See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/273060144

Application of Tensegrity Principles on Tensile-Textile Constructions:

Formfinding and Analysis.

Article · January 2011

CITATION READS

1 701

1 author:

Diana Peña
Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya
24 PUBLICATIONS 29 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

New solar control tensed devices for workshops about sustainable school architecture View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Diana Peña on 03 March 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal
Journal
VOL. 52 (2011) No. 2 contents
n. 168 June

Technical Papers
Application of Tensegrity to Tensile-Textile Constructions: Formfinding and 67
Structural Analysis
D.M. Peña, I. Llorens, R. Sastre, D. Crespo and J. Martínez

Deployable Cable-Chain Structures: Morphology, Structural Response and 83

Robustness Study
Y. Li, K.K. Vu and J.Y.R. Liew

Reliability and Sensitivity Evaluation of Nonlinear Space Steel Structures 97

H-j Li, C-g Liu, F. Jiao and G-f Lin

2D-Deployable Flat-Panel Structure 109

M. Takatsuka and H. Ohmori

Conversion of Imperfection-Sensitive Elastic Structures into Imperfection- 121

Insensitive Ones by Adding Tensile Members
X. Jia and H.A. Mang

COVER: Figure from paper by Peña, Llorens, Sastre, Crespo and Martínez

IASS Secretariat: CEDEX-Laboratorio Central de Estructuras y Materiales

Alfonso XII, 3; 28014 Madrid, Spain
Tel: 34 91 3357409; Fax: 34 91 3357422; [email protected]; http://www.iass-structures.org

Printed by SODEGRAF ISSN:1028-365X Depósito legal: M. 1444-1960

 JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR SHELL AND SPATIAL STRUCTURES: J. IASS

APPLICATION OF TENSEGRITY TO TENSILE-TEXTILE

CONSTRUCTIONS: FORMFINDING AND STRUCTURAL
ANALYSIS

Diana Maritza PEÑA1*, Ignasi LLORENS2, Ramón SASTRE3, Daniel CRESPO4, Joshua MARTÍNEZ5
1*
Doctorate Student. Department of Architectural Technology I. Technical University of Catalunya.
C/Perea 1-3 11º 2ª CP. 08035, Barcelona-Spain, [email protected],
2
Prof. UPC [email protected], 3Prof. UPC [email protected], 4Prof. UPC [email protected], 5Prof. UPC
[email protected]

Editor’s Note: Manuscript submitted 19 October 2009; revisions received 30 July 2010 and 4 January 2011;
accepted 27 February. This paper is open for written discussion, which should be submitted to the IASS Secretariat no
later than December 2011.

ABSTRACT

This paper applies tensegrity to create an architectural structure such as those that could be used for sports
arenas or other buildings requiring large, open spaces. This proposal generates an external tensegrity ring with
a central dome, free of any interior support, by formfinding a diamond-shaped membrane with discontinuous
struts in a double layer structure that finds its equilibrium through the pretension of the membrane. The tendons
that are used in traditional tensegrity structures are replaced by membranes and this proposal is the main
contribution of this work. Structural equilibrium was analyzed using the WinTess software and wind-tunnel
testing was used to determine the Cp-pressure coefficient.

Keywords: Tensegrity unit, tensegrity ring, formfinding, continuous membrane pattern, diamond-shaped
membrane pattern, pretension, wind tunnel, pressure coefficient.

1. INTRODUCTION Snelson (USA-1948). Emmerich reported that the

first proto-tensegrity system, called
Tensegrity geometry is defined by the equilibrium "Gleichgewichtkonstruktion", was created by Karl
of tensile and compressive forces and is Ioganson (Russia-1920). In 1976, Anthony Pugh
characterized by having discontinuous of the University of California did a classification
compression bars, which remain in equilibrium by of the diverse existing typology [2]. He described
tensed cables. The balance is achieved because all three models, or basic patterns, with which the
the compression and tension forces are perfectly tensegrity structures can be constructed: a
distributed, that is to say they work jointly, where diamond pattern, a zigzag pattern, and a circuit
the structural form is guaranteed because the final pattern. This classification originates from the
system is closed and auto-balanced, as Fuller [1] relative position of the bars amongst themselves
said “Islands of compression in an ocean of and the ends of the tendons [3].
tensions”.
The current research (Fig.1) is built on Anthony
Tensegrity is a developing and relatively new Pugh's classification of the diamond pattern and
system (less than 50 years old). Three people have the position of the bars aligned in a single layer or
been considered the inventors of tensegrity: a double layer, and proposes models using a
Richard Buckminster Fuller (USA-1962), David continuous membrane and a diamond pattern.
Georges Emmerich (France-1964) and Kenneth D.

