EN
TR
Investigation of Kinetic Building Shell in Context of Aesthetic Facts: Calatrava’s Buildings
Abstract
Aesthetic can be defined as the beauty perceived by the senses. In architecture, structures and forms are classified based on their functionality, sociological benefits, and aesthetic values. To achieve its core value, architectural products must be approached from various perspectives such as sociological, economic, technological, and aesthetic aspects. Buildings which are designed individually are perceived in relation to their surroundings due to being a part of a city. The shell of the structure is significant due to being the first element encountered by users and triggering aesthetic emotions. The building envelopes, which have been revitalized with current technologies, have been endowed with functions such as aesthetic value, energy efficiency, and sustainability. The kinetic systems that emerged with the inclusion of motion have added innovation to traditional design methods, and physical transformations have emerged in the structures. In this context, Santiago Calatrava has been the Pioneer of kinetic architectural research and has developed many systems to use motion in his design. In the study, the structures in which Calatrava integrated kinetic façade systems in his designs were examined in terms of aesthetics. In addition, concepts such as aesthetics, symmetry, order, proportion, inspiration from nature were discussed, and it was determined whether the structures examined had an aesthetic value in this context.
Keywords
References
- Baç, M., vd. (2007). Felsefe. (Ed. D. Taşdelen). Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları.
- Becerik, B. (2001). Mimarlıkta Estetik Olgusu ve Değerlendirilmesi Sorunu. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
- Beyoğlu, A. (2016). “Sanat Eğitiminde Altın Oran ve Leonardo da Vinci’nin Eserleri Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi". YYÜ Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, ss. 360-382.
- Demirarslan, D. (2007). “İç Mimarlık Eğitiminde Estetik Olgusu”. Mimarlıkta Estetik Düşünce, s. 281. Ankara: Mimarlar Odası Yayınları.
- Dickie, G. (1962). “Is Psychology Relevant to Aesthetics?”. The Philosophical Review, 71(3), ss. 285-302.
- Frederick, M. (2007). Mimarlık Okulunda Öğrendiğim 1 01 Şey. İstanbul: Yem Yayınevi.
- Garip, E. ve Garip, B. (2012). “Aesthetic Evaluation Differences Between Two Interrelated Disciplines: A Comparative Study on Architecture and Civil Engineering Students”. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 51, s. 533-540.
- Gündoğdu, E. ve Arslan, H. D. (2019). “Yapı Kabuğu Tasarımında Biyomimesis Kullanımının Örnekler Üzerinden Değerlendirilmesi”. Ulusal Çevre Bilimleri Araştırma Dergisi, 2(4), ss. 159-168.
Details
Primary Language
Turkish
Subjects
Aesthetics in Architecture
Journal Section
Research Article
Authors
Ruşen Yamaçlı
0000-0001-9659-9246
Türkiye
Publication Date
October 31, 2023
Submission Date
September 16, 2023
Acceptance Date
October 17, 2023
Published in Issue
Year 1970 Volume: 4 Number: 2