Architectural Engineering and Design Management

ISSN: 1745-2007 (Print) 1752-7589 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/taem20

Understanding kinetic architecture: typology,

classification, and design strategy

Naglaa Ali Megahed

To cite this article: Naglaa Ali Megahed (2017) Understanding kinetic architecture: typology,
classification, and design strategy, Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 13:2,
130-146, DOI: 10.1080/17452007.2016.1203676

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2016.1203676

Published online: 04 Jul 2016.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1798

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 5 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=taem20
ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT, 2017
VOL. 13, NO. 2, 130–146
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2016.1203676

Understanding kinetic architecture: typology, classification,

and design strategy
Naglaa Ali Megahed
Architecture and Urban Planning Department, Faculty of Engineering, Port Said University, Port Said, Egypt

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The objective of this research is to understand kinetic architecture and Received 24 January 2016
propose a conceptual framework for kinetic classification and design Revised 13 May 2016
strategies. A thorough understanding of kinetic systems that are Accepted 6 June 2016
relevant to architecture and their usage is important, because it enables
KEYWORDS
architects to think about the major aspects of kinetics and explore their Architecture; classification;
potential for architectural applications. In this context, the research design; dynamic; kinetic;
presents a methodology for the definition and classification of different strategy; typology
terms, concepts, and approaches in kinetic architecture. Moreover, it
develops a framework of design strategies to identify different kinetic
phases based on the main issues concerning the design, construction,
and maintenance. This demonstrates how the process of designing
kinetic architecture can effectively predict the challenges and problems
before the actual kinetic systems are constructed and installed in the
buildings.

Introduction
Although architecture is generally not associated with kinetics, this field has been growing in recent
years. The emergence of digital design processes as well as numerical and robotic technologies is
challenging the conventional assumption that architecture is static. In consequence, the opportu-
nities for practical applications of kinetic architecture have increased dramatically in the late twenti-
eth century (Kolarevic, 2015; Moloney, 2011). In this context, kinetic systems have been used by
architects to embed computation intelligence and thus create flexible and adaptable architectural
spaces that match the changing needs and desires of the users (Friedman, 2011; Osório, Paio, & Oli-
veira, 2014).
There are many approaches in which architecture can be said to be kinetic, through structural
innovation, material properties, mechanical elements, etc. (Fox, 2003; Moloney, 2011). As a result,
designing kinetic structures requires transdisciplinary approaches, architects may have to overcome
many difficulties in the mechanical and control engineering, and they should provide dynamic and
structural stability, forces to be applied and many more in the design process (Sorguç, Hagiwara, &
Selçuk, 2009). Consequently, it appears that designing kinetic architecture becomes even more diffi-
cult because it is expected to respond to changes in the general requirements, ranging from technical
and operational issues to psychological, functional, and formal requirements during the movement
process.
The objective of this research is to understand kinetic systems, concepts, and approaches that are
relevant to architecture. This understanding enables us to think about the major aspects of kinetics
and explore its potential in architectural applications. To date, no framework has successfully

CONTACT Naglaa Ali Megahed naglaaali257@hotmail.com

© 2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
 ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT 131

coordinated kinetic architecture, especially with regard to the typology, classification, and design
strategies. To fill this gap, this research proposes a conceptual framework for kinetic classification
and develops design strategies that reveal the underlying main phases and key elements of
kinetic architecture.

Related work
A careful search and review of the existing literature, both academic and professional, revealed a
recent interest in the investigation of kinetic architecture. This interest has been seen in a number
of publications and research projects (Alkhayyat, 2013; Asefi & Foruzandeh, 2011; El Razaz, 2010;
Fouad, 2012; Fox, 2010; Kirkegaard & Sørensen, 2009; Kolarevic, 2015; Kronenburg, 2014; Lee, 2012;
Moloney, 2011; Osório et al., 2014; Parkes, 2009; Sanchez-del-Valle, 2005). There has been a parallel
increase in the number of architectural applications adopting different kinetic approaches (Knippers,
Scheible, Oppe, & Jungjohann, 2012; Lienhard, 2014). There is no clarity on the exact rules followed by
this form of architecture, which may be due to the lack of conceptual approaches that define, classify,
and identify different kinetic terms, approaches, and systems. Furthermore, the framework of design
strategies is still not clearly explained in the literature. Each of these works is impressive within their
own right, suggesting that several possibilities for alternative visions still exist based on the common
grounds and understanding.

Research methodology
This study outlines the definition of kinetic architecture and its related terms, approaches, and strat-
egies in an attempt to enable architects to think about the major aspects of kinetics and explore its
potential in architectural applications. To this end, the study has been guided by the following
research questions: (1) How have the terms been understood through the different moving
approaches? (2) How is kinetic architecture classified? and (3) What are the main design strategies
in kinetic architecture?
Answering these questions requires multi-disciplinarily investigations across different fields. For
this reason, secondary data collecting is considered. The study first presents various definitions
and terms related to kinetic architecture. It then proposes a conceptual framework for kinetic classi-
fication and analyses existing examples on the basis of different movement approaches and technol-
ogies. Later, a case study building is investigated to highlight the process of kinetic architecture and
validate the proposed strategy. Finally, the study develops a framework for design strategies based
on the general phases required for kinetic architecture to function as efficiently and effectively as
possible.

