Initially titled ‘Looking into the future’, which sounded too rhetorical, this paper was an attempt to understand the new theoretical standpoints in architecture. Right from Vitruvius to Serlio, and F.L.Wright (not including the list of architectural theorists) we are aware of architectural theories, and interestingly the inclusion of nature and its ‘symbiotic’ relationship with architecture has been immense. The new architectural paradigm and most talked about is ‘energy and sustainability’. Architectural theories have gone through vast changes and this new paradigm needs to be firstly understood and then probable dissection of things can happen to further analysis these kinds of theoretical standpoints which relate architecture to energy and sustainability through nature. Hence we see a shift in the kind of architectural theories, and the future in architecture is hung with ideas of BIONIC ARCHITECTURE, BIO MIMICRY and etc ( mentioning only to give a fair idea of what is coming up).
note: this is not the full paper (due to word restriction) so in case any doubts please do let know the author obliges for any inconvenience.
What does representation mean in terms of architecture? For me, it is architecture’s physical or carnal quality or to put in another way, the labyrinthine quality of the body. I am reminded of the etching of the imaginary prisons by Piranesi entitled carceri. Their overwhelming power and extraordinary power of sense of space have long remained vivid in my memory. The oneiric and fictional prison of Piranesi, so like the trick pictures of Escher, is precisely what I imagine the maze of the body to be. TADAO ANDO.
Introduction: Nature has always been an inspiration for designers. Through advancements in science and technology; humans have challenged their own intelligence to go as far as possible in building technologies and achieved quite a feat. Architects through decades have been trying to imitate natural forms in built-forms. Bionics is one of the most advanced methodologies in this genre and is now been considered widely.
Bionics is a science of imitating biological (living) forms in the construction of mechanical and technical devices. Bionic architecture is process in design and construction of built-forms whose lines and layouts are borrowed from biological forms present in nature. These designs are in a way an opposition to the regular and rigid rectangular design layouts, in other terms relying more on curved forms of nature and the concept of fractal mathematics. This idea has not only been restricted to the form of the building but to the actual natural processes that living forms undergoes in its life cycle. A new perspective needs to be adopted, so that sustainability can be given a new ground to think on and a whole new dimension needs to be discovered.
From organic architecture to bionic architecture:
“I bring you a new declaration of independence ... an organic architecture means more or less an organic society. Organic ideals of integral building reject rules imposed by exterior aestheticism or mere taste, and so would the people to whom such architecture would belong reject such external impositions upon life as were not in accord with the nature and character of the man who had found his work and the place where he could be happy and useful because of it... beauty seems to have made no sense long at any time. I believe the time has come when beauty must make sense for our time at least... in this modern era art , science , religion – these 3 will unite and be one, unity achieved with organic architecture as center”.[1]
These are some of the apocalyptic phrases in Frank Lloyd Wright’s message to the British architects in 1939. Architect Frank Lloyd Wright not only coined this term but he also had certain fixed set rules and one could not merely ‘bend steel into a flower and call it organic’. According to him organic architecture was the structure like an organism that grows in accord with the law of its own individual existence, with its own specific order in harmony with its own functions and with its environment, like a plant or any other living organism. There was a specific search for a particularity and not just randomly one could buildings with curves as organic.
This was probably the 1st step towards the ‘imitation of natural forms’. But this was bounded with certain criteria’s. What followed was a chaos. A chaos so pre-determined because the idea of such architecture was both accepted and opposed. Where some people thought it was just an outlook to break away from the regular ideas of design, some saw it as an opportunity to move forward, but again it was restricted to design of spaces and the sustainability was not the criteria for such a movement.
Nature & technology:
Nature and technology are one to the mutual benefits of both and natural processes are integral with public consciousness. Technology is meant to make nature “subservient” to be exploited to create an unnecessary consumer need[2]. If nature has built, tested and perfected architectural structures for more than 5 billion years then what could our human –made structures and environment look like if we directly applied this knowledge from nature? What would nature produce if we had to design structures for human beings? If we can assimilate the wisdom of nature’s architecture and apply this wisdom t human-made architecture then would we benefit from this synthesis?
