PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 3662466

[The bone, a complex construction. Thoughts of an architect].

Abstract

Having a precise knowledge of the construction methods of technical objects is helpful to understand the developing processes in nature, the patterns, the bearing capacity and the investment of energy and material of natural lightweight structures. An engineering framework out of bars and knots can be compared with a framework of bones--keeping in mind, however, that solid and soft components viz. bones, cartilage, sinews, muscles and filling liquids together are building a force guiding system. Such complex systems can most easily be explained by their development and "production". Fibre nets and networks provide flexibility and stiffness to the weak pneu- or hydroskeleton. Outer appearance and internal microstructure prove the bone to be a solidified and prestressed pneu. The load capacity of the bone is determined by the solid materials and the supporting, varying inner pressure in combination with the blood circulation. In contrast to that the pressure of cartilage made of similar materials is constant. All other force guiding networked fibre systems are supposed to have a bone-like structure with all states of solidification. Highly flexible fibre nets are capable of self-alignment, self-remodelling and self-repair. A likewise self-organization can be found in the inner fibre net of the bone. In case of a fracture callus will seal the damaged pneu. The net structure of a strained bone has routings similar to the hypothetical flow of forces within solid bodies. The author evolves the thesis that the bone in the course of its forming process as well as in its final stiffened shape can be looked upon as a pneumatic system with regard to its load-bearing behaviour.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

F Otto. 1987. [The bone, a complex construction. Thoughts of an architect].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3662466/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

A mass balance approach for evaluating leachable arsenic and chromium from an in-service CCA-treated wood structure.

Many existing residential wood structures, such as playsets and decks, have been treated with chromated copper arsenate (CCA). This preservative chemical can be released from these structures incrementally over time through contact with rainfall. The objective of this study was to evaluate the levels of arsenic and chromium leached from an in-service CCA-treated deck exposed to rainfall, as well as their possible impacts on soils and shallow groundwater. Two monitoring stations, one containing a CCA-treated deck and the other containing an untreated deck as a control, were constructed outside for this study. Rainfall, runoff water from the decks, soils below the decks, and infiltrated water through 0.7-m depth of soil were monitored for arsenic and chromium over a period of 3 years. The concentration of the CCA-treated deck runoff for arsenic (0.114-4.66 mg/L) and chromium (0.008-0.470 mg/L) were significantly (p<0.001) higher than the untreated deck runoff (< or =0.002 mg/L for both). During the 3-year monitoring period, 13% of the arsenic and 1.4% of the chromium were leached from the amount initially present in the CCA-treated wood. Arsenic levels (<0.1-46 mg/kg) in soils under the CCA-treated deck were significantly (p<0.001) higher than under the untreated deck (<0.1-2.7 mg/kg), while chromium levels were statistically the same below the two decks (2.4-9.6 mg/kg). Approximately 94% of the arsenic from the runoff was absorbed in the soils below the CCA-treated deck; the upper 2.5 cm of the soils captured 42% of the total. The infiltrated water concentrations for arsenic (<0.001-0.085 mg/L) and chromium (<0.001-0.010 mg/L) below the CCA-treated deck were both significantly (p<0.001) higher than below the untreated deck (< or =0.006 mg/L). The amounts of arsenic found in the infiltrated water below the CCA-treated deck represented 6% of total arsenic leached and less than 0.7% of the initial mass in the wood. The study demonstrated that exposure of a CCA-treated deck to rainfall resulted in elevated arsenic concentrations in both runoff and soil. Although only a relatively small fraction of the initial arsenic from the wood was found to infiltrate through the soil, these impacts were significant and caused the infiltrated water to exceed drinking water standards. The study suggests that potential exposures to arsenic exist indirectly through an environment that is contaminated with arsenic leached from in-service CCA-treated wood.

Architecture↗