Glass Entrance Van Gogh Museum Amsterdam · Van Gogh Museum—being the third major museum of the...

Glass Struct. Eng. (2016) 1:205–231DOI 10.1007/s40940-016-0022-5

CHALLENGING GLASS PAPER

Glass Entrance Van Gogh Museum Amsterdam

Joeri Bijster · Chris Noteboom · Mick Eekhout

Received: 24 December 2015 / Accepted: 21 April 2016 / Published online: 20 May 2016© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Abstract In September 2015 the Van Gogh Museumin Amsterdam has opened its new Glass Entrance toaccommodate a growing number of visitors more com-fortably. The architectural design is drawn by KishoKurokawa Architect & Associates and the detaileddesign by Hans van Heeswijk Architects and Octatube,complementing the curved and elliptical shape of theKurokawa wing. The project fits in a trend of under-ground museum extensions enhanced by prominentstructural glass geometries, such as the Louvre Pyra-mids in Paris, the Mauritshuis in The Hague and theJoanneum Quarter in Graz. The Van Gogh MuseumGlass Entrance is featured by a spheroidal glass roofwith glass fins stabilising the steel structure, a cold bentglass facade and a 1.5 m cantilevering glass canopy.Inside there are glass balustrades and a glass stair-case supported by structural glass arches which aresite-bonded to the stringers. All glass in the projectis composed of low iron glass to create a high degreeof transparency without discolouring. The shape of theglass roof is defined by mirroring the spheroidal sur-face of the existing wing. The so created roof consistsof insulated and laminated glass units all different inwidth and supported by 30 triple laminated glass fins

J. Bijster (B) · C. Noteboom · M. EekhoutOctatube, Delft, The Netherlandse-mail: [email protected]

C. Noteboom (B)Arup, Amsterdam, The Netherlandse-mail: [email protected]

with SentryGlas� (SG) interlayers. All glass fins areoptimised and unique in length and height, the largestfin being 12 m long and 700 mm in height. The glassbeams are supported by steel shoes connected to themain steel structure consisting of 400 mm circular hol-low sections. This detail allows the glass fins to act likebeams while stiffening the steel structure and support-ing and stabilising the double glass units in the roof.Due to the complex geometry, the many glass fin con-nections and extremely tight tolerances, the entire steelstructure of 60 m×15 m×10 m was pre-assembled,surveyed and checked in the factory scale 1:1. TheIGU’s in the roof’s outer 1.3mwide perimeter are cold-twisted to fit in between the roof surface and façadeperimeter. The curved outer facade consists of cold-bent insulated glass units fixed to 20 unique triple lam-inated glass fins with SG, the longest being 9.4 m. Thesmallest bending radius of the elliptical curvature is11.5 m.

Keywords Museum · Structural glass stabilisation ·Glass fins · Cold-twisted glass · Cold-bent glass ·Glass staircase

1 Introduction

At the opening of the Van Gogh Museum’s GlassEntrance in September 2015, director Axel Rügerrecalled how he circumspectly took the plane to Japanto visit the architectural office of the late Kisho

123

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/s40940-016-0022-5&domain=pdf

206 J. Bijster et al.

Kurokawa (1934–2007). He wanted to discuss a lit-tle ‘problem’ with the architects who had designedthe museum’s granite-clad exhibition wing in thenineties. Bluntly and without beating around the bush,the Japanese architects said: “It is the pond, isn’tit?”. Apparently, they were very well informed aboutthe dysfunction of the sunken pool, once conceptu-alised as a contemplative intermediate space betweenKurokawa’s new wing and the existing museum build-ing of Rietveld. But the pool didn’t quite fit in theDutch climate and often suffered from defects suchas the broken water flow. A more compelling matterfor the museum was the notorious length of the ticketqueue, causing daily troubles at the small sized pedes-trian walkway at the Paulus Potterstraat, which was notwelcoming for the 90 % foreign visitors.

With the completion of the newwing of the StedelijkMuseum (2012) and the major refurbishment of theRijksmuseum (2013), the time seemed right for theVan Gogh Museum—being the third major museumof the Amsterdam Museum Square—to embark onits own construction project. By enclosing the empty‘sunken pond’, and creating a new main entrance, themuseum was able to solve two problems at the sametime. Without expanding the actual footprint on theMuseum Square, a new transparent entrance was cre-ated on top of the former pool, being a ‘state of the art’and innovative glass structure; the primaryobject of thispaper.

In the first section, the role of glass at undergroundmuseum extensions is illustrated with three Europeanprecedents. The study of references is followed byan historical and architectural description of the VanGogh Museum, after which the Glass Entrance is por-trayed in detail, from the preliminary design for theglass wing of Kisho Kurokawa Architect & Associates(KKAA) to the detailed design by Hans van HeeswijkArchitects in close collaborationwith the designers andengineers of Octatube. Hereafter, the structure and itschallenges are explained in detail from Sects. 5 to 9:the roof structure and its parametrically designed glassfins, the cold-bent glass façade with its varying bend-ing radius, the ingenious interface details and the glassstaircase which could literally and figuratively be con-sidered as a project within a project. In the conclusion,the Van Gogh Museum’s Glass Entrance is placed inperspective, and it is described why glass structuresseem to be so appropriate when it comes to museumextensions.

2 European precedents

Europe is home to many old cities which are popu-lar tourist destinations. Over the centuries, these citieshave preserved a fair amount of their cultural heritageand compact city centres. Nowadays many buildingsare labelled as monuments, assuring their future con-servation. Apart from churches, it is probablymuseumsattracting the highest number of tourists. Massive visi-tor numbers and the phenomenon of special art exhibi-tionswith queues stretching around the block, is knownsince the Enlightenment (Haskell 2000). In 1851 sixmillion people poured into London to visit the GreatExhibition in Crystal Palace, and in 1857 1.3 millionvisitors were attracted to an exhibition of the Old Mas-ters held in Manchester (Saumarez Smith 2015). Butthe visitor streamswere occurringmore andmore often,queuing in the densely built and already crowded citycentres. Although these visitors are boosting the localeconomy, they impose a logistical headache. In termsof visitor numbers, the leading European museums arecurrently the Louvre in Paris (9.3 million visitors in2014) and the British Museum in London (6.7 millionvisitors in 2014). But even the relatively small-sizedVan Gogh Museum had welcomed 1.6 million visitorsin the same year. The allurement of museums and the‘democratisation of art’ is accompanied by a paradox,referred to by van Heeswijk (2015) as ‘the down sideof success’: museums are becoming a victim of theirown successfulness.

If one would make a categorisation, there are twotypes of museum refurbishment projects in which glassplays a major role. The first one is the covered court-yard: an enclosed space for logistics, orientation andnatural light. Regularly courtyards have been the play-ground for architects and engineers.Whether it is a gridshell, a transparent glass fin roof or a bespoke steel-glass structure, glass roofs seem to fit well in monu-mental museum architecture (Fig. 1).

The second category is the underground entrance.With their already heavy footprint in historic city cen-tresmuseums are frequently forced to go belowground.In these projects, architects often decide to hide awaythe most congested area, being the entrance. Interest-ingly, this choice conflicts with the purpose of themuseum entrance to be a visible welcome and identifi-cation point for tourists who may be first-time visitors.Whereas the entrance used to be easily recognisablein a symmetrical classicist facade or renaissance style

123

Glass Entrance Van Gogh Museum Amsterdam 207

Fig. 1 a–d Examples of glass roofs covering monumental museum courtyards. From left to right the British Museum in London, theMaritime Museum in Amsterdam, the German Historic Museum in Berlin and the Municipal Museum in The Hague

museum building, it suddenly becomes a hidden archi-tectural space, deprived from natural light. It is the taskfor architects to solve these two problems at once, andglass has proven to be a very suitablematerial. Impelledby new structural possibilities and technologies, thishas led to a number of museums in which glass struc-tures illuminate the underground spaces, mark the newentrance, and facilitate a larger welcome area.

Three projects are described hereafter, allwith a verydifferent architectural and technical use of glass in com-bination with an underground museum entrance.

2.1 The pyramids of the Louvre, Paris

In 1981 president Mitterrand appointed Ieoh Ming Peito design a new entrance for the Louvre. Pei knewthe centre of gravity had to be found by excavatingthe courtyard enclosed by the museum wings (Can-nel 1995). The Cour Napoléon provided the neces-sary space that was lacking in the Louvre itself, andPei employed this space to unify the existing build-ings, including the Richelieu wing that was assignedto the museum. He could also address the problem ofthe building’s confusingdisorder by anewsubterraneanlayout of corridors, interconnecting themuseumwings.Moreover, the entrance problem could be addressed.Although the Louvre is an art museumwith the world’shighest number of visitors, these visitors were oftenwandering around themuseumwingswonderingwherethe entrance was. According to Pei, visitors need to bewelcomed by some kind of great space, and that spacehad to contain volume, daylight and a surface identi-fication (Cannel 1995). His design solution turned outto be the well-known glass pyramid, having enough

volume to ingest 15,000 visitors an hour in theory. Inaddition, there are three baby pyramids, one invertedpyramid and triangular reflecting pools with fountains,contributing to the quality of the urban space, open-ing up the Louvre and making an inviting gesture tothe crowds. Another advantage was that the pyramidencloses the largest possible floor areawithin the small-est possible volume, so that the building volume wouldprovide plenty of space for the large visitor numberswhile standing as unobtrusively as possible (ChipleySlavicek 2009). The footprint of the main pyramid isonly 1/30 of the courtyard (1000 m2), which providedPei with a strong argument of architectural modesty(Fig. 2).

Still, the pyramid needed to be prominent enoughto be the focal point, without compromising the Lou-vre’s authenticity as a national monument (von Boehm2000). The solution here was found in choosing a con-trasting material for the pyramids that is both translu-cent and reflective at the same time. The pyramidshad to be transparent to avoid upstaging the Louvre.No solid addition imaginable could gracefully blendwith the surrounding building, while glass was ableto reflect both the ornately stone facades as well as theParisian skies. The ancient pyramidal formmade of themodern materials glass and steel constitutes a dialoguebetween the old and the new, for it is at oncemuch olderand newer than the existing Louvre buildings (Cannel1995).

