Virtual 3D-reconstruction of key buildings of the Baranchinsky plant in the Perm Province at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries (source studies and technological aspects)

Gasanov Arsenii Master of arts, Historical Information Science Department, Lomonosov Moscow State University 119991, Russia, g. Moscow, ul. Lomonosovskii Prospekt, 27 k.4, Istoricheskii fakul'tet quat@bk.ru Other publications by this author

Introduction

The industrial heritage is a special part of the material and cultural heritage, which includes objects of industrial culture, such as industrial architecture, industrial equipment of the past, technologies that have fallen out of use and become part of history ^{[1, pp. 213-214]}.

The issue of the value of industrial heritage and the need to study and preserve it first received significant coverage in the 1960s in Great Britain, and in the 1990s the topic of industrial heritage spread to Russia. The history of the development of this area is discussed in more detail in the author's publication directly devoted to this issue ^[2]. The role of pioneers in the study of industrial heritage in Russia belonged to a group of historians, engineers and local historians led by Academician V. V. Alekseev, which did not develop by chance in the Urals, a key industrial region of our country.

It was industrial architecture that largely determined the appearance of the cities of the Urals during the Russian Empire, primarily the practical purpose of architectural objects, the harsh climate and logistical difficulties led to the emergence of unique architectural examples that deserve special attention in the context of the country's cultural heritage. Initially, Ural architecture was predominantly wooden, but the destruction caused by the Yemelyan Pugachev uprising and the need to rebuild factory buildings every 15-20 years eventually led to the transition to stone construction in the creation of large industrial structures. The architects were responsible for the consumption of materials, the safety of buildings, various aspects of logistics, the shapes and sizes of buildings were dictated by the equipment used, the location of which in the workshops also fell on the shoulders of the architects. They faced a difficult task – to combine rigid practicality and aesthetic component in their works, which led to the creation of many outstanding architectural monuments. In these harsh conditions, the talent of Ural architects such as I. I. Sviyazev, A. Z. Komarov, K. A. Sidorov and M. P. Malakhov was revealed ^{[3, pp. 14-25]}.

Although interest in industrial heritage is steadily increasing, as evidenced by the number and depth of new publications on the topic, industrial facilities are not receiving enough attention in the field of virtual 3D reconstruction, which is also a dynamically developing area that touches on more and more new topics. This study aims to produce a virtual 3D reconstruction of one of the oldest and most interesting metallurgical enterprises of the Russian Empire, the Baranchinsky Plant, and to describe the process and features of working with sources and software in a situation of virtual reconstruction of industrial complexes. The direct object of the virtual reconstruction was the blast furnace complex of the Baranchinsky plant, which is distinguished by its unique architectural appearance.

From the history of the Baranchinsky plant

The Baranchinsky plant belonged to the Gorobrazdatsky district of Perm province, which got its name from Bolshaya Blagodat Mountain, where rich deposits of iron ore were discovered in the 1730s. Ore miners who worked on the instructions of V. N. Demidov discovered brown ironstone outcrops at the confluence of the Aktai River with the Barancha River, and in 1734, the first plan for the construction of the plant was drawn up by the chief engineer Peter Yakovlev ^[4]. The Baranchinsky plant could have been built by the Demidovs, however, using the patronage of Empress Anna Ioannovna and her favorite Biron, Baron Kurt von Schemberg received all the rights to develop the resources of Mount Blagodat ^{[5, pp. 440-443]}. An agreement on the management of the mining industry was signed with Schemberg. By 1739, Schemberg had accumulated significant debts to the treasury for the plants received – 42 thousand rubles, but during the reign of Anna Ioannovna they were never recovered, since the baron enjoyed the patronage of the Empress and her favorite– Biron. During the short reign of Anna Leopoldovna, by decree of August 17, 1741, the payment of debts was postponed for five years. Finally, after the transfer of power to Elizabeth Petrovna, Baron Schemberg lost patronage in the highest circles ^{[6, pp. 77-78]}.

The first buildings of the Baranchinsky plant were built in 1743, just 14 kilometers from the Kushvinsky iron smelter, making it the third metallurgical enterprise in the district after Kushvinsky and Turinsky (named after the Kushva River and the Ture River). The factories, receiving resources from the rich deposits of Mount Blagodat, produced cast iron, various types of iron, anchors and artillery shells ^{[7, pp. 168-169]}.

