Barie Fez-Barringten
E-mail address:bariefezbarringten@gmail.com
Global University
www.bariefez-barringten.com
 |
| All collages are created by Christina Fez-Barringten |
Abstract:
The main scope of the research is to
show how architecture: the making of metaphors is valid with interactive (kinetic and responsive)
architecture. By its very definition interactive architecture is a metaphor
conditioning “architecture” with “interactive”, and vice versa.; when something
interacts it transfers; and, “transfer” is another word for metaphor; and, as all metaphors “interactive architecture”
makes the strange familiar and expresses one thing in terms of another: that is
its two referents, “interactive” and “architecture”. This research will show
that architecture makes metaphors with all sorts of technological and
conceptual variations whether
static,responsive, interactive or kinetic. Each period in architectural
history technology was the landmark of its period; perhaps ours will be marked
by our moving parts.
Artificial intelligence, natural intelligence, kinetic,
transfers, metaphor, interactive, architecture, automatic, passive, active,
read, show, art, aesthetic, sustainable, function, space, scale, embedded,
intelligent, craft.
All artwork are collages made by Christina Fez-Barringten.
Originals are for sale and have been published in a book called "Legend" which can be purchased at Amazon.com. You can see all of her art and read about her background at:www(dot)bariefez-barringten(dot)com.
Interactive
architecture makes metaphors
For years (Olgay, V. (1963) Victor
Olgay’s climatology, bio-climatic design, green architecture and smart
buildings interacted with users, participants and occupants. Most buildings do
this in a static way and its structures and forms are not actually nor
apparently in motion, albeit there may be components which move and such as
louvers, springs and valves, hinges and frames, etc. Otherwise, they are static
by design controlling the climate passively (not actively) and at little
expense. In this sense, all of
architecture is interactive as all of architecture is a metaphor; but to so
distinguish interactive architecture from all other traditional architecture is
to imply a claim that all other architecture is not interactive. So what is it
that the author’s of the new so-called “interactive architecture” really have
in mind? This research will show whether they only mean to describe the way
gadgets change the limits and bounds of exteriors and interiors with different
light of times of day and the weather, etc. While the buildings don’t change,
their form or shape may be modified because they interacted. It is a real
challenge to architecture when its parts, shapes and forms can change and
still retain its integrity as a serious work of architecture.
The renaissance sculptors designed
their figures as in motion while these, so-called, interactive architecture walls,
structures and appurtenances actually do move, change color, etc. Yet there is
an additional and unique technology emerging which reads shows and modifies
designed metaphors within the parameters of the building’s designed metaphor. It
is a kind of self-programming maker of metaphors within the metaphor of the
architectural metaphor. It is designed and like the carnival fun house (where
lights go on and off, figures lurch and make noises) responds with predetermined
changes in temperature, color, structure, etc. Unlike the fun house it reads participants
and like a conversation by two willing conversant modifies according to
behavior, vocabulary and subject.
Architectural program (the basis for
a work of architecture) includes COIG (conditions, operations, ideals and
goals) utilizing kinetic, mechanical, structural and digital systems.
While the prefix, period, and context
changes architecture remains a metaphor and operates as the literary metaphor;
making the strange familiar.
Programs are like a play’s script, a
movie’s story board or a football team’s game plan; and, of an interactive work
can be expanded to increase such interactive features.
In any case, architecture limits and
bounds space. It is a work of art and ever-present extent in the context. It is
a landmark to the times and place as well as a work of value and source of
pride, identity, status and dominion. Architecture can be designed to the peculiar
and specific or generalized to the society and/or engaged in the environment.
There is the public and private, large and small and the many building types as
institutional, industrial, residential, commercial and mixed-use.
Yesterday, today and tomorrow
architecture is a metaphor and architects are its makers. As all arts interacts,
so architecture interacts, responds, and adapts in both static and dynamic ways
and for all sorts of programmed features depending on the context of the work. For
some time buildings have been equipped with environmental controls and made
smart by a variety of artificial intelligent systems controlling not only the
heating ventilation and air-conditioning systems, opening and closing window
coverings, garage doors, lights, security systems ,etc but also regulating the
consumption and emission of energy and
light into the environment. Recently building design has added yet other
passive and automated systems which can alter the way building space is bound
and limited.
The metaphor
of building systems, boundaries, walls, structure that are animated, kinetic ,
static and engineered to adapt and
modify itself communicates itself to human and natural participants while metaphorically
interacting between components.
As the literary metaphor talks about
one thing in terms of the other so the interactive work necessarily finds
commonplace by communicating values. The metaphor is interaction between static
and or changing parts and becomes renewed as when day becomes night or when
seasons change and when occupants are exchanged.
Where static or kinetic the function
of the metaphor finds stasis as one referent seeks the other and the aesthetic
commonplace is resoled in change. As electro mechanical technology are brought
into the building industry the value of expectation of buildings have such capabilities
becomes a status and social requirement.
Not unlike the toaster, automatic
hearting, ventilation and air-conditioning such innovations are yet a status of
buildings and the metaphor of their context. They can even be play things, superficial
and artificial.
For example, on the floor of a
variety shop there lie a stuffed animal that when approached twirled and
growled. When I left its vicinity it ceased. I recently had lasik surgery which
my urologist confessed was mostly carried out by artificial intelligent sensors
and laser heat under his guidance. In traditional architecture while most walls
do not do is change their shape, vibrate, wiggle, etc. for many years there
have been room dividers, retractable walls, beds coming out of the wall,
automatic shades and curtains, etc. Whether it is labeled interactive, kinetic,
responsive, etc., architecture is an art because it makes metaphors and as all
art it too makes metaphors; is metaphoric and as all art it “transfers”,
communicates and interacts. The key difference is that by embedding “readers”
into the building’s components they are able to read and react in prescribed
ways to heat, motion and with those to qualities of people and the speed with
which they move. It means they automatically read; read without a human concern
and are really a product of artificial intelligence.
Radiologist now makes magnetic resonance
imaging (MRI) using conventionalized settings while the machine clicks away and
creates images. Neurologist openly confesses that their non-invasive lumbar
hemilaminectomy could not be carried out with out the hospital’s artificial
intelligence systems. They are also synthetic
and not indigenous and usually without a referent to the context and its existing
built environment.
Airline pilots are able to set course
and the “automatic pilot” reads the weather, climate, airflows, ground speed
and direction. Automobiles are now made by robots which begin and end there
routines feeling their way as the chassis is moved by them on the conveyor
belt. So it’s no big surprise that embedded computation (intelligence) with a
physical, tangible counterpart (kinetics) is introduced into buildings. A
uniquely twenty-first century toolbox and skill set-virtual and physical
modeling, sensor technology, CNC fabrication, prototyping, and
robotics-necessitates collaboration across many diverse scientific and
art-based communities. (Fox, M. & Kemp, M (2009)
Borrowing
form industry, numerical control (NC) refers to
the automation of machine tools that are operated by abstractly
programmed commands encoded on a storage medium, as opposed to manually
controlled via hand wheels or levers, or mechanically automated via cams alone.
The first NC machines were built in
the 1940s and '50s, based on existing tools that were modified with motors that
moved the controls to follow points fed into the system on paper tape. These
early servomechanisms were rapidly augmented with analog and digital computers,
creating the modern computed
numerically controlled (CNC)
machine tools that have revolutionized the design process. (Pease, W. (1952),
The Computer Numerical Control (CNC) fabrication process offers
flexible manufacturing runs without high capital expenditure dies and stamping presses. High
volumes are not required to justify the use of this equipment. It is equally
less surprising when full-scale built examples that program itself by observing
the lifestyle of the inhabitants, and then learns to anticipate and accommodate
their needs. Metaphoric interactive architecture is both a conceptual and technical
metaphor including the sociological and psychological stasis in terms of metaphor’s two technical and conceptual dimensions. Both are valid separately and even more
acceptable in combination. But how do
they two operate and how does knowing this benefit design, use and evaluation
of built works?
The technical is that all art,
including architecture, expresses one thing in terms of another by its inherent
and distinct craft. On the one hand there is the architect who acts as the master builder (head carpenter); and on
the other the fountain of conceptual
metaphors which expresses ideas as built conceptual metaphors other wise
known as works of architecture. Techne
is actually a system of practical knowledge as a craft or art informed
by knowledge of forms.
