Sei sulla pagina 1di 9

How Was The Great Pyramid At Giza Constructed?

By John McCauley

Source http://history-world.org/pyramids.htm
In this article, John McCauley uses his experience as an Architect and
Construction Manager to critically analyse the construction scheme for building
the Khufu pyramid and the popular theory of the use of an internal ramp.
There has been an innumerable quantity of books written about the construction
of the pyramids at Giza, Egypt. So too have there been any number of different
theories on how the construction of these pyramids was accomplished, with each
new or expanded theory accompanied by a description stating that it was the
definitive solution, or the puzzle finally solved, etc. Of late, a few authors
have focused on the internal ramp solution as being the most plausible
explanation on how the ancient Egyptians built the Great Pyramid. Indeed, some
Archaeologists have also acclaimed this internal ramp solution as a creative
explanation for this ages-old construction mystery. Most Archaeologists,
however, lack the technical training or understanding of the nature of structural
forces to make a qualified endorsement of this proposed solution. Let me first
state that this internal ramp solution represents a complete lack of
understanding on how gravity affects structures and why this theory bears no
serious thought in the academic world. Before I get into an analysis of why
internal ramps do not work, let me state very clearly that I honestly do not
know exactly how the Great Pyramid was actually built, but I think there are
clues that may lead to a reasonable explanation in the future.

Let me first outline some of the facts that we do know about the Great Pyramid
of Giza:
This pyramid appears to be the final evolution of pyramid building that evolved
from the mud brick mastabas which were supposedly the resting place of
important dignitaries.
The Great Pyramid has only one cartouche above the Kings chamber that
purports to indicate that it is the burial chamber of Khufu (Cheops).
This pyramid was covered with smooth white casing stones that partially
collapsed after a severe earthquake and were later used as a quarry to
construct some buildings in Cairo, notably the Mosque and Madrassa of Sultan
Hassan (completed in 1359). Some of these stones contained hieroglyphics. The
Greek historian Herodotus claims to have seen the Great Pyramid before the
casing stones were removed.
If some of the casing stones did contain hieroglyphics and if these stones were
scattered around Lower Egypt, finding them and deciphering them could lead to
some further understanding as to the construction of the pyramid.
As a retired Architect and Construction Manager with a strong background and
interest in Archaeology, I am focused on how ancient cultures built their
megalithic monuments. Since many of the very old cultures left no construction
manual on how they built their monuments, we are forced to reverse engineer
the remains of what we observe of their work. We can apply our knowledge of
the ancients religion, tools and tool marks, hieroglyphics, myth, etc. and weigh
these attributes against what we observe but ultimately it is only our best
educated guess on how and why certain construction techniques were used. We
can also discount certain theories, such as the application of anti-gravity, and
the like, as being without validity or in the realm of unproven wishful thinking. In
the end, we have to make a judgment that makes the most common sense given
what we know about the culture and their construction expertise.
So, let me outline some of the thought process that comes to mind when
analyzing this internal ramp approach. There are some inherent difficulties in
building an internal ramp and moving stones on it, as follows:

CONSTRUCTING THE INTERNAL RAMP WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT:


The ancient Egyptians employed two methods for spanning an opening: large
granitic stones from the quarries at Aswan were placed above the opening which
divert the structural forces around the opening, such as at the Kings Chamber,
or corbelling stone over a void as we see in the Grand Gallery.The "King's
Chamber" is a good example of the difficulty in constructing a void in such a
structure. The King's Chamber required granite stones which weigh about 60tons each. Stone is not good in bending only in compression so the size and
depth of these granite stones must be large enough to transfer the loads from
above to the stone walls on either side of the void. These granite slabs have a
tendency to collapse downward, and their bases spread outward from the loads
above, but these movements have to be resisted by the tremendous weight of
core blocks against the slabs, especially at the base of the slabs.