General kinetic typologies in architecture

Although the modern fascination with motion is associated with movements like Futurism in the
early twentieth century, research on kinetic architecture dates back to the 1960s and 1970s, when
computation and technology took a giant leap. Groups like Archigram took this new kind of knowl-
edge and used it in architecture so that spaces could be changed in order to match the changes in
the user’s wishes and needs. Between the 1980s and the end of the twentieth century, important pro-
jects were developed (Osório et al., 2014). During this time, the technological achievements in struc-
tural, mechanical, and material engineering as well as information and communication technologies
had an enormous effect on kinetic design. This is because a basic knowledge of different disciplines is
necessary to generate kinetic designs (Susam, 2013).
Based on the literature, it is noted that kinetics approaches are fluid, and in order to form a clear
definition, there is a difference between a building hosting only kinetic elements and a building
representing kinetic architecture. Thus, kinetic architecture is a large field of study that includes
132 N. A. MEGAHED

different systems and forms of construction. In light of the roots of kinetic architecture and the state
of the art, it appears that the embedded kinetic sciences have become a major trend in the field of
construction. Keeping these premises in mind, kinetic architecture has tried to develop this collabor-
ation, which can assume different configurations to respond to the changes in the specific needs of a
specific user in a specific context. A number of books, articles, and patents beautifully illustrate many
examples of proposed and actual projects from which to learn. However, the descriptive terms
employed are greatly varied and therefore difficult to find (Lee, 2012). Therefore, this section
attempts to explain the general kinetic typologies. It also provides an analytical description of
their definitions and a review of the terms and existing classifications.
The words used to describe buildings with movable parts or components associated with a shape
change include adaptable, collapsible, deployable, enabling, evolutionary, flexible, intelligent, kinetic,
mobile, performance based, reconfigurable, responsive, revolving, smart, transformable, and trans-
portable. Architecturally, it is viable to say that the typologies may overlap and that an example
can fall into more than one category (Werner, 2013; Zuk & Clark, 1970). It is normal for a single
term to be associated with different definitions, and conversely for distinct words to be associated
with the same meaning. Usually, each profession redefines the terms according to its own needs.
The use of a common terminology helps researchers in accessing and sharing information.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the term ‘kinetic’ originates from the Greek κῑνητικός,
which means ‘moving’, and is commonly used as an adjective with a number of meanings related to
various fields. In the field of architecture, while Zuk and Clark (1970) do not give a concise definition,
they do provide helpful architectural applications (Lee, 2012). Most of the things they describe as
ideas of the future have been realized.
Fox and Kemp (2009) provide a particularly useful contemporary definition. ‘Kinetic architecture is
defined generally as buildings and/or building components with variable mobility, location, and/or
geometry.’ This may be done by ‘folding, sliding, expanding, and transforming in both size and
shape through pneumatic, chemical, magnetic, natural, or mechanical’ means. In addition to this defi-
nition, kinetic architecture can also include buildings or structures with variable geometry or move-
ment, that is, soft-form buildings with transformation capacity made by membrane structures or
cable-net pneumatic structures and rigid-form buildings made of rigid materials connected by
joints and capable of deploying, folding, expanding, rotating, and sliding (Kirkegaard & Sørensen,
2009). There are other terms and typologies related to kinetic architecture that have been recognized
by several authors (see Table 1). While these terms may seem synonymous, there are important differ-
ences between them that need to be understood for clear and specific lines of research.

Classifications of kinetic architecture

Kinetic architecture is a wide field that includes and is associated with several concepts, approaches,
and methodologies. Over the years, many researchers have developed classifications for kinetic archi-
tecture. The classifications methods are based on the perspective and field of study of each author. As
shown in Table 2, the categorization can be done by structural and mechanical observations or by an
evaluation of applications and mechanisms related to the movement process. Table 2 summarizes
different classification approaches. The characteristics and systems are diverse and exist in more
than one sub-category, and each of these approaches can be explored at a deeper level.

The conceptual framework for kinetic architecture

A conceptual framework requires the researcher to specify what is going to be studied and what will
be neglected. It also assumes existence of relations between the key variables (Gray, 2004). Based on
the previous research on classification, this section presents a conceptual framework that provides
the research viewpoint in kinetic classification and establishes a new type of classification. This frame-
work can act as a guide map that links the key elements of kinetic classification.
 ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT 133

Table 1. Terms and typologies related to kinetic architecture. Table prepared by author on the basis of the works of Lee (2012),
Sherbini and Krawczyk (2004), and Werner (2013).
Term Description
Adaptable . Structures designed to be easily altered or modified to fit different social functions before and after
occupancy. Adaptable projects are generally residential, socially motivated, and often
accomplished through movable-wall systems

Deployable . Structures that can fold for transportation or storage. The principal conflict is between the
definitions of transformable and deployable, which are often used interchangeably. Deployable
structures are autonomously capable of major configuration changes

Intelligent . Structures that have the ability to learn as well as respond in time according to the processed
information measured or received from the exterior or interior environments by multi-input
information detectors and sources, in order to fulfill the users’ needs

Mobile . Prefabricated structures that are built in a factory on a permanently attached chassis before being
transported to the site.

Performance-based . Structures that use digital technologies to challenge the way the built environment is designed,
while benefitting the environment, users, and society

Responsive . Structures designed to respond to the social and/or environmental stimulation at a specific place
during the design phase of a project

Transformable/ . Structures that are able to quickly take on new shapes, forms, functions, or characteristics in a
transportable controlled manner by alterations in the structure, skin, and/or internal surfaces connected by
articulated joints. Transformable projects are generally less focused on aesthetic effects than on
fulfilling the functional requirements of the project

The material used in this classification is taken from Popper’s classification of kinetic art (Popper,
1968) and from the works of Zuk and Clark (1970), Otto and Burkhardt (1972). To define the research
area further, it has also been upgraded to accommodate more recent publications, especially those of
El Razaz (2010), Fox (2003), Kronenburg (2014), Lee (2012), Moloney (2011), and others. After this com-
prehensive review, two distinct movement approaches – static and dynamic – are presented. These
two approaches are further divided in subsequent sections and included different movements (see
Figure 1). While a static approach allows movement only during the drawing phase, a dynamic
approach includes spatial and non-spatial methods. The following illustration shows the conceptual
framework for kinetic classification and the connections between the various research methods, con-
cepts, and approaches.