In 1754 By decree of the Berg Collegium (restored by Elizabeth Petrovna in 1742), the factories of the Gorobrazdatsky district - Turinsky, Kushvinsky, Baranchinsky and the Serebryansky Plant, which is under construction, with all the peasants assigned to them, were transferred to general–in-chief P. I. Shuvalov in order to increase their productivity ^{[6, p. 84]}. Baron von Schemberg was stripped of his powers and exiled from the country "for government arrears." Count Shuvalov also received money from the treasury for the development of factories in installments for ten years. To increase efficiency, he increased the number of peasants assigned to factories from three thousand to 33 thousand souls in five years, while reporting that he was forced to employ "minors, the elderly and the maimed" ^{[8, pp. 37-39]}.

By the time of his death, P. I. Shuvalov, like his predecessor, had accumulated huge debts – 680 thousand rubles, of which 177 thousand were for the city's factories. A specially appointed commission to resolve the issue of Shuvalov's debts proposed to take the Gorobrazdat and Kama factories to the treasury, although their cost did not cover the amount of the debt, relying on the "mercy and generosity" of the Empress. Catherine II agreed with this decision, leaving all the iron in the factories to the heir of Count A. P. Shuvalov. Thus, during the reign of Catherine II, the Baranchinsky plant was again transferred to state management ^{[6, pp. 84-85]}.

By decree of Catherine II on March 29, 1762, the purchase of peasants with or without land to factories was prohibited. By this time, about 50 thousand souls had been assigned to the factories of the Urals. The situation of the peasants assigned to the factories was deplorable, and disobedience to the authorities was so significant that it reached the use of weapons ^{[8, pp. 37-39]}. The Empress honored the problems of the factory peasants with her close attention, ordering Major General A. A. Vyazemsky to look into the causes of discontent and stop abuses. According to the results of the Vyazemsky report, it was decided to limit the number of working days of peasants in factories, to stop using peasants living at a great distance from factories, and "not to burden peasants with too burdensome work," and peasants were allowed to file complaints about abuses. Unrest in the region, however, was particularly acute during Pugachev's uprising – his supporters often had support among factory workers. A new attempt to regulate relations between peasants and industrialists was the manifesto of 1779, which defined the duties of assigned peasants and doubled their wages. In 1781, factory managers, by decree of the Empress, lost the right to punish factory peasants at their own discretion ^{[8, pp. 39-43]}.

During the reign of Alexander I, Ural factories became de facto monopolists in metallurgy in the Russian Empire due to high customs tariffs, attention was paid to improving the living conditions and streamlining the situation of workers, and the responsibility of industrialists for the mutilation and death of workers was established. For the first time in 1801, the question of the importance of scientific study of industry was raised. Since 1802, "information on discoveries and inventions in the field of crafts, arts and agriculture" began to be published ^{[8, pp. 46-53]}.

The factories themselves were in about the same condition until the 1820s as they were when they were transferred to the treasury after P. I. Shuvalov. The mining chief, Oberbergmeister Mamyshev, took over the reconstruction of the factories. According to his estimates, he and his successors erected most of the buildings in the 1820s and 1850s, which remained until the end of the 19th century ^{[9, p. 13]}.

During this period, architect A. Z. Komarov built the complex of blast furnaces of the Baranchinsky plant, which was noted as an outstanding example of industrial architecture and a new word of technology at that time. The planned and voluminous solution of the complex is determined by its production purpose: in the center of the U-shaped composition there are two blast furnaces with a height of about 15 m, separated by a room for blowers. The foundry yard located in front of them is bounded on both sides by strongly forward-facing side wings - buildings designed for casting cast iron products. The center of the composition is accentuated by a gently sloping triangular pediment stretched across the entire width of the building with a semicircular arch with a radius of about seven meters inscribed in it. It is rhythmically complemented by symmetrical small arches in the corners of the pediment, as well as arched openings under the domed coverings of blast furnaces ^{[3, pp. 36-38]}.

Fig. 1. The Baranchinsky factory in the 1830s. A photograph from the collection of the Omsk Museum of Local Lore is presented on the Goskatalog electronic resource.

The buildings of the mechanical factory and foundry adjacent to the blast furnace yard were subsequently rebuilt, increasing in size and acquiring more decor, high arched openings of the side buildings were added, in harmony with the architecture of the blast furnace yard.

Fig. 2. The Baranchinsky plant at the end of the 19th century. The buildings of the mechanical and foundry factories (on the sides) have been rebuilt, with noticeable changes in size and decor. Photo from the album "Baranchinsky state-owned plant of the Gorobrazdatsky district". From the collection of the Sverdlovsk Museum of Local Lore named after O. E. Kler. It is presented on the electronic resource "Goskatalog".

