Pelin DURSUN ÇEBİ, Aslı ALDEMİR ÇELEN, Nilufer KOZİKOĞLU

Mapping relations as a design strategy, physical attraction forces correlation for design thinking

Architectural design is an iterative research and discovery process. The architect learns through investigation and experimentally develops his/her ideas, builds and evaluates the space, and continuously reforms it. Although this is a subjective process, there are design tools and methods that provide objective criteria for evaluating potentials of the designed space and iterating with feedback. Tools for measuring space in network thinking allow visualization of architectural decisions and developing potentials for architectural programming and restructuring design scenarios. This study evaluates the use of graph theory-based thinking and Space Syntax in architectural design, emphasizes the experimental and cognitive qualities of the design process, and investigates how scientific data and processes can be transferred into design. In other words, it explores the potentials for using Space Syntax related methods that provide real-time information in the design process. The argument is exemplified with the design strategies of the project “Login Park” for International Bandırma Park Competition. By utilizing an ‘animated relational mapping’ as a generative tool during the site-plan investigations, the designer could iteratively assess potential relations and their metric ranges between the required buildings and programs and examine various scenarios through the graph theory-based tools. The authors suggest that these dynamic tools and thinking lead to powerful instigation, management and assessment of configured spaces. By providing an evidence based design environment this is very much similar to the design processes of the landscape architect and urban designer.

PDF

___

Alexander, C. (1964). Notes on the Synthesis of Form. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Alexander, C. (1977). A Pattern Language: Towns, Building, Construction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Barabasi, A. L. (2016). Network Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bandırma Park Competition (https://competitions.archi/competition/ bandirma-park-competition/).
Bazalo, F., & Moleta, T. J. (2015). Responsive Algorithms An investigation of computational processes in early stage design. Paper presented at the meeting of the 20th International Conference of the Association for Computer Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia CAADRIA 2015, Daegu, South Korea.
Cross, N. (2001). Designerly Ways of Knowing: Design Discipline Versus Design Science, Design Issues, 17(3), 49-55.
Cross, N. (2007). Designerly Ways of Knowing. Basel: Birkhauser.
Dade-Robertson, M. (2011). The Architecture of Information Architecture, Interaction Design and the Patterning of Digital Information. New York: Routledge.
Dursun, P. (2007). Space Syntax in Architectural Design. Paper presented at the meeting of 6th International Space Syntax Symposium, ITU Faculty of Architecture, Istanbul, Turkey.
Dursun, P. (2012). Dialog on Space, Spatial Codes and Language of Space, ITU A|Z, 9(1), 104-119.
Dursun, Ç., P., & Kozikoglu, N. (2017). Network Thinking Architectural Design: Experimenting and Working with Relational Models. Paper presented at the meeting of 11th International Space Syntax Symposium, Lisbon, Portugal.
Hanson, J. (1998). Decoding Homes and Houses. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hillier, B. (1996). Space is the Machine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hillier, B., & Hanson, J. (1984). The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hillier, B., & Burdett, R., & Peponis, J., & Penn, A. (1987). Creating Life: Or, Does Architecture Determine Anything?. Architecture et Comportement/ Architecture and Behaviour, 3(3), 233-250.
Hillier, B., & Hanson, J. (1997). The Reasoning Art: or, The Need for an Analytical Theory of Architecture. Paper presented at the meeting of 1th International Space Syntax Symposium. London: UCL.
Johnson, S. (2018). Farsighted, How We Make the Decisions That Matter the Most, New York: Riverhead Books.
Kozikoglu, N., & Tezer, A., & Gürler, E., & Onuk, T. (2017). LoginPark- Bandırma: Logistics Innovation and Design for Community Transformation. Retrieved from http://www.arkiv.com. tr/proje/2-odul-bandirma-tasarim-parki- yarismasi/7488.
Kozikoglu, N., & Dursun, Cebi, P. (2015). Thinking and Designing with the Idea of Network in Architecture, ITU A|Z, 12(3), 71-87.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social, An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Latour, B. (2010). Networks, Societies, Spheres: Reflections of an Actor- network Theorist, Keynote speech for the international seminar on network theory: Network multidimensionality in the digital age, Los Angeles, USA.
Mohajeri, N., & French, J. R., & Batty M. (2013). Evolution and Entropy in the Organization of Urban Street Pattern, Annals of GIS, 19(1), 1-16. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/194756 83.2012.758175
Nourian, P., & Rezvani, S., & Sariyildiz, S. (2013a). A Syntactic Architectural Design Methodology. Paper presented at the meeting of 9th International Space Syntax Symposium, Seoul, Korea.
Nourian, P., & Rezvani, S., & Sariyildiz, S. (2013b). Designing with Space Syntax, A configurative approach to architectural layout, proposing a computational methodology, Computation and Performance. Paper presented at the meeting of eCAADe 31, Netherlands, 357-365.
Nourian, P. (2016). Configraphics: Graph Theoretical Methods for Design and Analysis of Spatial Configurations (Doctoral dissertation). Delft University of Technology, Netherlands.
Schön, A.D. (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, A Wiley Imprint.
Simon, H. (1996). The Science of the Artificial. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Turner, A. (2001). Depthmap: A Program to Perform Visibility Graph Analysis. Paper presented at the meeting of 3rd International Space Syntax Symposium, Georgia Institute of Technology, USA.