67
 Vol. 52 (2011) No. 2 June n. 168

Figure 1. A comparison of the work of Anthony Pugh and that proposed by the author.

2. FORMFINDING

The tensegrity geometric construction of this

research is based on:

• The concept of a basic module or tensegrity In the below pictures (Fig. 2 and Fig.3) we can
unit built from polygons and polyhedrons observe different scale model examples in
(prisms and anti-prisms) as well as Platonic tensegrity with cables and membranes constructed
and Archimedean solids. [4] from a variety of materials, that use these
• The substitution of geometric components principles of geometry.
(such as edges and vertices) with bars, cables,
joints, and membrane faces. After they were assembled, we chose some of the
• Forming more complex systems from groups models to define a classification and to do the
and variations of the basic module (tensegrity structural analysis:
unit).

68
 JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR SHELL AND SPATIAL STRUCTURES: J. IASS

Figure 2. Examples of sixty scale models in tensegrity. Models developed using an intuitive and experimental method based
on the geometry.

Figure 3. Examples of scale models in different materials. A spandex membrane was chosen as the material to construct the
scale models (1:100).

69
 Vol. 52 (2011) No. 2 June n. 168

3. CLASSIFICATION

Model types – Membrane patterns

a. Diamond-membrane pattern pieces and struts in a single layer

A A

B B

Figure 4. A tensegrity unit with a diamond-shaped pattern (an anti-prism of 4 struts) – scale model 1:100

The process is generated by cutting textile 4. The bars are tied to the adjacent pattern piece
membranes into rhombus or diamond shaped on one of its vertexes, and so on. The tied up units
patterns (rhombus= major axis 17 cm, minor axis can be closed by joining the first bar and the last
12 cm) for the basic anti-prism unit of four bars membrane pattern. The final anti-prism form has
(L=22 cm), which are then arranged in an oblique four parabolic surfaces constructed from a flat
direction or diagonal position. The bars are joined rhombus. The initial position of the bars in this
to the end points of the membrane as shown in Fig case is a single layer.
b. Continuous-membrane pattern piece with struts in a single layer

A A

B B

Figure 5. A tensegrity unit formed from a continuous membrane (an anti-prism with 4 struts) – scale model 1:100

One can depart from the previously described of the membrane. The initial location of the bars
process and use a continuous, single-piece, was determined by an orthogonal single mesh (3.5
rectangular-shaped membrane (15 cm x 3.75 cm) cm x 3.5 cm). The equilibrium of this unit
to find the form. The bars (L=10 cm) arranged in tensegrity anti-prism with four bars and single-
a single layer and joined to the end points of the piece membrane is achieved through the tension
membrane as shown in Fig 5. The system is then of the membrane. The final form is a continuum
closed by joining the first bar and the last corner of four paraboloids.

70
 JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR SHELL AND SPATIAL STRUCTURES: J. IASS

c. Continuous-membrane pattern piece with twenty struts in a double layer

A A

B B

C C

Figure 6. A tensegrity ring with a continuous membrane and 20 struts - scale model 1:100

In this tensegrity ring, formfinding is generated by joining the first bars and the last corners of the
means of a single-piece membrane (7.00 cm x membrane. The initial location of the bars was
36.75 cm), which has an initial rectangular shape. determined by an orthogonal double mesh (3.5 cm
For this model of twenty bars (L=10 cm) in a x 3.5 cm), whose distance was defined by the
double layer, the bars are arranged in an oblique elasticity of the membrane relative to the length of
direction or diagonal position, in an alternating the diagonal bar. The final form is a continuum of
pattern and are joined to the end points of the ten upper paraboloids and ten lower paraboloids
membrane like shown in Fig. 6, and resemble the below.
veins of a leaf. The system is then closed by

d. Diamond-membrane pattern pieces with mesh and twenty struts in a double layer

A A

B B

C C

Figure 7. Photos showing the components and final structure as well as a diagram of the tensegrity-ring construction
method – scale model 1:100

