CIVIL NEWS

Boazii University, Department of Civil Engineering Rion-Antrion Bridge, Greece

he dream of connecting Peleponnese with Continental Greece, which are separated by the Corinth Gulf, dates back to end of the19th century, when it was first discussed in the Greek Parliament. The founder of the idea was Harilaos Trikoupis who was born in Messolonghi, one of the main cities on the North coast of the Corinth Gulf strait. However the construction of such a bridge was not feasible until the late 20th century. In 1992 the tender was launched, leading to the signing between the Hellenic Republic and the company Gefyra S.A. of the Concession Contract for the Design, Construction, Financing, Maintenance and Operation of the Rion-Antirion bridge. Nevertheless the contract could not be awarded until December 1997, when the full financing for the project was achieved. The following two years was a preparatory period (1998-1999) during which the main works consisted of completing the final design for the bridge and installing the construction site, with the main task of building the dry dock. The dream came true after a 5 year building period (2000-2004), at about a cost of 770 million Euros (630 million for the construction).

#10

November 2005

Rion-Antrion cable-stayed bridge spans a total distance of some 2500m over the Corinth Gulf. When compared with its two prominent counterparts, Tatara Bridge and Ting Kau Bridge, both located in Japan, having total length of 1480m and 1177m and maximum span of 890m and 475m respectively, the Rion-Antrion Bridge has three 560m spans and the closest piers are 286m away from the land. Even though the Tatara Bridge is the longest span cable-stayed bridge in the world, the Rion-Antrion Bridge outperforms all other bridges including the long familiar Golden Gate Bridge (1996m long) with its four pylons and a total deck length of 2252m. The main difficulties the engineers encountered include water depths up to 65m, absence of stiff seabed subsoil, strong seismic activity, and possible tectonic movements. The deep sea water entailed custom built marine equipment to cope with it. Geological

investigations revealed the absence of any rock formation up to 500m, rendering usage of only large shallow foundations possible, refuting other options such as piles, embedded caissons and soil substitution. Owing to strong seismic activity, when defining the specifications for the bridge, the Greek State has imposed stringent design seismic loading: a peak ground acceleration equal to 0.48g (g: gravitational acceleration) and a maximum spectral acceleration equal to 1.20g between 0.2 and 1.0 second, corresponding to a 2000 year earthquake. As an example, these specifications are more severe than the accelerations recorded on 17 August 1999 during the Izmit 7.4 Richter scale earthquake. The design against tectonic movements was at least as challenging as the others; the bridge was designed to accommodate 2m displacement in both horizontal and vertical directions. This goal is achieved through a continuous deck which is suspended for its total length. Four damping devices connect the deck to the top of each pier and limit the pendulum movement of the deck during an earthquake. The dynamic relative movement during the design seismic event is in the order of 1.30m while velocities may exceed 1 meter per second. This is expected to allow the movement of the deck and permit significant movement between the piers. On the other hand tilt is prohibited to less than 0.1%. Additionally the bridge was designed so that it could withstand the impact of a ship weighing 180,000 tons cruising at a speed of 16 knots. Under all these severe conditions, damage would be 1

acceptable in the bridge whenever it remains repairable and reusable. There is no doubt that experimental and numerical validation were done before construction started, including centrifuge tests for ultimate failure loads and cyclic behavior and finite element models for the foundation and the superstructure. One of the most intriguing parts of the bridge is the foundation design. Since the tilting of the piers was the main concern in case of seismic activity, the geotechnical engineers came up with a novel idea of using large shallow foundations (90m diameter) on an upper part reinforced soil. The upper soil layers are reinforced with inclu-

than a curve in soil that would cause the tilt of the pylons); additionally it bounds the forces in the superstructure. Another impressing feature of the bridge is its pylons. A typical one is 220 meters high from sea bottom to pylon head. The piers are lying in around 60 meters of water. Pylon bottoms ranges from 25 meters to 45 meters (for the two central pylons) above sea level, leaving a shipping clearance below the deck of 52 meters in the middle of the strait. Pylons rise by 115 meters to a maximum height of 160 meters above sea level. The upper pier shaft bears a reverse pyramid with a height of about 15 meters and a

