Graphical analysis of the structural behavior, according

hypothesis of Rankine-Schwedler, of a large stone dome

in Granada (Spain)

Javier SUAREZ1, Rafael BRAVO1 and José A. GONZÁLEZ

1
Department of Mechanical Structures and Hydraulic Engineering. Granada University
(SPAIN). fjsuarez@ugr.es.

Abstract. This paper presents a geometric, constructive and structural analysis,

of the Encarnación church dome in Montefrío, Granada (Spain). It’s a hemi-
spherical dome, built of stone in the 18th century; the result of the confluence of
three trends at that time: Bourbon centralism, illustrated academicism and archi-
tectural neoclassicism. Its diameter is approximately 30m, it is considered to be
a replica of the Pantheon in Rome, having been the largest stone dome in the
world, since the bombing in 1943 of St. Hedwig's Cathedral dome in Berlin, un-
til the construction in 2008 of the Global Vipassana Pagoda in India. We pre-
sent the geometric modelling of the dome, taken from three-dimensional scan-
ning applied to architectural research. We also include an analysis of the me-
chanical behaviour of the dome is made, analytics and graphically according
hypothesis of Rankine-Schwedler, including detailed graphical diagrams.

Keywords: stone dome, graphical analysis, structural analysis, Rankine-

Schwedler, Montefrío.

1 Introduction

This paper aims to structurally analyse, analytics and graphically, the dome of Encar-
nación church in Montefrío (Granada, Spain), according hypothesis of Rankine-
Schwedler. The study includes the architectural analysis and geometrical modelling of
the structural element.
The Encarnación church in Montefrío was designed and executed by the architect
Domingo Antonio Lois Monteagudo between 1786 y 1802, when the Enlightenment
ideas were booming, and it is a perfect example of neoclassic style in the kingdom of
Granada.
The temple both spatially and dimensionally is a copy of Agrippa’s Pantheon in
Rome. It has only one nave rectangular in shape, whose dimensions are 25x49 m2
interrupted by a circular area of 29,87m in diameter. The dome, which is almost 30m
in diameter, lacks any kind of decorative element, even the lantern. There is only one
gangway, to which a railing was added in 1880.
The temple is built of ashlar stone joined by a layer of mortar.
2

If we compare it with the Agrippa Pantheon in Rome, it not only repeats the spatial
layout but also its proportions. The Pantheon was built by the emperor Adriano be-
tween 118-128d.c. on the same site as the Agrippa temple in 27a.c.. It has a hemi-
spherical dome 43m in diameter placed on a cylindrical base which made the Panthe-
on a formidable feat of engineering and maximum exponent of Roman architectural
technology. The height of the Pantheon up to the start of the dome is exactly half of
the diameter, i.e., if the dome’s curve was prolonged it would touch the floor. The
differences between the two buildings are due to their cultural and religious require-
ments, as the church needs a chapel, sacristy and tower.
Although the Montefrío church is smaller in size (its diameter is slightly less than
30m) its proportions are the same as the Roman building, i.e., the interior height from
the floor coincides with the diameter of the dome.
In spite of using different building materials, the structural mechanisms used are
similar in both buildings; in the Montefrío church, the semi-circular cavities and the
large chapel niches in the drum, act like the discharge arches in the Pantheon, chan-
nelling the stress generated by the weight of the dome towards the ground.

Fig. 1. The Encarnación church in Montefrío. The most impressive building of its time in the
Kingdom of Granada, its construction required several demolitions in the city centre.
 3