The peasant reform of 1861 had an ambiguous effect on the situation of mining workers. It was noted that with the harsh climate of the Urals and low agricultural efficiency, workers became extremely dependent on their earnings at factories. In addition, in the late 1850s, there was a sharp increase in food prices, and in a number of factories, including Baranchinsky, rye flour prices tripled ^{[8, pp. 87-91]}. The number of workers and the production of pig iron decreased several times, the latter returned to pre-reform values only in the 1880s and 90s and significantly exceeded them by 1900. This was facilitated by the retrofitting of the plant, which included two air heaters, a steam blower, the conversion of blast furnaces to hot blast, and the construction of new buildings for the plant's buildings ^{[10, pp. 53-54]}.

The development of technology has become an important factor in the life of Ural factories. Thus, in 1877, traffic on the Ural Railway was launched, which greatly benefited the Baranchinsky and Kushvinsky plants due to the construction of the Kushva and Barancha stations located near the plants, significantly optimizing logistics. In 1884, factory buildings and factories began to receive telephone communication among themselves ^{[9, pp. 19-20]}.

The success of the mining industry in the district was recognized by awards from a number of international exhibitions, in 1876 – a bronze medal in Philadelphia, in 1882 – a bronze medal and a second–class diploma in Moscow, in 1887 – a gold medal in Yekaterinburg, in 1893 – a large bronze medal in Chicago, in 1896 - a second-class diploma in Nizhny Novgorod. Novgorod, the highest award of the grand prix in 1900 in Paris ^{[9, p. 21]}.

In 1899, the Ural factories, including Baranchinsky, were visited by D. I. Mendeleev during a scientific research and inspection expedition. Speaking about the Baranchinsky plant, a member of the expedition, Professor of technology K. N. Egorov, notes: "There is no such abandoned, mismanaged look as the Kushvinsky plant depresses, and factory buildings are sometimes quite dapper in appearance. The Baranchinsky plant is equipped for the preparation of cast-iron shells for the Naval and Artillery departments. This large order also changed the general physiognomy of the plant."According to the estimates presented to the expedition, the plant smelted 500 thousand pounds of pig iron, 234 thousand of which were of the highest quality suitable for artillery shells. The two blast furnaces of the plant had different devices and purposes, the air was heated by Cowper devices, the steam boilers were outdated at the time of the expedition, and there was a Girard turbine. ^{[11, pp. 83-86]}. Many representatives of the subbotniks sect, widespread in the Urals at that time, worked at the plant, they were considered decent workers, but their cohesion was inconvenient to the leadership ^{[11, p. 90]}. According to the results of the expedition, D. I. Mendeleev came up with the following conclusion: "The Urals, after implementing a few measures that are not particularly expensive and, in any case, beneficial to the treasury, will supply Europe and Asia with large quantities of its iron and steel and may lower prices on them in a way that is simply unthinkable in Western Europe." ^{[11, p. 139]}.

A different fate, however, awaited the Baranchinsky plant in the near future. By 1904, a significant amount of unrealized cast iron had accumulated at the plant, exceeding the annual smelting, and it was decided to extinguish one blast furnace. In 1917, after a fire that completely burned down the machine shop, the blast furnaces were shut down and the plant stopped working. Later in the 1920s, the equipment of the Volta electromechanical plant evacuated from Tallinn was moved to the empty workshops of the Baranchinsky plant ^{[10, pp. 53-54; 12, p. 30]}. To date, a separate division of JSC Yegorshinsky Radio Plant operates on the territory of the former Baranchinsky plant, however, the architecture of most of the historical buildings, including the mechanical workshop and blast furnaces forming the characteristic appearance of the plant, is lost, and individual preserved buildings are gradually being destroyed.

Fig. 3. Superimposition of a fragment of the plan of the Baranchinsky plant (GAPK F. 716, Op. 2, 38) on satellite imagery (Google Maps). The original satellite image is below.

Fig. 4. The current state of the preserved buildings of the Baranchinsky plant, a photo from the media. This building does not belong to the buildings under reconstruction.

Source-based aspects of the study

Any virtual reconstruction has its initial stage, which largely determines the quality of the subsequent result, the collection of a source base involving the synthesis of written and visual sources, including plans and drawings, photographs, and artistic images. Documents related to the appearance of the Baranchinsky plant were found in archives – the State Archive of the Perm Region and the State Archive of the Sverdlovsk Region, as well as electronic resources – Goskatalog and Pastvu ^{[13, 14]}. The collected sources included drawings, plans, photographs, and documents on the history and records management of the Baranchinsky plant. Working with various sources in the context of virtual 3D reconstruction has its own specifics.