“No human being can deny that the study of nature has made them closer to an unknown and fascinating universe and that things have been profoundly changed by the study. To create as nature creates is to fulfil the birth right of human intelligence and dignity”.[3]
Architecture inspired from nature would definitely mean that a particular built-form would be able to give what nature is giving. Bionic architecture is an attempt to create what nature has created in terms of built-forms. And the process does not stop only there, it has been tried and tested out in various other fields like bio-technology. The idea is to extract the right ingredient from nature to make ‘something’ more adaptable like nature and more flexible. Again one cannot deny the fact that everything that exists in nature decays, but with a certain time line, so it needs to be understood that a building would have its own life cycle, probably through this it would be much more sensitive towards the environment. Architects have been trying out various methods to make a built-form more sustainable. Incorporating new technologies like use of photovoltaic cells and panels have increased in the recent years. But would that make a building ‘sustainable’. It would definitely reduce the amount of load on a building but the question here is on a larger perspective, if one needs to understand the concept of ‘energy and sustainability’.
Everything that exists has structure. Nature has the ability to provide a structure for every element it creates and evolves. Everything has to be adequate and appropriate for its purpose to survive and thrive. It s similar in case of architecture, where the built-forms need to act like a living organism, to understand to react to climatic conditions, adapting to the changing environment and the surrounding environment it evolves in. The question is “can nature teach us to emulate the same processes creating the same flexible behaviour in man-made materials”? According to research a single orchid flower contains more variety and flexibility of structural actions than the most remarkable buildings. [4] The processes of nature is what one would like to understand and incorporate in a building system, then probably a new perception, a new perspective would develop in terms of sustainability. The whole new dimension would perhaps change the lines and layout in which a building design is done. Architects have been trying out methods where nature could be dealt in a way where the building is given more depth. Mere imitation of forms from nature would only mean that it s restricted to a level of aesthetics. “Nature forms patterns. Some are orderly in space but disorderly in time. Some patterns are fractal, exhibiting structures self-similar in scale. Others give rise to steady states and oscillating one…[5]” For example most of the spirals in nature which are termed as gnomonic growth patterns are a result of a progression known as fibonnaci series.
Bionic provides a platform for this learning through and from nature. Form imitation from nature is probably the easiest way in this scenario. However buildings at this level do not aspire to any greater environmental responsibility. It is extremely important to understand the relation between the environment and the building, unless being sensitive towards it; it would not be possible to achieve a balance between the two. Again there should be no compromise in the aesthetic part of the building, and designers should not lose that ‘artistic’ touch in a building design. For example trees are another structural miracle. They collect solar energy using molecular devices, the photosynthetic reaction centres of chloroplasts, and that use of energy to drive molecular machines, which process carbon dioxide and water into the oxygen and molecular building bock that form the whole plant.[6]
Bionics is concerned with the systematic technical implementation and application of the construction, processes and principles of biological systems. For e.g. it s like developing a prototype which is based on nature’s law responding with nature , towards nature and most importantly getting sucked into it as a whole, not making it seem new to the environment yet sustaining in the system. It could call as a system within the system. The concept of bionics could also be based on instrumental approach, making form and function less of a dualism and more of a synergy that aspires to integral design solutions and an alternative model for sustainability. The basic fundamental would always remain constant. What one should be concerned is that nature gives examples of structures created with minimum energy consumption and maximum environmental compatibility. The idea of ‘self-assembly’ comes into the picture, where actually like in nature how an organism assembles ‘itself’ through cell structures, a building is imagined in much more simple way. Like a living body, a building could be broken down in a much simpler way. This is referred as ‘bottom-up’ technique.[7]
The idea of bionics relies on the mapping of biological forms and understanding the structure within them. The concept is simple, involving the mapping down of the entire structural system of a living organism and then a thorough understanding of their forms in the environment they live. But then how does it help architects to design buildings which would be sustainable? The idea here is to imitate living organisms and not their forms only. The details need to be understood in a different perspective altogether. In architecture design if one understands the processes of nature and would directly or indirectly apply this technique in built-forms then it would make much more sensibility.
