Unconventional formulations in architectural curricula: An atelier on design for outer space architecture

Theories and methods of integrating digital tools into the architectural curriculum cannot be conceptualized as simply the merging of computerized tools with conventional formulations of design. This paper focuses on a case study of a workshop entitled “Mission Mars 2024: A Biomimetic Structural Organism”, as part of the studio course ARCH 202 in the spring semester of 2017 at Izmir University of Economics. It explores the use of digital architectural design tools in the context of outer space architecture, and the use of biomimicry as a design approach. We encouraged students to explore various stages of Oxman’s digital design ontology at the design level, and to employ various CAD/CAM tools as well as Virtual Re- ality (VR) and 3D representation methods. It is important to emphasise that the curriculum is a studio-based education with limited access to additional technical classes. Part of our aim was to integrate this content into the studio and allow students to explore new methods of design development. In order to free the students from conventional architectural preoccupations, we particularly chose on the surface of Mars. The paper presents a critical approach to understanding the impact of digital tools and methods on the learning outcomes of the students, which are discussed and demonstrated based on four studio outcomes.


Anker, P. (2005). The ecological colonization of space. Environmental History. 10, 239-268.

Anker, P. (2007). Buckminster Fuller as captain of Spaceship Earth. Minerva. 45, 417-434.

Blikstein, P. (2013). Digital fabrication and ’making’ in education: The democratization of invention. Edited by J. Walter-Herrmann and Büching. FabLabs: Of Machines, Makers and Inventors. Bielefeld: Transcript Publishers.

Celani, G. (2012). Digital fabrication laboratories: Pedagogy and impacts on architectural education. Nexus Network Journal, 14(3), 469-482.

Corser, R. (2010). Fabricating architecture: selected readings in digital design and manufacturing. Princeton Architectural Press.

Dinçer, E., A., Tong, H., Çağdaş, G. (2014). A computational model for mass customized housing design by using cellular automata. ITU A/Z, 11(2), 351-368.

Duarte, J., Celani, G., Pupo, R. (2011). Inserting computational technologies in architectural curricula. Edited by Ning Gu and Xyangyu Wang. Computational Design Methods and Technologies: Applications in CAD, CAM and CAE Education. IGI Global, 390-411.

Gershenfeld, N. (2012). How to make almost anything: The digital fabrication revolution. Foreign Affairs, 91(6), 43.

Gökmen, H., Sayar, Y., Süer, D. (2007). Yeniden yapılandırma sürecinde mimarlık eğitimine eleştirel bir bakış, Mimarlık, 337, 63-67.

Gül, L. F., Simisic, L., (2014). Integration of digital Fabrication in architectural curricula. Paper presented at the meeting of FabLearn Europe 2014, Digital Fabrication Conference, Aarhus University, Denmark.

Halıcı, S. M.,Turhan, G. D., Aksu, S. M., Varinlioğlu, G. (2017). Uzay mimarlığında sayısal tasarım ve üretim araçlarının değerlendirilmesi üzerine Mars özelinde bir çalışma. Paper presented at the meeting of XI. Mimarlıkta Sayısal Tasarım Ulusal Sempozyumu Konferansı MSTAS, Ankara, Turkey 22-31.

Horne, M. and Thompson, E. M. (2008). The role of virtual reality in built environment education, Journal for Education in the Built Environment, 3(1), 5-24.

Kotnik, T. (2010). Digital architec- tural design as exploration of comput- able functions, International Journal of Architectural Computing, 8(1), 1-16.

Lu, X., Clements-Croome, D., Vil- janen, M. (2012). Fractal geometry an Architecture Design: Case Study Review. Chaotic Modeling and Simulation (CMSIM), 2, 311-322.

Mars One Project (http://www.mars- one.com/mission/simulation-outpost) Mission Mars Workshop (https:// missionmars2024.wordpress.com/ blog)

Massey, J. (2015). Buckminster Full- er’s reflexive modernism. Design and Culture, 4, 325-344.

Nowak, A. (2015). Application of Voronoi diagrams in contemporary architecture and town planning. Challenges of Modern Technology, 6(2), 30- 34.

Oxman, R. (2006). Digital design thinking: in the new design is the new pedagogy. Paper presented at the meeting of 11th International Conference on Computer Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia CAADRIA 2006, Kumamoto, Japan, 37-46.

Oxman, R. (2008). Digital archi- tecture as a challenge for design ped- agogy: theory, knowledge, models and medium, Design Studies, 29(2), 99-120.

Oxman, R. Gu, N. (2015). Theories and models of parametric design thinking. Paper presented at the meet- ing of 33th eCAADe Conference Pro- ceeding. Vienna University of Technol- ogy, Austria.

Ozdemir, K., Halici, S. M. (2016). Roll SEED Roll: An Architectural Assessment of a Spherical Mobile Habitat for Mars (SEED_Spherical Envi- ronment Exploration Device). Paper presented at the 46th International Conference on Environmental Systems. Vienna, Austria.

Pawlyn, M. (2011). Biomimicry in architecture. London, RIBA Publishing. Reinhardt, D. (2015). Coral-Colony - from singularities of mathematical code to relational networks, Architec- tural Theory Review, 20:3, 350-364.

Rokicki, W., Gawell, E. (2016). Voronoi diagrams - rod structure research models in architectural and structural optimization. Mazowsze Regional Stud- ies. 19, 155-164.

Varinlioğlu, G., Alaçam, S., Başarır, L., Genca, Ö, Üçok, I. (2016). Bilgisayar destekli teknik çizimde yeni yaklaşım- lar: Temsil araçları arası dönüşüm. Yapı, 419, 136-164.

Varinlioglu, G., Basarir, L., Genca, O., Vaizoglu, Z. (2017). Challenges in raising digital awareness in architectural curriculum. Edited by G. Cagdas, M. Ozkar, L. Gul and E. Gurer. Computer-Aided Architectural Design, Communications in Computer and Information Science, 136-150.

Kaynak Göster

406 160