BMY Pavilion: Pathways to Multifunctional Biomimetic Solutions by The Design School at Arizona State University

BMY_Pavilion

Pathways to multifunctional biomimetic solutions

â&#x20AC;&#x153;If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.â&#x20AC;? - Carl Sagan, Cosmos Photo by veeterzy on Unsplash

Acknowledgments

I owe a huge debt of gratitude to Dayna Baumeister for her amazing teachings, insights and feedback over the past 3 years. And for her support and guidance before I was even admitted into the Biomimicry program. She helped me with the initial hurdles of enrolling in the dual degree, and without that help, I certainly would not have spent the past 3 years pursing my dream so directly. I would like to give a special thanks to Brian Mattson in this regard, as well. Philip Horton and Michelle Fehler have been extremely supportive from the very beginning of my time here (and before). They both advised me directly on this project and so much of this work would not have been possible without their help and constant support. A huge thank you to Christine Lintott for her incredible insights into the world of biomimicry and architecture and for taking time to share them with me, answer my questions, and provide valuable feedback. I would like to thank everyone in the Biomimicry Professional Cohort V for their brilliant minds, and their continued feedback and support. Thank you to Flavia Bisi, Richard Altherr, and Catalina Bustillo for sharing with me their work on a related project and for their feedback on this work. Thanks goes to Alexandra Ionescu and Daniel Kinzer whose philosophical conversations with me inspired some of the directions of this work. And another thank you to Alex for her endless references to fascinating resources and ideas. Thank you to Shannon Sweeney, Rachel Ziegert, Chloe Chan and Louwie Gan for their fantastic suggestions and support on the biomimicry side of this project (and to Louwie also for some architectural insights, as well). And of course, thank you Breanne for putting up with my mess and all night hours while quarantining with me for these past two months. Thank you for planning the most amazing wedding I could have imagined while being fantastically supportive as I made my way through school. Thank you for being the most amazing person on this beautiful planet.

Photo by Nick Perez on Unsplash

Introduction

The following is not an uncommon question, but one with which progress toward an answer has seemed remarkably slow, especially considering the phenomenal rate of change in so many aspects of life today:

How can we better align our built environment with the systems of the natural world?

It seems a shift of perspective is required, at multiple levels. For this, the question above can be given as two, but taken together as one in the same:

What is needed to facilitate a deeper understanding of biological systems among the designers of our built environments? What is needed to clarify and ease the pathway toward biomimetic solutions in our built environments?

This book is the conceptual outline for an online tool to help architects and designers of the built environment, and students studying architecture, bring biomimicry into their designs. Currently, the process of realizing biomimetic designs in architecture – designs that draw enlightening lessons from natural systems and organisms – is difficult and time consuming. This book offers a platform for the design community, and any interested individuals, to deepen their understand of biological systems and relationships (conceptual and physical) between biology and the built environment; to develop skills necessary to translate between disciplines; to develop the skills necessary to create functional designs; and to strengthen connections, coordination and collaboration across the design community and between designers and the natural environment. The tool presented in this book is meant to be an evolving system to guide the progression of architecture toward a new and harmonious relationship with the natural world. As complexity increases in our built environments, and in the systems that create them, their behaviors naturally begin to resemble, more closely, natural systems. This is because natural systems are complex systems and complex systems, even when composed of very different components and in very different contexts, resemble each other (West, 2017). The resemblance we are naturally nearing between our systems and natural systems, however, refers to similarities in the mathematical models we can use to simulate them, and not to the consequences of the systems’ behaviors. Our systems are destroying the natural systems we rely on. Natural systems have evolved over 3.8 billion years with the single purpose of perpetuating life - as Janine Benyus has put it, “creating conditions conducive for life”. This tool contains several synchronized features, each with value in and of themselves. No single feature contains the overarching goal of this

project. For example, the purpose of this tool is not to offer architects quick access to a collection of bio-inspired parametric scripts. But that is a feature of this tool that offers the community a desired value, an interesting space to explore, an avenue into a new realm of creativity, and hopefully, an increased appreciation for the natural world. As the individual features develop and become more sophisticated, as more people use and contribute to these features, they enhance the value of each other. There is a level of attention that becomes more and more granular over time. The tool becomes more linked and synchronized within itself and with the communities that interact with it. It is online and interconnected with firms and households, and it is specifically designed to evolve, develop and grow within that rapidly changing environment. Together the features of this tool clarify the vision of a broader goal. There is no end point, but there can be accelerating progress, new discoveries, amplified curiosity, and a growing understanding of the fantastic and complex beauty of the natural world around us and our relationship with it. What is missing in our design practices today? We are missing a way to build the complex relationships mentioned above – a way to systematically translate biology to an architectural language, to an engineering language, to a design language, while preserving the functional and regenerative essence in natural systems. We are missing the synergistic links to leverage our complex social and intellectual connections for knowledge transfer, and the collaboration to merge the patterns of our increasingly impactful existence with the patterns of the natural environment - to help those patterns and be part of them.

Photo by Balazs Busznyak on Unsplash

Photo by Jules Bss

Photo by

Photo by Denys Nevozhai on Unsplash

Photo by Casey Horner on Unsplash

on Unsplash

Photo by Gwen Weustink on Unsplash

Photo by Pawel Nolbert on Unsplash

Towards Biomimicry Biomimicry can be seen as an exploration into the way our world works. Through billions of years of trial and error, nature has been probing the rules of our reality from the fundamental laws of physics, as evolution indiscriminately tested the bounds of its context, to the behavior of complex systems, as life itself became a fundamental characteristic of the environment it was adapting to. The result we live in today is a planet wide interconnected and interdependent biome. Adaptations within it are responding to attributes of our reality at levels and scales beyond what is intuitively, perceptually, and sometimes even conceptually, accessible to us. From lintels on posts, to arches and domes, architects have learned to better leverage the rules of our reality in order to accomplish more. The work of Frei Otto in the mid-20th century is representative of a modern shift, a deepening of the relationship between intentionality in our design and an understanding of the way our world works. Frei Otto coined the term ‘form-finding’ and employed the techniques he developed within this to explore new lightweight structures. Through his work with the research

group ‘Biologie und Bauen’ (with biologist Johann Gerhard Helmcke) and the organizations he created (the Institute of Lightweight Structures and SFB 230), significant progress was made into the understanding of the relationship of material properties and structure (Knippers, 2016) as well as in the successful integration of different disciplines (material science, engineering, biology, and architecture). Studies were done on various material systems, including gridshells, cablenets, and soap bubbles, to explore the inherent material properties responsible for computing form and finding equilibrium (Menges, 2015).

“We might define structures descri of energy events. . . all the pattern the other patterns of universe in va local configurations. . . It is a tende separate-out to join severally or si - Buckminster Fuller (Fuller, 1965)

Model - Frei Otto, Larry Medlin, 1964

Modell einer regelmäßigen Hoch- Tiefpunktfläche, Frei Otto, Larry Medlin, 1964 © saai | Südwestdeutsches Archiv für Architektur und Ingenieurbau, Karlsruher Institut für Technologie, Werkarchiv Frei Otto photo: Bernd Seeland

Just before Frei Ottoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s body of work, Buckminster Fuller was exploring the nature of, and describing the purpose and mathematical logic behind, the structural patterns in the world around us. His subjects of inquiry varied widely and included molecules, viruses, radiolaria, and flying seed pods (Fuller, 1965).

tendencies of matter and energy in nature. Frei Otto and Buckminster Fuller attempted to work with these patterns in the projects they produced. Biomimicry explores these patterns as well, but focussing specifically at the patterns that have been replicated and fine-tuned through evolution to perpetuate condition conducive for life.

Buckminster Fuller recognized the inherent interdependence and pattern continuations and reverberations at all scales and in all structures. These patterns tell us about our universe, they tell us about the flows in the world around us and the

This book explores a way to further reveal the evolutionary patterns life has discovered and to realize these patterns in the languages we use to explore and define our designs.

iptively as patterns of inherently regenerative constellar association ns of the universe are continually but non-simultaneously affecting all arying degrees and are continually reduplicating themselves in unique ency of patterns either to repeat themselves locally or for their parts to ingly with other patterns or to form new constellations.â&#x20AC;?

Buckminster Fuller - Montreal Biosphere

Copywrite Flickr user abdallahh

Biomimicry Overview: Essential Terms Function | Strategy | Mechanism | Feature Function In the practice of biomimicry, it is necessary to first understand what the design needs to do at a very basic level. Instead of starting with an object or product a designer imagines is the goal for the project, the designer starts with a function. Rather than looking simply to design a roof or incorporate an HVAC system, a designer looks for a way to shelter and shade, and a way to regulate temperature. This process of abstracting the function does two essential things: it allows the designer to see the problem from a different, broader, and more directly relevant point of view, thereby setting the stage for creative solutions; and, it provides a starting point for searching for biological solutions. Abstracting the function is the first step in making the translation to biology (Baumeister, Tocke, Dwyer, Ritter, & Benyus, 2014).

Photo by Annie Spratt on Unsplash

Function is an essential concept to understand. It is at the core of emulating biological systems in our designs.

Strategy The strategy employed by an organism or natural system is the means through which the function is achieved (Baumeister et al., 2014). It is the basic description of forms, processes or relationships that cause a function. For example, some species of honeybees warm their nest by contracting and releasing wing muscles that have been decoupled from their wings (Höcherl, Kennedy, & Tautz, 2016). The strategy in this case is ‘metabolic heat generation’ and the function the strategy is achieving is ‘generate heat’.

Mechanism The mechanism involved in achieving a function is more specific (often unique to a specific species) and requires a much more specific description of the math, physics, or chemistry involved. For the nest heating example given above, the mechanism requires a much more detailed description than the strategy mentioned. Depending on the context in which the biomimetic solution will be applied, the specific mechanism emulated could vary. A designer might want to look at the cascading reactions from temperature drop, sensory organs transducing the signal, to the chemical changes causing contracting and releasing of muscles. This pathway is one mechanism for heating, and the specifics need to be understood in order to emulate it. If a different direction is being pursued for the design, the mechanism focused on might involve an algorithm describing any variation in the temperature thresholds among bees that triggers this metabolic behavior. In either case, the mechanism contains the specifics.

Nuance, and importantly, attributes we might call â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;sustainableâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, can be found in strategies and mechanisms. These must be preserved in the descriptions we create for strategies and mechanisms in order for sustainable and regenerative properties to be preserved in our biomimetic applications. Strategies and Mechanisms are what a biomimetic design seeks to emulate. The strategies and mechanisms in nature are inherently sustainable. When emulating a strategy or mechanism for an application to solve a human design problem, it is essential to identify what it is about that strategy or mechanism that ensures sustainability. How does it connect to and effect the systems around it? An Abstracted Design Principle (ADP) describes the strategy or mechanism in abstract, while still viable, terms - and in terms translated for the specific designer that will be using the information. The tool proposed in this document translates biology into architectural terms.

