Design Dissertation (MArchD Part 1) by Askaree Dzaharudin

[BIO] REACTIVE Biological Approach in Architectural Reactivity

[BIO] REACTIVE

by Ahmad Askaree bin Dzaharudin Final Design Research Dissertation 13090666 Harriet Harriss

List of Contents 05 12

1.0 Introduction 2.0 Architecture in Dynamic Ecology

3.0 Biological Reactivity

4.0 Systemic Diagramming

5.0 Surface Reformation

6.0 Conclusion

Bibliography

Chapter 1

Introduction

“If time is real, then the principle of morphogenesis must be sought in time, within a mobile and dynamic reality riddled with creative instabilities and discontinuities” Kwinter, 2001

The objective of this research is to investigate the characteristics of reactive systems and how it reacts towards the dynamics of ecology. The idea is that within a context filled with environmental instabilities, a new framework in design is required, one that simple parametric form-generation and kinetic response could not adapt effectively due to the constant, yet unpredictable changes of extrinsic and intrinsic forces. I support Michael Weinstock’s proclamation of an architectural process based on a biological paradigm provides the potential of a higher form of performance-based architecture. In the context of reactivity, biological organisms proved to be more adaptable towards unstable environments. My idea is that the complex system of biological organisms can become a generative tool in the design process to create buildings with reactive capabilities towards its context. 1.1 Reactive System Before the research outline can be presented, it is vital that the definition of the terms is clarified. The term reactive system is used instead of reactive architecture as to cast a wider net in exploring the intrinsic theory of reactivity in interdisciplinary scope. This includes the study of reactivity in system theory and self-organisation of synthetic life-forms. The definition of reactive system that is utilised for the aim of the research comes from the biomimetic study by Michael Weinstock. Reactive system is the capacity for an organisation to consistently respond and adapt towards environmental instabilities (Weinstock, 2006, pp. 26--33). ‘Organisation’ is used instead of physical, chemical or spatial elements to emphasize that system is the harmonic composition of all the elements that makes it reactive.

The use of ‘reactive systems’ in architecture must not be confused by other terminologies such as smart architecture, intelligent environments, responsive environments, and kinetic architecture. Michael Fox definition of ‘interactive architecture’ comes close to the scope of ‘reactive’ within this research. He explained interactive architecture as a conjunction of implanted intelligence and the physical counterpart that adapts towards the conceptual context of environmental or/and human interaction (Fox and Kemp, 2009). While interactive and reactive may share a common behaviour in which they respond physically towards extrinsic and intrinsic changes, they differ vastly in their level of intelligence in which the former’s physical respond towards changes is based on a repetitive interaction within the response system whereas the latter is a responsive mechanism based on continuous interchange of information. In ‘Kinetic Architecture’, these two are divided as different categories of machinery (Zuk and Clark, 1970). However, the definition presented by Fox denotes three key components applicable when designing for reactive system which is the implanted intelligence, the physical response, and the adaptability towards a conceptual framework. However, the other terms stated previously is also researched in this study to inform potential factors in reactivity With the existence of advanced computational simulations and research in biomimetic systems, it is possible to implement the idea of a design methodology based on biological system that is able to actively adapt towards ecological instabilities. While the research is intrigued by the idea of an innovation in reactive architectural design within volatile ecologies, the research aim only to open the possibilities and potentials of exploring the approach of multi-dynamic ecological design through the concept of reactive system in design.

Efficiency is always a consideration in architectural design when it comes to adapting ecological influences. Efficient designs are performative towards its specific functions. However, organisms or systems that are too contextually specific in its performance, does not survive within an environment that is volatile and instable (Pedreschi, 2008, pp. 12--19). Therefore, a new approach is required, one that transcend the focus of efficiency in design towards the mindset of adapting multiple environmental influences. Adaptability in design is not a new field in the emergence of architectural technology, nor is the capacity for architectural form creation to adapt towards multiple forces and parameters. The approach of parametric as a design methodology has been widely used by architects. Form never constitutes the optimum shape derived through a form-finding process driven only by structural optimisation, but rather embodies and integrates a multitude of parameters (Bollinger and Grohmann et al., 2008, pp. 20--25). However, these parameters are conceived as static parameters and requirements that are solved once the form has been established. How then, is the design approach different when the parameters are dynamic in nature? Designing multi-dynamic ecologies should induce complex composition based on functional embedment that is able to measure existing conditions through intermittent analysis and generate response concurrently. Weinstock provides enlightenment in this in his study on biomimetic systems and how they provide potential in architectural design methodology (Weinstock, 2006, pp. 26--33). In order to integrate the concept of reactive system within the architectural design methodology, the principles of reactive system must be established.

1.2 Architecture in Dynamic Ecology While the research focusses on how reactive systems can perform within dynamic ecology, it is also vital to look at how architecture has responded towards dynamic environments. How has architecture progressed in the adaptation towards dynamic ecology? Intelligence in architecture is not without its precedence. In ‘Performance-Oriented Design Precursors and Potentials’, Michael Hensel explores how precedence in built architecture provides insight of passive approaches towards dynamic ecology (Hensel, 2008, pp. 48-53). The design framework is based on the interrelation of dynamics in material, spatial, environmental and social patterns. However, the emerging technologies in structure and mechanisms has brought towards building components that are physically active and responsive, termed as ‘kinetic architecture’ (Zuk and Clark, 1970). Therefore, the scope of studying precedents of architecture in dynamic environment is not limited to the passive approach, but also compares it to the active paradigm of kinetic architecture. Hence, how does the current approach in design adapt towards dynamic ecology? What is the difference in performance between active augmentation and passive approach of adapting dynamic influences in architecture design? Could any of these approach provide a guideline for designing reactive systems?

1.3 Biological Reactivity As the groundwork of dynamic ecology in architecture has been established, it is time to explore how biological systems can become the framework in addressing the volatility of dynamic ecology. In ‘Biological Reactivity, the research lays down the principles of reactivity within complex systems through the understanding of Michael Hensel and Michael Weinstock. The study intends to uncover the reactive behaviour of self-organization within biological systems. ‘Techniques and Technologies in Morphogenetic Design’ discusses the potential of rethinking architectural design in terms of theoretical and methodological framework based on biological systems (Hensel, 2006, pp. 12--17). Weinstock reveals the potential of systemic changes that looks into the convergence of complex ecological and physical changes that take place between organism and the context, promoting evolution, sustainability and processes of organisms (Hensel and Menges, 2008, pp. 6—11). In ‘Metabolism and Morphology’, Weinstock’s provides an account of dynamics in climate and economy, and how it suggests an agenda for the expansion of metabolic morphologies in architectural design. Instead of perceiving dynamic ecology as a multi-layered obstacle in, it is instead utilised to fuel the processes of metabolism within biological systems (Weinstock, 2006, pp. 26--33). Several questions arise from this. What are the characteristics of reactivity in biological systems? How does this system respond towards its stimuli? How can these characteristics be used in architectural design to achieve the same, or close mimicry of the biological responsitivity? The surface structure is an important element in design as it is the medium that divides between the reactive system and the dynamic ecology to which it responds to. Design of reactive surfaces must have inherent context-sensitivity through material systems and integral design method. The research will explore a multitude of surface structures that poses potential as the skin for reactive systems. What are the varieties of responsive surfaces? How are these surface structures able to deliver the processes of reactive systems? How are these surfaces manufactured within architectural building scale?

1.4 Systemic Diagramming Surface structures provide a physical medium in which the reactive system operates. However the processes within the system involve the cooperation of the building as a whole that affects the form and spaces within. Therefore, the implementation of reactive system must be embedded in the design stage, but in what form? Diagramming provides a potential in which the framework of reactive system can be mapped out. Stanley Shinners, author of ‘Modern Control System Theory and Application’ introduced the system theory, showing an insight of diagramming mechanical and automated system in terms of its mechanism and operation, and how it can be used in interdisciplinary applications of systems (Shinners, 1978). The understanding of system diagramming by Shinners is used as a foundation to identify other theorists and architect that practiced system diagramming in design. The use of system diagramming is not unique in architecture. Cedric Price, who was known for his radical conceptual ideas of the Fun Palace and Pottery Thinkbelt utilized system diagrams to map out the variant functions and operation of kinetic components in design (Price and Obrist, 2003). Mark Garcia provided other accounts of system diagrams in which he discussed various architects who practices functional diagrams in architectural design. Hyungmin Pai, a professor at the University of Seoul, Korea discussed the role of the diagram in denoting functions of the body and its integration with the variables of architecture in movements, materials, time and space (Garcia, 2010). The architecture firm of Reiser + Umetoto in ‘Atlas of Novel Techtonics’ discusses the focus of diagrams as an interpretation of vision in natural processes, material evolution and behaviours (Reiser and Umemoto, 2006). Perhaps this could provide a closer revelation to the implementation of biological reactive processes in architectural design. This chapter intends to explore the different understanding and application of system diagramming in architectural design and answer the following questions: How are dynamic ecologies mapped within system diagrams? How could these diagrams be developed into building form and space?

1.5 Surface Reformation As an embodiment of the theories presented, I propose a design intervention that explores the potential of using biological system as a toolset to inform a design that is reactive, supporting the notion of complex systems and its implication towards ecological dynamics. Using the diagram as the methodology, I intend to map the ecological dynamics and organize the reactive elements within a system diagram. By altering the kinetic behaviour of the projected surface into a reactive one, the focus lies in the physical formation and organization of the kinetic elements, and how it could be designed to increase its performance capability in terms of environmental sensitivity and occupant interactivity.