sions, which are 2 meter diameter hollow steel pipes 25 to 30 meters long driven at a regular spacing of 7 meters. About 200 pipes are driven in at each pier location. Still the key point was the placement of a 3m thick gravel layer that separated the soil and the piers. Through this design philosophy both over-strength in reinforced soil and confinement of plastic hinges to the gravel bed could be achieved. In other words, the gravel bed is planned to act as a fuse and control the failure mode (restrict it to horizontal sliding rather 2

square base of 38-meter long side. Each pylon is composed of four reinforced concrete legs with a section of 4 by 4 meters, embedded in the pylon head to form a monolithic structure. The stay cables are in inclined arrangements, with their lower anchorage on deck sides and their upper anchorage in the 35-meter high pylon head. They are made of parallel galvanized strands. The thickest cable is formed of seventy 15mm strands. The deck is 27.2 meters wide with two traffic lanes plus safety lane and a pedestrian walkway

in each direction. It is a composite structure with a steel frame made of two longitudinal 2.2-meter high plate girders on each side and transverse plate girders spaced every 4 meters. The top slab is made of pre-cast concrete panels. Finally on each side, a monumental transition pier links together the deck of the cable-stayed bridge with the deck of the approach viaducts. The construction methods were very innovative and as outstanding as the bridge itself. The process can be divided into four crude steps. The dry dock: Caissons that form the base of the piers are built first in a dry dock close to sea. When the base construction of the outgoing caisson is complete, the dock is flooded and the caisson floated and towed out to sea. The second caisson then takes the place of the fist, and construction can begin on a third. The wet dock: After being towed out to sea some 500m from the dry dock, caissons are anchored and construction of the bridge can continue. The sea bed: The soil preparation is carried out at the same time. A tension leg platform carrying a large crane is installed at the location of each pier. Then, the pipes are lowered one by one to the seabed and driven into the ground. Finally, a layer of gravel provides a perfectly flat surface for the positioning of the pier. The final positioning: Once the pier is in place, construction of the pylon can start. It takes a year to raise each pylon. Construction of the deck will be carried out by cantilever technique, assembling deck segments pre-cast on land. The Rion-Antrion Bridge is a good indication of the limits of construction engineering as well as the necessity of such structures in the contemporary world. It not only reduced the average crossing time from 45 min. to 5min. but also made the transportation possible under all weather conditions. The bridge is expected to both facilitate the communication between Greece and Italy hence Western Europe through harbors of Patras and Igoumenitsa and boost local development by providing a link between Patras and the more rural North Western Greece. Bora Gentrk

I Was Stiff and Cold, I Was a Bridge... F.Kafka

ankind faced with many problems and tried to struggle with them since the beginning. Sheltering and protection needs were solved with caves where the daily life mostly took place. The early man also had some diffuculties outside the cave. He crossed small trenches and valleys by using the trunks of lying trees, and the history got acquainted with a new concept: the bridge. Through the history, bridges evolved like humanbeings but they have no history in the proper chronological sense, because they have never been subjected to a linear process paralel to that of the other histories that might be recounted. Their evolution has been consequent on the development of systems of mobility. A series of specific moments in the history such as the centuries of Roman dominance, the Industrial Revolution or the technocratic development of the period after Second World War, combined with the refinement of new construction tecnologies, intensified reflection on the concept of the bridge. Thus the bridges relations with power, its urban potential and the very concept of beauty are all conditioned by these situations in an almost disciplinary manner. The word Bridge The short text of Franz Kafka, The Bridge takes the form of a monologue delivered by a bridge: I was stiff and cold, I was a bridge; I stretched out over a precipice. The tips of my toes on one side, my hands on the other; I clung desperately to the slippery clay. On either side flapped the skirts of my coat. In the depths below roared the icy torrent, full of trout. In Kafkas story, the identification of the bridge and the traveller, and by extension, of the bridge and the road, pursued to its ultimate conclusion, in effect explores the most habitual conception of the bridge, that of relating it to the public way of which it is the continuation. The bridge is part of the road to the extent that it serves to enable it to continue on its course, spanning the obstacles in its way. The word bridge can also be found in religions. The idea of the bridge is associated with the connection

between heaven and earth in the cultures of Central Europe. In contrast, in Islamic culture the bridge is regarded not as part of the road , as it is in many other cultures, or as an element of transfer or migration, as it was by the Germanic cultures, but as a place in its own right. The bridge that spans the abyss of Hell, connecting earthly life with Paradise is the place where we will be judged when we die. Legends, literature, religion etc. ; the concept Bridge shows its power and influence in every part of life. Related to its philosophy, there are some unique and excellent masterpieces in the world such as the Old Bridge (Stari Most) of Mostar. The Old Bridge of Mostar STARI MOST

