transformables»Hormigón y Acero
nº 193. 1994, Madrid. Pp. 85-104
[2] ISHII, K.
‘Structura Design of Retractable roof Structure’ IASS
Working Group Nº 16 1996.
[3] WAGNER, R. and KRÓPLIN, B
«Helium-Supported Hanger for a Small Solar-Powered
Airshap, Proc IASS+ASCE Int. Symposium on Spacial,
Lattice and Tension Structures, Atlanta, U.S.A., Abril 1994
[4] PIÑERO, E. P. & ESCRIG, F.
«Las Estructuras de Emilio Pérez Piñero» Arquitectura
Transformable. Textos de Arquit.. E.T.S.A. de Sevilla. 1993
[5] ESCRIG, F. & VALCARCEL, J. P.
‘To cover a Swimming Pool with an Expandable
Structure’ Rapidly Assembled Structures. Ed. P.S. Bulson
Computational Mechanics Publications. 1991. ISBN 1-
85312-136-3 PP 273-282
[6] ESCRIG, F. & VALCARCEL, J. P.
«Geometrias de las Estructuras Desplegables de Aspas»
Arquitectura Transformable. Textos de Arquit.. E.T.S.A. de
Sevilla. 1993
[7] PIÑERO, E.
Patentes españolas 266.801, 283.201, 311.901
U.S. Patent. 3.185.164