The study examines kinetic façade design components and inputs through literature. Factors affecting the kinetic façade composition are generalized with a compositional perspective. Compositional framework elements are distinguished as morphological and system aspects. These aspects are assessed with widely known examples in the relational dimension to reveal interactions between components and inputs. The relational assessments provide a base to build a morphological evaluation via AHP-TOPSIS. The method is applied to a parametric model. The values from the calculation can represent the complexity/uniformity of design alternatives. The most remarkable points of the method are that it can be reconstructed contextually with various sets of components for distinct subjects and its integration ability to any evaluation method as an external approach.
ZukWClarkRH. Kinetic architecture. Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1970.
2.
HosseiniSMMohammadiMRosemannA, et al.A morphological approach for kinetic façade design process to improve visual and thermal comfort. Build Environ2019; 153: 186–204.
3.
AsefiM. Transformable and kinetic architectural structures design evaluation and application to intelligent architecture. VDM Verlag Dr. Muller, 2010.
4.
CudzikJNykaL. Reasons for Implementing Movement in Kinetic Architecture. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng2017; 245(4): 042073.
5.
Waseef A and El-Mowafy BN. Towards a new classification for responsive kinetic facades. In: Proceedings of the Memaryat International Conference,2017.
6.
ZboinskaMACudzikJJuchnevicR,et al.A design framework and a digital toolset supporting the early-stage explorations of responsive kinetic building skin concepts. In: Proceedings of the 33rd eCAADe Conference,Vienna, Austria, 2015; 2: 715–725.
7.
LoonenRCGMRico-MartinezJMFavoinoF, et al.Design for façade adaptability - Towards a unified and systematic characterization. In: Proceedings of the 10th Conference - Advanced Building Skins. Switzerland: Bern, 2015; 1284–1294.
8.
MegahedNA. Understanding kinetic architecture: typology, classification, and design strategy. Architect Eng Des Manag2017; 13(2): 130–146.
9.
MoloneyJ. Designing kinetics for architectural facades: state change. Routledge, 2011.
10.
ColacoSGKurianCPGeorgeVI, et al.Prospective techniques of effective daylight harvesting in commercial buildings by employing window glazing, dynamic shading devices and dimming control-a literature review. Build Simulat2008; 1(4): 279–289.
11.
GrobmanYJCapelutoIGAusternG. External shading in buildings: comparative analysis of daylighting performance in static and kinetic operation scenarios. Architect Sci Rev2017; 60(2): 126–136.
12.
RiziRAEltaweelA. A user detective adaptive facade towards improving visual and thermal comfort. J Build Eng2021; 33: 101554.
13.
BakkerLGHoes-van OeffelenECMLoonenRCGM, et al.User satisfaction and interaction with automated dynamic facades: A pilot study. Build Environ2014; 78: 44–52.
14.
KoyazMPrietoAÜnlüA, et al.Towards a human centred approach for adaptive façades: An overview of user experiences in work environments. J Facade Des Eng2022; 10(1): 29–54.
15.
StevensS. Intelligent facades: occupant control and satisfaction. Int J Sol Energy2001; 21(2–3): 147–160.
16.
AdriaenssensSRhode-BarbarigosLKilianA, et al.Dialectic form finding of passive and adaptive shading enclosures. Energies2014; 7(8): 5201–5220.
17.
MahmoudAHAElghaziY. Parametric-based designs for kinetic facades to optimize daylight performance: Comparing rotation and translation kinetic motion for hexagonal facade patterns. Sol Energy2016; 126: 111–127.
18.
RekiMSelçukSA. Exploring New Forms with Parametric Patterns for Responsive Facades. Periodica Polytechnica Architecture2021; 52(2): 205–224.
19.
GaspariniKPremierA. Responsive Skins: Complexity vs Simplicity. Powerskin Conference2021; 2021: 27–37.
20.
RomanoRAeleneiLAeleneiD, et al.What is an adaptive façade? Analysis of recent terms and definitions from an international perspective. J Facade Des Eng2018; 6(3): 65–76.
21.
FoxMA. Sustainable applications of intelligent kinetic systems. In: Second International Conference on Transportable Environments. Singapore, 2001.
MatinNHEydgahiAShyuS (2017). Comparative analysis of technologies used in responsive building facades. In: 2017 ASEE annual conference and exposition, Conference Proceedings.
24.
MatinNHEydgahiA. Technologies used in responsive facade systems: a comparative study. Intell Build Int2019.
25.
ChamilothoriKKampitakiAMOungrinisKA. Climate-responsive Shading Systems with Integrated Shape Memory Alloys. In the proceeding of 8th energy forum on solar building skins conference 2013, 2013.
26.
FioritoFSauchelliMArroyoD, et al.Shape morphing solar shadings: A review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev2016; 55: 863–884.
27.
FormentiniMLenciS. An innovative building envelope (kinetic façade) with Shape Memory Alloys used as actuators and sensors. Autom ConStruct2018; 85: 220–231.
28.
MishraPSMuhuriS. Grading of architectural heritage using AHP and TOPSIS methods: a case of Odishan Temple, India. Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, 2021.
29.
QinHChenFLinP, et al. (2009). Architectural design proposals selection based on fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. In: 2009 IEEE international conference on industrial engineering and engineering management; 2266–2270.
30.
De ParisSLopesCNLJuniorAN. The use of an analytic hierarchy process to evaluate the flexibility and adaptability in architecture. Archnet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research2022; 16(1): 26–45.