Static approach
This approach generally seeks an aesthetic effect or simply tries to capture attention. It does not
include real movement but what can be considered a virtual one. Movements are applied during
the design process by use of parametric models that allow building design modifications only
during the drawing phase (El Razaz, 2010). There are many parametric models in architecture that
enable digital designers to create more complex structures that may present virtual movement in
order to maintain a modernist aesthetic. By setting up the logical control in the parametric model,
multiple design variations can be generated (Megahed, 2015).

Dynamic approach
Dynamic movement involves the incorporation of technologies into buildings in which transforma-
tive mechanized structures change with climate, need, or purpose.
134 N. A. MEGAHED

Table 2. Comparative analysis of existing classifications related to kinetic approaches.

Year Authors Approach Classification groups
1968 Popper Understanding kinetic methods and movement in art . Virtual or real movement
. Spatial or non-spatial
. Predictable via mechanical methods
or unpredictable via natural forces

1970 Zuk and Clark Investigating kinetic architecture through architectural . Dynamically self-erecting structures
applications and structural aspects . Mechanisms or kinetic components
. Reversible or non-reversible assembly
. Incremental architecture
. Deformable or transformable
structures
. Mobile or disposable architecture

1972 Otto and Using lightweight structures, convertible roofs in particular . Tensile structures
Burkhardt . Membrane structures

1992 Brookes and Investigating the types of structures in portable . Flat-packed

Grech architecture from a prefabrication perspective . Pantograph
. Membrane systems
. Pneumatics
. Tensegrity structures
. Pods or capsules

2000 Fox and Yeh Exploring kinetic systems on the basis of three key . Dynamic (mobile, transformable, and
elements: structural engineering, sensor technology, and incremental kinetic systems)
adaptable architecture . Deployable
. Embedded

2005 Sanchez-del- Understanding adaptive kinetic structures with digital tools . Simulation-based design
Valle . Performance-based design
. Digital prototyping

2010 Asefi Investigating the types of transformable roof structures that . Self-supported and non-self-
respond to the user’s requirements supported structures
. Permanent or temporary architecture
. Tensegrity and tensile principles

2010 El Razaz Exploring the sustainable vision of kinetic architectural . Dynamic

structures . Static

2011 Friedman and Investigating different types of movable roof structures . Retractable roofs with rigidly moving
Farkas either for enabling quick and/or safe construction, or in parts
order to adapt the structure to external stimulations . Retractable/deployable pantograph
structures
. Deployable tensegrity structures
. Retractable/deployable membrane
structures
. Pneumatic structures

2011 Moloney Exploring architecture that changes with time . Geometric translation in space
. Material deformation

2012 Lee Classifying kinetic structures or components that have . Adaptable

actual variable mobility, location, and/or geometry . Kinetic
. Responsive
. Transformable

(Continued)
 ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT 135

Table 2. Continued.
Year Authors Approach Classification groups
2013 Oungrinis Classifying kinetic techniques and mechanisms appropriate . Building components where
for transformable-adaptive structures transformability can be applied
. Transformations of peripheral parts

2014 Kronenburg Exploring the philosophical and technological issues raised . Portable and transportable buildings
by kinetic experimental and futuristic prototypes . Demountable and temporary
architecture

Figure 1. Conceptual framework for kinetic classification.

Mechanisms abound that provide a rich source of strategies that can be used in the real move-
ment approach. In addition to this approach, the definition of kinetics considered material defor-
mation as an additional category of complex and fluid motion (El Razaz, 2010; Parlac, 2015;
Werner, 2013).

. Spatial – real movement: Based on the axis of movements and the degrees of freedom, there are
some basic ways to categorize movements – folding, sliding, rolling, expanding, and transforming.
These movements are generally performed by basic mechanisms. When combined, they enable a
variety of movements by changing the axis, strength, and direction, as illustrated in Table 3. In
1979, Friedemann Kugel analyzed the types and directions of movement related to construction
systems, mainly roofs (see Table 3). His analysis, supported with kinetic diagrams, helps in illustrat-
ing the possibilities of movement accordingly with the materials and construction systems used
(Alkhayyat, 2013; Werner, 2013).
. Non-spatial – material deformation: Current technological achievements have brought about a
new generation of smart materials that are capable of decision-making beyond simple reflexivity.
Such materials are driven by the molecules’ ability to process their environment and respond to it
by changing their form, function, or appearance. The focus is placed on the relationship between
136 N. A. MEGAHED

Table 3. Classification of structural innovation with geometric transitions in space. Based on the drawings of Friedemann Kugel
(Werner, 2013).
Geometric transitions in space
Movement direction
Construction system Movement type Parallel Central Circular Peripheral
Rigid constructions (rigid panels or structural Slide
segments)

Fold

Rotate

Membranes, with stationary supporting structure

Gather or bunch

–
Roll

Membranes, with movable supporting structure – –

Slide

–
Fold
–
– –
Rotate

materials, form, and interaction, and particularly on how the behavior and properties of shape-
changing materials can support the design of kinetic and interactive surfaces. Through material
deformation/transformation, these surfaces can change their color, luminosity, topology,
texture, and permeability. As a result, a significant perceptual shift can occur with a change in
these materials. Consequently, these materials play an important role in kinetic behavior. Materials
that incorporate computational properties are reshaping the ways in which we design, interact,
and communicate. This can greatly influence the user’s experience (Coelho, 2008; Parkes, 2009;
Parlac, 2015).