Chapter 2

Architecture in Dynamic Ecology

Climate changes are always within careful consideration in architecture. We claim that architecture is becoming more aware towards the dynamics of climatic changes in order to minimize its effects, but the undeniable truth seems to be that the combination of technological emergence and human consumption is accelerating it. Heating, cooling and ventilating mechanisms deteriorates the environment through uncontrolled energy consumption. Wigginton demonstrated in â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Intelligent Skinsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; how mechanization of comfort, its resource and emissions, has created a degree of dependency that has caused significant environment degradation in the UK (Wigginton and Harris, 2002). The perception that human comfort is directly proportionate to the amount of energy consumed to maintain its condition is causing increase in carbon footprints worldwide. This is due to the lack of reaction between the built environment, and the dynamics of ecology that interacts with it, resulting in the need for extensive energy-reliant equipment. In light of this issue, there are actions made and realized in order to reduce carbon footprint and the intensive consumption of energy. Countless research is being made in preparing for sustainability within the built environment, with the ultimate aim of creating perfectly sustainable building, or zero-energy building. Such exploration includes minimizing thermal loss or impact, climatic modulations, and reduction of energy consumption. The approach towards architecture has led to emerging reactive strategies for ecological modulations. In the past, these strategies reacted with intricacy and beauty to the necessity for preserving local resources and deliver appropriate conditions for human habitation (Hensel, 2008, pp. 48--53).

As new technologies emerge, more possibilities in the method of reactivity becomes possible, from the mechanical level to the material level in architecture. There are potentials in past approaches of reactive strategies in modulation for design that interrelates with the dynamics of ecology and the patterns of human comfort. However, as mentioned by Kwinter in â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Architecture of Timeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, many architects are hesitant to revisit past methods and the images of primitive conditions, desiring instead to utilize in new technologies that surrounds environmental strategies (Kwinter, 2001). This results in architectural design that appears technologically advanced, but with no sense of identity or place. While reactive strategies are appealing in its potentials, are seen by some as a supporting element towards active mechanical systems. Others perceive it as a reflex that might hinder human comfort at large, converting the built environment into dysfunctional slums. This is due to the fact these strategies are usually either ineffective in its operation, or the need for constant awareness towards minimizing energy usage within the built environment. Is this still the issue at hand? Does reactivity in architecture provide no potential in its responsiveness towards dynamic ecology? Could precedents in reactive strategies show potentials for improved version of reactive systems? In order to shed light in this matter, it is vital to re-analyse precedents of reactive strategies in architecture. For the purpose of this research, three groups of reactive strategies in dynamic ecology will be discussed; passive reactivity, active reactivity, and material reactivity.

2.1 The Static Reaction Passive reaction involves the relationship between disparate surface arrangements reacting towards various microclimate, the dynamic means of user occupancy and the elements in space with their own energy signatures. If the static medium is able to respond differently towards various gradient of forces, then it too could be categorized in the context of reactive architecture. Generally speaking, material surfaces are already in reaction with the environment by means of partitioning between the interior and exterior space of the building. However, the dynamics of environmental gradient required within a space is not only exerted by the external disturbances and natural changes; it is also the consideration of moving occupants within the space with regards to activities and interaction. Odile Decq expressed that the modern condition is about how movement within space, also termed as ‘stealthily fluid’, becomes an organizing principle towards the absence of permanent form; and evolution of dimensions and spaces (Jencks, 1999). Reactivity occurs at the level that it involves the dynamic relationship between the architectural surface, the environment, and the subject utilizing the space (Hensel, 2006, pp. 12-17). There are various precedents that exemplify vernacular architecture in the use articulated reactive surfaces. These designs were never claimed to be under the categorization of the identity such as ‘reactive architecture’, but the approach of the design with careful consideration of the dynamic relationship could inform how reactivity was previously perceived. One strong example is the screenwall, particularly in Islamic architecture. The Mogul architects were claimed to have pursued the vision of designing the ultimate diaphanous wall, allowing the greatest comfort in spaces interior and exterior (Behling and Behling, 2000). Behling also mentioned other screeenwalls of this calibre such as the Indian jali and the Arabic mashrabiya. The jali is a perforated stone screen, whereas the mashrabiya is a projected window with wood latticework.

From top to bottom: Figure 1 example of jali screenwall perforation Figure 2 modern use of screenwall Figure 3 combination of mashrabiya screenwall and kinetic mechanism in perforation control

Figure 4 - intricate juxtaposition of light and shadow at the Friday Mosque in Isfahan, Iran

Figure 5 - effect of the traditional mashrabiya in the modulation of sunlight exposure and transparency

The primary purpose of these screens is to provide visual penetration from the interior to the exterior, but delimits vision from exterior to interior, maintaining the privacy of the occupants. The perforation also allows ventilation, provide ample shading and maintain the lighting environment of interior spaces. The articulation of intricate detailing and dramatic display of light and shadow that reacts from the exterior conditions create virtual spaces within the rooms. This ‘virtual space’ that changes with time have already been consolidated to Friedberg’s understanding of the virtual window in which the interplay of light and shadow creates duality in mobility and stasis, and materiality and immateriality of spatial paradox (Friedberg, 2006). The exciting interaction between the occupant and the virtual sense within the space created by the screenwall intrigues activities of the space.

“Architecture, like literature, asks for a willing suspension of disbelief so that, like the reader, the viewer enters a virtual world...” Jencks, 1999

The capacity for the screenwalls to react to the dynamism of its ecology in terms of environmental conditions and heterogeneity of space can also be related to Banham’s theory of a structure built by society that inhabits a space which is rarely regular, vague and adjustable (Banham, 1969). An evolution of this perforation method occurs at the precision of the reactivity through differentiated assemblies that utilize simulative assessment of environment to create more accurately reactive screenwall designs. An interesting step forward is the utilization of this method on a larger coverage of the building, creating layered envelopes that is perforated through the different environmental positions and various spatial conditions.

Surfaces of non-uniform thickness can also be categorized under articulated surfaces. The Ali Qapu Palace palace of Naghsh-I Jahan Square in Isfahan, Iran, contained a music room on the 6th floor with intricate walls and ceiling vaults. These vaults create cavities made of delicate three dimensional ornamentation that invokes the visual of elements in musical instruments. The stuccowork was intended to reduce reverberation effect while maintaining the solidity of upper and lower tones of sound. This is acknowledged as an extraordinary historical precedent as the stuccowork exemplify a surface of acoustic response in which it acts as an extension and amplifier of a musical instrument (Petersen, 1996). The articulation of this, and the variation of microclimates created by the layering of walls with varying thickness and porosity, adapt towards individual comfort and activities within the space. The articulated surface aside, the static reaction also occurs at spatial level. Historically, spatial configuration and the dynamics of human habitation and microclimate are interrelated (Hensel, 2006, pp. 12-17). Activities would change places vertically, or horizontally depending on the time of day. In hot and arid climates, multi-storey spaces are utilized in which inhabitants are able to use the lower floors during the day and sleep in the terrace levels at night to take advantage of natural cooling. It is said that the pavilions of Ottoman, Mogul, and Persian use similar concepts to fully exploit the use of migratory spaces in reaction towards microclimatic changes (Petersen, 1996). The combination of articulated surfaces and migratory spatial arrangements provide the possibilities of creating spaces that are not only heterogeneous, but adaptive towards microclimate in maintaining the comfort of individual users (Hensel and Menges et al., 2009). This compliments the understanding of static elements in space to be reactive.

Figure 6 - ceiling of the music chamber at Ali Qapu palace,Isfahan, Iran

Figure 7 - wall to ceiling stucowork, implying an extension of the musical instrument by reducing reverberation of soundwaves through different modulation of indentations and gaps

The discussion of passive strategies of addressing dynamic ecological factors in terms of articulated surfaces and heterogeneous spaces is essential in creating reactive system that is architecturally functional. Ecology is not approached as an isolated issue, but rather as a dynamism of energy exchange and environmental modulation. The consideration of ecological analysis to be identified and implemented in the design stages as critical parameters (especially regarding articulated surfaces), rather than post-rationalization and post-optimization. This coincides with Leatherbarrowâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s notion of a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;device paradigmâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; in which the environmental device process is set up within a heterogenous situation in order to create time-specific range of comfort levels (Leatherbarrow and Mostafavi, 2002). A key necessity for these passive strategies to work is the material used for the surfaces. A careful consideration of this can either promotes the reactivity of the surface; or render it useless. This becomes a particular potential when material properties are used and calibrated in itself to individually react towards external stimuli. Could materials that are labelled as reactive provide a different approach of reactivity towards the dynamics of ecology?

2.2 Embedded Reactivity and Anisotropy A necessary consideration of architecture in material practice is the reactivity between the built environment and the natural environment in order to create intriguing and sustainable ways of habitation. Key to understanding this relationship is to study the performance capabilities of material that construct the built spaces that we live within. The interaction between the material and the surrounding environment affects the comfort and conditions of spaces. On top of that, materiality invokes another ecological factor that is dynamic; culture and how it shapes materiality practice (Klooster and Boeing et al., 2009). This informs the importance of material consideration and its reaction to ecology in the built environment. However this would entail that all materials used in the built environment to be considered reactive. This is easily differentiated since the evolution of embedded reactivity within material entails that technology lies within the heart of the material in which it have virtually no connection with the engineering of building systems (Addington, 2004). Therefore precedents must be established to identify what ‘reactivity’ in material properties is. Defne Sunguroglu, demonstrated how the properties of wood and its responsive behaviour towards external stimuli could become a potential material function for active, sustainable-oriented architecture (Hensel and Sunguroglu, 2008, pp. 34-41). Hensel pronounced the capability for a material response to dynamics of ecology not as ‘reactive’, but as ‘smart’ material. Smart materials are inherent in its ability to react towards changes in stress, relative humidity, and temperature. For example, thermo-reactive materials like memory alloys and polymers are capable of differentiating its shape in accordance to the changes in temperature; and chromogenic systems that changes colour reacting to electrical, lighting and thermal stimuli. This notion can be further divided into semi-smart and smart material in which the latter offers the ability to become reversible n its behaviour (Schumacher and Schaeffer et al., 2010).

