An Exploration of Public Opinion On Changing Architectural Styles of Rseidences in Kerala

An exploration of public opinion on changing architectural styles of residences in Kerala 1
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................... 3
1.1 Aim: ................................................................................................................... 4
1.2 Objective: .......................................................................................................... 4
1.3 Methodology: .................................................................................................... 4
1.4 Sccpe: ............................................................................................................... 5
1.5 Limitations: ........................................................................................................ 5
2. TRADITIONAL DWELLINGS OF KERALA : A BRIEF STUDY .................................. 6
2.1The House: ......................................................................................................... 7
2.2 Planning and configuration: ............................................................................. 8
2.3 Compsition and structure: ................................................................................ 8
2.4 Elements of traditional Residences:................................................................. 9
2.5 Wood crafts:.................................................................................................... 10
2.6 Building materials: .............................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
3. CHANGING ARCHITECTURAL STYLES IN KERALA ............................................ 11
4. LITERATURE CASE STUDY ....................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
5. PARAMETERS FOR QUANTITATIVE AESTHETIC ASSESSMENT ....................... 15
5.1 ORDER: ........................................................................................................... 15
5.1.1 Symmetry: .................................................................................................... 15
5.1.2 Equilibrium .................................................................................................. 15
5.1.3 Disposition .................................................................................................. 15
5.1.4 Colour harmony .......................................................................................... 15
5.1.5 The negative factor ..................................................................................... 15
5.2 COMPLEXITY: ................................................................................................. 16
5.2.1 Form complexity: ......................................................................................... 16
5.2.2 Ornaments ................................................................................................... 16
5.2.3 Silhouette differentiation ............................................................................. 16
5.1.4 Colour contrast ........................................................................................... 16
6. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ............................................................................... 17
6.1 Building type selection : ................................................................................. 17
6.2 Questionnaire survey: ..................................................................................... 17
6.3 Demography of survey: .................................................................................. 17
6.4 Theory: ........................................................................................................................ 17
Rajiv Gandhi Institute of technology, Kottayam I Dissertation 2017

7. LIVE CAS STUDIES: ............................................................................................... 18

7.1 Residence A (Kumaaramangalam veedu):.................................................... 19
7.2 Residence B ( Pazhaya panthalakam veedu):............................................... 21
7.3 Residence C (Lucy Wilson house)): ............................................................... 23
7.4 Residence D (Venugopals house): ................................................................ 25
7.5 Residence E (Farooks house): ....................................................................... 27
7.6 Residence F (Baijus house): .......................................................................... 29
8.RESULTS: ....................................................................................................................
8.1 Analysis I: ............................................................................................................
9.CONCLUSION:............................................................................................................
APPENDIX A. SURVEY QUESTIONNARIE ....................................................................
10. BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................

1. INTRODUCTION
A built environment should perform its function providing psycho-physiological comfort

for users. It can be attained by wise use of planning, construction techniques and
materials, which may vary with particular region.
Traditional houses of Kerala were built with locally available building materials and
construction techniques those resisted the extreme rain and sun. Residential buildings
were planned around a courtyard and rooms arranged according to Vasthumandala.
During 18th century joined family system prevailed and houses were built to
accommodate about 15-20 members. This central courtyard Planning provided climatic
comfort against warm and humid climate of Kerala. This space served as gathering
space promoting interaction. They adopted passive cooling techniques, where courtyard
acted as a major element. Sloping roof were constructed to respond to heavy rain and
sun. Use of terracotta roof tiles helped in infiltration of air, whereas Attic space helped to
regulate the temperature inside. In traditional residences rather than spaces, flexible the
activities were.
Over the period, Kerala residential Architecture went through the transition from traditional
architecture style to prevailing contemporary style. There had a time of amalgamation of
traditional and contemporary style. Contemporary style refers to present day building
style, which is difficult to be defined. At present, with nuclear family trends, the need for
separate home and modern facilities, led to create big houses. They make use of either
clean lines or curve sometimes both. Contemporary residences make use of large
openings for abundant natural light to come in and open planning to promote social
interaction. Flat roof has with less over hangs become main element. And rather than
locally available materials they prefer imported materials and technologies. Innumerable
changes have been occurring from time in physical appearance, planning, and material
preferences in Kerala residences.
In fact traditional houses of Kerala have proven to be appropriate for human comfort with
respect to warm and humid climate of Kerala. But contemporary residence has also
gained popularity to far extend.
This dissertation is to collect public opinion on aesthetics of changing architectural style

of houses of Kerala.