From the mid 15th until the end of the 19th century Bosnia-Herzegovina was a part of the Ottoman State. Mosques, churches and synagogues existed side by side, signifying that in Bosnia Catholic Croatians, Eastern Orthodox Serbs, Sephardic Jews lived together with the Muslims for more than four

settlement around a simple wooden bridge, and it received its name from its keepers (Mostar in Bosnian language means bridge keeper). The reign of Suleyman the Magnificent was a time of great expansion and prosperity for the Ottoman State. At that time the town was growing fast; it needed a new and more solid bridge, and at the request of the inhabitants of Mostar, Sultan Suleyman ordered its costruction. According to an inscription in Ottoman, situated on the bridge before its recent destruction, it was finished in the year 974 of the Hidjra, which is between 19 July 1566 and 7 July 1567. The date of the completion was also given on an inscription of six half verses in Turkish of which the last line contained the date in the form of a chronogram: "Kudret Kemeri" (Arch of Power), in which each letter contains a numerical value, the sum of which gives 974. This inscription is lost but its content is preserved in the Gazi Husrev Bey Library in Sarajevo. The architect of the Old Bridge of Mostar (Stari Most) was Mimar Hayreddin who was the disciple of the master builder Koca Mimar Sinan. The Old Bridge of Mostar consisted of one stone arch with a single span and a curvature close to a lowered centre half-circle, (with some

Albert Kahn Musuem Mostar, 1912 [1] centuries. The city of Mostar is a significant example of the multicultural character of Bosnia-Herzegovina. When the Ottomans took the town of Mostar in 1468, it was a small peculiarities at the impost level and at the key stone). It was characterised by very slender and elegant shapes: its profile and its skyline were so thin and so high over the river waters that it was 3

hard to believe that such a structure could be worked out of huge stone blocks. The bridge was built in oolite limestone (known in Bosnia as tenelija) which was of a light tone colour, bright and changing during daytime depending on the sun. Its sides were cut so smoothly that there was no need for any adhesive material to hold them together. Mimar Hayreddin respected the choice of location made by whoever constructed the wooden bridge because it allowed for a relatively short span over the river and the river banks were not too high. He made the span of the bridge so that it rested on the banks ridges. To account for the midsummer low water level, the abutments were raised to 6.53 m., and from there he started his arch. The master builder raised an arch using geometry which until then was unknown in bridge construction. He didnt use a broken Ottoman (stilted) arch, nor the semicircular arch elsewhere. Geometrically it was nearer to an ellipse or oval, for the span for a very brave arch of 28.70 m. There is a 13 cm difference in height from one abutment to another. The result was an incredibly elegant and delicate vaulted structure. The thickness of the vault, measured at the crown, was only 77 cm; the width was 397 cm. The structure was fragile, so the master builder took care not to overload it with a single unnecessary stone. He avoided having to fill in the core of the bridge with rubble by placing the spandrel walls of the bridge to the 80 cm from each side. He introduced one middle rib by using three supporting elements to bridge the two cavities with a refined feeling for the even distribution of the load. To illustrate the delicate structural sensitivity of the alleviating cavities, in the cross-section through the bridge he introduced an asymmetric arrangement that shows that the upstream cavity is 20 cm wider than the other one. Along the right bank of the river, adjacent to the two vertical cavities there is a third, horizontal one that exists only on one side. These cavities were discovered during conservation work after the Second World War. The source of the bridges stability was not known until then. A 15 cm high cornice, parallel to the arch, accented the transition of the face arch to the facing walls on the 4