Figure 8 the microscopic view of the wood from the pine tree, showing the internal differentiation of the surface which greatly influence the behaviour of the wood towards extrinsic forces

Figure 9 pine cone is able to reactively open and close to release seeds dependant on the humidity levels of its surrounding in order to create favourable conditions

Figure 10 experimenting veneer composite surface and its anisotropic behaviour based on humidity levels.

The responsive behaviour of a material at the fundamental scale of a particular composition will have an exponential effect on the performance of a building system (Ritter, 2007). A material composition that spreads with different scales and magnitude could be the instrument to create variability and reactivity. This behaviour is known as anisotropic in which biological tissues, such as wood, is directionally dependant within the material composition. Changes in positioning, orientation and conditions of an ecology results in differentiated behaviour across the surface of a material (Addington, 2004). It is this anisotropic behaviour that allows wood to change its dimensions in reaction to fluctuations of extrinsic conditions. How could processed material for structural purposes retain its anisotropic behaviour towards fluctuating ecology? Material that is in its raw state undergoes a process of production and manufacturing that is defined by the performance of the material itself. A research conducted by Steffen Reichert of the Department for Form Generation and Materialisation at the Hochschule fur Gestaltung, Germany explored the reactive capability of wood to change its dimension to relative humidity and the possibilities of utilizing this on a surface scale (Hensel and Sunguroglu, 2008, pp. 34-41). The design process takes into consideration the property of the material, the system behaviour and the dynamics of ecological influences. This responsive capacity includes the materialâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s dimensional ratio of thickness and size, experimented on different relative humidity. The purpose of this experiment is to define a component based on its material reactivity and how it can be incorporated on a larger, and more integral system. The wood veneer contains an embedded combination of a humidity sensor, change actuator and porosity control element. The modelâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s reaction towards the dynamics of environmental changes shows a specified system in which each sub-location on the surface identify and react individually as a part of an overall ecological modulation (Schumacher and Schaeffer et al., 2010). This suggests that the composition in which the components are assembled plays a vital role in the sophisticated reactivity between the system and the ecology.

Figure 11 using the veneer module on a larger scale, implying curved surfaces to study the differentiation of anisotropic behaviours

Take the curvature as an example, its articulation does not only affects the structural capacity of the surface, it also creates variation in orientation and exposure of each element to its corresponding reactions. Therefore, it is essential that the careful tuning of the orientation, curvature and shape change coincides with the tuning of the ecological reaction. Weston stated the great advantage of veneer composition within the built form. When carefully calibrated, rotation of successive veneer poses a great advantage in maintaining diaphragm stresses and dimensional stability of a structural system (Weston, 2003). Taking advantage of material with an embedded reactive property as a medium for performance allows a system that does not require complicated mechanical and electrical control. However in most cases, the need for such control is integrated to create more advanced systems in terms of scale, functionality and control. Could precedents of active mechanism provide an insight of a more integral reactive system?

2.3 Kinetic Reaction and Augmentation The field of kinetic reactivity focusses on the motivation of creating dynamic mechanisms that can physically reconfigure itself to adapt to shifting situations (Fox and Hu, 2005, pp. 78-93) Fox explained that within the design of kinetic reactions, the collaborative fundamentals of interdisciplines are vital within the design process. This includes the integration of environmental dynamics, embedded computational infrastructure, kinetic engineering and mechanism construction. However, Zuk argues that the design methodology of kinetics do require, but are not limited to the mechanistic technological approach to kinetic forms in the use of machinery and built-in programmed computers. The approach could be one that is more personal in which it stresses on the direct correlation between the human necessities with the physical kinetic reaction (Zuk and Clark, 1970). In ‘Interactive Architecture’, Fox’s explained kinetic reaction in the context of extreme natural conditions (Fox and Kemp, 2009). Typically, buildings that are designed to adapt for these unpredictable situations are very static in their response. The change in conditions would only result in two responses of the extreme ends; to fully open up, or shield against the conditions of the environment. The potential of the responses in between the two extremes lies within the interactivity of kinetic envelopes. The only way to do so is by designing the responsive components of the envelope as a whole, instead of incremental addition of elements. Kathy Velikov in the article ‘Responsive Building Envelopes,’ defined the approach of interactivity towards climatic pattern in a contradicting manner (Velikov and Thun, 2013, p. 75). While Fox’s approach does explain the interaction between the contextual conditions of climatic pattern and the response of the envelope, the scope of climatic patterns are not limited to extreme natural conditions. Velikov described the scope of climatic patterns as everyday surrounding changes regarding human comfort and energy levels. The responses in between the extremes are based on predictive models, regulating the conditions within the building with relation to climate.

Figure 12 Building designed towards minimizing carbon footprint by using intelligent facade for the University of Toronto

Figure 13 Double skin facade equipped for automated shading to minimize mechanical lighting and air conditioning within spaces

Figure 14 - different formation of kinetic folding surfaces at Kiefer Technic Showroom, Austria

Figure 15 - basic movement of the folding module

The first precedent that is studied is the Kiefer Technic Showroom designed by Ernst Giselbrecht and Partner in Bad Gleichenberg, Austria. The envelope system of electronically based kinetic elements changes continuously at every hour of the day, portraying a new façade each time but also adaptively changes according to the users’ conditions. The kinetic transformation of folding joints allows a scaling effect on the envelope of the building. When the control system is activated, a range of vertical patterns in translation and scaling emerge. In order to avoid repetition, the envelope has the capacity to change the combinations of the kinetics, allowing multiple permutations of vertical ‘stacking motions’ (Moloney, 2011). In this precedent, there are two factors that must be pointed out which relates to a system’s capability to be reactive. The first factor is energy. While the movements of the shading devices provide the user a specificity in the level of lighting intensity, comfort, view and variability within the spaces, one must question the amount of energy required for the mechanism to work. If the sole function of the kinetic is for improved shading, then a static system such as the Indian jali or the Arabic mashrabiya would have suffice. A moving mechanism must execute its function proportionate to the amount of energy required to activate it (Fox and Kemp, 2009). A superficial method, which utilize higher amount of energy to achieve the same function would only deteriorate the definition of a building to become reactive. The second factor is human augmentation. Control is a core component in a reactive system. However, control should be a medium to regulate human comfort and therefore includes a sensory information more precise and delicate than the user’s commands (Schumacher and Schaeffer et al., 2010). Khan explained that functional optimization of a kinetic structure comes from its ability to reorganize spaces, affecting the people within through sensory information (Beesley and Khan, 2009).

In one of his kinetic installation known as the ‘Open Column’, Khan observed how circulation of people is affected by the ‘breathing movement’ of the kinetic structure, analysing visual changes in surrounding, and dissimilar forms of crowding around the Open Column. The movement of the kinetic installation is regulated at random to inform the unnecessary need for human augmentation in changing the dynamics of its surrounding. However, the installation’s response relies solely on its sensitivity to close-by movements. The Institut du Monde Arabe is considered a very famous example of kinetic envelope based on human augmentation (Molones, 2011). Using light intensity patterns as the variable, the kinetic mechanism represents a particular scaling effect produced from rotational movements of planes. In this example, the kinetic movement is similar to the mechanism of a camera lens. The broad surface of the envelope allows a variety of kinetic behaviours. While each bay within the grid is individually controlled, the composition as a whole allows a rich tapestry of kinetic fluctuation between bays. However, it is also well known that the 25,000 shutters were ineffectively operated. Jean Nouvel defended its operational failure by saying that the movement of the shutters are so slow that it is perceived as inoperable to the viewers (Bachman, 2003). The kinetic reaction must therefore entail a set of characteristic regarding physical movement and velocity. The necessity of control within reactivity should therefore not only be governed by the scale of the system, but the level of interaction between the physical device and the ecological influences. Zuk mentioned a categorization of kinetic systems within a set of machinic level of complexity (Zuk and Clark, 1970). More complex modulations would require higher sophistication of control in order to regulate the possibilities and variation created by the device. This notion coincides with Hensel’s understanding of a higher level of responsiveness based on its capacity for control in multi-parameter effectiveness rather than the efficiency of singular parameter (Hensel and Menges, 2008, pp.54-63).

Figure 16 the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Open Columnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; istallation which is sensitive to the human movement and reacts to retract itself when people attempt to get close to it; a control modulation to human flow

Figure 17, 18 Different views of the Monde Du Arabe kinetic facade system. A combination of the islamic mashrabiya and the movement of a camera lense, implying the kinetics of perforation augmentation

Chapter 3

Biological Reactivity With emerging computer-aided simulation and visualisation techniques that focuses on biological reactivity of ecological influences, responsive processes related to plant growth and metabolic capabilities can reveal sensibilities for architectural design process to be more than simple metaphor of the natural environment, but a drive towards creating complex systems that informs the built environment as â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;living organismsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; standing within an ecology with a synergetic relationship.

Technologies developed for visualizing and analysing the natural ecology has resulted in a profound understanding of biological mechanisms and yielded new sensibilities. From macro-scale environment based on satellite photos, overlooking whole environments to microscopic view of organism interaction, the biological paradigm revealed efficiency in size-dependant reactive capacity in relation to changing environments.

“the so called emergence and evolution of form will no longer follow the classical, eidetic pathway, it will follow the dynamic and uncertain processes that characterize the schema that links a virtual component to an actual one” Kwinter, 2001

Michael Weinstock suggests a biological paradigm that could enhance the capacity for architectural elements to adapt to an environmental modulation. The research intends to further push the theory towards the capacity for these architectural elements to be reactive based on presented biological paradigm. With emerging computer-aided simulation and visualisation techniques that focuses on biological reactivity of ecological influences, responsive processes related to plant growth and metabolic capabilities can reveal sensibilities for architectural design process to be more than simple metaphor of the natural environment, but a drive towards creating complex systems that informs the built environment as ‘living organisms’ standing within an ecology with a synergetic relationship. The core paradigm that formulate around the biological capacity for reactivity is self-organization. The discussion would reveal how plants are able to self-organize based on extrinsic forces, and if this could somehow inform a set of tools to be used for the architectural design process.