1.1 AIM
The dissertation aims at aesthetical assessment of houses of Kerala with respect to

changing architectural styles over the period ranging from typical traditional residence to
present day.
1.2 OBJECTIVE
1. To make a brief study on Kerala residential Architecture.

2. To collect public perception on aesthetics of houses of Kerala through examples of
typical traditional, contemporary cum traditional and contemporary.
3. To understand aesthetical parameters in architecture.
4. Quantitative assessment to find which one does public prefer with reference to identified
aesthetical parameters
1.3 METHODOLOGY
1. Literature study
2. Literature case study.
3. Live case study
As the study is based on architectural aesthetic assessment, it demands a systematic

and appropriate research methodology to arrive at an accurate conclusion
Dissertation has been carried out as 2 parts. The first part of the study is the compilation
of data from secondary sources to get a brief understanding on changes occurring in
planning, material and physical appearances of houses of Kerala. And second part of my
study deals with the research focusing on aesthetical evaluation of changing Architectural
style of residences of Kerala taking buildings of different age as reference.

1.4 SCOPE
Kerala Architecture is one of the exceptional south Indian architectural styles, found
nowhere in India. The evolution of domestic architecture followed the trend of Temple
architecture. Typical courtyard house is a main characteristic in Kerala Architecture.
Typical Kerala Traditional house is built with available local resources and with respect to
warm and humid climate of Kerala. For instance, rafters extend beyond the walls to shade
the walls and windows from extreme rain and sun.. Traditional residences of Kerala have
proven in providing human comfort through the wise use of materials and response
towards extreme climate. But there is noticeable increase in contemporary style
residences in Kerala. The dissertation aims to study patterns and activities of traditional
and contemporary in brief and to find out public opinion on aesthetical approach.
1.5 LIMITATIONS
This dissertation limited to aesthetical assessment of Kerala residences of particular

period of time ranging from traditional Nalukettu to contemporary style.
Since it’s merely difficult to study on such a vast topic like residences of Kerala within a
limited time span, the dissertation focuses on aesthetical aspects of Kerala residential
architecture with respect to time period.

2. TRADITIONAL DWELLINGS OF KERALA; A BRIEF STUDY

Kerala’s style of Architecture is unique in India, because of its striking contrast to

Dravidian Architecture which is normally practiced in South India. The specific climatic
conditions, the abundance of wood, and the unique community structure resulted in the
development of unique traditional architecture of Kerala.
The traditional architecture of Kerala comprises Temple, palace and house built which
characteristically reflect the wood construction system along with laterita stone. The
pitched roofs of angle between 30 to 45 degrees were constructed. Intricate detail carved
on gables, protrudes from the roof that became main visual element.
The form and features are believed to have evolved through Vedic principles of the
science of Architecture. This period also witnessed the application of architectural theory
such as,
 Manushyalayachandhrika
 Thanthrasamuchaya
 Shilparathna
2.1 THE HOUSE
Vasthushasthra or the science of architecture according to Vedic principles was widely

accepted in Kerala. Standardisation of design is an important feature of Vasthushasthra.
This standardisation resulted in a uniformity in propotions, geometry, dimension and
physicality. It had a general pattern with common language of building practices. Number
and size of the room varied according to the economical and social status of occupants.
This standardisation of design helped in extension work if required and at the same time
control the form and spread of the building.
This Kerala architectural practice initially rooted in Vedic priciples. There were slight
alteration made to fit local conditions. This chapter which ellaborate the pattern of local
adaptation made -Thachushasthram which is practical even today.
Fig 1 Typical traditional Kerala residence

(source: pinterest )

2.2 PLANNING AND SPACIAL CONFIGURATION
Traditional architecture is typically a rectangular plan with a central courtyard open to sky
where all 4 blocks joined together. The 4 halls on the sides are named as:
 Vadakkini (North block)
 Padinjatini (West block)
 Kizhakini (East block)
 Thekkini (South block)
Nalukettu has 1 central courtyard (4 blocks), Ettukettu with 2 courtyard(8 blocks) and
some with 3 courtyards(16 blocks) forms Pthinarukettu.
 Pomukham – Place to receive guests.