2 Historical context

The Encarnación church in Montefrío, was conceived and built as an important ele-
ment of neo-classical architecture, academicism, and Bourbon centralism in Spain.
With the recent inauguration in 1752 of the Royal Academy of Fine Arts of San Fer-
nando, the first Spanish academic centre for teaching architecture, the Council of
Castile imposed the mandatory re-view of construction projects by academic archi-
tects, who imposed the architectural design rules of neo-classicism prevailing at the
time, moving away from regional building traditions.
With radical interventions like the Encarnación church, the most impressive building
of its time in the Kingdom of Granada, whose construction required several demoli-
tions in the city centre; it was more a case of political propaganda than utility, with
the aim of highlighting the importance of the reforms of the Bourbon monarchy, and
demonstrating their far reaching influence.
The Galician architect Domingo Lois de Monteagudo designed the Encarnación
church in Montefrío between 1781 and 1782. His personal interpretation of the Pan-
theon in Rome, captured the essence of classical architecture.
The project was supervised and approved by Ventura Rodríguez, and built by Fran-
cisco Aguado be-tween 1786 and 1802. (Cervera 1982 & 1985) (Córdoba 2013)
(Guillén 1988).

3 Geometric modelling

The Montefrío temple is an overwhelming space generated by the fusion of simple

geometrical pieces; a cylinder crowned with a sphere.
This is the simplest and oldest of spaces, and at the same time the most representa-
tive of spirituality, used since antiquity by all cultures.
Geometric modelling of the dome was carried out in three successive phases with
ever greater precision: studying old documents and bibliography of the traces, meas-
uring in situ with measuring tape and manual laser, and 3D architectural digitalization
with a laser station.
Measurements were taken from different positions outside the temple, and inside
from below the dome; relating the same with common points and contrasting meas-
urements. The different positions, the number of points from each one and the accura-
cy of the laser measurements are detailed in (Alonso 2013).
The process of how all the points are obtained with the laser ray is detailed in (Al-
magro 2004).
The 3D digitization process, enables us to obtain cross sections of the dome, and
from them, we fitted the theoretical sphere in real section, analysing the deformation
experienced.
We measured the dome’s interior diameter equal to 27.87m, with a height from the
ground of 27.58m.
By establishing numerical relationships between the thickness of support walls and
the dome base, and the height of the impost in the extrados, represented in the dia-
4

gram in figure 4, we conclude that when drawing up the plans of the Encarnación
church in Montefrío, the architect Domingo Lois Monteagudo, faithfully followed
Fontana’s classical recommendations, very well considered at the time by the project
supervisor, Ventura Rodríguez, whose report was favourable, without imposing any
modification.

Fig. 2. Comparison between Montefrío church and the Agrippa Pantheon (Guillén 1989)
 5

Fig. 3. Main elevation and longitudinal section. Orthophoto obtained from the point cloud.
6

Fig. 4. Graphical representation of the dome’s cross sections. Relationship between wall thick-
ness in support walls (L/7.31) and dome base (L/9.19), and the height of the impost in the ex-
trados (L/4.06).
 7

4 Materials

The stone used to build the temple is yellowish (light brown), fine-grained and of
homogeneous structure; it came from a nearby quarry known as San Cristobal, and is
classified as bioclastic calcareous sandstone.
In (Alonso 2013) the sample collection process is explained, and the laboratory tests
carried out to determine their physical and mechanical characteristics.
Hydrostatic balance determined a value of bulk density equal to 2.04 kg/dm3; the
result obtained is consistent with those included in the bibliography. Ultrasonic test-
ing obtained Young's modulus ranging from 15.8 to 21.0 GPa.

5 Structural behaviour

5.1 Analysis of meridional and hoop forces.

The dome is a surface of revolution with a vertical axis, whose pole is the apex; con-
sequently the vertical sections will be meridian and the horizontal hoop.
According to Rankine’s and Schwedler’s hypothesis, the stresses generated by the
loads are contained in planes tangent to the half-surface at the point of application;
taking into account the axial symmetry of the charges we conclude that no shear
stresses are generated; only normal stresses either compressive or tensile, are generat-
ed.

Fig. 5. Only normal stresses are generated. Slice equilibrium.

Being, P: weight of the upper part of the dome; ϕ: colatitude (angle between the
tangent to the meridian horizontal); x: distance to the axial axis; y: distance to the
top of the dome.
The dome weight per parallel unit, decomposes according to both radial directions,
and tangent to the meridian:
Meridian compression force per parallel unit length.