Figure 19 Surface polymorphism. In biology it is the occurence of multiple forms acting simultaneously on a single organism

3.1 Self Organization “Self-organisation informs an architecture of systems that appear to organise themselves through an increase in the structure or order of the system behaviour” (De Wolf, 2004) Self-organisation is a process in which a specific function to adapt to ecology is carried out automatically without external augmentation through the internal regulation of a system. This definition is similar to the function of a kinetic reaction in architecture, except that it covers a specific scope in biological growth and adaptability. In biology, self-organisation is the capability for an organism’s cellular organisation to experience growth and differentiation of function and dimension. Cellular differentiation causes a morphological change in the structure of a cell. “The robust design of natural living systems is not produced by optimisation and standardisation, but by redundancy and differentiation” (Weinstock, 2006, pp. 26-33) In order to investigate how self-organisation can lay a foundation to design reactive system for multi-performance architecture, it would be beneficial to explore strategies for modelling biological growth in adapting to ecological modulation. A famous growth modelling technique was introduced by Aristid Lindenmeyer called the L-system. The L-system is a form of formal grammar in which the system is based on a set of strings. In the L-system, two types of strings are utilised; the analytical and the generative string. The analytical string ensures that all strings attached to it share a similar characteristic or behaviour whereas the generative string is an algorithm that creates variation for transforming strings (Mishra and Mishra, 2007). This L-system which is regulated by analytical and generative algorithms facilitates the growth process of an organism, such as plant modelling. Weinstock suggested that the L-system informs an architectural modelling process based on possibilities and indeterminacy of external influences, creating a potential framework for designing redundancy and differentiation (Weinstock, 2006, pp. 26-33).

Figure 20 microscopic image of the leaf surface. Differentiated surface elements defined by ecological parameters and self organization of growth process. The green trichomes are the protective layer. The yellow grandular hair excrete defensive chemicals while the grey hair provide mechanical support

Growth modelling such as the L-system is an interesting view for a reactive design paradigm as it allows input for multi-variable influences and simulates the changes it creates towards the growth process and organisation of the model. These simulations results in algorithmic outputs that can be presented with graphical images for easy comprehension and communication. Ruckman demonstrated in a study called ‘SelfOrganization and Design’ that within self-organization, the architect must determine two sets of input that will formulate the gestalt of the design; defining the module and analysing the ecological factors involved. This involves the manipulation of one module through addition and subtraction of ecological modulation, which causes a ripple effect that changes the displacement or dimension of surrounding modules or “unique articulation of individual unit’s dimension and orientation during the growth process” (Weinstock, 2006, pp. 34-41). In a research on biological growth development, Professor Prusinkiewicz stated that the analysis of self-organisation process of a plant model using the L-system allows an understanding of developmental mechanisms and the various principles that invokes self-organisation (Prusinkiewicz, 2004, pp. 79-83). The use of analytical and generative methods in architectural design could regulate a more responsive interaction between the system and its reactivity towards the ecology. The built environment, with its integration of large scale systems, could also utilize analytical and generative methods within subsystems to address more local and specific influences within a larger system of architecture to ensure each component are interrelated. In 2006, OCEAN and Scheffler + Partner proposed a design for the New Czech National Library in Prague (Hensel and Menges et al., 2009). The objective of the project was to create a heterogeneous spatial arrangement and responsive gradient based on environmental constraints, while maintaining the intense programmatic typology within the building design. The core design issue was how to integrate a tectonic system which can create a transitional flow from the personalized reading spaces to the highly congested and functional unitbased zones.

Figure 21 The simulated growth process of rose campion in a contextfree situation using a software that utilizes generative L-system called L-Studio

This particular approach is a similar to the idea proposed by Omar Khan that dynamic elements functions as a utilitarian process to allow occupants of the space to be visually aware of the changing surroundings within the space and realise dissimilar forms of crowding (Beesley and Khan, 2009). However the flow within the library does not only consider the movement of people, but also a set of specific environmental conditions throughout the transition. The design process demonstrated for the library informs the consideration for multiple parameters to be interrelated before it can be analysed for the appropriate responses. These responses are related to the specific articulation of each component from space to form, which generates a differentiation in terms of gradient, dimension and organisation. Michael Hensel demonstrated a design paradigm based on â&#x20AC;&#x153;an analytical computational procedure that identifies the gravitational force distribution within the cantilevering volumes of the envelope which is generated as a vector field of principle forcesâ&#x20AC;? (Hensel and Menges et al., 2009). Although the project does not inform a model related to selforganization, it exemplifies the articulation of analytical and generative methods in architectural design, creating multiresponsive building. Another particular model that was brought up by Professor Prusinkiewicz is the integration of biomechanics into plant development to transform self-organisations. This model enhances the dynamism of the previously explained growth model by inducing an element which informs the organization of substantial changes in the ecological gradients (Prusinkiewicz, 2004, pp. 79-83). This input, in turn, allows the self-organization to regenerate its adaptive strategies towards a more appropriate functional intensity. Weinstockâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s analysis of internal simulation of plant components suggests that complicated biological models integrate the combined effect of gravity, tropism, and contact with obstacles (Weinstock, 2006, pp.34-41). The methodological setup and ecological variations that are determined in this biological model could become a handy toolset for designing reactive architecture. Biomechanical concept would allow whole building systems to be informed by changing influences of ecological input in which the reactive components optimize its environmental functions.

from top clockwise: Figure 22 - building perspective image of the National Library Figure 23 - multi-layered parametric gradient based on the intensity of activity, flow of people, and the cantilever structures of the form Figure 24 - 3D model of the library Figure 25 Interior perspective of the main library space

In setting up a biological paradigm, Hensel stated that the study of behavioural ecology is also essential in self-organization (Hensel, 2006, pp. 18-25). While the previous study introduced by Professor Prusinkiewicz simulates the growth development and process of self-organization, behavioural ecology is the physical reaction towards extrinsic influences. This process involves three stages of reaction. The stimulus is the ecological influences necessary for adaptation. This stimulus could be a negative force that must be adapted, or a positive force that can be harnessed. The capability for the stimulus to be perceived and analysed is known as sensibility. Analysed information from the change in stimulus creates a reaction, which is the sensitivity of selforganization. The capability for an organism to sense, analyse and react is usually embedded within the material of the organism itself. Aside from the material make-up, the composition of the system plays a huge role in behavioural ecology. A research by Brendan Lane from the Department of Computer Science in University of Calgary simulated how the clustering of plant ecosystem reacts to ecological influences using the L-system. Irritability of specific plant types are determined using two generative strings. The complex string generates the clustering of the plant group in response to specific ecology, while the lower-level string generates the reaction in terms of each plantâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s dimensional transformation.

â&#x20AC;&#x153;...the biological system respond and adapt to environmental stresses and dynamic loading are complex, so that the responses are nonlinear, arising out of interaction of multiple hierarchyâ&#x20AC;? Weinstock, 2006

The study exemplifies similar potential for distribution of self-organization within the built environment. In ‘Designing Architectural Morphing Skins with Elastic Modular System’, Khoo demonstrated a morphing skin that consists of an articulation of hard and soft element. The former informs a characteristic for the surface to be built to last while the latter suggests the possibility of applying ‘elasticity’ within the former to respond to various conditions (Khoo and Salim et al., 2011, pp.397-420). Composition and clustering of self-organization in specific ways could accumulate or disperse the impact of reactivity to ecological influences. Distribution of building elements is informed by performance-based criteria and simulated to analyse the reaction from the distribution. Selforganization could suggest a notion for Leatherbarrow’s ‘device paradigm’ in which the “environmental device process is set up within a heterogenous situation in order to create time-specific range of comfort levels” (Leatherbarrow and Mostafavi, 2002). The approach of self-organization allows a different angle in perceiving reactivity in which it entails the synergetic interrelation between growth processes and the changing ecological influences using analytical and generative methods. Further elaboration is made to explore possible generative factors that informs self-organization.

3.2 Metabolism and Morphology An essential generative factor in reactivity is the metabolism capacity in self-organization. Design of surfaces for alteration and harnessing of ecological benefits have direct impact on the generative form of the built environment (Wigginton and Harris, 2002). Architectural metabolism system is designed based on criteria of technological availability and methods of construction. Remo Pedreschi expressed in ‘Form, Force and Structure’ that in the context of urban morphologies, the “insertion of green pockets and parks as the ‘lung’ of city spaces is an indirect metaphor to metabolism, one that is incorrect in the scope of performance-oriented design” (Pedreschi, 2008, pp.12-19). Michael Weinstock proposed an alternative agenda for metabolism in which it is perceived as a dynamic system, shaped by its specific reaction to the context. The relationship between form and metabolism of the natural world works in a different synergy than that of the built environment. Weinstock stated that natural precedents perform a sophisticated choreography of energy and surface structure such that it shapes the self-organization of natural systems (Weinstock, 2008, pp. 26-33). The study of natural metabolism is essential as it informs a method for morphological response in the harnessing and transition of energy. Living forms are capable of automatically reconstructing and maintaining its body through the exchange of energy and bio-mechanism within the surface structure. In Fox’s notion of ‘Interactive Architecture’, this ability is described as being ‘self-feeder’ in which the energy absorbed by a kinetic component is reutilized to ensure the mechanism continues to function (Fox and Kemp, 2009). Metabolism and lifespan of plants are driven by photosynthesis. However in different contexts, specifically that of harsher environments, plants evolved to a more efficient, modified photosynthesis (Weinstock, 2008, pp. 26-33). The common feature within natural metabolism of any plant system is the morphology of leaf arrays and branching networks. Array of self-organization modulates energy absorption and release, while energy transport and circulation is regulated by the branching system of the organism.