New Stari Most, 2005 [2] facade. The cornice was molded and convex to the face arch for 15 cm. In the same level to the outer plane of the cornice were the face walls, made of large tenelija voussoirs with explicitly horizontal layers, which were partially extended into the wing walls of the bridge. The bridge deck was emphasized on the facade by an end cornice, which was molded in the same manner as the cornice above arch, but somewhat thicker. This cornice was convex to the face wall for 14 cm. The bridge deck was steep from the middle towards and the upper side to the face wall. The bridge fence was oddly slanted outwardly on its upper side. The deck was paved with evenly cut stones made from the tough limestone, with perpendicular thresholds, which aided walking up an down the steep deck because they steadied the foot and particularly the horseshoe, and prevented them from slipping. Underneath the pavement, there were red clay mortar, limestone rubble and sand mortar layers. The bridge was a powerful stimulus to the growth of the city. The bazaar was enlarged and the city fortification system was expanded. Due to the development, many people from different countries started to visit the city and they fallen in love with the beauty and elegance of the Stari Most. According to the Katib elebi: Suleymans bridge has a single arch and is a great work of art that will amaze all the masters of the world. An Austrian traveler named Robert Michel wrote: If I have to single out the most beatiful bridge in the world, I would probably choose the Old Bridge in Mostar. I can say that no other manmade structure had produced such a strong impression on me as this bridge. Amir Pasi defines the bridge and its surroundings in his research. ... The imposing arch of the bridge with the surrounding buildings combined with gray on gray looked like stalagmites, and made a harmonic entity of the untamed scenery of the Neretva River and the rocky lanscape that resembled a huge rock with crystals grown on top. There man

The Bazaar near the Bridge in Mostar, 2005 [2] banks. Its highest point was 20.34 m above the river level measured during summer season. The bridge deck itself was bordered on both sides by a stone fence made of slabs that are 23-25 cm thick and 94.50 cm high. It was secured in the end cornice in the same level with the face walls, so the end cornice was convex both on the bottom

The Construction of the New Bridge, Jan. 2003 [1] carved a part of himself, his character and his grace... The Bridge was one of the most important crossing points in its region. After it served people about 400 years, a restoration period began in 1955 and continued till 1991. There had been some studies of conservation of the bridges foundations and the originality of the whole structure. Then, in 1991, the most monstrous event happened in the modern history. After the disintegration of the former Yugoslavia began, thousands of innocent people were killed or exiled in Bosnia and their five-centuries-old cultural heritage reduced to ashes. On November 9, 1993, the Old Bridge in Mostar , that had seen so many wars, survived so many years, was shot by Bosnian Croat artillery in an attack condemned globally as an act of vandalism, and, in a few hours, a masterpiece of the past times, an example of the ancient constructive technique and an element of regional identity was definitely cancelled. Damage due to this destruction is invaluable, either for the town of Mostar, either for the whole cultural world. The Stari Most had contained the meaning and the spirit of all Bosnia-Herzegovina: the essence of the bridge was meeting and joining together; the country, like the bridge, could be divided only by destroying it. Pasi wrote his feelings that: ... The bridge, in all its beauty and grace, was built to outlive us; it was an attempt to grasp eternity. Because it was the product of both individual creativity and collectice experience, it transcended our individual destiny. A dead man is one of us; the bridge is all of us forever... In the post-war period, a reconstruction project of the monumental complex of the Old Bridge of Mostar, of the Towers, and of the surrounding buildings started with the supervision of UNESCO and with funds managed by the World Bank, but donated by different countries, (among which Italy, France and Turkey). The reconstruction of the bridge has finished in July,2004 after a year and cost $12.5 million. The new bridge is an exact replica of the old one, built with marble stones taken from the same nearby quarry. Workers carved each stone by hand using traditional tools and methods based on archeological research from the old bridge's ruins. Croats and Muslims worked together in the project. I had a chance to see this new Old Bridge while I was working as a trainee at University of Zagreb,Croatia. The place of the bridge over Neretva river is wonderful with its surroundings. Mosques, churches and synagogues can be seen together, side by side in this small town. The beauty of the simplicity of nature is completed with the elegance and simplicity of the bridges architecture. When the sun shines on the bridge, the view looks like a heaven. Although this beauty, you may feel a little bit upset. It is sure that the former bridge was characterised by small irregularities, variations and by ordinary constructive imperfections. These small variations were precious and were part of the beauty of the monument. Nobody can find these details in the replica. After the war ended, Muslims and Croats started to live in different sides of the Neretva River. But the important point is that the reconstructed Old Bridge and Old City of Mostar is a symbol of reconciliation, international cooperation and of the coexistence of diverse cultural, ethnic and religious communities that suits the essence of the bridge: Meeting and joining together. Functionality and economy are gaining importance in todays world. It effects human relationships, social life and even architecture as the part of the culture. We are getting stiff and cold as in Kafkas short text but the ancient architectural examples like the Stari Most that has meaning, elegance, intelligence and perfection in its details, encourage us and light the way for future of the architecture. Tolga TUTAR REFERENCES [1] www.gen-eng.florence.it [2] photo by Tolga Tutar [3] Karaesmen, Erhan. Civil News issue 9, May 2005. [4] Roig, Joan Nuevos Puentes [5] Pasic, Amir. "The Old Bridge(Stari Most) in Mostar"