Source http://www.cheops-pyramide.ch/khufu-pyramid/cheops-greatpyramid.html

The "Grand Gallery" is another example of a void in the Great Pyramid. This
Gallery solution was solved by slightly "corbelling" the stones over each other;
that is, a slight overhang of each successive course over the course below. To
create even a minimum 6-foot wide internal ramp, there would have to be
quite a few corbelled tiers of stones, thereby creating a void that would be quite
considerable in volume. If, for instance, each course was cantilevered 6 above
the course below, it would take six courses of stone to cantilever three-feet; half
the width of the void. The height of these six courses would be about 18-21
high, on top of two vertical courses, thereby creating a void 6-0 wide at the
base and 27-feet or higher. This void would have to occur around the entire
pyramid, all the way to the top. As the pyramid grew taller, the amount of void
space would eventually be greater than the amount of remaining stone!
The complexity of creating such an internal ramp, using corbelled stones or
granite slabs, is further compounded by the following realities:
Such a void would have to be quite a bit inboard of the outer face of the
pyramid so that there is enough solid pyramid stone above the void thereby
allowing an adequate pathway for the structural transfer of loads to the walls of
the void. Even so, as the ancient Mayans intuitively understood, there would be a
tendency to "spread" the ceiling stones of the internal ramp apart, leading to
instability and collapse; the Mayans solved this by installing timber tie-beams
across the spring point of their vaulted ceilings.
Following this train of thought, there is a reason why the King's Chamber is
approximately in the center of the pyramid; the tendency of the granite roof
slabs to "spread" is limited by the equal dead weight of the pyramid mass on
either side of the spring point of these stones. If the Chamber was closer to the
outboard face of the pyramid, there would be an unequal dead load resisting the
spread of the granite slabs and the outboard limestone core blocks could not
resist the horizontal thrust forces.
If the internal ramp could be constructed without corbelling, it would require
a significant amount of very stout granite slabs, and the question is, how would
these much larger and heavier stones be placed? Using the King's Chamber as
an example, each one of these void ceiling stones in the internal ramp could
weigh 20-30 tons, or more, each. That is an enormous amount of Aswan granite
to haul up the pyramid ramps just to form the internal ramp as it advances!
For an internal ramp to make any sense for building the upper two-thirds of the
pyramid assuming that the bottom third was constructed with an external ramp
the entire length of the internal ramp would have to be maintained for the
entire duration of the construction phase. This would create quite a large
"hollow" space around much of the perimeter of the entire pyramid. This would
be a considerably unstable exterior for the entire pyramid. And, given the
frequency of earthquakes in the area, the probability of a catastrophic failure of
the pyramid would be assured. Since we know that a catastrophic earthquake
dislodged the casing stones, it would have also have impacted such an unstable
internal ramp.

Even if the internal ramp was used, and it had to be somewhat "inboard" of the
perimeter of the pyramid, it begs the question, once a stone is delivered to the
head of the internal ramp, how is it placed between the side of the internal ramp
and the exterior plane? Even more difficult would be the placement of the final
casing stones if the internal ramp already existed. This leads to a further
question and that is; in the internal ramp scheme, how are the casing stones
placed and how are they dressed and carved with hieroglyphics?
One would also question what becomes of the sleds that were dragged up the
ramps once they delivered their cargo of limestone core blocks.
The ancient Egyptians had no ability to empirically determine the size and
spanning ability of stone. Their entire building technology was developed over
millennia by the "trial and error" method. The failure of the earlier "bent
pyramid" attests to that. So, there doesn't appear to be any precedent for having
built such an internal ramp either before or after the Khufu pyramid. It is
therefore seemingly illogical to conclude that such a challenging and unique
"solution" would have been devised "out of the blue" and used just once.
Egyptologists have demonstrated the feasibility of a number of ancient
Egyptian technologies and construction techniques through actual example in
the field. This approach is admired to solving a problem. However, the use of
highly sophisticated 3-D computer technology software programs that were used
to graphically show an internal ramp, only demonstrates that something can be
drawn, but does not support the probability that it can actually be built in the
real world. Yes, some complex shapes can be drawn and built, but just because a
complex shape can be drawn does not mean that the shape makes any sense to
actually build. Computer graphics can mislead us into believing that since
something is in the memory cells of our hard drive, it must be buildable and
therefore the solution must be correct!
The slope of a six-foot wide ramp would require a great amount of work to
maintain. As this ramp sloped higher and higher, the corbelled vault above it
would have to be elevated also. This would introduce a level of complex
geometry that would slow construction and add unnecessary difficulty.
To pull a 2.5-ton stone efficiently, the surface on which it is pulled needs to
have a low coefficient-of-friction. This is difficult to attain between a sled and
stone and the sloped ramp surface, and at the same time provide a reasonable
surface on which the pullers are able to gain traction.
As a ramp ascends upward at, say 6-degrees, it would rise approximately 24"
every 21' of run. If the run was 100', the rise would be about 10-feet'. To make a
complete four-sided turn around the pyramid, the rise in this internal ramp would
be over 40-feet. This would require that virtually every course be sloped to allow
for a continuous 6' wide x 6' high passage, plus the height of the corbel vault. It
would also require that every corbelled course change in elevation to allow for

