Video/Talk: Saving Fallingwater - Mill Run, PA

[DavidC]

Saving Fallingwater: 20 Years of Preserving Wright’s Masterwork (John Matteo, PE, FAAR) - (1:25:37)


David

[Tom]

Wow - Ok.
One can safely ignore the first 11 minutes - it's all introduction and house keeping business.
Further, the engineer who walks us through all this (Matteo) is not a master narrator.
Nevertheless it's the best structural and technical look into this building since Silman's first presentations.
The explanation of structural forces acting in the horizontal planes as diaphragms was really good and helpful.
The 3d graphics of the steel reinforcing in the curved canopy was great too.
I'm not halfway through yet and it's an advance on what has been shown of Fallingwater on Wrightchat as far as I know.

[Tom]

Well after about 35:00 minutes into the talk the rest covers old material.
I was disappointed - thinking it would be new stuff like the first 35 minutes.

I wish Matteo had gone into more detail about some things he did cover - like the added carbon fiber reinforcement to the beams in the west side EJ terrace. Did they paint that on?

Also in no film or talk from the Silman office has there ever been any mention of how the structure extends back into the house. Especially of the heavily reinforced square over the livingroom and how the beams connect to that.

From the 3d computer drawings of the main beams of Lillian's Terrace one might think those stone columns in the livingroom are the only supports - it's not true. I mean Wright and the tradition of this house constanty goes on about how the structure is continuous deep into the house with the stone verticals being essential counterweight. No mention of any of that in the Silman analysis that is publicly accessible - as far as I know.

There is a LOT more to this building, structurally, than given out here.

[Tom]

The explanation of the curved canopy I found very helpful.
Seems like Matteo says that the forces of the tendency of the canopy to fall over on the unsupported side are the forces that hold a lot of it up as it "falls" into compressive arch action resolved at the two anchor ends. Great explanation. Have never seen it put so concisely.

Wonder why Wes Peters never wrote explicitly about the engineering in Wright buildings (am I correct about that? He never did, right?). That, for sure, is a big historical loss.

[SDR]

Your new assignment is to search Wright Chat for a video interview with Brandoch Peters. I'm sure I remember him saying something to the effect that Wes couldn't always show how he had arrived at a structural calculation but that he had full faith---borne out, apparently---that the results were reliable.

In the meantime there's this, from 2003:

https://lacrossetribune.com/news/grands ... 5c1c6.html

S

[Tom]

Thanks - Brandoch is his son right?
I've heard that Wes was really really smart too, although I don't like his stand alone architecture.

[Tom]

From the 3d computer drawings of the main beams of Lillian's Terrace one might think those stone columns in the livingroom are the only supports - it's not true. I mean Wright and the tradition of this house constantly goes on about how the structure is continuous deep into the house with the stone verticals being essential counterweight. No mention of any of that in the Silman analysis that is publicly accessible - as far as I know.

There is a LOT more to this building, structurally, than given out here.

Second thought. Matteo DOES go into the continuity of the structure as a whole in this video. He does so when he talks about diaphragm action in the horizontal plane. The two examples are 1.) the curved canopy and 2.) the far eastern most balcony.
His discussion in this regard of the far eastern most balcony kinda blew my mind - minor revelation moment. Would love to know more detail how stuff like that works. ... We need an engineer to get involved in this here Wright Chat thing.

I looked up Matteo firm to try and drop him an email. Firm is called MCC 1200. No contact info listed, only one phone number.
I also emailed Fallingwater - limited contact info there too - and requested they make their drawing set digital and available online. Looks like they have a much more complete set than what Avery is letting us see.

[Rood]

Wonder why Wes Peters never wrote explicitly about the engineering in Wright buildings (am I correct about that? He never did, right?). That, for sure, is a big historical loss.

One question that I would have loved to ask Matteo concerns the cantilevered trellis near the pool, at the far end of the guest quarters.

Years ago, as I stood there, admiring the cantilevered trellis, Wes Peters walked up ... to say that trellis cantilever was one of the most difficult structural problems that he was faced with solving... but that he finally figured it out. Unfortunately, he never offered to explain what he did, or why. Wes could be a man of few words.

[Tom]

Interesting.
Always thought of that building as pretty straight forward until now.
The rebar in the trellis has to turn up into the roof for sure.
Maybe that has something to do with it.

https://www.hippostcard.com/listing/mil ... rd/5329184

[SDR]

If you put enough rebar---or post-tensioned cable or rod---as near to the upper surface as possible, with the outboard end of the steel arcing down to the lower edge at the terminus, you could get somewhere with it. Isn't that what was done, more or less ?

One look at Fallingwater and you know it's not going to be straightforward ! Golly . . .

S