Figure 26 coloured scanning electron micrograph of a leaf section. The image consist of multiple cells containing small organelles that operates the photosynthesis of the leaf. These chloroplasts are formed within capsules that circulate the flow of synthesized products

Figure 27 bioreactor using algae synthesis to extract hydrogen gas from its by-product to be used as fuel. This technology converts a by-product into a metabolic substance for potential energy usage.

The overall shape of a plant and the volume of the leaves are limited to the specific orientation and shape of individual leaves, determined by how each leaf avoids shading each other from sunlight (Poorter and Werger, 1999, pp. 1464-1473). In a research on how sunlight absorption is affected by sapling architecture, Poorter stated how leaf ordering is essentially related to the avoidance of self-shading. In ecology with high sunlight intensity, the upper half of the plant is capable of self-arranging various arrays before the bottom part of the array receives minimal sunlight for photosynthesis, allowing sufficient metabolism without the need for further metabolism modifications. In relation to that, plant species adapting to lower light intensity reacts to avoidance of self-shading by alternative means such as fluttering and single-layered leaf volume (Horn, 1976). However, it is not absolute that these alternative strategies are significant in the increase of sunlight absorption since many plants have similar leaf characteristics. It is relatively agreeable that in the context of photosynthesis, leaf array self-organize actively and continuously to optimize the intake of sunlight. Negative impacts of leaf array are compensated by altering the shape, behaviour and orientation of modular leaf components. Anatomic organization of a plant involves the circulatory network for fluid transportation and support structure for leaf array. The morphological behaviour of the plantâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s form and shape is based on these two aspect. As previously discussed, leaf array reacts to the exposure of sunlight conditions. However it is not the sole trigger to its morphology. The suitable leaf positioning and dimension is also dependant on the effectiveness of fluid coursing through the branches. Niklas suggests that the ratios of length and branching angles of the main-to-sub branches designate the characteristic of leaf array, as they evolve as a fully integrated morphology (Niklas, 1982, pp 196-210).

Figure 28 distribution and array of leaf cluster is dependant on the effective ratio of branch length to ensure to optimal synergy between metabolic absorption by the leaf surface, and its transportation flow throughout the plant.

Figure 29 an algorithmic script to generate a branching network of a tree structure. The cross-sectional diameter differentiates from subsequent branches within its hierarchy. Parameters affecting the branching sequence is the total height of the plant, scale of mother-to-daugter branches, and quantity of small branchings

The metabolic behaviour of the plant informs a conceptual deployment for building systems as they share similar prospects. Plants builds the foundations of metabolism system based on the relationship of structural and metabolic elements in which they correlate to absorb and transport energy, while functioning as the physical construction of the plant (Weinstock, 2006, pp.26-33). This would suggest that in the metabolism of a reactive system, the capability to absorb and transfer harnessed energy plays an important role in the morphology of the built form. For example, the absorption of solar energy using photovoltaic panels does not only consider the orientation of sunlight and the amount of panels to the ratio of energy used in the building. It requires the careful consideration of integrating the photovoltaic elements within the structural consideration of the building, altering the building shape, and the positioning and dimensions of individual and group photovoltaic. The generative process must map out how energy from each individual module is transferred to the building as a whole, effecting the spatial and building services within the system. While the implementation of a morphological system based on the metabolic of plant is ideal, it must be realised that building systems are more complex, in which it must also anticipate â&#x20AC;&#x153;additional interactions such as volumetric, material constraints, and user specificationsâ&#x20AC;? (Velikov and Thun, 2013, p. 75). As reactivity relies heavily on the self-organization and array of surface structure, it must be elaborated on examples of surface compositions based on generative modelling that pose similar behaviour as the array of the leaf structure, informing potential surfaces as reactive elements.

3.3 Material Systems As the research develops generative modelling based on biological growth and metabolic system, the discussion unfolds the need to explore dynamic surface structures that could inform it being part of a reactive system. Hensel defines modulation of such surfaces as material systems. Material system is defined as a generative composition of physical elements and nodes, rather than a connection of standardized components. The concept of material system entails an integration of construction logic, ecological modulation, geometrical and material behaviour into a computational model (Hensel and Menges, 2008, pp. 54-63). The aspects could initially be embedded individually and progressively in order to generate an evolving morphological process. This suggests that differentiated surface is different than that of a static surface since the computational model is not definite in its form, but rather a framework of possible manipulations and differentiations based on changing situations. “The high performance that shape-adaptation at nodes and continuity of materials in biological structures produces suggests that the mechanical joint in engineered structures need to be rethought” (Weinstock, 2006) Weinstock’s statement explained that the biological self-organization entails an evolved material system that transcend conventional construction method, into rethinking components and materials that are able to change and configure when adapting towards ecological influences. Michael Hensel described the polymorphic surfaces that “comprises of hierarchal arrangement of material system which comprises of scale-dependant articulation and specific integration across the scales” (Hensel and Menges, 2006). To demonstrate the generative process of such differentiated surface structures, the research explores some projects made by the Architectural Association Diploma Unit 4, facilitated by Michael Hensel and Achim Mendes to see their potential for self-organization, as informed by Weinstock.

Figure 30 (Top) study model of the prototype to examine the structural capacity of the continuous laminae

A. Continuous Laminae This project is an extension of the study of embedded reactivity in which it focusses on the anisotropy of timber, specifically on the relationship between fibre-directionality and its reaction to environmental forces (Hensel and Sunguroglu, 2008, pp. 34-41). The surface structure is based on basic strip elements curved to form a continuous lamination process. The construction utilizes nodal support system to allow flexible movements and self-organizing between strip elements during the computational modelling. The surface structure creates a laminar flow by sustaining continuity of curvature between each strips. The articulation of multiple load system flow of the continuous laminar and the anisotropic behaviour of timber regulates the flexibility and movability of the structure as a whole. Relating this to the capacity for ecological reaction, the continuous laminae acts as a filtration medium for moving flows. Therefore, the analytical aspects when generating the continuous laminae must include dynamics such as airflow, system deflection and local terrain formation. Manipulation of porosity levels between laminae modulates airflow and fluid movements into spaces in a gradual manner. The crosssectional gaps of laminar elements could be used to facilitate the acceleration of flow through the surface.

Figure 31 (Top) connective nodes which links the laminar elements to each other. The flexible movability of the connection allows a differentiated behaviour of each laminar when encountered with ecological flow Figure 32 (Left) Parametric simulation based on airflow to identify th gradient of surface exposure of differentiated surface.

The articulation of the gaps with the flexible movement of anisotropic behaviours results in a complex capacity for regulating exposure and acceleration of air and water flow. This suggests a potential result by integrating the branching network model of main-to-sub branch based on the different velocities of different part of laminar sections (Niklas, 1982, pp 196-210). This approach of actively regulating flow could suggest an organizing principle for controlling ‘stealthily fluid’ as coined by Odile Decq in ‘Ecstatic Architecture’ (Jencks, 1999). Simulating the flow of metabolic elements within the surface structure informs the differentiation of dimensions between laminar elements. This would allow the structure to respond locally to the different orientation and positioning of individual strip element. The overall assembly creates a single complex surface that could actively control flow of ecological influences.

B. Differentiated Space Frame This project transform the space frame structure from a vector-active assembly into a surface-active assembly. The transformation of the space frame from a flat surface into one that is dynamically active allows performance embedment that transcend structural function, utilizing differentiation of space frame elements to locally respond to ecological influences. Before triggering the generative design of the differentiated space frame, a digital analysis is carried out by simulating individual space frame elements to its concurrent ecological aspect. In the context of this project, the simulation analyses the behaviour of airflow towards the triangulated space frame element. Dimension, size, angle, and perforation area is the altered in relation to the specific orientation and positioning towards general airflow, as simulated previously. This results in a morphology of various triangulated elements which are then reconfigured as a single complex surface configuration. While the process of organizing the various triangulated elements was not demonstrated, the leaf array method could suggest a composition tool to generating the surface-vector in ensuring that individual elements do not impose one another in their response towards their respective local forces (Poorter and Werger, 1999, pp. 1464--1473).

Figure 33 differentiation of the space frame created through the composition of triangulated pyramids that are of varying angles based on parametric informations

Figure 34 physical model created by glueing together triangulated elements. Since each triangulated elements are fixed at different angles, the formation creates an irregular surface of space frame.

Figure 35 parametric gradient based on solar exposure, informing the deformation of the planar surface, thus affecting the dimensions of individual triangulations.

The morphology of the space frame informs how such transfiguration could create an integration of structural and metabolic system within a single continuous surface structure. The project utilizes empty space frame to exemplify the differentiated triangulation and the dynamics of the surface as a whole in capturing airflow. However, these individual space frame can be exchanged with more functional material or mechanism for extended purposes, such as photovoltaic cells to actively capture sunlight. The dynamics of the surface as a whole would allow the individual cells to differentiate in its rate of absorption according to local situations. The differentiated space frame suggests a two double-layered generative framework from the analysis of individual triangulated cells, to the configuration of the surface as a whole. This multi-layered model could also be further divided into step-by-step progress in which both modelling is generated to handle specific ecological modulation. The coexistence between the individual cells and dynamic surface is essential in ensuring continuous response to ecological changes.

C. Porous Cast This particular study is interesting as it focuses on the fabrication process of the surface rather than its performative capacity. The responsive elements that reacts to ecological influences determines the formation of the surface by configuring them as a formwork where the surface material will ‘fill-in’. The surface would then occupy voids and pores that exists between responsive elements, acting as a bond that merges all the responsive elements into a single three dimensional surface structure. The elements that acts as the cast could then be removed to observe and analyze the behaviour of the porous surface structure. This method of modelling suggests a physical fabrication method for self-organization in which form is dependent on the growth of its elements. Although with current technologies it is highly uneconomical and impractical to cast whole porous structures, the essentiality lies in the prototype modelling as it could then be tested for ecological modulations. Casting could be systemized through compartmentalization of smaller casts to be assembled on site. Stephen Kieran suggested in ‘Refabricating Architecture’ of the ‘grand block’ system in which whole components are casted assembled in complex groups, comprising of permutations in casting framework (Kieran and Timberlake, 2003).

