|
good architect without introducing features both faulty and expensive. It is highly probable that if the engineer will modify his designs as much as is legitimate to meet the aesthetic requirements of the architect, the latter will gradually modify the rigidity of his ideals, and will see lines of grace, beauty, and fitness in the polygonal outlines of trussed bridges. Mr. Van Brunt himself has already shown this to be true by giving his unqualified approval to the architectural effect of the truss outlines in the draw-span of the author's bridge over the Missouri River at Omaha, although these outlines were determined primarily for utility and secondarily for appearance, and notwithstanding the fact that there is no attempt at even approximate curvature of chords in the entire span.
To recognize and acknowledge the deficiencies of modern bridge designs from the artistic point of view is one thing, but to show how they are to be remedied is another; because, while it is easy to say that a certain structure does not come up to one's ideal of grace and beauty, it is very difficult to show exactly where the defects are, and what should or can be done to remove them.
Notwithstanding this, the author will now endeavor to establish a few fundamental rules which, if followed, ought to correct the most glaring sources of ugliness in bridge designs; then, by entering more into detail, he will try to show how the structures may be decorated appropriately and inexpensively.
The architectural treatment of bridge-designing may be divided into these four parts:
1st. The layout of spans, piers, and approaches.
2d. The outlining of each span.
3d. The decoration of each span.
4th. The ornamentation of the entire structure by the adoption of elaborately artistic approaches.
In respect to the layout of spans, piers, and approaches for any bridge, there is one governing principle which should always be complied with, viz., that the entire structure, whenever possible, should be made perfectly symmetrical about a middle plane.
|