Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 4 – uploaded by Josep M. Puche Fontanilles

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
‘igure 3. Constructive development of the radial chapels and the ambulatory (J. Lluis, 2002). In the initial phase of construction a ring of nine radial chapels was built around the Roman- esque cathedral, which remained in use. They were built sequentially, from the Gospel side (North) to the Epistle (South) side, between 1383 and 1424, and have a square floor plan, with ribbed ati, The theoretical cross-section of the keystones was topped at 45 palms (1045.35 cm) high.

Figure 4 ‘igure 3. Constructive development of the radial chapels and the ambulatory (J. Lluis, 2002). In the initial phase of construction a ring of nine radial chapels was built around the Roman- esque cathedral, which remained in use. They were built sequentially, from the Gospel side (North) to the Epistle (South) side, between 1383 and 1424, and have a square floor plan, with ribbed ati, The theoretical cross-section of the keystones was topped at 45 palms (1045.35 cm) high.

Related Figures (11)

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisi out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisi out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms
Figure 1. Cathedral of Milan, layout of the section by Cesare Cesarino (Vitruvio, 1521).
Figure 1. Cathedral of Milan, layout of the section by Cesare Cesarino (Vitruvio, 1521).
Figure 2. Metrology of the apse of Tortosa Cathedral.
Figure 2. Metrology of the apse of Tortosa Cathedral.
‘igure 4. Point Cloud of the Cathedral of Tortosa (A. Costa and J. M. Puche, 2013).
‘igure 4. Point Cloud of the Cathedral of Tortosa (A. Costa and J. M. Puche, 2013).
Figure 5. Sections of the 3D model (A. Costa and J. M. Puche, 2013). The height of the keystones (Ha) in the chapels (Figure 7) differs by up to 40 cm, with the key- stone located at the greatest height in C2 (10.253 m) and at the lowest height in C8 (9.851 m). The next two chapels are of a similar height (C4 and C5) with a difference that does not reach | cm. The last four tend to be lower. The height of the severy in the keystone (Hb) follows the same pattern as that described for the keystone, with small variations and an average distance from Ha of 41 cm.
Figure 5. Sections of the 3D model (A. Costa and J. M. Puche, 2013). The height of the keystones (Ha) in the chapels (Figure 7) differs by up to 40 cm, with the key- stone located at the greatest height in C2 (10.253 m) and at the lowest height in C8 (9.851 m). The next two chapels are of a similar height (C4 and C5) with a difference that does not reach | cm. The last four tend to be lower. The height of the severy in the keystone (Hb) follows the same pattern as that described for the keystone, with small variations and an average distance from Ha of 41 cm.
Figure 8. Heights of the severies in the chapels. SI and SII.
Figure 8. Heights of the severies in the chapels. SI and SII.
Figure 7. Heights of the keystones. Figure 6. Nomenclature criteria. If we compare the heights of the severy where it meets the former arch (Hd) and the wall (Hc) in the longitudinal section (SI), He is always located higher than Hd. The dispersion in the former is 17.5 cm (C1-C4) and in the wall it is 15.10 cm (C3-C7). The height of the first three vaults is lower than the others (Figure 8). Zz aes ok jie. code as =
Figure 7. Heights of the keystones. Figure 6. Nomenclature criteria. If we compare the heights of the severy where it meets the former arch (Hd) and the wall (Hc) in the longitudinal section (SI), He is always located higher than Hd. The dispersion in the former is 17.5 cm (C1-C4) and in the wall it is 15.10 cm (C3-C7). The height of the first three vaults is lower than the others (Figure 8). Zz aes ok jie. code as =
Figure 9. Heights of the severies in the ambulatory. SI and SIL.
Figure 9. Heights of the severies in the ambulatory. SI and SIL.
Figure 10. Revised chronology of the construction (J. Lluis, A. Costa, J. M. Puche, S. Coll, M. A. Soriano- Montagut, M. Lopez and C. Soler, 2013).
Figure 10. Revised chronology of the construction (J. Lluis, A. Costa, J. M. Puche, S. Coll, M. A. Soriano- Montagut, M. Lopez and C. Soler, 2013).
Figure 11. Aerial view of the point cloud (J. Lluis, A. Costa, J. M. Puche, S. Coll, M.A. Soriano-Montagut, M. Lopez and C. Soler, 2013).
Figure 11. Aerial view of the point cloud (J. Lluis, A. Costa, J. M. Puche, S. Coll, M.A. Soriano-Montagut, M. Lopez and C. Soler, 2013).
Related topics:
PhotogrammetryArchitectureArchitectural HistoryMedieval Architecture3D laser scanner
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved