Biomimetic Architecture: Its Successes, Effectivity, and Challenges

BIOMIMETIC ARCHITECTURE ITS SUCCESSES, EFFECTIVITY, AND CHALLENGES

CHANI SAMUDRADEWA ARCH6008 - DISSERTATION (2022)

“If the goal of sustainable building is to lower impact, and the measure of low impact is untouched nature, then doesn’t the ideal logically move towards not building at all?”

(Kaplinsky, 2006, p.68).

A dissertation presented to the School of Architecture, Oxford Brookes University, in part fulfilment of the regulations for BA (Hons) in Architecture.

Statement of Originality This dissertation is an original piece of work which is made available for copying with permission of the Head of the School of Architecture

Signed: Chani Samudradewa

Acknowledgment A massive thank you to my parents and my supervisor, Owen Pearce, for all the helpful feedback and ambitious encouragements throughout the research process.

I would also like to express my gratitude for Neri Oxman and her research for inspiring the next generation of Architects to fearlessly delve deeper into the abyss of pristine nature.

CONTENTS

pg. 6

INTRODUCTION

08

CHAPTER OVERVIEWS

11

1.0

WHAT IS BIOMIMICRY?

12

RECOGNISING BIOMIMICRY

13

ORIGINS AND HISTORY OF BIOMIMICRY

16

THE PRINCIPLES OF BIOMIMICRY

18

A SUCCESSFUL BIOMIMETIC STRUCTURE

26

2.0 3.0 4.0

CONCEPT OR TECHNIQUE?

27

EASTGATE CENTRE CASE STUDY

28

VENTILATION SYSTEMS OF TERMITE MOUNDS

30

SUCCESS OF COMMERCIALISM

33

IS IT ALL BIOMIMETIC?

37

MATERIAL ECOLOGY

40

SUSTAINABLE MATERIALS

41

AGUAHOJA CASE STUDY

43

SILK PAVILION CASE STUDY

49

THE ENTANGLED CONCEPT OF BIOMIMICRY

56

THEORETICAL POSSIBILITIES

57

PHYSICAL POSSIBILITIES

61

CONCLUSION

64

BIBLIOGRAPHY

67

REFERENCES

67

FIGURE REFERENCES

70

INTRODUCTION Sustainable innovations are currently in

Gropius’s diagram of the Bauhaus curric-

a mainstream path which relies on tech-

ulum (figure 1) , highlights the process

nological innovations and human actions

of combining four subjects that would in

that aim to reduce energy consumption

turn lead to a development of all round

and waste production while utilizing nat-

Biomimicry incorporated design. Howev-

ural materials and resources with infinite

er, due to the lack of existing structures

produce. With primary inspiration from

that uses an amalgamation of Biomimetic

Neri Oxman and her views of Biomimet-

features, there is an unspecified mistrust

ic approaches to create a sustainable

when it comes to designing buildings for

future, this research will focus on the

the future. It appears the architectural

emulation of natural systems and the

innovation industry is disregarding the

effectivity of technology, construction,

new era of Biomimicry due to the lack of

and form in its application to architec-

evidence that proves its success and the

ture. Biomimetic Architecture, due to

uncertainty that arises among the capa-

the newness of the concept, is only be-

bilities of the innovation industry; hence

ing explored within its individual cate-

it is only fair to recognize the knowledge

gories that sum up the field (materials,

gap and address the successes and fail-

sustainable systems, organic forms, etc.)

ures while observing the effectivity and

therefore, a successful structure that has

challenges of applying a Biomimetic ap-

a combination of such categories is rare

proach to the future of Architecture.

and, in most cases, is a futuristic concept that is yet to be developed into an existing structure. Oxman’s Krebs Cycle of Creativity III (figure 2) inspired by Walter Figure 1: Walter Gropius Bauhaus Design Curriculum (Borson, 2018) Figure 2: Krebs Cycle of Creativity III (Oxman, 2020, p.17, fig. 14)

pg. 8

01

02

pg. 9

pg. 9

Field of Research Biomimetic Architecture: the effectivity and challenges in the era of sustainable approaches towards architectural innovations Research Question To what extent do Biomimetic designs and principles prove to be effective in the wider commercial scale of the built environment?

CHAPTER OVERVIEWS

1.0

This chapter will focus on clarifying the term Biomimicry and outlining the aims of Biomimicry. With reference to Michael Pawlyn and Janine M. Benyus, this chapter will provide a brief explanation of the guidelines required to design a Biomimetic structure that produces a sustainable outcome.

The following chapter will provide a case study of one of the most famous Biomimetic structures – the

2.0

Eastgate Centre designed by Mick Pearce. Furthermore, this chapter will go onto discuss the successes and failures of the commercial structure and provide an in-depth analysis of the effectivity of Pearce’s Biomimetic approach.

Chapter 3 will focus on Neri Oxman and her approach of a Biomimetic application. It will aim to clarify

3.0

Oxman’s process of fabrication and sustainable outcome that incorporates a closed-loop system all the while proving the effectivity of her approach in comparison to Pearce’s approach implanted in the Eastgate Centre.

This consecutive chapter outlines the theoretical understanding of the differences between Oxman’s

4.0 5.0

and Pearce’s perceptions of Biomimicry. With reference to Joe Kaplinsky (2006), A. Marshall and S. Lozeva (2009), and Michael Fisch (2017), this chapter will argue the effectivity and success of the two differing approaches.

The research will then conclude with a brief summary of the discussed perspectives of Biomimicry and its varying approaches with the aims of answering the question of whether Biomimicry is an effective design approach that can be enforced on the wider commercial scale of the built environment.

WHAT IS BIOMIMICRY? CHAPTER 1

Nature is used in Architecture as a main source of inspiration for patterns and as an “aesthetic sourcebook” however, “Biomimicry is concerned with functional solutions and is not necessarily an aesthetic position” (Pawlyn, 2016).

pg. 12

RECOGNISING BIOMIMICRY 1.1

Biomimicry is a large field of study and

midst of an urban landscape. The use of

approach which consists of a combina-

vegetation on the exterior walls does not

tion of categories and can be misunder-

“reflect or magnify the sun’s rays but fil-

stood as several other fields of nature

ters them” (Boeri, 2018) as a result cre-

incorporated design strategies. Biomim-

ating a microclimate proving its sustain-

icry is most commonly mistaken as Bio-

ability.

philia, a term that can be defined as “the innate human instinct to connect with nature and other living beings” (McCain, 2020). In the field of Architecture, Biophilia is understood as a design approach to create the said innate connection between the occupants of a space and nature. The Bosco Verticale (figure 3), located in Milan, Italy, designed by Stefano Boeri Architects is known to be one of the greatest examples of generating the connection between the occupants and nature through the use of overhanging balconies that house trees, shrubs, and perennials covering a total area of 3000 m2 (Boeri, 2018). The structure is known

03

to be a successful sustainable structure as it creates a green environment in the Figure 3: Bosco Verticale, Milan, Italy (Boeri, 2018)

pg. 13

An additional term worth clarifying is Biomorphism, in Architecture referring to a contemporary design approach that “adopts the idea of embracing natural shapes and patterns into the architecture” with the aim of “turning naturally organic shapes into a functional structure” (Helmy, 2021). The Eden Project (figure 4) by Grimshaw Architects, located in Cornwall, England, is a vivid example of a Biomorphic structure. In applying Buckminster Fuller’s approach on geodesic dome construction, The Eden Project has been designed to adapt to the uneven land, inspired by soap bubbles and its ability to adapt to any surface they settle on (ICE, 2015). The Bio04

morphism of the structure is apparent as it uses inspiration of naturally occurring forms and applies the concept and the shape to an architectural structure.

However, the Eden Project, in various stances, has been mediated as a Biomimetic structure and understandably so.

Figure 4: Eden Project, Cornwall, United Kingdom (Walsh, 2018)

pg. 14

05

pg. 15

ORIGINS AND HISTORY OF BIOMIMICRY 1.2

One of the earliest examples of Biomimicry applied to Architecture can be seen in Filippo Brunelleschi’s Cathedral of Santa Maria Del Fiore (figure 6), opened in 1436 (Pawlyn, 2016b). Brunelleschi’s construction of the Cupola was inspired through his eggshell study in order to design a lighter and thinner dome (figure 5 ). Furthermore, La Sagrada Familia (figure 7) designed by Antoni Gaudi in 1882 is a structure that vividly expresses the inspiration from nature. The structure’s most notable Biomimetic features are the columns that branch out similar to that of trees. These provide a more stable support by distributing the load, 06

mimicking the natural weight distribution found in trees (Snaves, 2018).

So how can one distinguish a Biomimetic structure?

Figure 5: Brunelleschi’s sketches of Santa Maria Del Fiore (Chiu, 2015) Figure 6: Santa Maria Del Fiore (Mastrandrea, 2008) Figure 7: La Sagrada Familia (Jones, 2013)

pg. 16

07

pg. 17

THE PRINCIPLES OF BIOMIMICRY 1.3

As stated previously, Biomimicry is a diffi-

The question worth identifying however

cult field to distinguish from other nature

is whether any sustainable and nature

inspired fields and design approaches in-

inspired structure can be considered as

volved in Architecture. To decipher the

Biomimetic? Pawlyn (2016a), expand-

complexity, Benyus (1997) has created a

ing on Benyus’s laws of nature, has clar-

set of categories that should be incorpo-

ified each significant factor that can be

rated in a built structure in order for it to

classed as a Biomimetic feature within a

be recognised as Biomimetic. However,

structure.

it is worth recognising that Biomimetic structures can correspond with other nature inspired design approaches as stated above. Benyus (1997) highlights nine laws of nature that should be incorporated followed in using a Biomimetic design approach: “Nature runs on sunlight.

Nature uses only the energy it needs.

Nature fits form to function.

Nature recycles everything.

Nature rewards cooperation.

Nature banks on diversity.

Nature demands local expertise.

Nature curbs excesses from within.

Nature taps the power of limits.”

pg. 18

Efficient Structures: “Nature makes extremely economical use of materials, often achieved through evolved ingenuity of form” (Pawlyn, 2016a). This can be seen through the organic forms present in natural objects.

Nature aims to minimise materials, only uses what it requires, for its “survival in all its varied aspects” (Pawlyn, 2016a).

The concept and design approach within the category of creating efficient structures is established on the grounds of “less material, more design” (Pawlyn, 2016a) which is brought forth by the act of observing and accommodating an indepth understanding of the “how” of natural structures. It goes on to say that efficient structures, using less material, falls under the sustainability regime by reducing waste and consumption.

08

Figure 8: X-ray of leaf structure (Pawlyn, 2016a)

pg. 19

Manufacturing Materials:

terials, Pawlyn further explains that un-

Manufacturing materials within a Bio-

derstanding the 4 main elements* and

mimetic design approach is solely based

a further 7 elements* are the basis for

on understanding the elements that

nature’s material productions. Mean-

nature is composed of and the combi-

while, humans are resorting to the usage

nations that create stable, reliable, and

of “virtually every element in existence”

long lasting materials. Pawlyn (2016a)

(Pawlyn, 2016a) including the highly tox-

in his book, Biomimicry in Architecture,

ic and harmful elements in manufactur-

highlights the noticeably extensive dif-

ing materials. With this in mind, Pawlyn

ference between the strategies used by

has provided a chart (figure 9) that high-

nature and humans in producing mate-

lights the contrasts between Engineering

rials. Manufacturing aramid fibre, a syn-

and Biology in order to understand the

thetic fibre known for its heat resistance

differences and work towards the Bio-

and strength, requires “petroleum to be

logical approaches of designing material

boiled in sulphuric acid at around 750⁰C.

in a sustainable manner.

The mixture is then subjected to high pressure … producing large quantities of toxic waste”. Whereas spiders produce the same material, if not stronger, in an “ambient temperature and pressure with raw materials of dead flies and water” (Pawlyn, 2016a). In highlighting the extensive contrast between natural production and human production of ma4 elements: Carbon, Oxygen, Hydrogen, Nitrogen 7 elements: Calcium, Phosphorous, Potassium, Sulphur, Sodium, Chlorine, Magnesium Figure 9: Seven key distinctions to guiide Biomimetic thinking (Pawlyn, 2016a) Figure 10: Cradle to cradle design system (Pawlyn, 2016a)

pg. 20

09

10

pg. 21

Zero waste system: A zero-waste system refers to a closedloop model regarding the use of resources, a shift from the current linear model. Pawlyn refers to ecosystems to derive inspiration and design strategies for a closed-loop model for waste management. “The underlying organisation of life is principally through cycles of carbon, nitrogen, and water” (Pawlyn, 2016a). In other words, each natural system is a closed loop system in which resources are not wasted but reused in different forms or at its simplest description, “elements and interconnections harnessed to a function or purpose” (Pawlyn, 2016a). The following chart (figure 11) highlights the contrasting differences between ecosystems (closed-loop systems) and conventional human-made systems (linear systems).

FIgure 11: Biomimetic principles (Pawlyn, 2016a)

pg. 22

11

Water management:

ing water loss and maximising its use and

Managing water is increasingly becom-

efficiency, applied to architecture aids in

ing a main focus due to climate changes

the sustainability outcome of a structure.

that are reducing water levels. In order to safeguard the availability of water, Pawlyn suggests two methods of minimising water loss; water storage and water harvesting, as found in several insect species and animals that live in arid climates. For example, the Namibian fog-basking beetle (figure 12) has been studied to harvest water from the air. Biologist, Andrew Parker, studied the beetle and understood that the beetles’ wings is a wax like surface with bumps

12

that attract water during the fog which then roll along its back to the mouth (BBC World Service, 2001). Parker, using this research and his understanding, produced a type of plastic with the same surfaces as the beetle’s shell that enhances condensation and collects water. Pawlyn highlights that understanding and exploring such strategies of minimisFigure 12: Namibian Fog Basking Beetle (Frederick, 2019)

pg. 23

Energy efficiency:

erstanding these systems in a way that

In order to understand how the strategy

nature approaches the creation of ener-

of Biomimicry can be employed into the

gy and adapting such systems into tech-

built environment, it is crucial to recog-

nologies that can be applied to the built

nise the aims and the possible methods

environment.

that bring about energy efficiency. As a Biomimetic solution to energy, Pawlyn suggests the following: Demand reduction through radical increases in efficiency as the first priority; a source of energy that will last indefinitely; a solar economy “that is powered entirely by forms of renewable energy” from sources generating solar power, wind, wave, biomass, tidal, and geothermal energy; resilience through diversity and distributed networks; resource flows that are non-toxic and compatible with a wide range of other systems.

In this stance, this strategy is highlighting sustainable energy sources and systems however, Biomimicry plays a role in und-

pg. 24

Thermoregulation and Light:

Understanding how natural species use

Thermal regulation, in other words, Ho-

daylight as a form of energy and light ab-

meostasis is the “self-regulating process

sorption can be an essential point of fo-

by which biological systems tend to main-

cus in the field of Biomimicry.

tain stability while adjusting to conditions that are optimal for survival” (Britannica, 2018). Pawlyn suggests that thermoregulation is one of the main aspects of controlling temperatures and conditions that is optimal regarding the application of Biomimicry. A further factor involved in both thermoregulation and energy efficiency is the use of light. Architects are known to focus on manipulating light for the aesthetics and for the purpose of the form. However, if light was focused

13

in the means of maximising the use of daylight, Pawlyn (2016a) argues that not only will it be beneficial for the aesthetic purpose but for the occupants of a space and for the benefit of energy usage by minimising the energy required to light up a space, mainly larger structures and most commonly, commercial structures.

Figure 13: Termite mounds known for natural thermoregulation system Photo by: John W. Banagan (Heimbuch, 2020)

pg. 25

A SUCCESSFUL BIOMIMETIC STRUCTURE 1.4

As understood according to Pawlyn and Benyus’s laws of applying nature to architecture, it can be argued that a successful Biomimetic structure takes into regard all design aspects of architecture and finds a natural source of inspiration that provides a solution, in most cases towards achieving sustainability, and adapts the natures’ forms and functions to the design strategy. Even though, this design approach seems valid in the hopes of devising an eco-friendly, sustainable structure, it is worth reasoning the effectivity the approach.

This is due to the several other design strategies that focus on the sustainability of architecture that have proven to be successful, is Biomimicry any different? How effective is a Biomimetic design approach in its sustainable outcome?

pg. 26

CONCEPT OR TECHNIQUE? CHAPTER 2

“Whether the building has begun to attain a life of its own since occupation is a matter of judgment. This was an attempt to design a building based on the metaphor of a living system more like a termitary. An eco-system not a machine for living” (Pearce, 2016)

CAN ARCHITECTURE BE CONSIDERED AS BIOMIMETIC OR IS IT JUST A CONCEPT?

EASTGATE CENTRE CASE STUDY 2.1

Mick Pearce is a world renown, Zimba-

2016) including 5600 m2 of retail shops

bwean architect known for his associa-

and 26000 m2 of office spaces (Smith,

tion with Biomimicry, termite mounds,

1997), is recognised to fit the 11th Sus-

and its application in designing and

tainable Development goal put forth by

constructing a self-cooling, thermo-reg-

the United Nations – Sustainable Cit-

ulated, and sustainably ventilated com-

ies and Communities. The main focus

mercial structure. The Eastgate Centre

of the centre was to create a “self-reg-

(figure 14), located in Harare Zimbabwe

ulating ventilation system” (Asknature,

and completed in 1996, consists of office

2021), that keeps a balanced and com-

spaces and retail shops that do not re-

fortable temperature for the occupants

quire air conditioners to withstand the

all year-round without the use of costly

tropical temperatures of Zimbabwe. The

air-conditioning. Instead, the building is

Eastgate Centre is known as one of the

constructed using materials that have

primary successful buildings that has

a high thermal capacity that stores and

shown the use of a Biomimetic approach

dispenses the heat gained from the sur-

with Pearce taking inspiration from ter-

rounding climate.

mite mounds (explained below) and applying the functions, forms, and process of natural ventilation. This has in turn resulted in an energy efficient, low cost strategy to control the climate and temperatures of the Eastgate Centre. The large commercial building, covering an area of 55000 square meters (Pearce,

pg. 28

The Eastgate Centre will be used as a critical case study in understanding Biomimicry at an Architectural level due to its parallel use of features expressed in termite mounds, an Architecturally astounding creation by nature. A combination of old and new, the commercial building located in Zimbabwe uses new materials such as brick and reconstructed stone and old materials such as steel and glass. While the old set of materials are used towards lifts, bridges and steel structuring, the new set of material conform with the style of “ancient traditional stone architecture of Great Zimbabwe” and local resources (Pearce, 2016).

14

The use of local resources that belong to the social construct of Zimbabwe further agrees with sustainable sourcing of materials.

Figure 14: The Eastgate Centre - Harare, Zimbabwe (Koschke, 2020)

pg. 29

VENTILATION SYSTEMS OF TERMITE MOUNDS and its application to the Eastgate Centre

2.2

A fascinating and one of the main fo-

air spaces that are spread throughout the

cuses of the Eastgate Centre is the

building (figure 16) with an operating fan

amalgamation of two different natural

to enhance the heat storage and air flow.

ventilation systems that are present in

Meanwhile, the excess heat from the us-

different types of termite mounds. Turn-

ers, machinery, and the building’s ther-

er and Soar’s (2008) research paper on

mal mass creates a thermosiphon flow

termite mounds and its application to

from the office and retail spaces towards

living buildings discusses the success

the top stacks and into the chimneys,

of Pearce’s adaptation and application

mimicking the termite mounds (figure

of termite mound ventilation system in

18) that let the hot air out resulting in

the Eastgate centre. One of the very first

a balanced interior temperature without

models of termite mound functions was

the use of unsustainable technology for

Martin Lüscher’s thermosiphon mech-

heating or cooling a large structure such

anism which operates in mounds with

as the Eastgate Centre.

closed chimneys and includes a porous wall structure. The alternative ventilation system, known as a stack effect or induced flow, can be seen in mounds with open chimneys (figure 15). The similarity between this system and the Eastgate Centre is visible as seen on figure 17 . The induced flow system is adapted and applied with the stacks of office and retail blocks that open out into the vast Figure 15: Ventilation systems found in termite mounds (Turner and Soar, 2008) Figure 16: Mimicked ventilation system of the Eastgate Centre (Asknature, 2021)

pg. 30

15

16

pg. 31

17

18

Figure 17: Interior stacks of the Eastgate Centre (Fehrenbacher, 2012) Figure 18: Chimneys of the Eastgate Centre (Pearce, 2016)

pg. 32

THE SUCCESS OF COMMERCIALISM AT THE EASTGATE CENTRE with the use of Biomimicry in its Architecture

2.3

With the population constantly increas-

Therefore, in questioning the effectivity

ing, the demand for material goods is

of Biomimicry on commercial architec-

proportionally increasing. With the aim

ture, is it possible that a more environ-

of feeding the desires of communities to

mental and sustainability focused design

satisfy their material needs, the built en-

approach applied to commercial struc-

vironment is constantly enhancing com-

tures would have a positive impact on

mercial structures, using the architectur-

the environment and the quality of ar-

al creativity as a method of marketing to

chitecture as argued by Rudofsky?

attract the targeted audiences. Bernard Rudofsky (1964), however, has deemed that Architects are partially to blame for diminishing the focus and improvement of dwellings and “that they were mostly ‘concerned with problems of business and prestige’” (Morgan, 2018). Along with this he argues the negative impact of commercialism on the “quality of architecture and the environment as a whole” (Morgan, 2018) .

pg. 33

Focusing on the aesthetic approach of Bi-

minished the negative environmental

omimicry and using the Eastgate centre

impact by regulating the heat within the

as a case study, Rudofsky’s view of nega-

structure. This shows that commercial-

tive impact of commercialism, to an ex-

ism does not have to have a negative

tent, can be neglected. One of the main

impact on the quality of architecture

recognitions of Biomimetic Architecture

and the environment. Furthermore, it

is mimicking the physical appearance

is evident that the aesthetic factor of a

of natural elements and applying it to a

Biomimetic approach can be effectively

structure in order to enhance a certain

utilised in developing the sustainability

function. As seen in figure 19, the pro-

of commercial space as seen through

jecting stone components, made from

Pearce’s adoption of projecting stone

precast concrete and brushed to unmask

components as a façade for the Eastgate

the granite aggregate, replicate the “li-

Centre. Additionally, the quality of archi-

chen covered rocks” of Zimbabwe’s wild

tecture, in the case of the Eastgate Cen-

sceneries (figure 20). Furthermore, the

tre, is not undermined by the purpose of

stone components, while protecting the

commercialism as suggested by Rudofsky

small windows from the sun, increas-

(1964) but uses the architecture as an

es the external surface of the building

aesthetic and environmentally friendly

which enhances the heat gain during

advantage to accentuate its purpose by

the day and loss by night (Pearce, 2016).

attracting a large number of the public

Understanding the replication of natural

due to the unique façade and structure

features that enhances the function and

implemented by Pearce.

provides environmental comfort highlights that the Eastgate Centre has diFigure 19: Projecting stone components of the Eastgate Centre Facade (Williams, 2020) Figure 20: Lichen covered rock landscape of Zimbabwe - Photo by Vladislav T. Jirousek (Dzwowa, 2021)

pg. 34

19

20

pg. 35

Economic benefits of the Eastgate Cen-

for the purpose of the structure and has

tre: Pearce having incorporated a said

created an advantageous aftermath for

Biomimetic approach in the Eastgate

the environment. Therefore, Pearce’s

Centre has further created an economic

use of Biomimetic principles in the East-

success as well as a beneficial environ-

gate Centre prove to be successfully ad-

mental impact. It can be understood that

vocated, all the while justifying the ef-

Rudofksy’s view of commercial struc-

fectivity of using Biomimetic principles

tures creating negative environmental

in commercial structures by enhancing

impacts, in this case can be overlooked.

environmental, sustainable, economical,

Taking in to account, the sustainability

and commercial factors.

and energy usage of the structure, two main principles that Biomimetic architecture aims to achieve, the Eastgate Centre uses 35% less energy compared to the surrounding commercial buildings (Jacobson, 2010). Addressing the economic benefit of the Biomimetic structure, the Eastgate Centre managed to save up to $3.5 million in energy costs during the initial five years since its opening (Parr, 2012). This clarifies that the adoption of Biomimetic functions based on energy and thermal regulation has indeed created a beneficial outcome

pg. 36

REALISING THE EASTGATE CENTRE IS NOT ALL BIOMIMETIC the failures of the imposed sustainability

2.4

As explained in the previous chapter,

adapted method in the construction of

“Biomimicry is concerned with func-

the Eastgate Centre.

tional solutions” (Pawlyn, 2016) that

The structure foundation is con-

create a reduced environmental impact

structed of reinforced concrete and the

and aims mainly towards zero energy

frame from steelwork. The exterior uses

and waste production. While a Biomi-

concrete slabs and bricks (Smith, 1997,

metic approach is strongly expressed as

p.5). The exterior materials are known

eco-friendly and sustainable, “this is not

for absorbing the heat without altering

always how the practice of Biomimic-

the interior temperature, similar to that

ry unfolds” (Marshall and Lozeva, 2009,

of the termite mounds. Even though

p.2). Termite mounds, the inspiration

Pearce was targeting a self-cooling struc-

for the Eastgate Centre, are construct-

ture, the use of low and high capacity

ed by accumulating mud from below

fans are operated throughout the day

the ground, mixing it with the termite’s

and night “in order to help flush the

saliva and other fluid excretions and ex-

hot air stored during the day with cool

truding the structure. The termites make

air during the night” (Jacobson, 2010).

a decision on the placement of the mud

Therefore, Jacobson (2010) argues that

mixture based on climatic, environmen-

the use of low and high capacity fans

tal, and social conditions (Fry, 1996). The

eliminates the Biomimetic approach that

mounds therefore, result in a sustaina-

was said to be used by Pearce due to the

ble process of construction due to the

external and unsustainable factor adding

natural sourcing and recycling of mate-

onto the mimicked and adapted mate-

rials caused through weathering. Pearce

rials. Therefore, according to Pawlyn’s

however, does not utilise a similar or

views, Pearce’s Biomimetic approach of

pg. 37

the Eastgate Centre in the case of con-

system emulated from termite mounds

struction and function is not entirely

prove to have a sustainable outcome

Biomimetic as termite mounds do not

for the commercial structure justifying

require external cooling technologies

its effectivity. However, considering Bio-

to regulate the interior temperatures.

mimicry is a fairly new field and method

It can be further understood that a Bio-

of approaching a more sustainable built

mimetic approach may not be the most

environment, it can be accepted that

appropriate, as of yet, towards large

the Eastgate Centre has taken the first

commercial structures due to the com-

steps of mimicking nature, not entirely

plications in functions with the aim of

through technology or construction but

sustainability and a positive impact on

via concept and system by providing a

the environment. Provided that Pearce

clearer understanding of natural systems

may have developed a more fitting and

of termite mounds.

similar construction approach with the use of more appropriate materials to that of termite mounds, the Eastgate Centre, even though sustainable to an extent, could have been Biomimetically more successful. According to Marshall and Lozeva (2009), the Eastgate Centre is more certified to be a technocentric structure rather than Biomimetic. The principles, design, and construction of the thermal regulation and ventilation

pg. 38

Commercial structures such as the Eastgate Centre, although has an exceptional application of ventilation and thermal regulation system similar to that of termite mounds, it can only be regarded as a sustainable building. Consequently, it is troublesome to understand the overall “Biomimicry” of the structure due to the minimal application of what is known and defined to be Biomimetic. Additional projects classed as Biomimetic, such

21

as the Eden Project by Grimshaw Architects in Cornwall, UK (figure 21) and BIQ house in Hamburg, Germany (figure 22) have similar points of concern regarding the extent to which it is Biomimetic. Even though not commercial, these structures can be identified to focus on a single step in the wider approach of Biomimicry therefore, does not and is unable to be classified as solely Biomimetic due to the lack of knowledge thus far on the functional mechanism of natural systems and available technologies and materials that

22

assist.

Figure 21: Eden Project, Cornwall, United Kingdom - Photo by Richard Saker (Simpson, 2021) Figure 22: BIQ house, Hamburg, Germany (Loomans, 2013) - see chapter 4 for further details on BIQ house

pg. 39

MATERIAL ECOLOGY

CHAPTER 3

“Through growth and programmed decomposition, organism – becomes – shelter and shelter – becomes – organism – a bona fide Material Ecology” (Oxman, 2020).

pg. 40

SUSTAINABLE MATERIALS 3.1

With insight to Pawlyn and Benyus’s laws

as sustainable or have a low-environ-

of conducting a Biomimetic project, it

mental impact. Timber is one of the most

can be seen that each category of Bio-

sustainable materials in the construction

mimicry in the current architectural era

industry with a high durability and low

is advancing and implementing new

embodied carbon footprint all the while

technologies that imitate natural sys-

being a readily accessible and renewable

tems. However, it is recognisable that

material (Buro-Happold, 2021).

the material sector is lacking this said

Likewise, one of the few mate-

advancement even though it may be cat-

rials that have proved its sustainability

egorised as one of the most important

is ETFE (Ethylene Tetrafluoroethylene).

focuses towards a sustainable design ap-

Found in 1982 (Quirk, 2014), this ma-

proach. The sun-baked clay brick is one

terial is known to be sustainable due to

of the earliest materials that have been

its long-life as it does not degrade under

used to construct some of the most per-

UV light and the material can be 100%

manent structures in the history of archi-

recycled to produce new ETFE sheets.

tecture (Quirk, 2014). Bricks are still one

Meanwhile the production of ETFE uses

of the world’s most commonly used con-

a water based process therefore, does

struction materials. Since the bricks, un-

not require additional solvents and pro-

sustainable materials such as steel, con-

duces lightweight sheets that require

crete, glass, iron, and PVC are being used

considerably low amounts of structural

in the construction of all architectural

support (Construction wiki, 2013). ETFE

structures. Compared to the handful of

and Timber are two of the only popular-

unsustainable materials in the construc-

ised sustainable materials present in the

tion industry, only a few can be regarded

construction industry. Therefore, it is

pg. 41

safe to say that focusing on producing sustainable materials would be the most beneficial advancement in the field of Biomimicry.

Neri Oxman, a professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology Media Lab, is well known in the architecture industry for her work on material ecology. Material Ecology is a combination of “technological advances of computational design, synthetic biology, and digital fabrication” (Green, 2018), in other words, Oxman and her team have experimented with moss, mushrooms, and apple pectin as well as animal behaviours and characteristics in order to develop compostable structures or products that hold a certain degree of sustainability. With the initiatives of fabricating materials, Oxman aims to apply nature’s characteristics to large scale designs with the hopes of employing the material outcomes onto future sustainable designs and possibly architecture.

pg. 42

AGUAHOJA CASE STUDY 3.2

One of Oxman’s main projects is the

material can be “programmed” to decay

Aguahoja (agua-hocha), a water-based

within a required amount of time as nat-

biopolymer pavilion. Oxman’s initiative

ural materials without causing environ-

to create the pavilion (figure 24) arose

mental pollution (Oxman, 2020).

from the fact that 400 million tonnes of plastic is produced world-wide and only 12% of the plastics have been incinerated and 9% have been recycled (UN, 2021).

With this information, Oxman proposed the creation of organic structures that include more efficient material properties and do not cause environmental harm as man-made polymers would do. The use of three molecular components – cellulose, chitin, and pectin, have been recommended by Oxman in order to construct a wide range of functional

23

materials without any synthetic associations. The Aguahoja is a digitally fabricated biopolymer pavilion that proposes an alternative to plastic with material properties that can be adjusted and finetuned, including the material density, opacity and colour, smell and taste. The Figure 23: Close up of Chitosan sample used in Aguahoja (Oxman, 2013b) FIgure 24: Aguahoja (Oxman, 2020)

pg. 43

pg. 24 44

Cellulose is an organic compound and the most common biopolymer. Containing immense amounts of glucose molecules, Cellulose can be found in plants, algae, and bacteria. It is the main structural molecule within the cell walls of plants (Helmenstine, 2019). One of the

25

main biopolymers used in the fabrication of Aguahoja is Chitin which has been around for over 200 years and is a molecular compound found in exoskeletons of insects and invertebrates. With over 1 billion tonnes of Chitin naturally produced, it has the ability to create solid structures such as insect wings and when combined with other molecular

26

components such as calcium carbonate, stronger elements such as shells can be fabricated (Lane, McLaughlin and Whitehouse, 2017). Figures 25-27 show Chitin in its different states in which the gel state has been used to create the transparent material of Aguahoja.

27 Figure 25: Shrimp shell derived Chitin (Oxman, 2020) Figure 26: Dried Chitosan derived from Chitin (Oxman, 2020) Figure 27: Different concentrations of Chitosan in gel form (Oxman, 2020)

pg. 45

Process of fabrication:

drogels” (Oxman, 2020) that can be 3D

Aguahoja was fabricated using a robot-

printed from small millimetre scales to

ic platform designed for 3D printing bi-

large meter based structures.

omaterials. The shape and composition of the material could be controlled and varied by altering the following; physical properties – stiffness and opacity, changes in environmental conditions – load, temperature, levels of humidity, and fabrication constraints – degrees of freedom, arm speed, and nozzle pressure (Oxman, 2020). Unlike other polymers, the material of Aguahoja collection (figure 28) reacts to environmental conditions by changing in shape, behaviour, and colour according to the inconsistencies in heat, humidity, and sunlight.

“Such time-based ‘temporal’ behaviour is utilized as a design feature, one that is able to sense, inform the user of, and adapt to changing environmental conditions” (Oxman, 2020). The robotic platform is designed to modify biopolymers into “high-performance sustainable hy28 Figure 28: Aguahoja collection (Shen, 2018)

pg. 46

Final product: Made up of 5740 fallen leaves, 6500 apple skins, and 3135 shrimp shells, Aguahoja stands at five meters tall. With the combination of shell and skin like elements exposed to water evaporation, the pavilion’s strength and sturdiness is designed to resist changing environmental conditions such as heat and humidity. When exposed to rainwater, the structure will degrade back into the earth, “restoring their constituent building blocks to the existing ecosystem” (Oxman, 2020). This completely natural structure, “grown” and manually fabricated using the technology at hand creates immense opportunities for future structures, both large and small, to follow the sustainability driven building conventions. Minimising the use of harmful substances in the process and product of structures and the materials it uses has the ability to initiate

29

a significant reduction in various pollutants.

Figure 29: Aguahoja material close up (Shen, 2018)

pg. 47

Biomimetic effectivity:

mimicry and have a possible opportuni-

Understandably so, the design and exper-

ty to apply the results and functions into

imental approach that Oxman and her

the wider scale of the built environment.

team have conducted conforms into an

With an accurate approach to Biomimic-

extremely precise Biomimetic approach.

ry, the effectivity of focusing on material

Oxman’s methods of fabricating the ma-

productions is slowly but surely on the

terial uses inspiration from natural func-

path of benefiting the field of sustaina-

tions; the natural process of decay, all

bility.

the while using organic compounds that do not produce harmful excretions in the process or the product. The Biomimetic approach is vivid as she uses the natural and organic formulas and adapts it to correspond with the required external conditions of a space to create a desired outcome. The idea and approach of Biomimicry is appropriately apparent in Oxman’s approach as it further produces a sustainable and environmentally friendly product. Therefore, it can be recognised that the approach of Biomimicry, with a fixate on material development and advancement may be the central focus that is required to expand in the field of Bio-

pg. 48

SILK PAVILION CASE STUDY 3.3

The process of silk production and

silk worm and eliminates any chance of

understanding the Bombyx Mori Silk

reproduction proving its unsustainability

worm (figure 30):

and further highlighting a linear mod-

A further example of Oxman’s applica-

el (Fabio Gramazio, Kohler and Langen-

tion of Biomimicry into the built envi-

berg, 2014, pp.249–255).

ronment can be seen through the construction process and outcome of the silk pavilion – a digitally fabricated fibre based structure (figure 31). The inspiration for the silk pavilion was stimulated by the Bombyx Mori silk worm. The silk worm goes through five stages of growth. After two months of grazing on Mulberry leaves, the silk worm matures into a silk-producing caterpillar, the fifth stage in which it spins its silk cocoon.

The need to focus on a more sustainable method of silk production was due to the shortened life span of a silk worm in the typical method of silk production which

30

involves harvesting and soaking the cocoons in soapy water. Thereafter, an end of a single fibre is pulled out and spun into silk. This method however, kills the Figure 30: Bombyx Mori Silk Worm (Hirst, 2019) Figure 31: Silk Pavilion (Francis, 2013)

pg. 49

pg.3150

Analysis of silk worm movements and

21mm while heights prior to this only

material properties:

consisted of flat surfaces of silk. The den-

With this inspiration, Oxman and her

sity of the silk surface varied according to

team navigated a study on silk worms

the distance from the central pole (Fabio

to map their movements throughout a

Gramazio, Kohler and Langenberg, 2014,

3-day period in which a cocoon is spun.

pp.249–255).

The 3D map of its movements were then converted into a visual representation (figure 32). Using highly developed imaging technologies such as MicroCT (microtomography) and SEM (Scanning Electron Microscope), the patterns were cross examined to understand and analyse the organisational properties, textures and material properties across the cocoon sections. With prior research of

32

silk worms and spinning cocoons, a template experiment was conducted with varying heights (figure 33) and morphological features in order to examine the relationship between the surface and the fibre characteristics. Results of this experimented showed that a cocoon structure only emerged at a height of

33

Figure 32: Thermal template of silk web (Oxman, 2013a) Figure 33: Height measurements of cocoon (Oxman, 2013a)

pg. 51

Process of construction:

With the primary structure constructed,

Digital fabrication was used to construct

Oxman and her team brought 6500 live

a primary structure, a frame, intricately

silk-worms and provided them with the

designed to allow the silk-worms to spin

required habitat conditions and fed them

silk without altering any environmen-

Mulberry leaves prior to their fifth stage

tal conditions they require and without

of the life cycle. Once the silk worms

creating changes that would be harm-

had started spinning silk, they were

ful to the silk worm. The primary frame

placed onto the digitally fabricated pri-

was constructed of 26 polygonal panels

mary structure. Most of the silk worms

made of silk threads. The geometry of

were observed to locate at the top of the

the frame was assembled using an algo-

frame due to higher temperatures and

rithm that arranged a single continuous

low lighting (figure 34). Post spinning,

thread across the patches of the frame

after 2-3 days, the silk worms were col-

which created varying degrees of density.

lected in a drop cloth placed below the

In understanding the silk-worms’ natural

structure and allowed to continue their

movement to darker and denser spaces

life cycle, lay eggs, and reproduce with-

according to natural light and heat, the

out harm (Fabio Gramazio, Kohler and

primary structure was aligned in a specif-

Langenberg, 2014, pp.249–255).

ic state that allowed certain areas have differing thicknesses of silk spun by the silk worm (Oxman, 2013a).

Figure 34: Silkworms at higher points of the structure (Howarth, 2013)

pg. 52

34pg. 53

Product, purpose, and Biomimetic ap-

such as the Eastgate Centre would expe-

plication:

rience a higher scope of complications if

The final outcome of this process is in-

it were to utilise a Biomimetic construc-

fact a silk pavilion that is entitled to a

tion approach like that of the Silk Pavil-

combination of digital and biological fab-

ion. Albeit having complications in ap-

rication (figure 35). Oxman and her team

plying the methods foreseen by Oxman

have observed the natural process and

and her team to larger structures in the

behaviours of the Bombyx Mori silk worm

built environment, it is justifiable that

and applied its methods of silk produc-

such experimentations in materiality and

tion to constructing a structure without

methods of construction are a colossal

negatively impacting the natural system.

step forward in the fields of design, sus-

This Biomimetic approach of observing

tainability, and technological innovations

and application highlights the possibility

and provides a broad spectrum for fu-

and effectivity of the technique as it is

ture advancements.

known to produce a stable structure all the while adhering to a close loop cycle.

Referring back to the Eastgate centre, the fabrication of the silk pavilion proposes a method in which the construction and the process could employ a Biomimetic approach which would in turn allow for a greater range of sustainability from the building. However, it is reasonable to state that a commercial structure Figure 35: Silkworms at work or Silk Pavilion (Oxman, 2013a)

pg. 54

pg. 55 35

THE ENTAGLED CONCEPT OF BIOMIMICRY CHAPTER 4

In order to be able to conclude on the effectivity of Biomimetic applications, it is vital to consider the theoretical point of view of Biomimicry. It is crucial to understand the perspective of a Biomimetic approach that designers and architects are envisioned with in order to recognise the position in which there may be space for error or mismanagement of the proposed design approach that is predicted to bring about immense advancements in the fields of design, technology, science, and sustainability.

pg. 56

THEORETICAL POSSIBILITY

of implementing Biomimicry in the wider built environment

4.1

Even though the field of design is radi-

The two latter principles are apparent in

cally focused on recovering and restoring

comprehending the approach towards

the environment, and concentrating on

nature and design. We are not aware

nature and biology as a mode of inspira-

of the said mysteries that nature has to

tion and learning to do so, there seems

offer and therefore, we should not be-

to be an “idolisation of nature that seeks

lieve that we understand all of nature’s

to cut humanity and human achievement

systems and functions. The first princi-

down to size” (Kaplinsky, 2006, p.67).

ple however, Kaplinsky clarifies by stat-

Kaplinsky’s principles (as stated below)

ing that the idea of expecting natural

express the superiority of nature and its

solutions to natural limits, such as waste

system that diminish human activity and

management, is misguided. This is be-

advancement, the positive outlook that

cause nature itself produces waste that

is followed by the communities that use

is not recycled or included in the close-

nature as a means of design and devel-

loop systems that it has proposed, for ex-

opment.