For
example, the craft of managing a
firm of architects where even virtue is a kind of technê of management and design practice, one that is based on an
understanding of the profession, business and market. In this case the technai
are such activities as drafting, specifying, managing, negotiating,
programming, planning, supervising, and inspection.
By association with these technai,
we can include house-building, mathematics, plumbing, making money, writing,
and painting. So much so that the study
and practice of design is devoid from the humanities and downplays theories of
architecture; developing rather the
crafts, skill and understandings needed to engineer, plan, sketch, draw,
delineate, specify, write, and design.
Contemporary architecture is replete
with axioms, principles and theorems guiding the geometry, applications of
science, use of engineering, and formal logic to produce technical metaphors
and justly excluding a whole conversation about the conceptual part of the
built metaphor.
Now there are city-wide projection
systems reading and relating to the numbers , frequency and speed of pedestrian
and vehicular ambulation changing street lights and now even projecting images
on buildings changing the images, colors textures and with that the scale and
apparent height . (Watson, T. (2008)
As the two referents in any metaphor
interact talking about on thing in terms of the other and making the strange
familiar so are the building and the participants in the conversation, such a
conversation seeking a commonplace and stasis by the limits of the technology
and the concept of the designer.
There is common metaphor (commonplace)
between natural intelligence (NI) and artificial intelligence (AI). The
inference warrants that for both architectures’ (AI and NI {building}), master
builder is an interdisciplinary, multi-crafted and multi-venue team. They are
also both arts since they wed
intentional ideas to “craft”; and, with craft they both make metaphors, the commonality to all the arts.
While “architect” actually means master builder and “architecture” the
product of the master builder, this
is historically identified with habitable buildings. The warrant to the
inference of the resolution is that the computer industries (and virtual
designers) have made a metaphor referring to the word “architecture” with its
conceptual design and fundamental operational structures of computer
systems. Already, IT and AI industry metaphorically compare their sciences and
art of selecting and interconnecting hardware components to create computers
that meet functional, performance and cost goals with the ways and means
traditional architects design buildings.
There is an interconnectivity between
the metaphor of computer’s instruction
set architecture, or ISA, machine
language (or assembly language), Microarchitecture
and system design.
Making use of the metaphorical way of
learning and inventing (Gordon, W. J. J. (1966)
What can be done for the design of manufacturing plants, machine parts
and assemblies may be applicable to creating communities, environments,
developments and specific buildings. To do this the architects had to talk
about one thing in terms of another and thus make the strange familiar. It was
an interdisciplinary act necessitating the use of making metaphors. The resolution’s presumed context is that it
is not just limited to information technology
(IT) but a presumption of intelligence assuming
man can make something which can think for
itself as today’s computer games, medical procedures, aircraft and military
devices
The below examples show that when
programmed, systems can make judgments in a strange environment and
metaphorically make the strange familiar (metaphorically) and systematically
design buildings. (Where design is
intentionally originating and developing a plan for a product, structure, system, or
component).
The impact of artificial intelligence
on the future of architecture: practice, process and products are that today
there are “smart buildings” with internal mechanical and electrical systems
that respond to the specific behavioral patterns of occupants.
“The availability of reliable,
high-speed electronic connectivity enabled collaborative design team’s function
irrespective of physical distance. (Eskil, MT (2004)This calls for new type of design and simulation
environment—one that facilitates automated searching and locating of satisfying
and optimizing parts, integration of selected parts in an assembly, and
simulation of the overall design that is distributed over the Internet”.
An increasing quantity of building applications of AI work is
based on (Eastman, CM (1978) “Building
Information Modeling (BIM) generating and managing building data during
its life cycle” [2]
Most acronyms are themselves metaphors
and the acronyms spun off of the architecture technology metaphor of artificial
intelligence and interactive architecture is no exception. ANTS, ARTS, ACTS,
RBS, CAD, and ED are just some examples. The practical and the esoteric (select
and rare) applications of AI to the built environment is often the result of
metaphoric inventive processes, shocks and imaginative invention such as
(Curtis, S. /Daniel J.2008) ANTS which is an innovative example of an AI
application to design buildings. “The Autonomic Nanotechnology Swarm (ANTS) [1]
is a generic mission architecture consisting of miniaturized, autonomous,
self-similar, reconfigurable, addressable components forming structures. The
components/structures have wide spatial distribution and multi-level
organization. This ‘swarm’ (metaphor) behavior is inspired (metaphoric
association) by the success of social insect colonies where within their
specialties, individuals outperform generalists and with sufficiently efficient
social interaction and coordination, groups of specialists outperform groups of
generalists. (Curtis, S. /Daniel J.2008) (Multi-disciplinary)
Axiomatically, the type of
information that is preserved in the traditional built environment is
organized-complexity: precisely the type of information that defines living
systems themselves. Thus, the traditional built environment consists of evolved
and discovered solutions (schemata) that make our life easier and more
meaningful.
That having been said as ACTS combines design and construction research
in construction automation at the University of Reading led to the formulation
of a computer-integrated, component-based construction system. (Bridgewater, C
& Atkin, B. L.(1994) ANTS is a model for IA as it is automated only
requiring a third party stimulant what interactive architecture refers to as
participant, however the participant must be read as no metaphors can operate
without transference from one to another
referent.
The Reading Building System (RBS) was rationalized for
automation following a systematic study of the construction processes involved
in the design and erection of a variety of building types, especially high-tech
offices.
Computer-aided design (CAD) packages
were written that used Parts Set components as primitives and that offered
flexibility in design that was so often lacking in earlier approaches to system
building. At the same time, a family of automation aids was developed to
manipulate the parts that were modeled in the CAD. [1]
As any metaphor’s technique the
aesthetics of interactive architecture will be affected by its system’s
designer, the command of the craft, the technology and the system employed. To
ever believe that the aesthetic outcome will be “objective” is a fallacy as
there is even an aesthetic to a kaleidoscope which has infinite possibilities
yet all within the aesthetic of the kaleidoscope’s design. The aesthetic
outcome may be the result of interaction and the very change itself may meet
the aesthetic of the participant; but, will it be the precise aesthetic of the
participant? It is conceivable that the interactive mechanism can be as
personalized and peculiar to specific contexts, persons and environments as to
interact in relevant terms to construct a relevant aesthetic metaphor. Arnold
Berlant’s website states that: “Sense perception lies at the etymological
(history of words) core of aesthetics (Gr. aesthesis, perception by the senses), and is central to
aesthetic theory, aesthetic experience, and their applications. Berlant finds
in the aesthetic a source, a sign, and a standard of human value”.
It is this human value which is one
leg of the art metaphor and the very basis for my view that metaphor is the
foundation for both art, architecture and aesthetics, and why I have spent the
past forty years researching the stasis to architecture being an art (because
it too makes metaphors) it can also be shown that this same stasis is the
commonplace to the works of aesthetic interactive architecture.
This coincidence confirms the
intrinsic nature of my study of epistemology of architecture is a study in
aesthetics. In fact metaphor is the driving parte for most creative art and
orchestral works. Some
contemporary aesthetic theory differs with how best to define the term
“art”, What should we judge when we judge art?, What should art be like?, The value of art, things of
value which define humanity itself; contrasted to Raymond Williams who argues that there is
no unique aesthetic object but a continuum of cultural forms from ordinary
speech to experiences that are signaled as art [4] by a frame, institution or special event.
Conversations about aesthetics,
metaphors and architecture reassess current and traditional issues by providing
a scientific method for the way metaphors work in traditional architecture and
even more so in inter5active architecture which tries to find a generalized
system that yield a relevant metaphor.
Even if it is one metaphor it could
be responsive to changing numbers by altering actual and perceived scale;
proportions, shades and shadows, etc. (Williams,
R. (1958). The commonality of all arts [4] is that they express thought in terms of
their peculiar craft and thus they (all arts) are technically metaphoric,
metaphors because they transfer, carry-over and express one thing (some idea)
in terms of another(the craft). {Parenthetically, there is no doubt that craft
itself derives from ideas and concepts and within each is a sub-metaphor}. The
sculptor who finds the figure as he malls the block is where the craft and the
material inform the artist. The splashes of paint to canvas by Jackson Pollack
even prevented any slow and deliberate cognition until the process was
complete. Mies van der Rohe belittles his forms by simply ascribing his end
result to being faithful to the materials and their properties. While all art [4] is not expressed as a linguistic
metaphor all arts are metaphoric. Likewise, if architecture is the making of
metaphors what are the linguistic, psychological, and cognition science’s
commonalities between architecture and metaphors? This monograph is linguistic
analogy transferring from linguistic, psychological and cognitive fields to art
and architecture what has been scientifically studied.
