See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/312001342

Evolution of Construction Systems:

Chapter · January 2017

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-1744-3.ch002

CITATIONS READS

3 5,360

1 author:

Meltem Vatan
Bahçeşehir University
14 PUBLICATIONS   31 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

IGI GLOBAL BOOK PUBLICATION. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Meltem Vatan on 08 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 35

Chapter 2
Evolution of
Construction Systems:
Cultural Effects On Traditional
Structures and Their Reflection
On Modern Building Construction

Meltem Vatan
Bahçeşehir University, Turkey

ABSTRACT
This chapter is going to deal with the evolution of structural systems; traditional
structural systems, modern structural systems and more than traditional approach to
the structural systems. Beyond this, even though this chapter is related with structural
systems as an integral part of architectural design, it is also going to explore the link
between culture, traditional structural techniques, and influence of culture, cultural
beliefs and local materials, natural constraints as local available materials, climate
effects and disaster risks as drivers affecting the evolution of structural systems.
Structural principles of traditional construction techniques will be analyzed. The link
between modern buildings and their structural systems and traditional construction
techniques will be discussed by tracing modern buildings and structural systems
in terms of their evolution. The subject matter will be approached in a descriptive
manner. The examples given will be used to trace the link between past and present
as a way of associating cultural effect with the architectural uniqueness.

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-1744-3.ch002

Copyright ©2017, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
 Evolution of Construction Systems

INTRODUCTION

From Caves to Skyscrapers

Thirty thousand years ago, people roamed from place to place hunting animals
and looking for wild plants to eat. As they were always moving, they did not build
houses. They slept under the stars, got wet under the rain, sweated under the sun and
cooked their meals over open wood fires. Much later on, the early humans began to
put up shelters, tents made of animal skins and tried to protect themselves from the
weather. … A few more thousands of years went by and about ten thousand years
ago people slowly began to learn a new way of getting food. … Humankind had
discovered agriculture. … once they found ways of staying in one place, they started
thinking about building shelters that were larger, stronger and more comfortable…
(Mario Salvadori, 1990)

The history of structural systems in architecture is as old as human history. Even

early humans attempted to make a shelter to ensure their safety and to live in more
comfortable conditions. The first examples of shelters were simple structures such
as caves, tents, and houses constructed from stone or wooden logs, adobe blocks,
and so forth where the basic materials were local ones and formation of the shelter
was based on cultural traditions. Even though materials used were similar for dif-
ferent geographies and were materials that could be found locally and easily such as
natural creations (caves), wood, stone, mud, straw, leaves and so forth, the aesthetic
part like ornaments, paintings, colors used, and compositions were quite different, a
fact which led to unique architectural creations. At this point, the effect of culture on
the architectural and structural formation is obvious; whenever humans are involved,
even if identical tools and materials used are the same, differences in process and
cultural preferences always create diversity; this is called architectural creativity.
There are many distinctive styles of traditional construction techniques around
the globe that could be defined as ancestors of modern structural systems. In com-
mon, all traditional constructions are based on stone, wood, adobe, brick, mud, and
mortar. Traditional constructions and techniques are basically affected by the local
conditions which are predetermined and constant such as material properties, geo-
graphical position, soil condition, natural exposures and risks such as earthquakes,
floods, and climate effects; the way of expression which makes architecture unique
is shaped by community traditions and beliefs which constitute the culture itself.
Deplazes (2010) states that an expression of architecture is dependent not only on
the materials used but also on its constructional composition. The evolution of con-
struction system is influenced by past and present cultural traditions because of the
fact that culture itself has a living character by its tangible and intangible aspects.

36
Evolution of Construction Systems

The purpose of this chapter is to explore traditional construction systems and

materials used and construction techniques as well in different geographical locations
by making comparative discussions about the effect of culture and local traditions
on the evolution of construction systems. Both similarities and peculiarities are
studied to conceive architectural creative process of construction systems. Basically,
traditional materials, traditional construction systems, and their components are ad-
dressed. The last section is devoted to raising the question of rethinking / reevaluating
/ reinterpreting traditional construction systems and using local materials as drivers
affecting modern techniques in structural system design and building construction.

NATURAL CONSTRAINTS

Since the early days of humanity, the way of understanding structural systems and
developing new ones based on this understanding has been to analyze structural
vulnerabilities and critical points of the structures in terms of structural safety.
Based on this analysis, critical elements are determined and future structures are
improved and even new structural systems are developed. This is the nature of the
so-called “evolution of construction systems”. Natural constraints that could not be
changed, diminished, or neglected have a noticeable impact on the structural systems
and could be explained as drivers affecting “evolution of construction systems”.
The way of learning, since the early days of humanity, has always been unaided as
acquiring knowledge based on experiences, raise of questions and observation of
nature and natural events as autodidact ones.
Humans, upon observing nature itself and natural events, inherently interpret
the circumstances under the effect of the culture to which their community belongs.
Although nature and natural events and their impact on the structures are equal, re-
flection to the building in terms of architectural expression is done in various forms.
This chapter intends to deal with natural events and their effects on the “evolution
of construction systems” considering availability of local materials, climate condi-
tions, and potential disaster risks as natural constraints which cannot be changed
or ignored. Various solutions could be found and naturally emerged as a result of
taking into account natural events when cultural diversity is considered.