ample fossils which humans are using for our advantage in producing unsustaina-

“The natural world places important con-

ble energies. As part of the nature, hu-

straints on our activities; nature presents

mans do rely and depend on nature itself,

mysteries that are beyond our compre-

however, the experiences we gain from

hension; we should be humble and place

nature and the course of action we take

diminished confidence in our abilities”

towards utilising nature spirals around

(Kaplinsky, 2006, p.68).

the existing technological systems. Kaplinsky (2006, p.68) argues that it is the “comfort of modern technologies

pg. 57

pg. 58

that allow us to romanticise natural solu-

ties that have hopes of “recovering na-

tions” or in other words, the capabilities

ture” is based merely on the basis that

of the advanced technologies that hu-

“only a basic shift in humanity’s self-un-

mans are using as solutions are under-

derstanding and its attitude toward na-

mined by the lack of understanding that

ture will prevent social and ecological ca-

circulates around nature, which poses

tastrophe” (Zimmerman, 1994, p. 185).

the said limits and constraints in the

Fisch argues that Biomimicry “promotes

world of environmentally driven practic-

itself as a new science of nature” (Fisch,

es. Referring to the Eastgate Centre, it is

2017, p.798) which disregards the pur-

evident that Pearce is troubled with such

pose of the approach. He states that Bi-

limits and constraints as the inspiration

omimicry should instead encourage the

he derived from nature does not en-

use of technology and allow for advance-

hance the technology that is available to

ments in technics rather than “reducing

him. He conspicuously uses the comfort

technology to mere functional instru-

of the technologies to present a natural

mentality” (Fisch, 2017, p.799).

solution, one which surely is inspired by

In order to further apprehend

nature. However, he uses the available

Kaplinsky’s perception on the approach

technology to execute the mimicked na-

of Biomimicry, Fisch refers to Benyus and

ture rather than mimicking the nature it-

Oxman and their notion of a Biomimet-

self and adapting the technology to con-

ic approach. Benyus expresses a “main-

front the limitations.

stream Biomimicry” (Fisch, 2017, p.799)

Moreover, as Michael Fisch (2017)

in which nature is treated as a “blue-

has pointed out in his paper, the mindset

print” that can be mimicked using availa-

of the environment focused communi-

ble technologies.

This objectification of nature is appar-

arises.

ent in Pearce’s application of Biomimicry

According to the understandings

incorporated in the Eastgate Centre as

of Biomimicry discussed above, it is evi-

Pearce uses a natural function as a form

dent that Biomimicry, in theory, does not

of inspiration and mimics it using tech-

always provide a corresponding outcome

nological apparatus in order to corre-

in practice. Similarly Benyus’s theory of

spond with the built environment. Fisch

Biomimicry, portrayed as an eco-friend-

(2017) further argues the effectivity of

ly approach to design, can be disregard-

Benyus’s mainstream understanding in

ed as an effective Biomimetic approach

comparison to Oxman’s technique which

can come across as one that is more

is understood to be an entanglement be-

adamant on the first point suggested

tween technology and natural functions

by Marshall and Lozeva. The belief that

suggesting that the latter allows for the

technological advancements and appa-

advancement in technology all the while

ratus can restore global climate issues is

producing sustainable and natural prod-

known as techno-centrism (Marshall and

ucts or outcomes. With this in mind, the

Lozeva, 2009, p.3). Ideas and values that

divide between the use of technology

revolve around ecology, on the other

in two contrasting approaches becomes

hand and in contrast to techno-centrism,

unclear due to the difficulty in grasp-

is recognised as eco-centrism, wherein

ing the role of technology integrated in

“it is possible to interpret Biomimicry as

a Biomimetic approach. Therefore, the

potentially bridging the two philosophies

question whether Biomimicry is simply

since it involves the creation of technol-

a technocentric idea or whether there is

ogy that values nature” (Marshall and

potential and effectivity in its application

Lozeva, 2009, p.3).

pg. 59

It is argued that Biomimicry may have

tric Biomimicry as she has developed and

a more dominant focus on technology,

bettered available technologies to create

as opposed to Benyus’s, although like

organic and natural structures that echo

Oxman’s, the effectivity is apparent.

natural systems and functions whilst pro-

Biomimicry may be more technocen-

viding a sustainable aftereffect, therefore

tric than eco-centric, even though the

proving an enhanced effectivity.

straightforward understanding leads to a focus on the environment. However, Biomimicry being perceived as a technocentric approach, like Oxman’s, undoubtedly can be regarded as more effective due to the advancement in both technology and sustainability without diminishing human capabilities and confidences, as referred to above. This makes it evident that the Eastgate Centre focusing on an eco-centric Biomimicry is not all that effective as it has not allowed room for technological advancements. Pearce has merely used existing technologies to minimise the environmental impact with inspiration from a natural system.

Whereas Oxman’s pavilions, Aguahoja and the Silk Pavilion, use a techno-cen-

pg. 60

PHYSICAL POSSIBILITY

of implementing Biomimicry in the wider built environment

4.2

In recognising the theoretical perspec-

two structures discussed previously, the

tive of Biomimicry, it is evident that

process of construction involves existing

there are several different approaches to

technologies that have been developed

applying Biomimicry into the built envi-

and adapted to have the capability of

ronment. Benyus’s mainstream idea of

creating natural structures. This high-

a Biomimetic approach involves observ-

lights an advancement in technological

ing a natural system, comprehending its

innovations all the while producing or-

functions, and applying the natural tech-

ganic and sustainable outcomes. None-

nique to a wider design or built structure

theless, Oxman’s approach is not entire-

with the use of existing technologies.

ly advanced enough to be applied to the

The aim of this approach is to create a

wider scale of the built environment,

sustainable outcome and minimise the

however, her strategy has been evident

negative environmental impact. Oxman’s

in architectural structures such as the

technique of the application of Biomim-

BIQ house of Hamburg, Germany (figure

icry, even though similar to the first steps

36).

of Benyus’s approach of observing and comprehending natural systems, has a substantially contrasting outcome. Her procedure involves conducting experiments to clarify the characteristics of the organic compounds that she aims to use in order to construct her design. Furthermore, her outcome does not include technology. As seen through her Figure 36: BIQ house facade (Arup, 2013) 36

pg. 61

The BIQ house (Bio Intelligent Quotient)

and fermented, hence converting it to

is one of the world’s first buildings to have

biogas which provides energy through-

a bio-receptive façade designed by the

out the structure. The carbon dioxide re-

ARUP group and completed in 2013. The

leased in the process of converting the

façade is known to generate energy from

biogas to electricity is collected and used

algal biomass and solar thermal heat

to feed the algae stored inside the glass

using 200 m2 of algae filled bio-reactive

panels (The Architecture Student, 2014).

panels (figure 37) which generates the energy required for the building all the while reducing the carbon dioxide emissions by 6 tonnes per year. The process of photosynthesis applied to the façade of the structure uses glass photo-bioreactors installed to face the south-west and south-east sides. Furthermore, the structure provides a progressive shading strategy, thermal insulation, and noise cancellation features. Each of the 129 panels that make up the façade create a “greenhouse environment for the algae” (Starr, 2013). With the provision of nutrients, carbon dioxide, and sunlight, the algae is able to photosynthesize and produce biomass. This is then collected Figure 37: BIQ house facade panels (Arup, 2013) 37

pg. 62

It is evident that the BIQ house is a struc-

BIQ house uses technological apparatus

ture that bridges the gap between the

in order to aid the growth of the natu-

two differing approaches of Biomimicry

ral elements that are integrated in the

as discussed above. ARUP uses the sim-

structure of the façade panels. Howev-

ple understanding of photosynthesis and

er, the apparent difference between the

derives of it a façade that provides for

Aguahoja is that Oxman uses technolog-

a sustainable outcome in supplying the

ical support although produces a purely

energy required for the building all the

organic outcome whereas the BIQ house

while minimising the release of carbon

façade uses technological support inte-

dioxide, instead using it as nutrients for

grated into organic system – a combina-

the algae – a closed-loop system. The

tion of mainstream and techno-centric

mainstream Biomimetic approach is no-

Biomimicry.

ticeable in the structures’ façade due to the use of technology that is incorporated within the function of deriving energy.