The Hidden Danger In The Wet

t was on 2, August, 2005 when Toronto was subjected to a horrifying thunderstorm in the afternoon. Towering cumulonimbus clouds with cloud to cloud lightning brought about a heavy rain that was incompatible with a typical hot and sunny summer afternoon. Air France flight AF358, an A340 aircraft, which had departed from Paris at 13:32 local time, was approaching TorontoPearson International Airport with heavy thunderstorms and rain. Visibility had already diminished below 4 miles and the magnitude of the cross wind had risen above the tolerable limits. Despite the terrible weather conditions, the aircraft touched down on the runway 24L that was 2743-meter long without any significant problem at about 16:00. Everything looked all right and sound ed good until th e passengers, all of a sudden, heard the engines backing up. The pilot had realized that the plane would not be able to stop before the end of the runway and would overrun. The A340 aircraft skidded off the runway and eventually, it plunged into a ravine and stopped. Roel Bramer, who was seated in the aircraft's last row, said, The plane went up and down like a roller coaster after it touched the runway and was already burning when it came to a stop. The plane then burst into flames but all of the people on board, 297 passengers and 12 crew members, were evacuated safely. A variety of causes, ranging from the intolerable cross wind to the heavy thunderstorm, brought about this first crash of A340 since the craft had been introduced by manufacturer Airbus more than a decade ago. Moreover, some witnesses said that lightning may have struck the plane while it was landing. But it was neither the unfavorable cross wind nor the lightning that caused the aircraft to skid off the runway. It was the aquaplaning phenomenon that gave rise to the crash since a thin film of water had accumulated on the runway on account of the heavy rain. Aquaplaning, or referred to as hydroplaning in America, takes place when a combination of vehicle speed, depth of water on the pavement, tire wear and tire inflation causes the tires to lose traction. In rainy weather, if a vehicles tires have not been worn and 6

properly inflated, they cut through the water film and they move the water out of the way in order for the tire to stay in contact with the pavement. But at higher speeds, usually faster than 60 km/hr, especially under the conditions such that the tires are underinflated or the water film on the pavement is too deep, the tires cannot push the water out of the way so water passes under the tires and then the tires start riding on a cushion of water. In other words, the vehicle starts gliding forward uncontrollably on top of a thin film of water between the tires and the pavement, like a water skier on lake, which may result in complete loss of traction. In such a case, it feels all of a sudden as if the vehicle has its own mind and it is possessed by something else. The frictional force that acts on the tires rapidly decreases and there becomes no adequate frictional force that enables the tires to roll without slipping. If the driver feels that his vehicle starts aquaplaning, he should never attempt to apply the brakes suddenly or turn the steering wheel, which can throw the vehicle into a skid. Instead, he should hold the wheel firmly and should not steer in any other direction. Easing his foot off the gas enables the vehicle to slow down and the steering to return to normal conditions. Moreover, if the vehicle has anti-lock brakes, then the driver should brake normally so that when required, the vehicle's computer will mimic a pumping action. On a smooth pavement with polished surface in moderate rain, if a car is going at 90 km/hr, each tire has to displace about 4 liters of water every second from beneath a contact patch that is not bigger than a size 40 shoe. Each gripping element of the tread touches the ground for only 1/150th of

