Theatre Design & Technology - Dec 1965 - 9

MODULAR PLATFORM SYSTEMS FOR THE STAGE
Ned A. Bowman and Philip R. Eck, University of Pittsburgh

(The

following paper was presented

session
Theatre

Augus

in an earlier version to a

on Theatre Engineering ot the American Educational
Association convention in Minneapolis, Minnesota on

28. 1963).

INTRODUCTION Variation of stage space through Under functional analysis, both of these two evolved
three-dimensional development of the stage floor was systems prove less than satisfactory to the active
already a reality when Adolphe Appia began his theatre organization seeking maximum utilization of
agitation for a completely variable stage floor during its equipment investment. The parallel-platform comthe final decade of the Nineteenth Century. The plat- bination, though reasonably portable and efficient in
formed stage of the Saxe-Meiningen company's pro- terms of its storage requirements, lacks flexibility:
ductions touring Europe in the 'seventies and 'eight- a separate parallel is necessary for each height
ies represented a more advanced (albeit less highly- modulation. The rigid platform of two-by-four or twoengineered) conception of theatre space than did the by-six deal lumber construction with an integral top
hydraulic and electrical systems of theAsphaleia is stronger, and may be temporari Iy legged to any
Society, or those of Karl Brandt, Edwin Sachs or height. However its inescapable weight and the
Friederich Kranich. All of these still tended by the accompanying awkwardness in its handling, together
turn of the century to reinforce the division of stage with the almost mandatory requirement for storage
space into a series of planes parallel to the prosce- space near the playing area make it a poor choice
nium arch. The picture frame stage was character- where extreme labor costs or inexperienced scenery
istically sliced laterally by its elevator system into handlers become a particular limitation, or where the
segments six to nine feet In breadth, extending the theatre's storage conditions are even more acute
width of the proscenium.
than usual.
More subtle modulations became possible in the
"chessboard" systems dating from early in the
present century, which allowed for a rectilinear floor
grid of mechanically-interlocking podiums, such as
those designed for the Teatro Reale in Rome or the
1
civic theatre at Brno, Czechoslovakia.
Additions to these systems above floor level were
characteristically based on portable platforming
evolved from scaffolding techniques which employ
the battened butt joint, paralleling flat scenery
practice. By the mid-nineteen-twenties, rigid platforms of modular dimensions were in common use in
Europe and elsewhere The particular Praktikabel
employed at the Dessau Bauhaus, for example, were
rigid platforms based on a one meter by one meter
by fifty centimeters module, with added two-step
units having twenty-five centimeter ri ser heights.
The most widespread improvement on rigid construction has been the collapsing parallel and platform
top assembly still in common use. Gillette describes
the two traditional systems employed in this country
at mid-century, in which the height of an elevated
plane may be varied either by use of a Itemate fold·
ing parallels ("standard" or "continental"), or by
legging up the heavier rigid platform, which is usually constructed of two inch deal lumber. 2

DECEMBER 1965

The Ideal Platform System.
An ideally-conceived
platform system would satisfy the following criteria:

(1) It would suppart an infinitely heavy live
loading at any point over its top surface, with
no deflection. Practically, point loadings of
250 pounds and a working maximum of twenty
five to thirty pounds per square foot {750 to
1,000 pounds for a four by eight platform}
should suffice for most stage purposes. A maximum deflection of .2% of the supported span
is not unreasonable ta anticipate {about 3/16"
in 8 feet}.
{2} It would be infinitely light in weight.
Actual weight limitations per component part
are to a considerable extent dependent on the
physical capacity of the technician who will
hand Ie the un it. If the un it is permanent Iy
assembled, then the basic platform module will
likely be dependent on carrying capacity of
from two to four persons, and the determining
factor is the ease with which the unit can be
gr i pped and maneuvered through doorways,
downtraps, etc. Demountabi lity beyond the
initial length-width module tends to reduce the
problem to finding the means for handling the
platform top, since the remaining components

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Theatre Design & Technology - Dec 1965