Architecture today needs sustainable solutions to cope with the existing environment. Growing industries, mass-production, over-population to name a few are now an integral part of a built-environment. In the sense we cannot detach a building just for the sake of aesthetics and forget about the facts. High-tech technologies are incorporated in the building system making it a more complex affair.
Bionic architecture is a feat of hyper-technology. It is the highest and most advanced in terms of architectural design because it takes into account all the various natural forces and human concerns in a way that is ecologically and humanly productive. An evolutionary approach towards design of buildings which allows one to apply principles that have developed in nature over great span of time without reference to past and present stylistic aesthetics. It’s actually a cross-breed between architects and biologist where the first is concerned with spaces and making a building more efficient in terms of use of minimum energy, the latter is trying to find out ways through nature. The fusion of both is what makes ‘bionic’ more interesting and creates an urge of curiosity to understand the various complexities involved. Every species evolved in nature has the ability to sustain and create a mechanism to stay in the eco-system. A designer’s ability to give such attributes to a built-form and or create such an envelope is in itself a challenge to explore limits in design.
Bionic architecture is concerned more with the idea of incorporating the various systems found in a living organism to cope up with the environment, against climate and various others factors. This would be the ‘post-occupancy’ factor in a living organism. Once a living organism has undergone various processes, it s capable of producing a type of mechanism which would avoid things that would affect it. It s the nature which then test, and if an organism survives it s sustainable towards the environment and the two (energy & sustainability) come together when minimum energy is used, thus the two act in synergy.
Architecture is the strongest form of representation in the physical world. So visually appealing and dominating that one cannot deny its presence. Bionic architecture may be one of the ways of environmental architecture. It may be even called as ‘a new evolution’ in architecture. With such complexities being tried to achieve it becomes important to know that how far human intelligence should go far. The complex and unpredictable interaction between different aspects of nature and built-form would always remain, where nature would always have an advantage. Nature has the power to actually flex itself in different ways to cope up with nature itself. It would be very complex issue as to how that could be achieved in architecture[8]?
Conclusion:
In recent times architecture and nature have been together in different ways. This duality in response to the environment has brought changes. Changes so wide, that there have been considerable thoughts on how architecture and the idea of sustainability & energy need to be looked on together. A new humanity is what one s looking for, bionic may not provide 100% solution but it certainly provides a big platform for this type of ideology where nature meets nature in a more matured way. The fusion of technology, material expression, and aesthetics would actually create an exploration and open ways to think more maturely. We need to look back, but not for imitation but in terms of traditions and culture value which have changed in a way to fit in today’s context. Bionic has helped in parametric designs and further explorations are done. It s change so small but on cannot deny the fact that this change is needed. The post industrial phase would be looking and hoping on new technologies which would take this conquest further and not let it down by just making it another movement. What we need to ask is what would be the grounds for objecting if the environmental case were answered democratically and desired?
[1] Hagan,Susannah. “Taking shape-a new contract between architecture & nature”.architectural press.2001.pg141.
[2] F.l.wright , towards organic architecture. Pg 27.faber and faber lmtd.
[3] Tsui,Eugene. “evolutionary architecture-nature as basis for design”. John wily sons. NY Canada.1999.
[4] Ibid.pg.26
[6] Ibid.pg 65
[7] Gleick, james. “chaos-making new science, penguin, London.pg.308.
[8] Thorne,Robert. “towards a social architecture”.. Thames & Hudson. 1987. pg.32
.
References
1. Ramaswamy, sakthivel. “Bio mimicry – an analysis of contemporary bio mimetic
Approaches”. Published thesis, CEPT University. 2007.
2. Gleick, James. “Chaos – a making of a new science”. Penguin publications. London.
3. Tsui, Eugene. “Evolutionary architecture – nature as a basis for design”. John wily & sons.
NY, Canada. 1999.
4. Hagan, Susannah. “Taking shape‐a new contract between architecture & nature”.
Architectural press. 2001.
5. Wright, F.L. “Towards an organic architecture”. Faber & Faber publications.
6. Thorne, Robert. “Towards a social structure”. Thames & Hudson. 1987
7. Wikipedia.org. “self-assembly”
No comments:
Post a Comment