Considering the that largest self supporting stone/ brick domes in the world are about 45 metres in diameter, the Rotunda is quite a large dome with a diameter of 39 metres and a height of 55 metres. The whole building itself is not constructed as most of the churches in Malta , that is, in the shape of a cross, but it is round as the name suggests. It is engineered such that the result is elegant as well as very strong to take the load that the dome generates. On the ground floor there is a set of circularly spaced arches holding the dome, where each arch houses an alter and the related decorations including the main and side doors. The distances between and separating the arches or effective columns are substantial and clearly meant to take the downward and radial thrust offered by the heavy dome above. Over the arches there is a large ring , which exists under most domes and is meant to withstand the radial forces generated by any dome and for people to walk inside the dome. Looking at the dome from inside the church it appears to be of a hemispherical shape and not a catenary , while looking at its external shape, it is clear that the extra rings around it at the lower part of the dome were added to ensure that ample side resistance to radial thrust was built in. While this effect made it look so robust, it took away the elegance produced by the verticality that normally accompany the lower part of a round dome. On looking at the thickness of the walls used on the Rotunda and comparing them with the Dome at St Paul's cathedral in London or the cathedral at Santa Maria del fiore , in Florence, it is clear that the Rotunda at Mosta is very much over engineered. In spite of this over engineering used in the Rotunda, it is clear that it is suffering from some cracks due to settling down over the years, while the continuous traffic vibrations that surround it does not help at all. Recently some suggested that they should build an underground car park to ease the parking problem at Mosta. Under the circumstances his suggestion would not be such a good proposition as the cracks that already exist do indicate that even over such a short period of 170 years, the rotunda has not yet settled in its steady state condition. Compared to the Filippo Brunellesci interlaced double dome in Florence and the Sir Christopher Wren conical " triple" dome in London and the Haggia Sophia in Turkey, which date back to over 500 years, the over engineering of the relatively new Mosta dome would classify it as not a dome where intelligent elegant engineering design was applied. The Mosta neoclassical design of Giorgio Grognet de Vassé could have been better in its execution. It contains a heavy amount of art which could have been obtained by a thinner dome considering that the dome technology had advanced so much in 1833. When one builds a self supporting dome in a place of worship, a higher standard of worship to God should be reflected in the intelligence of engineering used in its bare and naked form and such qualities should never be hidden by putty and paint. At least, in a place of worship, all religions should insist that the bare and naked, silent and unseen engineering functions, would occupy the same level in projection as the artistic nature of what is sculpted or painted on a self supporting dome. What a pity that emotions in humans move them much more than the wonders of silent and hidden engineering around them, including all the electronic wonders in the modern digital cameras, that are used to film such beautiful historical engineering that was projected through the our interesting history and that is helping me to write these comments. We all live in a wonderful world, let us all look after it, as it is our only home.
Considering the that largest self supporting stone/ brick domes in the world are about 45 metres in diameter, the Rotunda is quite a large dome with a diameter of 39 metres and a height of 55 metres. The whole building itself is not constructed as most of the churches in Malta , that is, in the shape of a cross, but it is round as the name suggests. It is engineered such that the result is elegant as well as very strong to take the load that the dome generates. On the ground floor there is a set of circularly spaced arches holding the dome, where each arch houses an alter and the related decorations including the main and side doors. The distances between and separating the arches or effective columns are substantial and clearly meant to take the downward and radial thrust offered by the heavy dome above. Over the arches there is a large ring , which exists under most domes and is meant to withstand the radial forces generated by any dome and for people to walk inside the dome. Looking at the dome from inside the church it appears to be of a hemispherical shape and not a catenary , while looking at its external shape, it is clear that the extra rings around it at the lower part of the dome were added to ensure that ample side resistance to radial thrust was built in. While this effect made it look so robust, it took away the elegance produced by the verticality that normally accompany the lower part of a round dome.
On looking at the thickness of the walls used on the Rotunda and comparing them with the Dome at St Paul's cathedral in London or the cathedral at Santa Maria del fiore , in Florence, it is clear that the Rotunda at Mosta is very much over engineered.
In spite of this over engineering used in the Rotunda, it is clear that it is suffering from some cracks due to settling down over the years, while the continuous traffic vibrations that surround it does not help at all. Recently some suggested that they should build an underground car park to ease the parking problem at Mosta. Under the circumstances his suggestion would not be such a good proposition as the cracks that already exist do indicate that even over such a short period of 170 years, the rotunda has not yet settled in its steady state condition.
Compared to the Filippo Brunellesci interlaced double dome in Florence and the Sir Christopher Wren conical " triple" dome in London and the Haggia Sophia in Turkey, which date back to over 500 years, the over engineering of the relatively new Mosta dome would classify it as not a dome where intelligent elegant engineering design was applied. The Mosta neoclassical design of Giorgio Grognet de Vassé could have been better in its execution. It contains a heavy amount of art which could have been obtained by a thinner dome considering that the dome technology had advanced so much in 1833.
When one builds a self supporting dome in a place of worship, a higher standard of worship to God should be reflected in the intelligence of engineering used in its bare and naked form and such qualities should never be hidden by putty and paint. At least, in a place of worship, all religions should insist that the bare and naked, silent and unseen engineering functions, would occupy the same level in projection as the artistic nature of what is sculpted or painted on a self supporting dome. What a pity that emotions in humans move them much more than the wonders of silent and hidden engineering around them, including all the electronic wonders in the modern digital cameras, that are used to film such beautiful historical engineering that was projected through the our interesting history and that is helping me to write these comments.
We all live in a wonderful world, let us all look after it, as it is our only home.