71
 Vol. 52 (2011) No. 2 June n. 168

The ring structure is made up of a continuum when the last two bars are put into place.
of ten upper-level paraboloids and ten lower-
level paraboloids with a diameter of 40 cm. A dome is created by combining the above ring
Formfinding for the ring structure is generated structure with a “roof” consisting of one
by means of a diamond-shaped membrane central mast (L=9 cm) and ten minor masts
pattern pieces (rhombus = major axis 11.5 cm, (L=6.5 cm) placed in a circular form held in
minor axis 4 cm) formed by two layers of place by the tension of the membrane itself.
twenty bars (L=20 cm), which are arranged The membrane balances the system and joins
either in an oblique or a diagonal position. The the dome with the tensegrity ring. The final
bars are connected to the end points of the structure is a dome free of any internal
membrane as shown in Fig 1 and then to the supports.
adjacent membrane piece at the corresponding
end point. If one compares the model in Fig. 7 with the
continuous membrane in Fig. 6 it can be
This procedure is repeated for all adjacent observed that, though they have the same
membrane pieces, while at the same time, the number of bars, the diameter of model in Fig. 7
upper section is interlaced with the lower is larger (approximately double) and this is
section creating one continuous ring structure why the diamond-pattern model was ultimately
selected for structural analysis.

Figure 8. Technical and geometric drawings of the structure. The tensegrity ring and central dome are shown with
the membrane and external support cables.

The final structure can be scaled as needed. To larger. A larger prototype was assembled using
make a larger diameter, there are two options. 20 struts (L=50 cm) in a double layer resulting
First, the quantity of bars would have to be in an overall diameter of 100 cm (Fig. 9). The
increased proportionally to the elasticity of the ratio of length of the bars to the overall
membrane used. Second, if the length of the diameter is 1:2.
bars is increased, the ring diameter will be

72
 JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR SHELL AND SPATIAL STRUCTURES: J. IASS

Figure 9. Tensegrity dome with a diameter of 100 cm – scale model 1:100

4. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

Tensegrity structures are characterized by: [5] • That the maximum reaction in the
• Discontinuous elements that work under foundation nodes is 24 tons.
compression • That, during external snow loads of 50
• Pre-stressed structural membrane kg/m, a maximum (vertical) displacement
• Auto-balanced structure of 60 cm is found in the minor dome masts
(the minor masts are shown in black in the
The proposed structure was first tested via drawings in Fig. 8) and the maximum
WinTess software [6]. Testing demonstrated reaction in the foundation nodes is 22 tons.
the following: • That the large displacements must be
countered by the use of external tubes and
• It allowed the structural elements cables if the structure is to be built in the
(membrane, tubes, and cables) to be real world.
analyzed and optimized for dimensional • The exterior tubes are placed surrounding
stability. the ring so that they continue in the
• That the structure is closed, in equilibrium direction of the forces coming from the top
(all the compression and tension forces are membrane dome. The pretensioned cables
perfectly distributed via a 650 kg/m increase the stiffness of the structure and
pretension of the membrane), and able to contribute to support and balancing of the
support its own weight. system.
• That, during extreme external wind • In some analyses, distortions and/or
conditions of 170 km/h, the maximum irregularities were used to see if the
inward (horizontal) displacement of the bar structure remained balanced. In our case,
free nodes is 95 cm, which was decreased we tested the irregularities and they had no
to 17 cm after being reinforced. (The bar impact on the structural balance. In
free nodes are located on the side of the addition, the structure is not symmetrical
structure between the upper and lower to wind; the tensegrity of the position of
levels of the tensegrity ring. They are not the bars has a twisting motion like a
directly connected to the upper dome or to windmill, and therefore, the reactions are
the foundation nodes. The bars of the different.
tensegrity ring are shown in blue and red
in Fig 8).