Available/Local Materials

Since ancient times the first materials selected for construction were governed by
local availability and had natural origins such as inorganic (e.g., stone) or organic
(i.e., biological) based materials (Wright, 2005). Natural sources for deriving these
elements were bones, animal skins, wood, straw, ropes and so forth. The combina-

37
 Evolution of Construction Systems

tion of mud with straw and reeds was used to form the walls and bricks were dried
in the sun. The first types of bricks were made based on sun-dried mud and later
on from clay by change of technology as burning to 1,000 °C. Availability of wood
was based on forest reaches. Although stone was a widely existing material, due to
its strength and difficulty of working with, it required more skill to use. Structural
parts such as walls, columns, arches, domes, vaults etc. were made from dry stone,
and in some cases used together with bricks and mortars (Croci, 2000, p. 3). This
fact could be stated as the main reason for using masonry structural system in most
of the monumental buildings rather than ordinary ones.
Ordinary buildings like houses could be associated mostly with wooden-framed
and masonry-infilled structures and adobe structures. Obviously, it is not possible
to state that masonry was not used in house building. Due to its material strength
in accordance with the geographical location, stone was used in house building as
well. In order to use the appropriate construction technique and material and to
improve their skills of developing new ones, humans needed to perceive physically
and even mentally the behavior of structural materials and to figure out the impact
of natural constraints such as local materials, climate effects and natural hazards
as disaster risks.
Therefore, humans were concerned with the strength of materials, load sustain-
ing capacity, deformation capacity of structural elements, causes of deterioration,
and damage. However, the question of materials’ strength never was (and remains)
a constant one. Depending on the circumstances, material effectiveness was signifi-
cant. The most appropriate material selection and the way of using it were related
and affected by cultural beliefs and human perception besides local availability.

Climate Effects

One of the strongest effects on evolution of structural systems has always been and
continues to be the climate condition. People have tried to resist weather condi-
tions and their exposures and to build shelters for this purpose since the beginning
of the human history. Due to the fact that early humans believed in living nature,
they also tried to understand its whisper and be at peace with it. During this period,
the evolution of construction systems was compatible with nature. Selection of a
structural system and its material, and construction techniques also have a close
relationship with the climate condition of the place where the building is going to
be built. Pertinently, since early history humans have developed special architectural
characteristics and structural types in accordance with the climate condition such
as hot, dry, and humid climates.
Massive construction such as masonry made of stone, brick, or adobe was devel-
oped for hot and dry climate conditions by few and small wall openings. Massive

38
Evolution of Construction Systems

construction not only delays heat transfer through the walls but also accumulates it
for cool nights which is typical in hot and dry climate conditions (Lechner, 2015,
p. 287). In locations such as Dubai or the Persian Gulf where there is no prevailing
wind direction, wind towers with many openings were developed. The wind tower
has a rectangular geometry divided by the diagonal internal walls which create air
wells by facing four different directions. In some cases, there are shutters on the
wind towers for keeping out unwanted ventilation. Additionally, some wind towers
include porous jugs of water (Lechner, 2015, p. 288).
Similar to the previous examples, volcanic tufa cones in Cappadocia – Turkey are
special constructions developed to be effective in extremely hot and cold weather
conditions (Lechner, 2015, p. 289). The examples provided above could be extended,
but this is outside the scope of this chapter.

Disaster Risks

Disasters, explained as natural events, have a drastic effect on human history and
on cultural traditions. According to Max Frisch, “Only man experiences disasters,
to the extent that he survives them. Disasters are unknown in nature…”. Gerard
Waldherr explains disasters as “a blunder of systems upheld by mankind, and
therefore a failure of both the built and the social infrastructure.”, Mischa Meier’s
definition is “events that suddenly and profoundly affect, or are felt to affect, man’s
daily life and that have grave effects on the social action of the people concerned
…” (Meier et al., 2007, p. 23).
In accordance with these definitions, disasters could be considered as key events
and turning points of human history and collective memory which create cultural
routines both tangible and intangible. Obviously, one part of the cultural routines
is building construction tradition. During history and today as well, people improve
their skills and knowledge of building construction based on experiences and lessons
learned from disasters. When any hazard as a natural event becomes a disaster, it
has a dramatic impact on the community and mostly it exceeds the ability of the
community to cope with it by its own resources. Therefore, people affected by the
disaster, intrinsically try to improve their knowledge, skills and abilities to be pre-
pared for the next one basically by lessons learned from the disaster. In Prometheus
Bound this is explained as “I gave them fire … and from it they shall learn many
crafts. (Prometheus Bound 254–256)” (Wright, 2005).
When building construction is considered, obviously the most effective impact
on the structures as a disaster is attributed to earthquakes besides floods, fires, and
volcanic eruptions. Although an earthquake is an unpredictable and sudden event,
it is possible to be mitigated and it is possible to improve building technologies in
terms of earthquake resistant structures as well. Therefore, this study discusses the