 Padinjattithara – Western wing of house to receive respected guests and serve meals
 Deenamuri (sick room) – Room to sick male members
 Meladukkala – Day to day dinner hall.
 Kalavara –Store room
 Vadakke akam – Labor room
 Vadakke kett – Dinner hall for Namboothiris
 Adukala – Kitchen
 Oottupura – Place to pray
 Nadumittam – Inner courtyard
2.3 COMPOSITION AND STRUCTURE
 Primary elements were common for all structures.

 Normally of circular, rectangular, square shapes with ribbed roof,
 Long steep sloping roof built to protect the walls, normally layed with tiles/thatched roof
supported by timber frame.
 Structurally the roof form was supprted on pillars or walls erected on plith which normally
raised from ground for protection from insects.
 Often walls are of timber since abundantly available.
 Gable window at the ends for ventillation at attic .
 Visually they are low height buildings due to oversloping roofs.
 Wooden overhead beams to support the roof.

2.4 ELEMENTS OF TRADITIONAL RESIDENCE
Padippura : It is the main Poomukham : It is the prime

entrance to the compound of portico soon after steps to
the house. An opening with the house. It has tiled roof
ornamneted door and tiled on top supported by series
roof n top. of columns on either side.
S
i
d
e
s
a
r
e
Fig 2 typical traditional padippura Fig 3 typical traditional
(source: readtiger.com ) poomukham (source: readtiger.com )
Chuttu verandah : From Charupadi : Seating spaces
Poomukha comes with decorative backrest
chuttuverandah which act as carved on wood.
transition apace between
public and private area.
Fig 4 typical traditional chuttu Fig 5 typical charupadi

verandah (source: : readtiger.com ) (source: : readtiger.com )
Kulam : Basically every Nadumuttom : Central

residence had its own kulam courtyard space with
with entrance hall namely verandahs surrounding it.
kulappura.
Fig 7 nadumuttom
Fig 6 kulam (source: : readtiger.com ) (source: : readtiger.com )

2.5 WOOD CRAFTS


Fig 8 wood crafts (source: : readtiger.com )
 Ornamentation on columns, doors, gables were of teak wood.
 Rich carvings on archways of doors, ceilings influenced by religious epics as well as floral and
animal motifs.
 The elegant doors of Tharavadu were studded with brass.
2.6 BUILDING MATERIALS
 Mud, laterite, granite stone blocks, lime mortar, wood, bamboo, clay roofing tile, etc
 Granite : Due to limited availability, granite was limited to the foundation of buildings only.
 Clay : Clay was used for walling, filling the timber floors, making bricks and tiles.
 Laterite: Laterite and timber most common building material because it was locally available.
Laterite improves strength as exposed to sun and moisture.

3. CHANGING ARCHITECTURAL STYLES IN RESIDENCE OF KERALA

In Kerala, indigenous architecture has variety of residential types, religious and

institutional buildings. Traditional Architecture of Kerala has unique construction
techniques, roofing system and craftsmanship.
With modern material and construction technologies there is much deviation from
traditional ways of designing and construction of houses. The modern movements have
affected traditional system of design.
Fig 9 sketches (source: author)
Contemporary architecture differs from traditional architecture style in planning, pattern,

spacial configuration and aesthetical values. The changing lifestyle, culture and needs
have influence on this changing architecture
The concept of Padipura has lost its relevance in the contemporary Kerala architecture.
There are changes in overall planning layout of the residences. The modern residences
generally have more spacious living rooms and bed room.
There is a visible change in the size and characteristics of the openings in the modern
residences compared to the traditional residences. Large openings, sliding door cum
windows with glass and steel replaced the smaller wooden windows. More light is coming
to the private areas including the bed rooms.
‘Poomukham’ have been transformed to linear sit out and there are more attempts to
emphasis car porch which has become an element in planning.
Inner courtyards have evolved to serve as a mere landscape courts with skylight
openings and in many cases replaced with a skylight glass cover.
Simplicity in design elements is main characteristic of contemporary architecture.