Feature The term feature is not as widely used in the practice of biomimicry, but it is an important concept for this project. Feature simply refers to an integrated collection of strategies and mechanisms and includes anything from a single organ to an entire system, a lung or the respiratory system, a leaf, a pinecone, a termite mound, or a birdâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s nest. Features are important here because one of the goals of this project is to illuminate the integration of strategies in nature that weave together multifunctional systems in a single organ, a single organism, and an entire ecosystem. Multifunctional harmonization and the seamless integration of the strategies and mechanisms that achieve them (across distance, scales, and time) is a profoundly elegant characteristic of all life, and something human design sorely lacks in comparison (Knippers, Speck, & Nickel, 2016). This project uses multifunctionality as a lens through which to better understand interdependence in nature and between human and natural systems. Multifunctionality is a way to understand how our designs function as cohesive wholes, how they fit into their contexts, how they influence other systems locally and more broadly. Exploring how functions are linked in nature, at all scales, from the ubiquitous patterns to uniquely clever adaptations, can help us recognize, internalize, and emulate these harmonies in our own designs. Features in nature incorporate several, sometimes contradictory, functions. Bird feathers are an easy example (Lingham-Soliar, 2014):

Feature: Bird Feather Multiple Functions: reduce drag

purposes

assist flight

reflect or diffract light for signaling purposes

stay clean provide insulation reflect or absorb light for thermal

provide camouflage resist forces (while remaining very lightweight)

“Through genetically controlled self-organization, living organisms form hierarchically organized finely tuned and highly differentiated materials and structures that feature multiple networked functions and that sometimes fulfill contradictory functional requirements. Interestingly, the terms ‘material’ and ‘structure’, which are distinctive design categories in architecture and building construction, dissipate in nature as it is nearly impossible to discern between them in the hierarchically structured world of organisms, which ranges from the molecule to the largest living beings by ten orders of magnitude.” (Knippers et al., 2016)

Photo by Jenelle Hayes on Unsplash

Biomimetic Design Process in Architecture

This is a basic outline of what the typical â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;challenge to biology to architectureâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; design process looks like. Clay-colored circles represent translation friction points which can be difficult for designers new to biomimicry. The first of these translation frictions comes in the initial translation from architectural needs to biologized functions - terms that can be useful when searching for solutions in the biological literature.

ESII Tool

Climate Consultant

Understand Context, Problems, Opportunities & Constraints

Identify & Biologize Desired Functions

AskNature

Design is an iterative process, and at any point on this diagram a designer or a team may circle back to an earlier stage. Dark blue circles show where there are existing tools to help architects with biomimetic design. There are many more than are listed here, but these are some of the most popular. Spaces where existing tools are not shown (at the three translation friction points) are areas where helpful tools are lacking for architects.

Translation Issue

Find Biological Models

Abstract Design Principles

Translation Issue

Translate into Architectural Solution

Translation Issue

Rhinoceros

Revit

Digitally Model

eQUEST

ATHENA

Simulate

This tool is not meant to replace any existing tools. It is meant to work with them and adapt to any new tools that may come out.

Create Physical Prototype

Test & Iterate

What BMY_Pavilion Addresses

Light green/blue covers areas of the biomimetic design process in architecture that this tool is designed to help with. This tool uses linked functions as a way to both narrow down a search and direct a search in novel and unexpected directions. Functions are linked by single strategies. This points a designer toward potentially fruitful solution spaces and it paves the way toward integrated, multifunctional solutions. Link Functions

This tool helps with understanding context and the initial translation friction point by showing the designer translations of contextual attributes and search terms into abstracted functions. The tool provides a list of features and strategies in nature that solve several of the biologized functions translated. It works with AskNature and other biology related resources by linking to specific articles related to the features and strategies presented. The tool also offers information on the second translation friction point. Abstracted design principles are provided for some features and strategies along with tutorials on how a designer can create their own. Digital models and parametric scripts are also provided. These provide more help for the second and third translation friction points and they help designers realize their designs in digital models. Beyond the explicit offerings of this tool, it is hoped that use and exploration of it will help designers develop the mental models necessary to create meaningful biomimetic designs and better understand the languages nature has created to respond to changing conditions on Earth and perpetuate life.

Existing Tools and Methodologies There are several existing tools and frameworks that define and help designers navigate the biomimetic design process. These include (but are not limited to) IDEA-INSPIRE & SAPPhIRE (Kaiser, Hashemi Farzaneh, & Lindemann, 2012; Sartori, Pal, & Chakrabarti, 2010); SEABIRD (Vandevenne, Verhaegen, Dewulf, & Duflou, 2014); PeTaL (Shyam et al., 2019); E2BMO (McInerney et al., 2018); PRISM (Agres & Pearce, 2013); BioTRIZ (McInerney et al., 2018); Engineering-to-Biology Thesaurus (Stroble, Stone, McAdams, & Watkins, 2014); DANE; and Biomimicry 3.8’s Biomimicry Thinking and Biomimicry Taxonomy (Baumeister et al., 2014) which is used for the basis of the online tool AskNature. Abstracting the function, or biologizing the function (Baumeister et al., 2014), creates a “semantic bridge” (McInerney et al., 2018) between biology and the discipline specific to the design, be it mechanical engineering, business, transportation, computer science, medicine, or in our case, architecture. This is a common way to make the initial connection and base a search for relative strategies. It is used in all methodologies in one way or another. BioTRIZ expands on this by searching for strategies that solve contradictory functions as a way to home in on particularly innovative solutions. The multifunctional approach used in the tool proposed in this book (BMY_Pavilion) uses a similar but less restrictive (in the sense that contradiction is not required, but it is rewarded). Also, BMY_Pavilion encourages the integration of several functions. From the methodology developed by Biomimicry 3.8, this tool has similarities in the functional taxonomy and in the use of Abstracted Design Principles (ADPs) as a useful translation from biology to any design or engineering field. The functional taxonomy used here is organized more loosely in clusters and contains many

more function phrases (which are in some cases more likely relevant to needs in the field of architecture). Chakrabarti & Chakrabarti (2017) identify some shortcomings of existing tools used to identify analogical models in nature for a specific design domain. One issue noted is the results are rarely relevant and specific enough for the context in which they will be translated. This tool looks specifically to architecture and gives result (translated information) not only specific to the context and functions needed, it gives information in specific software languages that are immediately understandable and customizable by the designer (more on this in the Biomimicry in Parametric Modelling and Computational Design sections). Another issue noted by Chakrabarti & Chakrabarti (2017) is the lost opportunity for “crowd-sourcing and knowledge multiplication”. This tool encourages solution sharing and building similar to many parametric design communities and programming communities like GitHub. It has one important advantage Chakrabarti & Chakrabarti’s IDEA-INSPIRE lacks: translations are in languages (digital models, parametric scripts, software code) for which communities already exist comprising passionate individuals adamantly sharing and building off of each other’s knowledge. Patterns in nature are mentioned frequently in parametric design tutorials, for example, and there is an innate attraction to this kind of translation. This book proposes that if we can show individuals with these skills how to make these translations, they will take up those challenges. Issues related to a lack of biological knowledge by contributors are still of concern here. A way to incentivize biologists to contribute their knowledge and vet contributed solutions is needed.

Another major obstacle to the efficacy of this tool is the difficulty with populating the solution space with enough information. There is an ocean of biological information out there, and most of it is not in a useful format and/or requires extensive work to retrieve and translate into a useful format. There is so much more information in living systems that is still waiting to be discovered, and endless research that can be done to reveal more about the natural world. These translations are something this tool seeks to offer to designers, but providing them here will be difficult. The first answer to this comes from the proposition that from the information we already have, the translations that have already been made on platforms like AskNature, many creative solutions are waiting to be realized. These translations can be formatted for this tool (and linked to externally), and more translations can be added by people working directly on the tool. Tutorials will teach users of the tool to make

Photo by Filipe Resmini on Unsplash

these translations themselves. Point based, or subscription reduction incentives, will encourage users to contribute, and to keep the quality high. This tool is set up in a way to catalyze the kind of creative thinking necessary to make these realizations. Since this is a platform designed for creative people, creative solutions can thrive here and multiply with this existing information. The next answer comes from coordination with some of the tools and methodologies being created and mentioned above. The Periodic Table of Life (PeTaL), for example, uses many metrics of natural adaptations, from scalability to their convergent existence across different species, and Artificial Intelligence, to search much more broadly through biological research to find potentially viable solutions. This is a free and open source software that could greatly help BMY_Pavilion. Hopefully, dialogue and interest in these searches on BMY_Pavilion can also help tools like PeTaL.

The Importance of Multifunctionality None of the methodologies described on the previous page use multifunctionality specifically to narrow search spaces. This book proposes that since all adaptations in nature are inherently multifunctional, since multifunctional design is desirable in terms of cost savings and resource conservation (and in terms of aesthetics and elegance of design), and since nature has provided elegant ways to integrate the functions we are seeking, using multifunctionality to guide our searches, and to reveal patterns, will be extremely helpful.

“Ecosystems optimize the system rather than its components . . . Materials and energy should have multiple functions” (Zari, 2010) Nature does not maximize efficiency in any one area, it optimizes for several. This tool uses several. The beauty is in that combination, how it all works together so seamlessly. This is the basis of the initial search.

Good Design is the marriage of several functions into a single, elegant solution. In nature, in any ecosystem, even when there are multiple organisms, everything is married into a single symphony operating in dynamic non-equilibrium.

“Biological materials . . . are hierarchically organised and intimately constructed such that the final design makes it difficult to separate the parts or their functions from the whole. Rather, there is

a fluidity between the functions of the parts (multifunctionality) enabling greater adaptability to different stresses—a product of millions of years of evolution.” (Lingham-Soliar, 2014)

Architectural Terms

Latitude & Longitude

Challenges / Opportunities

Translation

Solution Space

Organized Search Terms

Biologized Functions

Features & Strategies

Context Attributes & Terms Climate Information

Genius of Biome

This fluidity is where architecture is headed

BMY_Pavilion Homepage The homepage features streaming images of different offerings on the website. A tutorial is shown below. A link to the biomimetic search tool is just above that and can be reached with a click or a search. A click leads to a check-box page where a collection of predefined functions and context attributes can be selected together. A search leads directly to a term-function-strategy map (next page).

about

tutorials

pathways

solve a strategy

biomimetic solution search tool search terms

capture water; small; dry; cold

tutorial: abstract flocking algo for responsive facade

Other features of the site are along the top banner, including a link directly to the tutorial page or a link directly to a page of example solutions. There is a separate, more general search option on the top banner as well. This is in case a designer would like to search for something specific like a tutorial on how to create an ADP with Adobe Illustrator or a Grasshopper script for leaf veins.

example solutions

select biome

orithm e

connect a function pathway

add a strategy

nathan hays

sign out

enter location

Tool Search Results This is an example of an option for the tool interface. Organized search terms are on the left, linked to biologized functions, which are linked to features and strategies in nature that address several of the identified biologized functions. The connecting lines between the organized functions and the biologized functions vary in intensity. This variance is based on the strength of each particular translation.

homepage

capture water; small; dry; cold

needs

capture water small

about

tutorials

pathways

solve a strate

enter location / biome

capture wa

gather moistu

optimize spa

arrange efficie

pack tightly

maximize surface a

context

protect from fr

manage free

regulate temperatu

dry cold

maintain he insulate

generate h

distribute h gather hea

absorb light

absorb NIR/IR

Connecting lines between functions and strategies also vary. This variance depends on how specifically the strategy addresses the function it is connected to. If the strategy has evolved, and is a primary strategy, to solve the function connected, intensity is high. If the strategy is a supplemental solution for the function, intensity is medium. If the strategy merely allows for and contributes slightly to the function, intensity is low.

egy

example solutions

ater

ure from air

ure from soil

ace

ently

area

rost

ezing

ure

eat e

heat

heat at

R radiation

connect a function pathway

add a strategy

results to show:

showing:

1 - 24

thermoelectric silk

ice nucleation

Search Method

capture water; small; dry; cold

needs

capture water small

enter location / biome

results to show:

showing:

1 - 24

thermoelectric silk

capture water

gather moisture from air

ice nucleation

gather moisture from soil optimize space arrange efficiently

pack tightly maximize surface area

context

protect from frost

manage freezing regulate temperature

dry cold

Organized Terms Search terms an architecture or designer enters are recognized and sorted into two categories: needs and context. Some terms could be either. â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Heatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, for example, could be something a designer wants to provide or a context attribute to be avoided, so if the initial interpretation is incorrect, the user can move the term.

maintain heat insulate generate heat

distribute heat gather heat

absorb light

absorb NIR/IR radiation

Biologized Functions

Features and Strategies

Search terms are translated into various biologized functions. Because this tool uses multifunctionality to locate solution spaces, several different functions are given for each term. If a function appears that the user disagrees with, it can be removed.

