Talk:Groin vault

Query

What is the English term for this type of vault? --Ghirla ^-трёп- 18:33, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

it is a groin vault. Anlace 18:41, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I stumbled on this entry because I tried to look up the term "quincunx /ˈkwɪn.kəŋks/" which evidently is the term for the vaulted ceiling that I had learned was implemented for it's specific acoustic qualities. At first glance I figured it was related to the worm e-quinox, which seems to hold true I just never imagined Heaven to have vaulted ceilings, sealings maybe, but I had always imagined Heaven to exist somewhere up in the clouds. That seems to be what is traditionally taught to the children, as if the adults have forgotten which planet Dead get buried on, so that they may live. Dirtclustit (talk) 07:14, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Examples

I think we should define a criteria for inclusion in the examples paragraph, currently it's open for everyman and his dog to add to this list his local groin vault. I suggest notablility criteria for inclusion. i.e. the oldest by material, widest, tallest, unusually interesting for a specific reason, etc.etc. --Mcginnly | Natter 13:57, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

i dont think the widest, tallest etc really make a lot of sense as the main criteria, although they might weigh in. i would propose the following:

• world geographical distribution (we probably only need one from Russia)
  • No, Too numerous. --Mcginnly | Natter 18:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
    • no one is talking about listing every groin vault. this is an international encyclopaedia and we must strive for geographic diversity. two from russia is one too many Anlace 19:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
• representation of different types of structure (eg monastery, baths, cathedral, castle)
  • Yes, Ok with this in principle.--Mcginnly | Natter 18:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
• use of a building that has a Wikipedia article
  • No, Too numerous
    • no one is talking about listing every wikipedia article with a groin vault. this criterion should be a MINIMUM requirement. Anlace 19:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
• emphasis upon older structures (although having one modern on from the u s mint is good. it also partly solves geographic representation from the americas)
  • Yes, I think this is valid.--Mcginnly | Natter 18:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
• use of a building that is still extant and not in ruin
  • No,Too numerous--Mcginnly | Natter 18:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
    • again no one is talking about listing every extant. this should be a desireable but not essential criterion.
• use of a building true to its architectural type
  • Not sure what this means?--Mcginnly | Natter 18:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
    • it means avoiding using buildings that have been extensively modified over time Anlace 19:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
• use of a buiding that has a material role to the history of its locale
  • No too numerous - every locale then gets a plug regardless of whether the vault is significant or not.--Mcginnly | Natter 18:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
    • no one is talking about listing every such building. this should be a minimum requirement and should exceed a role in history that is more than of parochial interest Anlace 19:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
• use of a building that has an existing reference source in this article or has a reference that can be advanced
  • No, too numerous - every groin vault we can reference isn't restrictive at all. --Mcginnly | Natter 18:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
• use of a building that has an image on wikipedia (whether or not the image sits in Groin vault
  • No, too numerous. --Mcginnly | Natter 18:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
    • this should be of course a MINIMUM mandatory requirement. Anlace 19:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
• groin vaults that have unusual dimensions or materials
  • Yes, sounds like notablility to me. --Mcginnly | Natter 18:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

there may be others. what are your thoughts Mcginnly|Natter ? regards Anlace 17:14, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I think List of buildings with groin vaults would be a pretty useless article and unless we seriously restrict the list in this article to say 10 max. important groin vaults by whatever criteria we agree on, then we'll have a runaway list on our hands. With that in mind I've commented on your list. --Mcginnly | Natter 18:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

• This list should include no more than following exemplary buildings IMHO:

1. One famous thermae (Diocletian's or Caracala's)

2. Constantin's Basilica.

3. Speyer cathedral (typcal romanesque dome-groin vaults)

4. San Ambrogio in Milano (one of first examples of rib-enforced groin vault).

5. Choir of abbey churhc of St. Denis (first Gothic groin vault).

6. Chartres cathedral (first High Gothic groin vaults on a rectangle basis).

7. Several gothic cathedrals from other regions outside central France: one English (Cantenbury or Salisbury, I think, have groin vaults), one German (St. Margaret of Augsburg, I belive), one Italian (Milan cathedral), one Spanish (Toledo or Barcelona cathedral).

8. A cloister which has groin vaults of certain famous monastery (Franciscan monastery of Dubrovnik comes to mind).

9. One notable example of groin-vaulting from post-Gothic periods (can't think of anything worth mentioning here at the moment; groin vaulting went almost extinct in large-scale buildings after Gothic age).

IMHO it would be utterly pointless to create a special article with list of buildings with groin vaults. We would then have to make list of buildings with windows, list of buildings with doric columns, list of buildings with mansart roofs, etc., and similar articles which realy have no purpose beyond recapitulation of other articles. --Hierophant 19:31, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

• hello. no one has suggested a separate article with a list. this discussion (i thought) is about the article section called ==Examples== regards. Anlace 19:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I've given some thought to the above. I think hierophants list is a good compromise because it assert notablility for all the examples and restricts the number. My suggestion is that we do away with the 'list' altogether and weave his examples into the body of the article, discussing the progression of the vault through history. What do you think? --Mcginnly | Natter 13:39, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Support. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 14:18, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

When I was taught of that styled arch, it was part of a lesson on meaning, value, and specific purpose of such intricate architecture of Alhambrah. So I guess I always just assumed that the the acoustic qualities were designed for there. It never occurred to me that builders would go to such trouble for ornamental visual qualities.Dirtclustit (talk) 19:16, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Illustration

Anybody speak Italian?

I think the Illustration would be more helpful if there was some accompanying description that could explain the various elements in greater detail for the reader with little or no experience and or familiarity with construction of this type.

I took a closer look at the diagram, and found that it had been created by someone with a very nice website, which I think dealt with aspects of structural design and maybe Computer Assisted Drawing?

But as the site was in Italian I was at a loss as to how to contact the creator and ask him for his assistance.

Anybody think they might be able to make that connection?

Thanks for reading.

Take Care,

James

Rampant unicorn (talk) 16:21, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Lateral stress

Does groin vault really have any advantage over barrel vault when it comes to lateral stress (and need to counteract it)? Article says: "...groin vault is intrinsically a stronger design compared to the barrel vault, since the barrel vault structure must rest on long walls creating less stable lateral stress, whereas the groin vault design can direct stresses almost purely vertically on the piers" and this sounds misleading to me, suggesting some magic related to the horizontal stress which likely does not exist:

• Yes, concentrating weight on piers is certainly advantage of groin over barrel
• BUT almost purely vertically can be achieved by both groin and barrel IF there is another neighboring vault counteracting the horizontal force (and by none of them if there is not).

If you cover a long corridor with either barrel vault or a series of groin vaults, I bet that the average horizontal force to be counteracted is the same. The advantage of groin is that this force is concentrated to points where it perhaps may be more practically counteracted by external supports (e.g. typical cathedrals). Maybe this is the advantage which should be stressed in the article, rather than hinting some magical disappearance of the horizontal force? --Vaclav.hanzl (talk) 16:06, 31 January 2023 (UTC)