Based on the proposed conceptual framework, Table 4 illustrates different architectural and
kinetic examples that include and embed different movement approaches. According to the descrip-
tion of kinetic design key elements, the Thematic Pavilion for EXPO 2012 was chosen to investigate
different design strategies in kinetic architecture within its dynamic and spatial approach.

Case study: Thematic Pavilion, Flectofin hingeless louver system

A transdisciplinary collaboration among architects, engineers, and biologists at the University of
Stuttgart’s Institute of Building Structures and Structural Design studied the kinetic mechanism of
the Bird-of-Paradise flower. The result of this collaboration is Flectofin, a hingeless louver system
that is capable of shifting its fin 90° by inducing bending stresses in the spine caused by displacement
of a support or change of temperature in the lamina. This technology is currently being displayed at
the Thematic Pavilion (SOMA Architecture). The project is a role model for a novel application of GFRP
for hingeless louver system as well as for advanced biomimetic research and design (Knippers et al.,
2012; Lienhard, 2014). The kinetic façade acts as a sustainable climate control device. Not only is it a
Table 4. Analysis of kinetic architecture based on the proposed conceptual framework.
Type Kinetic example Diagram Description of kinetic design key elements
Static Draw Polyline Central China TV, Beijing, China Rising from a common platform, two towers lean towards each other and finally merge in a
approach perpendicular, 75-m cantilever. The facades reveal the irregular geometry of the building’s steel
structure which reflect the distribution of forces under different load conditions

Circle City Hall London, UK The circular shape achieves optimum energy performance by maximizing shading and minimizing
the area exposed to direct sunlight

Modify Copy The Cube, Beirut, Lebanon The concept for the tower is simple but effective. The copy and add concept reaches the
maximum allowable height to produce flexible floor plans to optimize breath taking views of
Beirut and the Mediterranean

ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT

Cut Crescent Moon Tower Dubai, UAE The structure is designed as a crescent, a symbol of energy and power. This moon shaped
building, which literally cuts across the skyline proposed to present a major symbol of the
Islamic faith

Offset Scottish Exhibition and

Conference Centre, Glasgow, UK
Rotate Massar Children’s Discovery
Centre Damascus, Syria
External shell takes a flat sheet material to clad a series of framed hulls, which wrap around the
disparate elements. These overlapping, aluminium-clad shells create a distinctive profile on the
skyline
The proposed structure represents the rose petals that rotate around the central atrium to create
an amazing scenography of light into the interior spaces

Mirror Emirate Tower, Dubai, UAE The two adjacent towers, which rise to 355 m and 309 m, respectively, is situated in a mirror-
shaped to provide an iconic profile

Stretch The Gherkin Building London, UK The structure has a steel frame with circular floor plans and a glass facade which is essentially an
elongated, curved, shaft with a rounded end that is reminiscent of a stretched egg

(Continued )

137
 138
N. A. MEGAHED
Table 4. Continued.
Type Kinetic example Diagram Description of kinetic design key elements
Dynamic Spatial Rigid Rotating Skyscraper Dubai, UAE The tower is designed to be self-sustaining, up to 79 wind turbines will be fitted to each floor.
approach Each floor is designed to rotate independently around the core by means of power-generating
wind turbines, resulting in a changing shape of the tower

Membrane One Ocean – Thematic Pavilion for Bionic façade with kinetic glass fiber reinforced polymers (GFRP). Opening and closing moveable
EXPO 2012 Yeosu, South Korea lamellas in succession allows choreography of wave-like patterns to be created along the entire
length of the building
Pneumatic The Media-TIC building. Façades made of ETFE (ethylenetetrafluoroethylene) air cushions that provide pneumatic shading.
Barcelona, Spain The cushions consist of three layers of plastic with two air chambers between them that can be
inflated or deflated as needed

Non- Material National Aquatics Center (Water Dynamic façades based on ETFE cladding by nearly 3000 bubble-like pneumatic cushions of all
spatial deformation Cube) Beijing, China sizes supported by a polyhedral steel-framed structure. It built upon ‘the soap bubble’ theory
resulting media facades shine in the sunlight like a pearl in water
 ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT 139

Figure 2. Thematic pavilion for EXPO 2012: (a) Bird-of-Paradise flower; (b) basic Flectofin principle; (c) project Flectofin louvers; and
(d) Lamella façade – movement from closed to 60° opening.

beautiful building, but it is also bioinspired. The Thematic Pavilion is one of the major buildings for
the Expo 2012 in Yeosu, South Korea (see Figure 2).
Within the framework of the case study, the process of designing the kinetic façade is investigated
based on secondary data collection (see Table 5). This process is further developed to propose and
emphasis the following design strategies in kinetic architecture.

Design strategies in kinetic architecture

As shown in the previous sections, the product of kinetic design is not a single result but a strategy
that requires multi-disciplinarily expertise and the crossing of fields. This is due to the multi-dimen-
sional responses to both functional and non-functional requirements before, during, and after the
movement. Thus, to establish kinetic architecture, the designers need to follow some strategies
that can support the discovery of several characteristics, key elements, and phases before the
kinetic systems are actually constructed or installed in the buildings.
This section presents the development of a methodology for design strategies that reveals the
underlying main phases and key elements of kinetic architecture. This strategy is based on and devel-
oped in the works of Alkhayyat (2013), Asefi (2009), Asefi and Foruzandeh (2011), Fouad (2012), and
Knippers et al. (2012), as well as analysis of the case study results. According to characteristics to be
outlined, a new design strategy is proposed. This strategy is based on the vision of the author and is
supported by the scientific literature mentioned above. However, it is open for debate and can be
improved in future studies.
As shown in Figure 3, there are five design strategies in kinetic architecture. Strategy 1 investigates
the formal aspects of design generation, including all aspects of module, concept, and morphology.
Strategy 2 demonstrates the innovation aspects of the required technology before, during, and after
movement. Strategy 3 evaluates the rationale of kinetic proposals before their realization. Strategy 4
converts the evaluated proposal to an actual constructed environment. Strategy 5 enhances and
maintains the final kinetic product through the policy aspects. To avoid negative impacts of
kinetic architecture on the constructed environment, architects should therefore identify and find
answers to questions related to the developed design strategies. The main criteria presented here
Table 5. Analysis of the case study building in terms of the kinetic design process. Table prepared by the author on the basis of the works of Knippers et al. (2012), Lienhard (2014) and Maier (2012).