The structure of the glass pyramid is an early exam-ple of structural glazing that is stabilised by meansof cables. Pei’s team called on the expertise of navalengineering firm Navtec to manufacture the nodes andstruts, and to install the structure that included 128open trusses held in place by sixteen very thin cables

123


Fig. 2 Cross and longitudinal section of Cour Napoléon with the different pyramids (Pei Cobb Freed & Partners)

Fig. 3 a Construction photo of the Louvre’s steel structure (Pei Cobb Freed & Partners). b The large entrance pyramid

(Jodidio 2008). The outside of the pyramid is a metalframework, with outriggers sticking inside, stabilisedagainst inward and outward directed loading by contin-uous cables. Although the engineering challenge hadbeen to create a structure as transparent as technologycould attain, Pei was not too impressed by the trans-parency of the result. On this subject, Arup engineerFernández Solla notes (2011) how the pyramid mightbe fairly more integrated than a glazed space frame,but the 675 diamond-shaped and 118 triangular glasspanels are not part of the structure at all (Fig. 3).

The objective of transparency was also achieved bythe colour of the glass (Wigginton 1996). In order toshow the Louvre’s facades without the greenish dis-tortion visible in commercial glass, Pei advocated theinstallation of special clear glass without a green tint.Although the feasibility was questioned initially by one

of the big glass manufacturers, eventually the glass wasproduced using white and pure sand and the Louvre’spyramids got their extra uncoloured glass with a lowiron content. Seen from the inside outward, the con-struction turned out to have a reasonable transparency,offering views of the historic facades. Seen from theoutside there is much reflection.

Whereas the main pyramid was completed in 1989,it took four more years before the inverted glass pyra-mid at the underground shopping mall was realised.One of the leading firms for engineering tensile glassstructures at the time was Rice Francis Ritchie (RFR).For the main pyramid, they had only been involvedas a consulting office, but RFR was in full charge ofthe technical design of the inverted pyramid, one ofthe earliest examples of a frameless, suspended andpoint-fixed glass structure. The upper part acts as a

123


Fig. 4 a Interior photo of the main pyramid with the winding entrance staircase. b The inverted pyramid

tensile stressed floor structure, while the lower pyra-mid is mainly loaded on deadweight. The siliconisedstructure turned out to have an additional challenge infinding a way to allow the inside to be cleaned, a trickyjob for abseilers to this day (Fig. 4).

In the 21 m high entrance pyramid Pei’s philosophyabout architecture can be perceived best. Besides themodulation of light and the creation of a geometriclandmark, it celebrates themovement of people.Not theexpansion itself, but the logistics havemade the Louvresuitable for blockbuster art exhibitions (Cannel 1995)and the growing number of visitors. The museum hasbecome a theatrical event for mass audiences, ratherthan a solemn art repository. The descent is markedby the pyramidal space and is symbolised by the glasspyramid that provides a central focus point in a hugecomplex of buildings which had no centre (von Boehm2000). During the day, the courtyard is brought to lifeby tourists. At night, the courtyard is illuminated fromwithin the glass pyramids, as if it were lanterns. Jean-Luc Martinez, the president of the Louvre, claims thathismuseum is the only one in theworldwhose entranceis considered to be a work of art.

2.2 Universalmuseum Joanneum, Graz

Taking a leap in time towards the twenty-first century,it appears that Pei’s glass pyramids have inspired a newgeneration of architects. By the end of 2011, the trans-

formation of the Joanneum museum quarter in Graz(Austria) was completed. The design of Nieto Sobe-jano Arquitectos connects the Museum of Natural His-tory, the Provincial Library and the New Gallery ofContemporary Art, that used to face a residual court-yard. Because the buildings belong to the same institu-tion, there was a need for a common means of accessand welcoming space. This resulted in the transforma-tion of the rear courtyard into the focal point of themuseumquarter and adding to the programof the build-ings below ground. New facilities such as a visitors’centre, conference hall, reading areas, museum shop,depot and service areas are joined together in the newcommon access zone (Fig. 5).

Architecturally, the design is accentuated by a com-bined series of truncated glass cones protruding aboveground. In fact, the courtyard is punctuated by theinverted cones, bringing light into the conical patios andredefining the horizontal surface of the new square. Atnight the urban space is illuminated from below by arti-ficial light. In an interview the architects explain howthey wanted to avoid the feeling of being in a buriedbuilding (Schwar 2013). This was done by the naturallight shining through the curved glass towards the inte-rior and by the visual links upwards towards the histori-cal facades. Although most of the spaces are concealedbeneath the pavement, the architects have certainlydevoted a lot of time to the perforated streetscape, thatis materialised as an intermediate between the WorldHeritage city level and the contemporary underground

123


Fig. 5 a, b Exterior and interior photo of the glass cones (Universalmuseum Joanneum/N. Lackner)

Fig. 6 a Photo of the entrance escalator (Universalmuseum Joanneum/N. Lackner). b Cross section by Nieto Sobejano Arquitectos

world. In the largest of the glass cones, two escalatorsprovide access to the underground space. This physicalconnection between the ground floor and the basementis a bit graceless, but vital for the project. Apart froma dominant feature above ground and an aesthetic lightwell below ground, the cone is also a permeable glassstructure (Fig. 6).

The smooth glazing surface of the cones is definedby two differently sized circles, one being shifted abovethe other. As a result the double glass units have variousdimensions and radii, splaying out from a vertical posi-tion to an increasing sloped angle about the perimeter.The glass panels are supported on top and bottom only,thus eliminating vertical structural elements. The top-most glass panels are shaping the circular balustradeand are cantilevering from the hidden peripheral metal

sections at ground floor level. A flush glass surface hasbeen realised by means of a hidden solid steel profilein every joint of the double glass units, and a bondedconnection for the laminated balustrade glass panels,braced at the top by means of a stainless steel handrailprofile. Since the curved glass holes are thematerialisa-tion of the project’s concept, it can be understood whyso much attention is given to the quality of the glassand the detailing. The glass segments of the cones areinsulated and laminated glass units at the undergroundlevels, while single laminated glass panels were used atthe balustrades. The curved glass panels are furnishedwith a dotted screen print, with a radius decreasingtowards the base. All glazing is low iron, to providethe best colour rendering index. Neugebauer (2014)has shown how various safety glass compositions of

123


conical-curved annealed glasses were used to realisethe difficult shapes with an inclination varying from avertical position to an angle up to 30◦.

The architects pride themselves on not giving in tothe temptation of developing an iconic structure, as hasoften happens in recent museum expansions (Schwar2013). It is true that most attention was given to theintermediate space, rather than creating a blatant struc-ture. The intervention could be considered as an embed-ded landmark within the urban landscape. It adds to thestreetscape and opens up the buried world.

2.3 The Mauritshuis, The Hague

Before he was commissioned to work on the Van GoghMuseum’s Glass Entrance, Hans van Heeswijk fin-ished another Dutch underground museum extension:the Mauritshuis in The Hague. The city centre did notallow an increased footprint, so the solution for spatialexpansion was to make an underground connection toa neighbouring building. Van Heeswijk introduced anopening in the forecourt with a staircase and a trans-parent elevator shaft sticking out above street level, amodest but innovative glass structure that is one of theproject’s pillars.

The Mauritshuis museum is housed in a promi-nent building that used to be a seventeenth centurypalace. The Dutch State acquired the building in 1820to house the ‘Royal Cabinets of Rarities and Paint-ings’ and just like the Louvre, a royal museum hadthus been opened to the public. Since the 1960s, beforeart became an affair of ordinary people, but it took

another five decades before the shortcomings of theMauritshuis became apparent. The main entrance wasno longer suitable for the growing number of visitors,who had to enter the building through a former serviceentrance at the side. In addition, themuseumwas forcedto move the permanent collection in order to accom-modate temporary exhibitions, depriving the visitorsa view of unique paintings that had to be temporarilytaken to the depot. The Mauritshuis suffered from itspopularity, becoming a victim of its own success (Gor-denker 2014), but a solution emerged when a buildingacross the street became vacant. The opportunity wasseized to excavate the forecourt and the design of anunderground entrance foyer connecting the two build-ings was born.

Van Heeswijk is aware of the fact that many visitorscome to a museum for the first time. So a museum’sorganisation can never be too simple and the architec-ture should be welcoming (van Heeswijk et al. 2014).To satisfy the need for more space and improvementof the public amenities, the foyer is designed as a dis-tribution centre. Just like the premises of the Univer-salmuseum Joanneum in Graz, there is little visibleat street level except for a cylindrical glass structurewhich is situated—along with the museum—right nextto the Dutch government buildings that house one ofthe oldest parliaments in the world. The most promi-nent added structure is an eye-catching all-glass eleva-tor shaft that also casts light downwards and functionsas an urban lantern in the evening. The elevator is animportant cylindrical glass landmark that points out thenew entrance of themuseum and provides a spectacularmeans to ascent into the museum. The elevator shaft is

Fig. 7 a, c Photos of the glass elevator shaft (L. Kramer). b Section of the Mauritshuis extension by Hans van Heeswijk Architects

123


unique in the history of undergroundmuseum architec-ture because its structural stability is totally realised byglass components (Huisman 2014) (Fig. 7).

The principle of an underground entrance has thebenefit that visitors immediately have an overview ofthe layout while they enter from above. This concept isalso the starting point for Apple’s flagship store in NewYork, an all glass project that has been an inspirationfor the glass elevator as well.

The glass elevator embodies two experimental steps(Eekhout and van der Sluis 2014): firstly the realisationof a cylindrical glass shaft in an outdoor environmentwith full wind loads and secondly the employment oftwo glass fins to guide the sides of the glass eleva-tor cage directly. With additional sidelights and a glassfloor at the forecourt, the spacious underground tunnelbecame a well-lit foyer, with the 9 m high glass ele-vator shaft as its business card. The Mauritshuis hasbecome twice as large, but its distinctive and intimateatmosphere has been preserved.

