If you look beyond the nice shapes in nature and understand the principles behind them, you can find some adaptations that can lead to new innovative solutions that are radically more resource efficient. It's the direction we need to take in the coming decades. (Michael Pawlyn in Scott 2012)
Constituents of application of nature entail, taking natural form as an inspiration for shaping the appearance, taking natural process as an inspiration to understand the performance process, and taking an ecosystem as an inspiration to understand holistic connection. However, it is difficult to understand and identify the level these constitutes have been used and their relationship in architectural practice.
During the Renaissance period (15th century) Leonardo da Vinci: an artist, scientist, architect and inventor created many nature inspired inventions specifically the flying machine inspired by form, process and structure of a bird. Several successful examples of using natural systems to inspire engineered product design have informed the present study. Design utilisation involves developmental research on products that draw on principles from the biological domain.
Examples of design utilisation to develop bio-inspired products include the following: Lotusan created by Sto Corporation, is a self-cleaning exterior coating inspired by the lotus leaf; Gecko tape (Figure 2.4), a dry adhesive tape inspired by the adhesive mechanism of gecko feet (Figure 2.3); Fastskin swimwear that Speedo created for the 2004 Olympic Games, inspired by the
Chapter 2: Biomimicry as a Response to Design
Exploring a Biomimicry Approach to Enhance Ecological Sustainability in Architecture 2‐15 surface ridges on shark skin; and the bionic vehicle (Figure 2.2) Mercedes-Benz Company, inspired by the aerodynamics of the box fish (Figure 2.1) (DesignBoom, 2010).
Figure 2.1: Box fish (designboom 2000-2010)
Figure 2.2: Bionic vehicle (designboom 2000-2010)
Figure 2.3: Gecko feet (designboom 2000-2010)
Figure 2.4: Gecko tape (designboom 2000-2010)
During the 19th century, Frank Lloyd Wright initiated the perception Organic Architecture that promotes harmony between human habitation and the natural world through design approaches to integrate with its context was followed by many architects namely: Alvar Aalto, Antoni Gaudi, Hugo Häring, Bruce Goff, Eero Saarinen, Louis Sullivan and Buckminster Fuller.
Buckminster Fuller is well-known as a pioneering architect who experimented with natural concepts as inspiration for the design of built structures. Most of his designs resulted from the application of design principles he found in Nature, such as high efficiency, light weight and dynamic patterns. His masterpiece American Pavilion at Montreal’s Expo 1967 (Figure 2.5) was a 250 foot diameter, bubble-shaped, transparent geodesic dome that was inspired by nature’s
‘synergetic-energetic geometry’ (De Varco, 1997), which involves observing the behaviour of the whole system and its assembly of parts (Antoniades, 1992). Most of these earlier nature inspired practice examples did not reflect environmental consciousness, but were more of novel innovations or landmarks.
Chapter 2: Biomimicry as a Response to Design
Exploring a Biomimicry Approach to Enhance Ecological Sustainability in Architecture 2‐16 Figure 2.5: US Pavilion-Expo 67’ Montreal (Boldt & Boldt 2009)
Many innovative designs that have emerged over the past decade provide examples of the use of biomimicry (Benusa & Friend, 2008). The structure of the Water Cube designed for the 2008 Olympics in Beijing by PTW Architects and Engineers is based on the arrangement of soap bubbles (Carfrae, 2006). The Pearl River Tower (Figure 2.6) designed and engineered by Skidmore, Owings, and Merrill, is based on the structure of a sea sponge and utilises wind energy to create electricity resulting in a zero energy building. Green technologies were blended seamlessly into the tower’s architecture to produce a visually appealing structure based purely on biomimicry principles (Benusa & Friend, 2008; Hansen, 2007).
Figure 2.6: Pearl River Tower, Guangzhou (Liggett 2010)
Chapter 2: Biomimicry as a Response to Design
Exploring a Biomimicry Approach to Enhance Ecological Sustainability in Architecture 2‐17 The Beijing National Stadium built for the 2008 Olympics mimics the structure of a bird’s nest.
Its design is based on biomimicry, and the use of recyclable steel and ETFE materials made it a
‘green’ stadium (2007).The Hydrological Centre in Namibia uses water harvesting technology based on how the Namibian beetle obtains water from the morning fog (2007). Similarly, the design of the biomimetic icon, the Eastgate Centre (Figure 2.7) in Harare, Zimbabwe, was inspired by the way the native Zimbabwean termite harvests fungus growing within its mound and maintains a consistent temperature for the fungus to thrive (Doan, 2007).
Figure 2.7: Eastgate Centre in Harare, Zimbabwe (Kerns 2014)
Designers have employed natural orders in their own way, from Future Systems’ exploration of biomimicry, to Foster’s ecological systems approach and Yeang’s adoption of termite-tower principles for natural ventilation. Design in nature, however, is not problem-free (Edwards, 2001). Featuring a combination of organic and technological innovation, Calatrava’s building forms are often inspired by nature. For example Milwaukee Art Museum was inspired by forms of marine life in the vicinity. While architects such as Calatrava, Renzo Piano and Foster have designed bio-inspired innovative shapes, it remains unclear how sustainable they are. The Pearl River Tower in Guangzhou, China, the Water Cube and Birds’ Nest in Beijing are also examples of strategies drawn from natural system, but lack clarity in terms of sustainability.
However, learning from nature entails using ecology in quite distinct ways. The Eden project in Cornwall (Figure 2.8) has been recorded as a worthy example of innovative forms inspired by biomimicry that integrate technology with ecology. A horticultural architecture was created;
biomes and the subsequent phases taking inspiration of the warm temperate and humid tropics for this project (Pawlyn, 2011).