140
The process of design kinetic structure
Design . The Flectofin principle is based on mimicry of the elastic kinematics of Bird-of-Paradise flower movements. Though this flower was the focal point of this project there are many
generation other species of plants that are worthy models for kinematic study

N. A. MEGAHED
. The case study building is the first large implementation which determined whether the Flectofin principle could be magnified to the large scale of lamellas with varying
heights. More than one hundred individual moveable louvers can be set to respond to changes in environmental conditions

Mechanism . The operable louvers while fulfill a climatic function allowing different modes of operations to create animated patterns along the façade. The potential choreography ranges
from subtle local motion to overall waves affecting the whole length of the façade
. These louvers are moved by actuators located on both the upper and lower edge, inducing compression forces to create the complex elastic deformation. A computer-
controlled bus-system allows the synchronization of the actuators. The operation system requires feedback information from the electric servomotors regarding the actual
position of the louvers and can be linked to the Internet. This allows uploading movement scenarios and information about façade condition to be sent to a maintenance
company
. To emphasize its kinetic character, LEDs illuminate the façade during the night. After sunset the analogue visual effect of the moving louvers is intensified by linear LED bars,
which are located at the inner side of the front edge of the louver. When open the LED can illuminate the next louver depending on the angle at which it is opened

Rationalization During the process of design this kinetic facade, different possible technical solutions have been investigated. The most significant beings are:
. Design verification concept: Design rules for GFRP, which exist in international and national guidelines are far from being complete and consistent. Therefore, structural design
verification of GFRP louvers is based on considering various safety factors with different critical positions
. Dimensions/ connection details: A detailed geometrical analysis of the movement has been carried out in order to determine potential collisions
. Load assumptions/wind tunnel tests: The facade had to be designed for very high wind speeds occurring on the South Korean coast under Typhoon conditions. In these
conditions, the façade will be closed and locked automatically. The wind loads were derived from wind tunnel tests in order to achieve a safe and economic design of the
louvers through different open positions
. Numerical models/calculation results: Reliability of results has been double-checked by means of specific software as well as considering different recommendations,
guidelines, and codes
. Performance mock-up tests: Overall load deflection behavior has been tested within full-scale performance mock-up

Materialization . Instead of connecting rigid elements with strained hinges, the kinetic louvers gain their flexibility by differentiating morphological and anatomical features to create an all-in-
one pliable system. They are made of GFRP, which is both strong and flexible
. These modular components and adjustable connections make it possible to realize different shapes, configuration and scales. Each louver has one stiff and one thin edge and
associated with actuator placed both at the top and bottom. These actuators push the upper and lower edges together and lead to an elastic bending combined with a side
rotation of the GFRP elements. These elements are capable of asymmetrical bending to allow light to radiate in and out of the building as well as afford views both ways

Management . The facade is 140 m long and between 3 and 14 m high. It consists of 108 kinetic GFRP louvers, which are supported at the top and bottom edge by fixed supports on one
corner and extendable actuators on the other corner. The damaged and defective parts can be easily repaired or replaced due to ease of connections and modularity of the
structure
. The use of hingeless mechanical systems reduces the amount of maintenance commonly associated with interactive facade systems
 ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT 141

Figure 3. Design strategies in kinetic architecture.

are based on the general characteristics required for the kinetic structure to function as efficiently and
effectively as possible.

Design generation (formalization)

The first strategy of the kinetic framework has to do with how an architect deals with the formal
aspects of the design – developing an idea, choosing a function, and sketching a form with the sup-
porting structure. This strategy is divided into three phases – concept, module, and morphology.

. Concept: A kinetic structure should be elegantly designed, so that when it is constructed, it is con-
sidered as a good piece that integrates art, architecture, science, and functionality. The first phase
of design generation is to find connections or patterns between abstract ideas and then piece
them together to form a complete picture. A key characteristic found in kinetic structures is the
dual functionality of the structural elements.
. Module: Based on the kinetic concept, the second phase of the design generation requires
modular components to be sketched, modeled, and fabricated. A simple module is the best for
achieving an efficient movement process.
. Morphology: This phase involves the conversion of the design concept into an actual design by
investigating the details of form and structure.

Mechanism (innovation)
This strategy looks at the new possibilities associated with kinetic elements and investigates the
aspects of support technology and control mechanism.

. Movement: This phase investigates the movement of kinetic elements in space. As illustrated in
Table 3, motion has many geometric transitions in space. In addition, in this phase the designer
should determine the parts of the project that are supposed to be movable. Sometimes a building
can adopt different types of movement, such as kinetic elevation elements, interior elements, roof
elements, kinetic walls, kinetic parts of the structure itself, or even the building as a whole.
. Technology: This phase involves the suitable embedded computation, ranging from simple
systems to more complicated ones connected to sensors, detectors, and computers. In addition,
it investigates the suitable control mechanism, that is, either manual or automatic control.
There are many ways whereby automatic controls with pre-programmed settings allow users to
modify the settings according to their needs and desires.
142 N. A. MEGAHED

Rationalization (evaluation)
This strategy is related to transforming the conceptual sketches into rational ones that are joined with
a supporting structure and mechanism. It deals with procedures that are used together for checking if
a kinetic system meets requirements and specifications and whether it fulfills its intended purpose. It
also deals with special procedures with regard to safety issues. This phase needs to be followed by
full-scale testing in the laboratory or the field.