Functions link to a list of strategies and features in nature. Each strategy and feature is linked to several functions, since nothing in nature solves just one issue. Items on this list can be removed, and the list length can be adjusted.

function clusters

capture water; small; dry; cold

needs

capture water small

enter location / biome

strategy clusters

results to show:

showing:

1 - 24

thermoelectric silk

capture water

gather moisture from air

ice nucleation

gather moisture from soil optimize space arrange efficiently

pack tightly maximize surface area

context

protect from frost

manage freezing regulate temperature

dry cold

maintain heat insulate generate heat

distribute heat gather heat

absorb light

absorb NIR/IR radiation

Above, the function clusters and strategies clusters are outlined. These are not definite categories (as there are not definite categories in nature). They are simply arranged and clumped based on similarities (coming from information embedded digitally in each function and strategy). These clusters have two different purposes. The first is to present this biological information in a way that may reveal patterns to the designer. By organizing strategies and features in this way, different patterns in the approaches nature takes to solve for these specific needs in this specific context might begin to become apparent. The second reason refers specifically to the function clusters, and is a means by which the different kinds of functions listed are differentiated from each other. This differentiation is factored into strategy and feature weights - strategies and features that address a diversity of functions receive more weight in this category. Weights are described in more detail on the next page.

Formula Strategies and Features vary by size, brightness and clarity in the user interface. These differences depend on a collection of variable determined by connection strengths, number of connections, variety of connections, function type relative to the kinds of functions needed in architecture and needed in sustainable design, and the specificity of the specific strategy or feature.

needs

capture water small

thermoelectric silk

capture water

ice nucleation

gather moisture from air gather moisture from soil optimize space arrange efficiently

pack tightly maximize surface area protect from frost

context

dry cold

manage freezing regulate temperature

maintain heat insulate generate heat

distribute heat gather heat

absorb light

absorb NIR/IR radiation

No single strategy or feature is ever, necessarily, the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;bestâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. These variations are simply indicators of potential - information presented visually meant only as subtle suggestions or call varying in tone and frequency coming from different paths with different kinds of solution possibilities. Hopefully, presenting strategies and features together in this way, with their subtly varying appearances, can help reveal some patterns in the kinds of solutions nature uses to solve a given search query - with strategies and features presented similarly sharing some underlying patterns in their approaches.

Core Function Values:

3 - collect energy 3 - reduce carbon 2 - collect water 2 - structure 2 - lighting 2 - temperature regulation 1 - humidity control 1 - air exchange 1 - water protection 1 - filter air 1 - filter water

strength of each term-function connection is weighted

value between 1 and 3

(strength of connection) = function score (size each function is displayed) function values rescaled, each is given a score between 1 and 2 (function score)(strength of connection) = connection score (rescaled between 0 and 1) |(position cluster a) - (position cluster b)| = cluster score (rescaled between 0 and 1) average (connection score, cluster score) = size

(core function value)(strength of strongest connection) + 0.1 = core function score [for each additional connection within core funcion category] (core function score)(feasibility factor)(nuance factor) = brightness

strategy or feature specificity = clarity/fuzziness

Contributing to Size: number of connections strength of connections function scores of connections distance of connected function clusters

Potential to reveal a multifunctional applications for your search

Contributing to Brightness core function connections feasibility nuance Contributing to Clarity specificity of strategy or feature

Potential for a novel sustainable/ regenerative solution

Amount of further research likely required

Formula Will Evolve Over Time (ex: local adaptation bonus to brightness)

Multi-Layer Resource Network thermoelectric silk

capture water

ice nucleation

gather moisture from air gather moisture from soil optimize space arrange efficiently

pack tightly maximize surface area

From each strategy and feature, there is a multilayer resource network that links to biological information, connections in patterns shared in other strategies and functional relationships with other strategies, and architectural translations with the appropriate technical and context information in-tact and available so a designer can creatively apply the strategy or feature to an architectural solution.

protect from frost

manage freezing regulate temperature

maintain heat insulate generate heat

distribute heat gather heat

absorb light

absorb NIR/IR radiation

Solution Space

Biology Biological Information

Links to online resources and/or peer reviewed articles explaining the strategy

Connections

Features & Strategies

Systems Connection & Patterns

Other strategies that share patterns or have functional relationships with the strategy

Translations ADPs, Models & Scripts

Abstracted design principles, digital models and digital scripts translating the strategy

Biology This section provides direct links to AskNature and other trusted sites and articles that may help a designer understand the strategy or feature in nature.

Connections This section links to information specific to the kinds of patterns the strategy exibits and the functional harmonies it has with other strategies (within an organism or across organisms).

Translations This section brings a designer closer to a tangible solution by providing examples of how the strategy could be used and a clearer path to creative applications.

homepage

about

tutorials

pathways

solve a strategy

example solutions

connect a function pathway

add a strategy

Ice Nucleation functions needed: capture water; gather moisture from air; manage freezing; protect from frost; maintain heat

biology

connections

AskNature: Lichens capture water via ice nucleation, absorbing the moisture once the temperature rises and the ice melts. Article: Ice nucleation activity in Fusarium acuminatum and Fusarium avena-

homepage

about

tutorials

filter by

translations

Article: Characterization of Biological Ice Nuclei from a Lichen Article: Biological ice nucleation activity in lichen mycobionts and photobionts

pathways

solve a strategy

example solutions

AskNature: Lichens protect from colonization by bacteria via the secondary metabolite usnic acid.

Article: Ice Nucleation Activity in Lichens

connect a function pathway

add a strategy

Ice Nucleation functions needed: capture water; gather moisture from air; manage freezing; protect from frost; maintain heat

biology

connections

AskNature: Lichens protect from colonization by bacteria via the secondary metabolite usnic acid. Article: Functional aspects of the lichen symbiosis

homepage

about

tutorials

icon view

translations

Article: The symbiotic phenotype of lichen-forming ascomycetes Article: Physiological interactions between the partners of the lichen symbiosis

pathways

solve a strategy

example solutions

connect a function pathway

add a strategy

Ice Nucleation functions needed: capture water; gather moisture from air; manage freezing; protect from frost; maintain heat

biology

connections

translations

Potential Application: Ice Lattice Functions Addressed: capture water; gather moisture from air; maintain heat Information: This solution includes a metal lattice surrounding a building accompanied by a water collection trough directly below the lattice and a below ground water collection cistern. A very slight electric current is all that is needed to induce ice nucleation (Edwards & Evans, 1962).

Context: This strategy is appropriate only in cold climates. It is most beneficial in dry areas or areas in which water is not readily available. Biology Discussion: Some lichen induce ice nucleation through a chemical interactions as a way to gather water from the air and control the temperature (raise the temperature) at which the pure water from the air transitions to ice. This potential application emulates the basic strategy of inducing ice nucleation as a way to maintain heat and collect water, not the specific mechanism through which ice nucleation is achieved.

Translation Example: Ice Nucleation This is an example ‘translations’ page focused on one particular translation - in this case, a simple explanation and diagram showing a potential application. If several translations had been added under ‘Ice Nucleation”, they would be shown on this page and clicking on any one of them would bring the designer to a page like this.

homepage

about

tutorials

pathways

solve a strate

Ice Nucleation

functions needed: capture water; gather moisture from air

biology

connections

translation

Potential Application: Ice Lattice Functions Addressed: capture water; gather moisture from air; maintain heat Information:

This solution includes a metal lattice surrounding a building accompanied by a w directly below the lattice and a below ground water collection cistern. A very s all that is needed to induce ice nucleation (Edwards & Evans, 1962).

Photo by Fergus Ray Murray

egy

Here, the strategy is emulated, without the underlying mechanism. The strategy is ice nucleation for the function of water collection and protection from extreme cold. The lichen induces the formation of ice at higher temperatures than moisture in the air typically freezes. This has the multifunctional benefits of protection from extreme cold, creation of an insulating layer, and moisture collection from the air (T. L. Kieft & Ruscetti, 1990; Thomas L. Kieft, 1988).

example solutions

connect a function pathway

add a strategy

r; manage freezing; protect from frost; maintain heat

water collection trough slight electric current is

attach and detach

Potential to make Novel Connections modular

create hierarchical arrangements

assemble modular com move fluids

change shape

radiant cool

deploy

rapid deployment

control light

homepage

about

fold

tutorials

pathways

solve a strate

open and close expand and contract

tortoise beetle

optimize space vary transparency

protect from frost

cold snow

functions needed: vary transparency; move fluids protect from snow protect from snow accu manage freezing

biology

regulate temperature maintain heat insulate generate heat distribute heat gather heat

connections

translation

absorb light Potential Application: Radiant Windows an absorb NIR/IR rad Functions Addressed: vary transparency; move fluids

Context: This is a shading/lighting and radiant heating/cooling strategy. It is ap text in which temperature regulation and lighting control are required. Information:

The strategy here is, to some degree, is reversed from that of the tortoise beetle. ture in the tortoise beetle elytra fills â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;randomlyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; arrange pores, changing the ma tion from inhomogeneous (and light scattering but translucent) to homogenou multilayer mirror to create interference patterns in the light that produce a gold 2007).

Image Credit National Geographic

The potential application here also uses a fluid to move from an inhomogeneou in a material to a homogeneous one, but in order to move from translucent to t is no chirped mirror in this design, just transparent material, joined optically (t scattering) by a fluid with an equal index of refraction. all that is needed to induce ice nucleation (Edwards & Evans, 1962).

mponents

When searching for solutions spaces using multiple functions as a primary criteria, novel solutions present themselves. A search for ‘radiant cooling’ and ‘lighting control’ would not typically lead a designer toward a beetle. However, since two of the biologized functions from these terms saguaro are merged beautifully in one pleats strategy of the tortoise beetle, a novel solution space is presented to the designer. barrel cactus pleats

egy

example solutions

connect a function pathway

add a strategy

hinged anthers

umulation

nd Walls

diation

ppropriate in any con-

. It is likely that moisaterial’s index of refracus, allowing the chirped d color (Vigneron et al.,

us index of refraction transparent (since there thereby removing light

counter-current heat

sunflower seed arrangement subcutaneous blubber

ommatidial gratings

Biomimicry in Parametric Modelling A Language of Relationships

Beyond offering Abstracted Design Principles and potential applications in the ‘translations’ portion of the site, parametric scripts that are embedded with the pertinent principles present in the biology (thereby helping to ensure the application with perform the desired functions) are available for download. Many online libraries and communities exist today in which individuals not only share scripts, but help each other create and understand them. The most popular of these currently are Grasshopper scripts. Grasshopper is a Rhinoceros pluggin that acts as a kind of visual coding tool. With Grasshopper, a designer defines the relationships between entities: “All entities in the design are logically connected when they are related, so in changing the length of a line, the ramifications of this change update the rest of the model.” (Burry, 2011) This allows for emulation at the level of relationships that make up a strategy with complete customization beyond that. So, the genotype of the strategy remains in these sharable scripts while the ‘physical’ manifestation (the phenotype) varies based on the specific context in which any designer places the solution (Burry, 2011). When you are designing and emulating at this level, you need to be very conscious about what the reasons are for each step, what the precise relationships are in the biology you are emulating. A designer needs to break down the problem into its most basic, logical components (Burry, 2011). Because of this, parametric (and

more broadly, computational) design is a very good way for designers to become intimately aware of the principles in the biology they are emulating. The tool presented in this project will both offer these parametric scripts, offer tutorials on how to create them and explaining the science behind them, and in cases where a script is not yet available, offer all the information needed for users to create (and ideally upload) their own parametric script. Problems with Romanticizing Open Source “[T]echnology tends to accumulate more error, whereas biology tends to eliminate error through death and extinction . . . so when you consider software, every time there’s a bug, you don’t throw away all the software, you add a patch . . . and that leads to extraordinarily messy, and kludgy systems” (Krakauer, n.d.) This site will welcome uploading and sharing of different solutions, but a system must be developed whereby uploaded solutions are vetted. This could be accomplished with biologists, computer scientists, and architects on staff judging viability of the solutions from their perspective areas of expertise. Users may earn points, or get discounts on subscriptions, for contributing high quality solutions (e.g. abstracted design principles, system connections, diagrams, scripts, etc.).

