Understanding the principles of design with a flexible

architectural pattern

Abdul Jaleel
1. Masters in ARCHITECTURE from PUT in Poznan, Poland (In Progress)

Bahareh Mahdikhani

2. Postgraduate from Polytechnic University of Technology in Poznan, Poland

Abstract
Today, industrial tools and equipment and other devices depend on the principles of flexibility, adaptability,
versatility and multi-form nature, which has led to significant advances in technology. Meanwhile, architecture
has lagged behind other sciences in terms of these principles, while the lack of structural and systematic research
in terms of new construction methods and humanizing aspects of architecture for sustainable development is
very much felt. Nowadays, whenever the word "flexibility" is used, it only means a kind of ability to transform
or move. This has caused this pattern not only not to appear as one of the architectural features, but also to
become a part of it and the result will be very low and one-dimensional. In this research, which has been done in
a descriptive-analytical manner with library tools, the principles of different types of flexible architectural
attitudes have been studied.

Keywords: Architecture, Pattern recognition in design, Flexibility

Introduction
What emerges from the reality of new artistic developments is the unpredictability of the most
important of these arts, and flexibility in architecture is a category that meets many changing
needs in spaces. Given the need for flexibility changes to a great extent over time and with the
change of human needs, only the general classification of effective factors can be addressed.
Types of flexibility include "versatility", "adaptability", and "variability" and on the "micro",
"medium" and "macro" scales. According to this classification, flexibility is functional,
structural and spatial, which occurs in fixed, semi-fixed and variable elements.
Definition and nature of flexibility
"Flexibility" generally refers to objects’ ability to change. In architecture and environmental
design, the term "flexibility" refers to spatial flexibility and the organization of man-made
space and change in it to achieve new conditions, needs and applications (Einifar, 2002).
Some spaces provide many activities without the need to reorganize, others can be changed to
meet different needs. Environmental designers have used the terms adaptability and flexibility
for these two cases. Adaptive spatial organization is a plan that provides behavioral patterns at
different times without the need for physical changes. Such a space is called a stabilized
multipurpose space. There are good reasons for designing a multi-purpose building so that a
space can respond to different functions at the same time or at different times (Vantouri,
2010).
In the first case, the behaviors occur next to each other, and in the second case, the variable
behaviors occur at different times and in the same place. While these two terms have common
conceptual aspects and contexts, they also have differences. In the present study, adaptability
is considered as one of the types of flexibility.
Since the constituent elements of any architectural space define its totality, in order to achieve
a flexible space, its constituent elements or components must also be flexible. Generally, in
any man-made space, three types of organization can be distinguished. These three types are
fixed, semi-fixed, and variable spaces. According to this classification, a fixed space consists
of non-movable elements, such as load-bearing walls, floors, windows, and etc. Usually, fixed
space is closely related to the structural system and construction traditions in each period
(Hall, 1991).
A semi-fixed space is a space that can be changed by changing the arrangement of furniture,
which is reflected in the traditional architecture of Iran. Many semi-fixed spaces are formed in
a flexible way in the vertical layers separating the space. Elements, such as closets, niches,
and etc. have such a role in organizing and flexibility of interior spaces.
A variable space occurs when two or more people are connected to each other in the interior
space of the building as an operator. Such a space does not exist visible and outside the
human mind, but is something that is perceptible and related to the latent function of that
particular space. This type of architectural space in modern architecture is achieved through
spatial transparency, visual spatial communication and through the expansion and creation of
