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

net/publication/339177260

THE BIOLOGICAL METAPHOR Skin-facade analogy and biomimetic

architecture

Chapter · February 2020

CITATIONS READS

0 808

1 author:

Anna Conzatti
University of Bath
3 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Anna Conzatti on 18 May 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

THE BIOLOGICAL
METAPHOR
Skin-facade analogy and
biomimetic architecture

Anna Conzatti
PhD Student at University of Bath
B.Sc Architecture Abstract

M.Arch, DIPIA, University of Metaphor is a strategy used by

Udine architects, not only as a rhetorical
figure produced by language but
also as a guide of the project. The
most common trope in architecture
Keywords: skin, metaphor, manifests the analogy between the
biomimicry human body and the building. This
similarity has been investigated
and used in the theory of architec-
ture by authors such as Vitruvius
and Leon Battista Alberti. Even dur-
ing the Illuminism, the building ele-
ments found their correspondence
with human anatomy. However,
after the expansion of scientific
knowledge, the similarity between
the human body and building was
transferred from an anthropomor-
phic metaphor to an organic meta-
phor in which the building itself is
an expression of biological mecha-
nisms.

Within this scenario, the skin is

the biological paradigm, which is
converted into a technical and vi-
sual element in the facade design
process. The anatomical aspects
of the skin find a correspondence
in the facade systems through a
reinterpretation of the biological
functions and the structure. The
biomimetic approach summarized
this process. Through the emula-

196

tion of natural strategies and the
fundamental role of morphology, it
aims to improve the development
of the building envelope in terms
of composition and performance.
This paper, starting from a de-
scription between the skin as an
organism and as an architectural
element, tries to identify the most
suitable biological factors and phe-
nomena for new design solutions.
Then it is highlighted the design
effectiveness of skin as an active,
adaptable and functional element,
communicative and permeable.
The skin: biology and identity
The skin is the largest vital organ of
the human body. It is the first de-
fence a man has towards the out-
side world. It is part of the integu-
UC THE CITY AND THE SKIN
mentary system, along with hairs,
nails and exocrine glands.
Its main functions are protection,
waterproofing, thermal insulation
and fat storage. The skin is mainly
formed by skin tissues and cutane-
ous appendages, and it is divided
into two main layers: epidermis
and dermis. The first layer is com-
posed of multilayered epithelial
tissue (basal layer and stratum cor-
neum), while the second layer is
formed of connective tissue and
contains cutaneous appendages,
hair follicles, sebaceous glands,
sweat glands and blood vessels
and nerve endings. In addition to
these two layers, there is also the
subcutis (hypodermis), formed by
connective tissue and adipose cu-
taneous fat cells.
197
The first task of the skin is to protect
the body from mechanical dam-
age, heat, light radiation, chemi-
cals and micro-organisms. Further-
more, through the touch, the skin
sends signals through the nerves
to the brain.
As can be observed, human skin is
an organ that is sensitive to external
stimulation thanks to the numerous
free endings that register not only
temperature variations, but also
pain and pressure. It acts as a filter
between the external environment
and the interior of the body, allow-
ing the body to know external situ-
ations and to interpret them, gen-
erating adequate responses able
to adapt to any change in the envi-
ronment. In these terms, the sense
of touch is essential to allow the
man to interact with his surround-
ings.
Tact is essential as sunlight (Aker-
man 1991) as the ability to respond
to stimuli is one of the fundamen-
tals of life. All the other senses are
an extension of this sense and the
specialization of skin issues related
to it (Pallasma 1995). Many archi-
tects have tried to rediscover and
reinforce the qualities of touch in
architecture through the rediscov-
ery of the sense of materiality and
hapticity - texture and weight, den-
sity of space and materialized light
(Pallasma 1995), such as Tadao
Ando. Being alive will mean noth-
ing anymore; it is the only thing
that architects can do is make sure
we do not lose our sense of touch
(Ando 2012). Alternatively, like
Wright, who invites us to redis-
cover the spirit of contact through
the Imperial Hotel. “Walking down
these halls, the guest is almost
198
compelled to run his fingers along
the grooves. However, Wright did
not intend that people run their fin-
gers along the grooves. The brick is
so rough that to obey this impulse
would be to risk mangling a finger.
With this device, Wright enhances
the experience of space by person-
ally involving people with the sur-
faces of the building”. (Hall 1982).
Moreover, where the sense of our
touch ends, the identity of the indi-
vidual begins to take shape. Man’s
boundary begins and ends with his
skin. (Hall 1982). It is fundamental
for the identification of a person
and allows his recognition within a
group. It is the fabric that forms the
boundary between the individual
and the collective.
Describing human skin is a com-
plex task, as it introduces different
themes, ranging from biology to
sociology. In this case, the human
external surface allows us to ob-
serve the architecture through a
different perspective, which leads
us to reconsider the role of biology
and nature within the design pro-
cess.
The body and the building: a
metaphor
Before introducing the paradigm
that links human skin to the build-
ing envelope, it is good to dwell
on the connection between the hu-
man body and architecture.
In biological terms, three systems
could synthesize the human body:
- the skeleton with its connections
- the brain and the transmission
 UC THE CITY AND THE SKIN