Figure 36 a series of study model to examine the physicality, material and parametric gradient of the porous cast. The formwork is made from styrofoam and embedded with pneumatic cells.The void spaces are cast with plaster, showing the differentiated, irregular and performative capacity of the porous cast

Figure 37 the array of porous formation on whole surfaces and curvature implies a parametrically informed surface based on the different permeability of individual pores. Different ecology factor can also be approached by embedding the pores with pneumatic materials

Since differentiated surfaces relies heavily on composition of unique responsive elements, the porous cast generative method allows freedom of configuration, resulting in a higher accuracy for ecological responsiveness. Manipulation of pore sizes could be used as morphological features for lighting and ventilation filtration, while the installation of responsive elements within pores could further embed complex functions. The absence of infill would complement Friedbergâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s approach of duality in materiality and immateriality in creating virtual spaces by controlling the dimensions and sizes of the pores towards infiltration of external aspects (Friedberg, 2006). The dynamic effects of individual, unique pores would inform a gradient form of activity and movement within the space.

Chapter 4

Systemic Diagramming 60

This scientific approach towards architectural diagramming could suggest a way to map out reactive systems of architectural elements. Focussing on the diagramâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s capability to map out reactive system within architectural elements, the research explores diagrammatic practices that superimpose complex dynamic functions and regulative systems into architectural diagrams.

The complexity for architectural elements to be reactive entails the harmonic synergy of multiple elements that are kinetic and static in nature. Previously, the research exposed the analytical and generative tools that would suggest a direction for designing architectural reactive towards ecological modulations. However, these set of information in terms of simulation, and modelling must be systematically organized for the design process to be integrated and interrelated to the programmatic function of the built form as a whole. Behavioural morphology such as the self-organization of surfaces and the branching network of metabolic elements is carefully charted out within an integrated medium to ensure technicality and validity of the tools used. The researchâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s interest in diagramming lies in mapping the architectural design for the instrumental use of technological, biological and structural composition, and the interrelation of all the functional elements. Built on the foundation of a biological paradigm, systemic diagramming became the medium of choice to redefine the architectural design process. Hyungming Pai demonstrated the diagramâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s function in the integration of the body with aspects of movement, space, time and material in architecture. In the context of architectural applications, the diagram regularly addresses the relationship of factors towards photographic and plan form. Pai expressed the limitation of such medium to integrate analysis, control and prediction models. He argues that functional diagram should be one that is machinic as complex as a biological system, in order to properly map out the organizational, behaviour and productivity of a body. This scientific approach towards architectural diagramming could suggest a way to map out reactive systems of architectural elements. Focussing on the diagramâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s capability to map out reactive system within architectural elements, the research explores diagrammatic practices that superimpose complex dynamic functions and regulative systems into architectural diagrams.

4.1 Cybernetic Diagram of Cedric Price

“I’m only radical because the architectural profession has got lost. Architects are such dull lot - and they’re convinced that they matter” Cedric Price (Castro, 2004) The statement proclaimed by Cedric Price was an expression of his frustration towards the opposition in architects’ desperation to create monumental buildings. Price had always favoured architecture as an operable and flexible system, embracing the role of anti-architect. During the early 60’s, Price was fixated with system theory in order to find a new way in approaching the design process; one that focusses on the potentials of avant-garde technological systems in the architecture of performance (Mathews, 2006, pp. 90-95). The systemic diagramming is a graphical communication method that implements interdisciplinary and scientific methods in design development as a catalyst to solve multi-dimensional problems and erratic circumstances. Cedric Price learnt of the latent potentials in combining electronic and cybernetic control systems as a mean to design programmatic variability (Mathews, 2006, pp. 39--48). Price’s fascination of cybernetic comes from the possibilities of dynamic systems that could self-sustain and regulate for the need of the users. Cybernetics are tools of performance that are subject to modification and flexibility. Its usage in the design diagrams allows the opportunities for long term performative schemes. By creating a methodology to approach indeterminate and evolving systems, cybernetic theory established the foundation for Price’s virtual architecture. The practice of systemic diagramming allowed Price, the possibilities of procreative design process, created by the merging of complex information technology and architectural requirements. Price took a step further by utilizing the systemic diagramming within the boundaries of architectural drawings, connecting technological sequences with localized spatial context, converting the built form itself to become a diagram (Mathews, 2006, pp. 39--48).

As Price was developing the Fun Palace, he visualized how the building elements are able to actively reconfigure to suit the function of the space being used. The possible configurations are organized into procedures that are satisfied by computerized elements that detect, control and regulate the various configurations. In the scope of the Fun Palace, ecological influences are based on internal factors of human activity, movement, and spatial heterogeneity. While Priceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s method of diagramming does not suggest re-active elements based on a biological system, it exemplified how kinetic elements are mapped using symbols within a simplified diagram in cybernetic theory. These simplified elements are then manifested into building elements by superimposing the cybernetic diagram into an architectural drawing of plan, elevation and section. The function of superimposing is to ensure that the active elements are designated in the correct scale and proportion, and to analyze the technicality for the elements to move within the range that they are allowed to. With the aid of computer-aided modelling, this procedure of cybernetic diagram could be further improved by simulating the activity of kinetic elements towards the heterogeneity of spaces involved.

Figure 38 Cedric Priceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s diagram mapping functional sequence and programs in the Inter-Action Centre

Figure 39 cybernetic diagram of the Fun Palace programs by Cedric Price and Gordon Pask

However, Weinstockâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s scope of reactivity involves the morphological behavior of reactive elements and their capacity to regulate metabolic aspects. Could another diagramming method of a more recent context inform a higher form of systemic diagramming involving morphology of elements based on dynamic influences and its synergy with the integrated active system?

Figure 40 planning diagram showing maneuverable services and mobility of plugged in components within a grid system

4.2 Atlas of Novel Techtonic The diagram, as perceived by Kwinter, is a pool of information in which the potentials of a context are actively stored within sections of the reservoir. These sections establish which aspects are to be emerged, and which to be conserved. This way, the diagram acts as a dynamics of matter, in which certain modules trigger the function of aforementioned aspects. Reiser + Umemoto in the ‘Atlas of Novel Techtonics’ attempted to explore architecture elements as a dynamic pattern between matters through the use of structuring diagrams. The diagram informs of an active continuous flow of information and energy between the environment and the subjected architectural elements (Reiser and Umemoto, 2006). As previously discussed, material systems play an essential role in establishing a reactive behaviour within the built environment. Umemoto stated the active role of the material behaviour in creating morphology of emerging structural forms. The structural form that is capable in changing its form and shape towards multiple extrinsic forces (Zuk and Clark, 1970). The act of these forces can be modelled to behave diagrammatically by rescaling the forces and form that receives them. The continuous relationship between the form and forces can generate multiple levels of expression, from the structural capacity of the form to the occupation and user within the building. This complex flow of action and reaction is organized within the confines of the diagram. The diagram is capable of organizing this dynamic system at various scales. The dynamics of ecological influences could be mapped in a gradient field from the source to the material system. In system theory, This can also be described as a diagram of closed-loop devices in which the relationship is the flow of energy between devices, emerged into the correct scale and materiality (Shinners, 1978). In relation to information theory, Gregory Bateson described the gradient mapping of ecology not as a direct form generator, but as the boundaries that defines the scope of the form generator. The function of the diagram can be related to this, such that the gradient information informs an abstract for providing the material system a range of variation in changes and behaviour.

“...the behaviour of material system at one scale allows the architect to predict its behaviour in another” Jesse Reiser (Reiser and Umemoto, 2006)

While the system theory provided by Shinners excel in systematically organizing the probabilities and differentiations of relationship between material behaviour and ecological factors, it usually entails the diagram into the most basic form of representation; scientific symbols. Umemoto suggests a better diagrammatic approach through the geometry of material behaviour and its representation of scaling. Material systems at the architectural scale must be modelled in a diagrammatic level in order to simulate changes and behaviour. Hence, the analogue relationship between dynamic forces and the material system must also be made in micro-scale. Adjustment of scale must be made in order for the system to be simulated within a more extensive model. Representation of certain element is necessary to simplify the visualization and communication generated by the diagram. The use of different scales within a picture diagram is able to create different perception and effects by manipulating the scale of the object and the environment it is superimposed to (Garcia, 2010). This example shows that when the geometry of a material behaviour exceeds the matter it is projected upon, the object becomes representional. On the other hand, the inverse of this relationship reduces the object into its most basic information; such as that utilizes by Shinners in system theory. Reactivity therefore, entails the diagrammatic mapping of relationship between the differentiated architectural elements, and its variation of response with the ecology through the use of representational tools, as demonstrated by Reiser+Umemoto. Now that the research has established how reactive relationship between material system and ecological behaviour can be informed by a design process based on diagramming, I intend to test this method on a real site, objectively to investigate the dynamic ecology and how selforganization system could inform reactivity within the built environment.