a common chapter between the functions of the building (Hall, 1991).
In flexible designs, the structure can be changed and respond to different needs. This kind of
flexibility is more than provided by the semi-fixed elements of space. Buildings that are
flexible and adaptable are designed and built to be more sustainable over time. The practical
use of the concept of flexibility requires prior organization and planning, otherwise the
organization of the interior space will be chaotic.
With the advancement of technology, the separation of load-bearing and separating elements
has become an important aspect of flexibility. As a result, the history of flexibility of
architectural spaces was closely related to the evolution of the skeleton of the building. The
development of the distinction between the building skeleton and the partition walls was such
that at the end of the nineteenth century, it became possible to design a building without the
use of a skeleton and the free design of the plan. Although skeleton construction paved the
way for many modern architectural developments, the reliance on the use of technology led
the concept of flexibility to dry physical solutions and its use in the industrial production of
buildings. In the second half of the twentieth century, with the use of early conceptual ideas
and new technical possibilities, and by strengthening the sense of participation and social
responsibility among the inhabitants of the complexes, flexibility once again became the
spatial social concept.
Types of flexibility
Different types of flexibility can be defined and analyzed at different scales, which are
presented here.
Flexibility in architectural planning
In his book on architectural planning, Pena believes that flexibility includes multifunctional
architectural features, indoor variability, and exterior scalability, each of which alone cannot
replace the concept of flexibility.
Multifunctional space (diversity)
Diversity is the ability to provide different uses of time. This kind of flexibility deals with two
variables of space and time. In fact, architectural space can be used for several functions and
at different times.
Diversity can be achieved through the design of maps with a regular geometric structure, easy
and readable access to equipment. The most important properties of spatial variability are:
A: Ability to easily and legibly access the spaces
B: Combining functions in one space and reducing waste in communication spaces
A: Useful use of access space, in a way that allows the conversion of functions.
The ability to change the function of space over time is a feature of the diversity index. Also,
this approach does not require large open spaces or new structural methods, and the
traditional systems of the building are well coordinated with it.
Adaptability
Adaptability is the ability to adapt a space to new required conditions. In practice, adaptability
includes all internal changes such as personality and structure changes, micro elements and
composition of spaces, which is the most effective way to achieve adaptability, instability of
internal components and the possibility of their various combinations.
Variability (separation and aggregation)
Variability is the increase and decrease of quantities or the separation and aggregation of
spaces and the possibility of returning to the original design after expanding or decreasing its
area, which has the ability to respond to the growth of space population. The need for this
kind of flexibility may be due to long-term or short-term needs. Variability is possible by
adding to the infrastructure and separating its spaces without changing the area.
Flexibility can be examined and analyzed in different scales, which can be generalized from
the scale of a single space to the scope of a city. So here it is defined in three micro, medium
and macro scales.
Micro scale
Micro-scale flexibility takes into account the capability of specific spaces inside buildings in
such a way that a wide range of uses can be considered for it. This category has a direct
impact on the quality of the environment in the activities and the day-to-day choice of the
majority of users. This scale deals with smaller and more detailed design decisions, so it is
vital for users and can be explored in the final stages (Bentley, 2001).
Medium scale
At this scale, flexibility deals with how spaces are grouped to meet needs. The functional
layers of the building and the use of natural light and ventilation are of particular importance
in this regard.