. Verification: It is the static practice of verifying documents, designs, codes, and programs. It is gen-
erally done before validation.
. Validation: It is the dynamic mechanism of testing the actual product. It has many techniques and
methodologies depending on the type of testing required.

Materialization (reality)
This strategy investigates decisions with regard to the construction and operation processes, ranging
from the selection of materials and structural systems to ensure that manufacturing and safety oper-
ations are in place.

. Construction: A kinetic structure may be designed to reach stable configurations during various
movement processes. Thus, choosing the appropriate material in terms of the structural aspects
is a vital process. Lightweight and efficient materials need to be considered in order to lower
the self-weight of the building and facilitate the assembly process.
. Operations: In the actual construction environment, there are many operations that require the
kinetic structures to be easily manufactured and shipped. This can be achieved with certainty
when the module phase is successfully investigated. Moreover, the simplicity of the detailing
and construction mechanism makes it possible for the structure to be constructed in different
places in a short period of time with minimum wastage. This, in turn, makes the execution
process smooth and reduces the costs. In addition, it is very important to ensure reliability and
safety in construction sites.

Management (policy)
Kinetic architecture as part of global architectural processes requires a carefully planned system of man-
agement and maintenance in order to guarantee the safety of the users and ensure that the building
operates in the desired way, both architecturally and structurally. However, in kinetic architecture, due
to the nature of transformation involving repeated opening and closing of the structure, special
arrangements should be made to ensure the smooth and reliable movement and articulation of the
structural components. To complete the unified framework of design strategies in kinetic architecture,
the designer should investigate the different issues to ensure maintenance, reuse, and cost reduction.

. Maintenance and repair: The maintenance and management strategies chosen must consider the
effective and efficient operation of the structure in both open and closed states and during the
movement process. The connection mechanisms should be resistant and allow the required move-
ment to take place with little or no maintenance and in a way that does not cut short the life
expectancy of the construction.
. Reuse and cost reduction: Every building consists of a lot of non-recyclable components that
increase the costs and pollute the environment if the building is reused or demolished. Therefore,
one of the main design considerations for kinetic structures must be the use of recyclable and non-
polluting materials. The proposed folding and closing mechanisms should be designed to reduce
 ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT 143

wear and tear during the movement process. This system should also carefully monitor the con-
struction, running, and maintenance costs of the project.

Results and discussion

A lot of research effort has been put into kinetics. This research provides an overview of the existing
research and literature in this area. The study then presents a conceptual framework for understand-
ing kinetic architecture, reviewing the existing research viewpoints on the classification of kinetics,
and establishing a new one. In addition, the study develops a methodology for design strategies
that identifies the main issues concerning the design, construction, and maintenance. This design
strategies framework is based on the research done by Alkhayyat (2013), Asefi and Foruzandeh
(2011), Fouad (2012), and Werner (2013).
The developed design strategy for kinetic architecture should encourage architects to find
answers to design issues, determinations that include the possibility of the modules to expand
with the assembly of other modules, and the flexibility of the module itself. Is it possible to
change configurations or materials depending on the specific user or context? How can the
concept and technology be transformed to a real design? What types of material and transformations
are expected? What kind of movement will the structure realize? Are evaluation procedures used for
checking whether a kinetic system meets the requirements and specifications? In general, the kinetic
approach is essential to fit changing social functions before and after occupancy, but how do the
architectural choices affect the internal space? How is the movement operated? Is the control
system manual or automatic? Does it have the security requirements to open and close the structure?
Which building components are intended to be kinetic? Is any supporting equipment needed for the
structure to operate? What is its impact on the costs of construction and operation? What is the life
expectancy of the construction? What are the strategies for its maintenance, repair, and eventual
reuse?
These are some of the concerns, issues, and questions that come up when thinking about kinetic
architecture. For this reason, architects must be receptive in order to integrate knowledge from other
disciplines so that they can include the novel design approaches and enable the applications of
kinetic architecture.
The purpose of creating the framework is to make a valuable contribution to the study of
kinetic architecture with reference to current technology. The research results indicate that the
process of designing kinetic architecture has five design strategies – design generation, mechan-
ism, rationalization, materialization, and management. The design generation strategy investigates
the formal aspects of the design and how the required architecture has been represented. The
mechanism strategy investigates the supported technological aspects and control mechanism.
The rationalization strategy is concerned with the evaluation processes for checking whether a
kinetic system meets requirements and specifications and whether it fulfills its intended
purpose. The materialization strategy takes informed decisions regarding the construction and
operations processes. The management strategy affirms the importance of the establishment of
maintenance and management strategies that could reduce costs and ensure safety throughout
the lifecycle of kinetic buildings.
This design strategies framework should provide a methodology for architects of kinetic struc-
tures. In addition, it is important to highlight that the relationship between materials, structural
components, and mechanical connections is not merely fundamental. An alteration in any of
them, if it takes place without updating the others, generates malfunctions of hardware and
failure of the kinetic system. In this context, designers responsible for these systems should
have an open dialogue with other professionals (e.g. engineers, manufacturers, and constructors)
in order to identify the best solution and specifications for each kinetic system. To achieve
optimal results, architects should work in teams in close collaboration with specialists from
144 N. A. MEGAHED

different fields. Each such group of specialists plays a vital role during each phase of the design
strategies framework. These fields range from engineering, such as information technology, com-
munication, mechanical, and structural engineering, to environmental and social sciences.