3 The Van Gogh Museum, Amsterdam

At the end of the nineteenth century, the city of Ams-terdam had grown out of its old city walls. In betweenthe Rijksmuseum (1885), the Royal Concertgebouw(1888), and the Stedelijk Museum (1894), a new quar-ter emerged just outside the city centre, featured byan open space in between a number of cultural build-ings. This area was soon referred to as the MuseumSquare and was shaped as an urban park. In 1963 archi-tect Gerrit Rietveld (1888–1964), one of the membersof Dutch modernist art movement De Stijl, was com-missioned to design a new museum at the perimeterof this urban park, dedicated to the works of Vincentvan Gogh. Rietveld was both at the height and the endof his career. His preliminary design was taken overby his successors, and the building came into com-pletion in 1973. The museum terrain was becominga playground for architects and urban designers in thedecades to come. In 1989, CarelWeeber first suggestedan expansion of the Van Gogh Museum at the side ofthe Museum Square. Only two years later, a new exhi-bition wing was about to rise from the drawing boards.The design came from Kisho Kurokawa and providedthe Van Gogh Museum with a new exhibition wing,in line with the Museum Square master plan of Dan-ish landscape architect Sven-Ingvar Andersson (Kloos

2015). Because the Kurokawa Wing was designed as adetached volume, one ofAndersson’s important opticalaxes perfectly coincided with the Van Gogh Museum’snew layout, which had an underground connection. Thefloor plan of the newwingwas a semi-ellipse completedby an adjacent pool. This sunken pond was designedas an intermediate space where visitors could ‘purifytheir minds’ whilst moving from the Rietveld buildingto the new Kurokawa wing (Fig. 8).

In terms of the museum’s logistics there were alsogreat benefits. Previously, temporary exhibitions tookplace in the Rietveld building, and just like in the Mau-ritshuis, the permanent collection had to be removedevery time. With the new wing, this belonged to thepast. The museum prepared itself for 1 million yearlyvisitors. Meanwhile the discussion and ideas about thetransformation of the Museum Square were ongoing.The Van Gogh Museum’s big brothers, the Rijksmu-seum and the Stedelijk museum developed extensiveand costly expansion plans, both with a new entrancedirected towards the Square. The Van Gogh Museumcouldn’t fall behind.

4 The Glass Entrance

The design for the newGlass Entrance of the VanGoghMuseum in Amsterdam was a collaboration betweenKisho Kurokawa Architect & Associates, Hans vanHeeswijk Architects and the structural designers andengineers of Octatube, all with the application of glassat the forefront of their minds.

4.1 Kurokawa

Just like the museums described in Sect. 2, theVan Gogh Museum has been experiencing a notableincrease of visitors since the opening of Kurokawa’sexhibition wing on the Museum Square in the earlynineties. When the adjacent Rijksmuseum underwentmajor refurbishmentworks between2003 and2013, theVan Gogh Museum eclipsed its neighbour in being themost popular museum in the Netherlands, hitting 1.6million visitors in 2011. In order to respond to variousproblems, amore comfortable, safer andmore spaciousentrance was at the top of the museum’s wish list. Anew entrance was to replace a small entryway in theRietveld Building at the Paulus Potterstraat that had no

123


Fig. 8 a, c The Kurokawa Wing and its sunken pool (Sels Clerbout). b Isometric view (Kisho Kurokawa Architect & Associates)

visual connection to the Kurokawa Wing whatsoever.The idea of moving the entrance towards the MuseumSquarewas also in linewith the newly openedRijksmu-seum, the Stedelijk Museum and the Royal Concertge-bouw, which all had their new entrances directed to thisurban lawn.

In April 2012, five years after the decease of KishoKurokawa, his Japanese office KKAA received the for-mal programme of requirements for designing a trans-parent entrance at the pond. In terms of the building’sappearance, it stated that the museum had to be anexperience for the visitor. Keywords were: daylight,openness, visibility and hospitality. Furthermore, visi-tors should explicitly not be given the impression thatthe entrance is located in the basement. The clientwanted to be able to communicate the experience of themuseum and its identity on the outside of the building.Kurokawa paid careful attention not to give excessiveimpact on the vicinity, including the Rietveld Build-ing. The same had been done at the existing exten-sion of the KurokawaWing (1990–1998), a closed vol-ume which added a lot of space to the museum ofwhich 75 % was situated underground. For the newentrance, the office also wanted to respect and main-tain the architectural originality of theKurokawaWing,which didn’t have a separate entrance and was nick-named ‘the Oyster’. This was done by creating an aes-thetical tension between the two. The entrance is com-pletely detached from the cantilevering cubical ‘pic-ture cabinet’ and from the northern slanted wall of theKurokawa Wing. The shape of the glass roof of thenew Glass Entrance is defined by an upside-down ver-sion of the existing Kurokawa Wing’s spheroid roofsurface. In this way an expression is given to the con-tinuation of the original design. Underneath, the for-

mer sunken pond is transformed into a spacious andwell-lit basement floor. In a mail conversation withthe author, KKAA explains why they proposed glassas the main building material: it is in line with theclient’s brief, and it is conceived to be a very durablematerial, without any wear and tear to the surfaceover time. With regards to the architectural meaningof glass, Kurokawa provided the impression of open-ness in the new entrance, with sufficient space and day-light. They aimed to identify the new entrance as a con-trasting building next to the aluminium, titanium andgranite stone Kurokawa Wing, and wanted to relievethe impact of the new entrance on the vicinity by thereflection of glass and its transparency. When specta-tors arewalking by and looking through the building, orwhen museum visitors are at the basement of the newentrance looking outwards, the existing Rietveld andKurokawa buildings are visible through a curved glassfaçade.

Kisho Kurokawa was not only an influential archi-tect, but also a gifted and passionate philosopher.His comprehensive Philosophy of Symbiosis (1997)expresses his thoughts on architecture clearly. WhileKurokawa applies the concept of symbiosis from thescale of a human being to entire cities and soci-eties, it must have inspired his buildings too. Thatis why his office might have been so cooperative inobliterating the spirituality of the pond. The ambi-guity of the intermediate space is surely related tothe philosophy of symbiosis, both in its old stateand in the redesign. In the 1990s, the symbiosisbetween the new wing and the Rietveld Buildingwas attained through the open intermediate space ofthe pool, and from 2015 onwards by the new GlassEntrance.

123


Fig. 9 a–c Artist impressions of the preliminary design of Kisho Kurokawa Architect & Associates

Fig. 10 a–c Artist impressions of the detailed design (Hans van Heeswijk Architects)

4.2 Hans van Heeswijk & Octatube

After receiving the general concept from KKAA, itwas obvious for the client—being the Central Govern-ment Real EstateAgency—they had to get a specialisedglass façade company on board as soon as possible.That’s how the design and build company Octatube gotinvolved in the project, following a selection procedure.A few months later, the office of Hans van HeeswijkArchitects was appointed for the detailed architecturaldesign.

Although the concept and shape of the GlassEntrance had already been defined by Kurokawa,the entire glass envelope structure was redesigned.Whereas the initial Kurokawa design was featured by amassive structure of trusses andoverlappingmetal gird-ers, the final design left only a minimal steel structureconsisting of a 3D-curved CHS tube along the perime-ter of the glass volume. This roof beam sits on ten steelcolumns. The rest of the main structural elements arecompletely made of glass. A comparison between theoriginal artist impression of Kurokawa (Fig. 9) and theones below demonstrate how the structure has beenredesigned (Fig. 10).

The ambitions of Van Heeswijk had been to pro-vide transparency, visual tranquillity and a high levelof finish quality. Especially at the materialisation of thestructure and the interior staircase, the latest develop-ments in glass engineering and construction live up tothese aspirations.

The inverted spheroid surface of the glass roof issupported by 30 parallel glass fins that are all uniquein length and height, the longest being 12 m. Boththe facade and the roof glass panels are stabilising thesteel structure so that no wind bracings were neces-sary and the steel structure appears to be simple. The600 m2glass roof surface consist of double glass unitsthat are cold-twisted in the outer perimeter, to createa smooth transition between the roof and the ellipticalcurved façade. The façade is made of 650 m2 cold-bentdouble glass units and supported by 20 unique glassmullions andbespokemetal purlins. The insulated glassunits (IGUs) are cold-bent on site to a minimum radiusof 11.5 m. This is done airborne by an electric robotcurving machine, see Sect. 7.6. After being bent to aprecise radius and brought to the right position, they arefixed by clamps with a bolted connection. The revolv-ing glass doors at the entrance are marked by a 1.5 m

123


Fig. 11 Architectural section of the Van Gogh Museum (Hans van Heeswijk Architects)

Fig. 12 a Exterior photo (Ronald Tilleman). b, c Exterior and interior photo (Luuk Kramer)

cantilevering glass canopy. The majority of the visitorsdescend via a glass staircase (Fig. 11).

The axis of Andersson’s pedestrian walkway isuntouched, but the sunken pond is transformed into acovered underground space. In the evening, the GlassEntrance functions as an urban lantern (van Heeswijk2015), as we have seen at other glass museum struc-tures. But in contrast with the Louvre’s pyramid,the Van Gogh Museum’s Glass Entrance Building isabstract and visually simple, whilst technically com-plex (Fig. 12).