Macro scale
This scale of flexibility is in the collection of spatial spots and provides functional, structural
and spatial flexibility in functional and horizontal expansion. In fact, this scale is about the
ability to change the use of the whole building as a whole unit or major parts of the building,
and having the benefits of flexibility on this scale usually involves resources that are not
easily accessible to most people. But indirectly, macro-scale flexibility can increase the power
of public choice in the long run, ensuring that the building is physically justifiable and makes
it easier to increase the diversity of uses within the domain. Macro-scale flexibility, as deals
with major and basic uses, blends with the overall or general design requirements of the
building, so it is necessary to pay attention to it in the first stage of design (Bentley, 2001).
Type of spaces in terms of flexibility
Soft and hard spaces
Spaces such as ducts, stairs and elevators are among the hard spaces and the possibility of
functional change of these parts during the useful life of the building is low. Soft spaces are
spaces where changes are accompanied by less restrictions.
Active and inactive spaces
Any internal part that can interfere in some way in external activities and have a positive
effect on it is called an active part. The ground floor of the building, where it shares a
common border with the public space, is occupied by these active sections. Other internal
activities may also interfere with or affect the level of external activities. Visual contact with
indoor activities can make the place more enjoyable for the viewer.
Flexibility and multifunctional spaces
Flexible design begins with the assumption that there is no right solution. Because the
problem that needs to be solved is in constant circulation, or in other words, it is always
temporary. Although flexibility design can adapt to any change, it is never the best solution. It
can have an answer at any time that is by no means the best answer. In fact, flexibility
represents a set of all the unsuitable solutions to a problem. Accordingly, a flexible
organization in design that absorbs changing conditions, shows flexibility against them. In
fact, it offers the most unbiased solution to problems, but it is by no means the best and most
appropriate solution (Hertzberger, 2009).
The only structural approach to a situation that is changing is to use a form that considers
change by default and as a permanent factor. That is, a form that can be used in many
different ways, without the need for change. In this way, we reach a better solution with a
minimum of flexibility.
The feature of being polyvalent has been interpreted in various ways by users. What we need
is a diverse range of space in which different functions are transformed into archetypal forms.
So the key to achieving architecture is that while maintaining its identity, it allows the user to
experience different functions depending on what the designer has had in mind. If we go
further, we must say that the architecture must be such that it stimulates the user to make
changes in the space (Hertzberger, 2009).
According to the definition of multifunctional spaces in the previous section, what is most
noticeable in such spaces is the relationship between form and function, which is always a
debatable topic in architecture. By carefully examining the contemporary architectural
literature, it can be seen that different architects and theorists tried to challenge the slogan of
modern architecture by presenting different slogans in order to present a more appropriate
model of the relationship between form and function.
For example, in his controversial book "Contradiction and Complexity in Architecture",
Robert Venturi insists on the multi-functionality of architectural spaces and emphasizes the
dual meanings of the architectural forms left over from the mono-functionality of modern
architectural spaces. According to Venturi, multi-functionality and dual functions of
architectural forms and elements give vague and complex meanings to architectural spaces,
which in turn increases happiness and joy in architectural spaces and, first of all, in users
(Venturi, 1911).
Mies van der Rohe also believes that a building should be designed to be multi-functional and
to be adaptable to human needs over time. An adaptive and flexible design is one that
provides performance at different times without the need for physical changes. That is why
Mies van der Rohe emphasizes the universal quality of architectural spaces and tries to
achieve more flexibility in architectural spaces, and establishes an inextricable link between
quality and flexibility in the design of architectural spaces (Motallebi, 2001).
Based on the multifunctional quality and variability of functions over time, it can be argued
that architectural forms are inherently driven towards timelessness. This means that at
different times in their lives they have to respond to different users and their needs, because in
fact real human needs have not changed and will not change dramatically over time, and
changes have only occurred or will occur in the level of adaptability of man and his
environment over time. This timelessness is also presented in Louis Kahn's statements in the
form of the concept of "achievable" and the words of the Dutch architect, Aldo van Eyck, in
the concept of "diversity" (Venturi, 2010).
Based on the above, there is a need to provide a more complete expression to show the
relationship between "form" and "function", in which the concept of "capability" helps:
"The ability to expand the concept of function in an architecture built in conjunction with
forms."
In other words, it can be said that the potential capabilities of architectural spaces at any given
moment are the result of the form of space and its function based on human needs. This is
where Louis Kahn speaks in his speeches about the capabilities of objects and their form and
what the elements that make up space are "want to be" in their nature:
"The kitchen wants to be the living room. The bed room wants to be a little house by itself.
The car is the room on wheels …. a predetermined total form might inhibit what thw various
spaces want to be."
In one of his famous statements, he also says:
"Talk to a brick and it will tell to you it likes an arch"
Louis Kahn, "structure is the giver of light", in Latour.
What Louis Kahn is talking about is, in fact, the same potentials that exist in the nature of
forms and objects, and he called them "beings." In other words, by beings or potential
capabilities he means the form of objects and spaces that show people what to do with those
objects or spaces and expect what they will benefit from them in relation to their needs.
Given what has been said, different users of an architectural work at different times will be
able to search for different functions based on their wishes. This theory expresses a
probabilistic approach in architecture that in order to understand the relationship between
people and environmental capabilities, the form and spaces of architecture provide various
opportunities for human behavior so that the built space gives different functional layers to
humans, based on their needs (Motallebi, 2001).
Hence, the motto of modern architecture of "form follows function" cannot express the
necessary capabilities to explain the relationship between form and function. By substituting
the concept of "affords" for the word "follows", it seems to be able to best express the
relationship between form and function in architecture. In this proposition, the concept of
function is presented in a broad expression and also suggests a flexible and non-algebraic
relationship with form. So:
"Form AFFORDS Functions"
According to the above, in this study, wherever there is talk of flexibility, the purpose is to
achieve multi-functional spaces that have the ability to perform different functions at different
times with the forms they take.
Key factors in achieving flexibility at different scales
One of the principles of flexibility support is to design the layout of the elements of the space
context such that a variety of activities coexist as much as possible in the public domain
without taking each other's place.
In the meantime, we examine the factors that guide us to achieve this quality in different
scales:
Macro scale
At this scale, the three key factors that indicate the achievement of this element are:
Access
All building users need some connections to the outside world. Therefore, the location and
number of access points can be one of the key factors in organizing for adaption of the
diversity of uses in a building. First, it must be ensured that the location of the building is
chosen so that it can be easily accessed from any direction on the ground floor. The ratio of
the front of the building to the public space must be maximized to provide the highest number
of entrances for the building (Bentley, 2001).

