Biomimicry
The term ‘biomimicry’ first appeared in scientific literature in 1962,7 and grew in usage particularly among materials scientists in the 1980s. The term ‘biomimicry’ was preceded by ‘biomimetics’, which was first used by Otto Schmitt in the 1950s, and by ‘bionics’, which was coined by Jack Steele in 1960.8 (Pawlyn 2)
Biomimicry is related to architecture in how we can build with efficiency, for example efficient structures. Bamboo, for example, is “efficient” in that it minimize the amount of materials in maintaining its strength over great lengths, thanks to its specific tubular structural growth with regular nodes.
Biomimicry is applicable to architecture not necessarily in mimicking natural forms but rather their “logical” responses to the particular environments. For example, the mangroves in the Mekong Delta develop their buttressed roof structures in order to response to the wetland soil and to minimize contacts to salt water.
Precendents in biomimicry in vernacular buildings or more recent architecture include Guastavino vaulting (which shares similarity with the structure of the abalone), Timber gridshells, the Palazzetto dello Sport by Pier Luigi Nervi (which takes inspiration from the Amazon water lilly’s leaves), Canopy structures by architect Andres Harris, Skeletal structures by Future Systems or Santiago Calatrava and so on.
As Pawlyn has pointed out, the benefit of biomimicry is that we can combine various biological strategies to optimize a building’s structure and/or behavior. He also warned us about the limitation in emulating natural forms: ” A challenge for architects and engineers in trying to emulate natural forms has been in achieving efficiency through complexity of form without adding excessive cost. While structures in nature are assembled molecule by molecule, human artefacts are constrained by the practical and economic limitations of our construction technology.” (Pawlyn 19)
Aesthetically, biomimicry approach stresses on the economy of means, as Pawlyn has observed: “It could be argued that the beauty found in nature is derived from its economy, with the absence of the superfluous being part of the rigour that we perceive.” (Pawlyn 21). But also, extravagance could add to the aesthetic quality of a building (as in many Caltrava’s buildings), and Pawlyn has associated it with the terms “biomorphic design,” and argued that biomimicry and biomorphic design could work together to convey meaning.
With the rise of Computation design, biomimicry approach has been empowered to further exploring the possibilities of translating nature into architecture.
Researching on biomimicry requires consideration of the following topics:
– (efficient) Structural design
– Material manufacturing
– Zero-waste systems
– Water management
– Environment & Building (thermal environment control, light, power etc.)
Biomimicry is not only applicable to building but also the scale of the city, in Pawlyn’s own word: ” We can imagine creating a completely new city, based on biomimetic principles, integrating a good quality of life for its occupants with clean air, healthy
food, access to nature, and so on. We can also see its possible implications: such a city might take decades to develop a strong culture. The most common arena of urban design is adapting existing cities. This could be compared to working on a tapestry that has been added to, repaired and reworked over time. The areas that were reworked maintain a trace of what was there before and the new sections continue key threads from the old. It is clear that this is an organic process rather than a tabula rasa approach and, in that sense, might sound inherently more biomimetic.” (Pawlyn 129)
Biomimicry has also inspired disciplines and professions other than design, such as Biomimetic business (Interface as an example):
” For businesses wishing to rethink their structure, purpose and planning, it can be illuminating to use biomimetic metaphors. For instance, involving a biomimic to help to translate all the company job titles and key business functions into the nearest biological equivalents can reveal new opportunities for how the company could transform to become better adapted to its environment. Similarly, resilience planning can learn from how biological organisms have evolved to maintain features that are critical for survival in crisis situations. Consultant Paul Z. Jackson uses biomimicry and improvisational techniques to coach businesses in how to manage organisational change.” (Pawlyn 139)
Some most common terms and organisms studied in Biomimicry design:
Aegithalos caudatus
Arachnothera longirostra
Arthopos
Arachnids
Chaetura pelagica
Convolvulus flower
Crustaceans
Endoskeleton
Insect
Hornbeam leaf
Microcospic diatom
Myriadpod
Exoskeleton
Radiolaria
Remizidae
Sea urchin
Spider webs
Tortoise
Weaver bird (Ploceus cucullatus)
Some common biomimicry structures in architecture
Deployable structures
Exoskeletons
Integrated Approaches
Pneumatic structures
Webs/ tension structures
Woven, fastened and reciprocated structures
Precedents in Biomimicry Architecture & Urbanism:
Atelier One and Jamie McCulloch. The Luxmore Bridge, Eton College
Kazuhiro Ishi. The spiral reciprocal roof structure of the Seiwa Bunraku Puppet Theatre
Judit Kimpian. Inflatable Auditorium
Thomas Heatherwick. Rolling Bridge
Umbrella for the forecourt of the Al Hussein Mosque, Cairo.
Nicolas Grimshaw. The Eden Project Biomes
Arup. Dong Tan and Wanzhuang
Hammarby Sjostad
Stefano Boeri. Torre del Bosco
Kaohsiung Port and Cruise Service Center
Tonkin Liu. Island of Light
Designers and Architects
Andres Harris
Frei Otto
Kengo Tange
Pier Luigi Nervi
Nicolas Grimshaw
Rafael Guastavino
Santiago Calatrava
Reference:
Thompson, D’Arcy Wentworth. On Growth and Form.
Pawlyn, Michael. Biomimicry in Architecture. RIBA Publishing, 2016.