5 Main structure

The structural design of the glass envelope is a typi-cal mix of a steel structure with additional stabilisa-tion from the glass roof surface and the glass façade.The glass envelope could be called a ‘steel-glass struc-ture’ in its structural sense. The volume of the glassentrance was derived from the design of Kurokawa

and exactly followed the former balustrade around thedeep pond on the outside. On the side of the KurokawaWing the inclinations were mirrored to obtain a uni-tised elliptical stone and glass design. The curved topperimeter had to be lowered a bit, to allow the newroof plane to slide under the existing cubical volumeof the cantilevering picture cabinet, low enough to beable to install the glass panels and to allow for main-tenance (see Fig. 13b). The initial Kurokawa designof a perimeter space truss and steel purlins on verticalCHS columns (see Fig. 9) was further developed into amore abstract scheme of a perimeter CHS tube, curveddownward next to the KurokawaWing and curved bothhorizontally andvertically at the side of the curvedglassfaçade. The steel columns were maintained, but had tobepositionedunder an angle due to the total shapeof theglass envelope. The explicit wish of the architects wasto minimise the amount of metal components as muchas possible, without the ‘all-glass budgets’ of Apple.The metal purlins of Kurokawa were replaced by glassbeams in the cross direction at every glass panel seam,

123


Fig. 13 a 3D view of structural model (Octatube). b section (Octatube)

with a maximum length of 12 m. At the time of designdevelopment the façade glass panels were polygonal inshape and around 1.8×1.8 m in size. A later thoughtwas to have a more fluent façade instead of the polygo-nal facetted façade. The glass panel size became 3.6 mhorizontally over a height of 1.8 m vertically (the widthof the glass panel) tominimise the support structure andvisual distortions due to irregular reflections which arevery visible when walking by the outside of the facade.Vertical glass fins at every 3.6 m in combination withhorizontal steel curvedpurlinswere designed to create afree panorama when looking horizontally between tworows of purlins, from left to right. As a result of thisdesign, the main structural system is a steel CHS struc-ture of two beams on steel columns, connected at vari-ous positions and stiffened by the roof glass structure.In the calculations of the total frame, the stiffness of theelliptical façade is not included, however in reality thiswill minimise deflections even further (see Fig. 13a).So the structural design is a CHS steel structure partlystabilised by the glass roof and the glass façades, alongwith bespoke connections and interface details. All inorder to prevent steel wind bracings in the façade andthe roof and to obtain an abstract viewwith a reasonableprice level, usual in the Dutch market.

5.1 System description

The eye-catching elements of the Van GoghMuseum’sGlass Entrance are the façade and roof, both supportedby a hybrid system of steel tubes, glass panels and glass

fins. Two curved CHS tubes in the roof are supportedvertically by ten tubular steel columns. The dimensionsof all CHS are engineered at Ø406.4×12.5 (S355) fora univocal appearance. Four columns positioned at anoffset of 1.3m of the curved glass facade are positionedvertically and four columns next to theKurokawaWingare tilted with the same 6◦ angle as the slanting metalclad façade that was realised in 1998. Two columns thatsupport the intersection of the two curved roof tubeshave a different inclination as if the steel structure isperforming a balancing act next to theKurokawaWing.

In accordancewith the static scheme (Fig. 13), struc-tural stability and stiffness are created in four ways:

• Applying a moment-fixed connection between thetubular columns and tubular 3D shaped roof beamsto create a portal frame structure [D1].

• Applying a hinged connection at the bottom of thesix slanted columns next to the Kurokawa Wingin combination with a connection between thesecolumns and the structure of the gutter [D2]. Dueto these connections most column are in itself sta-ble. The same principle of the slanted columns isapplied to the vertical columns. However, thesecolumns are not connected to the gutter structurebut to the curved concrete edge at ground floor level[D2].

• Introducing eight hinged-connected tubular beamsthat connect the steel structure to the KurokawaWing for extra stiffness.

• Connecting the slanted glass beams in the roof(slope = 16.5◦) and their bonded rectangular hol-

123


low steel sections (RHS) to the steel tubes in a waythe normal forces are transferred [D3].

As glass is usually not used to stiffen steel structures,this last method is experimental and hence elaboratedin more detail. Normally, both glass fins and regu-lar glass units are mainly loaded by bending forces.Fins are then used to support glazing units in facadeand roof structures that are primarily loaded by windand snow. However, as glass is capable of withstand-ing high compressive forces, fins could be used ascompression elements in a structure. The engineers ofOctatube experimented successfully with glass stabil-isations since the mid 1990s (BRN Catering, Capellead IJssel). For the Van Gogh Museum it was proposedto use the glass fins in the roof to vertically supportthe IGUs (8/16/1010.4) and to transfer horizontal com-pressive forces from the curved steel tube next to thefacade to the curved beam next to the KurokawaWing.To transfer tensile forces, the bonded rectangular stain-less steel sections (Figs. 15, 16) are connected to thesteel structure as well.

The dimensions of the glass beams are chosen inrelation to their span. Due to the elliptical shape ofthe floor plan and the resulting curved geometry of thefaçade, all glass fins differ in length. Downward load-ing, dead load in combination with snow load, is nor-mative for the glass fins. This load is simplified as anequally distributed load on one glass fin. In the designof glass fins, dimensions are governed by strength asallowable stresses are relatively low. A ratio is deter-mined in which this normative (simplified) load com-bination would lead to stresses equal to about 50 % ofthe allowable stresses.As bending stresses in an equallydistributed loaded beam on two supports quadraticallyrelate to the span, and stresses also quadratically relateto the height of the beam, a linear relation between theheight h and span L was chosen for a fin with a glasscomposition of 3×15 mm:

h [mm] = L [mm]17

≥ 200mm (1)

The longest span of a glass fin is 12 m for which aheight of 700 mm is determined. In relation to the totalthickness of less than 5 cm this is a very slander beamand therefore susceptible to lateral torsional buckling.Torsional stiffness of a laminated section is determinedby the thickness of single sheets and shear interactionbetween those sheets. In the analysis the thickness of

the interlayer is omitted. Calculations of the glass rooffins were based on the interlayer PVB which resultedin almost no shear interaction between the glass sheetsin case of long-term loading. e.g. G = 0.05 N/mm2 fora load duration of 50 years. Then, torsional stiffness ismainly determined by the thickness of the single glasssheets. Next to providing enough torsional stiffness,stability is determined by lateral support of the beam’sareas in compression. In case of the roof fins of the VanGogh Museum, stability is increased by connections(centre-to-centre 800 mm) on top of the glass fins tothe IGUs of the roof with a maximum width of 1.8m(see Fig. 16 for typical details). At these positions lat-eral movement at the top of the glass beam, that isloaded in compression in the normative load case, isprevented. Inverted upward loading due to wind suc-tion is not normative as dead load of all glass elementsis relatively high and the slope of the roof is quite mod-est. After finite element stability analysis of the glassfins, a glass composition of 3×15mmwas determined.A laminate of three sheets was chosen tomake sure thatafter breakage of one glass sheet, the maximum char-acteristic load can still be resisted by the two remainingpanes. Fully tempered glass was chosen to increase theallowable stresses. In combination with SentryGlas�(SG) interlayers, the post-failure characteristics havebeen improved in the event that all three glass panes ofa laminated glass roof fin would be broken. However,this is very unlikely as they are high up in the air andcannot be reached bymaintenance staff without specialequipment.

A three dimensional structural finite element modelwas made to analyse the structure, e.g. determine nor-mal forces in the glass fins (Fig. 13a). Femap, as pre-and postprocessor, is used in combination with NXNastran as solver. In the main model, only one dimen-sional elements are used. Gap elements are used totransfer compression only and their spring stiffnessis determined in relation to the design of the connec-tion details. Two dimensional elements with propertiesaccording to the equivalent plate thickness approachare used in sub-models. The 12 m long roof glass beamwas modelled as follows:

• Vertical nodal supports (z-direction) at the two bot-tom corners;

• Horizontal nodal supports (x-direction) at two thirdof the length of the vertical edges where the steelshoe supports the glass beam;

123


Fig. 14 Finite elementmodel with instability shape(Octatube)

• Horizontal nodal supports (x-direction) every800mm at the top of the glass beam;

• Longitudinal nodal support (y-direction) in the cen-ter of one vertical edge;

• Equivalent plate thickness calculated for every loadcase with corresponding load duration according toNEN2608 for glass panes supported at three edges;

• Load in y-direction applied at nodes at position ofintermediate material between steel shoe and glassbeam (paragraph 5.3);

• Load in z-direction applied at top edge of glassbeam.

It was found that the normative load case for stressesand stability is snow load in combinationwith a glass finthat has one broken pane (Fig. 14). Still, the eigenvalueis more than 30, and therefore no imperfections need tobe taken into account and a geometrical linear analysisis sufficient. It was also checked if enclosing of thefins at both ends and rotation of the fin at its supportsresulted in local tensile stresses, but this effect was notdetected due to the very small deflections of the glassfin itself.

5.2 Loading

Standard load cases that need to be considered in struc-tural design are dead load, live load and variable load-ing. Normative variable loads for the main steel andglass structure of the new entrance of the Van GoghMuseum are wind load and snow load. Temperatureload is also investigated, both globally and locally.

Snow load is determined according to NEN-EN1991-1-3 and the Dutch national annex. Due to thehigher existing volume next to the gutter, snow driftshould be taken into account. Therefore, the resultingloads are very high. The maximum characteristic snowload on the glass roof is determined to be 2.1 kN/m2.Snow load in the gutter is calculated to be 2.8 kN/m2.Assuming a volumetric weight of snow of 200 kg/m3

this is over 1 m snow, and therefore quite conservativefor the Netherlands.

Wind load is determined according to NEN-EN1991-1-4 and the Dutch National Annex. However,wind load on an elliptical shape is not mentioned in thecode. Therefore, the wind load is determined accord-ing to the procedure that is stated for cylindrical shapeswith a certain width and height. A conservatively highmaximum pressure coefficient (wind pressure) of+1.0and a minimum pressure coefficient (wind suction) of−1.5 was chosen. These pressure coefficients wereused in combination with inner under pressure andoverpressure, to calculate all facade glazing units andglass fins separately. Global calculations for the steeland glass structure were performed with simplifiedpressure coefficients. Due to the curved plan, asymmet-ric loading was found to be normative for the overallstiffness of the structure.