“STRUCTURE, for this is form seen inside, as a definite arrangement, static or changing, of localizable parts, such as a pattern of points . . . structure is a formal system of relations of certain logical types, and the EMPHASIS IN ALL USAGES IS ON THE RELATIONSHIPS rather than on the terms or entities which they relate.” -Lancelot L. Whyte (Whyte, 1965)

“parametric modelling introduces fundamental change, ‘marks’, that is, parts of the design, relate and change together in a coordinated way.” -Robert Woodbury in Elements of Parametric Design (Davis, 2013)

Photo by David Clode on Unsplash

Pleating Pattern Example Original Search Terms: Modular; Adaptable; Dry; Hot; Sunny This example search leads to â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;pleating patternâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; as one of the features suggested to the designer. From there, the designer finds two different Grasshopper scripts available for download. Below are brief descriptions of these two scripts. Click here to see a video demonstration of the flexibility offered with these scripts.

ModularSelfShadingFacade.gh

This pleating pattern, or ribbed facade, is a common feature in many species of cactus. This is an obvious example of a multifunctional feature in nature. These pleats provide self-shading, increase surface area to increase radiative heat loss at night, allow for rapid shape change to quickly absorb water when it is available, and in species like the saguaro, they protect from wind by creating vortices that reduce fluctuating shear forces (Liu, Shi, & Yu, 2011).

AdaptablePavilion.gh

Functions Addressed: Arrange Modular Components; Minimize Solar Heat Gain; Enhance Heat Radiation This script provides a customizable self-shading facade. The shape of the surface, the number of pleats, the depth of the pleats, and the spiral form can all be easily adjusted by the designer. These adjustments can be made with an evolutionary algorithm like Galapagos (a biomimetic plugin for Grasshopper) to optimize for minimal material and minimal solar heat gain. Once optimized components can be standardized for easy fabrication and quick construction.

Functions Addressed: Minimize Solar Heat Gain; Enhance Heat Radiation; Change Shape; Arrange Modular Components This script emulates the quick shape change and pore placement of the cactus self-shading facade. Windows in this script are placed in the crevices of the pleats similar to the placement of pores on the cactus to minimize water loss. After the sizes of the wall components have been adjusted to the designer’s needs, the volume of the pavilion will still be adjustable once constructed (as shown in the diagrams to the left).

Photo by Paweł Czerwiński on Unsplash

Connections Contributing to Design This example search leads to â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;pleating patternâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; as one of the features suggested to the designer. From there, the designer finds two different Grasshopper scripts available for download. Below are brief descriptions of these two scripts. Click here to see a video demonstration of the flexibility offered with these scripts.

Radius = 15 ft

homepage

about

tutorials

Radius = 22 ft

pathways

solve a strategy

example solutions

connect a function pathway

add a strategy

Cactus Pleats functions needed: arrange modular components, minimize solar heat gain; change shape

biology

connections

Pattern: Radial Arrangement

translations

Pattern: Fibonacci

Pattern: Boundary Layer

icon view

Scale Connection: Wax

Pattern: Thin Fanned

The following scenario illustrates one way the ‘connections’ sections, and different arrangments stressign relationships, might help designers make creative connections. While adjusting and customizing the parametric script, a designer notices something they saw on the ‘connections’ page of the Cactus Pleats collection. The radial arrangement of their pleated pavilion appears to be reflecting the radial arrangement of yucca to capture water and fog harvesting of some thin leaf rosette plants. The designer develops a tension system with mesh and cables to collect water in their dry climate. The designer becomes more familiar with patterns in nature, frequently used features and strategies, and which of often used together. This is a small part of better understanding the language of evolution on our planet.

Photo by David Clode on Unsplash

Ommatidium Example Original Search Terms: fast assembly; modular; [select biome]: Boreal Forest

needs

fast assembly modular

homepage

Boreal Forest wide seasonal temperature swings

Ommati

functions neede

cold winter low precipitation

biology

slow evaporation / moisture stays summer rain winter snow high seasonal sun altitude swing low direct sunlight extended dark (winter) extended radiation exposure (summer)

[view full context list]

This is an example of scale linking through the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;connectionsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; tab. The Boreal biome is cold and receives low light. The solution shown here is emulating moth eyes to absorb as much light as possible for daylighting, to direct toward a thermal mass, and for energy capture. The most effective solution, however, involves linking strategies at different scales. Each hexagonal component has very small protrusions that have indexes of refraction that vary moving downward from an index close to that of air to an index that matches the lens beneath (about n = 1.52) (Gorb & Gorb, 2016). This is beyond the scope of an architecture firm but could be embedded in a BIM model and simulation software and could be a reference for product manufactures. Click here to view a video demonstrating what a designer might do with the Grasshopper script.

200 nm

n = 1 (air)

300 nm

n1 n2 n3 nX = 1.52

about

tutorials

pathways

solve a strategy

example solutions

connect a function pathway

add a strategy

idium

ed: self-clean; absorb light; arrange modular components

connections

map view

translations

turtle shell

bee hive

layers wax

mmatidium

fibers

wasp nest gratings paper

hexagon

Flocking Birds Example “[Organisms] react ‘online’ to environmental changes in a typically fast, efficient and highly dynamic manner” (Knippers et al., 2016) Parametric modelling gives us an opportunity to simulate, model and test these responsive behaviors. Below is an example of a translation using the Kangaroo plugin in Grasshopper to simulate a responsive facade

homepage

about

tutorials

pathways

solve a strate

flock of birds

functions needed: conserve energy; coordinate modular co

biology

connections

translation

Potential Responsive Facad Potential Application: Application: Radiant Windows an Functions Addressed: Conserve Energy; Coordinate Modular Components

egy

system inspired by the behavior of flocking birds. The algorithm used and the physics simulated are very simple. A skilled computational designer could create much more sophisticated systems based on more complex algorithms in nature Click here to see a video demonstration of the responsive facade.

example solutions

connect a function pathway

add a strategy

omponents

de nd Walls Information: This potential application involves a simplified algorithm from flocking birds applied to facade components. There are no electronics in the facade components, just specifically arranged magnets to compute and play out coordinated reorientations. Flocking birds adjust their speed, position, and orientation based on their closest neighbors. These facade components adjust their orientations based on the changing orientations of their neighbors, triggered by a changing magnetic field at one corner responding to environmental changes. Context: This works in any circumstance a designer would like to respond to changes in precipitation, changes in cloud cover and sun direction, and changes in wind direction.

Computational Design

“Architects are ultimately choreographers of systems, and the benefits of teaching programming in an architectural context are manifold. If architecture wants to survive as a discipline, it needs to engage the culture of innovation and computing.” - Mark Collins & Toru Hasegawa of Proxy (Burry, 2011) Computation is becoming a more and more powerful tool at every level of the building process – from site analysis, to concept generation, to simulation and fabrication. If architects don’t embrace computational design, coders will be designing our buildings. If biomimics don’t learn how to code, nature will be left out of our designs. Swarm Behavior is a frequently latched on to algorithm category for computational design today. When describing the kind of computational design that will represent a paradigm shift, Pisca (2017) describes the fluid form arising from changing behaviors reacting to changing relationships. He uses a flock of birds as a “the classic example of a computational technique” in which each bird “searches and reacts to the nearest bird around it” and according to changing variables “differing formal activities emerge.” “Behavioral design methodologies represent a shift from ‘form being imposed upon matter’ to ‘form emerging from the interaction of localized entities within a complex system’” (Snooks, 2017) These systems are interesting for their potential in biomimicry because of their obvious connections to the way components interact in nature and the way form is created, structures are realized,

from the self-organization of discrete pieces of matter. “Agent-based design enable the mutual negotiation of [multiple] concerns” . . . “cast into a constant feedback loop” (Snooks, 2017) “This enables structure and ornament to operate as behaviors within a single body of material rather than existing as discrete elements or geometries.” (Snooks, n.d.) Snooks frequently gives the example of multifunctionality in these emergent forms as the seamless integration of ornament and structure (Snooks, n.d., 2017). Since it is natural systems that are being emulated so often to program these behavioral relationships, and these natural systems have many functions, can we not, instead, look specifically at the kinds of relationships, and the kinds of abstracted algorithms, that makes possible those marriages of functions – (e.g. structure & humidity control & water movement & thermoregulation). Ornament can be an emergent benefit, not a specific goal, as it often is in nature. Capturing more sophisticated functional integration within these swarm behaviors is a more complex endeavor, but these swarm simulation technologies have been around for decades, and it is time biomimicry steps in to guide these system interpretations into more fruitful, and ultimately regenerative, directions. The information to create and code these algorithms, and the evolving programs themselves, can be an important component of the ‘translations’ portion of this site. They will be an essential component as our design methods inevitably become more complex, borne from generative processes, anchoring them in the logic of the natural environment and its inherent characterizes that promote perpetual conditions conducive for life.

Short list of natural algorithms used in computation: Ant lion Firefly Krill herd Mouth brooding fish Virus colony Bat Ant Colony Evolution Bees Bacteria chemotaxis Spider monkey Cuttlefish Flocking birds Elephant herd Cuckoo

These algorithms are not being used to find regenerative models - not explicitly to align better with the natural environment. They are used because they are just the best models, the most interesting â&#x20AC;&#x201C; nothing else can compare. The core principles that make the algorithms found in nature regenerative by default are not being pulled out. We can identify and translate those core principles in natural languages that could harmonize our built environment with the natural world. A generation of designers fluent in code is coming, and this platform can be ready for them to add translations in the form of computer code. There is so much to learn from nature, and so much potential for computational design to translate it.

Grey wolf Flower pollination

Photo by Alexandra Rose on Unsplash

Beyond a Fixed Language Computational design requires a precise and abstracted understanding of the problem, just as biomimicry requires a direct and abstracted definition of the function needed. Descriptions of mechanisms in nature require the same kind of detail and understanding that descriptions in computer code require. These methods of defining and relating information are, at their core, very similar and inherently attuned conceptually. Since the methodology of Biomimicry Thinking (from Biomimicry 3.8) and other biomimetic methodologies more broadly welcome, and in fact require, the translation of biological phenomena to any other language, languages as powerful and sophisticated, and as welcoming of underlying logic, as computer languages, are primed and ready to align and reveal the languages of the natural world. Since computer science and computational design are rapidly redefining their languages to better align with the complexities of our world and to better align with, and expand, the ways we think about our world, this is a perfect space to explore, learn from, and align with the inherently regenerative languages of the natural world. “Form . . . [is] a logic deployed, while the object is merely the latter’s sectional image, a manifest variation on an always somewhat distant theme.” - Stanford Kwinter (Snooks, 2017) This platform can be a space to explore and translate that logic in nature, of course always just shy of revealing or understanding all there is, but a way to get closer to that harmonization we want and need. No one language, be it English, Latin, calculus or a computer language, can fully encapsulate and communicate all the nuances of the world around us. Math can encapsulate so much, be requires much translation to be meaningful for most of us. Computer languages can translate, but any single language becomes a limiting scaffolding. This platform can be a space where languages evolve. “Authoritative customisation of the ‘black box’ affords the designer opportunities to escape the strictures inherent in any software – by definition in ways not thought of by the makers, otherwise it would be an existing capability.” (Burry, 2011) The deepest value of utilizing computation for biomimicry in architecture comes not from the convenience and speed with which complexity can be modelled, but with the mental dexterity developed while, and the close attention of the biological relationships required for, creating computational programs and languages. The ‘translations’ space on this website can be more than a script sharing space like GitHub. It can be a space for creative exploration in the built environment through the languages nature speaks.