39
 Evolution of Construction Systems

effects of earthquakes on the evolution of structural systems in historic perspec-

tive. Hazards are natural events which are not possible to extinguish or prevent, the
only option is to try to understand their nature and to try to mitigate the change to
a disaster. This is exactly what the humankind has done during the history and still
does today: understanding of structural behavior through lessons learned. The at-
tempt to understand structural behavior triggers the evolution of structural systems.
Each disaster brings out new knowledge and helps to improve the existing level of
knowledge and to develop the new technique as well. This is the only way of survival.
Because disasters have drastically changed the life of the victims and communi-
ties over time, humankind has always been interested in disasters and the way of
their occurrence and attempted to prevent or mitigate them throughout history. The
way of learning lessons and improving the skills is the “trial and error” process
(Sassu, 2015). Each hazard or disaster is an open book of learning. Even thousands
of years before the birth of Christ, early humans perceived nature as a living being
and tried to be in peace with it so as to live in harmony. Accordingly, to show their
gratitude to the nature they offered sacrifices which were part of their life. There
are legends explaining the stories of interpretation of disasters in ancient times and
facts relatively from recent history:

• Poseidon the God of Earthquakes: In the ancient period of Anatolia the

God of the Sea and Storms is also connected to earthquakes as an earthshak-
er. In that area Poseidon’s name originated as earth shaker and soil absorber
God, in Homers he is described as earth shaker Enosikhton. Therefore, in
Anatolia there are statues of the rituals of sacrifices suffering natural disas-
ters. (Ünal & Vatan, 2016).
• Precaution against Natural Events: In ancient times, the widely used tradi-
tion was to make sacrifices and to write a cult as precaution against natural
events. In the text of a cult it is written, “If you are repairing a demolished
house or if you are constructing a new one in another place, you should
put the following when constructing its foundations: one mine (measure of
Akhas) cleaned copper, four bronze nails, and one small hammer. He (God)
will dig the earth in the center of kurakki, and will put the copper in the place
dug; he will fasten nails from four corners and hammer. While he (God) is
doing this he says, “The copper is well fixed; make this shrine strong like it.
Make it strong and well supported on this dark earth.” (Naumann, 1991, p.
66). The tradition of offering sacrifices to the Gods against natural disasters
is obviously described in this text. (Ünal & Vatan, 2016).

The conclusion of these facts could be stated as the intention of the humans to
develop structural systems and construction techniques inherently based on their

40
Evolution of Construction Systems

experiences with the nature. For instance, buildings and construction techniques with
poor earthquake performance were no longer used whereas well-performing ones
were repeated and improved after each disaster. When earthquakes are concerned
as natural constraints, the interesting result is that many different cultures, living in
different geographical locations with similar earthquake conditions, reached similar
construction techniques independently without any communication (Sassu, 2015).

CULTURAL EFFECTS IN EVOLUTION

OF CONSTRUCTION SYSTEMS

The evolution of construction systems could be linked to the first sheltering needs
which were based on the invention of agriculture. The first settlements were erected
along water resources due to the requirements regarding farming. For instance, in
5000 BC when the Sahara Desert was a rich savanna with its flora and fauna, there
were settlements of agricultural society. They erected their rural areas and small
towns. Since 4000 BC, settlements and their organization have changed in terms of
governing, politics, finance, and religion. In parallel with these changes, the layout
of the settlements and their components flourished as well. The first banks and
houses of merchants were erected at this time (Aydon, 2007).
All these facts bring to the scene “civilization” by means of presence of culture
that spans a large enough territory and survives long enough with its presence in a
specific style of urbanization. This point could be the best start for discussing the
first types of city formation, which is the starting point of the evolution of construc-
tion systems as well. Mesopotamia with the Tigris River and the Euphrates River
is accepted as the first geographical location of human civilization. Urbanization
and building construction played their role in human history. The city Uruk of
Sumerians – then the richest Empire of that time – located in South Mesopotamia
along the Euphrates River included 10-kilometer-long city walls and water supply
channels (Aydon, 2007).
Another important civilization of human history could be stated as Ancient Egypt
in terms of cultural effect on the evolution of construction systems. Pharaohs, gov-
ernors of the Ancient Egypt, declared themselves as Gods and imposed their power
on religion and community. This brought about the development of construction
technology of Pyramids and their specific structural and spatial organization. The
intended use for Pyramids was a cemetery for Pharaohs – the God / immortal one
with his endless life – including all the staff necessary to continue to live as a king.
This cultural tradition created the biggest stone building in the world: the Keops
Pyramid in Giza with its two million stone blocks (Aydon, 2007). The examples
above show the influence of culture on building construction and the evolution of

41
 Evolution of Construction Systems

construction systems. It is possible to discuss the role of civilization in cultural

creation by means of building construction.

First Shelters

The birth of shelters in human history is parallel with the invention of agriculture.
When people invented farming, they started living in certain places constantly, and
by this, building construction became the main issue for the early humans. Settling
brought the idea of constructing larger, taller, stronger buildings (Salvadori, 1990,
pp. 2 – 3). Early humans improved their skills of observing the nature itself and the
impacts of natural events on the buildings. The first shelters can be listed as caves,
tents and simple house buildings made of stone, adobe (mud mixed with straw) and
wood. When the number of the single houses located close to each other increased,
the first villages appeared (Salvadori, 1990, p. 3).
The formation of communities occurred in human history in this manner. When
a community comes into existence, it brings some functional requirements such as
meeting places and halls and religious buildings. The formation of these buildings
is directly related with cultural beliefs, life style, and religion. These characteristics
are reflected on the building such as materials used, paintings, ornaments, colors,
geometry of the building, and organization of the settlement in terms of functional
relation.
Research shows that most of the historic structures existing today are religious
buildings, military, or defense structures and governmental buildings which were
built with better material quality and skill (Croci, 2000, p. 4). Today, even thousands
of years later, people still generate settlements by constructing buildings in accor-
dance with the number of users, cultural beliefs of the community, location and the
like. Although the scales of the buildings are quite increased, the basic principle is
still the same: to ensure that the building will be standing one.