199
pathways of nerve impulses (The
human mind reacts to stimuli and
governs the response of the or-
gans)
- the human skin that in its com-
plexity makes the human body a
microclimate.
These systems are also present in a
building that has:
- a supporting structure
- internal environment control sys-
tems
- a protection and filtering system
between the internal environment
and the external environment
Metaphor is essential to under-
stand the connection between the
body and the building. This rhetoric
figure allows us to clarify complex
systems and let us experience a
new way of thinking. Among archi-
tects, the use of metaphor is widely
widespread. Through this rhetoric
figure, the design process could
be expressed, translating the ideo-
logical meaning to a visual plan,
orienting the composition. In this
sense, the metaphor is connected
with the method and the purpose,
especially concerning architectural
theory. It is a mean by which pro-
duce a reaction and western soci-
ety has always conceived architec-
ture as a metaphor. One of these is
the metaphor of the building as a
body (Forty, 2000).
The relationship between the hu-
man body and the building has
historically been present for mil-
lennia in architectural treatises.
Vitruvius identifies the principle for
200
good architecture in symmetry. He
combines the square with the cir-
cle and numerical series, to pursue
corporeal unity, through balance
and proportion. According to his
theory, the human body is merely
a pictorial representation of the
body in architecture, used as a sys-
tem of measurement.
The Renaissance, especially with
the figure of Leon Battista Alberti,
formalizes Vitruvian theories and
the sense of proportion of human
measures, produced by the cre-
ation guides the vision of the world
and projects. The human figure is
inscribed in the facades through
the mimesis that allows the man to
identify himself with the building. It
is a mimetic impulse (Adorno 1984)
that will enable humans to feel at
home through a process of sym-
bolic identification. The building
becomes an extension of the body
and expresses human existence.
Human skin and building skin:
analogies
Through the metaphor of the
building as a body, the concept of
human skin could be transferred
to the building skin concept, using
the analogy. There are many simi-
larities between what is generated
by biology and the architectural
design process.
Both the human and the building
skin define a difference between
an internal and an external environ-
ment — two different spaces, with
distinct chemical composition and
phases. The interaction between
outside and inside, as in the case of
human skin may be a total closure
 UC THE CITY AND THE SKIN