3 1. Fibrous Assemblage â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Multi-Agent drawing / University of Pennsylvania. Instructor: Roland Snooks / Students: Mike Golden + Bradley Schnell 2. Micro-scale timber fibres - Image Credit Roland Snooks 3. Jenny Sabin - Knitted Textile Pavilion

Conclusion “The aim of an evolutionary architecture is to achieve in the built environment the symbiotic behavior and metabolic balance that are characteristic of the natural environment.” (Frazer, 1995) The above quote is from a book published in 1995. Frazer proposes an “evolutionary architecture” in which “[t]he profligate prototyping and awesome creative power of evolution are emulated by creating virtual architectural models which respond to changing environments . . . the primary inspiration comes from the fundamental formative processes and information systems of nature” (Frazer, 1995). Frazer was scripting new languages that align more closely with the way nature operates. Clearly, these ideas are not new, but with the massive advancements in computation and fabrication technologies, their widespread availability, growing communities familiar with their operation and how to manipulate them, and the emergence and growing sophistication of biomimicry, these emulations can be finely tuned to communicate with nature, to learn from nature, to design with nature, to become reality. The platform proposed in this document offers ways in to understand nature’s languages - from beginning biomimetic to expert, from traditional to computational designer.

Personal Reflection When I started this project I was worried technology would outpace biological incorporation in architecture. I was worried we would move too quick into complexity without referencing biology. I thought it would be years before computational design could be fully embraced by the average architect. I thought we were a long way from having the capability to allow everyone access to exploration and translation of complex relationships in nature. But we have that capability now. Much of the research, and many of the examples I encountered, that was putting forth seemingly futuristic and novel ideas, came from more than a decade ago. Much of what was conceptualized in computer science related fields in the 60s, 70s and 80s is finally being realized today (Lanier, 2017) - ideas finally finding an environment in which they can flourish. But still, computer experts ignore so much about the natural world and how it can help us, even though so many of them default toward biological algorithms. And many of those familiar with biological complexity unwilling to go beyond what are the culturally safe and recognizable paths toward sustainability, ignoring computer science as too far removed from nature. “Programming is useful in handling information beyond our perceptual capabilities.” -Panagiotis Michalatos & Sawako Kaijima, AKT Architects (Burry, 2011) So much of the natural world falls into that category. What has been holding us back is the intimidation associated with learning a new language. With a platform like the one proposed in this document, we could begin to train ourselves to understand and design in the same languages as the living systems around us.

Photo by Ivan Bandura on Unsplash

References Agres, K., & Pearce, M. (2013). An Information Foraging Model of Interactive Analogical Retrieval. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. Baumeister, D., Tocke, R., Dwyer, J., Ritter, S., & Benyus, J. M. (2014). Biomimicry Resource Handbook : a seed bank of best practices. Missoula, MT: Biomimicry 3.8. Burry, M. (2011). Scripting Cultures: Architectural Design and Programming (Kindle). Wiley. Chakrabarti, A., & Chakrabarti, D. (2017). Idea Inspire 3.0—A Tool for Analogical Design Amaresh. Research into Design for Communities, 66(February 2018), 1037–1047. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3521-0 Davis, D. (2013). Modelled on Software Engineering: Flexible Parametric Models in the Practice of Architecture. RMIT University. Edwards, G. R., & Evans, L. F. (1962). Effect of surface charge on ice nucleation by silver iodide. Transactions of the Faraday Society, 58, 1649–1655. https://doi.org/10.1039/tf9625801649 Frazer, J. (1995). An Evolutionary Architecture. London, UK: Architectural Association. Fuller, R. B. (1965). Conceptuality of Fundamental Structures. In G. Kepes (Ed.), Structure in Art and in Science (3rd ed., pp. 66–88). New York, NY: George Braziller, Inc. Gorb, S. N., & Gorb, E. V. (2016). Insect-Inspired Architecture: Insects and Other Arthropods as a Source for Creative Design in Architecture. In J. Knippers, K. G. Nickel, & T. Speck (Eds.), Biomimetic Research for Architecture and Building Construction (Kindle). Springer International Publishing. Höcherl, N., Kennedy, S., & Tautz, J. (2016). Nest thermoregulation of the paper wasp Polistes dominula. Journal of Thermal Biology, 60, 171–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtherbio.2016.07.012 Kaiser, M. K., Hashemi Farzaneh, H., & Lindemann, U. (2012). An approach to support searching for biomimetic solutions based on system characteristics and its environmental interactions. Proceedings of International Design Conference, DESIGN, DS 70, 969–978. Kieft, T. L., & Ruscetti, T. (1990). Characterization of biological ice nuclei from a lichen. Journal of Bacteriology, 172(6), 3519–3523. https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.172.6.3519-3523.1990 Kieft, Thomas L. (1988). Ice Nucleation Activity in Lichens. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 54(7), 1678–1681. https://doi. org/10.1128/aem.54.7.1678-1681.1988 Kieran, S., & Timberlake, J. (2003). Refabricating architecture : how manufacturing methodologies are poised to transform building construction. McGraw-Hill. Knippers, J. (2016). From Minimal Surfaces to Integrative Structures – The SFB-TRR 141 in the Light of the Legacy of Frei Otto and the SFB 230 ‘Natürliche Konstruktionen.’ In J. Knippers, K. G. Nickel, & T. Speck (Eds.), Biomimetic Research for Architecture and Building Construction (Kindle). Springer International Publishing. Knippers, J., Speck, T., & Nickel, K. G. (2016). Biomimetic Research: A Dialogue Between the Disciplines. In J. Knippers, K. G. Nickel, & T. Speck (Eds.), Biomimetic Research for Architecture and Building Construction (Kindle). Springer International Publishing. Krakauer, D. (n.d.). Complex Time: A SFI/JSMF Research Theme. Retrieved from https://www.santafe.edu/research/themes/complex-time Lanier, J. (2017). Dawn of the New Everything: A Journey Through Virtual Reality. Henry Holt and Co. Lingham-Soliar, T. (2014). Feather structure, biomechanics and biomimetics: The incredible lightness of being. Journal of Ornithology, 155(2), 323–336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10336-013-1038-0 Liu, Y. Z., Shi, L. L., & Yu, J. (2011). TR-PIV measurement of the wake behind a grooved cylinder at low Reynolds number. Journal of Fluids and Structures, 27(3), 394–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2010.11.013

McCafferty, D. J., Pandraud, G., Gilles, J., Fabra-Puchol, M., & Henry, P. Y. (2018). Animal thermoregulation: A review of insulation, physiology and behaviour relevant to temperature control in buildings. Bioinspiration and Biomimetics, 13(1). https://doi. org/10.1088/1748-3190/aa9a12 McInerney, S., Khakipoor, B., Garner, A., Houette, T., Unsworth, C., Rupp, A., … Niewiarowski, P. (2018). E2BMO: Facilitating User Interaction with a BioMimetic Ontology via Semantic Translation and Interface Design. Designs, 2(4), 53. https://doi.org/10.3390/ designs2040053 Menges, A. (2015). Material synthesis : fusing the physical and the computational (A. Menges, Ed.). Pisca, N. (2017). Forget Parametricism. In P. Yuan & N. Leach (Eds.), Computational Design (pp. 43–45). Tongji University Press. Sartori, J., Pal, U., & Chakrabarti, A. (2010). A methodology for supporting “transfer” in biomimetic design. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing: AIEDAM, 24(4), 483–505. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060410000351 Shyam, Friend, Whiteaker, Bense, Dowdall, Boktor, … Robinson. (2019). PeTaL (Periodic Table of Life) and Physiomimetics. Designs, 3(3), 43. https://doi.org/10.3390/designs3030043 Snooks, R. (n.d.). Fibrous Assemblages and Behavioral Composites. The Funambulist. Retrieved from https://thefunambulist.net/ architectural-projects/guest-writers-essays-25-fibrous-assemblages-and-behavioral-composites-by-roland-snooks Snooks, R. (2017). Behavioral Matter. In N. Leach & P. F. Yuan (Eds.), Computational Design (pp. 142–151). Tongji University Press. Stroble, J. K., Stone, R. B., McAdams, D. A., & Watkins, S. E. (2014). An engineering-to-biology thesaurus to promote better collaboration, creativity and discovery. Competitive Design - Proceedings of the 19th CIRP Design Conference, 355–362. Vandevenne, D., Verhaegen, P. A., Dewulf, S., & Duflou, J. R. (2014). SEABIRD: Scalable search for systematic biologically inspired design. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing: AIEDAM, 30(1), 78–95. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0890060415000177 Vigneron, J. P., Pasteels, J. M., Windsor, D. M., Vértesy, Z., Rassart, M., Seldrum, T., … Welch, V. (2007). Switchable reflector in the Panamanian tortoise beetle Charidotella egregia (Chrysomelidae: Cassidinae). Physical Review E - Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics, 76(3), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.76.031907 West, G. B. (2017). Scale : the universal laws of growth, innovation, sustainability, and the pace of life in organisms, cities, economies, and companies. Penguin. Whyte, L. L. (1965). Atomism, Structure and Form: A Report on the Natural Philosophy of Form. In G. Kepes (Ed.), Structure in Art and in Science (3rd ed., pp. 20–28). New York: George Braziller, Inc. Zari, M. P. (2010). Biomimetic design for climate change adaptation and mitigation. Architectural Science Review, 53(2), 172–183. https:// doi.org/10.3763/asre.2008.0065 Zexin, S., & Mei, H. (2017). Robotic Form-Finding and Construction Based on the Architectural Projection Logic. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 216(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/216/1/012058 Zhao, Y., Baldini, I., Sattigeri, P., Padhi, I., Lee, Y. K., & Smith, E. (2018). Data Driven Techniques for Organizing Scientific Articles Relevant to Biomimicry. AIES 2018 - Proceedings of the 2018 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, 347–353. https://doi.

org/10.1145/3278721.3278755

Appendix A: Research Outline77 BROAD GOAL: Unleash the potential of biomimicry to produce innovative solutions for regenerative design in the built environment

FOCUS: Architects and Architectural Design

NARROWED GOAL: A smoother path for architects to create meaningful applications of biomimicry in the built environment

GOAL FOR THIS PROJECT: An architectural tool, methodology, collection and/or prototype that facilitates, or is representative of, this smoother path

PROJECT QUESTION: How can X be explored and presented in a way that might help facilitate meaningful applications of biomimicry in architecture more broadly? (where X is the focus of the project)

PURPOSE OF THIS RESEARCH (surveys, interviews, literature review): Find X

YS VE R SU

S EW

VI ER

TU RA

MAIN RESEARCH QUESTION: What kind of project can help shine light toward a smoother path for architects to create meaningful applications of biomimicry in the built environment?

Where are the main points of friction?

Appendix B-1

Where does biomimicry have the most potential?

Appendix B-2

Where are the main points of interest?

Appendix B-3

Where are there gaps between potential and focus?

Appendix B-4

Where are the overlaps in gaps and main points of friction?

Appendix B-4

What do professionals feel they need?

Appendix B-5

How do perceived needs intersect the overlaps?