a second, during which it has to displace the bulk of the water, press through the remaining thin film, and then begin to grip the road surface. Consequently, it can be assumed that any speed in excess of 90 km/h is fast enough to bring about aquaplaning regardless of other factors. However, this is not to state that a vehicle going at 80 km/h is absolutely safe because the exact point at which transition to aquaplaning occurs depends on various variables such as tire size, tire tread pattern, water depth, vehicle weight and road surface type, etc For instance, there are certain tread patterns that channel water more effectively or the wider the contact patch relative to its length, the higher the required speed giving rise to aquaplaning. Or take the case of the vehicle weight, for example. The lighter the vehicle is, the more likely it is to aquaplane. Besides, a road surface of non-grooved asphalt is more prone to aquaplaning than a road surface of grooved asphalt or grooved concrete. Thus, it is the responsibility of tire manufacturers, civil engineers and the drivers themselves to avert aquaplaning phenomenon, which may lead to very severe highway accidents. However, among those, it is the civil engineers that can take the most effective safety measures in order to eliminate the risk of aquaplaning. In the first place, taking the most effectual precautions against the aquaplaning phenomenon begins at the highway route layout process. The civil engineer whose responsibility is to establish the optimal highway route for a particular highway design project has to avoid passing the highway route from deep valleys. Road drainage is thoroughly troublesome in deep valleys where water accumulates in case of heavy thunderstorms, so averting an overwhelmed pavement in such zones entails sophisticated and expensive drainage techniques, which raise highway maintenance cost significantly. If the highway route has to be passed from very flat land, then the highway elevation should be set a few meters higher than the natural ground surface to facilitate drainage despite the fact that such a design scheme adds to the embankment requirement and thus necessitates additional amount of earthwork. Thereby, although the flat land may

become inundated in case of a heavy rain, the highway surface will not undergo flood and water will not accumulate on the pavement surface. In the highway geometric design process, minimum superelevation rate as well as minimum longitudinal grade should be determined so as to fulfill rapid rate of road drainage. Moreover, zones with relatively high groundwater table should be avoided and the grade line of the road should always pass above the groundwater table, taking the seasonal variation of the groundwater level into account as well. Briefly, it is only through proper road drainage that the risk of aquaplaning can be totally eliminated. Next, macrotexture of road and airport pavements is a crucial factor that can substantially reduce the risk of aquaplaning. Macrostructure is relevant to the formation of thicker and clearly noticeable films of water, i.e. deeper than 0.1 mm, on pavement surfaces. Pavement engineers should design road and airport pavements in such a way that the surface is rough enough with sufficient holes and grooves. Thereby, water can be easily moved out of the way by the tire at low to medium speeds, and then the tire maintains contact with the pavement surface. On the contrary, poor macrotexture ends up with a smooth surface, and in that case, the tire can easily ride up onto the water film and thus aquaplanes. Concrete pavements inherently have poor macrotexture, so grooving has to be applied extensively on concrete roads and runways in order to provide them with adequate macrotexture. On the other hand, grooving may not be applied to bituminous pavements with the exception of flexible runways for large commercial airplanes such as 747, 777, A330 or A340 since flexible pavement surfaces often have fair macrotexture. But no matter what type of a pavement has been constructed, grooving has to be performed occasionally as a maintenance requirement because macrostructure wears out and thus; it is gradually lost with time. Besides, in some cases, porous asphalt, which not only has a satisfactory macrostructure but also can have a coefficient of permeability as high as 200 m/day that facilitates rapid drainage, can be preferred especially in regions where sudden and

heavy showers frequently take place. Stone matrix asphalt, although relatively impervious, also provides fair macrostructure that hinders the formation of a water film on the pavement surface. In the next place, friction is another major factor that can play a significant role in minimizing the risk of aquaplaning. In general, adequate friction is associated with good microstructure of pavement surface. The microtexture is relevant for very thin films of water, usually thinner than 0.1 mm, so proper microtexture can avert the formation of very thin water films that are not apparently visible to drivers and thus, may not be easily noticed by drivers, who may continue to run at high speed. In order to ensure satisfactory microstructure, road friction tests have to be conducted separately for roads and runways. As far as runways are concerned, that some full scale friction testing machines are capable of operating at relatively low speeds obstructs the accurate measurement of friction and microstructure for runways. Take the case of the old DCA MuMeters a kind of friction testing machine in Australia, for instance. They were used for evaluating the microstructure and the friction for speeds below 100 km/h so the friction and the microstructure for an airplane that is about to take off or that has just landed cannot be evaluated since such an airplane goes much faster than 100 km/h. So civil engineers should develop more precise methods for measuring high speed coefficient of friction as well as low speed coefficient of friction of airport runways. Furthermore, in highway design, cobble stones should not be preferred since they have poor friction on account of the limited tire-surfacing contact they provide with their inadequate microtexture. In addition, cobble stones are not only too smooth but they are often polished by the traffic, which makes them even more slippery. In conclusion, although tire manufacturers can effectively reduce the risk of aquaplaning to a certain extent, it is indeed civil engineers that can most effectually deal with the peril of aquaplaning in highways and runways. Thus, adhering to an appropriate design scheme in every stage, ranging from route layout and