𝑁 = (1)
8

Radial compression force per parallel unit length:

𝐻 = →𝑅= → 𝑑𝑅 = 𝑑(𝑃 cot 𝜑) (2)

Compression parallel force per meridian unit length.

𝑅 = = (𝑃 cot 𝜑) (3)

5.2 Graphical procedure.

This procedure is applicable not only to the domes formed by surfaces of revolution,
but also to those whose horizontal sections are ellipses or other analogous lines.
Assuming the dome is cut by horizontal planes 1, 2, ... and by vertical planes contain-
ing the axis, we will obtain a series of elements subjected to the forces P1, P2, ... from
which we can determine their internal stresses according to the hypothesis of Ran-
kine-Schwedler.
The load P1 is decomposed into a force N1 parallel to the tangent to the meridian, and
a horizontal force H1. N1 is the compression in the meridian curve corresponding to
the 1-1 plane.
In the horizontal plane, the reaction H1 causes the reactions from the adjoining ele-
ments, R1 and R1', in the directions of the tangents to the curve of the horizontal sec-
tion. We have the following forces in equilibrium: P1, N1, R1 and R1'.
In the same way, the components N2 and H2 are determined for the load P1 + P2.
The resultant ∆H2 = H2 - H1 produces compressions when H2 > H1 and tractions oth-
erwise.

Fig. 6. The dome is cut by horizontal planes 1, 2, ... and by vertical planes containing the axis.

Figures 7 to 9 graphically represent different phases in the application of the graphic

method of the dome.
Let the dome be divided into 50 sections, and we will take one of these slices and
will divide it into 92 voussoirs. A 3D model has been made to calculate the volume
 9

and gravity centre of each voussoir. The weight has been represented by a concentrat-
ed force at the centroid of each division.
Let´s consider each voussoir. There are four forces acting: a) the weight of the ma-
sonry, b) the pressure from the voussoir number 2, c) the pressure on each side from
the adjoining slices. These two thrusts from the adjoining slices will be considered to
be equal and horizontal and are acting in the same plane. These forces have to be in
equilibrium.
If we take other division, there will be five forces acting, the weight, the two forces
from adjoining slices, one on each side, and the two forces from the adjoining vous-
soirs. These forces have to be equally in equilibrium.
The pressure from one voussoir to the next one, will be considered as a vector in
the direction of the line that joins the two centroids.
To stablish equilibrium in each division, a polygon is drawn with all the weight
forces (from 1 to 92). After each vector, we will find a ray (discontinuous) parallel to
the colatitude. This polar ray will be extended until it intersects the horizontal made at
the starting point. These polar rays are the meridian forces (N).
The horizontal vector represents the resultant of the pressure from the adjoining
slices or centripetal forces (H). Each horizontal vector can be decomposed in two
thrusts, that are parallel to the line of action of the lateral sections (tangent at the point
of contact between slices).

Fig. 7. Let the dome be divided into 50 sections, and we will take one of these slices and will
divide it into 92 voussoirs.
10

Fig. 8. The horizontal vector represents the resultant of the pressure from the adjoining slices or
centripetal forces (H). Each horizontal vector can be decomposed in two thrusts, that are paral-
lel to the line of action of the lateral sections (tangent at the point of contact between slices).
 11

Fig. 9. The resultant ∆Hi = Hi - Hi-1 produces compressions when Hi > Hi-1 and tractions other-
wise. The procedure allows to detect traction zones in the dome.