Global temperature load was considered in the mainmodel for all roof elements (steel roof tubes and glassfins). A reference temperature of 17◦ was set and thetemperature loads of −25◦ and +60◦ where appliedto check deformations and stresses. These temperaturedifferences are also used in the design of the thicknessof the structural silicone between the glass and steel ele-ments. Climatic loads are not normative for the designof the IGUs due to their (large) dimensions.

5.3 Connection of glass fins to steel tubes

To activate the glass beam as a compression element,and the stainless steel RHS section on top, as an ele-ment loaded in tension, a detail is designed as shownin Fig. 15. Forces on the façade are in the first placetransferred by the double glass units in the façade tothe vertical façade fin. By means of a mechanical con-nection, the forces are transferred with a steel rod to thecurved steel tube that runs along the façade’s perime-ter. This steel tube is supported vertically by steel CHS

123


Fig. 15 Schematic sectionwith connections of glassfins to steel tubes (Octatube)

columns. This connection is made by welding a squarehollow section in the horizontal tube and a welded baseplate that is connected with eight M30 bolts (8.8) to ahead plate welded in the vertical tube. The set backof the head plate compared to the tube edge creates ashadow line. The horizontal tube has one plate weldedto it in the direction of the glass roof fin onto which awelded steel bracket is screwed in a way a similar smallset back is created as described before. Thewelded steel‘shoe’ bracket in which the glass roof fin is placed hasa screwed Polyoxymethylene (POM) block in it ontowhich the glass fin is placed. The same detail is madeat the glass fin’s bottom support. As the glass roof fin isunder an angle of 16.5◦, another POM block is placedat the bottom end of the fin to prevent shear behaviour.When resisted by this block a small gap between glassand steel at the top end of the fin of about 20mm results.This gap was measured on-site to precisely produce thefinal keystone element. This element is designed as acomposite of POMand neoprene of which the latter hasa much smaller stiffness than the former. After a para-meter study an axial connection stiffness of 9600N/mmwas chosen to be a good intermediate, stiff enough totransfer forces but flexible enough to reduce internalstresses in the glass beams in the two corners of thesteel roof structure a lot in case of thermal contraction.The neoprene stiffness is much less than that of POM.As a result, the total axial compression stiffness of theglass fin and the connections is determined by the neo-prene stiffness in combination with the axial stiffnessof the glass beam.As the glass fin ismodelled in Femapusing beam elements with the right sections, the fin’saxial stiffness is implicit. The formula ofRocard (Aikenet al. 1989) was used to determine the axial compres-sion stiffness of neoprene. The formula calculates the

Young’s Modulus E, out of a shear modulus G, shapefactor S, that is calculated by dividing the surface areaby the bulge area, and constants k1 that equals 4.8 andk2 that equals 4. The shear modulus of the applied neo-prene is estimated to be 1.0 N/mm2 and constants k1and k2 are 4.8 and 4.

E = 3G ·(1 + k1 · S21 + k2 · S2 + 2 · S2

)(2)

AYoung’sModulus of about 30N/mm2 was calculatedfor the neoprene block of 50×48×6mm (applied tofinswith height≤500mm) and 20N/mm2 for a block of100×48×10 (applied to fins with height >500 mm).The difference in axial stiffness (EA/L) is about 20%. Itwas shown in thefinite elementmodel that the increasedstiffness of the block of neoprene with a 6mm thick-ness had little influence on the forces and deflections.In addition, the formula mentioned by Battermann andKöhler (1982)was used to determine the neoprene stiff-ness. Differences in Young’s Modulus were less than10 % and were covered in a sensitivity analysis of thefinite element model.

The axial compression design load in the beam ele-ments in the model was found in the smaller glass finswith amaximumof15.7kN.Axial short termstresses inthe neoprene of 6.5N/mm2 will be no problem.The cal-culated (compression) strain in this ULS combinationis 20 %. The potential increased stiffness due to non-linear material behaviour is covered by the sensitivityanalysis and added stiffness would mean that the glassfins will support the steel beams even better. A locallyhigher normal force is no problem for the system dueto the high eigenvalue of the glass fins and relativelylow stresses compared to the allowable stresses.

123


5.4 Test assembly

To check the production tolerances of the curved CHSroof beams, a full scale test assembly was made in thefactory of Octatube. In the design of glass elements,allowable tolerances are very small. Especially in thiscasewhere glass is such an integral part of the construc-tion, production tolerances of the roof structure werecritical, as the theoretical supported width of the edgesof the double glass units in the roof is only 15 mm.Furthermore, the supported width of a glass fins in theroof was quite small (3 cm for the smallest fins) andthe detail of the steel support had no adjustment possi-bilities due to aesthetic reason. Therefore, the centre-to-centre distance of both tubes need to be checkedcarefully before welding all connection plates to them.To ease welding, the structure of the test assembly wasinverted (assembled upside down). In that way mostwelds could be made by welding staff members stand-ing on the factory floor. It was found that the differencein geometry between theory and practice was largest atthe two end corners of the tubes, however these couldbe compensated for in the welding procedures of thesteel plates.

6 Roof

The roof of the new entrance has a complex geometryand also plays a role in stabilising the glass roof fins.As it is made of glass, thermal greenhouse effects werealso investigated. However, as the glass volume is ori-ented North, most of the time it is in the shadow of thestone clad Kurokawa Wing. The glass roof is made ofinsulated glass units that are supported by the glass fins.

As these fins are positioned parallel, but at an angle of16.5◦ in one direction and differ in height in the otherdirection, most glass units are rectangular and posi-tioned at an angle in two directions. The compositionof the IGUs, 8/15/1010.4, will be described in moredetail. The outer pane is a 8 mm fully tempered singleglass sheet with an Ipasol solar control coating 62/29that lets most light in, but keeps most of the heat out.It’s fully tempered to be able to resist a characteristicpoint load of 1.5 kN and the high snow load, even withreduced allowed stresses due to the 44 % white dottedfrit on the inner side of the outer pane. The inner PVBlaminated heat-strengthened glass panemakes sure thatif one or more of the three glass panes should break,not one glass shard will fall down. The inner laminatedglass pane also contributes in stabilising the glass fins.

Dead load of the glass units, that are at an angle intwo directions, is resisted in two ways. As the glassunits are clamped to the glass roof fins, the slope isthe same as the inclination of the fins. It is uncertainif friction between the supports of the glass units isenough to resist the dead load and therefore glidingis prevented by a steel element at the bottom end ofthe glass units that is connected to the rectangular hol-low section. This is the first support method. In Fig. 16three typical details are shown in which the varyingslope of the glass units in the other direction is demon-strated. The second method to resist dead load of theglass units in this direction is found by stacking of theglass units. Stacking, because if we look at the totalglass roof section, some glass units want to slide rightand some left. If all panes are stacked, they counter-act each other. As the roof is not symmetrical in thelongitudinal direction, additional connections betweenthe glass units and the steel supporting structure ensure

Fig. 16 a–c Connections ofglass fin to glass roof unitsunder varying degrees(Octatube)

123


Fig. 17 Images of previously built projects with cold shaped glass. a LoggiaWasseralfingen (Bogenglas). b Parking hedgesWesterlaan,Rotterdam (Octatube). c Floriade Pavilion, Hoofddorp (Octatube)

that an equilibrium is obtained. In addition, the detailis made in such a way that the element in betweenthe glass units—transferring compressive forces—isscrewed firmly to the steel substructure. The doubleglass units also press in the other direction comparedto the ‘slide down direction’. Therefore, if both glassunits at each side of a glass fin have the same size andare at the same angle, the detail is in equilibrium andthe glass fin is only loaded in global z-direction and notsideways. Contrariwise, the glass fin will load the glassunits in the roof if it is itself loaded vertically due toimperfections. When loaded vertically, the top side ofthe glass fin will be in compression while the bottomside is in tension. To prevent lateral torsional buck-ling the compression top side of the fin, as mentionedbefore, should be supported sideways every 800 mm.The longer the glass fins in the roof, the more impor-tant this support, because the shorter fins are much lesssensitive for instability failure modes.

The roof glass to glass roof beam detail is made indifferent ways in relation to the angle between the glassunits and the horizontal pane (see Fig. 17a–c).

(a) Angle between horizontal pane and roof glass unitsα < 10◦ and maximum fin length is 12 m: Thesmall angle between stiff steel section and glassunit is compensated by flexiblematerial. The POMblock in between the glass units is screwed directlyinto the stainless steel rectangular hollow section.Out of plane forces at the top of the glass beamare transferred to the roof glass units via shear andtension in these EJOT screws and compression inthe POM block.

(b) Angle between horizontal pane and roof glass units10 ≤ α ≤ 30◦ and maximum fin length is 10 m:The angle between glass unit and steel section is

compensated by a combination of black colouredthin steel plate and a local plastic block. The POMblock in between the glass units is screwed directlyinto the stainless steel rectangular hollow section.Out of plane forces at the top of the glass beam aretransferred as mentioned before.

(c) Angle between horizontal pane and roof glass unitsα > 30◦ and maximum fin length is 4 m: Theangle between glass unit and steel section is com-pensated by a combination of black coloured thinsteel plate and a local plastic block. The POMblock in between the glass units is screwed into thePOM block that is previously screwed to the stain-less steel rectangular hollow section. Out of planeforces at the top of the glass beam can be trans-ferred in two steps via EJOT screws, and POMblocks, but are not really an issue due to the smalllength of these fins.

7 Façade

The cold-bent glass façade of the new entrance of theVan Gogh Museum is one of the eye catching aspectsfor architects and structural designers and engineers.Its curve completes the existing stone façade to be thecomplement of the stone wing as one continuous ellip-tical building shape. The facade consists of in situ bentglass units that are connected to the vertical glass façadefins.