31.
ElshafeiGKatunskýDZeleňákováM, et al.Opportunities for Using Analytical Hierarchy Process in Green Building Optimization. Energies2022; 15(12): 4490.
32.
BostanciogluEOnderNP. Applying analytic hierarchy process to the evaluation of double skin façades. Architect Eng Des Manag2019; 15(1): 66–82.
33.
VelasquezMHesterP. An analysis of multi-criteria decision making methods. Int J Oper Res2013; 10(2): 56–66.
34.
LeeM-XLeeJ-H. Form, Style and Function A Constraint-Based Generative System for Apartment Façade Design. In: Proceedings of the 24th eCAADe Conference 2006, 2006; 874–883.
35.
CaetanoISantosLLeitãoA. From idea to shape, from algorithm to design: A framework for the generation of contemporary facades. In: International conference on computer-aided architectural design futures. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2015, 527–546.
36.
CaetanoILeitãoA DrAFT: an Algorithmic Framework for Facade Design. In: Proceedings of the 34th eCAADe Conference,2016; 465–474.
37.
NagyZSvetozarevicBJayathissaP, et al.The Adaptive Solar Facade: From Concept to Prototypes. Frontiers of Architectural Research2016; 5(2): 143–156.
38.
SchnädelbachH. Adaptive Architecture: A Conceptual Framework. Proceedings of MediaCity2010; 197: 523–555.
39.
KonstantoglouMTsangrassoulisA. Dynamic operation of daylighting and shading systems: A literature review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev2016; 60: 268–283.
40.
AeleneiDAeleneiLVieiraCP. Adaptive Façade: Concept, Applications, Research Questions. Energy Proc2016; 91: 269–275.
41.
BökeJKnaackUHemmerlingM. Superposition matrix for the assessment of performance-relevant adaptive façade functions. J Facade Des Eng2019; 7(2): 1–20.
42.
TabadkaniARoetzelALiHX, et al.Design approaches and typologies of adaptive facades: A review. Autom Con Struct2021; 121: 103450.
43.
de DearRJBragerGS. Developing an adaptive model for thermal comfort and preference. Build Eng1998; 104(1): 145–167.
44.
ChamilothoriKChinazzoGRodriguesJ, et al.Subjective and physiological responses to façade and sunlight pattern geometry in virtual reality. Build Environ2019; 150: 144–155.
45.
InkarojritV. Balancing comfort: occupants’ control of window blinds in private offices. Berkeley: University of California, 2005.
46.
CorrodiMSpechtenhauserK. Illuminating: natural light in residential architecture. Berlin: Birkhäuser, 2014.
47.
PhilipsD. Daylighting: natural light in architecture. Routledge, 2004.
48.
CaetanoILeitãoA. Integration of an algorithmic BIM approach in a traditional architecture studio. Journal of Computational Design and Engineering2019; 6(3): 327–336.
49.
BelokFRabeaMHanafiM, et al.Facades for Achieving Visual Comfort: High Performance Computing. International Journal of Environmental Science & Sustainable Development2019; 4(1): 1–12.
50.
CaliskanEBKarakusF. Titanium-zinc as an architectural material: etu campus gate project. In: 1st International Conference on Advances in Engineering, Architecture, Science, and Technology, Erzurum, Turkey: Erzurum Technical University2021; 522–530.
51.
ElmokademAEkramMWaseefA, et al.Kinetic Architecture: Concepts, History and Applications. Int J Sci Res2018; 7(4): 750–758.
52.
SharaidinK. Kinetic facades: towards design for environmental performance (doctoral dissertation. RMIT University, 2014.
53.
OungrinisKA. Implementation of kinetic systems in architecture: a classification of techniques and mechanisms appropriate for discreet building parts. In: Proceeding of International Conference on Adaptation and Movement in Architecture, 2013.
54.
SchumacherMSchaefferOVogtM-M. Move: architecture in motion-dynamic components and elements. Walter de Gruyter, 2012.
55.
ElkhayatYO. Interactive movement in kinetic architecture. JES. Journal of Engineering Sciences2014; 42(3): 816–845.
56.
FoxMAYehBP. Intelligent Kinetic Systems in Architecture. In: Managing Interactions in Smart Environments. London: Springer, 2000; 91–103.
57.
SherbiniKKrawczykR. Overview of Intelligent Architecture. 1st ASCAAD International Conferencee-Design in Architecture, 2004; 137–152.
58.
OchoaCECapelutoIG. Strategic decision-making for intelligent buildings: comparative impact of passive design strategies and active features in a hot climate. Build Environ2008; 43(11): 1829–1839.
59.
WangCLiFZhangJ, et al.Tectonic methodology on the faade composition pattern of prefabricated building enclosure wallboards. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci2020; 510(5): 052086.
60.
RossiDNagyZSchlueterA. Adaptive distributed robotics for environmental performance, occupant comfort and architectural expression. Int J Architect Comput2012; 10(03): 341–359.
61.
EnginASDincerAE. A Generative Design Approach Specific to Kinetic Façade Systems on the Relationship between Interior Function and Façade Surface. In: ÇağdaşGÖzkarMGülLF, et al. (eds), Computational Design in Architecture, 15th National Symposium. 2021; 135–146.
62.
RibeiroRAMoreiraAMVan Den BroekP, et al.Hybrid assessment method for software engineering decisions. Decis Support Syst2011; 51(1): 208–219.
63.
SaatyTL. The analytic hierarchy process. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1980.