6 Conclusions

The geometric, constructive and structural analysis, of a stone dome is presented for
the first time. It is a singular dome for the following reasons:
- The historical circumstances in which it was conceived and built are an important
neoclassical architectural element in southern Spain.
- The beauty of its geometric proportions is intimately related to the Pantheon of
Rome.
- The execution of masonry meets the highest quality.
The dome study is a good example of the application and contrast between different
methods of structural analysis: membrane theory, limit analysis, numerical methods,
and using non destructive testing to determine material properties.
12

In this paper an analysis of the mechanical behaviour of the dome is made, analytics
and graphically according hypothesis of Rankine-Schwedler, including detailed
graphical diagrams.
This work serves as a starting point for teaching and research lines that explore the
aforementioned disciplines.

References
1. Almagro, A. Levantamiento Arquitectónico. Universidad de Granada. (2004).
2. Alonso, E. Análisis Estructural de la cúpula de la Iglesia de la Encarnación de Montefrío
(Granada). Trabajo fin de Máster dirigido por Javier Suárez Medina. Máster de Estructu-
ras de la Universidad de Granada. CA 2012/13. (2013)
3. Boothby, Thomas E. Engineering Iron and Stone, ASCE Press, 2015.
4. Bouguer, P. Sur les Lignes Courbes propres a former les Voutes en Dome. Mémoires de
l’Académie Royale de Sciences de Paris, pp. 149-166. (1734).
5. Cervera, L. Ventura Rodríguez, maestro mayor de obras de Madrid y de sus fuentes y via-
jes de agua. Boletín de la Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando. (1982)
6. Cervera, L. El arquitecto Gallego Domingo Antonio Lois de Monteagudo (1723-1786) y
su “Libro de Barios adornos”. Fundación Pedro Barrie de la Maza. (1985).
7. Frézier, A.F.. La théorie et la pratique de la coupe de pierres. Paris. C.A. Jombert. 3 vols.
(1737-39).
8. Guillén, E. Arquitectura religiosa en el Arzobispado de Granada. De la ilustración al histo-
ricismo (1773-1868). Universidad de Granada. Departamento de Historia del Arte. (1988).
9. Guillén, E. La fortuna de un arquitecto pensionado en Roma: Domingo Lois Monteagudo.
Academia. Base de Datos CSIC. (1989).
10. Heyman, J. On shell solutions of masonry domes. International Journal of Solids and
Structures, vol. 3, pp 227. (1967).
11. Heyman, J. Equilibrium of shell structures. Oxford University Press. (1977).
12. Heyman, J. El esqueleto de piedra: mecánica de la arquitectura de fábrica. Instituto Juan de
Herrera, Madrid. (1999).
13. Mas Guindal, A. Mecánica de las estructuras antiguas. Ed. Munilla-Lería. (2011).
14. Poleni. Memorie istoriche della gran cupola del templo vaticano. Stamperia del Seminario.
Padua. (1748).
15. Saliger, R. Estática Aplicada. Editorial Labor S.A. (1932).
16. Suárez, J & Madero, C. Structural analysis of a large stone dome in Granada (Spain).
IB2MAC Brick and Block Masonry. Trends, Innovations and Challenges. Editors: C. Mo-
dena, F. da Porto & M.R. Valluzzi. Book of Abstracts. ISBN: 978-1-138-02999-6 pp.
1137-1144. eBook PDF ISBN: 978-1-4987-9592-0. IB2MAC 16th International Brick and
Block Masonry Conference. Padua, ITALY. (2016).
17. Suárez, J; Bravo, R; Alonso, E. Structural analysis of the church dome “Encarnación” in
Montefrío, Granada (Spain), the second largest stone dome in the world. ISBN: 978-1-
929-081-45-5. 12th North American Masonry Conference (12NAMC). University of Colo-
rado. DENVER. 2015.
18. Wolfe William S. Graphical analysis. A Text Book on Graphic Statics. McGraw-Hill Book
Company, Inc. New York. (1921).
19. Thunnissen, H.J.W. Bóvedas: su construcción y empleo en la arquitectura. "Gewelven.
Constructie en toepassing in de historische en hedendaagse bouwkunst. (1950)". Instituto
Juan de Herrera. ETS de Arquitectura de Madrid. (2012).