Photos allow you to use technologies for combining 2D images with 3D coordinates, allowing you to recreate the model based on the source. Similar technologies are implemented in a number of modern 3D editors, such as Sketchup - Matchphoto, 3ds-Max - Camera Match and Blender (where this is implemented by separately downloadable modules – free Fspy and commercial Perspective Plotter). Nevertheless, the combination of photographs and 3D space is not perfectly accurate, for example, the mismatch of the contour of the second blast furnace (assuming that they are the same) in the long run may seem like an inaccurate combination, when in reality the blast furnaces had different sizes, which the drawings are able to show. Drawings and plans are also not a perfectly reliable source, since, as the photographs show, individual elements could actually be implemented differently than shown on the plan. Both photographs and drawings relate to a specific point in time, and any changes that occur after that make them less relevant. Different sources may relate to different time periods, and therefore attribution is an extremely important task, in which written sources allow clarity. Artistic images in the field of industrial heritage are less common than in the rest of the cultural heritage, however, despite possible inaccuracies in size and proportions, they carry important information about color. Individual architectural elements and information about color and materials can be reviewed based on modern photographs of preserved buildings or building elements, in some cases on similar structures, especially by the same architects.

Fig. 5. Shell foundry of the Baranchinsky plant, the turn of the XIX-XX centuries, photo from the album "Baranchinsky state-owned plant of the Gorobrazdatsky district". From the collection of the Sverdlovsk Museum of Local Lore named after O. E. Kler. It is presented on the electronic resource "Goskatalog".

Fig. 6. The building of the Girard model and turbine, a photo from the album "Baranchinsky state-owned plant of the Gorobrazdatsky district". From the collection of the Perm Museum of Local Lore. It is presented on the electronic resource "Goskatalog".

It is important to choose the immediate time period for which the reconstruction is carried out. The availability of sources becomes a key criterion for this choice - in particular, a set of photographs of various buildings of the Baranchinsky plant and some of its interior, dating back to the turn of the XIX-XX centuries, was discovered. The presence of photographic sources is most characteristic of this particular period due to the spread of technology, so the turn of the 19th-20th centuries is becoming the most convenient time period for reconstruction. It should be noted that some of the photographs relate to the period before perestroika in the 1880s and 90s, and some after, as can be seen from the images of the foundry and the mechanical factory.

7. An example of scientific and technical documentation, a fragment of a drawing of blast furnaces of the Baranchinsky plant. GAPK F. 716, Op. 2, 40.

Below is a table summarizing the features of working with various categories of sources in the context of virtual 3D reconstruction of cultural and, in particular, industrial heritage.

*Reference - "reference", "reference", "example", image, video, material or other object that is used during the work on the project.

The process of virtual reconstruction

Modern 3D editors have a wide range of functionality, which is complemented by separate plug–in modules, which allows you to perform most of the tasks of virtual 3D reconstruction in any software package convenient to the author. As part of this reconstruction, only one 3D editor was used, in which all the necessary operations were performed, starting with combining 2D images and a 3D model, continuing to create geometry, scan, overlay materials, and ending with rendering. Blender, a free and open source software package, has become such a universal software package. The main features of Blender are its accessibility, low entry threshold, extensive functionality, and an active community developing extensions and modifications to the functionality.

The work on building 3D models based on 2D images was previously discussed in the publications of D. I. Zherebyatyev and T. V. Malandina using the example of Match Photo technology in the Sketchup program and the author of this study using the example of Camera Match in 3ds-Max ^{[16, 17]}. There are two plug–ins with similar functionality for Blender - the free Fspy and the commercial Perspective Plotter based on it. For the virtual reconstruction of the buildings of the Baranchinsky plant, the second one was used as a more complete professional tool. The principle of operation is similar to Match Photo and Camera Match – a 2D image is loaded into the program, then four lines related to two coordinate axes should be placed on it along smooth straight elements, for more precise adjustment, all three coordinate axes can be used. Next, the program will calculate the position and parameters of the camera, in which the perspective of the 3D space will coincide with the image. The use of such technologies makes it possible to more accurately position the architectural elements of the reconstructed buildings. As mentioned earlier, the use of combining 3D and 2D does not give perfectly accurate results, nor is it size–dependent, so it is necessary to simultaneously use this technology and scale drawings and plans. In 3D reconstruction of an entire complex of buildings, Perspective Plotter must be applied independently to individual buildings, and then their dimensions must be correlated with each other in order to avoid scale variability.