At the same time however, it can be verified that the façade, with the use of natural elements and a closed-loop system allows for the advancement of technology as well as using it as an advantageous apparatus for the buildings’ energy system. In comparing the approach exemplified in the Eastgate Centre, which utilises solely technological apparatus, the

pg. 63

CONCLUSION

CHAPTER 5

Having understood the meanings and theories of Biomimicry and its recognition along with examples of Biomimetic applications in the built environment, one would try to understand whether the effectivity of Biomimicry is based on the amount of room available for the expansion of technology that can be developed to create pure organic and sustainable structures. We are aware of the essential points of focus that are required in order to categorise and/or apply a Biomimetic technique to a structure as formerly established by Pawlyn and Benyus’s set of rules.

pg. 64

Having understood these principles and

le apparatus to mimic a closed-loop sys-

administering it to consider the Biomim-

tem is praised. Nonetheless, Pearce’s

icry of the Eastgate Centre, the con-

arrangement of technology to mimic a

clusion attained to be that Pearce had

natural system is understood to be sus-

indeed used inspiration from a nature–

tainably ineffective as it does not allow

termite mounds, and in attempts to

room for technological advancements

mimic this system, with the use of tech-

and continues to express a linear sys-

nological apparatus, he has successfully

tem equivalent to any other sustainable

achieved the construction of a sustaina-

structure. This brings about the question,

ble structure focusing on the sectors of

regardless of whether a mainstream or

thermal regulation and energy efficien-

technocentric Biomimicry is more suc-

cy. In this regard, it can be said that the

cessful, is it effective and applicable to

Biomimetic approach known to Pearce

the wider commercial scale of the built

has proven to be extremely effective in

environment?

producing a sustainable structure that has contributed to lowering the negative environmental impact that is induced by the built environment.

The theories of Kaplinsky (2006), Fisch (2017), Marshall and Lozeva (2009) focus on the contrasting techno-centric factors involved with Biomimicry. In all cases, Oxman’s Biomimetic approach that integrates technology as a profitab-

pg. 65

Using the Eastgate Centre as an example

measure of development but has the

of a commercial structure, it is evident

potential to aid technological advances.

that applying a Biomimetic design ap-

With Oxman and her team commencing

proach does prove to be effective in the

a new and accurate view and applica-

wider scale of the built environment due

tion of Biomimicry that encourages and

to the easily accessible technological

inspires technological and sustainable

apparatus all the while producing a sus-

innovations, applying it to the areas of

tainable outcome with a reduced nega-

design and architecture, in the future,

tive impact on the environment. None-

can prove to be monumentally effective

theless, considering Oxman’s approach,

towards the sustainability of the wider

it has the potential to be effective when

commercial scale of the built environ-

enforced on smaller structures such as

ment.

the pavilions and the BIQ house. However, such applications of Biomimicry that aims to compose a closed-loop system, may not be the most effective strategy in constructing larger commercial structures considering the current advancements of technology. The possibility of imposing a natural system or process of fabrication to a structure of a larger scale may not be profitable or sustainably advantageous. Nevertheless, Biomimicry is a field of study that requires an immense

pg. 66

BIBLIOGRAPHY REFERENCES

Asknature. (2021). Passively Cooled Building Inspired by Termite Mounds. [online] Available at: https://asknature.org/innovation/passively-cooled-building-inspired-by-termite-mounds/#biomimicry-story [Accessed 17 Nov. 2021].

BBC World Service (2001). Beetle back juice | Science and Technology | BBC World Service. [online] www.bbc.co.uk. Available at: https:// www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/sci_tech/highlights/011109_beetle.shtml [Accessed 11 Jan. 2022].

Benyus, J.M. (1997). Biomimicry : innovation inspired by nature. New York: Morrow.

Boeri, S. (2018). vertical forest | Stefano Boeri Architetti. [online] Stefano Boeri Architetti. Available at: https://www.stefanoboeriarchitetti. net/en/project/vertical-forest/ [Accessed 9 Jan. 2022].

Britannica (2018). homeostasis | Definition, Examples, & Facts. In: Encyclopædia Britannica. [online] Available at: https://www.britannica. com/science/homeostasis [Accessed 12 Jan. 2022].

Buro-Happold (2021). Is timber the most sustainable building material? [online] Buro Happold. Available at: https://www.burohappold. com/articles/is-timber-the-most-sustainable-building-material/# [Accessed 14 Jan. 2022].

Construction wiki (2013). ETFE. [online] Designingbuildings.co.uk. Available at: https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/ETFE [Accessed 14 Jan. 2022].

Fabio Gramazio, Kohler, M. and Langenberg, S. (2014). Fabricate: negotiating design & making. Zürich: Gta-Verlag, pp.249–255.

Fisch, M. (2017). The Nature of Biomimicry. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 42(5), pp.795–821.

Fry, C. (1996). What termites can teach architects | BBC Earth. [online] www.bbcearth.com. Available at: https://www.bbcearth.com/ news/what-termites-can-teach-architects [Accessed 17 Nov. 2021].

Green, P. (2018). Who Is Neri Oxman? The New York Times. [online] 6 Oct. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/06/style/neri-oxman-mit. html [Accessed 9 Oct. 2020].

Helmenstine, A.M. (2019). What Is Cellulose? Facts and Functions. [online] ThoughtCo. Available at: https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-cellulose-definition-4777807 [Accessed 15 Jan. 2022].

pg. 67

Helmy, P. (2021). 10 Examples of Biomorphic Architecture around the world - RTF | Rethinking The Future. [online] RTF | Rethinking The Future. Available at: https://www.re-thinkingthefuture.com/architectural-styles/a3096-10-examples-of-biomorphic-architecture-around-the-world/ [Accessed 9 Jan. 2022].

ICE (2015). Eden Project. [online] Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE). Available at: https://www.ice.org.uk/what-is-civil-engineering/what-do-civil-engineers-do/the-eden-project [Accessed 11 Jan. 2022].

Jacobson, H. (2010). Learning From Nature: Biological Templates for Adapting to Climate Changes. [Research paper] pp.3–6. Available at: https://web. mit.edu/nature/projects_14/pdfs/2014-BiomimicryResearchPaper_HJacobson.pdf [Accessed 7 Jan. 2022].

Kaplinsky, J. (2006). Biomimicry versus Humanism. Architectural Design, 76(1), pp.66–71.

Lane, A., McLaughlin, K. and Whitehouse, L. (2017). Chitin. [online] Biology Dictionary. Available at: https://biologydictionary.net/chitin/ [Accessed 15 Jan. 2022].

Marshall, A. and Lozeva, S. (2009). Questioning the Theory and Practice of Biomimicry. 4(1), pp.1–10.

McCain, M. (2020). Bringing the Outdoors In: The Benefits of Biophilia. [online] NRDC. Available at: https://www.nrdc.org/experts/maria-mccain/bringing-outdoors-benefits-biophilia#:~:text=Biophilia%20is%20defined%20as%20the [Accessed 9 Jan. 2022].

Morgan, D. (2018). Kant for architects. New York: Routledge.

Oxman, N. (2013a). Silk Pavilion I. [online] Silk Pavilion I. Available at: https://oxman.com/projects/silk-pavilion-i [Accessed 25 Jul. 2021].

Oxman, N. (2020). Aguahoja. [online] Aguahoja. Available at: https://oxman.com/projects/aguahoja [Accessed 19 Oct. 2021].

Parr, D. (2012). Biomythology: Eastgate-gate 1 (or How the Eastgate Centre, Harare, is not like a termite mound). [online] Biomimicron. Available at: https://biomimicron.wordpress.com/2012/12/11/biomythology-eastgate-gate-or-how-the-eastgate-centre-harare-is-not-like-a-termite-mound/ [Accessed 7 Jan. 2022].

Pawlyn, M. (2016a). Biomimicry in architecture. 2nd ed. Newcastle Upon Tyne: Riba Publishing.

Pawlyn, M. (2016b). How biomimicry can be applied to architecture. [online] www.ft.com. Available at: https://www.ft.com/content/e2041a1e-0d3211e6-b41f-0beb7e589515 [Accessed 13 Jan. 2022].

Pearce, M. (2016). Eastgate Building Harare. [online] Mickpearce.com. Available at: https://www.mickpearce.com/Eastgate.html [Accessed 17 Nov. 2021].

Quirk, V. (2014). INFOGRAPHIC: Materials in Architecture (A History). [online] ArchDaily. Available at: https://www.archdaily.com/476252/infographic-materials-in-architecture-a-history [Accessed 14 Jan. 2022].

pg. 68

Rudofsky, B. (1964). Architecture without architects : a short introduction to non-pedigreed architecture : Catalogue of an exhibition shown at the musuem of Modern Art 1964-5. London: Academy Editions.

Smith, F. (1997). Eastgate, Harare, Zimbabwe. The Arup Journal, 32(1), pp.3-8.