Chapter 2: Biomimicry as a Response to Design
Exploring a Biomimicry Approach to Enhance Ecological Sustainability in Architecture 2‐18 Figure 2.8: Eden Project, Cornwall (Werbach 2011)
Architect Mick Pearce draws the concept of an integrated or interrelated totality from biological synergy: “No one part can be extracted without affecting the performance of the building as a whole. like a living organism, the building requires all of its limbs and organs to fully function”
(Johnston, 2002, p. 1). William McDonough argues that observing the law of gravity is not just a good idea, it is a given, and this should be the case for the other laws of nature (Johnston, 2002).
The process of designing to imitate ecosystems is known as ecomimesis. This is the fundamental premise of eco design. To achieve a similar state of stasis in the human built environment, built forms and systems need to imitate nature’s processes, structures and functions. The design innovations of Yeang’s tall buildings, known as the vertical concept, are based on the concept of ecomimesis. Examples include the EDITT Tower in Singapore, the Chong Qing Tower in China, the BIDV Tower in Vietnam, the K Tower in Kuwait City and the Eco Bay Complex in Abu Dhabi, UAE (Yeang, 2008). The concept of integrated life cycle design involves a life cycle view of design decisions in relation to planning, urban design, building envelope, interior environment and ecologically responsible energy and resource use.
According to architect Lindsay Johnston, good passive design is integrated in to the building form and the demand for heating and cooling is minimised by the use of well-considered natural systems (Johnston, 2002, p. 42).
Designers and architects at HOK have been collaborating with Biomimicry 3.8 biologists for several years. Together, they determine what could be inspired by ecologies to design, build and interact to balance the impact of buildings. They have designed many projects in this manner including three significant projects: the Lavasa town centre in Pune (Figure 2.9), King Abdulla University in Saudi Arabia (Figure 2.10), and a Master development plan for Brunei. HOK
Chapter 2: Biomimicry as a Response to Design
Exploring a Biomimicry Approach to Enhance Ecological Sustainability in Architecture 2‐19 architects believe that the gap between the built and natural environments can be filled through biomimicry, as an emerging field of study urging emulation of naturally occurring principles and processes. This firm’s main focus has been the temperate broadleaf forest biome (ecosystem) that uses patterns, principles, and phenomena of the forest system and its unique individual organism’s natural systems.
Michael Pawlyn practices biomimicry in his established firm Exploration Architecture and strongly believes that biomimicry could lead the way to an ecological future. Most of his current practice examples of biomimicry in architecture are well articulated giving explanation to many issues pertaining to close loop system found in natural systems.
Figure 2.11: Sahara Forest Project (Rocky 2008)
These include: resource efficacy, structural efficiency, water efficiency, zero-waste systems, thermal environment, energy supply and biomimetic cities, while biological examples include
Figure 2.9: Larvasa Town Centre,Pune (HOK., 2014) Figure 2.10: King Abdulla University of Science and Technology, Saudi Arabia (Kolleeny 2010)
Chapter 2: Biomimicry as a Response to Design
Exploring a Biomimicry Approach to Enhance Ecological Sustainability in Architecture 2‐20 rainforest ecosystems, (Pawlyn, 2011). One of his major projects is Sahara Forest Project (Figure 2.11), currently in development that includes a seawater greenhouse, fresh water distillation from sea water using sun light, and a Concentrated Solar Power array which uses the sun’s energy to create steam to drive electricity turbine(Pawlyn, 2011).
In an Australian context architectural firms DesignInc (Council House 2, Melbourne-Figure 2.12) and Francis-Jones Morehen Thorp (Macquarie University Library-Figure 2.13), have explored biomimicry more as design elements in buildings than as holistic design concepts.
However, both buildings have tried to respond reciprocally to the characteristics of their local biome.
Figure 2.12: Council House 2,Melbourne (Green
diary 2014) Figure 2.13: Macquarie University Library (Fjmt 2003–2014)
A detailed taxonomy of literature on biomimicry in architectural eco design practice showed that most projects (design and architectural) adopt the indirectly mimicking approach (using principles derived from understanding how nature performs), and a few buildings adopt a directly mimicking approach, which mimics natural form, process or an ecosystem.
The eco design buildings that use biomimicry principles indirectly were identified, but these proved difficult to categorise since most eco design principles are very similar to biomimicry principles, with only slight variations. Most buildings that were inspired by nature were not necessarily sustainable and buildings that had used nature to achieve sustainability and directly were found to have applied it as an element or service device (eco-technology) rather than holistically. Unlike the examples of successful product design, architectural practice remains something of a grey area that needs further research and development.
Chapter 2: Biomimicry as a Response to Design
Exploring a Biomimicry Approach to Enhance Ecological Sustainability in Architecture 2‐21 The search of practice application of biomimicry in buildings reveals that most building designs inspired by nature are not sustainable and most sustainable buildings are not inspired by nature.
However, most biomimicry practitioners insist that the inspiration of natural systems will prompt innovations to advance “resource efficient, environmentally benign, and aesthetically satisfying” building and product designs (Solomon, 2002, p. 179). However some critics suggest the practice of biomimicry is creating values centred on innovative technology to values centred on ecology. “If biomimicry can learn from various ecocentric traditions, such as the alternative technology and deep ecology movements, then it can be transformed into a more manifestly environmental practice”, and proposes ecomimicry, as an alternative approach (Marshall & Lozeva 2009, p. 7). However, ecosystem biomimicry is seen by most as one of the constituents of a Biomimicry Approach in architectural practice (Pedersen Zari, 2015).