Decorative carvings on wooden doors, archways, windows and columns have noticeably
decreased.

4. LITERATURE CASE STUDY

Quantitative architectural aesthetic assessment
by Yasser Megahed(New castle university) Applying Birkhoff’s formula
The research focuses only on the Formal Aesthetic features that are related to the
structure of form and its mathematical relations which can be quantitatively assessed.
(Gifford et al., 2000) Birkhoff and followers presented a mathematical interpretation of the
formal aesthetics of objects through an inverse relation between the Order and
Complexity
Accordingly, aesthetic measure in architecture can be redefined by Order and

Complexity. Order deals with the geometrical relation in its composition under which
negative feeling on repetition or imperfection of certain elements considered. Complexity
in Birkhoff’s terms represents the factors responsible for increasing the feeling of tension
and effort of attention. When considering the example shown in this publication its clear
that there is a relation between order and complexity that redefines aesthetics of the
building.
Until recently, there was a great difficulty in objectively evaluating the formal aesthetics
of Architecture. There should be proper parameters for evaluating aesthetics in order to
get better feedback from the observers on the aesthetics of architecture.
The methodology selected for research is to initially list out the various aesthetical
parameters and in view of a case study select the apt parameter to conduct online survey
with questions based on the theory.

This section introduces the application of Birkhoff’s Formula on different situations of buildings' aesthetics
Fig.10. Applying Birkhoff’s Edited Formula on The Madrasa of Al-Sultan Hassan:

Orderliness measur(source :The researcher)
Fig.11 Applying Birkhoff’s Edited Formula on Mosque of Al-Sultan Hassan;

Complexity measure (source :The researcher)

5. PARAMETERS FOR QUANTITATIVE AESTHETICAL ASSESSMENT
Birkhoff's formula can be employed in Architecture by redefining the equation's

parameters; Order and Complexity
The Aesthetic Measure (M) increases with the increase of Order (O) and decreases with
the increase of Complexity (C).
ORDER can be computed by five items:

Symmetry (S), Repetition (R), Equilibrium (E), Disposition (D), and Color harmony1 (H),
Randomness is considered as a negative factor affecting Order (n.f.)
COMPLEXITY can be measured by

Form complexity (F.C), Ornament (Orn), Silhouette differentiation (S.d), and Color
Contrast (C.c)
Hence, the parameters for quantitative aesthetical assessment are:
5.1 ORDER
5.1.1 Symmetry (S): identifies the different probabilities of symmetry. The existence of
bilateral symmetry gains a score of S = 2, where local symmetry gains a score of S = 1.
Lastly, lack of symmetry is represented by S = 0. Local symmetries can be counted in
the main court, Iwans1, the main gate, the windows,
5.1.2 REPETATION (R): stands for the existence of translational symmetry. It is

especially found in the repeated items on the level of elevations. In principle, R = 2 for
an elevation with plenty of identical objects. R = 1 for self similar items that are not
identically analogous but have the same outline with difference in details. In case of no
repetition, R = 0.
5.1.3 EQUILIBRIUM (E): is the property of visual stability of masses. In Birkhoff’s

measure; E = 2 if the building shows perfect equilibrium. E = 1 for the mechanical
equilibrium of dynamic forms unlike the historic buildings' static equilibrium. Buildings
that seem unbalanced, unstable, or even visually unsafe, E = 0..
5.1.4 DISPOSITION (D): stands for the 2D relation of vertical, horizontal, and diagonal lattices.
D = 2 for conventional iron grid buildings. D = 1 for buildings that reflect angular or complicated
grids. D = 0 for buildings that have random organization or very complicated grid.
5.1.5 COLOR HARMONY (H): deals with matching in colors in exterior or interior elevations.H
= 2 for buildings that have uniform colors, a single color, faintor no color. H = 1 for less matching
colors. H = 0 for the use of clashing colors.
5.1.6 THE NEGATIVE FACTOR (n.f.) displays a measure of imperfection and

dissatisfaction that diminishes the state of order.