Case Studies

Tiger’s Nest: Paro, Bhutan

Motivation for constructing a building could always be associated with cultural

needs and community beliefs. Tiger’s Nest Temple in Paro - Bhutan can be stated
as one of the best distinctive examples of building and construction technology
(Figure 1). Construction of the building is directly based on community beliefs and
is associated with its own legend and history. The location of the building itself
shows the challenge of its construction and the strong effect of pushing the limits
for constructing a building in such a place.

42
Evolution of Construction Systems

Figure 1. Tiger’s Nest Temple in Paro, Bhutan

Source: Meltem Vatan.

Tiger’s Nest is an eminent temple located in the Himalayan Buddhist sacred site
of Paro Valley cliff and dates from 1692. The structure is devoted to Guru Padma-
sambhava (Guru Rinpoche), who brought Buddhism to Bhutan. The legend of the
Tiger’s Nest is based on the belief of Guru Padmasambhava’s flight on the back of
a tigress from Tibet to its current location on the cliff of Himalayas. This place was
consecrated to the belief that the Tiger demon was tamed there. Another legend is
based on the belief that a former emperor’s wife willingly became a disciple of Guru
Padmasambhava in Tibet. According to the legend, she transformed herself into a
tigress and carried the Guru on her back from Tibet to the current location of Tiger’s
Nest temple. Meditation and emergence of eight incarnated forms of the Guru caused
this place to be considered holy.

Japanese Pagoda Structures

Japanese Pagoda structures play an important role in Japanese history, culture, and
architecture as religious symbols with their unique structures. The uniqueness is
not only the structure itself but also the tradition of its construction as well. Tra-
ditional Japanese pagodas are characterized by their slenderness and marvelous
wooden workmanship (Figure 2). The vertical effect represents the spiritual value
as stretching out to the sky.

43
 Evolution of Construction Systems

Figure 2. Traditional Japanese pagoda, Kyoto

Source: Meltem Vatan.

Wooden Japanese pagodas are originated from the Indian Stupa and multi-storied
wooden Chinese buildings with sohrin which is the upper part of the Pagoda struc-
ture. The central pillar of the pagoda is the most important part of the structure by
its spiritual meaning of being the resting place of Buddha. Spiritually the central
pillar could be considered as the whole structure; however, the rest represents the
presence of Buddha’s ashes. The mystery and the uniqueness of pagoda structures
could be stated by the central pillar standing alone without any support of the
other parts of the structure.
According to the history of pagodas, this construction type provides earthquake
resistance although this theory is not accepted today. During an earthquake, the
central pillar and the remaining structure will have different movements and will
counteract each other. At present, earthquake resistance is more connected with the
material characteristics of wood (Abe & Kawaguchi, 2002). Although pagodas are
historic structures, the tradition of their construction is based on reconstruction. The
idea is to save the spirit of Buddha which is represented by the central pillar and to

44
Evolution of Construction Systems

have a certain location for the next reconstruction which is made by specially grown
trees for this purpose. The reconstruction is carried out periodically along with the
rituals, and the belief is that the spirit of Buddha is living in the new construction
(Vatan & Kaptan, 2012).

The Churches of Peace: Poland Protestant Churches

Lutherans’ Protestant churches located in Poland could be stated as unique examples

of the evolution of structural systems affected by cultural beliefs. The construction
history of these churches is related with religious strife and forcing constraints of
politics. Due to the fact that the Protestant population in Poland was very small and
since physical and political conditions included constraints, the Protestant community
developed their skills of construction of wooden framed churches. The construction
material for Protestant community was limited only to the wood. They were not
permitted to build their churches with different construction materials.
The value of Protestant churches started to be undermined later in the 16th century
and during the religious strife in the 17th century, Protestant community was forbid-
den by the city officials from worshipping within the city. Additionally, Protestants
were allowed to build only wooden churches and their churches were attacked by
arsonists to root them out. Protestants were permitted to build their churches only
from wood, loam and straw, and the time allowed for construction was limited to one
year (Alvis, 2005, pp. 30 – 33). However, this push led the Protestant community to
develop their skills in wooden construction, and at present, the churches from this
period are the largest wooden framed religious buildings in the world. Since 2001,
the two remaining churches have been listed as UNESCO World Heritage Sites.
Figure 3 shows a church close to the city of Wroclaw.