201
or a filter. Both are composed of
several layers, each with a specific
function, but collaborating. Both
person and building skin must be
recognizable and be aesthetically
pleasing. However, above all, both
must guarantee protection from
mechanical shocks, radiations,
chemicals agents and must allow
exchanges between internal and
external. For the correct function-
ing of the metabolism in the case
of the skin, and to maintain the
standards of comfort in the case of
the building.
During the 20th century, the build-
ings were conceived as a machine
and for this reason have become
identical in most of the world. As
a consequence, the external en-
velope becomes closed, and the
building skin acts as a barrier and
not as a filter. Technological ad-
vancement has produced build-
ings with an interior that is increas-
ingly separate from the outside.
Architectures can work even in ex-
treme weather situations. However,
what are the implications? Build-
ings have become increasingly
similar to one another, causing the
loss of regional differences and the
soul of spaces, indiscriminate use
of material and energy.
Therefore, a change of metaphor
occurred. It changed the relation-
ship with nature and the environ-
ment. However, culture and climate
should influence the building. Cul-
ture gives identity to the building,
while the climate relates to the en-
ergy consumption of architecture.
Therefore, a change in metaphor is
necessary: the old metaphor, one
that is essential regional differenc-
es and environmental health while
202
embracing appropriate technolo-
gies that can give us the comfort,
service and security we now expect
(Berkebile and McLennan 2002).
Nature can again guide the design
process. The metaphor of human
skin is a valid example for the de-
sign of facades able to interact with
the external environment and be
part of it.
Biomimicry: from skin to
biomimetic building skin
The term Biomimicry, whose syn-
onyms can be biomimesis or bio-
mimetic, was first used by Otto
Schmitt in the 1950s to indicate
the observation, interpretation and
imitation of biological processes
or natural shapes. Different fields
have applied this methodology,
such as transports, electronics and
clothing1.
In architecture, nature has always
been a source of inspiration. The
most glaring example is the Crys-
tal Palace, where the observation
of water lilies inspired James Pax-
ton. Frank Lloyd Wright himself has
incorporated biomimesis into his
concept of organic architecture, re-
interpreting a waterfall2 or a shell3.
Thus, architects have often turned
to nature to find solutions to com-
plex design problems. However,
the biomimetic approach goes be-
yond the pure inspiration or imita-
tion of natural forms or processes.
Currently, it is mainly widespread
in the UK (but also in Germany,
in Austria and the United States),
thanks to the work of Professor Ju-
lian Vincent, who however empha-
sizes that no general approach has
been developed for biomimetic.
 UC THE CITY AND THE SKIN

Table 1. Analogies in functions of the human skin and the building skin (adapted from Gruber P. (2008). Biomimetics in Architecture. Reading, U.K. The University of Reading Institute for Building Construction and Technology.

Human Skin function How Building Skin analogy

Protection Protection of inner organs epidermis > outer layer

hypodermis
collagen

Mechanical defense epidermis > resistant materials

dermis
hypodermis

Protection from radiation epidermis > UV protection, choice of correct

materials, the orientation of
windows

Protection from chemicals and micro- Langerhans cells > cleaning

organisms

epidermis
Insulation Protection from heat and cold > thermal insulation layer
hypodermis

Filtering Control the amount of sunlight epidermis > orientation of windows

Thermal regulation hypodermis > thermal insulation layer

sweat glands control of sunlight and heat with
the orientation of windows

Control of air exchange epidermis > windows and mechanical air

system control

Exchange of water, oxygen and other chemical action > windows and mechanical
substances ventilation system control

Sensing sense of touch (see > surface’s material and sensors

Table 2)

Storage Storage of thermal energy hypodermis > thermal insulation layer

Storage of chemical energy (carbohydrates, dermis > energy storage

fat) hypodermis
blood vessels

Storage of water and water resistance keratinocytes > control of humidity and water
prevent water loss storage, waterproof layer

Adaptability Adaptability for the environment and epidermis > control of internal temperature
internal change: change skin colour, control melanocytes > control of the windows
of internal temperature produce melanin > control of lights and shadows
sensory receptors

Table 2. Analogies in other aspects of the human skin and the building skin (adapted from Gruber P. (2008). Biomimetics in Architecture. Reading, U.K. The University of Reading Institute for Building Construction and Technology.

Human skin How Building Skin analogy

Sense of touch Sensing temperature and mechanical > building surface (internal
pain (mechanoreceptors such as and external) treatment
Merkle cells, tactile > visual metaphor
corpuscles and bulbous > thermal condition
corpuscles)

neural (sensory neurons)

Identification Identification of the single in skin colour, tattoos, > external layer’s material
the environment scarifications

The enclosure of the single in

a social group

A connected system of Three connected layers integration between each > each layer has its
independent layers Glands layer and component function, but they
Blood vessels collaborate to make the
Pores whole system work

Aesthetic and Skin colour and temperature skin colour and temperature > appearance in the
communication show people mood, physical show people mood, physical environment
state and attractiveness. state and attractiveness

