Nexus Network Journal

Mario Salvadori in many ways embodied architecture and mathematics, and certainly embodied the particular mental aperture necessary for interdisciplinarianism. I first met Mario in 1991, not long after I had moved to Tuscany. Like all architects in my generation, I had studied structural mechanics from his textbooks at university. When I moved to the province of Florence, I discovered that Salvadori was a rather common name; I wondered if it might be the same family. Once when I returned to New York I called him, though of course he didn’t know who I was, and explained where I was from. He invited me to come to his office that very day and have a sandwich in his office. That was how our friendship began, and it is characteristic of the kind of spontaneity, warmth and interest that Mario always exuded. Already in his 80s when we met, he was still as bright as a dollar, continuing his writing and teaching at the Salvadori Center. He encouraged me every step of the way as I organized the first Nexus conference for architecture and mathematics in 1996. He came, with his wife Carol, to that conference, in Fucecchio, not far from Legnaia where he was born, and gave the keynote address, entitled “Are There Any Relationships Between Architecture and Mathematics”. The next year he passed away. I have wished many times he could have seen how the Nexus conferences grew, and how the Nexus Network Journal was founded and prospered.

An oval dome may be defined as a dome whose plan or profile (or both) has an oval form. The word “oval” comes from the Latin ovum, egg. The present paper contains an outline of the origin and application of the oval in historical architecture; a discussion of the spatial geometry of oval domes, that is, the different methods employed to lay them out; a brief exposition of the mechanics of oval arches and domes; and a final discussion of the role of geometry in oval arch and dome design.

The four answers to the prize question of the Brussels’ Academy of 1783 on the development of a theory of beams demonstrates that the modeling and mathematical mastering of the problem remained for a long time limited to a very small circle of men. With savants such as the Viscount de Nieuport (1746–1827), who worked on the calculus of vaults and who formulated this question on beams, the Academy appears such a privileged milieu. In Belgium, it would at take least until the creation of the polytechnic school at the State University of Ghent in 1835 for this approach to be diffused in a systematic and institutionally way among (an elite of) construction professionals.

It is a great pleasure for me to review this book, because I was present at its birth and watched it mature. Prof. Eaton’s aim, first with an article published in the NNJ and then in detail with this fine new book, was to show how American engineer Hardy Cross developed a method for analyzing indeterminate structures that minimized the inconveniences and risks involved in the use and development of reinforced concrete. Along the way, however, Eaton also provides us with a tapestry of other considerations as to the interactions of engineering and architecture, the relationship of engineering and mathematics, and the contrasts between American engineers and their peers overseas. This is as culturally rich a book on a single technical argument as you could wish to find.