Kinetic architecture – benefits and challenges

Though kinetic architecture is not a new concept, it has been infrequently applied until recently.
The progress in science and technology has affected all aspects of building design and construc-
tion. This has enabled kinetic architecture to make a spectacular comeback and challenge the
traditional form of architecture. Kinetic structures offer the means to significantly expand the
functional and performance-related features of traditional and static architectural solutions.
This can be realized only if the buildings can transform by use of kinetics without losing the
fundamental strengths of traditional architecture. In this context, kinetic approaches offer fresh
perspectives and design innovation in research and in practice (Fotiadou, 2007; Osório et al.,
2014).
Kinetic approaches offer a wide range of possibilities for architecture. They can be used as indoor
elements. They can appear as a part of the building’s structure, or even as the whole structure. The
main motivation for moving toward kinetic architecture lies in the increasing demands for comfort,
flexibility, adaptability, as well as the need to use natural resources more prudently. In some cases,
there are multiple reasons for using kinetics. The most common reason is the need to control and
use space and material by function sharing, and the ability to change geometry’s appearance
(Fouad, 2012; Wierzbicki-Neagu & de Silva, 2007).
Ultimately, kinetic approaches provide designers with the creative means to solve problems using
technological advancements. Installing kinetic systems in buildings will increase costs; on the other
hand, if these systems are employed for energy efficiency by maximizing the use of sunlight and
natural ventilation, the buildings’ running costs will reduce in the long run.
For architects, it is important to highlight that design strategies framework should provide a
methodology of kinetic structures, thus helping in formulating and selecting the most suitable
techniques and methods that can be used. While much has been accomplished, it is also clear
that a number of serious obstacles remain, which must be overcome before implementation pos-
sibilities of kinetic concepts can be realistically assessed. Architects should realize that creating
motion does not change our understanding of architecture and that it may actually make archi-
tecture more functional and exciting for the users. In this context, the question is whether kinetic
structures can address the increasingly complex requirements of contemporary architecture. Can
they ensure easily deployable, robust, and adaptable sheltering in emergency conditions? Can
they offer better comfort in adverse climatic circumstances? Most importantly, can they provide
better protection in extreme conditions like natural or man-made disasters? Can they provide
functional benefits in densely populated areas? Finally, and most seriously, can they serve
people and save human lives more effectively?
Finding the answers to these questions is a long-term task, since answers will depend on control
strategies, specific structural applications, hardware details, and a variety of other specific issues,
many of which need to be understood better and developed further. These issues significantly indi-
cate possible directions of future research.
Finally, since the concept of a kinetic structure is a significant departure from traditional structural
concepts, real obstacles exist with respect to its social acceptance. This is particularly due to concerns
about safety issues. Thus, in order to gain initial acceptance, more laboratory tests need to be con-
ducted and appropriate changes to the building codes need to take place. Further experimental ver-
ification must be done as a part of other evaluation strategies. Additionally, it is of great importance
to carry out research in order to understand how kinetic architecture will affect urban planning and
the image of future cites.
 ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT 145

Conclusions and future perspectives

The kinetic architecture being constructed right now is sound architecture; when it plays its role
without trying to be something else. It is not only an addition to the architectural aesthetics but
also plays a role in conserving the environment and improving the functionality of buildings. Kinetics,
when installed in buildings, allow users to reconfigure the environment they occupy. It is not required
for large parts of the building to move for it to be dynamic; the integrated movements of small parts
can achieve the concept of kinetic architecture. In addition, the evolution of smart materials makes it
easier and simpler to influence the user’s experience.
There is a need for architects and designers to develop the skills necessary to explore, consider,
and design kinetic architectural systems. A deeper understanding of kinetic approaches and their
use becomes more important. In this context, the study presents a conceptual framework for
kinetic classification that provides the research viewpoint in kinetic classification, including various
research methods, concepts, and approaches. Even though there are several examples of kinetic
architectural structures, they are not yet completely disseminated. There is a lot of scope for explora-
tion and investigation. In fact, the design of kinetic structures is more difficult than that of static struc-
tures. The added element of motion creates considerable challenges in the different phases of the
design strategies framework, due to the multi-dimensionality of the responses to both functional
and non-functional requirements before, during, and after movement. To help architects recognize
these multi-disciplinarily design issues, the study has developed a methodology for design strategies
that reveals the underlying main phases and key elements of kinetic architecture.
Finally, the study may have some impact on understanding the process of designing kinetic archi-
tecture. However, the proposed strategies need to be tested and validated before can be introduced
to industry for implementation. In a technical point of view, designing kinetic structure is such a
complex engineering task, which requires integration of different disciplinary, adequate aid efforts
are needed to consider the expectation of each individual aspect of design. However, the author pre-
sents only the architectural point of view that may encourage other specialists to add to the scientific
knowledge and to test or validate the proposed design strategies.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