In contemporaneity, it is essential to underline the analogy that exists between human skin and the building
envelope on the level of exchanges between the internal and external environment and how they are
fundamental for the thermal comfort of the building and the regulation of energy consumption.
During the 20th century, the buildings were conceived as a machine and for this reason have become identical
in most of the world. As a consequence, the external envelope becomes closed, and the building skin acts as 203
a barrier and not as a filter. Technological advancement has produced buildings with an interior that is
increasingly separate from the outside. Architectures can work even in extreme weather situations. However,
what are the implications? Buildings have become increasingly similar to one another, causing the loss of
However, some studies are pro-
ducing methods capable of stan-
dardizing the similarities between
biology and architecture (Vincent
2006).
At the moment, the Biomimicry
Institute’s Design Spiral provides
the most explicit description of the
biomimetic process, as seen in Fig-
ure 1.
Four steps resume this process:
- Identify a design problem
- Examine ways other organisms or
ecosystems have solved the prob-
lem
- Identify a specific trait in a body
- Translate the feature into a design
that responds to a human problem
In the design of the building skin,
the problem that arises can find an
answer through the study and ob-
servation of nature. For example,
Professor Janine Benyus, in her
projects4 She used the beetle, to
make a building skin that breathes,
that is strong and resilient, while
Julian Vincent examines the shells
of ants5. The surface had to be re-
sponsive, allowing the passage of
air but restrict the invasion of water
or dangerous chemicals. However,
there is no more dynamic façade,
breathable and self-sustaining than
the first skin.
Currently, few examples apply
the concept of human skin to the
façade of the building, but many
are developing. Doris Kim Sun
204
proposed one of them (Figure 2),
who is trying to make the building
skin more similar to human skin.
She is experimenting with the use
of thermo bimetal skin with pores
able to open and self-ventilated
without the use of external en-
ergy source. Another example is
provided by Manuel Kretzer, who
developed the ShapeShift (Figure
3), a dynamic skin prototype that
responds to the presence of solar
energy. Finally, a realized example
is the Media-ICT Building (Fig-
ure 4), constructed in Barcelona
in 2011 and designed by Cloud 9
Architects. The facade has a pneu-
matic mechanism that is activated
by light sensors that respond to the
presence of solar energy.
Conclusions
The biomimetic approach is not a
new method. Natural processes in-
spired human being, since his first
presence on earth, and he is part of
them. For example, the vernacular
architecture itself, present for cen-
turies, explains how a design that
interprets nature can be useful in
terms of efficiency and aesthet-
ics. However, the biomimetic ap-
proach is fundamental for a design
more aware of the role it plays in
the environment. Human skin can
become an exciting field of inves-
tigation, and opens up new per-
spectives for the design of facades
that are not only technologically
efficient, but that can also be rec-
ognized. The use of technology
allows the implementation of sys-
tems that mimic the behaviour of
human skin. The further step will be
to integrate these systems with a