This is the “stasis” (the state of
equilibrium {equipoise} or inactivity
caused by opposing equal forces) of the controversy of architecture being an
art; that if architecture behaves, acts, looks and works like art than it too
must be an art. [4].
Why? Because it, too, makes
metaphors, and those metaphors are varied in depth, kind, scope and context. It
is the stasis because it is where art and architecture meet.
The metaphor is the conceptual focal
point. While many claim that the architect is the “techne” artist being a
crafts man point has been conceptual and so useful as to bridge, carry-over and
provide both artist and architect a common authority over the making of the
built environment. As stasis, Architecture:
the making of metaphors enables the center of the dispute to be argued with
common purpose. So this is a stasis in definition which concedes conjecture.
While there may be other concepts
justifying the relationship between art and architecture the metaphor is the
stasis, common ground and commonality apparent to me. It not only is apparent
but I have found has wide and broad applications to a variety of arts and
architectural definitions, practices and contexts.
There may have been a time when the architect was the “master
builder” and the lead craftsman but that is only true by his skill in drawing,
design and specifying and not his skill as master carpenter.
The interactive architect adds other digital
design disciplines. As such these in them selves have an aesthetic about their precision,
craft and quality. Before solidifying
our hypothesis about architecture and metaphors we both compared architecture
to the art of sculpture reflecting Christina’s work as a sculptress and my work
as an architect and designer. It soon became apparent that while we could
easily agree that buildings were “sculptural”,” colorful”,” lyrical”, “graceful”,
”rhythmic” etc. these were illusive and neither a field, base, or a true
commonality to all the arts, including sculpture and architecture; so what was
it? Aside from the traditional role of the architect to gather and design the
program of conditions, operations, ideals and goals the parameters of a dynamic
aesthetic is introduced. Interactive architecture requires information
technology, computer aided design and artificial intelligence
The commonality of all arts is that they technically express
something in terms of their peculiar craft and thus they are metaphoric.
However technically metaphoric, how does architecture conceptually make
metaphors and is there an influence between the technical and the conceptual
architectural metaphor?
When kingdoms created dynasty’s
iconic buildings the architect and artisans took their ques from the reigning
monarch. In our modern democratic pluralistic society the free reign of ideas
and opinions as to contexts and their meanings are diverse.
Not only is my childhood quest
relevant but the essence of the responsibility of today’s architect who not
only reasons the technical but individually reasons the conceptual. It is to
the architect that society turns to be informed about the shape and form of the
context in which life will be played.
With this charge the need to know
that we know and do by reasoning what science verifies by the scientific method
to know that we know about the buildings, parks, and places we set into the
environment. It is a public and private charge included in the contract for
professional services but unspoken as professional life’s experience; to prove
the relevant, meaningful and beneficial metaphors that edify encourage and
equip society as well as provide for its’ health, safety and welfare. So it is
critical to realize, control and accept as commonplace that the role of the
architect is to do much more than build but build masterfully.
·
Interactive
wall in Singapore
·
Multi-touch
wall is a touch screen; Clarify Near Life
·
Lenovo (an IBM company offshoot)
water wall projection
·
Reverse
water wall
·
Liquid
magnet sculptures: Japan: Fero magnetic liquid
·
Protrude
flow; Magnetic liquid Ferro fluids are composed of nanoscale ferromagnetic
particles suspended in a carrier fluid, usually an organic solvent or water.
The ferromagnetic nano-particles are coated with a surfactant to prevent their
agglomeration (due to van der Waals and magnetic forces).
·
Responds
to sound
·
Hairy
paper
·
Water
sound water: Germany Mackensie.com Cornstarch water and sound Collin's Lab: DIY
Cymatics. (Sturrock, J., (1981).
There is no so-called “interactive
architecture “which tries to address the metaphor of landmark preservation,
restoration or historic preservation and contextual design. Most of the woe and
cry of the general public is about relevance and adaptation of their habitat to
their life-style and traditions. So many buildings lack the amenities, layout,
appurtenances, conveniences, scale, forms, shapes, texture and color needed by
occupants. The least of their complaints is that the building doesn’t change
form, pulsate or change color.
Aside from
a technical, aesthetic and sculptural derivative for Interactive Architecture
there is also a conceptual framework which can be traced back to structuralism.
Structuralism is an approach to the human
sciences that attempts to analyze a specific field (for instance, architecture)
as a complex system of interrelated parts.
It began in linguistics with the work
of Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913), but
many French intellectuals perceived it to have a wider application, and the
model was soon modified and applied to other fields, such as sociology,
anthropology,
psychology,
psychoanalysis,
literary
theory and architecture. This ushered in the dawn of
structuralism as not just a method, but also an intellectual movement that came
to take existentialism's pedestal in 1960s France. (Sturrock, J., (1981).
Structuralism as a movement in architecture and
urban planning evolved around the middle of the 20th century. [8]
The common definition of responsive
architecture, as described by many authors, is a class of architecture or
building that demonstrates an ability to alter its form, to continually reflect
the environmental conditions that surround it. The term "responsive
architecture" was given to us by Nicholas
Negroponte, who first conceived of it during the late nineteen
sixties when spatial design problems were being explored by applying
cybernetics to architecture. Negroponte proposes that responsive architecture
is the natural product of the integration of computing power into built spaces
and structures, and that better performing, more rational buildings are the
result. Negroponte also extends this mixture to include the concepts of
recognition, intention, contextual variation, and meaning into computing and
its successful (ubiquitous) integration into architecture. (Negroponte, N. (1970).
the work of Nicholas Negroponte and the Architecture Machine Group at the MIT
from the late 1960 ́s to the mid 1970 ́s. Negroponte proposed the application
of computers in architectural design and endorsed their integration in built
structures and spaces. (Grünkranz, D. (2010).
"The concept of architectural
responses arose from the initiation of the research program was a consequence
of the crisis of architectural rationalism and the endless repetition of industrialized
architectural forms.
The goals of the program were to make
buildings context responsive and to create an intelligent environment that
responses to the requirements and desires of users. (Grünkranz, D. (2010).
Metaphorically these are two very separate issues: 1. Context responsive and 2.
Respond to the desires of users.
The common introduction to responsive
architecture is usually made by using the example of the thermostat. It is a
basic example of a cybernetic feedback loop placed in a building environment in
which the actual output is affected in response to an input.
A sensor distributed in the
environment is monitoring its change (as for example a decline of temperature).
A controlling device, which may also enables a user to enter his/her
preferences (a change in space temperature), is reading the sensory output and
compares it to a predefined instruction (hold a certain space temperature). If
there is a change in the input criteria (temperature dial) the controlling
device is triggering actuators (the heating system) which are able to change
the environment. The thermostat is an example for what Don Ihde calls in his
classification background phenomena. That is, as the term reveals, when a
“specifically functioning technology” occupies a “background or field position”
or becomes “a kind of near-technological environment itself.” (Grünkranz, D. (2010)
Once set, these technologies,
controlling for example lighting, heating, and cooling systems, are operating
more or less automatically. They do not require our focal attention. These
technologies in the background would be a source of conflict for a
phenomenology as operated by Heidegger, because they disconnect us from
activities that bring change to an environment we live in. In this view, which
might be called romantic, the way to heat a home is that one has to go out to
cut down a tree using an axe as a technology for this purpose. Furthermore,
someone has to chop the wood, dry it, store it, and at last set it ablaze to
generate heat energy. In contrast, to operate a thermostat is a “fire and
forget” activity. But also a conventional wood fired oven becomes an example
for background relations in the intervals between the maintenance of the fire.
The oven does not need our undivided
attention to cause environmental change. This examination should demonstrate
the sometimes tense relationship between phenomenology and technology. It is
shown in a missing acceptance for the nature of technology and its development
as a fact of human endeavor. Ever since technologies have been deployed and
accepted, they, on one hand, intended to change our ways of doing and on the
other hand they also have changed the production of environments and social
fields where we place our doing.