7.1 Cold deformed glass

Normally, when an architect designs a curved façadeor roof, this is executed with hot deformed glass, in

123


laminated panels or in IGUs. These so called ‘hot bent’laminated glass units, are named after the manufac-turing process in which the individual glass pane isheated to about 600 ◦C and then shaped (sagged) in areceiving mould. Cooling down can be done naturallyto obtain an annealed glass panel or the glass can becooled instantly by cold air simultaneously along bothfaces of the pane in case of obtaining fully temperedglass (very short cooling period) or heat-strengthenedglass (longer cooling period). After cooling down, thesingle bent glass sheets can be laminated by using anautoclave. IGU units of annealed, heat strengthenedor fully tempered glass, can be composed of single orlaminated panes, depending on the analysis of stressesexpected in the glass and the expected safety behaviourafter eventual breakage of one of the panes. When theterm ‘cold-bent glass’ is used, ‘cold’ refers to the instal-lation process at ambient temperature atwhich the glassis bent in a certain shape. The flat glass unit from thefactory is produced in the samewaywith the same PVBinterlayer as is always done industrially to produce flatlaminated glass units. PVB is a commonly used inter-layer for laminated glass and its creep behaviour makesit a good choice for cold-bending. In reality laminatedglass is always slightly cold-bent due to imperfectionsin the glass unit itself or in its substructure ontowhich itis fixed. Fixing inevitably introduces local cold bendingof the glass panels. However, in engineering terms, theapplication is marked as ‘cold-bent’ when the defor-mation is more significant and specifically done withan engineering purpose, after thorough analysis.

The first experiments of Octatube with cold shapedglass date back to 2001 when the ‘spaghetti’ facadesof the Town Hall of Alpen aan den Rijn and the Flo-riade Pavilion in Hoofddorp were realised. All overthe world facades and roofs are now made with colddeformed glass. Often a distinction is made betweencold-bent glass and cold-twisted glass in which the for-mer is mostly referred in case of surfaces with a singlecurvature and the latter in case of double curved sur-faces. However, in practice both have double curvedsurfaces as bending in one direction results in bend-ing in the other direction. This is due to the fact thatdeformation in one axis results in deformation perpen-dicular to this axis as described by the Poisson’s ratio.This secondary curvature is often an undesired curva-ture as reflections can be different than if one wouldhave a perfect one dimensional curved surface. In thispaper, the general verb ‘bending’will be used to refer to

single and double curvatures. Cold twisting is affiliatedto the theory of cold bending, whereas the directionsof bending are opposed to each other.

7.2 Short historic overview of cold-bent facades androofs

To show that cold bending of glass units is done atleast for several decades now, a few relevant projectsand products will be described. In The Netherlandsfrom 1993 the product RadiusGlas was used in projectssuch as in Leiden (Staaks 2003) and Haarlem (Cobouw1995). Since 2000,MaierGlass fromGermany sells theproduct MAGLA� Bogenglas that was used for exam-ple at the Loggia Wasseralfingen (Maier Glas 2015).For this product, the bent shape of originally flat glasspanels is created by tensioning cables that cause outof plane bending of the planar (monolithic fully tem-pered or laminated heat strengthened) glass unit. Inthe Netherlands, cold-bent glass was applied in 1997in roofs of the skylights of the central train station‘s-Hertogenbosch (Vákár and Gaal 2004) and doublecurved glass in the town hall of Alphen aan den Rijn,designed in 1999 and completed in 2003 (Staaks 2003).Already in the early nineties, Octatube was researchingcold-twisted glass use (Eekhout et al. 2007). Anothercompany in the Netherlands, BRS, used it for the ellip-tical façade of the Jinso Pavilion in Amsterdam, builtin 2008 ( Vollebregt 2009).

Octatube has ample experiencewith cold-bent glass.One year after the aforementioned town hall, DriesStaaks graduated on the subject of cold-twisted glassand his ‘Theory of Staaks’. With the accumulatedknowledge several double curved roofs were designedand built. For example, the Medieval & RenaissanceGallery of the Victoria & Albert Museum in London(designed by MUMA and Tim MacFarlane), featuredby IGUsdeformed about 100mmout of their plane for adiagonal length of 3 m. The Floriade Pavilion designedby Asymptote Architects (New York) was developedand built with laminated cold-bent point fixed lami-nated glass units. Also some small entrance units of anunderground parking garage in Rotterdam designed byEctor Hoogstad were constructed with cold-bent lam-inated glass. In addition, multiple canopies have beenrealised such as the bus and tram station ‘Zuidpoort’ inDelft designed byMickEekhout and ‘DeDroogloop’ inAmstelveen, designed by Thijs Asselbergs. Both have

123


laminated glass panels with an out of plane deforma-tion of about 100 mm. The Zuidpoort roof was madewith rectangular panels and diverging silicone seamsto realise the undulating roof form as a proof of theTheory of Staaks.

7.3 Geometry facade Van Gogh Museum

At both ends, between the existing stone façade andthe new glass entrance, two flat glass panels are placedwith a small recess to emphasise the transition betweenthe old and new building. Between these glass units acurved façade of about 60 m in length stretches with avarying height and varying bending radius. The heightof the facade is a result of the roof geometry, as men-tioned in Sect. 4, and is varying between 8 and 10 m.The curvature of the façade is directly linked to theelliptical ground plan design of Kurokawa followingthe balustrade at the edge of the former pond. This ellip-tical shape with a varying curvature is approximated byseveral arcs with amaximal deviation of a fewmm. Theminimal bending radius that results in the highest cur-vature was found to be 11.5 m. The maximum radiusis 42.5 m.

In the first design phase a centre-to-centre distanceof the vertical supporting structure was sketched to be1.8m and the height of a glass unit would also be 1.8m.The facade was facetted. After an investigation of thedouble curved surface that resulted if one would bendthe 1.8×1.8 m glass unit it was concluded that theresulting reflections would become undesirable. To getbetter deflections, it was then expected that the widthof the glass unit should be higher to get more bendinglength. A length of 3.6mwas chosen, and after buildinga mock-up it was also concluded that the vertical glassfin support in the centre of the glass unit could be omit-

ted. This was also quite economical. Thus, a centre-to-centre distance of 3.6 m between the glass fins resulted.To have an unobstructed view at eye height and to havea rigid element at 1.0 m above the surrounding pave-ments the height of the bottom glass unit was decidedto be 0.9 m. To have a smooth curve with a variableheight at the top of the façade, the top glass units of thefacade all have varying dimensions.

7.4 Glass unit and supports

The cold-bent glass units are connected to glass fins formaximum transparency, which has most likely neverbeen done before. The composition of the glass unitsconsists of a laminated outer and inner pane, both withtwo sheets of 5 mm heat-strengthened glass and 4 lay-ers of PVB in between. Normally, two layers of PVBwould be applied by the glass supplier to cope withimperfections, but 4 layers have been chosen due to thelower (especially long term) bending stresses as theshear deformation of the PVB reduces shear interac-tion between the glass sheets. Normally, fully temperedglass is chosen in case of cold-bent glass for its highertensile capacity, but in this case heat-strengthened glasswas chosen after detailed analysis, for the benefit offavourable post-failure characteristics. Even when allglass sheets would have been completely broken, itstays in place (Fig. 18).

The supports of the cold-bent glass units are cus-tom designed and also different than the usual linearclamped edges. The long edges are supported by smallscrew plates at the outside and a linear element at theinside, while the short edges are supported at the out-side by a stainless steel solid linear section and at theinside by a rectangular hollow stainless steel sectionthat is glued to the vertical glass fin. The small steel

Fig. 18 a Radii of façade curves (Octatube). b, c Geometry of two typical bent glass units (Octatube)

123


screw plates at the end of the long edges are used togenerate a rotation at the end of the four corners of theglass unit. The ones in the centre of the glass unit arestructurally active in case of wind suction, which oftenhappens around a curved building. The horizontal steelsection in between the glass fins is loaded by a bendingmoment at its ends when the end steel plates are tight-ened. The steel sections are mechanically connected tothe glass fins to be able to partly transfer dead load andwind load. Dead load of the glass panels is transferredby compression from the top panels to the lower pan-els. This system thus enables the fixation of the glassunit, but due to the stiffness of the glass pane itself,the short edges would bulge if not restrained. To havea better reflection also these edges are restrained andscrewed to the rectangular section that therefore pulls atthe structural sealant between it and the glass fin. Thisis a permanent load acting on the silicone for which theallowable stresses are relatively low.Stresses dependonthe stiffness of the glass unit and silicone itself, and aftercontact with Sika the high strength structural siliconeadhesive Sikasil SG-550 was chosen that has an allow-able static stress of 0.020 N/mm2. The total summedthickness of the glass sheets of the fin was needed formaximum tensile resistance. Tape that is applied duringthe production process as spacer between the stainlesssteel RHS profile was put at low stressed locations andthe application process of the sealant in the factory wasmonitored closely to make sure this critical detail wasexecuted perfectly.

The actual bending of the flat IGUs to their curvedpre-stressed cold-bent shape is done airborne, by anelectrically operated bending machine combined withvacuum suckers, as will be described in more detail inthe next paragraphs.

7.5 Calculation of stresses in bent glass

In case of structural calculations of laminated glassunits, time dependent behaviour of the laminate isvery important. Finite element models were, just asthe models described in Sect. 5, made in the pre-and postprocessor Femap. To reduce calculation timea laminated glass pane is modelled with plate ele-ments instead of solid elements. Normally, when usingplate elements, an equivalent glass thickness is appliedto these elements according to the Dutch glass codeNEN2608. This equivalent thickness takes into account

the shear interaction between laminated glass sheetsthat depends on the properties of the interlayer, loadduration and temperature. When no shear interactionbetween the glass sheets is accounted for (long loadduration and high temperatures) the lower bound of theequivalent thickness of two sheets of 5 mm (reducedaccording to NEN2608 to 4.8mm) glass is:

tgg,ser,min = 3√n [−] × t [mm]3

= 3√2 × 4.83 = 6.05mm (3)

However, this method is meant for distributing externalloads over both glass sheets. In case of an enforced dis-placementwith no shear interaction, the stresses shouldbe calculated with the thickness of one single sheet. Tocheck stresses for load combinations, a two-step proce-dure is used. The first step is the geometrical nonlinearcalculation of geometry and stresses due to bending.Noshear interaction between the cold-bent glass sheets isassumed due to the thick PVB interlayer and time forrelaxation before the first significant external loads areapplied. A higher thickness results in higher stresses.Therefore, the stresses are calculated with a thicknessof 5.0 mm instead of 4.8 mm as mentioned in the code.The second step is the calculation of stresses and geom-etry due to an external load on the bent glass unit. First,the deformed geometry of the first calculation step is setto be the new geometry. Second, the equivalent thick-ness, calculated by the NEN2608, is applied to all plateelements. Third, constraints are set to match the finalexecuted design. Fourth, the external loading is appliedand extra stresses due to this external load are calcu-lated. The total stress is determined by adding stresseswith the corresponding safety factors for long term andshort term loading (Fig. 19).