5.2 COMPLEXITY
5.2.1 FORM COMPLEXITY (F.C.) represents the existence of items that raise the tension
of mind like; curves, mass differentiation, and complicated grids where F.C. = 2, while
F.C. = 1 for the existence of less curves, mass differentiation, and/or less complicated
grids. F.C. = 0 for plain masses, no curves, mass differentiation, and/or the existence of
iron grids.
5.2.2 ORNAMENTS (Orn) are defined as the region of much information. Plain surfaces
carry the least amount of information. Orn. = 2 for the existence of regions of high details.
Orn. =1 for the existence of a moderate level of details. Orn. = 0 for plain surfaces with
no details.
5.2.3 SILHOUETTE DIFFERENTIATION (S.d.) represents the number of turns in every

façade of the building. This item reverts back to the genuine definition of polygon's
complexity in Birkhoff's original formula. The more turns in façade silhouette, the more
complexity it represents. Quantitatively, S.d. = 2 for large number of turns in façade. S.d.
= 1 for moderate number of turns in façade. S.d. = 0 for facades with the least number of
turns (about 4 turns).
5.2.4 COLOR CONTRAST (C.c.), this sub-item stands for contrast in color hue and
saturation. C.c. = 2 for contrasting colors. C.c. = 1 for less contrasting colors. C.c. = 0
for uniform colors

6. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
6.1 Building type selection:
Major factors were considered while selecting the building type for the study:
 It must come under residential category building, with similar user group.
 Double storied residence with relatively similar scale, proportion and massing.
 Residences showing variation in architectural style with respect to time period.

6.2 Questionnaire survey:
An online questionnaire survey had been formulated considering the wider reach and
easy accessibility to gather adequate data.
The beginning of the questionnaire dealt with the personal information and visual
perception on architectural elements of a residence. And the second half provides
respondents with required data (images and drawings) of the selected residences of 3
chronological time period, which were collected. Images or drawings for individual
parameter are provided correspondingly.
The respondents are asked to rate each of the buildings based on aesthetic parameters
selected on a scale of 0 to 2, 0 being lowest and 2 the highest.
6.3 Demography of survey:
The survey was decided to be conducted among architectural students of various

colleges and architects in Kerala
This was owing to the following facts:
Chosen group has idea on design and aesthetics and have less knowledge on
parameters for measuring aesthetics.
6.4 Theory:
Aesthetical appraisal of building can be best obtained by quantitative analysis through

parameters mentioned earlier. The application of Birkhoff’s principle helps to collect
public opinion on aesthetics of houses of Kerala.

7. LIVE CASE STUDIES

7.1 KUMAARAMANGALAMHOUSE
TRIVANDRUM, KERALA- Residence A
Is an example of Kerala traditional architecture with rectangular plan and central courtyard
system.
Nalukettu house with central Nadumuttom and 4 blocks Vadakkini, Thekinni, Padinjattini
and kizhzkinni connected to it. Poomukham /sit out leads to kizhakkini and then comes
the verandah which has access to kidappumuri. Privacy is well maintained.
Fig 11 Kumaaramangalam veedu

(Source: College of architecture , Trivandrum)
Fig 12 Ground floor plan


Fig 13 First floor plan

Sloping roof with gables on both side; has been supported by wooden double columns. It
has typical door and window with less ornamentation.
Gables of decorative floral motifs carved out of wood.
Fig 14 Gable
(source: College of architecture , Trivandrum)
Fig 15 Courtyard Fig 16 Roof type and gables