TRADITIONAL CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUES AND

STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS

Traditional construction techniques and structural systems are based on local material
availability and the process of using these materials in structural components. Wood,
stone, and adobe are the main traditional construction materials. Although the struc-
tural materials are the same, traditional buildings show their unique characteristics
which testify to their history and the culture to which they belong; local conditions
and the environment of their location create diversity of traditional buildings.
Obviously, the construction and production processes were affected by diverse
cultural factors. The production of construction represents different crafts learned by
apprenticeship and oral communication, which directly means that cultural diversity

45
 Evolution of Construction Systems

Figure 3. Protestant church close to Wroclaw city

Source: Meltem Vatan.

will create differences in the end product, “the building”, as an entity (Costa et al.,
2014). Ali Ihsan Unay defines the structural form of buildings as “the geometrical
configuration of the space involved by the structure” and continues, “However,
within a similar external geometry, different structural actions could be responded
by structure under the same kind of loads” for pointing out the wide variety of ef-
fects on structural configuration including culture (Ünay, 2000).
The most common traditional construction techniques used all over the world
can be listed as wooden framed structures with masonry infill or log constructions,
masonry structures including stone, brick and mortar, and adobe and rammed earth
structures since ancient times. Of course, the reason is the easy reach, location, and
shaping processes and the strength of the material itself. All these different systems
are shaped mainly as a result of the organic development through time of vernacular
and traditional architecture by experiences of natural exposures such as earthquake
resistance. Their seismic performance was one of the main reasons for standing
strong or collapsing; those which were earthquake resistant were able to continue
their presence and were improved for next generations.
In this chapter the traditional construction techniques listed above are discussed in
terms of materials used and composition and behavior of structural system. Therefore,
traditional structural systems are classified as masonry structures, wooden framed
structures and earthen structures.

46
Evolution of Construction Systems

Masonry Structures

Masonry has been used since ancient times in building construction. Geometry of
masonry structures and their construction techniques are based on their material
characteristic. Masonry structures are mainly composed of stone, brick, adobe and
mortar which are brittle, not ductile, the only force capable to be resisted is compres-
sion. The main structural components of masonry constructions are walls, columns,
arches, domes, vaults, slabs, tie beams, and lintels. Due to its material characteristics,
the structural behavior of masonry material under any load condition only permits
the shapes of arches, vaults, and domes. Other geometries should be supported by
tension elements such as wood or metal tie beams.
The first examples of masonry structures were dwellings made of mud and brick
which included simple geometrical forms and were supported by wooden tie beams.
As time passed, the population increased, and their settlements became more orga-
nized, the necessity for larger and more complex buildings arose. In particular, the
functional requirement for religious buildings or places for the assembly of com-
munity created the need for large scale constructions; as a result, the use of stone
and brick / block masonry constructions increased because of limited span capacity
of the wood. The most important examples of stone masonry from ancient times are
Egyptian Pyramids although they do not have large spaces. The scale of the structure
itself is large enough to be worth mentioning. The structural form was created with
perfect capacity against environmental exposures (Ünay, 2000).
The cultural needs of the Roman period since its beginning to the end of the18th
century brought slender components and elements to the structure which was made
of fired bricks and masonry blocks (Ünay, 2000). Additionally, the same period
of time which overlaps the Byzantine, Seljuk, and Ottoman periods witnessed the
development of large domed masonry structures. During that period, religious
requirements and need for community meeting places were drivers affecting the
development of large domed structures, such as the Pantheon in Rome and Haghia
Sophia in Istanbul. During the 16th century during the Ottoman Empire, the great
architect Sinan excelled in domed structures in terms of aesthetic view, satisfactory
functional requirements, and structural system organization.
However, the European part of the world was introduced to Gothic buildings.
The idea of Gothic architecture was based on reaching up to the heavens, which
was reflected in the building construction. The examples of Gothic architecture
were cathedrals, abbeys, churches, and civic structures. Religious cultural effects
led to the development of new building techniques such as flying buttresses that
made the buildings look slenderer and made their effect lighter, which was one of
the religious demands of reaching the heaven.

47
 Evolution of Construction Systems

Traditional masonry structures do not include only monumental buildings ad-

dressed in the paragraphs above but also a great number of civil architectural build-
ings. Civil architectural buildings are mostly residential examples which include both
masonry construction and wooden framed masonry or adobe infilled constructions.
Wooden-framed and adobe constructions will be explained in the paragraphs that
follow. Although the construction technique is more or less similar, particularly
residential buildings include a wide variety of examples around the world with their
cultural effects. The colors, ornaments, organization of spaces, and plan configuration
vary in accordance with the culture and the natural and environmental constraints
where the building is located.
One particular example can be seen in the traditional houses in the city of Ga-
ziantep located in Anatolia on the Ancient Silk Road in the southeastern part of
Turkey. The peculiarity of traditional Gaziantep houses is in their plan formation
based on privacy preferences of the local culture and climate characteristics of the
region. Private life is concealed from the public by massive façade walls with few
openings covered by screens and fences located on the upper part of the wall, while
daily life is arranged around the courtyard. In opposition with the simplicity of the
façade wall, the formation of staircases has an important role in traditional Gaziantep
houses. Staircases are shown on the façade as an architectural characteristic and are
designed in a striking manner (Figure 4) (Vatan & Kuyucu, 2015).

