Longstanding Design: Roman Engineering of Aqueduct Arcades

Abstract

Ancient Roman engineers are famous for their use of arcades, or arched bridges, to elevate roads and aqueducts across valleys. The Romans first designed and built arches using stone blocks and then later changed to special concrete construction. In this paper, we illustrate how early unmortared arches could have been built using geometric design principles. This simplified analysis is sufficient to demonstrate, via retrospective analysis, the need for reconstruction efforts for arches violating these design criteria. Well-preserved remnants at the Simian Bridge and Vallon des Arcs arcades, located in southern France near Arles, are excellent examples of Roman arch engineering and are used as case studies to understand geometric arch design in practice. These arcades are vital parts of a larger aqueduct system used to provide the water-powered industrial Barbegal Mill and city of Arles with water in the first century A.D. Analysis of currently standing arches implies that Roman engineers may have relied extensively upon geometrical rules of thumb for design of these structures. In particular, modern stability analysis demonstrates the effectiveness of geometrical rules of thumb in determining structural failure requiring reconstruction at the Simian Bridge. The reconstruction that exists at the Simian bridge shows a shift from stone blocks to concrete. This shift may have occurred as a result of the Roman engineers’ increased awareness of geometrical criteria for arch design.

Keywords:

• Roman engineering
• aqueduct arcade
• arch geometric design principles
• Barbegal Mill and aqueduct system
• retrospective analysis

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge support from the Wright Pal eohydrological Institute for the field study of Roman aqueduct bridges.

Notes

1. N.A.F. Smith, ‘The Hydraulics of Ancient Pipes and Pipelines’, Trans. Newcomen Soc. 77 (2007), pp. 1-49; P.B. Lourenço, ‘Analysis of historical constructions: From thrust-lines to advanced simulations’, in P.B. Lourenço, P. Roca (Eds.), Historical Constructions (Guimarães, 2001).

2. Smith.

3. C.O’Connor, ‘Roman Bridges, (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1993), p. 163.

4. D.N. Wilber, ‘The Plateau of Daphne’ in R. Stillwell, ed., Antioch on the Orontes (Princeton, 1938), vol. 2, 53 n. 9.

5. Huerta, ‘Galileo was Wrong: The Geometrical Design of Masonry Arches’, Nexus Network Journal 8 (2006), pp. 25-52.

6. W.F. Lorenz, P.J. Wolfram, P. Castermans, ‘Water Flow to the Ancient Industrial Mill of Barbegal- La Burlande Basin’, IWA Specialized Conference on Water & Wastewater Technologies in Ancient Civilizations, MN-60, 22-24, (March 2012), pp. 1-10.

7. Huerta; M. Levy, ‘The Arch: Born in the Sewer, Raised to the Heavens’, Nexus Network Journal 8 (2006), pp. 7-12; M. Corradi, ‘Empirical methods for the construction of masonry arch bridges in the 19^th century’ in Arch Bridges (Rotterdam: A.A. Balkema, 1998), pp. 25-36; J. Heyman, The Masonry Arch, (Ellis Horwood Limited, 1982); O’Connor.

8. J. Guendon, P. Leveau, ‘Dépôts carbonatés et fonctionnement des aqueducs romains: Le bassin amont du vallon des Arcs sur l'aqueduc d'Arles (Bouches-du-Rhône)’, Gallia 62.1 (2005), pp. 87-96; P. Leveau, ‘Les moulins de Barbegal (1986-2006)’, TRAIANVS, http://www.traianvs.net/textos/barbegal.pdf (2006), pp. 1-21 (accessed 4 February 2015);. P. Leveau, ‘Les Moulins de Barbegal 1986-2006’ in J.P. Brun and J.L. Fiches (eds.) Force Hydraulique et Machineries à Eau dans l'Antiquité Romaine, Napoli, Italy (2007), pp. 185-199.

9. W.F. Lorenz, P.J. Wolfram, ‘The Millstones of Barbegal’, Civil Engineering 77 (6) (ASCE, 2007), pp. 62-7.

10. F. Benoit, ‘L'usine de meunerie hydraulique de Barbegal (Arles)’, Revue Archéologique, sixième série 15.1 (1940), pp. 19–80; C.L. Sagui, ‘La meunerie de Barbegal (France) et les roues hydrauliques chez les anciens et au moyen age’, Isis 38 No. 314. (February 1948), pp. 225–231; R.H.J. Sellin, ‘The large Roman water mill at Barbegal (France)’, History of Technology, 8 (1983), pp. 91–109; P. Leveau, ‘The Barbegal water-mill in its environment: archaeology and the economic and social history of antiquity’, Journal of Roman Archaeology, 9 (1996), pp. 137–153; W.F. Lorenz, ‘Ancient Roman Water Development in France’, Water Resources Impact 7(3) (2005), pp. 4‐8; Lorenz and Wolfram (9).

11. S. Heimann, U. Drewes, and P. Leveau, ‘Discharge calculations for the Roman aqueducts at Arles and the mills of Barbegal’, Wasserwirtschaft 83.9 (1993), pp. 490-3; E. Blanchet, Aqueducs romains: Essai de recherches détaillé du tracé de l'aqueduc nord des Alpilles (1999), unpublished; E. Blanchet, Aqueducs romains. Trajet de Barbegal à Arles (2001), unpublished.

12. T.A. Hodge, Roman Aqueducts & Water Supply (Duckworth, 2002).

13. P. Bellamy, J.-L. Ballais, B. Hitchner, and M. Jorda, ‘Le Pont Simian à Fontvieille: Étude géo-archéologique d’un Pont-Aqueduc’, Milieu et Sociétés dans la Vallée des Baux (2000), pp. 25-8.

14. Bellamy; W.F. Lorenz, P.J. Wolfram, ‘Arches Have No Rivals’, Roads and Bridges, September (2007), pp. 48-50.

15. Lorenz et al.

16. W. F. Lorenz, P. J. Wolfram, ‘Valley Crossings and Flood Management for Ancient Roman Aqueduct Bridges’, Journal of Irrigation and Drainage 137 (12) (ASCE, 2011), pp. 816-9.

17. Huerta (Galileo).

18. Levy.

19. P. Block, M. DeJong, J. Ochsendorf, ‘As Hangs the Flexible Line: Equilibrium of Masonry Arches,’ Nexus Network Journal 8 (2006), pp. 13-24.

20. Huerta (Galileo).

21. Ibid.

22. Ibid.

23. Ibid.

24. Block et al

25. Corradi.

26. Heyman.

27. Huerta (Galileo).

28. O’Connor.

29. Huerta (Galileo).

30. Ibid.

31. Hodge.