Talk:Lintel

[Untitled]
At some point the content here may have been merged to Talk:Post and lintel.

supposed 120 ton example
I removed the following, at first because I was thinking it is not an example of a lintel and/or its stated weight is wrong (and, though it basically may be a valid example, I am keeping it out for now due to wondering about current sources and/or how it should be presented):"An example from the Mycenaean Greece cultural period (c. 1600 – 1100 BCE) is the Treasury of Atreus in Mycenae, Greece. It weighs 120 tons, with approximate dimensions 8.3 × 5.2 × 1.2 m, one of the largest in the world." First of all, I was not sure I believe a block of stone of dimensions 8.3 × 5.2 × 1.2 m would weigh that much. Maybe that would be a huge block of stone, like maybe that could weigh that much. But, are the dimensions of the relevant lintel (perhaps the one shown in images at right?) actually that large, or is the lintel there much smaller, perhaps 8.3 x 5.2 x 1.2 feet instead?

I note the Treasury of Atreus article currently mentions a 1,200 ton weight for the entrance, perhaps termed an architrave, but that consists of an entire domed structure, not just a single lintel. Was "120 ton" an editing mistake misrepresenting the actual 1,200 ton weight, and also assuming the weight of the lintel alone was that of the whole entrance structure?

I also modified the article to clarify that the term "architrave" may refer to a lintel, but that the term has other (larger) meanings. Perhaps there is a source that says the architrave of the Treasury of Atreus is estimated to weigh 120 or 1,200 tons, and perhaps there are sources saying that an architrave is a lintel, which it may be in some cases, in some usage. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 05:01, 6 July 2023 (UTC)


 * The cited source covers the Treasury of Atreus in its Chapter VI, with mention on its page 230 that the entranceway (I think the one in photo here) is 20 feet wide, with an entrance itself that is seven feet ten inches wide at the top.

"A space of twenty feet in width between two walls leads to the entrance, which is nine feet and a half wide at the base, and seven feet ten inches at top, and about nineteen feet1 in height, and leads by a passage of eighteen feet in depth, to the subterraneous circular chamber, which is in the form of a Gothic dome, terminating at top in a point or key stone."


 * So 8.3 x 5.2 x 1.2 feet rather than meters seems more plausible as size of the lintel here?


 * But, hmm, on page 233 is an account of a "gigantic stone", of breccia, which is one part of a lintel (where, perhaps at the entrance to a main chamber inside?):"The lintel of the door is composed of two masses of stone, the largest of which is of the surprising dimensions of twenty-seven feet in length, seventeen feet in breadth, and three feet nine inches in thickness, the specific gravity of which must be about one hundred and thirty-three tons. No masses* except those of Egypt and Balbec, can be compared with this gigantic stone, which is of the same material as the rest of the building."


 * Using the convert template as a tool to check conversions from feet to meters: those are 27 ft, 17 ft, and 3.75 ft, so that would be "8.3 x 5.2 x 1.14 m", not far off from "8.3 x 5.2 x 1.2 m" that was stated in the article. Okay perhaps in approximate terms then?  But does the lintel run much further than the opening it spans, i.e. run out of sight to the left and right? (If the depicted width is 20 feet, and the actual width of the lintel is 27 feet, it would have to extend out of sight to the left and right;  in which case how is its length known? Or is the lintel mentioned not the one in these images?


 * I would have thought that the term "specific gravity" would refer to a density measure, say pounds per cubic foot or tons per cubic meter; the term specific gravity in wikipedia refers to a ratio of densities;  in context here the author seems to be using it to mean simply the weight, presumably computed by multiplying the usual density of breccia times the estimated volume of the lintel, with result in some type of ton measure (long ton or short ton or metric ton?).  His estimate of 133 tons could correspond to 120 tons of some other type?


 * The source, published in 1819 (or should it be 1834?), is about Edward Dodwell's trips in 1801, 1805, and 1806, and I don't think that would be definitive about this one being the largest lintel in the world known today; there could be larger in temples of other ancient cultures in Mexico or Thailand or elsewhere not known to Dodwell back then, or as "lintel" of a bridge somewhere, or in some unusual modern structure.  --Doncram (talk,contribs) 05:38, 6 July 2023 (UTC)


 * This 2014 article "WORLD’S LONGEST CONCRETE BEAMS INSTALLED" by Sharon J. Rehana in or at "Concrete Construction" (a trade magazine? or just a website?), states "The longest prestressed concrete beams ever manufactured were successfully installed in the Netherlands. These huge box beams—223 feet long and 480,000 pounds—form the main span of the new bridge in Zuidhorn." Those would properly be termed lintels, I think.  Again using convert template tool to convert lbs to tons, that is: 480000 lb . --Doncram (talk,contribs) 06:03, 6 July 2023 (UTC)


 * One natural application for very large concrete "blocks" (actually more likely hollow box beams, aka box girders, made of prestressed concrete (same as post-tensioned concrete?) that I happen to know a very little about (because I largely developed the Wikipedia article) might be for aircraft taxiway bridges.|this 2008 source cited in that article describes large concrete box girder(s) (one one big one across 5 spans or more likely five separate ones?) at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport in Phoenix, Arizona: "The 406-ft-long, design-build project features five continuous spans of posttensioned concrete box girders. The bridge was designed to be 214 ft wide to meet the safety area requirement for Group V aircraft and to support a gross aircraft weight of 1.5 million lb using the wheel configurations for a Boeing 747-400." But there are not statements of the dimensions of concrete beam(s) cast there, nor weight estimate(s). --Doncram (talk,contribs) 06:18, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Maybe the example was approximately okay and should be restored, but... Are there no more recent sources about the estimated dimensions and weight of that specific "gigantic stone". And are there other examples to be presented? And/or how could the one example be presented better here (and in the Treasury of Atreus article, which should have the detail of anything being cited here)? --Doncram (talk,contribs) 06:31, 6 July 2023 (UTC)