In the philosophy of technology,
these two points were often strictly divided by the discussion over the
neutrality or non-neutrality of technology; divided by the instrumental theory
of technological-determinist position on one side and by the substantive theory
of social determinists on the other side for which Heidegger took position.
(Grünkranz, D. (2010).
As architects make metaphors so do it
users as they reconstruct the referents and creative process making the
metaphor. Automated or not the maintenance of either the context or the habitat
conditions the operation of the goals of the metaphor according to its ideals
and those of its cultures and particular users.
Responsive, interactive, kinetic or static architecture
engages participant user inhabitants perusing life’s business. It is very natural for a metaphor to change
as it for metaphor to cause change. Certainly inhabitants impact the metaphor
as the metaphor impacts the inhabitant.
Not every inhabitant’s impulses are followed by the person’s own
responses nor may it be desired. Architecture which responds and interacts
makes the unknown known and the need manifest by some accommodation of that
need.
Responsive Architectures Projects [10]
Responsive architectures are those
that measure actual environmental conditions (via sensors) to enable buildings
to adapt their form, shape, color or character responsively (via actuators) (Sterk,
T., (2006). Responsive architecture is a form of interactive architecture where
architects make a metaphor. The metaphor can be both interactive and responsive
or both.
Shape control within responsive architectural
structures is a natural extension to the practice of engineering and
architectural design.
The knowledge needed for this builds
upon two well understood foundations: 1) the long existing knowledge that building
performance and function are intimately connected to the shape of built spaces;
and 2) the relatively new idea that embedded computational systems may be
employed to control devices in useful and beautiful ways; when combined each
type of knowledge can be used to further architecture and engineering at both
theoretical and methodological levels as architecture: the making of metaphors.(Sterk,
T. (2006). Even non-structural walls that move must be supported and carried. However,
the cost of air-conditioning, cleaning and heating may offset the additional
cost for the controls to change the space, shape and form of a building.
Usually the sizes and shape of a building are included in the program and their
ability to be modified may enhance the metaphor. [9]
Although
this is a critical part of the background to Interactive Architecture but is merely
Johnson control integrated systems of all building mechanical and electrical systems.
These read the environment and not the people. These are reactive and not
interactive but when digitized and adapted by re-programming is similar. The concept of intelligent architecture started as an interest
in the latest integrated building systems operating a single building or
facility, so that systems can communicate and exchange information. In that
sense they interact.
The communication among these systems
allows the right responses and decisions to operate buildings in a productive, economical
and convenient way. Communication and information sharing prevents decisions
from interfering with other systems’ responses or operation. Systems’ decisions
and responses form the Responsive architecture that is represented by systems
outputs.
Kinetic architecture is really sculptural
pieces mechanically controlled and automated. Kinetic architecture is a design
concept in modern architecture which explores the physical transformation of
part or portion of structural elements of a building with the objective to
redefine traditional applications on motion through technological innovation.
The use of robotics, mechanics and electronics are being more known as new
approaches into architectural possibilities. (Curl, J. S.; (2000)
Kinetic Architecture evolved in the
belief that the static, permanent forms of traditional architecture were no
longer suitable for use in times of major change. Kinetic architecture was supposed to be dynamic, adaptable, and
capable of being added to or reduced, and even disposable. ARHGRAM,
Futurism,
Metabolism,
and the work of Friedman and Fuller
have been suggested as examples of Kinetic architecture.
About once every couple of months one of my students sends me
a video of ART+COM’s
mechatronic installation, made up of 714 metal balls for the BMW museum.
ART+COM describe it as “a spatial translation of a design process. Seemingly
weightless and guided solely by the power of the mind, the sculpture moves
through a cycle of free abstractions and typical BMW vehicle forms.” ( Curl, J.
S.; (2000).
In search of flexible buildings – Kengo
Kuma uses the term “weak architecture”. Itsellf a metaphor, his teahouse
does not rise up from the ground as a fixed wooden construction, but unfolds as
an airborne ephemeral structure. This metaphor works when a ventilation system is activated, the
teahouse swells into shape like a white textile blossom. In its interior,
comprising a surface of approximately twenty square meters, are nine tatami
mats, an electric stove for the water kettle, and a preparation room. The
design of the moving structure takes advantage of the Teflon foils and Shape
Memory Alloys (SMAs) NiTiCu. This structure is fixed to the ground or to
another structure and is a part of the electrical circuit.
The reactions controlled by computer
are caused by the various circuits which connect the members of spirals of
SMAs. The members are covered by the layered Teflon foil which is welded to the
shape which is determined by the critical shape of the whole structure.
Another, The structure changes the
shape continuously between the two critical positions. The SMAs change the
shape according to the transformation temperature caused by the current
passage. The very changes aree the metaphor of this work of archiotecure. The
deformation is about 5% but using spirals multiply the result. The
transformation temperature is 30°C and that is why the spirals are covered with
the heat protection covering.
Two conditions of the structure come
out from the characteristics of NiTiCu – the cold shape and the hot shape. The
structure could be packed and transported during the cold shape position. The
spirals of SMAs are welded to the joints which are connected by the system of
locks which provides the stiffness of the whole structure. The structure is
multilevel, and allotted chains determine the critical shape. ( Curl, J. S.;
(2000). Ideally, the metaphor formed is a collaborative commonplace whose stasis
is the user where the aesthetic, function
and the form interact successfully. Architecture makes metaphors with all sorts
of technological and conceptual variations whether static,responsive, interactive or kinetic.
Throughout history technology has created its own system which has become the
landmark of its period; perhaps ours will be marked by our moving parts.
(Fez-Barringten,B. (2010)
#####
Footnotes: [ ] as noted in the text
In the Netherlands (Sha, R. (1998)
“Artificial Design focuses on the application in architecture and design of the
algorithmic approach to art being developed at the Institute of Artificial Art
Amsterdam. Once a style has been defined
the tool can suggest any desired number of alternative designs for a given document. The Department
of Artificial Architecture
develops programs which generate random specifications of 3-dimensional
objects.
Each of these programs employs a
"visual grammar" to define an infinite set of structures, and then
draws random samples from this space”.
“The science of design
usually conceives of AI as a set of tools for structuring the process, or
planning, or optimizing [3] This further warrants that: “Rarely does the
computer explore a space of designs, and in doing so, it is generally following
a set of precise rules, so the machine is doing little else than repeating a
series of mechanical steps, faster than a human could. Creativity is usually
considered to lie outside the realm of what computers can do”. Evolutionary
Design (ED), the creation of designs by computers using evolutionary methods is
a new research area with an enormous potential”. Interactive Architecture uses
much this system to design the mechanisms and support for the components of an
interactive building. Interactive
architecture reads and shows its form, color and texture based on its
engineered design program; its aesthetic is the commonplace of the metaphor
Plausible accounts rather than
scientific results are why we have conventional metaphors and why conceptual
systems contain a preference for one set of metaphorical mappings over another.
An artificial intelligence (AI) establishes its own vocabulary which once
comprehended become the way in which we experience its’ product’s finding. Its
discrepancies and fits seek the first and all the other similar elements while
humans judge consistency, integrity and aesthetics of AI. The two have their respective roles. The
human monitors, manages and controls wile the AI system performs anticipated
intelligent operations leaving the human to find variances and reprogram. In
this way AI in general and the application in particular evolves and impacts
both architectures. However much the building’s systems behave participants
read and digests and transmits new, changing and evolving information. Metaphor
is the main mechanism through which humans comprehend abstract concepts and
perform abstract reasoning. Whether it
is one or thousands public cultures is influenced, bound and authenticated by
its’ metaphors.
Not withstanding “idolatry” the
metaphors are the contexts of life’s dramas and as our physical bodies are read
by our neighbors finding evidence for inferences about social, political and
philosophical claims about our culture and its place in the universe.
For humans much subject matter, from the most mundane to the
most abstruse scientific theories, can only be comprehended via metaphor
However, AI capacity is limited only by its microprocessor chips and RAM. Metaphor is fundamentally conceptual, not
linguistic, in nature.
Human’s free will, whim, natural functions and being the
original indigenous native inhabitants characterize man over his artificial
creations. Left to its own AI would create a world of possible machine parts,
systems and structures well suited for artificial intelligent life. (Lakoff, G.