Wooden Framed Structures

Throughout history wood has been used as a widespread construction material. Local
availability, lightness, easy workability, and aesthetics are the best known charac-
teristics of wood as a construction material. Due to its material characteristics and
natural form, it is convenient to be used in framed systems. The spanning capacity
of wood in traditional constructions is limited. This is the basic reason for being
used mostly in house buildings although there are some monumental examples like
mosques and churches.
Wooden framed construction is commonly used with masonry, and in some
cases masonry is used as an infill material or as the material of ground floor where
the upper floors continue with the wooden frame. Depending on the construction
technique, wooden structures can be listed as log construction, wooden laced con-
struction and wooden framed constructions (Doğangün et al., 2006).
Even though the construction techniques include similarities and the structural
behavior is the same, the way of expression of traditional wooden structures differ
around the globe. The most common traditional construction techniques can be
addressed to Bahareque in El Salvador, Quincha in Peru, Taquezal in Nicaragua,
Pontelarisma in Greece, Pombalino and Tabique in Portugal, Taq or Dhajji dewari

48
Evolution of Construction Systems

Figure 4. Traditional house in Gaziantep

Source: Feyza Kuyucu.

in Kashmir, Hatil, Hımıs, Bağdadi in Turkey (Figure 5). These constructions are
mostly composed of adobe, rammed earth, and cob, wooden frames with or without
masonry infill (stone, brick, adobe) and stone masonry structural systems (Costa
et al., 2014).
The main load bearing elements of the wooden frame are vertical posts, diago-
nal braces, and horizontal linking elements. Diagonal bracing is not used in the
cases where vertical posts are close to each other (40 – 60 centimeters) (Bal & Vatan,
2009). The system depends on the location where it is used. The main idea of using
wooden frame construction is its behavior under earthquake load conditions which
is endurance against earthquakes. The evolution of this construction system during
history was always based on earthquake resistance. Wooden frame with masonry
infill construction adapts to the earthquake shakes by absorbing the energy; wood-

49
 Evolution of Construction Systems

Figure 5. Wooden frame – masonry infill building, Düzce, Turkey

Source: Gülten Gülay.

en frame resists the tensile and flexural forces and masonry infill resists the com-
pression forces by providing confinement to the slender wooden elements. Therefore,
structural behavior of wooden framed – masonry infilled construction is based on
the tension capacity of wood and the compression capacity of masonry.
Another different type of wooden frame construction is using wood as an infill
material. The construction is composed of vertical and diagonal main structural
members infilled by wood. In this type of construction technique, short rough
wooden elements were used as an infill, and they were lightly nailed to vertical studs
or horizontal connection elements (Vatan, 2014). The examples of this construction
types are bagdadi buildings in Turkey which are mostly located in the Marmara
region (Figure 6).

Earthen Structures

Earth and clay are ones of the oldest construction materials. In terms of the material
used, adobe and rammed earth structures are earthen constructions. On the other
hand, in terms of structural behavior, adobe and rammed earth structures are ma-
sonry structural systems. The main material of adobe and rammed earth (Figure 7)
constructions are clay, sand, water, straw, and organic fibers. The type of the clay
is one of the main factors that affects definition of material property, strength, and

50
Evolution of Construction Systems

Figure 6. Prinpiko Palace, Istanbul

Source: Meltem Vatan.

construction technique. The most common way of using earth in building construc-
tion is adobe. It could be prepared as sun dried blocks or compressed mixture in the
form – work as rammed earth.
Earth material has no resistance to water and due to this fact, foundations and
plinth level are constructed mostly by stone. On the stone level, wooden tie is placed
and then the earthen part is constructed. This construction technique is developed
based on the experiences. Earthen structures are maintained by annual plastering
and general repair works. Since ancient times, earth has been used as a construction
material all over the world. It is possible to say that almost every country has heri-
tage examples of earthen buildings. Earth was used basically where wood and stone
were not available enough. It is known that Assyrians constructed adobe buildings
6,000 years ago in Mesopotamia, and Egypt still has standing adobe buildings dat-
ing from 3,000 years ago (Türkçü, 2015).
The early examples from thousands of years ago could be addressed to Tibet,
India, China, Peru, Egypt, Iran, Syria, and Turkey and so on where the first civili-
zations were established. When the subject is to explore the cultural effect of the
construction system, it could be linked to human history in terms of invention of
agriculture and transformation of life style itself from nomadic to permanent settle-
ment. At that point, earth and clay came into play as a construction material for the
first shelters / homes. Blondet et all state that there are constructions in Peru dating

51
 Evolution of Construction Systems

Figure 7. Rammed earth construction: Bhutan

Source: Meltem Vatan.

back to 900 BC in the Casma and Rimac coastal valleys with conical and rectangular
adobe blocks (Blondet et al., 2002).
Earth is most used as a mixture of soil and organic fibers as straw. Fibers are
used for tension while earth is used only for compression. Because of the material
characteristics of earth and clay such as their plasticity (pasty mixture) when it is
mixed with water, mud emerges and gains strength when it becomes dry. Earth could
be stated as the counterpart of wood where forests are not rich (Wright, 2005). The
earth and clay materials are easy to obtain and the mud mixture is easy to work on,
and due to these facts, earthen structures have had a place in history since ancient
times.