Fig. 8. Work with Perspective plotter, reconstruction of the foundry building based on photos from the album "Baranchinsky state Plant of the Gorobrazdatsky district". Screenshot from the Blender software.

The main volumes of buildings are created by primitives – cubes, cylinders, spheres, etc., then the location of key elements is noted – doors, windows, pilasters, for this, for example, the Loop Cut tool can be used to create an arbitrary section. These and other tools are available in Blender in editing mode, where the program switches from working with whole objects to working with individual points, edges, and polygons. Extrude and Extrude Along Normals allow you to create convex or recessed elements, Insert Faces creates polygons inside polygons, which, for example, is convenient when creating windows, Bevel allows you to smooth edges and change their shape. Important for virtual reconstruction are the ability to measure distances on a model with reference to specific points (i.e., the measurement accuracy does not decrease if a virtual "ruler" is not accurately applied), as well as to move, scale, and rotate objects and individual elements to specified distances by keyboard input.

Fig. 9. The virtual model's "blocking" stage has been completed. At this stage, the basic shapes and dimensions of the model are created. Screenshot from the Blender software.

Fig. 10. The creation of the basic geometry of the reconstructed buildings has been completed. Screenshot from the Blender software.

Since the buildings of the Baranchinsky plant were built at different times, the architecture differs significantly between them, and it was possible to copy only a number of individual elements. After creating the geometry, the next step is the scan. UV scanning involves the arrangement of projections of 3D elements on 2D space to indicate which textures and how they are located on the model. Due to the large size of the architectural ensemble of blast furnaces, it was advisable to use automatic cubic projection, which made it possible to create adequate details for a large sweep model of all buildings without much effort. The automatic scan option was used from the Blender Kit plugin, the main functionality of which is the ability to upload models, textures, and materials from the corresponding online library to the Blender scene ^[18].

Materials from the Blender Kit, when uploaded to Blender, are presented in the format of nodes – individual texture maps and the logic of their interaction. This makes it possible to easily change the parameters of the material to match the historical ones. It is possible to change the texture repetition rate (tiling), change brightness, contrast, add shade, and mix different textures.

The final stage of the reconstruction at the moment was the creation of renderers – this functionality is also implemented in Blender. The program uses two different built–in rendering algorithms - EEVEE and Cycles, the first is less demanding on hardware and takes much less time, the second involves more complex work with lighting and reflections, resulting in a more realistic picture. The hardware used allowed the use of Cycles, so this algorithm was chosen for the final renderers. The model was located on the factory map, and the HDRI texture of the sky was used as the background (such textures have a larger brightness range, and therefore can be used in 3D editors and engines to create additional lighting).

11. Final renderings of the buildings of the Baranchinsky plant. The buildings of the foundry and mechanical factories, blast furnaces and blast furnace yard, the wagon building, the steam engine building, the Girard turbine building, and the Cowper machine building were reconstructed. A render from the Blender software when using the "Cycles" rendering algorithm.

Fig. 12. Final renderings of the buildings of the Baranchinsky plant. Close-up of the steam engine building and Cowper machine building.

Fig. 13. Final renderings of the buildings of the Baranchinsky plant. The frame building and the wall of the foundry.

14. Final renderings of the buildings of the Baranchinsky plant. Close-up of the foundry.

Fig. 15. Final renderings of the buildings of the Baranchinsky plant. Close-up of the Girard turbine building, the building is connected by a pipe to a mechanical factory.

Conclusion

The result of this work was the creation of a 3D model of the complex of the main buildings of the Baranchinsky plant at the turn of the XIX-XX century - the highest point of development of this enterprise. Industrial development and the change of technological patterns have left industrial facilities of the past without their original use. Nevertheless, the unique architectural solutions are of considerable value to historical scholars. The question arises about the preservation, museification and repurposing of those objects that have come down to our time, as well as about preserving the memory of those objects that were lost. Virtual 3D reconstruction provides such an opportunity, capturing the architecture of the past in the format of virtual models available to both the scientific community and the general public.

Research experience shows that with proper work with archival materials and electronic resources, it becomes possible to restore not only individual, but also entire complexes of industrial facilities. Another important conclusion of the work is the possibility of implementing virtual 3D reconstructions in various software, including in a single free package, and not just in a select selection of professional commercial programs. Such freedom of choice of software should contribute to the development of the field of virtual 3D reconstruction of cultural heritage, allowing researchers to select programs according to their preferences and technical capabilities. Creating static renderers is not the most technologically advanced and interesting form of presenting virtual reconstructions, and therefore it is promising to continue this work in order to create a more complete, visual and interactive presentation.