Chapter 5

Surface Reformation This proposal aims to explore the methods in which an intervention, altering the gestalt of an existing architectural form, could inform a more ecologically reactive architecture, fully utilizing the potentials of changing ecology and advocate an “emergence of form” based on “differentiation and redundancy”

As an extended discussion on reactive architecture, I propose a design intervention that exemplifies the philosophies that I have positioned myself to explore the potentiality of adopting self-organization and metabolic behaviour within architectural element to create a built environment that is continuously responsive to its surrounding. Coinciding with the research findings, I utilize the diagram as a medium to identify the suitable material system for the building intervention. This proposal aims to explore the methods in which an intervention, altering the gestalt of an existing architectural form, could inform a more ecologically reactive architecture, fully utilizing the potentials of changing ecology and advocate an “emergence of form” based on “differentiation and redundancy” as informed by Michael Weinstock. By adopting the Reiser + Umemoto’s method of organizing scale and complex systems, I assume to create a more active design by altering the formation of the facade elements; a surface reformation The intervention is carried out on the Kiefer Technic Showroom building. The primary concern of the building is the kinetic façade. The showroom presents a truly physical form of responsiveness, expressed by its dynamic façade system of electrically driven folding elements of perforated aluminium. The architects of the showroom, Ernst Giselbrecht + Partner explained that architectural facades used to be characterised by window arrangement and axes. These features expresses surface relief with the architectural elements from the particular style. Friedberg explained that the window used to be an indicator for spatial functionality; the increased number of window axes within a room indicates the importance, privacy and intense activity within that particular space (Friedberg, 2006).

Figure 41 - facade composition

Figure 42 - ground floor plan

Figure 43 - first floor plan

Figure 44 - interior elevation

The showroom applies the possibility for whole surfaces to be transparent, in which the architect dictates its whole transparency to be an indication of modern character. Integrating whole transparency with individual needs and the intelligence of comfort, the kinetic system regulates the suitable conditions within the spaces, while expressing an exciting presentation through variation of different composition. In the context of kinetic architectural systems, energy efficiency remains as a key aspect within its constitution (Szell, 2003). This can be divided into two main approaches; spatial comfort by calibration of environmental influences, and the efficient energy regulation. What this entails is the function of the kinetic behaviour to become both functional and superficial in its form, in which the kinetic serves as a regulator of ecological exposure, while becoming representative and ‘sculptural’ in its dynamics. This kinetic organization provides an ideal condition to study and alter the behaviour of the façade and the building system, with regards to “dynamic environmental performance” and the “heterogeneity of space” as informed by Michael Hensel. As intervention, I propose an articulation between the folding elements and the differentiation based on microclimatic exposure and spatial function to create a continuous action-reaction between the exterior and the interior. Anshuman raised the issue that the monotonous characteristics of the surface projection as a whole, coupled with the repetitive timing for the folding elements, shows a lack of interactivity which results in the perceived inertness for how cognition fails to assess activeness of the façade system. Therefore, we see that even though the physical kinetic of the folding aluminium is highly dominant, the perceived responsiveness is not pushed to its optimum function. I acknowledge that the abuse of repetitive kinetic elements dominates the unique characteristics of places across the projected surface and renders the spectator as the object of operation rather than the subject of action (Bloomer, 1977).

“Standardization of surface elements both within facades and in other interior surfaces with their authorships assigned to automated systems, reduces the potential of personal projection, authorship and interaction with these elements.” (Anshuman, 2005, pp. 12-23)

While maintaining the folding behaviour of the façade, I propose to reorganize the surface structure to differentiate based on gradient localized factors. My idea reflects Anshuman’s alternative model in organizing the principles within an interactive system. The alternative model utilizes an integrated approach to environmental response and user information by re-organizing two main components; the surface elements according to ecological and interactive influences, and the systemic process of the kinetic mechanism to strive for energy efficiency. In the context of morphological responsive design, the tectonics of partitioned spaces and the Modernist’s open spaces have led to an extensive use of modularisation in building elements, such that all components are devoted to serve a single, primary function with efficiency. This singleobjective paradigm revolves around the optimum projected performance with the ratio of energy consumption. My proposal would utilize a multi-performance paradigm that would create a synergetic relationship between the kinetic surface and the ecological dynamics. In this case, it would be wise to recall Reyner Banham’s analysis in the traditions of nonsubstantiality from the use of environmental gradient. Therefore in my intervention, I attempt to utilize the self-organization paradigm of the complex brick assembly to integrate the projected kinetic surface, microclimate and the intensity of spatial activity into a synergetic relationship. The innovative use of the brick formation by using parametricallyinformed curved surfaces and augmentation of additional function proved as an inert potential for an evolution of the screenwall function in ecological reactivity (Sunguroglu, 2008, pp. 64--73). The methodological framework involves the intensive differentiation of material behaviour using self-organization of biological reactivity paradigm regarding its mutual feedback, passive modulation strategies and natural energy absorption. Through literature and diagrammatic analysis of the existing gestalt of the Kiefer Technic Showroom within the scope of reactivity, I intend to explore the possibility of self-organization within kinetic system to better respond towards dynamic ecology.

Figure 45 Organizational diagram to inform necessary components and procedures to initiate the reactive process

From the analysis of recorded material, it was possible to create diagrams of environmental gradients as generator for self-organization. Firstly, a diagrammatic model of ‘Exposure Mapping’ was produced. The exposure mapping indicates the gradient in levels of solar exposure on the kinetic façade surface. This diagram allows a simplified reading on the different levels of sunlight exposure on the curvature of the projected surface. At the same time, a gradient mapping is also generated to indicate the functional flow within the spaces using the intensity of the activities and the circulation behaviour. Based on the frequency and dynamics of the circulation, the diagram will demonstrate the movement of people within the showroom using radiating lines. The spaces with the most radiating lines indicate the important programs within the showroom, which is the exhibition areas. From the activity mapping generated on planar view, the gradient of activity intensity is projected on the facade surface, imposing a diagram on people’s flow to indicate gradients of transparency.

Figure 46 - activity mapping on ground level

Figure 47 - activity mapping on upper level

Figure 48 - vertical flow mapping on projected

Figure 49 - solar exposure gradient on facade surface

Simultaneously, the response of sunlight exposure of the current façade must also be analysed in order to initiate morpho-ecology. Therefore, a detailed study is done on the existing kinetic system. The ‘Kinetic Model’ is an exploration model created to intensively demonstrate the behaviour of folding elements in relation to its function as a shading device. The model reduces the kinetic façade into its simplest organization to observe and speculate its different composition towards the variety of exposure gradient.

Figure 50 - physical model of one set of folding element extracted from the showroom facade

Figure 51 diagram indicating pattern and variability of facade composition

Figure 52 - diagram indicating segregation of the folding element

The study on the facade composition would inform a paradigm for the new surface organization. The diagrams demonstrate the segregation and rhythm of the folding elements, in relation to the gradient of transparency of the windows. Based on the diagrams created, it can be identified that the composition of kinetic elements are segregated into large groups. This reduces the accuracy of sensitivity in the folding reaction of kinetic elements. The repetitive and equal axes of segregation also informs a monotonous surface reaction in terms of exposure and shading. Therefore, any differentiation occurs on the facade surface would be superficial. The rhythm diagram informs the variation of composition that can be made by the folding elements, suggesting any organization that can be re-utilized for self-organization.

Figure 53 simulating solar exposure on the 3D folding model using computational software

The study of kinetic reactivity based on sunlight exposure and shading capacity is physically simulated in a single day timeframe. The variation of folding compositions is generated based on the most appropriate formation for the particular sunlight exposure that would allow ample natural lighting without glaring. At the same time, the model allows observation on the degree of permeability allowed for every hour of daytime.

Figure 54 composition of folding element based on gradient of sunlight throughout the day

By superimposing the ‘Exposure Mapping’ and the basic element of the ‘Kinetic Model’, it is possible to array a new surface structure based on the self-organization paradigm. The morphological diagram exposed will illustrate the process of transformation towards a more ecologically responsive façade surface. My proposal of self-organization will be based on the array formation of complex brick assembly. The formation of brick assemblies acts as that of the screenwall that reacts towards ecological modulation such as shading and ventilation. In order to inform the scale of brick assembly suitable to replace the existing facade elements, the representation diagram is used to visualize the different scales.

Figure 55 scale representation diagram on whole surfaces

Figure 56 scale representation diagram on part surfaces

Figure 57 scale representation diagram on whole surfaces using smaller modules

Figure 58 scale representation diagram on window modules

Figure 59 - morphology of folding elements from repetition to brick formation

Before applying on whole surface, the morphology from basic folding elements to its coresponding brick formation is illustrated, based on the suitable scale from the representation diagram. The most important modulation is the transparency gradient and permeability of the facade surface. As an added function, the kinetic folding elements provide a potential for solar energy absorption which utilizes the behaviour of the complex brick formation. The formation would inform a brick geometry in which voids are created between elements to control transparency while maintaining the perpendicular orientation towards sunlight for embedding photovoltaics.

Figure 60 morphology of facade surface based on gradient mappings

The main intervention lies in the morphology of the facade from a repetitive folding formation to a complex brick assembly. Using gradient information produced by the mapping of solar exposure, the surface is vertically curved to divide the surface into two categories; the upper bulked surface is overexposed to sunlight while the lower surface is optimally shaded. Majority of photovoltaic surface will be embedded on the upper curvature of the surface. The horizontal deformation of the surface is informed by the mapping of activity flow, in which the indented surface implies a lower density of intense human interaction. The surface projected by the articulation of horizontal and vertical deformation creates an active surface towards solar exposure and spatial behaviour, allowing better augmentation for kinetic elements.

By creating a reactive surface based on self-organization of brick formation, an evolved facade is created, in which the individual folding elements react specifically to its local ecological modulation. The result is a higher sensibility towards influences, and a more dynamic form of kinetic composition, deviating from the repetitive and monotonous reaction. This surface intervention provides an insight on the heighten performance and aesthetic of the reactive surface. One could also perceive it as a form of conflict between kinetic vs reactive.

from top to bottom: Figure 61 fully enclosed facade, implying passive activity within the exhibition spaces. Folding elements with photovoltaic are oriented towards sunlight Figure 62 partly enclosed facade, implying part of the spaces are in use. The rest are either passive, or closed for privacy. This indicates a communication between movement of people and movement of facade Figure 63 fully opened facade, implying full use of the exhibitional spaces to optimize natural lighting and maximize transparency and permeability.