Appendix B-5

CURRENT STATE

LEVERAGE POINTS

APPLICATIONS

VI RE

Appendix B: Research Discussion77 *Surveys and Interviews are still in progress, new answers may reveal themselves as this work is completed

B-1 Friction Several points of friction have been identified. Oguntona and Aigbavboa1 looked specifically at the barriers to the adoption of biomimicry as a sustainable construction practice. Through a survey they found overarching perceptions pointed toward (1) the lack of awareness about biomimicry, (2) the lack of implementation knowledge, (3) lack of training and education, (4) problems with multidisciplinary collaboration, and a (5) lack of databases and information (top 5 out of 19). Of the question on my survey searching for main points of friction in respondents’ specific places of work (Clarity of the path / fit methodology, Research capability/resources, Interdisciplinary collaboration, Design tools, Client buy-in, and Time required to develop biomimetic solutions), Research and Time topped the list with Design Tools and Client buy-in tying for third. Friction in research capability and lack of databases and information from Oguntona and Aigbavboa’s study are related problems. Fragmented55, and difficulty in producing usable60, research showed up in other areas of my surveys. Other obstacle to meaningful implementation identified in my surveys and interview included troubles with translation59,60, lack of existing examples56,57,59, its unconventional nature clashes with cultural and technical practices58, makes it difficult to contract58, and difficult to rely on60. Biomimetic solutions can be unconventional at different levels, from material, to construction, to process and integration. Reliability is essential in new buildings, and at this point, biomimicry cannot usually provide that60. Lack of focus on systems and integration, and the complexity associated with integration, were also addressed55,57. Indentify lacks in these areas: Research, Databases, Translation, Education, Existing Examples, Systems Focus

B-2 Promise The highest score on my surveys for areas in which biomimicry can positively contribute was in Idea Generation, with a perfect score. In second place was a benefit to material flows. Tied for third (with scores of 6 out of a possible 7) was Building Operation Performance, Systems Integration, and Occupant Health and Well-Being. From the literature review, an objective interpretation will be offered by considering the main focal points in the research [Appendix B-3]. I will offer a more subjective view here, though. There was a wide range in the quality of the research analyzed. Criteria I used to judge quality include projects that exhibit what I call in my survey introductions “Meaningful biomimetic solutions in the built environment”: “Meaningful” – Biomimetic solutions which are functionally effective, align with the biology they seek to emulate, and directly contribute to a regenerative project. “Regenerative” – Overall impact on human and natural systems is positive. Articles that caught my attention also included something that was innovative (or at least, new to me at the time I read it). Some of these articles included Al-Obaidi et al.’s Biomimetic building skins: An adaptive approach14; Yunis et al.’s Bio-inspired and fabrication-informed design strategies for modular fibrous structures in architecture36; Schleicher et al.’s A methodology for transferring principles of plant movements to elastic systems in architecture32, Zari M. P.’s Ecosystem processes for biomimetic architectural and urban design31, and Groenewolt et al.’s An interactive agent-based framework for materialization-informed architectural design6. All five involve deeper levels of integration (integrating across scales, systems, and processes – separate from the category ‘systems integration’ in Appendix D, which refers specifically to mechanical (or no-need-for-mechanical) systems integration). Integration occurs across design, construction, and eventual performance6, across scales of design31, and across building operation systems14. Nature is particulatily good at systems integration, and I feel this area holds promise. Identify promising areas: Idea Generation, Material Flows, Building Operation Performance, Broader Systems Focus, Systems Integration, and Occupant Health and Well-Being

B-3 Existing Focal Points Focal points and gaps can be seen in the literature review table [Appendix D]. Most of the focus in the articles analyzed was in the biomimetic Design Process for architecture, Structural Emulation, Building Envelop Applications, and Thermoregulation. Gaps appear to be in Education, Sustainability Measurement, Modelling Solution Behavior, Embodied Energy and Life Cycle, Convertible / Adaptable Structures, Systems Integration, Ventilation / Gas Exchange, Humidity, and Energy Generation/Distribution. In the project review articles4,9,18,21,23,25,37,38, few examples are given of realized biomimetic building (or larger projects). Examples include weak ties to biomimicry like Gaudi and Calatrava, and examples like the Eastgate Center (which represents an incorrect emulation of nature, that does, though, lead to a more sustainable building). Some stronger examples are given, but for the most part, true applications of biomimicry come in prototype examples. This reinforces the previously stated friction that architects don’t have many good existing examples to turn to or learn from. I did not come across any articles focusing on translational issues between biology and architecture. [I have come across one since, however, and will include this in further research].

Books like Michael Pawlyn’s Biomimicry in Architecture; Blaine Brownell and Marc Swackhamer’s Hypernatural50; Ilaria Mazzoleni’s Architecture Follows Nature51; Jan Knippers, Thomas Speck and Klaus G. Nickel’s Biomimetic Research for Architecture and Building Construction52; and Maibritt Pedersen Zari’s Regenerative Urban Design and Ecosystem Biomimicry53; were not included in the literature review table since the purpose of the table was to determine existing areas of focus in peer reviewed articles. They did, however, influence my impressions of the existing focal points of biomimicry in architecture. The first two are intended for popular audiences and present slightly overlapping arrays of biomimicry in architecture examples. Both present many examples which fall outside a strict definition of biomimicry. Hypernatural explicitly goes beyond these bounds and looks at new ways of building informed by natural phenomena, well beyond living organisms and systems. Architecture Follows Nature also seems intended for a popular audience, but it ventures into the territory of generating new examples. The focus here is specifically on organism skins or outer membranes and building envelops. Biomimetic Research for Architecture and Building Construction52 is a collection of essays (or articles) written at an academic level. Most chapters focus on specific prototypical explorations on form, building performance, and construction. Chapter 18 focuses on sustainability measurement. Even if this is added to the literature review table, this area still has low representation. Sustainability measurement was also described in a survey as an important but lacking area of focus54. Chapter 1 and Chapter 19 focus on unifying fields, adjacent to translational issues. Regenerative Urban Design and Ecosystem Biomimicry represents focus in system emulation, as do articles in the table15,31,42, but she seems to represent the bulk of this focus. This may be an open area for new exploration based on the vast work she has provided. Identify Current Focal Points: Design Process; Structural Emulation; Building Envelop Applications; and Thermoregulation Identify Gaps: Education, Sustainability Measurement; Modelling Solution Behavior; Embodied Energy and Life Cycle; Convertible / Adaptable Structures; Broader Systems Focus; Systems Integration; Ventilation / Gas Exchange; Humidity; Energy Generation/Distribution; Existing Examples; Translation

B-4 Overlaps Identify gaps between promise and main focal points: Material Flows, Embodied Energy and Life Cycle, Broader Systems Focus, Systems Integration, and Occupant Health and Well-Being; within Building Operation Performance: Ventilation / Gas Exchange; Humidity; Energy Generation/Distribution How do these gaps relate to the main points of friction? Systems Focus is present in at all three of the last four stages. Systems address all of the overlaps listed above. Embodied Energy and Life Cycle fits with Material Flows and Broader Systems Focus. Ventilation / Gas Exchange and Humidity can fit within Systems Integration.

B-5 Percieved Needs and Possible Applications Survey respondent rated the potential of further development in different areas to promote the adoption of meaningful biomimetic solutions in the built environment. Design software that makes connections between design and biology convenient and understandable was rated to have the most value for helping biomimicry in architecture. Second in this category was high school education in biomimicry, followed by college level courses. Respondents were also asked to rate the potential usefulness of different tools. Top scores in this category included:

Software that allows users to visualize and design new systems maps of material flows in a given region

[All of the above tools scored at least a 6 out of 7 up to this point in the research]

A tool that interprets local climate data, pulls out context specific opportunities or abiotic pressures, and relates them to strategies in nature A collection of common functional issues in architecture coupled with biological strategies A collection of biological strategies simultaneously solving 2 or more specified functions A collection of biological strategies solving specified functions in specified contexts

Synthesis: Friction points:

Research Databases Translation Education Existing Examples Systems Focus

Promise / gaps overlaps:

Material Flows Embodied Energy and Life Cycle Broader Systems Focus Systems Integration Occupant Health and Well-Being Ventilation / Gas Exchange; Humidity Energy Generation/Distribution

Valued areas:

Design software that makes connections between design and biology convenient and understandable

Defined pathway and resulting architectural example(s) focusing on biomimetic systems integration

Software that allows users to visualize and design new systems maps of material flows in a given region A tool that interprets local climate data, pulls out context specific opportunities or abiotic pressures, and relates them to strategies in nature A collection of common functional issues in architecture coupled with biological strategies A collection of biological strategies simultaneously solving 2 or more specified functions A collection of biological strategies solving specified functions in specified contexts Education

Possible Projects:

A collection of biological strategies simultaneously solving 2 or more specified functions and resulting architectural project(s) Database and/or map of system level emulation for material pathways and example project Educational/Studio curriculum and example project for biomimetic systems integration Systems Integration focused Architecture to Biology translation collection with example architectural application(s) Functions in (possibly desert) context collection and resulting systems integration example application(s)

Appendix C: Literature Review Table77

FOCUS intangible

FOCUS TYPE tangible

scale

material & form

intangible

tangible

operation / performance scale

material & form

operation /

n s g io in g ut icele s at e in ct yc rib ge m re/r andgel pe prfae c st e e i e e y l an l t v d i o b i ive bl s s n n to st/ l ch / n/ n/ ob su chm at ta at ta ro begy n ex io de pr ionea eioxr de tio tio g atio er ap er ewap gy p o a a a a i n ng t r r s n n w s s n r r m i t t d d / v c c e e w e via d er di era l ithe la ga ge /a eg op faes tio laty gaa eg op fa ta wen ogy reiovni vie/ g l rele/ en ha gen ha gen on m / ble nt voenl iveroc nta egbuili n /beh nt vel ive gu n / n i i i s s l d b d d t t e e e l a m / y a e e c s enti s p e orna tioal ity s en s ia /r y g m reie dore reuc t rth icrta y or tio ity di tur ru ith ert rim em /ca ognn tic m mai la ri id rer nrgio rg in n ri paod o tu tutr c ri ge e em / on tic m la id r ng rg bo ruc nst lgor nv pe st indu spsi eple erst ntai te um ateat ghnttieeneuild rba xpe ommb ettrhucteorans roljgeo ioolonv urv yst kin esp ine her nti um ate ghti ene t ve h w li u e c e ms li c p a bc s ex co sy ske rede kiinm thsu vem s s r k h wm li i em st co a co b

g in g s at in m /r el le re od ob asu r m r s n p me vio es tio ity ha e n roc ta bil l tio n p men ina ial b ia r g a er rio in n uc sig le sta ter at te ld ba ed de imp su ma m in bui ur

life

cle

. O. Barriers Militating Against the Adoption Biomimicry a .Aigbavboa, .. 1. of Oguntona, O. as A. & C. O. Barriers Militating Against the Adoption of Biomimicry as a . . .

2019

n Architectural Education: Case study of ‘Biomimicry ... 2. Amer, N.inBiomimetic Approach in Architectural Education: Case study of ‘Biomimicry in . . .

d Functional: A Review of Biomimetic Design in Additive . . .et al. Beautiful and Functional: A Review of Biomimetic Design in Additive . . . 3. du Plessis, A.

hafaghat, A. & Keyvanfar, A. Employing biomimicry urban . 4. Ferwati,inM. S., Al. .Suwaidi, M., Shafaghat, A. & Keyvanfar, A. Employing biomimicry in urban . . .

dditive manufacturing concept for architectural composite . . rapid additive manufacturing concept for architectural composite shell . . . 5. Felbrich, B. etshell al. A .novel

uyen, L. & Menges, A. An interactive agent-based framework for . . . T., Nguyen, L. & Menges, A. An interactive agent-based framework for . . . 6. Groenewolt, A., Schwinn,

ermoregulation: A review of insulation, physiology and behaviour . . Animal . 7. McCafferty, D. J. et al. thermoregulation: A review of insulation, physiology and behaviour . . .