(1993)
Metaphorical language is a surface
manifestation of conceptual metaphor. Prerequisite to understanding interactive
architecture is to first understand architecture: the making of metaphors
because interactive architecture reacts, recreates, and interpolates based on
what it reads from participants. They each are referents of one metaphor. This
is a transfer from one to another; making the strange (building) familiar and
expressing one thing in terms of another; the very essence of metaphor. As one
referent reaches stasis with the commonplace it forms the metaphor. The stasis
is the metaphor and the commonplaces the aesthetic of the particular
inter-architectural work.
As language is to speech so is output
to AI where each has a content and inner meaning of the whole as well as each
of its parts. As each word, each attachment, plain, material, structure had
first been conceived to achieve some purpose and fill some need. Hidden from
the reader is the inner psychology, social background, etc of the man when
speaking and the programming deign and contacting process from the reader of a
building metaphor. As in completing an argument the reader perceives the
inferences with its warrants and connects the evidence of the seen to the
claims to make the resolution of the whole, all of which are surmised from the
surface.
Though much of our conceptual system
is metaphorical a significant part of it is non-metaphorical. Metaphorical
understanding is grounded in non-metaphorical understanding. AI is well suited to the architectural
science of the strength of materials, mathematics, structures, indeterminate beams,
truss design, mechanical systems, plumbing systems, electricity, cladding,
finishes, lighting, etc. as are each understood metaphorically and their
precepts applied metaphorically. But often random selections, trials and
feasibility are random and rather in search of the metaphor without knowing
whether it is or is not a metaphor and fit to be part of the metaphor at hand.
AI will not know the relevant
commonality. It may select some commonality but chances are it will be
irrelevant and as incongruous as often are language translations selecting
incongruous phrases and usages. It is for such a risk that human management and
monitoring may be required.
On the other hand we may select one or another based on
non-metaphorical, empirical test and descriptions of properties. We then try to
understand the metaphor in the selection, its commonality, how it contributes
to the new application, how it has properties within itself which are alone
strange and unrelated yet when coupled with the whole or part of the created
metaphor contributes to metaphor.
Metaphor allows humans to understand a relatively abstract or inherently
unstructured subject matter in terms of a more concrete or at least more highly
structured subject matter. Like the onomatopeics (words such as buzz or murmur
that imitate the sounds associated with the objects or actions to which they
refer) metaphors mappings of
conceptions override the overt spoken and descriptive, and rely much more on
mnemonics (something intended to assist the memory, as a verse or formula).
Peculiar to the human, assistance comes from something much more primordial
(constituting a beginning; giving origin to something derived or developed;
original; elementary: primordial forms of life) to the
person’s or societies experiences. Again, it is for such a risk that
human management and monitoring may be required, an architectural design may
warrant human invasiveness into the process. Interactive architecture strives
to find the form best suited to what it reads. The conceptual metaphor is in
search of the technical half of its metaphor as architectural metaphors are
composed of both technical and conceptual metaphors (Fez-Barringten, B. 2009)
However, once
completed these become the matrix (encyclopedic) of schemas (in argument; the
warrants {where a warrant is a license to make an inference and as such must
have reader's agreement} supporting the inferences (mappings) where in the
metaphor becomes real). In this way the reader maps, learns and personalizes
the strange into the realm of the familiar. The reader does so by the myriad of
synaptic connections he is able to apply to that source. Hence humans translate their conceptions
from philosophy, psychology, sociology, etc into two dimensional scaled
drawings and then to real life full scale multi dimensions convention
consisting of conventional materials, building elements the task of upload
axioms to AI would take a lifetime of dedicated specialist.
Well suited to AI as maps are the
result of cartographers rendering existing into a graphics for reading so is
mapping to the reading of metaphors where the reader renders understanding from
one source to another.
Doing so
mentally and producing a rendition of understanding (as a pen and ink of a
figure) not as a graphic but a conceptual understanding. The best risk management is when reader sees in a critical way the
existing culling through and encyclopedia of referents to make the true
relationship; the mapping which best renders the reality; the relationship
which informs and clarifies as the map the location, configuration and
characteristic of the reality. As the cartographer seeks lines, symbols and
shadings to articulate the reality so the reader choices of heretofore
unrelated and seemingly unrelated are
found to have and essence common to both the reality and the rendition so that
the metaphor can be repeated becoming the readers new vocabulary . In fact architects do the opposite as graphic
renditions are made of synapses between amorphic and seemingly desperate
information. This relationship between axiom and performance assure for program
conformity and reliability.
Yet the
process of mapping is no less intense as architect review the matrix of
conditions, operation , ideal and goals of the thesis to find similarities and
differences , commonalities, and potential for one to resonate with another to
make a “resolution” on the experience of a cognitive mapping which becomes the
metaphor, parte and overwhelming new reality. The new reality is the target of
the source and finally can be read. In
the case of the birth of an infant metaphor readers may find a wide variety of
source information which is germane to their own experience.
Before the public ever sees the
constructed metaphor Building Officials, manufactures, city planners, owners,
estimators, general contractors, specialty contractors, environmentalist,
neighbors and community organization first read the drawings and map their
observations to their issues to form a slanted version of the reality. Human
manager can easily monitor this variance and modify the performance. Their mappings are based on the warrants
which are their licensed to perform. Each warrant will support a different
mapping (inference) and result in its own metaphor. In effect each will see a
kind of reality of the proposed in the perspective of their peculiar warrant,
where license is permission
from authority to do something. It is assumed if one gets permission it has met
the conditions, operations, ideal and goals of the proposed metaphor. As risk
is managed by other professions, operations and systems mapping is critical at
this read to assure that the architect’s rendering of the program is faithful
to the cognitive, lawful, physical and legal realities.
It s like a map which gets tested by
scientist, navigators , pilots and engineers before they build a craft to use
the map, or set out on a journey using the map. Before the contracts start
committing men and material the metaphor must map and be the metaphor meeting
all expectations. As there is metaphor between natural (NI) and
artificial intelligence (AI) in cognitive linguistics, conceptual metaphor, or cognitive metaphor, refers to the
understanding of one idea, or conceptual
domain, in terms of another, for example, understanding quantity
in terms of directionality (e.g. "prices are
rising"). A conceptual domain can be any coherent organization of human
experience.
The regularity with which different
languages employ the same metaphors, which often appear to be perceptually
based, has led to the hypothesis that the mapping between conceptual domains
corresponds to neural mappings in the brain. Earlier much of this was merely
cybernetics (human control functions and of mechanical and electronic systems
designed to replace them, involving the application of statistical mechanics to
communication engineering) Cybernetics was defined by Norbert Wiener, in his book of that title,
as the study of control and communication in the animal and the machine.
(Bailey, K. (1994) Wiener popularized the social implications of cybernetics,
drawing analogies between automatic systems (such as a regulated steam engine)
and human institutions in his best-selling The Human Use of Human Beings:
Cybernetics and Society (Houghton-Mifflin, 1950). Another characteristic of
the new cybernetics is its contribution towards bridging the "micro-macro
gap". (Weiner, N. (1950) That is,
it links the individual with the society" Another characteristic noted was
the "transition from classical cybernetics to the new cybernetics [that]
involves a transition from classical problems to new problems. These shifts in
thinking involve, among others, (a) a change from emphasis on the system being
steered to the system doing the steering, and the factor which guides the
steering decisions and (b) new emphasis on communication between several
systems which are trying to steer each other" (Bailey, K. (1994) The work of
Gregory
Bateson was also strongly influenced by cybernetics. Pure
cybernetics studies systems of control as a concept, attempting to discover the
basic principles underlying such things as: Artificial intelligence, Robotics,
Computer
Vision, Control systems, Emergence,
Learning organization, New
Cybernetics, Second-order cybernetics Interactions of Actors Theory, and Conversation Theory ( the operational premise
of interactive architecture)
NASA; Goddard Space Flight Center;
Human exploration of planetary surfaces. The Vision requires
innovative multi-function structures, minimal resource use, and development of
stand-alone and human-interfaced robotic capabilities which interacts by
reading the environment, designing and building a habitat.
The NASA team has responded by
developing ART (Addressable Reconfigurable Technology), as near-term
Tetrahedral Walkers and Manipulators for lunar reconnaissance (ALMA/ALI) and as
a more advanced mobile infrastructure for lunar exploration and exploitation
(LARA) with applicability wherever extreme mobility is required on Earth.