Snaves (2018). Biomimetic Architecture: Sagrada Familia. [online] Steemit. Available at: https://steemit.com/architecture/@snaves/biomimetic-architecture-sagrada-familia [Accessed 9 Jan. 2022].

Starr, M. (2013). BIQ House: World’s first building powered by algae. [online] CNET. Available at: https://www.cnet.com/news/biq-house-worlds-firstbuilding-powered-by-algae/ [Accessed 19 Jan. 2022].

The Architecture Student. (2014). BIQ House. [online] Available at: https://www.thearchitecturalstudent.com/2014/08/biq-house.html#:~:text=As%20 the%20world [Accessed 19 Jan. 2022].

Turner, J.S. and Soar, R.C. (2008). Beyond biomimicry: What Termites Can Tell Us about Realizing the Living Building. [Article] pp.2–5. Available at: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.577.9558&rep=rep1&type=pdf [Accessed 17 Nov. 2021].

UN (2021). Drowning in Plastics – Marine Litter and Plastic Waste Vital Graphics. [online] UNEP - UN Environment Programme. Available at: https:// www.unep.org/resources/report/drowning-plastics-marine-litter-and-plastic-waste-vital-graphics [Accessed 15 Jan. 2022].

pg. 69

BIBLIOGRAPHY FIGURE REFERENCES Figure 1: Borson, B. (2018). The Bauhaus and Me. [online] Life of an Architect. Available at: https://www.lifeofanarchitect.com/the-bauhaus-and-me/ [Accessed 19 Oct. 2021].

Figure 2: Oxman, N. (2020). The Material Ecology Catalogue. New York: The Museum Of Modern Art, p.17, fig. 14.

Figure 3: Boeri, S. (2018). vertical forest | Stefano Boeri Architetti. [online] Stefano Boeri Architetti. Available at: https://www.stefanoboeriarchitetti.net/en/ project/vertical-forest/ [Accessed 9 Jan. 2022].

Figure 4: Walsh, N.P. (2018). Grimshaw’s Next Eden Project Could be in the North of England. [online] ArchDaily. Available at: https://www.archdaily.com/901136/ grimshaws-next-eden-project-could-be-in-the-north-of-england [Accessed 26 Jan. 2022].

Figure 5: Chiu, R. (2015). The Landscape of Perspective. [online] AHBE LAB. Available at: https://ahbelab.com/2015/11/02/the-landscape-of-perspective/ [Accessed 26 Jan. 2022].

Figure 6: Mastrandrea, L. (2008). La fabbrica di Santa Maria del Fiore. [online] Radio Papesse. Available at: https://radiopapesse.org/en/archive/sonora/la-fabbrica-di-santa-maria-del-fiore [Accessed 26 Jan. 2022].

Figure 7: Jones, R. (2013). AD Classics: La Sagrada Familia / Antoni Gaudí. [online] ArchDaily. Available at: https://www.archdaily.com/438992/ad-classics-la-sagrada-familia-antoni-gaudi [Accessed 26 Jan. 2022].

Figure 8, 9, 10, 11: Pawlyn, M. (2016a). Biomimicry in architecture. 2nd ed. Newcastle Upon Tyne: Riba Publishing.

Figure 12: Frederick, E. (2019). Could this desert beetle help humans harvest water from thin air? [online] www.science.org. Available at: https://www.science. org/content/article/could-desert-beetle-help-humans-harvest-water-thin-air [Accessed 24 Jan. 2022].

pg. 70

Figure 13: Heimbuch, J. (2020). Nature Blows My Mind! Miraculous Termite Mounds. [online] Treehugger. Available at: https://www.treehugger.com/natureblows-my-mind-miracles-termite-mounds-4857728 [Accessed 24 Jan. 2022].

Figure 14: Koschke, T. (2020). Eastgate Centre, Harare, Zimbabwe. Available at: https://www.africanstatearchitecture.co.uk/post/eastgate-centre-harare-zimbabwe [Accessed 19 Oct. 2021].

Figure 15: Turner, J.S. and Soar, R.C. (2008). Beyond biomimicry: What Termites Can Tell Us about Realizing the Living Building. [Article] pp.2–5. Available at: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.577.9558&rep=rep1&type=pdf [Accessed 17 Nov. 2021].

Figure 16: Asknature. (2021). Passively Cooled Building Inspired by Termite Mounds. [online] Available at: https://asknature.org/innovation/passively-cooled-building-inspired-by-termite-mounds/#biomimicry-story [Accessed 17 Nov. 2021].

Figure 17: Fehrenbacher, J. (2012). BIOMIMETIC ARCHITECTURE: Green Building in Zimbabwe Modeled After Termite Mounds. [online] INHABITAT. Available at: https://inhabitat.com/building-modelled-on-termites-eastgate-centre-in-zimbabwe/ [Accessed 24 Jan. 2022].

Figure 18: Pearce, M. (2016). Eastgate Building Harare. [online] Mickpearce.com. Available at: https://www.mickpearce.com/Eastgate.html [Accessed 17 Nov. 2021].

Figure 19: Williams, J. (2020). Building of the week: Eastgate, Zimbabwe. [online] The Earthbound Report. Available at: https://earthbound.report/2020/05/15/ building-of-the-week-eastgate-zimbabwe/ [Accessed 24 Jan. 2022].

Figure 20: Dzwowa, C. (2021). Mind-Boggling Rocks, Heart-Stopping Falls, and Other Dramatic Landscapes to See in Zimbabwe. [online] Fodors Travel Guide.

Available at: https://www.fodors.com/world/africa-and-middle-east/zimbabwe/experiences/news/mind-boggling-rocks-heart-stopping-falls-and-other-dramatic-landscapes-to-see-in-zimbabwe [Accessed 24 Jan. 2022].

Figure 21: Simpson, D. (2021). Inspired by a sink full of soap bubbles: how we made the Eden Project. [online] the Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2021/mar/15/how-we-made-eden-project-cornish-lost-civilisation-soap-bubbles [Accessed 24 Jan. 2022].

Figure 22: Loomans, T. (2013). The World’s First Algae-Powered Building in Hamburg. [online] Inhabitat. Available at: https://inhabitat.com/the-worlds-first-algaepowered-building-opens-in-hamburg/ [Accessed 24 Jan. 2022].

pg. 71

Figure 23: Oxman, N. (2013b). Water-Based Digital-Fabrication. [online] Water-Based Digital-Fabrication. Available at: https://oxman.com/projects/water-based-digital-fabrication [Accessed 24 Jan. 2022].

Figure 24: Oxman, N. (2020). Aguahoja. [online] Aguahoja. Available at: https://oxman.com/projects/aguahoja [Accessed 19 Oct. 2021].

Figure 25, 26, 27: Oxman, N. (2020). Aguahoja. [online] Aguahoja. Available at: https://oxman.com/projects/aguahoja [Accessed 19 Oct. 2021].

Figure 28, 29: Shen, Y. (2018). Neri Oxman and MIT Develop Programmable Biocomposites for Digital Fabrication. [online] ArchDaily. Available at: https://www.archdaily.com/894979/neri-oxman-and-mit-develop-programmable-biocomposites-for-digital-fabrication [Accessed 26 Jan. 2022].

Figure 30: Hirst, K. (2019). Who Invented Silk, and Did That Really Involve Silkworms? [online] ThoughtCo. Available at: https://www.thoughtco.com/silkworms-bombyx-domestication-170667 [Accessed 26 Jan. 2022].

Figure 31: Francis, I. (2013). Silkworm and robots work together to weave silk pavilion – GARAKAMI. [online] garakami.com. Available at: https://garakami. com/20130607/silkworm-and-robots-work-together-to-weave-silk-pavilion/amp/ [Accessed 26 Jan. 2022].

Figure 32, 33, 35: Oxman, N. (2013a). Silk Pavilion I. [online] Silk Pavilion I. Available at: https://oxman.com/projects/silk-pavilion-i [Accessed 25 Jul. 2021].

Figure 34: Howarth, D. (2013). Silkworms and robot work together to weave Silk Pavilion. [online] Dezeen. Available at: https://www.dezeen.com/2013/06/03/ silkworms-and-robot-work-together-to-weave-silk-pavilion/ [Accessed 26 Jan. 2022].

Figure 36, 37: Arup (2013). BIQ house by Arup | Apartment blocks. [online] Architonic. Available at: https://www.architonic.com/en/project/arup-biq-house/5101636 [Accessed 26 Jan. 2022].

WORD COUNT: 8898

pg. 72