2018

Speck, O. & Leistner, P. Bio-inspired sustainability .. 8. Horn, assessment R., Dahy, H.,. Gantner, J., Speck, O. & Leistner, P. Bio-inspired sustainability assessment . . .

rchitecture: Creating a Passive Defense System 9. Mohamed, in Building A. S.Skin Y. Biomimetic ... Architecture: Creating a Passive Defense System in Building Skin . . .

iomimetic compliant shading device for complex free form . . Flectofold - A biomimetic compliant shading device for complex free form . . . 10. Körner, A. et .al.

Parametric Analysis of a Spiraled Shell: Learning from . .&. Klotz, L. Parametric Analysis of a Spiraled Shell: Learning from Nature’s . . . 11. Chen, D.,Nature’s Ross, B.

urkar, P. Applying biomimicry to design building envelopes that . D. . . & Bhiwapurkar, P. Applying biomimicry to design building envelopes that . . . 12. Fecheyr-Lippens,

al organisms as a mimicking tool in architecture. Int. J. Des. Nat. . . . of natural organisms as a mimicking tool in architecture. Int. J. Des. Nat. . . . 13. El-Mahdy, D. Behavior M., Hussein, H. & Abdul Rahman, A. M. Biomimetic building . 14. Al-Obaidi, K. M.,. .Azzam Ismail, M., Hussein, H. & Abdul Rahman, A. M. Biomimetic building . . .

2017

esign: Ecosystem service provision of water and energy. .. 15. Zari, M. P. .Biomimetic urban design: Ecosystem service provision of water and energy. . . .

ee, J. CFD modelling of air temperature reduction and . . Kim, Y. & Lee, J. CFD modelling of air temperature reduction and airflow . . . 16. Shon, D.,airflow Piao, .G.,

ign based on sponge spicules’ forms. CAADRIA 2017P.- 22nd .. 17. Zhang, et al. .Generative design based on sponge spicules’ forms. CAADRIA 2017 - 22nd . . .

. & Ben Croxford. How plants inspire façades. From plants to . . R., . Martín, S. & Ben Croxford. How plants inspire façades. From plants to . . . 18. López, M., Rubio,

C. O. Biomimicry principles as evaluation criteria of sustainability ... 19. Oguntona, O. A. & Aigbavboa, C. O. Biomimicry principles as evaluation criteria of sustainability . . . Biomimicry, an Approach, for Energy Effecient BuildingG. Skin . . .& Osama, N. Biomimicry, an Approach, for Energy Effecient Building Skin . . . 20. Radwan, A. N.

ramian, A. Ecosystem Biomimicry: A way to achieve thermal ... 21. Abaeian, H., Madani, R. & Bahramian, A. Ecosystem Biomimicry: A way to achieve thermal . . .

2016

ve Algorithm for Architectural Design Based 22.on Sarwate, Biomimicry P. & .Patil, . . A. Generative Algorithm for Architectural Design Based on Biomimicry . . .

g solar shadings: A review. Renew. Sustain. 23.Energy Fiorito,Rev. F. et55, al. .Shape .. morphing solar shadings: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 55, . . . Incorporation of Biomimicry into an Architectural 24. Sarwate, Design P. .L.. .& Patil, A. P. The Incorporation of Biomimicry into an Architectural Design . . .

ife : The potential contribution of biomimicry shaping future . 25.inBuck, N. T.the The art of. .imitating life : The potential contribution of biomimicry in shaping the future . . .

mework of Heat Regulation Strategies for 26. the Badarnah, Design of .L. . .A Biophysical Framework of Heat Regulation Strategies for the Design of . . .

inspired Panel Design for Thermal Management. Procedia Eng. . . .et al. Bio-inspired Panel Design for Thermal Management. Procedia Eng. . . . 27. Portilla-Aguilar, J. M.

2015

rghabehi, O. O., Menges, A. & Speck, T. Development digital . . . T., Torghabehi, O. O., Menges, A. & Speck, T. Development of a digital . . . 28. Ahlquist, of S.,aKampowski,

rea, D. Meteorosensitive architecture: Biomimetic building . . . A. & Correa, D. Meteorosensitive architecture: Biomimetic building skins . . . 29. Reichert, S., skins Menges,

hodology for the generation of biomimetic 30. design concepts. . Badarnah, L. &. .Kadri, U. A methodology for the generation of biomimetic design concepts. . . .

es for biomimetic architectural and urban design. Archit. ... 31. Zari, M. P. Sci. Ecosystem processes for biomimetic architectural and urban design. Archit. Sci. . . .

ppinga, S., Speck, T. & Knippers, J. A methodology for . . S., . Lienhard, J., Poppinga, S., Speck, T. & Knippers, J. A methodology for . . . 32. Schleicher,

heory of structures-design methodology transfer from trees ... 33. Grigorian, M. to Biomimicry and theory of structures-design methodology transfer from trees to . . .

2014

Speck, T. & Speck, O. Sustainability assessment of a lightweight ... 34. Antony, F., Grießhammer, R., Speck, T. & Speck, O. Sustainability assessment of a lightweight . . .

tures: An integrative approach to design computation, ... 35. Reichert,simulation S. et al. Fibrous structures: An integrative approach to design computation, simulation . . .

d fabrication-informed design strategies for36. modular . Yunis,fibrous L. et al.. .Bio-inspired and fabrication-informed design strategies for modular fibrous . . .

s a Problem Solving Methodology in Interior . .A. Biomimicry as a Problem Solving Methodology in Interior Architecture. . . . 37.Architecture. El-Zeiny, R. .M.

n and construction principles in nature and38. architecture. . Speck, T. Design and construction principles in nature and architecture. . . . Knippers, .J.. &

2012

processes in architecture: Morphogenetic 39. andMenges, evolutionary ... A. Biomimetic design processes in architecture: Morphogenetic and evolutionary . . .

el based on Biomimicry to enhance ecologically sustainable .. 40. Gamage, A. & .Hyde, R. A model based on Biomimicry to enhance ecologically sustainable . . .

ies : system convergence and multi-materiality. Bioinspir. .T.. .Beyond assemblies : system convergence and multi-materiality. Bioinspir. . . . 41. Wiscombe,

or . . .

, Y. . . .

inetic . . .

2010

42. Zari, M. P. Biomimetic design for . . . 43. Badarnah, L., Nachman Farchi, Y. . . . 44. Wang, J. & Li, J. Bio-inspired kinetic . . .

Totals

1 16

10 5

161 816 83 132 31 3

52 51 236

8 19 12 14 10 25 126 102 3

16 8

19 1

Appendix D: Literature Review Discussion

To limit my search, I chose to only include articles published in the last 10 years and only to include articles that are specific to architecture â&#x20AC;&#x201C; this means the articles must explicitly discuss applications in architecture. Articles that could have clear applications in the built environment, but did not explicitly mention architecture, were not included. Articles were found through database searches of JSTORE, Academic Search Premier, the Journal of Experimental Biology, Google Scholar, and the journal Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, with the search terms:

Biomimicry + Architecture Biomimetic + Architecture Biomimetic + Construction Biomimicry + Construction Biomimetic + Architecture + Interior Biomimicry + Architecture + Interior Biomimicry + Urban Biomimetic + Urban Parametric + Biomimicry Parametric + Biomimetic Generative + Biomimetic Generative + Biomimicry

Red articles are of lower quality. Because they were apparently peer reviewed and do represent examples of focal points, they were included in the review. Other articles, however, did not meet a quality threshold and were not included in the review. These articles made the final cut due to, an admittedly, subjective judgement of quality. Along this subjective scale I felt I should mark these (while I did not mark others). The light grey article focusses primarily on non-biomimetic solutions but does include a significant section on biomimetic solutions. Design Process is heavily focused on. This concurs with the high scores in the surveys I conducted related to the potential to generate new ideas. Interest in defining this idea generation process is high. I wonder if there is already enough focus here or if this is still fertile ground since this appears to be a great strength of biomimicry. It seems that more should be done with comparison to best practices. The reason for this gap is likely due, at least in part, to the lack of good, existing examples. In general, all articles either directly or indirectly address issues of climate change. Zari15,42 focuses specifically on climate change adaptation, emulating and uniting with an array of ecosystem services. This specific category was not included in the table since all articles focus on issues related to climate change or unsustainable building industry to one degree or another. It might be a good category to include, however. Missing from this list is a more thorough philosophical argument on why we should use biomimicry. Each article glosses over its strengths, briefly. But I feel more should exist, specific to architecture, delving into issues like: the relationship of nature and the built environment; the relationship of humanity and nature; our evolutionary past, through to our evolved ability to reflect, and design, and learn; biomimicry as a culturally evolved, self-referencing adaptation. Some of these exist in other disciplines, but I did not come across any among the architecture specific papers. A potentially interesting next step might be to cross this literature review with Lifeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Principles to see what is represented and what is missed. Those principles that are missed might either have little relevance for architecture (those principles specific to chemistry, for example) or they might represent areas with great potential that have been overlooked.

References 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42.