SAVE THE PAST, PROTECT THE FUTURE

The phenomenon of the evolution of construction systems could be described as a

living subject. Throughout history, construction systems evolved in parallel with
human history, transition from nomadic life to the settled one, requirements of the
growing populations for shelter, dependency on the local material availability, cul-
tural and social traditions, and skills to construct a building and so forth in terms of
response to their environment. Continuous evolution of the construction techniques

52
Evolution of Construction Systems

which has drastically increased acceleration by the technical and technological

developments in recent decades includes the knowledge and experiences inherited
from early humans as the ancestors and passes it down to descendants for the future.
This could be described as “the reflection of traditional construction techniques
and structures on modern buildings”. The development of modern construction
techniques and new materials always have a relation with the traditional ones.
The main reason for this fact is experiences already gained and lessons learned.
Particularly when the subject is construction systems, there is coherent relation
with the natural exposures and capacity to resist. In this sense, experiences which
have a dominant role can be gained over a period of time by being practiced many
times until a resistant construction technique is reached. The requirements for the
structures and their construction techniques do not change over the years; the forces
acting on the buildings are the same and the minimum performance requirements
are the same as well.
The expectations were stated by Vitruvius (Costa et al., 2014) thousands of years
ago: “environmental comfort, aesthetic comfort, and durability through robustness”.
Reflection of the traditional construction techniques and structural systems to the
modern construction techniques tended to be explained through some selected
examples in the paragraphs below.

Earthquake Resistance

The modern seismic codes and earthquake resistant building design regulations
require lightness of weight, ductility, prevention of resonance effect, vertical and
horizontal continuity, and avoidance of structural weaknesses. The concept is to
absorb as much energy of the earthquake as possible with minimum damage to the
building. Research on the historic structures even from the ancient times show that
all these aspects and concerns were included in the historic constructions. One of the
particularities for the earthquake resistant building design today as the new technol-
ogy is construction approach of the relation between soil and building (foundation of
construction) and another one is development of seismic isolation systems. Natural
exposures and seismic actions have always affected buildings through history and
will continue to do so in the future. The main purpose of earthquake resistant con-
structions is to isolate the building and soil movement to prevent the interaction
between the two and their deformations.

Soil - Building Relation (Foundations)

The archeological excavations in Cerablus – Anatolia show that wherever the soil
is rigid, there is a thin layer of gravel under the 5-meter thick adobe block defense

53
 Evolution of Construction Systems

wall. On the contrary, wherever the soil is soft, on the hill the house building is
found which includes the foundation built in a hole four meters deep and 1.80 meters
wide (Naumann, 1991, p. 66). The main aim of these construction techniques is the
prevention of resonance of the building during earthquake shakes. Resonance is the
increased shake of the building even if the load is damped. Prevention of resonance
can be reached by separation of building movement and soil movement. Resonance
could cause severe damage and even total collapse of the building. According to
the modern seismic resistant building design approach, avoidance of the resonance
might be reached by preventing the connection of rigid soil and rigid building like
masonry or reinforced concrete buildings and by preventing the construction of elastic
structures with long building periods like wooden framed structures on soft soils.

Base Isolation Systems

The archeological excavations in Boğazköy – Anatolia revealed foundation holes

with oval concave shapes where the wall is placed (Naumann, 1991 p. 66). This
could be stated as the ancestor of friction pendulum seismic isolation system. The
archeological excavations in Alacahöyük – Anatolia revealed a foundation of the
building dating from the Chalcolithic Era where there is 10 centimeters of three adobe
layers along the whole building. On this part there is a stone layer of 6.5 centimeters
width which is slightly inclined outward (Naumann, 1991, p. 66). The main aim
of this construction technique is again to reduce the effect of seismic loads on the
building. Seismic isolation systems have become significant in reducing the risk of
damage in building construction technology to improve the earthquake performance
of the buildings. The main aim of the seismic isolation is to reduce the effect of soil
movement on the building by isolating superstructure from its foundation in order
to prevent severe damage and transmission of shakes of the earth to the building
(Kravchuk et al., 2008).

Steel and Timber Frame Structural Systems

Large number of examples of modern buildings includes steel and timber frame
structural systems. When the technological development of these structural systems
is examined, the relationship between traditional wooden framed structures and
modern steel and timber frames can obviously be seen. Particularly the bracing ele-
ments that are used for earthquake resistance are similar to the diagonal members of
traditional wooden frames. During history even early humans have seen that lateral
load condition like the earthquake requires triangulated geometry.

54
Evolution of Construction Systems

Lightweight Concrete Slabs

One of the important principles for earthquake resistant building design and reduction
of earthquake load effect on the buildings is decreasing of the building weight. The
earliest examples from history, particularly monumental buildings, were made of
masonry and the building weight was quite high. Many studies and examples of the
historic monuments show that this fact was known since ancient times and reduction
of the building weight was desired even thousands of years ago. The tendency was
to prepare some holes in the structural elements where the stress accumulation is
considerably less, for reducing the building weight. Based on this knowledge today
lightweight concrete slab systems are developed. The idea is to reduce the weight
of the slab and to construct the building with thinner slabs. This technology ensures
the reduction of self-weight, large span capacity and well earthquake performance.