sense of identity and belonging to
the place. In this way, it will be pos-
sible to obtain technologically ef-
ficient buildings capable of dimin-
ishing distance between man and
the physical world. As the survival
of a living organism depends on its
relationship with the environment,
the life of a building depends on
the responses it can give to the ex-
ternal environment.
Endnotes
1 Shark skin inspired the hulls of sailing
boats (Bechert et al. 2000)
2 Kaufmann House, also known as
Fallingwater. Designed by Frank Lloyd
Wright in 1935 over a waterfall on Bear
Run, Pennsylvania
3 Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum.
Designed by Frank Lloyd Wright from 1943
to early 1944. The spiral design recalled a
nautilus shell.
4 Janine Benyus is a biologist and writer.
She is the Co-founder of the Biomimicry
Institute.
5 Julian Vincent is a biologist and
mechanical engineering professor at the
University of Bath.
Bibliography
Ahmad H., Taleb H. (2015). Built environment
inspired by nature: a case study of human
skin. WIT Transaction on Ecology and The
Environment, Vol 193, pp.1031-1040.
Alberti L.B. (1988). On the art of Building in
ten books. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Antoniades Anthony, C. (2008), Poetics of
Architecture: Theory of Design. Hoboken, US.
Wiley & Sons.
UC THE CITY AND THE SKIN
Badarnah L., Farchi, Y.N. & Knaack, U.
(2010). Solutions from nature for building
envelope thermoregulation. In Brebbia,
C.A. & Carpi, A. (Eds.). Design &Nature,
Volume V, p. 258.
Borgerson J., Schroeder J. (2012). Skin
and Identity, AP - Asia-Pacific Advances in
Consumer Research, Volume 10, pp. 465-
468.
Gruber P. (2008). Biomimetics in
Architecture. Reading, U.K. The University
of Reading Institute for Building
Construction and Technology.
Gruber P., Gosztony, S. (2010). Skin in
architecture: towards bioinspired facades.
WIT Transaction on Ecology and the
Environment, Vol 138.
Hall E.T. (1982). The Hidden Dimensions.
New York, Random House.
Hensel M., Menges, A. & Weinstock,
M (2010). Emergent Technologies and
Design: towards a biological paradigm for
architecture. London, Routledge.
Kellert S. (2005). Biophilic Architecture.
Building for Life: Designing and
Understanding the Human-Nature
Connection. Washington, DC, Island Press.
Pallasmaa J. (1994). An Architecture of the
Seven Senses. Questions of perception:
phenomenology of architecture, pp. 27-37.
Pawlyn M. (2011). Biomimicry in
architecture. RIBA Enterprises, pp. 136.
Pellegrino P., Jeanneret E.P. (2009),
Meaning of space and architecture of the
place. Semiotica, Vol. 175-1/4, 269-296.
Plowright P.D. (2018). Extending Skin:
Architecture theory and conceptual
metaphors. ARCC Conference Repository.
Radawan G., Osama N. (2016). Biomimicry,
an approach, for energy efficient building
skin design. Procedia Environmental
Sciences, Volume 34, pp. 178 – 189.
205
Shahril Bin Ab Sahak M. (2013). Biomimicry
in Architectural Sustainable approach,
Jurnal Alam Bina
Shahrudin Manan, M. (2012). Beyond
building: architecture through the human
body, Alam Cipta, Vol. 5, pp. 35-42.
Sung D.K., (2013). Skin Deep: making
building skins breathe with smart
thermobimetals, Journal of Architectural
Education, pp. 145-152
Taghizadeh K., Bastanfard M. (2012). The
anatomy of a Human Body, a model to
design smart high building, Science and
Technology, Volume 2(1), pp. 8-14
Julian F.V. Vincent et others (2006).
Biomimetics: its practice and theory,
Journal of the Royal Society Interface, Vol.
3, pp.471-482
The Biomimicry Institute, Biomimicry
Innovation Inspired by Nature. Paper
presented at IBE Annual Conference, 6–9
March. 2008
Author Biography
Anna Conzatti, B.Sc Architecture,
M.Arch, DIPIA, University of Udine.
She graduated with honours in
2016, with a final dissertation
about urban regeneration (super-
visor prof. arch. Giovanni La Varra).
In 2017 Architecture researcher on
the theme of Social Housing in Eu-
rope in Paris, Madrid and Ljubljana,
with a scholarship funded by Or-
der of Architects of Pordenone and
Ado Furlan Foundation. In 2018
winner of the first prize in the com-
petition “Europe and Youth” for re-
search about the regeneration of
town centres and industrial areas
as a consequence of the changes
to industry and production.
Now Architect Assistant at ERMC
ltd, Portsmouth (UK).

Yew T. H., Young D., Young M. K. (2003).

Introduction to Japanese Architecture.
Singapore, Periplus Editions.

Yowell J. (2011). Biomimetic Building Skin:

A Phenomenological Approach Using Tree
Bark As Model, pp. 1–71.

Yurtkuran S., Kirli G., Taneli Y. (2013).

Learning from nature: biomimetic design
in architectural education, Procedia – Social
and Behavioral Sciences, Volume 89, pp.
633-639.

206
 UC THE CITY AND THE SKIN

Images Captions.
In order of appearance.
Figure 1: Adapted from Carl Hastrich
(2005) via The Biomimicry Institute. Free
for personal and commercial use. No
Attribution required. https://biomimicry.org

Figure 2: DOSU Studio Architecture. Free

for personal and commercial use. No
Attribution required. https://www.dosu-
arch.com/armoured-corset

Figure 3: MATERIABILITY. Free for personal

and commercial use. No Attribution
required. http://materiability.com/
portfolio/shapeshift/

Figure 4: Enric Ruiz Geli – Cloud 9.

Free for personal and commercial use.
No Attribution required. https://www.
designboom.com/architecture/enric-ruiz-
geli-media-ict-building-under-construction/

207
View publication stats