Future ART structures will be capable
of true autonomy using bi-level intelligence combining autonomic and heuristic
aspects, acting as part of an Autonomous Nanotechnology Swarm (ANTS).
The Autonomous Nanotechnology Swarm (ANTS) Architecture is
well suited to remote space or ground operations. It is being implemented on a
near term basis, using Addressable Reconfigurable Technology (ART). In the
future, Super Miniaturized ART (SMART) will form highly reconfigurable networks
of struts, acting as 3D mesh or 2D fabric to perform a range of functions on
demand.
The ANTS approach
harnesses the effective skeletal/ muscular system of the frame itself to enable
amoeboid movement, effectively ‘flowing’ between morphological forms”. ANTS’
structures would thus be capable of forming an en tire mobile modular
infrastructure adapted to its environment.
The ANTS architecture is metaphorically inspired by the
success of social insect colonies, a success based on the {axiom} division of
labor within the colony in two key ways: [principle of axiom [T]} First, within
their specialties, individual specialists generally outperform generalists.
[Principle of axiom [T]} Second, with sufficiently efficient social interaction
and coordination, the group of specialists generally outperforms the group of
generalists. Thus systems designed as ANTS are built from potentially very
large numbers of highly autonomous, yet socially interactive elements. The
architecture is self-similar in those elements and sub-elements of the system
may also be recursively structured as ANTS on scales ranging from microscopic
to interplanetary distances” These are both metaphoric and multidisciplinary
applications of axioms and AI methodology. AI Architecture is not the making of
metaphors but self translating the design into a finally built product.
(http://ants.gsfc.nasa.gov/ArchandAI.html Official): Steven
Curtis; Website Curator: James Daniel; Last Updated: April 2008.
One theory claims that Professor
Charles M. Eastman at Georgia
Institute of Technology coined the term. This theory is based on a
view that the term Building Information
Model is basically the same as Building
Product Model, which Professor Eastman has used extensively in his book
and papers since the late 1970s. ('Product model' means 'data model' or
'information model' in engineering.)
Nevertheless, it is agreed upon that the term was popularized
by Jerry Laiserin as a common name for a digital representation of the building
process to facilitate exchange and interoperability of information in digital
format. According to him and others the first implementation of BIM was under
the Virtual Building concept by Graphisoft's ArchiCAD, in its debut in 1987.
Typically BIM uses three-dimensional, real-time, dynamic building modeling
software to increase productivity in building design and construction. The
process produces the Building Information Model (also abbreviated BIM), which
encompasses building geometry, spatial relationships, geographic information,
and quantities and properties of building components.
Building,
Construction and Engineering, PO Box 56, Highett, Victoria, 3190, Australia. “The development of standardized
product and process models for the building and construction industry has now
reached a stage where collaborative design is feasible. The challenge comes from the appropriate
adoption of emerging technologies to support advanced data interoperability at
different levels of granularity. Interoperability is the enabling mechanism
that allows information to be exchanged between collaborative systems. The
process covers the information flow from a CAD system to the code checking
system.
It contains the events and activities taking place within
each separate CAD and compliance checking system and through the communication
channels between the two systems”.
.jpg)
Read: in order to be read buildings must
be authored (designed) and readers made literate; with interactive architecture
the components and not the participants read and interact.
Art: Involving craft and technique
architecture is an art; whether read or not is ever-present in our environment
and constitutes our context
Aesthetic: whether read, authored or artful
building’s aesthetic must be appreciated by beholder. The interactive itself is
an aesthetic as opposed to the aesthetic of the traditional passive
Function: Aesthetic, artful, unread or
un-authored if it doesn’t shelter to its peculiar demand the work is irrelevant
and abandoned.
Interactive: buildings that program itself by
observing the lifestyle of the inhabitants, and then learn to anticipate and
accommodate their needs.
Sustainability; Green; environmentally friendly.
The 5 star hotel with 600 rooms is
conceived as a new spectacular and architectural highlight for Dubai. The
streamlined form of the building reminds of the body of a bird, spreading out
its wings and lifting up its head just before starting to fly. The fascination
of the Flyotel is based upon the theme of flying · People on the move are
weaving threads around the world by traveling from airport to airport · The
Flyotel celebrates the fascination of flying. The design captures the images of
a bird spreading out its wing and lifting its head just before taking off. The
Flyotel seems to float on water, just connected to the beach like a body which
is both pier and building. Extraordinary is the construction of the diagrid
steel framework: the 3d computer model of the architect is directly translated
through a unique file to factory process of mass-customization to the
production machines of the steel manufacturer. The non standard design
technique and the file to factory production process technique makes the
structurally and architectural audacious expression of the volume possible and
cost-effective to realize. Design: ONL [Oosterhuis_ Lénárd] Rotterdam the
Netherlands
Structuralism was a reaction to CIAM (International Congress of Modern Architecture) -Functionalism
(Rationalism) which had led
to a lifeless expression of urban planning that ignored the identity of the
inhabitants and urban forms. (Sturrock,
J., (1981). Two different manifestations of Structuralist architecture exist.
Sometimes these occur in combination with each other. On the one hand, there is
the Aesthetics of Number,
formulated by Aldo van Eyck [6] in 1959. This concept can be
compared to cellular tissue. The "Aesthetics
of Number" can also be described as "Spatial Configurations in Architecture".
(Sturrock, J., (1981). On the other hand, there is the Architecture of
Lively Variety (Structure and Coincidence), formulated by John Habraken
in 1961. This second concept is related to user participation in housing. The "Architecture of Lively Variety"
can also be called "Architecture
of Diversity" or "Pluralistic
Architecture". Structuralism in a general sense is a mode of
thought of the 20th century, which came about in different places, at different
times and in different fields. It can also be found in linguistics,
anthropology, philosophy, art and architecture, as architecture: the making of
metaphors. (Sturrock, J., (1981).
Built structures corresponding in form to social structures,
according to Team 10 (a group of architects and other
invited participants who assembled starting in July 1953 at the 9th Congress of
C.I.A.M.
for the investigation of interrelationships between social and built structures: amongst those
attending was Shadrach Woods
(June 30, 1923 – July 31, 1973). The archetypical
behavior of man as the origin of architecture (cf. Anthropology, Claude Lévi-Strauss).
Different Rationalist architects had contacts with groups of the Russian
Avant-Garde after World War I. They believed in the idea that man and society
could be manipulated. Coherence,
growth and change on all levels of the urban
structure. The concept of a Sense of
place. Tokens of identification (identifying devices). Articulation of the built volume. Polyvalent
form and individual interpretations
(compare the concept of langue et parole
by Ferdinand de
Saussure). User participation in housing. Integration of
"high" and "low" culture in architecture (fine architecture
and everyday forms of building). Pluralistic architecture.
Structuralism is inherently a metaphor and metaphoric is so
far as its referents are apparently unrelated and primarily it has a
commonplace to it s context. (Sturrock, J., (1981).
Today, environmental concerns play a
more important role within design so this focus has shifted slightly. The role
of architecture at present can be more accurately described as to support human
endeavors while using the minimum number of resources throughout the life of a
building. This includes minimizing the resources used within construction and
lifecycle processes. Responsive architectures help achieve this goal by finding
best-fit formal solutions to both user activities and environmental changes.
Today this is determined by comparative analysis for optimum design. They also may help reduce building mass and
embedded energy costs. Though similar, the methodologies that architects need
to produce these types of buildings are not the same as those used by
engineers. Architects require cladding methodologies as well as response
methodologies that can adapt to subjective spatial desires as well as to rigid
structural criteria. Subjective desires include aesthetic, psychological and
environmental factors such as comfortable ranges of temperature, lighting and
acoustic performance. To construct systems that respond to these desires,
control mechanisms that are capable of building partial user models may be
required. (Sterk, T. 2006)
These are contextual models that
capture three types of input, environmental data, user’s activity data, and
data about when users correct the system. Above and beyond structural and
architectural abilities they demand knowledge of distributed computing
processes, network structures and synchronization, control theory, intelligent
systems and learning within AI. Methods for networking responsive structures
are especially significant because through coordinating different shape control
systems larger environmental gains should become feasible.