Organic - Inorganic Fibers for Reinforced Concrete

Due to its material characteristics, concrete is a brittle material which does not
possess tension capacity; it has only compression endurance. Based on this fact
reinforced concrete was developed and for tension iron and later on steel elements
were used. Conventionally, in accordance with the moment diagram of structural
members, position of the reinforcing bars was specified and the reinforcement was
made of continuous bar element. The new technological development of construc-
tion systems brought out the use of fibers as reinforcement in concrete. In order
to increase the energy absorption and tensile strength of the concrete, small and
randomly distributed pieces of fibers are used instead of reinforcing bars as reinforc-
ing elements. The idea of using these small pieces goes back to adobe mud mixture
which includes organic fibers as straw.
The given examples of the new technologies do not cover new developments
of the whole construction systems which is major topic of further research. The
intention is to give the key aspect of providing a link from the past to the present,
and convey it into the future by highlighting the importance of studying traditional
technologies and taking lessons from them in systematic and methodical research.

55
 Evolution of Construction Systems

REFERENCES

Alvis, R. E. (2005). Religion and the Rise of Nationalism – A Profile of an East

Central European City. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
Blondet, M., Torrealva, D., & García, G. V. (2002, April 19-2). Adobe in Peru:
Tradıtıon, Research and Future. Paper presented at the meeting of Modern Earth
Building 2002 International Conference and Fair, Berlin.
Churches of Peace. (2016). Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/Churches_of_Peace
Costa, A., Guedes, J. M., & Varum, H. (Eds.), (2014). Structural Rehabilitation
of Old Buildings - Building Pathology and Rehabilitation. New York: Springer.
doi:10.1007/978-3-642-39686-1
Cyril, A. (2007). The Story of Man: An Introduction to 1200 Years of Human His-
tory. Philadelphia, PA: Running Press.
Deplazes, A. (Ed.). (2010). Constructing Architecture: Materials, Processes, Struc-
tures, A Hand Book (2nd ed.). Berlin, Boston: Birkhauser.
Doğangün, A., Tuluk, Ö. İ., Livaoğlu, R., & Ramazan, A. (2006). Traditional Wooden
Buildings and Their Damages during Earthquakes in Turkey. Engineering Failure
Analysis, 13(6), 981–996. doi:10.1016/j.engfailanal.2005.04.011
Engin, B. I., & Vatan, M. (2009, June 25-27). Earthquake Resistance of Traditional
Houses in Turkey: Timber-Frame Infilled Structures. Paper presented at themeeting
of International Symposium on Timber Structures from Antiquity to the Present,
Istanbul, Turkey (pp. 125-136).
Giorgio, C. (2000). The Conservation and Structural Restoration of Architectural
Heritage. Southampton, UK: WIT Press.
Gül, Ü. Z., & Vatan, M. (2016, March 2-4). Lessons Learned for Sustainable Pro-
tection: Relationship Between Cultural Heritage and Natural Disasters. Natural
Disasters and Disasters Management SymposiumDAAYS’16, Karabuk, Turkey.
Ihsan, U. A. (2000). Structural Wisdom of Architectural Heritage. New York:
UNESCO World Heritage.

56
 Evolution of Construction Systems

Kravchuk, N., Colquhoun, R., & Porbaha, A. (2008). Development of a Friction

Pendulum Bearing Base Isolation System for Earthquake Engineering Education.
Proceedings of the 2008 American Society for Engineering Education Pacific
Southwest Annual Conference, California State University, Sacramento, CA, USA.
Lechner, N. (2015). Heating, Cooling, Lighting – Sustainable Design Methods for
Architects. New York: Wiley.
Mario, S. (1990). The Art of Construction: Projects and Principles for Beginning
Engineers and Architects. Chicago: Chicago Review Press.
Masaru, A., & Mamoru, K. (2002, November). Structural Mechanism and Mor-
phology of Timber Towers in Japan. Journal of Asian Architecture and Building
Engineering.
Meier, H. R., Petzet, M., & Will, T. (Eds.). (2007). Heritage at Risk, Special Edi-
tion. Cultural Heritage and Natural Disasters, Risk Preparedness and the Limits of
Prevention, Dresden, Germany.
Naumann, R. (1991). Eski Anadolu Mimarlığı. Istanbul, Turkey: Türk Tarih Kurumu
Yayınnları. (in Turkish)
Paro Taktsang. (2016). Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paro_Taktsang
Sassu, M. (2015). Vernacular Housing Construction. Pisa, Italy: University of Pisa.
Türkçü Çetin. (2015). Yapım (in Turkish). İstanbul, Turkey.
Vatan, M. (2014). Protection of Traditional Vernacular Heritage Buildings: Recom-
mendations for the Local People. Paper presented at the meeting of Cultural HELP
2014, Cultural Heritage and Loss Prevention, Porto, Portugal (pp. 191 – 201).
Vatan, M., & Kuyucu Feyza. (2015, March 25-27). Formation of Staircases in Tra-
ditional Gaziantep Houses. Paper presented at the meeting of iaSU Archi-Cultural
Interactions through the Silkroad, Istanbul, Turkey.
Vatan, M., & Kubilay, K. (2012). Kültür Mirasının Mimari Strüktürde Tezahürü,
Korumada Farklı Bir Yaklaşım: Japon Pagodaları. Journal Mimar, 43.
Wright, G. R. H. (2005). Ancient Building Technology(Vol. 2. Materials). Leiden,
Netherlands: Brill Publishing.

57

View publication stats