73
 Vol. 52 (2011) No. 2 June n. 168

Figure 10. Structural analysis using WinTess software. Note that the computer model is shown with both the
membrane and cables, which prevent the structure from moving in the real world. The structure remains balanced
when wind of up-to 170 km/h is applied. (diameter 40 m - scale model 1:1)

Structural characteristics of the model • Ring tubes: L=20 m -  400-10_S235 -

elements [7]: Section 122,522 cm2 - Elasticity
modulus 2.100 t/cm2 = 210 kN/mm2 -
• Membrane: Ferrari Fluotop T2 1202 – Density 7,85 t/m3 = 78,5 kN/m3
Pre-stress 1% = 32.5 daN/5cm = 650 • Dome central mast: L=9 m -  110-
kg/m Resistance Rk = 560/560 daN/5cm = 5_S235 - Section 16,493 cm2 - Elasticity
11200,0 kg/m - Safety factor (5) = Rd = modulus 2.100 t/cm2 = 210 kN/mm2 -
Rk / 5 = 112 daN/5cm = 2240 kg/m Density 7,85 t/m3 = 78,5 kN/m3
• Border cables (Boltrope): 1x91 (36mm)
Inox  36 - Section 753 mm2 - Elasticity • Dome minor masts: L=6,5 m -  90-
modulus 1.380 t/cm2 = 138 kN/mm2 - Q= 4_S235 - Section 10,807 cm2 - Elasticity
87,21 t = 872,1 kN modulus 2.100 t/cm2 = 210 kN/mm2 -
Density 7,85 t/m3 = 78,5 kN/m3
• External cables (Guyrope): WS-2
(36mm) Galv  36 - Section 855 mm2 - • External tubes: L= 8 m -  250-8_S235 -
Elasticity modulus 1.635 t/cm2 = 163,5 Section 60,821 cm2 - Elasticity modulus
kN/mm2 - Q= 125,46 t = 1.254,6 kN 2.100 t/cm2 = 210 kN/mm2 - Density 7,85
t/m3 = 78,5 kN/m3

74
 JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR SHELL AND SPATIAL STRUCTURES: J. IASS

Table 1. Structure general data

Number of nodes 447
Number of bars 1296
Number of tubes 41
Number of elements 709
Number of cables 305
Covered surface 1177 m²
Volume (between membrane and plane Z=0) 15818 m³
Membrane surface 2959 m²
Membrane elongation modulus 65 T/m
Weight of the bars 53807 kg
Weight of the membrane 3848 kg
Total weight of the structure 57655 kg
Weight of the structure per m² 49 kg/ m²

5. WIND-TUNNEL TESTING

Figure 11. Wind-tunnel testing – scale model 1:250

The proposed structure was then tested in a wind model; thus the flow profile is laminar. However,
tunnel. Due to the nature of tensile-textile the model size is 0.17 m (scale 1:250), and free
construction (lightweight structures), the ability of stream speed ranged between 5 and 20 m/s, that is
the structure to withstand external loads relative to Reynolds numbers from 5x10^4 and 2x10^5,
weight of the structure itself is much greater that which is a fully turbulent regime, which
of conventional construction [8]. It is important to corresponds to the a real-world-sized building.
note, though, that small changes in wind pressure
or snow loads can have a major impact on the size The model is made from a rigid plastic material,
and shape of the structural elements and the while the real-world structure would have a
deformations that occur. For this reason, it is flexible cover. The forces measured with the
important to understand the pressure and suction model have been scaled to the real-world-sized
coefficients that impact the structure: vertical structure assuming that it acts as a rigid body, due
force (lift coefficient) and horizontal force (drag to the beams that support the building in tension.
coefficient). The wind tunnel tests were used to determine the
lift and drag coefficients. Drag coefficient was
Description: The wind tunnel is open, and works used in WinTess to calculate the structure to wind
by aspiration (Eiffel style); that is, undisturbed air up-to 170 km/h.
is accelerated through a nozzle and sent to the

75
 Vol. 52 (2011) No. 2 June n. 168

5.1 Lift coefficient

2.5
2.4
2.3
2.2
2.1
2.0
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5

Figure 12a. Lift- coefficient model plan view.

The value of the global lift coefficient

obtained from the experimental
measurements was Cl ~0.86. Local
measurements of the lift coefficients,
determined in small holes on the model
surface, reach values up to 1.5. Given
the size of the wind tunnel testing
section (40 cm x 40 cm cross section)
there is no wind below and the diameter of the model (17 cm)
this line. the statistical error is estimated to be
approximately 15%.
Cl can be estimated from: (1)
2 Fvertical
Cl 
 ·7.5 cm2 · ·v 2
Where Fvertical is the vertical component
of the force acting on the model, ρ is the
air density and v is the free stream
Figure 12b. Lift-coefficient testing diagram. speed.