Three prototypes shape changes
include leaning, extension, collapse, and flattening correlated to scope. Scope
becomes a tool for enabling different regions of a structural system to become
more or less rigid and affect the shape of the structure. For example, by
limiting the scope of actuation to one half of a structure, leaning can be
induced, while by enabling a global scope, expansion or contraction results.
Limiting factors of rigidity, still apply to this system. Rigidity limits
impact by restricting the degree of freedom that a structure has to move.
(Sterk, T. (Jul 2006). Without affecting the basic architectural program
building shapes may be altered and still retain the building’s metaphor.
Tristan d' Estree Sterk of The Bureau
for Responsive Architecture and The School of the Art Institute of Chicago and
Robert Skelton of UCSD
in San Diego
worked together on actuated tensegrity, experimenting with pneumatically
controlled rods and wires which change the shape of a building in response to
sensors both outside and inside the structure. Their goal was to limit and
reduce the impact of buildings on natural environments.
A full scale actuated tensegrity
prototype built from cast aluminum, stainless steel components and pneumatic
muscles (pneumatic muscles provided by shadow robotics UK) by Tristan d' Estree
Sterk and The Office for Robotic Architectural Media (2003). These types of
structural systems use variable and controllable rigidity to provide architects
and engineers with systems that have a controllable shape. As a form of
ultra-lightweight structure these systems offer a primary method for reducing
the embodied energy used in construction processes.
MIT's Kinetic Design Group
has been developing the concept of intelligent
kinetic systems which are defined as "architectural spaces and
objects that can physically re-configure themselves to meet changing
needs." They draw on structural engineering, embedded computation and
adaptable architecture. The objective is to demonstrate that energy use and the
environmental quality of buildings could be rendered more efficient and
affordable by making use of a combination of these technologies.
The E-motive House is a programmable and
demountable structure that would change shape in real time; the Flyotel [7]
, a hotel in Dubai that celebrates the pleasure of flying, The Acoustic
Barrier and the Hessing
Cockpit in Utrecht that combine a 1.5km long acoustic barrier with an
industrial building of 5000m2.
The concept is to design with the
speed of passing traffic since the building is seen from the perspective of the
driver. Using a process he calls "mass customization", each piece of
glass, steel, each node in the structure is slightly different that the others.
MUSCLE Tower II , a tower that reacts
to its environment, and pro-actively determines the space around itself. It is
inherently metaphoric where the structure likens itself to the environment and
the environment likens its properties to the building. The HRG have also worked
on the design of an interactive
hotel room. The Muscle Room would allow the user to alter his surroundings to suit
his every need. In this case the user makes the metaphor with
the metaphor created by the architect. When the room is entered it is
completely empty. By interacting with the room the user can get a different
layout or appearance. The user and the room are the referents with the metaphor
they make the commonplace to be discovered. Using a system of moving panels,
the walls could be shaped into furniture, doors, and spaces. Like any metaphor
it is shaped by its author to include two referents reaching toward each other
to form a stasis. Also the appearance, light, sound and climate can be
influenced to create the perfect room. "Muscles" is a 35-foot-high skyscraper designed to
change posture thanks to a jointed spine and pneumatic muscles, designed by the
WhoWhatWhenAir skyscraper
team: Philippe Block, Axel Kilian, Peter Schmitt,
and John Snavely.
MUSCLE Tower II , a tower that reacts
to its environment, and pro-actively determines the space around itself. It is
inherently metaphoric where the structure likens itself to the environment and
the environment likens its properties to the building. The HRG have also worked
on the design of an interactive
hotel room. The Muscle Room would allow the user to alter his surroundings to suit
his every need. In this case the user makes the metaphor with
the metaphor created by the architect. When the room is entered it is
completely empty. By interacting with the room the user can get a different
layout or appearance. The user and the room are the referents with the metaphor
they make the commonplace to be discovered. Using a system of moving panels,
the walls could be shaped into furniture, doors, and spaces. Like any metaphor
it is shaped by its author to include two referents reaching toward each other
to form a stasis. Also the appearance, light, sound and climate can be
influenced to create the perfect room. "Muscles" is a 35-foot-high skyscraper designed to
change posture thanks to a jointed spine and pneumatic muscles, designed by the
WhoWhatWhenAir skyscraper
team: Philippe Block, Axel Kilian, Peter Schmitt,
and John Snavely.
The goal was To design a
"smart" structure that responds to the people interacting with it.
The architect of such a system provided the tools for the user to make a metaphor
whose only understanding is limit the makers own perceptions. The project was
inspired by structural engineer Guy Nordenson's
idea of responsive structures for buildings. He said, "If architects
designed a building like a body, it would have a system of bones and muscles
and tendons and a brain that knows how to respond. If a building could change
its posture, tighten its muscles and brace itself against the wind, its
structural mass could literally be cut in half."
The Muscles tower is an articulated
jointed spine controlled by a series of pneumatic muscles. Activating the pumps
allows the structure to bend in different directions by introducing a twist in
the jointed core. By stacking and activating several "muscle" units,
the mini skyscraper can gently curve in space away from its upright equilibrium
position. If no muscles are active, the core keeps the structure upright.
The team imagines that, in a full-scale tower, such active structural
components would be used to cancel out movement and stabilize the tall
structure against changing forces from wind or earthquakes.
Living Glass involves a reactive,
transparent surface with an infrared sensor and gills that open and shut as
they detect the presence of humans and control air quality in a room. With minor changes, the system could be
tuned for environmental control, detecting carbon dioxide in a room and in
multiple grapefruit-sized zones, and "breathing" when levels are
high. Here, movement promotes health by allowing air flow when needed, and it
provides information by signaling a high carbon dioxide level, which is
normally invisible. David Benjamin and Soo-in Yang are both architects, but
to call their company, "Living".
Responsive Interior Architecture
(Interior Design). Parsons students transformed their lobby with walls that
change configuration depending on activity in the room. In the lobby of the
school's Design and Technology department, Witzgall's students mounted two
deceptively simple polycarbonate panels, donated by Polygal, into a garage-door
track in the ceiling. They sit side by side, partially blocking passage between
the lobby's elevator and the hallway beyond. When someone approaches, embedded
sensors trigger the panels to move toward the perimeter walls. These temporary
walls remain parted during periods of high traffic, and return to the center of
the lobby when there is none. The very nice panels also react to cues other
than lobby gridlock. Each includes 128 LEDs linked to microphones in the
department's two computer labs. The LEDs light up within a grid to graph the
volume inside: the X-axis represents time; the Y-axis marks the activity level.
Brightline lighting systems donated fluorescent fixtures, which create an
ambient color wash that is programmed to change throughout the day with the
class schedule.
If intelligent buildings need to
receive, analyze, and react according to
such processes, responsive ones are required only to receive
and react
to only one input parameter. Technology and communication
systems
make it possible to combine several parameters by using
system
integration and computerization. Technology and computerized
systems have enhanced and changed the manner of responses and
provided a variety of decisions according to different sources of information.
Receiving, analyzing, and reacting are the key criteria of intelligent building
the input (reception) category covers information detection devices such as
temperature sensors.
The second category will be the
category of analyzing devices. The third category, decisions and outputs, will
cover both output of sensory devices and forms of reaction and response that
emanate from these systems. As a result of the third category, this paper will
survey the forms of responses to determine whether or not the kinetic response
is a viable choice.
The concept of intelligent building
presents the strongest level of communication among a building’s systems. The
term “building systems” refers to all systems that operate a building like
HVAC, mechanical,
structural, access control, safety and security, building
management, lighting, maintenance, local networking, and energy management.
The intelligent building concept presents control and
management by a
building’s systems and users using computer abilities to
achieve users’ needs, which may include productivity, efficiency, energy
savings, entertainment, delight, and comfort, return investment, and low life
cost. (Sherbini, K. & Krawczyk, R.
(2004)
Anonymous (various): Designing Interactive Systems; (2008) Proceedings
of the 7th ACM conference on Designing interactive systems
Cape Town, South Africa
Pages: 21-30
Year of Publication: 2008
Bridgewater, C
&Atkin, B. L.
(October 1994) Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering: Vol. 8, No. 4; pp.
469-488, Whiteknights, Reading RG6 2AZ, England:
Bailey,
Kenneth D. (1994), “Sociology and the New Systems Theory: Toward a Theoretical Synthesis”,
p.163).