Oguntona, O. A. & Aigbavboa, C. O. Barriers Militating Against the Adoption of Biomimicry as a Sustainable Construction Practice. MATEC Web Conf. 266, 03010 (2019). Amer, N. Biomimetic Approach in Architectural Education: Case study of ‘Biomimicry in Architecture’ Course. Ain Shams Eng. J. 10, 499–506 (2019). du Plessis, A. et al. Beautiful and Functional: A Review of Biomimetic Design in Additive Manufacturing. Addit. Manuf. 27, 408–427 (2019). Ferwati, M. S., AlSuwaidi, M., Shafaghat, A. & Keyvanfar, A. Employing biomimicry in urban metamorphosis seeking for sustainability: case studies. ACE Archit. City Environ. 14, 133 (2019). Felbrich, B. et al. A novel rapid additive manufacturing concept for architectural composite shell construction inspired by the shell formation in land snails. Bioinspiration and Biomimetics 13, (2018). Groenewolt, A., Schwinn, T., Nguyen, L. & Menges, A. An interactive agent-based framework for materialization-informed architectural design. Swarm Intelligence vol. 12 (Springer US, 2018). McCafferty, D. J., Pandraud, G., Gilles, J., Fabra-Puchol, M. & Henry, P. Y. Animal thermoregulation: A review of insulation, physiology and behaviour relevant to temperature control in buildings. Bioinspiration and Biomimetics 13, (2018). Horn, R., Dahy, H., Gantner, J., Speck, O. & Leistner, P. Bio-inspired sustainability assessment for building product development - Concept and case study. Sustain. 10, 1–25 (2018). Mohamed, A. S. Y. Biomimetic Architecture: Creating a Passive Defense System in Building Skin To Solve Zero Carbon Construction Dilemma. EqaInternational J. Environ. Qual. 29, 1–28 (2018). Körner, A. et al. Flectofold - A biomimetic compliant shading device for complex free form facades. Smart Mater. Struct. 27, (2018). Chen, D., Ross, B. & Klotz, L. Parametric Analysis of a Spiraled Shell: Learning from Nature’s Adaptable Structures. Designs 2, 46 (2018). Fecheyr-Lippens, D. & Bhiwapurkar, P. Applying biomimicry to design building envelopes that lower energy consumption in a hot-humid climate. Archit. Sci. Rev. 60, 360–370 (2017). El-Mahdy, D. Behavior of natural organisms as a mimicking tool in architecture. Int. J. Des. Nat. Ecodynamics 12, 214–224 (2017). Al-Obaidi, K. M., Azzam Ismail, M., Hussein, H. & Abdul Rahman, A. M. Biomimetic building skins: An adaptive approach. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 79, 1472–1491 (2017). Zari, M. P. Biomimetic urban design: Ecosystem service provision of water and energy. Buildings 7, (2017). Shon, D., Piao, G., Kim, Y. & Lee, J. CFD modelling of air temperature reduction and airflow induced by the use of chilled wall panels based on the biological principles of zebra stripes. Archit. Sci. Rev. 60, 507–515 (2017). Zhang, P. et al. Generative design based on sponge spicules’ forms. CAADRIA 2017 - 22nd Int. Conf. Comput. Archit. Des. Res. Asia Protoc. Flows Glitches 509–518 (2017). López, M., Rubio, R., Martín, S. & Ben Croxford. How plants inspire façades. From plants to architecture: Biomimetic principles for the development of adaptive architectural envelopes. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 67, 692–703 (2017). Oguntona, O. A. & Aigbavboa, C. O. Biomimicry principles as evaluation criteria of sustainability in the construction industry. Energy Procedia 142, 2491–2497 (2017). Radwan, G. A. N. & Osama, N. Biomimicry, an Approach, for Energy Effecient Building Skin Design. Procedia Environ. Sci. 34, 178–189 (2016). Abaeian, H., Madani, R. & Bahramian, A. Ecosystem Biomimicry: A way to achieve thermal comfort in architecture. Int. J. Hum. Cap. Urban Manag. 1, 267–278 (2016). Sarwate, P. & Patil, A. Generative Algorithm for Architectural Design Based on Biomimicry Principles. Int. J. Innov. Res. Sci. Eng. Technol. 5, 15232–15240 (2016). Fiorito, F. et al. Shape morphing solar shadings: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 55, 863–884 (2016). Sarwate, P. L. & Patil, A. P. The Incorporation of Biomimicry into an Architectural Design Process: A New Approach towards Sustainability of Built Environment. Bonfring Int. J. Ind. Eng. Manag. Sci. 6, 19–23 (2016). Buck, N. T. The art of imitating life : The potential contribution of biomimicry in shaping the future of our cities. 1–21 (2015) doi:10.1177/0265813515611417. Badarnah, L. A Biophysical Framework of Heat Regulation Strategies for the Design of Biomimetic Building Envelopes. Procedia Eng. 118, 1225–1235 (2015). Portilla-Aguilar, J. M., Sánchez-Hernández, L. M., Mayorga, M., Romero-Salazar, L. & Arteaga-Arcos, J. C. Bio-inspired Panel Design for Thermal Management. Procedia Eng. 118, 1195–1201 (2015). Ahlquist, S., Kampowski, T., Torghabehi, O. O., Menges, A. & Speck, T. Development of a digital framework for the computation of complex material and morphological behavior of biological and technological systems. CAD Comput. Aided Des. 60, 84–104 (2015). Reichert, S., Menges, A. & Correa, D. Meteorosensitive architecture: Biomimetic building skins based on materially embedded and hygroscopically enabled responsiveness. CAD Comput. Aided Des. 60, 50–69 (2015). Badarnah, L. & Kadri, U. A methodology for the generation of biomimetic design concepts. Archit. Sci. Rev. 58, 120–133 (2015). Pedersen Zari, M. Ecosystem processes for biomimetic architectural and urban design. Archit. Sci. Rev. 58, 106–119 (2015). Schleicher, S., Lienhard, J., Poppinga, S., Speck, T. & Knippers, J. A methodology for transferring principles of plant movements to elastic systems in architecture. CAD Comput. Aided Des. 60, 105–117 (2015). Grigorian, M. Biomimicry and theory of structures-design methodology transfer from trees to moment frames. J. Bionic Eng. 11, 638–648 (2014). Antony, F., Grießhammer, R., Speck, T. & Speck, O. Sustainability assessment of a lightweight biomimetic ceiling structure. Bioinspiration and Biomimetics 9, (2014). Reichert, S. et al. Fibrous structures: An integrative approach to design computation, simulation and fabrication for lightweight, glass and carbon fibre composite structures in architecture based on biomimetic design principles. CAD Comput. Aided Des. 52, 27–39 (2014). Yunis, L. et al. Bio-inspired and fabrication-informed design strategies for modular fibrous structures in architecture. Fusion - Proc. 32nd eCAADe Conf. Vol. 1 1, 423–432 (2014). El-Zeiny, R. M. A. Biomimicry as a Problem Solving Methodology in Interior Architecture. Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci. 50, 502–512 (2012). Knippers, J. & Speck, T. Design and construction principles in nature and architecture. Bioinspiration and Biomimetics 7, (2012). Menges, A. Biomimetic design processes in architecture: Morphogenetic and evolutionary computational design. Bioinspiration and Biomimetics 7, (2012). Gamage, A. & Hyde, R. A model based on Biomimicry to enhance ecologically sustainable design. Archit. Sci. Rev. 55, 224–235 (2012). Wiscombe, T. Beyond assemblies : system convergence and multi-materiality. Bioinspir. Biomim. 7, (2012). Zari, M. P. Biomimetic design for climate change adaptation and mitigation. Archit. Sci. Rev. 53, 172–183 (2010).

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35.

Badarnah, L., Nachman Farchi, Y. & Knaack, U. Solutions from nature for building envelope thermoregulation. WIT Trans. Ecol. Environ. 138, 251–262 (2010). Wang, J. & Li, J. Bio-inspired kinetic envelopes for building energy efficiency based on parametric design of building information modeling. Asia-Pacific Power Energy Eng. Conf. APPEEC 1–4 (2010) doi:10.1109/APPEEC.2010.5449511. Isaacson, W. Steve Jobs. 630 (2011) doi:10.22140/pv.28. American, S., America, N. & American, S. The Flow of Energy in the Biosphere Author ( s ): David M . Gates Source : Scientific American , Vol . 225 , No . 3 ( September 1971 ), pp . 88-103 Published by : Scientific American , a division of Nature America , Inc . Stable URL : https://www.jstor.or. 225, 88–103 (1971). Brown, M. T. & Ulgiati, S. Emergy Evaluation of the Biosphere and Natural Capital Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article: Emergy Evaluation of the Biosphere and Natural Capital. R. Swedish Acad. Sci. 28, 486–493 (2019). Friedman, T. L. Thank you for being late : an optimist’s guide to thriving in the age of accelerations. (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2016). Baumeister, D., Tocke, R., Dwyer, J., Ritter, S. & Benyus, J. M. Biomimicry Resource Handbook : a seed bank of best practices. 280 (2014). Brownell, B. E. & Swackhamer, M. Hypernatural : architecture’s new relationship with nature. (Princeton Architectural Press, 2015). Mazzoleni, I. Architecture follows nature: Biomimetic principles for innovative design. Architecture Follows Nature-Biomimetic Principles for Innovative Design (2013). doi:10.1201/b14573. Biomimetic Research for Architecture and Building Construction: Biological Design and Integrative Structures. (Springer International Publishing, 2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-46374-2. Pedersen Zari, M. Regenerative Urban Design and Ecosystem Biomimicry. Regenerative Urban Design and Ecosystem Biomimicry (Taylor & Francis, 2018). doi:10.4324/9781315114330. PhD Candidate at Loughborough Design School, Consultant at Biomimicry 3.8 and International Living Future Institute (ILFI). Survey. Received 11/01/2019. Architect, Partner at McLennan Design. Survey. Received 11/02/2019. Architect, Director of Interior Design at Peet’s Coffee. Survey. Received 11/03/2019. Architect, Executive Design Lead at Biomimicry Frontiers, Research Advisor at Biomimicry Academy. Survey. Received 11/04/2019. Architect, Professor at SCI-Arc. Survey. Received 11/28/2019. Architect, Executive Design Lead at Biomimicry Frontiers, Research Advisor at Biomimicry Academy. Interview. Conducted 11/19/2019. PhD candidate at the Institute for Computational Design and Construction at Universität Stuttgart. Survey. Received 11/24/2019. Gruber, P. The signs of life in architecture. (2014) doi:10.1088/1748-3182/3/2/023001. McInerney, S. et al. E2BMO: Facilitating User Interaction with a BioMimetic Ontology via Semantic Translation and Interface Design. Designs 2, 53 (2018). Vincent, J. & Mann, D. Systematic Technology Transfer from Biology to Engineering. Philos. Trans. Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 360, 159–173 (2002). Vincent, J. F. V., Bogatyreva, O., Pahl, A. K., Bogatyrev, N. & Bowyer, A. Putting biology into TRIZ: A database of biological effects. Creat. Innov. Manag. 14, 66–72 (2005). Vincent, J. F. V. Deconstructing the design of a biological material. J. Theor. Biol. 236, 73–78 (2005). Agres, K. & Pearce, M. An Information Foraging Model of Interactive Analogical Retrieval. Proc. Annu. Meet. Cogn. Sci. Soc. (2013). Sartori, J., Pal, U. & Chakrabarti, A. A methodology for supporting ‘transfer’ in biomimetic design. Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf. AIEDAM 24, 483–505 (2010). Architect and former Scientific Researcher at the Institute for Computational Design and Construction at Universität Stuttgart. Survey. Received 12/03/2019. Buchanan, P. Empty gestures: Starchitecture’s Swan Song | Essay | Architectural Review. Architectural Review https://www.architecturalreview.com/architects/empty-gestures-starchitectures-swan-song/8679010.article?search=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.architectural-review. com%2Fsearcharticles%3Fqsearch%3D1%26keywords%3Dbiomimicry (2015). Walker, C. Hole-hearted design: The Evolution of Shell Lace Structure | Essay | Architectural Review. Architectural Review https://www.architecturalreview.com/rethink/reviews/hole-hearted-design-the-evolution-of-shell-lace-structure/8674399.article?search=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.architecturalreview.com%2Fsearcharticles%3Fqsearch%3D1%26keywords%3Dbiomimicry (2015). Armstrong, R. Rachel Armstrong on Biomimicry as parametric snake oil | Essay | Architectural Review. Architectural Review https://www.architecturalreview.com/rethink/reviews/rachel-armstrong-on-biomimicry-as-parametric-snake-oil/8650000.article?search=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.architecturalreview.com%2Fsearcharticles%3Fqsearch%3D1%26keywords%3Dbiomimicry (2013). Weston, R. Juhani Pallasmaa’s Sense and Sensibility | Essay | Architectural Review. Architectural Review https://www.architectural-review. com/rethink/reviews/juhani-pallasmaas-sense-and-sensibility/8641723.article?search=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.architectural-review. com%2Fsearcharticles%3Fqsearch%3D1%26keywords%3Dbiomimicry (2013). Barac, M. Pedagogy: KNUST, Kumasi, Ghana | Essay | Architectural Review. Architectural Review https://www.architectural-review. com/essays/reviews/pedagogy-knust-kumasi-ghana/8638831.article?search=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.architectural-review. com%2Fsearcharticles%3Fqsearch%3D1%26keywords%3Dbiomimicry (2012). Buchanan, P. The Big Rethink Part 2: Farewell to modernism − and modernity too | Essay | Architectural Review. Architectural Review https:// www.architectural-review.com/archive/campaigns/the-big-rethink/the-big-rethink-part-2-farewell-to-modernism-and-modernity-too/8625733. article?search=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.architectural-review.com%2Fsearcharticles%3Fqsearch%3D1%26keywords%3Dbiomimicry (2012). Weston, R. A different approach to learning from nature | Essay | Architectural Review. Architectural Review https://www.architectural-review. com/rethink/reviews/a-different-approach-to-learning-from-nature/8625697.article?search=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.architectural-review. com%2Fsearcharticles%3Fqsearch%3D1%26keywords%3Dbiomimicry (2012). Shadow Pavilion by PLY Architecture, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA | Building | Architectural Review. https://www.architectural-review.com/awards/aremerging-architecture/shadow-pavilion-by-ply-architecture-ann-arbor-michigan-usa/8622909.article?search=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.architecturalreview.com%2Fsearcharticles%3Fqsearch%3D1%26keywords%3Dbiomimicry. Hays, N. (2019). Finding a Pathway to Meaningful Biomimetic Soltutions in the Built Environment. [Independent Project Proposal]