Height
The importance of access also affects the height of the building. In high-rise buildings, the
higher the floors, the more restrictions on easy access to the outside. Therefore, the upper
classes are in a more unfavorable position for a wide range of uses. When the height of the
building exceeds four floors, its flexibility decreases, which necessitates arrangements for
vertical accesses (Bentley, 2001).
Walls
It is how to use the active elements of the ground floor to bring to life the adjacent edges of
the outer spaces. At the edge of the building should be placed activities that benefit from
interaction with the collective realm in order to participate in the promotion of life and the
public arena. The first step to achieving the goal mentioned in the designed locations is to
increase the number of building entrances as much as possible, so that most of the current
direct traffic on this front is visible from public areas.
If the buildings in question lack effective uses in the mobility and vitality of the public edge
or they are necessarily hidden from public view by a wall due to a certain type of function, it
may be possible to anticipate new functions for the building in question that were not only
unimaginable by the original makers and supporters, but they are also effective and useful in
activating the edges (Bentley, 2001).

Figure 1: Active uses on the walls (A coffee house that revitalizes the soulless wall of an
auditorium on the south side of the street) (Bentley, 2001)
Medium scale
Spatial sphere
Stable cores or domains should be located where they do not restrict the operation of other
spaces. In buildings with a width of less than 11 meters, it is better to put this area and its
related elements in one place, and in sizes of more than 11 meters, the central cores with a
distance of 20 meters from each other provide basic possibilities for achieving flexible spaces
(Bentley, 2001).
Dimensions
Small spaces can accommodate a small number of types of activities, while very large spaces
can accommodate a wide range of activities, and as this size increases, adapting to more
activities will be less effective. This means that there is an optimal limit for the size of the
space. The integration and separation of these spaces with shear and load-bearing walls
should be avoided. Of course, it should be noted that the dimensions and size of moving
spaces are very effective in flexibility, with a slight increase in the minimum area of moving
spaces, while maintaining their original function, these spaces can be prepared for a wider
range of activities (Bentley, 2001).
Large spaces, if built based on the number of medium-sized spaces, will be suitable for a wide
range of uses. Such spaces, while useful for gathering large groups, will be a good platform
for small groups and individuals. Such spaces have the physical capacity to be permanently or
temporarily separated into smaller units as needed.
Geometry
The geometry of space also affects the number of different activities that can occur at a given
level. In this regard, compact spaces are preferred to narrow and elongated rooms and the
power of choices they provide (Bentley, 2001).
Micro-scale - Spatial details
Like the dimensions and geometry of the space, the design of the details affects the number of
activities that can be done there. If carefully considered, factors such as the location of doors,
windows, facilities, etc. can have a great impact on increasing flexibility without additional
cost. By adding sub-spaces, they enable users to adapt the main activity of this space to a
range of communications, such as participation and observation.
 Figure 2: The use of flexible furniture in Platoon Kunsthalle (http://www.archdaily.com)
Conclusion
As mentioned, flexibility is implemented in three ways: diversity, adaptability, and
variability. Also, in each of these types, it is implemented in three micro, medium, and macro
scales, each of which has its own capabilities and solutions, which are further categorized in
the table below.
Table 1: Classification of flexibility
Types Scale Capability Solution
Micro
Diversity (multi- For multiple simultaneous
Medium Use of general
functions and for different
functional space) patterns and scales
Macro functions at different times

Adaptability Micro Instability of

Flexibility Ability to adapt a space to internal components
(coordination Medium the new requirements and the possibility
capability) required of various
Macro combinations

Variability Micro Adding to the

infrastructure and
(separation and Medium Ability to respond to space
separating the
population growth
integration) spaces without
Macro
changing the area

References
Bentley, E. (2001). Responsive Environments. Translated by Behzadfar. Tehran: Science and
Technology University Press
Einifar, A. (2002). A model for flexibility analysis. Journal of Fine Arts, (12).
Motallebi, Gh. (2001). Recognizing the Relationship between Form and Function in
Architecture. Journal of Fine Arts, (21).
Venturi, R. (2010). Contradiction and Complexity in Architecture. Translated by Seyed Ali
Reza Mir Torabi. Tehran: Samira Publications.
Hall, E. (1991). The Hidden Dimension. Ttranslated by Manouchehr Tabibian. Tehran:
Tehran University Press.
Hertzberger, H. (2002). Lessons for Architecture Students. Translated by Bahman Mir
Hashemi and Behrouz Khabaz Beheshti. Tehran: Arad Publications.