(Source: College of architecture , Trivandrum) (Source: College of architecture , Trivandrum)

7.2 PAZHAYA PANTHALAKAM HOUSE

CALICUT,KERALA – Residence B
This traditional house is characterized by Rectangular plan without the provision for
central courtyard. At the same time satisfies all elements of traditional residences
including elaborate Padipura. Typical wooden doors and windows brings uniformity
throughout.
Fig 17 Poomukham
(Source: author)
Fig 18 Ground floor plan

(Source: author)

Fig 19 First floor plan

(Source: author)
It has limited decorative elements and use of wood. Doors and windows are of typical
design. Simple and symmetry are also design peculiarities of this house.
Fig 19 Verandah Fig 20 Doors and windows

(Source: author) (Source: author)
Fig 21 Elevation (Source: author)

7.3 MR.AND MRS. WILSON’S HOUSE

CHANGANASSERY, KERALA-Residence C
It is a Contemporary residence with traditional values. Linear symmetrical planning with

long verandah running around the courtyard. Traditional elements like long verandahs,
the courtyard, pillars and pitched roof are mixed with contemporary elements like use of
cladding, steel and glass.
Fig 22 Exterior view (author)
Fig 23 Ground floor plan (Source: RAS, Kochi)

Pitched roof extends beyond the walls to resist extreme climatic conditions. They are
supported on concrete columns. Use of wood is limited for decorative purpose in
columns, doors and windows.
Simple typical wooden windows resembles traditional element. Whereas use of glass for
openings and cladding for columns are among contemporary practices.
Fig 24 Exterior view (Source: RAS, Kochi)
Fig 25 Section
(Source: RAS, Kochi) Fig 26 Window (author)

7.4 VENUGOPAL’S HOUSE

ALUVA, KERALA-Residence D
Fig 26 Exterior view (Inspiration, Kochi)
Linear planning with simple

circulation but satisfying all
basic needs of a residence
forms its characteristic feature.
It is a house that satisfies both

traditional and contemporary
values of a house. Exposed
brick wall and sloping roof,
concrete roof slab along with
steel truss work and support
system is true amalgamation of
traditional and contemporary
style.
Fig 27 Ground floor plan (Inspiration, Kochi)

Fig 28 First floor plan (Inspiration, Kochi) Fig 28 Exterior view (author)
Fig 29 Exterior view (author) Fig 30 Elevation (Inspiration, Kochi)

7.5 FAROOK’S HOUSE,

CALICUT, KERALA- Residence E
It is a Contemporary residence with simple open planning and minimum decorations.

Large continuous openings with extensive use of glass and Exposed concrete walls are
contemporary elements. Flat concrete roofing with minimum overhang contradicts roofing
system traditional residences. Open to sky courtyard act as design element that doesn’t
have much to do with the functional aspects as central courtyards of traditional
residences.
Fig 31 Exterior view (Thought Parallels, Calicut)
Fig 32 Ground floor plan (Thought Parallels, Calicut)

Fig 33 First floor plan (Thought Parallels, Calicut)
Fig 34 Section (Thought Parallels, Calicut)

7.6 BAIJU’S HOUSE

CHANGANASSERY, KERALA-Residence F
It is a Contemporary residence with linear planning and minimum decorations. Long

elevation with distribution of typical windows at equal distance keeps building clean and
pleasing.
Fig 35 Exterior view (author)
Fig 36 Ground floor plan (RAS, Kochi)

Fig 37 First floor plan (RAS, Kochi)
Flat roof continues to be weather shade for

openings.
Vertical elements are used to break the long

continues wall.
Fig 38 Exterior view (author) Fig 39 Exterior view (RAS, Kochi)

An Exploration of Public Opinion On Changing Architectural Styles of Rseidences in Kerala

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

An Exploration of Public Opinion On Changing Architectural Styles of Rseidences in Kerala

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

An exploration of public opinion on changing architectural styles of residences in Kerala 1