Curl, James Stevens; (2000) “Kinetic architecture:” A Dictionary of Architecture and
Landscape Architecture
Encyclopedia.com (Highbeam research,
Inc.
Curtis, Stephen; Daniel, James; (2008):NASA; Goddard Space
flight Center; (http://ants.gsfc.nasa.gov/ArchandAI.html Official): Autonomous
Nanotechnology Swarm (ANTS). ART (Addressable Reconfigurable Technology),
Eskil, Mustafa Taner (advised by Jon Sticklen)
(2004):”Distributed routine design over the internet with cooperating mdm
agents”; Michigan State University. East Lansing
Eastman, Charles, M. (1978) “Product model’ means
data model of ‘information model’ in engineering”; Georgia Institute of
Technology (not quoted)
Eric Vreedenburgh and
Remko Scha (1998)
pp. 154-155. "The Artificial City." (Not quoted)
Fez-Barringten, Barie; (2009-10) Architecture is a
technical and conceptual metaphor; and The History of the periods of metaphors;
AI Journal (2010)
Fox,
Michael Fox & Kemp, Miles; (2009) “Interactive
Architecture; Princeton Architectural Press:
http://www.interactive-architecture.com/).
Graffiti
Research Lab; Interactive architecture business website:
(Graffiti Research Lab: http://graffitiresearchlab.com/?page_id=32)
Grünkranz, Daniel ;( 2010) Towards a
Phenomenology of Responsive Architecture, the University of Applied Arts in Vienna.
Gordon, William .J.J. (1966) The metaphorical way of
learning and knowing; applying Synectics to sensitivity and learning
situations; Porpoise Books, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Khalid
Sherbini and Robert Krawczyk ;( 2004) “Intelligent Building
Kinetic Architecture”: 1st ASCAAD International Conference, e-Design in Architecture: King Fahd University of Petroleum Minerals.
Lakoff, George; (1993) The contemporary theory of
metaphor in Metaphor and Thought: Second Edition Edited by Andrew Ortony:
School of Education and social Sciences and Institute for the learning
Sciences: North Western University Published by Cambridge University Press
First pub: 1979 Second pub: 1993
Negroponte, Nicholas. (1970). The Architecture Machine: Towards a More Human Environment.
Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Olgay, Victor; (1963) Design with Climate: Bioclimatic Approach to
Architectural Regionalism: Princeton University Press
Pease, William (September 1952), "An
Automatic Machine Tool", Scientific American: 101-115.
Remko Scha: "Towards Architecture of
Chance." In: Hans Konstapel, Gerard Rijntjes and Eric Vreedenburgh (eds.):
De Onvermijdelijke Culturele
Revolutie. (Den Haag: Stichting Maatschappij en Onderneming, 1998), pp.
105-114. [In Dutch.] (Not quoted)
Sturrock, John, (1981) Structuralism and Since,
Introduction. Opus Books; UK
Sterk, Tristan
d’ Estre., (2006) Responsive Architecture: User-centered Interactions
within the Hybridized Model of Control, in Proceedings Of
The Game
Set and Match II, On Computer Games, Advanced Geometries, and Digital
Technologies, Netherlands: Episode Publishers, pp. 494-501.
Sterk, Tristan d’ Estre; (Jul 2006) Shape control in responsive architectural structures – current Reasons
& challenges; university California, San Diego; 4th World Conference on Structural Control
and Monitoring;
Watson, Theodore; Generative Graffiti; (2009) Proceedings of the 7th ACM conference on Designing
interactive systems;
Wiener,
Norbert; (1950)
Cybernetics and the Human Use of Human
Beings: Cybernetics and Society; Houghton-Mifflin: USA
Williams, Raymond; (1958) Moving from High
Culture to Ordinary Culture; Originally published in N.
McKenzie (ed.), Convictions; London
Barie Fez-Barringten; Associate professor Global
University
1. "Architecture the making of
metaphors"
Main Currents in Modern
Thought/Center for Integrative Education; Sep.-Oct. 1971, Vol. 28 No.1, New
Rochelle, New York.
2."Schools and metaphors"
Main Currents in Modern
Thought/Center for Integrative Education Sep.-Oct. 1971, Vol. 28 No.1, New
Rochelle, New York.
3."User's metametaphoric phenomena
of architecture and Music":
“METU” (Middle East
Technical University: Ankara, Turkey): May 1995"
Journal of the Faculty of Architecture
4."Metametaphors and Mondrian:
Neo-plasticism and
its' influences in architecture" 1993 Available on Academia.edu since 2008
5. "The Metametaphor of architectural
education",
North Cypress, Turkish University. December, 1997
6."Mosques
and metaphors" Unpublished,1993
7."The
basis of the metaphor of Arabia" Unpublished,
1994
8."The
conditions of Arabia in metaphor" Unpublished,
1994
9. "The metametaphor theorem"
Architectural Scientific Journal, Vol. No. 8; 1994 Beirut
Arab University.
10. "Arabia’s
metaphoric images" Unpublished,
1995
11."The
context of Arabia in metaphor" Unpublished,
1995
12. "A partial metaphoric vocabulary
of Arabia"
“Architecture:
University of Technology in Datutop; February 1995 Finland
13."The Aesthetics of the Arab
architectural metaphor"
“International
Journal for Housing Science and its applications” Coral Gables, Florida.1993
14."Multi-dimensional
metaphoric thinking"
Open House,
September 1997: Vol. 22; No. 3, United Kingdom: Newcastle uponTyne
15."Teaching the techniques of
making architectural metaphors in the twenty-first century.” Journal of King Abdul Aziz University Engg...Sciences; Jeddah:
Code: BAR/223/0615:OCT.2.1421 H. 12TH
EDITION; VOL. I and
“Transactions” of
Cardiff University, UK. April 2010
16.
“Word Gram #9” Permafrost: Vol.31 Summer 2009 University
of Alaska Fairbanks; ISSN: 0740-7890; page 197
17.
"Metaphors and Architecture."
ArchNet.org. October, 2009.at MIT
18. “Metaphor as an inference from sign”; University of Syracuse
Journal of Enterprise Architecture;
November 2009: and nominated architect of the year in special issue of Journal
of Enterprise Architecture explaining the unique relationship between
enterprise and classic building architecture.
19. “Framing the art vs. architecture argument”; Brunel University (West
London); BST: Vol. 9 no. 1: Body, Space
& Technology Journal: Perspectives Section
20. “Urban Passion”: October 2010; Reconstruction & “Creation”; June 2010; by C. Fez-Barringten; http://reconstruction.eserver.org/;
21. “An architectural history of metaphors”: AI & Society: (Journal
of human-centered and machine intelligence) Journal of Knowledge, Culture and
Communication: Pub: Springer; London; AI & Society located in University of
Brighton, UK;
AI & Society.
ISSN (Print) 1435-5655 - ISSN (Online) 0951-5666
: Published by Springer-Verlag;; 6 May 2010
http://www.springerlink.com/content/j2632623064r5ljk/
Paper
copy: AIS Vol. 26.1. Feb. 2011; Online
ISSN 1435-5655; Print ISSN 0951-5666;
DOI
10.1007/s00146-010-0280-8; : Volume 26, Issue 1 (2011), Page
103.
22. “Does Architecture Create Metaphors?; G.Malek; Cambridge; August
8,2009
Pgs 3-12 (4/24/2010)
23. “Imagery or Imagination”:the role of metaphor in architecture:Ami
Ran (based on Architecture:the making of metaphors); :and Illustration:”A
Metaphor of Passion”:Architecture of Israel 82.AI;August2010pgs.83-87.
24. “The sovereign built metaphor”: monograph converted to Power Point
for presentation to Southwest Florida Chapter of the American Institute of
Architects. 2011
25.“Architecture:the making of metaphors”:The Book;
Contract to publish: 2011
Cambridge Scholars Publishing
12 Back Chapman Street
Newcastle upon Tyne
NE6 2XX
United Kingdom
12 Back Chapman Street
Newcastle upon Tyne
NE6 2XX
United Kingdom
Edited by
Edward Richard
Hart,
0/2 249
Bearsden Road
Glasgow
G13 1DH
UK
Lecture:
http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=2433463466927232250#editor/target=post;postID=4762025633656742696