headroom. This would require an unwarranted amount of labor and skill to create
such a ramp.
THE 90-DEGREE CORNER CONUNDRUM:
As we all know from the evaluation of the many proposals and theories on
"spiraling ramps" on the outside of a pyramid, the right angle corners are critical
to maintaining the correct geometry of the four sloping sides. Otherwise, the four
sloping planes of the sides and their intersecting corners will not meet at a
common apex point. The internal ramp scheme proposes that the corners were
used to possibly mount a "crane" of sorts to transfer the limestone blocks from
one internal ramp slope to the next portion of the ramp. In this approach, this
open corner is required since the crew who are pulling a 2.5-ton stone could not
make a right-hand or left-hand turn to begin ascending to the next ramp. One
can also look at the physics and dimensional requirements of moving such a
stone up a 6' wide ramp and come to the following conclusion:
A 2.5-ton stone in a 6' wide ramp leaves no room for more than one rope to
pull the stone and a maximum of one puller on each side of this rope, forming a
column of multiple pullers.
A 2.5-ton stone = 5000# ; each "puller" can exert approximately 100# 125#
of pulling force, at best, on a level plane. This would result in 20-25 "pullers"
when the coefficient-of-friction of a sled and stone was 0.40.5. However at a 6degree slope (the near maximum attainable slope for pulling in ancient Egypt),
the number of pullers would have to increase to perhaps 30-40 pullers. If these
pullers were spaced 5' apart and the puller nearest to the stone was at 8' from
the stone, the
total pulling column would be 20 pullers x 5-feet, plus 8-feet, plus the length of
the sled, or about 115-feet long. Assuming that the first puller in the column
didn't want to fall off the pyramid, the rear of the stone would be about 115-feet
from the edge of the pyramid at the head of the ramp so that a crane could lift it
and then rotate it to the next upward sloping ramp. This required space would
result in a large corner opening of 115-feet x 115-feet on each side; an enormous
opening that would be very difficult to fill in later because of its location.
If each corner had such a large gap, one would certainly question not only the
feasibility of closing in such an opening later in construction, but in maintaining
the geometry of the four sloped sides and the diagonal lines of the corners.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS:
By even a conservative calculation, core stones for the pyramid had to be
delivered every minute and returning timber sleds had to be recycled down the
same internal ramp. This would not be possible within such a confined space as
an internal ramp.

The internal ramp is too dimensionally restrictive and requires a high level of
specialized stonemasonry when construction duration may have been a strong or
real consideration.
In reviewing other rational approaches to building a pyramid, a combination of
outside earthen ramps and exterior ledge ramps should be considered. The
external ramp approach should not be discounted so quickly by those who are
infatuated by the new and novel internal ramp solution. A continuous ledge
ramp corkscrewing around the outer edge of the pyramid is a real possibility.
SUMMARY:
There is a guiding principle in building construction throughout the ages and that
is, "keep it simple"! The derivation of the smooth-faced pyramid seems to have
logically evolved from stacking mastabas on top of each other much like a
wedding cake and then filling in the ledges. It would seem that these ledges
could also serve as opportunities to transport stone blocks from one level to
another without the need for an internal ramp. Why make it unnecessarily
complicated?
We may never figure out exactly how the Khufu pyramid was built but deductive
reasoning would certainly eliminate certain theories due to their complexity, cost
and structural limitations. Undoubtedly, a combination of short external ramps,
ledge ramps, and leveraging "machines" were used because they were effective
and simple solutions that abounded in ancient times. The process of building a
pyramid was definitely evolutionary with some very innovative techniques
developing with each new pyramid. The knowledge had to be cumulative and
was passed on through guilds of expert craftspeople and builders! Each disaster
and each success gave the Egyptian architects a better intuitive understanding
on how the forces of gravity worked and how those forces could be overcome by
an altered design and construction approach on the next pyramid. Let us
remember, the ancient Egyptians did not have the empirical knowledge we now
have about structures; they either had an intuitive sense of what would work, or
it might fail. Knowledge was built on the try-and-fail method.

Source http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pyramid_of_Khufu.jpg
The main argument against the exterior corkscrewing ramp seems to be that it
might obscure the sightlines on the four corners of the pyramid such that the
apex of the pyramid could not be observed as it is being constructed. However, if
one uses a simple sighting board, it is easy to see how the slope of all of the
edges of the pyramid can easily be maintained to converge at the same top
point in space. The use of "offset" stakes was probably also a technique that the
Egyptians used to confirm slopes and measurements from level to level. The
Egyptians had figured this out centuries previously; geometry could be
maintained from the uninterrupted side angles as well as the corners. This
argument about the angle of the pyramid not being maintained because of some
obscure problem at the corners doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.The French
team that recorded "anomalies" cork-screwing around the perimeter of the
pyramid appear to have jumped to the conclusion that the images represented
evidence of this internal ramp. However, that may not have been the proper
interpretation. If, for instance, the pyramid was constructed with an external
ledge ramp along the perimeter and then the ramp was filled in with finished
stones as the pyramid was being finished from the top down, these final stones
would have been taken from a different location in the quarries than the original
core stones. The different locations where stones were quarried would have
slightly different densities, aging properties and moisture retention. Micro
gravimetric readings of the entire pyramid would probably show similar
corkscrewing anomalies just because the perimeter stones which filled in the
abandoned ramp came from a different location in the quarry and have a
different density.

Sources
http://www.grahamhancock.com/news/index.php?pg=2

http://www.grahamhancock.com/forum/McCauleyJ1.php

Potrebbero piacerti anche