Theatres from Ancient Times

magine an ancient city, and what probably comes to your mind at first would be an open air theatre, even if you may not have any knowledge about the city. This little game shows us how theatres had an important role in the social life of ancient civilizations. These theatres w e n t t h r o u g h m an y c h an g e s throughout the history. For instance, early theatres had only a few hundreds of seats, whereas the one in Pergamon, which belongs to the Hellenistic period, has thousands. Theatres can have diverse characteristics for every culture, and can change in accordance with the needs of that time. When we look over the history of the theatres, the most significant differences can be observed especially between two civilizations Greeks and Romans.

Pergamon Theatre To start with, the cavea, which is an amphitheatre built on a hill slope, is common in a typical Greek theatre. It has a seat of honour near the orchestra. There are walkways in the cavea in line with the orchestra, which is called diazoma. The other parts of the theatre are the scene, proskene and the orchestra. Acting is done on the scene. However, the earlier theatres do not have a permanent scene. Proskene is the front part of the scene. In the early times, there are circle orchestras, but the later ones are in the form of semi circle, especially from Hellenistic Period on. Pergamon theatre, which was constructed in the third century B.C., is an important Hellenistic theatre. It has all the basic characteristics defined above. Because of the landscape, the theatron can not be larger than semicircle as all the Hellenistic theatres, and it was the steepest theatre for that time. Because it has no permanent stage, the holes in the floor inform us about the configuration of the stage and its 7

surroundings. Two holes at the corners explain the two entrances called as paradoi. In addition, four holes in the middle are the foundations of the wooden columns of the stage. The difference between the periods can be seen in Pergamon, as well. The first constructed part of Pergamon has a seating capacity of 3,500 people. The Romans enlarged the capacity to an amazing 30,000 seats. For Roman times, one of the most significant innovations was that the theatres were usually built on arches and vaults. A tall faade of the stage, which was built for cutting the theatre from the outside world, is called skaene frons. Skaene frons, that are screening the noises, are one of the basic characteristics of Roman theatre. Aspendos theatre is a typical example of the Roman theatre. It is entirely built on barrel-vaulted substructures. It also rests on the hillside; however this comes from the Greek tradition. It has a colonnaded arcade at the top of the cavea. It has side entrances which are called paradoi. The two entrances are parallel to the auditorium in Roman fashion, and they are roofed, which is a Roman characteristic as well. The stage building has skaene frons that is in very good condition, and isolating the theatre from the outside world. The five doors are giving entrance to the proscenium, where the performances take place. In addition to the theatres used for performances, the Romans have

amphitheatres for gladiatorial games and games with animals. The Colosseum, that is Amphitheatrum Flavium, is a famous example of amphitheatres. Recognizing the differences between the theatres from an essay is a difficult way of learning. For the interested reader I will introduce a web link The Theatre Department of Whitman College carried out a project called Historic Theatre Tour Project. Their website has sections for the historical

background, characteristic properties, 3-D panoramas and plans of the theatres. For a better comprehension of Evolution of the Hellenistic Theatre, they provide a visual tool. The page also includes a dictionary of Greek and Roman Theatre Glossary which may help the reader to understand the terms used in this essay. Emre KALAYCI References http://www.andreas-praefcke.de/ carthalia/index.html http://www.whitman.edu/theatre/ theatretour/

Sahibi: Boazii niversitesi naat Mhendislii Blm adna Prof. Dr. Erol Gler Sorumlu Mdr: Yard. Do. Dr. Hilmi Lu A plan showing the basic characteristics of the Roman style Contributors: Kvan A. Avrenli, Bora Gentrk, Emre Kalayc, Hilmi Lu, Tolga Tutar. 8