In addition to the aforementionedprocedure, stressesduring the initial bending process are investigated, todetermine the actual stresses for different load com-binations. In Fig. 19, boundary conditions and stressesare shown for two analyses to investigate stresses due tocold bending. Image (a) represents the airborne bend-ing process by the bending robot and the stresses duringthat process. While bending, shear interaction betweenthe sheets will be significant assuming an ambient tem-perature of less than 20◦ and a high bending speed.Therefore, a high equivalent thickness of 10 mm isapplied to the plate elements. In the model, an outerpane is connected to an inner pane, to take into accountthat an IGU is bent. The 10 mm plate property thick-

123


Fig. 19 Comparison between twomodels of which the resultingglobal relative displacement in bending direction between cor-ner and centre is about the same: 14 cm, that corresponds to abending radius of 11.5 m. a Major principal stress in airbornesituation suspended in the curving robot after geometrical non-

linear analysis of two plates t=10 mm coupled at the edges andof which one plate is loaded with eight point loads (Octatube).b Major principal stress after geometrical nonlinear analysis ofone plate t=5 mm (Octatube)

ness is applied to both panes. The edges of the outerand inner pane are connected to represent the spacerand structural silicone of the IGU that have a highaxial stiffness. As will be explained in the next para-graph, only the inner pane is loaded during bending.In reality eight point loads will act on this pane. In themodel, the four loads in the centre of the IGU are mod-elled by point supports. Image (b) represents the bend-ing process with the boundary conditions according tothe final situation. Two curved stiff lines are modelledbelow the glass plate with gap elements in between thatare loaded in compression only when the gap is zero.One single glass pane is modelled because boundaryconditions of the outer and inner glass pane are aboutthe same when loads and constraints would be appliedto the glass edges. In the geometrical nonlinear analy-sis, four point loads are applied after which two lineloads are added as well. The point loads resemble theclamp plates at the corners, and the line loads resem-ble the vertical solid steel sections that are screwed to

the stainless steel RHS profile which is glued on theglass fin. It is shown in Fig. 19 that the major principlestresses are three times higher in the post-stress situa-tion (a) in comparison to the final situation (b). This isdue to the higher stiffness of the elements (t = 10 mminstead of t = 5 mm) and the difference in loading. Toprevent glass breakage during installation the bendingprocesswas tested several times, the bending speedwasreduced and monitored closely during installation.

7.6 Testing and execution with a new designedbending machine

To investigate the bending procedure, fixation, geome-try, air tightness, reflections and post-failure behaviour,a mock-up was built in the Octatube laboratory (seeFig. 20a). Two glass units of 3.6 m×1.8 m and twoglass units of 3.6 m×0.9 m were bent to a frame witha curvature of 11.5m. First bymenpower, later by using

123


Fig. 20 a Mock-up (Octatube). b The lifted bent double glass unit of which all four glass sheets are broken to test post failure behaviour(Octatube). c Vacuum machine (Octatube)

Fig. 21 a–d On site air borne bending, checking, flying, and installation of cold-bent glass units (Octatube)

a specially built robotic bending machine. This multi-purpose bending machine was developed together withthe company ViaVac and is shown during test-phasein Fig. 21b, c. It is developed as a combination of aregular glass vacuum lifting machine with two vacuumcircuits, and an electrically driven bendingmechanism.The bending mechanism was designed to be very easyin use so one green button was designed as bendingbutton and one red button as reverse-bending button.It was calibrated on site to accommodate the differentbending radii.

To illustrate the procedure on site, a couple of execu-tion steps are shown in Fig. 21. Flat IGUs are deliveredon the building site first. Then, the special developed‘robotic’ bending vacuum machine is fixed onto theglass and the IGU is lifted from the glass stillages andbent airborne to the desired curvature that is measuredby the relative deflection. Next, the curved glass in the

bending robot is lifted by a crane and hoisted to itsdestination where the bent form matches the form ofthe substructure. To connect the bent IGU to the sub-structure, at least the four corner bolts with clamps aretightened and then, the bending machine is released.

8 Connection of roof and façade

The façade is based on an elliptical ground floor shapeand sloped line visible from the Stedelijk Museum andthe Rijksmuseum. This slope is derived from the exist-ing roof of the Kurokawa Wing and goes down in thedirection of the new entrance as shown in Fig. 14b. Anelliptical shape is then generated as edge curve of theexisting roof and new top façade edge. The invertedspheroid surface of the glass roof is approximated by acylinder under an angle, starting low near the existing

123


Fig. 22 a–d Majorprinciple stress patterns ofcold-twisted glass roofpanels under varyingconditions (Octatube)

stone façade and ending high at a distance of 1.3 m ofthe façade, above the double curved steel roof tube.

The double curved surface between the ellipticaledge curve that is at angle and the cylindrical surfaceis populated with cold-twisted glass units of about 1.2m×1.8 m. The IGU has an 8 mm fully tempered outerpane and a double laminated heat strengthened 88.2inner glass pane. The maximum out of plane deforma-tion or cold-twisting is about 70 mm. Figure 22 showsstress patterns of such panels for multiple load casesand combinations. Figure 22a shows the stresses dueto out-of-plane deformation of 70 mm. Figure 22b–dshow stresses due to extra added upward wind load,snow load and a point force respectively.

9 Glass staircase

The glass staircase, architecturally designed by HansvanHeeswijk as awelcominggesture and to openup theunderground space for visitors, connects the entranceat the Museum Square at ground floor level with theunderground entrance. The architect envisioned a stairsreflecting the architectural appearance and technologyof the new glass entrance. The staircase is state-of-the art in terms of glass technology, spanning a heightof 5.5 m and being supported and stabilised sidewardby a glass portal frame. The total glass mass is about4 tons and can be subdivided in: over 30 triple lami-nated fully tempered glass steps and glass platformswith embedded LEDs, 16 double laminated fully tem-pered glass balustrade elements, and two spectaculartriple laminated fully tempered glass units of the portalframe. Welded steel box sections are designed to spanbetween glass portal frame and concrete bottomand topfloor. In principle the RHS steel beams could have beenreplaced by glass beams including the full height of the

balustrade, much like the stairs in the Apple Stores, butthis would have added too much to the project costshere.

9.1 Glass steps

The glass steps have a depth of 320 mm and a maximallength of 2.7 m. They are made of three PVB laminatedfully tempered glass sheets with a thickness of 12 mm.To have a walkable surface with maximum friction andhigh durability the CriSamar�STEP Lunaris-X frit isapplied to the topmost glass pane. All glass steps aresupported and connected at three positions. Glass sup-ports are executed with 2.3 mm thick 3M VHB Tape4991. This was chosen due to its clean application andflexibility compared to glue. Each support has a tapedsurface area of 38×250 mm2. The tape was applied tothe glass step first, after which stainless steel elementswith threaded holes were pressed onto the tape. Thenthe stainless steel sections were bolted to the sectionsthat had been welded to the steel stringers. In the engi-neering analysis, a maximum characteristic point loadof 300 km on a surface of 50×50mm2 was assumed.The structural glazing tape was checked to cope withrotations due to deformation of the thread and also forenforced displacement of the steel stringers. All steelelements are relatively flexible since they have beendesigned with a minimal height. The static indetermi-nacy of the three-point supported glass steps proved tobe the main difficulty for the structural analysis and forvalidating the steps and connections.

9.2 Balustrade

The balustrade glass units all have a different geom-etry. They are connected to the sides of the welded

123


Fig. 23 a Artist impression of the glass staircase (Octatube). b, c Photographs of the glass staircase (Luuk Kramer & Ronald Tilleman)

box profiles with an offset of 20 cm. Torsion in thestringers is resisted via the connections at the bottomto the concrete and by rotation fixed connections to theother stringers at the centre and top of the staircase.Four point-fixed mechanical connections are used toconnect each glass unit to the steel stringer. Aroundthese connections, stresses in the glass are high dueto the holes needed for the mechanical connections.To resist all applied loads with minimal connections,fully tempered glass with a thickness of 12 mm waschosen for the laminated glass panes. SG is applied asinterlayer for safe post-failure behaviour. An extensiveanalysis was done of all glass panes connected by thehandrail, in which the characteristic point load (1kN)and line load (0.8kN/m) on the guardrail still had to beresisted if one glass sheet would break.

9.3 Glass portal frame

The main—almost invisible—eye catcher of the stair-case structure is the glass portal frame that is composedof two half-portal glass elements made by laminatingthree glass sheets of 15 mm. Three main stringers reston top of this glass structural element that acts like athree-hinged portal frame to transfer vertical and hor-izontal forces from the steel stringers to the concretebase floor. The steel profiles are hinge-divided just afterthe glass portal frame to cope with relative verticaldeflections of the top connection of the staircase to arelative flexible free concrete floor edge. In this way astatic determined system is created that is less suscepti-ble to unforeseen movements. The centre steel stringerruns through the portal frame and the connection should

transfer a vertical design load of over 90 kN to the glass.Horizontally the portal frame is calculated to resist aforce of 10 % of the total vertical load. This percent-age was chosen arbitrarily as a design value to ensurehorizontal stability of the frame. A horizontal load onthe portal frame results in upward and downward forceon the lower two connections of the glass elements.However, no upward force results from load combi-nations, because the dead load is very high. The cen-tre connection needs to transfer compression betweenboth glass elements when it is loaded vertically andshear forces when loaded horizontally. The 10 mm gapbetween the laminated glass and steel is injected withHilti HIT-HY 70 mortar (coloured yellow in Fig. 24c)of which long term and short term stresses are checkedfor the relevant load combinations. Local buckling ofthe glass arch elements is checked by applying an ini-tial imperfection of 10 mm according to the normativeinstability mode and running a geometrical nonlinearanalysis if no shear interaction between glass sheets isassumed. This eccentricity is chosen as a conservativevalue as an out of plane deviation of over 10mm is visi-ble and would not be accepted by Octatube (contractorand structural designer).