76
 JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR SHELL AND SPATIAL STRUCTURES: J. IASS

5.2 Drag coefficient

The amount of suction or pressure depends on the velocity of the wind and the angle of incidence.

= wind

Figure 13. Surface normal angle in the model (p=pressure and s=suction).

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Figure 14. Drag-coefficient diagram. Pressure coefficients relative to the lateral wall of the building.

The entire wall was found to have negative- The model has a very aerodynamic structure
pressure coefficients, which shows that the effect relative to wind coming from the side due to the
of wind on the wall is that of suction. Negative suction created as a result of negative coefficients
values closer to zero (in red) indicate less suction of pressure. The convex forms allow wind to
and are mostly found for angles closer to zero freely pass by.
relative to the direction the wind. Negative values
farther from zero (in blue) indicate greater suction Drag coefficient: The global drag coefficient
and are mostly found for angles lower than -90 obtained experimentally was Cd ~0.30. Local
degrees and greater than 90 degrees relative to the pressure coefficients show a significant
direction of the wind. dispersion, as shown in Fig 14.

2 Fdrag
Cd  (2)
 ·S e · ·v 2
Where Se is the elevation surface (model 0,008718
Figure 15. Drag-coefficient diagram. m2)

77
 Vol. 52 (2011) No. 2 June n. 168

After wind-tunnel testing, we found that there is • Dome central mast: L=9 m -  200-5_S235
an overload of forces on the model and we had to - Section 30,631 cm2 - Elasticity modulus
re-optimize the structural elements. The elements 2.100 t/cm2 = 210 kN/mm2 - Density 7,85
that changed were: t/m3 = 78,5 kN/m3

Wind up-to 170 km/h: • Dome minor masts: L=6,5 m -  110-

5_S235 - Section 16,493 cm2 - Elasticity
• Membrane: Ferrari Fluotop T2 1302 - modulus 2.100 t/cm2 = 210 kN/mm2 -
Prestress 0.8 % = 32,6 daN/5cm = 652 kg/m Density 7,85 t/m3 = 78,5 kN/m3
Resistance Rk = 800/700 daN/5cm = 16000,0 Table 3. Structure general data
kg/m - Safety factor (5) = Rd = Rk / 5 = 160
daN/5cm = 3200 kg/m Membrane-elongation modulus 80 T/m
Weight of the bars 64880 kg
Weight of the membrane 4144 kg
• Border cables (Boltrope): WS-2 (36mm)
Total weight of the structure 69024 kg
Galv  36 - Section 855 mm2 - Elasticity Weight of the structure per m² 59 kg/ m²
modulus 1.635 t/cm2 = 163,5 kN/mm2 - Q=
125,46 t = 1.254,6 kN
The weight of the structure increased from 60864
Table 2. Structure general data kg to 69024 kg. And the maximum reaction in the
foundation nodes was 22 tons.
Membrane-elongation modulus 80 T/m
Weight of the bars 56720 kg
Weight of the membrane 4144 kg Results: In the next analysis (Table 4) we can
Total weight of the structure 60864 kg compare the different results of the model with
Weight of the structure per m² 52 kg/ m² different options through the WinTess software.
The nodes displacements in the tensegrity ring
and the dome, the weight of the structure,
The weight of the structure increased from 57655 reactions, dimension of the structural elements.
kg to 60864 kg. The maximum reaction in the All tested under loads of wind, self weight and
foundation nodes was 24 tons. snow take in account the pressure coefficient. The
comparison between structure with only cables,
Snow up-to 50 kg/m2: structure with only membrane, and structure with
both membrane and cables, which demonstrated
• Border cables (Boltrope): WS-2 (42mm) major efficiency in the structure tested, to wind
Galv  42 - Section 1160 mm2 - Elasticity 170 km/h (minor displacements) that the structure
modulus 1.635 t/cm2 = 163,5 kN/mm2 - Q= tested to snow 50 kg/m, (less efficiency, major
171,36 t = 1.713,6 kN displacements). After the analysis the proposed
structure’s aerodynamic and load-bearing features
• Ring tubes: L=20 m -  450-10_S235 - would be helpful if building in an area frequented
Section 138,23 cm2 - Elasticity modulus by high winds and in areas with little-to-no snow.
2.100 t/cm2 = 210 kN/mm2 - Density 7,85
t/m3 = 78,5 kN/m3

78
 JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR SHELL AND SPATIAL STRUCTURES: J. IASS

Table 4. A comparison of the results between structure with only cables, structure with only membrane and structure
with both membrane and cables.