Rajiv Gandhi Institute of technology, Kottayam I Dissertation 2017

7. LIVE CAS STUDIES: ............................................................................................... 18

Rajiv Gandhi Institute of technology, Kottayam I Dissertation 2017

A built environment should perform its function providing psycho-physiological comfort

This dissertation is to collect public opinion on aesthetics of changing architectural style

Rajiv Gandhi Institute of technology, Kottayam I Dissertation 2017

The dissertation aims at aesthetical assessment of houses of Kerala with respect to

1. To make a brief study on Kerala residential Architecture.

As the study is based on architectural aesthetic assessment, it demands a systematic

Rajiv Gandhi Institute of technology, Kottayam I Dissertation 2017

This dissertation limited to aesthetical assessment of Kerala residences of particular

Rajiv Gandhi Institute of technology, Kottayam I Dissertation 2017

2. TRADITIONAL DWELLINGS OF KERALA; A BRIEF STUDY

Rajiv Gandhi Institute of technology, Kottayam I Dissertation 2017

Kerala’s style of Architecture is unique in India, because of its striking contrast to

2.1 THE HOUSE

Vasthushasthra or the science of architecture according to Vedic principles was widely

Fig 1 Typical traditional Kerala residence

Rajiv Gandhi Institute of technology, Kottayam I Dissertation 2017

2.2 PLANNING AND SPACIAL CONFIGURATION

 Pomukham – Place to receive guests.

2.3 COMPOSITION AND STRUCTURE

 Primary elements were common for all structures.

Rajiv Gandhi Institute of technology, Kottayam I Dissertation 2017

2.4 ELEMENTS OF TRADITIONAL RESIDENCE

Padippura : It is the main Poomukham : It is the prime

Fig 4 typical traditional chuttu Fig 5 typical charupadi

Kulam : Basically every Nadumuttom : Central

Rajiv Gandhi Institute of technology, Kottayam I Dissertation 2017

2.5 WOOD CRAFTS

2.6 BUILDING MATERIALS

Rajiv Gandhi Institute of technology, Kottayam I Dissertation 2017

3. CHANGING ARCHITECTURAL STYLES IN RESIDENCE OF KERALA

In Kerala, indigenous architecture has variety of residential types, religious and

Fig 9 sketches (source: author)

Contemporary architecture differs from traditional architecture style in planning, pattern,

Simplicity in design elements is main characteristic of contemporary architecture.

Rajiv Gandhi Institute of technology, Kottayam I Dissertation 2017

4. LITERATURE CASE STUDY

by Yasser Megahed(New castle university) Applying Birkhoff’s formula

Accordingly, aesthetic measure in architecture can be redefined by Order and

Rajiv Gandhi Institute of technology, Kottayam I Dissertation 2017

Fig.10. Applying Birkhoff’s Edited Formula on The Madrasa of Al-Sultan Hassan:

Fig.11 Applying Birkhoff’s Edited Formula on Mosque of Al-Sultan Hassan;

Rajiv Gandhi Institute of technology, Kottayam I Dissertation 2017

5. PARAMETERS FOR QUANTITATIVE AESTHETICAL ASSESSMENT

Birkhoff's formula can be employed in Architecture by redefining the equation's

ORDER can be computed by five items:

COMPLEXITY can be measured by

Hence, the parameters for quantitative aesthetical assessment are:

5.1.2 REPETATION (R): stands for the existence of translational symmetry. It is

5.1.3 EQUILIBRIUM (E): is the property of visual stability of masses. In Birkhoff’s

5.1.6 THE NEGATIVE FACTOR (n.f.) displays a measure of imperfection and

Rajiv Gandhi Institute of technology, Kottayam I Dissertation 2017

5.2.3 SILHOUETTE DIFFERENTIATION (S.d.) represents the number of turns in every

Rajiv Gandhi Institute of technology, Kottayam I Dissertation 2017

6.1 Building type selection:

6.2 Questionnaire survey:

6.3 Demography of survey:

The survey was decided to be conducted among architectural students of various

Aesthetical appraisal of building can be best obtained by quantitative analysis through

Rajiv Gandhi Institute of technology, Kottayam I Dissertation 2017