Out of plane stability of the glass portal frame isincreased by connecting the glass portal frame to theadjacent balustrade glass units, as is visible in Figs. 23band 24b. These vertical edges have each five mechan-ical connections with bolts through holes in the glassand bent stainless steel elements. To check interactionbetween deformation of the steel stringers and con-nections to the glass balustrade and glass portal framean integral finite element model was made. To copewith the relative deflections of the steel stringers at the

123


Fig. 24 a–c Images of glass portal frame and centre connection (Octatube). (Color figure online)

position of the connections to the balustrade and at theconnections to the portal frame, the balustrade unitsare executed to stand on the concrete floor with invis-ible steel footings (and not to be suspended from thebalustrade). A connection detail with large holes andlow rotational stiffness allows relative vertical deflec-tion between the glass unit and steel beam.

10 Conclusion

Present-day underground museum entrances could bedefined as a distinct architectural typology, in whichglass structures are playing a major role. Pei’s teamwas ahead of its time designing the glass pyramids ofthe Louvre. The iconic glass entrance pyramid is a sym-bol that welcomes a global public. This function of aglass structure being a point of attraction or even anart object in itself, can also be recognised at the Mau-ritshuis and the Van Gogh Museum. Sometimes, glassis more an intermediary between monumental facadesand a new space below ground, as can be seen at theUniversalmuseum Joanneum. In every case, the statelynineteenth and twentieth century ascend towards theentrance of a historic museum building is replaced bya modern and theatrical descend.

The Glass Entrance of the Van Gogh Museum hasbeen designed by Kisho Kurokawa Architect & Asso-ciates, while Hans van Heeswijk and Octatube devel-oped it further in all its elements, components, connec-tions, its total composition and overall transparency.The completion and its contrast with the KurokawaWing is striking and the integrally designed and devel-oped glass and steel structure has its prime enchant-

ment due to its transparency and abstraction. The glassentrance is composed of a load bearing steel struc-ture of CHS beams in the roof and as columns, stiff-ened by the glass roof. The transparency of the totalenvelope is even more prominent than its technolog-ical composition. At first glance the entrance hallmay be composed of known elements and componentsin a very transparent composition, but a number ofinnovative engineering glass features characterise theproject:

• The formof the building envelope as amix of differ-ent geometries and components, leading to a semi-free-form design with the geometric complicationsof the constituting components;

• The triple laminated glass fins in the roof span upto 12 m and stiffen the steel CHS beams;

• The glass roof IGU panels stabilise the glass rooffins;

• The glass fins in the facades are stabilised by thepost-curved IGU’s;

• Connections between glass fins and IGU panels aremade by fully siliconised stainless steel RHS pro-files.

• The IGU glass panels in the façade are colt-bent bya robotic curving machine before installation;

• The glass stairs is supported and stabilised by alaminated glass portal frame;

The project shows how the structure is effectivelydesigned to create a physical collaboration betweenglass and steel in many ways, in strong contrast to amere application of glass as an infill material. Whereasmuseum architecture often stands out by its ‘extrava-ganza’, the geometric glass volume is more an abstract

123


Fig. 25 a Exterior photo (Ronald Tilleman). b Interior photo of the staircase (Ronald Tilleman)

shape, refined in its detailing. Architecturally the glassentrance hall constitutes a balance between the his-toric Rietveld building and the Kurokawa Wing, whileproviding an state-of-the-art window to the Van Goghpaintings (Fig. 25).

Acknowledgments Mick Eekhout for his inspiration; Nils-JanEekhout for his leadership of the project; Luis Weber, Peter vande Rotten and Michael van Telgen for their collegial advice;Photographers Ronald Tilleman and Luuk Kramer for capturingthe newGlassEntrance; TheMuseumJoanneum for their consentto use their images; Nieto Sobejano Arquitectos in Berlin forproviding information on the Joanneumsviertel project; Pei CobbFreed& Partners for providing images of the Louvre’s pyramids;Kisho Kurokawa Architect & Associates for the initial designimages and Hans van Heeswijk for challenging the engineers atOctatube to make an innovative glass envelope.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest On behalf of all authors, the correspondingauthor states that there is no conflict of interest.

References

Aiken, I.D., Kelly, J.M., Tajirian, F.F.: Mechanics of Low ShapeFactor Elastomeric Seismic Isolation Bearings. Universityof California, Berkely (1989)

Battermann, W., Köhler, R.: Elastomere Federung-ElastischeLagerungen. Ernst & Sohn, Berlin (1982)

Buvelot, Q., Gordenker, E., Heeswijk van, H., Huisman, J.: HansvanHeeswijkArchitects: TheMauritshuis. Nai010 Publish-ers, Rotterdam (2014)

Cannel, M.: I.M. Pei, Mandarin of modernism. In: Cannel, M.(ed.) The Battle of the Pyramid, pp. 1–31. Carol SouthernBooks, New York (1995)

Chipley Slavicek, C.: Asian Americans of Achievement: I.M.Pei. Chelsea House Publishers, New York (2009)

Cobouw: Gebogen overkapping nu mogelijk met radius-glas. Published in Cobouw 4, February 1993.http://www.cobouw.nl/artikel/70396-gebogen-overkapping-nu-mogelijk-met-radiusglas. Accessed 8 Dec 2015

Eekhout, M., van der Sluis, W.: Glass elevator shaft for theMauritshuis, The Hague. In: Louter, C., Bos, F., Belis, J.,Lebet, J.-P. (eds.) Challenging Glass 4 & COST ActionTU0905FinalConference.Taylor&FrancisGroup,London(2014)

Eekhout, M., Lockefeer, W., Staaks, D: Application of coldtwisted tempered glass panels in double curved architecturaldesigns. In: Glass Performance Days, pp. 213–220 (2007)

Fernández Solla, I.: The Louvre pyramids revisited. FaçadesConfidential. http://facadesconfidential.blogspot.nl/2011/10/louvre-pyramids-revisited.html (2011). Accessed 27Nov 2015

Haskell, F.: The Ephemeral Museum: Old Master Paintings andthe Rise of Art Exhibition. Yale University Press, NewYork(2000)

Jodidio, P.: I.M. Pei: Complete Works. In: Jodidio, P., AdamsStrong, J., Wiseman, C. (eds.) Grand Louvre, pp. 219–253.Rizzoli, New York (2008)

Kloos,M.: VanGoghMuseum—HetGebouw. In: Kloos,M., vanHeeswijk, H., Rüger, A. (eds.) De laatste draai—Van GoghMuseum: het hart van het Museumplein, pp. 80–91. Nai010uitgevers, Rotterdam (2015)

Kurokawa, K.: Each One a Hero: The Philosophy of Symbiosis.Kodansha International, Tokyo (1997)

Maier Glas: http://www.maier-glas.de/magla_referenzen_referenzen.php?eintrag=7 and http://www.maier-glas.de/maier_unternehmen_historie.php. Accessed 8 Dec 2015

123

http://www.cobouw.nl/artikel/70396-gebogen-overkapping-nu-mogelijk-met-radiusglas

http://www.cobouw.nl/artikel/70396-gebogen-overkapping-nu-mogelijk-met-radiusglas

http://facadesconfidential.blogspot.nl/2011/10/louvre-pyramids-revisited.html

http://facadesconfidential.blogspot.nl/2011/10/louvre-pyramids-revisited.html

http://www.maier-glas.de/magla_referenzen_referenzen.php?eintrag=7

http://www.maier-glas.de/magla_referenzen_referenzen.php?eintrag=7

http://www.maier-glas.de/maier_unternehmen_historie.php

http://www.maier-glas.de/maier_unternehmen_historie.php


Neugebauer, J.: Applications for curved glass in buildings. J.Façade Des. Eng. 2, 67–83 (2014)

Saumarez Smith, C.: Blockbusters aren’t the be-all and end-all.In: The Art Newspaper Special Report Number 267, p. 2,London (2015)

Schwar, S. (ed.): From Building Site to Showcase Building:Development. Construction andUse of the JoanneumQuar-ter. Landesimmobilien-Gesellschaft, Graz (2013)

Staaks, D.: Scriptie: Koud torderen van glaspanelen in blobs.Master’s Thesis, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven Facul-teit Bouwkunde (2003)

Vákár, L.I., Gaal, M.: Struct. Eng. Int. 14(2), 95–97 (2004)van Heeswijk, H.: Van Gogh Museum—Het Gebouw. In: Kloos,

M., Heeswijk van, H., Rüger, A. (eds.) Het noodlot vansucces. Nai010 Publishers, Rotterdam (2015)

Vollebregt, R.: Vrije vormen met koud gebogen glas. Glas inBeeld (April 2009)

von Boehm, G.: Conversations with I.M. Pei—light is the key.In: von Boehm, G. (ed.) The Challenge of the Louvre, pp.77–95. Prestel Publishing, New York (2000)

Wigginton, M.: Glass in Architecture. Phaidon Press, New York(1996)

123

Glass Entrance Van Gogh Museum Amsterdam · Van Gogh Museum—being the third major museum of the...

Documents

Transcript of Glass Entrance Van Gogh Museum Amsterdam · Van Gogh Museum—being the third major museum of the...