Final Chapter

Conclusion

The emergence of architecture from past-precedents has informed many forms of reactivity towards ecological modulation. From the Islamic architecture of screenwall to the technologically equipped kinetic forms and embedded intelligent materials, the reaction towards ecological influences has become vast and flexible with increasing efficiency and practicality. The way in which these architectural elements are developed involves the delicate relationship between the articulated surface and the dynamics of ecological influences. Reactivity therefore entails the consideration of ecological analysis to be implemented within the early design stages as necessary parameters rather than post rationalization. The â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;device paradigmâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; is a perfect notion that compliments the discussion of articulated surfaces and the internalexternal synergy that creates heterogeneous spaces. The extension of this notion through kinetic mechanisms and embedded materials is the involvement of an additional parameter that is key to the degree of reactivity of an object; that is the sophistication of augmentation. The debate between automation and human augmentation does not directly inform whether an element is reactive, rather it only affect its sensibility and level of control. Therefore, the essence of reactive elements is the articulation of all the aspects involved including the environmental influences, heterogeneity of space and the augmentation of the system. The behaviour of reactivity from the biological system as informed by Weinstock (2006) manifest itself as a new paradigm in which architectural reactivity is based on analytical and generative processes of self-organization. The biological behaviour of plants, and its algorithm of growth simulates a morphology of form that builds its foundation on differentiation and redundancy rather than the efficiency of a singular functions. This continuous loop of action-reaction between the contextual dynamics and the behaviour of plant growth indicates an unpredictable process, in which architecture is approached not as a physical element, but a framework of possibilities and variations.

From the formations of differentiation, biological system strives for the accurate organization and formation that maximizes metabolic feedback, intake and flow, while minimizing energy loss. This informs reactive architecture not as a quest of form-finding, but as an organization of many elements that are interrelated in complex and synergetic relationships. Therefore, the morphology of bio-reactive entails the need to organize complexity within a system in order for the whole organization to work in harmony. Using means of diagramming, I attempted to organize the reactive relationship between the articulated surface elements and the ecological modulations. Applying the data mapped and organized within the system diagram, I proposed a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;surface reformationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; towards the organization of kinetic elements projected on the Kiefer Technic Showroom facade using a complex brick formation that is informed by an integration of environmental exposure and spatial flow. The morphology of the new surface was intended to become a differentiated facade that is locally sensitive to environment and increased interactivity with the occupants within, while maintaining the folding behaviour of the existing kinetic mechanism. The complexity of reactive systems in the context of performance-based architecture entails an integration of many factors, variations, and possibilities that is specific only to the environment that it is located in. Reactivity is a potential ability within the built environment, especially in adapting to extreme environmental conditions and sensitive contexts. Constructing these impermanent and instable set of parameters require a specific organizing toolset to ensure the reactive capability of the object functions in the predicted way (or ways). The research explored a number of potential toolset that could define the boundaries of this paradigm. A way forward would be to utilize a specific toolset to inform a reactive design project. For future research, an in depth exploration could be made by investigating self-organization capability of a specific plant, and its generative behaviour to inform a framework for designing within that specific ecology.

Bibliography 1. Antonelli, P. 2008. Design and the elastic mind. New York: Museum of Modern Art. 2. Bollinger, K., Grohmann, M. and Tessman, O. 2008. Form, Force, Performance: Multi-Parametric Structural Design. Architectural Design, 78 (2), pp. 20--25. 3. Cove, B. and Quay, H.. Techniques and Technologies in Morphogenetic Design. Wiley Online Library. 4. Garcia, M. 2010. The diagrams of architecture. Chichester: Wiley. 5. Hensel, M. 2008. Performance-Orientated Design Precursors and Potentials. Architectural design, 78 (2), pp. 48--53. 6. Hensel, M. and Menges, A. 2008. Versatility and Vicissitude: An Introduction to Performance in Morpho-Ecological Design. Architectural Design, 78 (2), pp. 6--11. 7. Price, C. and Obrist, H. 2003. Re CP. Basel: Birkhauser. 8. Wigginton, M. and Harris, J. 2002. Intelligent skins. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. 9. Hensel, M. 2008. Performance-Orientated Design Precursors and Potentials. Architectural design, 78 (2), pp. 48--53. 10. Kwinter, S. 2001. Architectures of time. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 11. Jencks, C. 1999. Ecstatic architecture. New York: Academy Editions. 12. Behling, S. and Behling, S. 2000. Solar Power. New York, NY: Prestel. 13. Banham, R. 1969. The architecture of the well-tempered environment. Chicago: University of Chicago. 14. Petersen, A. 1996. Dictionary of Islamic architecture. London: Routledge. 15. Leatherbarrow, D. and Mostafavi, M. 2002. Surface architecture. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. 16. Klooster, T., Boeing, N., Davis, S. and Seeger, A. 2009. Smart surfaces. Basel: BirkhaĚ&#x2C6;user.

17. Addington, M. 2004. Smart Materials and Technologies in Architecture. Burlington: Elsevier. 18. Ritter, A. 2007. Smart materials in architecture, interior architecture and design. Basel [u.a.]: Birkhäuser. 19. Hensel, M. and Sunguroglu, D. 2008. Material Performance. Architectural Design: Versatility and VIcissitude, 78 (2), pp. 34-41. 20. Schumacher, M., Schaeffer, O., Vogt, M. and Müller, A. 2010. Move. Basel: Birkhäuser. 21. Weston, R. 2003. Materials, form and architecture. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 22. Fox, M. and Hu, C. 2005. Starting From The Micro: A Pedagogical Approach to Designing Interactive Architecture. pp. 78--93. 23. Zuk, W. and Clark, R. H. 1970. Kinetic architecture. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. 24. Fox, M. and Kemp, M. 2009. Interactive architecture. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. 25. Velikov, K. and Thun, G. 2013. Responsive Building Envelopes: Characteristics and Evolving Paradigms. High Performance Homes TRUBIANO, p. 75. 26. Moloney, J. 2011. Designing kinetics for architectural facades. Abingdon, Oxon [England]: Routledge. 27. Beesley, P. and Khan, O. 2009. Responsive architecture/performing instruments. New York , NY: The Architectural League of New York. 28. Bachman, L. R. 2003. Integrated buildings. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons. 29. Hensel, M. and Menges, A. 2008. Inclusive Performance: Efficiency Versus Effectiveness Towards a Morpho-Ecological Approach for Design. Architectural Design, 78 (2), pp. 54--63. 30. Mathews, S. 2007. From agit-prop to free space. London: Black Dog Pub. Ltd. 31. Mathews, S. 2006. The Fun Palace as virtual architecture: Cedric Price and the practices of indeterminacy. Journal of Architectural Education, 59 (3), pp. 39--48. 32. Mathews, S. 2006. Cedric Price: From the ‘Brain Drain’to the ‘Knowledge Economy’. Architectural Design, 76 (1), pp. 90--95. Reiser, J. and Umemoto, N. 2006. Atlas of novel tectonics. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

33. De Wolf, T. and Holvoet, T. 2004. Emergence and Self-Organisation: a statement of similarities and differences. Engineering Self-Organising Systems, 3464 pp. 1--15. 34. Weinstock, M. 2006. Self-organisation and the structural dynamics of plants. Architectural Design, 76 (2), pp. 26--33. 35. Mishra, J. and Mishra, S. N. 2007. L-system fractals. Amsterdam: Elsevier. 36. Weinstock, M. 2006. Self-organisation and material constructions. Architectural Design, 76 (2), pp. 34--41 37. Prusinkiewicz, P. 2004. Modeling plant growth and development. Current opinion in plant biology, 7 (1), pp. 79--83. 38. Hensel, M. and Menges, A. 2008. Designing Morpho-Ecologies: Versatility and Vicissitude of Heterogeneous Space. Architectural Design, 78 (2), pp. 102--111. 39. Hensel, M. 2006. (Synthetic) life architectures: ramifications and potentials of a literal biological paradigm for architectural design. Architectural Design, 76 (2), pp. 18--25. 40. Khoo, C. K., Salim, F. and Burry, J. 2011. Designing Architectural Morphing Skins with Elastic Modular Systems. International Journal of Architectural Computing, 9 (4), pp. 397--420. 41. Pedreschi, R. 2008. Form, Force and Structure: A Brief History. Architectural Design, 78 (2), pp. 12--19. 42. Weinstock, M. 2008. Metabolism and Morphology. Architectural Design, 78 (2), pp. 26--33. 43. Poorter, L. and Werger, M. J. 1999. Light environment, sapling architecture, and leaf display in six rain forest tree species. American Journal of Botany, 86 (10), pp. 1464--1473. 44. Horn, H. S. 1976. The adaptive geometry of trees. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. 45. Niklas, K. J. 1982. Computer simulations of early land plant branching morphologies: canalization of patterns during evolution?. Paleobiology, pp. 196--210. 46. Leopold, L. B. 1971. Trees and streams: the efficiency of branching patterns. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 31 (2), pp. 339--354. 47. Hensel, M. and Menges, A. 2008. Inclusive Performance: Efficiency Versus Effectiveness Towards a Morpho-Ecological Approach for Design. Architectural Design, 78 (2), pp. 54--63.

48. Hensel, M. and Menges, A. 2006. Morpho-ecologies. London: Architectural Association. 49. Kieran, S. and Timberlake, J. 2003. Refabricating architecture. New York: McGraw-Hill. 50. Hensel, M., Menges, A. and Hight, C. 2009. Space reader. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley. 51. Hensel, M. 2008. Performance-Orientated Design Precursors and Potentials. Architectural design, 78 (2), pp. 48--53. 52. Hensel, M. 2006. Computing self-organisation: environmentally sensitive growth modelling. Architectural Design, 76 (2), pp. 12--17. 53. Sunguroglu, D. 2008. Complex Brick Assemblies. Architectural Design, 78 (2), pp. 64--73. 54. Anshuman, S. 2005. Responsiveness and Social Expression; Seeking Human Embodiment in Intelligent Fa\ccades. pp. 12--23.