79
 Vol. 52 (2011) No. 2 June n. 168

6. APPLICATION

There exists a need for roof structures that can patterns with twenty struts in a double layer, to
cover large surfaces and spaces and that are free cover a 40 m diameter sports arena, which has a
of any interior supports. After doing the pertinent surface of 1.200 m2 and can be occupied by
calculations, a tensegrity ring is proposed with a approximately 626 people.
central dome, using diamond-shaped membranes

Figure 16. Application of the tensegrity ring to cover a sports arena.

7. CONCLUSION proper definition and selection of the structural

elements.
The current research demonstrates that the
equilibrium of the proposed tensegrity dome is The uniqueness of these structures is, even though
achieved by formfinding and pretensioning a they are auto-balanced for external loads such as
diamond-membrane pattern used in conjunction wind and snow, that it is sometimes necessary to
with bars in a double layer. increase the stiffness of the structural elements
and/or reinforce them with external tubes and
Testing demonstrated that to successfully develop cables to prevent a collapse due to extraordinary
the proposed structure, it is important to analyze conditions.
the forces in the components, and to consider
endogenous factors such as the internal prestress Small changes in wind pressure or snow loads can
of the structure, and exogenous factors such as have a major impact on the size and shape of the
external loads, points of support, anchorages, etc. structural elements and the deformations that
occur. The impact of these issues during our
The major stress data distribution produced by the wind-tunnel testing led to the re-optimization of
WinTess software shows the importance of the the structural elements, which resulted in a

80
 JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR SHELL AND SPATIAL STRUCTURES: J. IASS

structure that remained in equilibrium in spite of REFERENCES

the wind and snow loads.
[1] Fuller, R. B., Synergetics, MacMillan, New
As demonstrated with the scale model, tensegrity- York, 1975.
dome structures allow for large, unobstructed
spaces such as are required in sports arenas. [2] Pugh, A., An Introduction to Tensegrity,
University of California Press, Berkeley,
The comparative analyses of the structure with 1976.
only cables, with only membrane, and both cables
and membrane tested under loads of wind, self [3] Jáuregui, V., Tensegrity Structures and
weight, and snow concluded that larger their Application to Architecture, Master
displacements were observed before the structure Thesis in Architecture, Queen’s University
was reinforced with external tubes and cables. The Belfast -UK., 2004.
wind-load displacements went from 950 mm
down to 179 mm in the tensegrity-ring bar free [4] Pérez, N., Folding Closed Tensegrity,
nodes. Thesis in Architecture, University National
of Colombia, Bogotá, 2003.
The proposed structure was found to perform best
when used in conjunction with external cables. [5] Llorens, J., García Ch. y Pöppinghaus
H., Tensegrity Structures for Textile Roofs,
The proposed structure’s aerodynamic and load- Textile Composites and Inflatable
bearing features would be helpful if building in an structures, E. Oñate and B. Kröplin (Eds.),
area frequented by high winds. It would not be Cimne, Barcelona, 2003.
optimal for use in areas that experience heavy
snow. [6] Sastre, R., Disseny i Càlcul d'Estructures
de Barres Totalment Articulades amb
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Grans Deformacions, Ph.D. Thesis,
Department of Architectural Technology I -
Thanks to my thesis tutor, Professor Josep Ignasi UPC, Barcelona, 1981.
Llorens, for his support throughout my thesis
project. [7] Peña DM., Llorens J. y Sastre R.
Application of the tensegrity principles on
Thanks to Professor Sastre for use of his WinTess tensile textile constructions. International
software as well as his never-ending support. Journal of Space Structures 2010;
Vol.25,1:57-67.
Thanks also to Professor Daniel Crespo Artiaga
(Physics) in the Department of Applied Physics [8] Foster B., Mollaert M., European Design
and Professor Joshua Martínez Tristancho Guide for Tensile Surface Structures,
(Aeronautical Engineering) in the Computer Madrid: Munilla Lería, LD 2009.
Architecture Department at Universitat
Politècnica de Catalunya for their work and
assistance performing the wind-tunnel testing.

81

View publication stats