References
Alkhayyat, J. (2013). Design strategy for adaptive kinetic patterns: Creating a generative design for dynamic solar shading
systems (M.Sc. thesis). Manchester, UK: University of Salford.
Asefi, M. (2009, September 28–October 2). Design management model for transformable architectural structures. In
A. Domingo, & C. Lazaro (Eds.), Proceedings of the international association for shell and spatial Structures (IASS),
Spain: Universidad Politecnica de Valencia.
Asefi, M. (2010). Transformable and kinetic architectural structures: Design, evaluation and application to intelligent archi-
tecture. Berlin: VDM.
Asefi, M., & Foruzandeh, A. (2011). Nature and kinetic architecture: The development of a new type of transformable
structure for temporary applications. Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture, 5(6), 513–526.
Brookes, A., & Grech, C. (1992). Connections – Studies in building assembly. Oxford: Butterworth Architecture.
Coelho, M. (2008). Materials of interaction: Responsive materials in the design of transformable interactive surfaces.
Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
El Razaz, Z. (2010). Sustainable vision of kinetic architecture. Journal of Building Appraisal, 5(4), 341–356.
Fotiadou, A. (2007). Analysis of design support for kinetic structures (MSc). Vienna: Department of Architecture, Vienna
University of Technology.
Fouad, S. (2012). Design methodology: Kinetic architecture (M.Sc. thesis). Alexandria: Architectural Engineering, Alexandria
University.
Fox, M. (2003). Kinetic architectural systems design. In R. Kronenburg (Ed.), Transportable environments 2 (pp. 163–186).
London & New York: Spon Press.
146 N. A. MEGAHED

Fox, M. (2010). Sustainable applications of intelligent kinetic systems. Cambridge, MA: Kinetic Design Group, MIT.
Fox, M., & Kemp, M. (2009). Interactive architecture. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.
Fox, M., & Yeh, B. (2000). Managing interactions in smart environments, Springer, 91–103.
Friedman, N. (2011). Investigation of highly flexible, deployable structures: Review, modelling, control, experiments and appli-
cation. Budapest: Budapest University of Technology and Economics.
Friedman, N., & Farkas, G. (2011). Roof structures in motion – On retractable and deployable roof structures enabling
quick construction or adaption to external excitations. Concrete Structures, 12, 41–50.
Gray, D. (2004). Doing research in the real world. London: Sage.
Kirkegaard, P., & Sørensen, J. (2009, September 28–October 2). Robustness analysis of kinetic structures. In A. Domingo, &
C. Lazaro (Eds.), Proceedings of the international association for shell and spatial structures (IASS). Spain: Universidad
Politecnica de Valencia.
Knippers, J., Scheible, F., Oppe, M., & Jungjohann, H. (2012). Kinetic media façade consisting of GFRP louvers. In
International conference on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering CICE 2012, Rome.
Kolarevic, B. (2015). Towards architecture of change. In B. Kolarevic, & V. Parlac (Eds.), Building dynamics: Exploring archi-
tecture of change (pp. 1–16). Abingdon, OX: Routledge.
Kronenburg, R. (2014). Architecture in motion: The history and development of portable building. Oxford: Routledge.
Lee, J. (2012). Adaptable, kinetic, responsive, and transformable architecture: An alternative approach to sustainable design
(M.Sc. thesis). Austin: The University of Texas at Austin.
Lienhard, J. (2014). Bending-active structures: Form-finding strategies using elastic deformation in static and kinetic systems
and the structural potentials therein. Stuttgart: Universität Stuttgart – Institut für Tragkonstruktionen und Konstruktives
Entwerfen.
Maier, F. (2012). One ocean – Thematic pavilion for EXPO 2012. Retrieved February 17, 2016, from http://www.detail-
online.com/article/one-ocean-thematic-pavilion-for-expo-2012-16339/
Megahed, N. (2015). Digital realm: Parametric-enabled paradigm in architectural design process. International Journal of
Architecture, Engineering and Construction, 4(3), 175–184.
Moloney, J. (2011). Designing kinetics for architectural facades: State change. Abingdon, OX: Routledge.
Osório, F., Paio, A., & Oliveira, S. (2014, May 14–16). KOS – Kinetic origami surface. In Rethinking comprehensive design:
Speculative counterculture, proceedings of the 19th international conference on computer-aided architectural design
research in Asia (CAADRIA 2014) (pp. 201–210). Kyoto.
Otto, F., & Burkhardt, B. (1972). IL Five: Convertible roofs, issue 5 of information of the institute for lightweight structures series.
New York: George Wittenborn Incorporated.
Oungrinis, K. (2013, October 11–12). 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 move-
ment in architecture (ICAMA2013), Toronto: Ryerson University, Department of Architectural Science.
Parkes, A. (2009). Phrases of the kinetic: Dynamic physicality as a dimension of the design process. School of architecture and
planning. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Parlac, V. (2015). Exploring responsiveness in architecture. In B. Kolarevic, & V. Parlac (Eds.), Building dynamics: Exploring
architecture of change (pp. 191–204). Abingdon, OX: Routledge.
Popper, F. (1968). Origins and development of kinetic art. London: Studio Vista.
Sanchez-del-Valle, C. (2005). Adaptive kinetic structures: A portal to digital prototyping. In Proceedings ACADIA’05: Smart
architecture, Association for Computer-Aided Design in Architecture (ACADIA). SCAD/Savannah: Georgia.
Sherbini, K., & Krawczyk, R. (2004, December). Overview of intelligent architecture. In 1st ASCAAD international conference,
e-design in architecture (pp. 137–152). Dhahran: KFUPM.
Sorguç, A., Hagiwara, I., & Selçuk, S. (2009). Origamics in architecture: A medium of inquiry or design in architecture. Metu
Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 26(2), 235–247.
Susam, G. (2013). A research on a reconfigurable hypar structure for architectural applications (M.Sc.). Izmir: İzmir Institute of
Technology.
Werner, C. (2013). Transformable and transportable architecture: Analysis of buildings components and strategies for project
design. Barcelona: Universidad Politécnica de Cataluña.
Wierzbicki-Neagu, M., & de Silva, C. (2007, October). Development of design workflows for kinetic structures using fuzzy
logic. In Proceedings of association for computer-aided design in architecture conference, expanding bodies in art, cities
and the environment (pp. 250–259). Halifax, NS: Dalhousie University Faculty of Architecture and Planning.
Zuk, W., & Clark, R. (1970). Kinetic architecture. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.