A Computational Method To Promote Architectural Design

With Traditional Identities

Systematic Analysis and Synthesis of “Gongpo” with KotaSys,
an Intelligent Design System for Traditional Korean Architecture

Jinwon Choi, Jieeun Hwang, and Hyunsoo Lee

Department of Housing and Interior Design, Yonsei University

Abstract

New trends for this millennium include, simultaneously, both globalization and localization. These days, while the world has become more
multi-cultural, there is also a focusing on local characteristics of a certain culture. Not only finding local identities from traditional heritages but
also representing the traditional identities might be an important research issue especially for Asian architects and researchers.
Korean architects had not had many chances to learn from their traditional buildings during the period of the nation's rapid industrial develop-
ment. This study is quite timely in the sense that while there is a current emphasis on sustainable and ecological building systems, the
wooden structure of traditional Korean architecture gives a certain clue to develop such systems. Nevertheless, the structure of traditional
Korean architecture has not been fully explored in a systematical or computational manner. Furthermore, this information is not managed
efficiently even though the technology for managing information effectively is quite widely available and the information could be used in many
application areas. Currently all but a few experts keep their knowledge exclusively and transfer it to few people in a limited and traditional
manner.
This study thus explores a computational method for sharing and creating architectural knowledge of the Korean context including building
forms, construction information, and determinants of all. To this end, we select an old, well-known temple building, Buseoksa Muryangsujun,
one of the oldest Buddhist temples in Korea, as a prototype. We first build a three-dimensional model of the building with the aid of a tradi-
tional building expert, categorize its building components, and then analyze their formations and determinants by focusing specifically on the
capital order system. Like the Greek order system, the Korean order system, called Gongpo, is both structural and ornamental, and plays a
key role in constructing the wooden structure.
The result of the study shows schematic diagrams for the data models both of formations and of design determinants carefully designed for an
intelligent design system that is currently under development. We expect that our effort will provide a new methodology to promote ‘tradition’
in architectural design practices.
Further research issues identified are as follows: 1) expanding the data model to explain the whole building's structure; 2) developing a VR-
based design and simulation system; 3) developing KotaGen, a generative design system as a subsystem of KotaSys, which can intelligently
generate a new type of building that could actually be built; 4) refining the data model for design determinants; and 5) conducting cross-cultural
research on geometric forms and design determinants.

Keywords: Traditional Identity, Traditional Korean Architecture, Buseoksa Muryangsujun, Data Modeling, Gongpo, Design Determinant

Introduction
GLOBALIZATION VERSUS LOCALIZATION

The more information-oriented the world becomes, the more multi-cultural dimensions it takes on. As the speed of in-
formation sharing increases, the range and capacity to understand cultural situations and differences broaden. This would
make it much easier for people from different cultural backgrounds to interact with and influence each other. This new age
has evoked a number of possibilities to blend diverse cultures, as while the demands for globalization are increasing, the at-
tention on localization, the local characteristics of a certain culture, are on the rise at the same time. These issues of global-
ization and localization are currently critical especially in the design community, which is not only based on the cultural un-
dergrounds but also assimilated into the culture as an influential factor itself. A new word, ‘Glocal Design1 ’reflects the im-
portance of both globalization and localization as a significant current trend.

LOCAL & TRADITIONAL IDENTITIES IN ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN

The attention on localization basically arises from the demands for globalization. Because a solid characteristic of local-
ity is a base, as a unit, of globalization, the investigation of local and traditional identities is a starting point for how meaning-
fully and culturally we design environments as well as products in the present age. Especially in architectural design, the

1
During World Congress on Environmental Design for the New Millennium, a special symposium subjected “Glocal Design” had been
held, in November 19, 2000.
issue of traditional identity is closely related to local context, such as climate, geological factors, ideology, religion, etc, - all
what could be called ‘Culture’. Amos Rapoport explains this locality as a concept of ‘cultural landscape’, and the relations
between cultural factors and architectural/environmental design.

“Any (purposeful) modification of the face of the earth is design, so that all human environments are designed in the sense
that they embody human decisions and choices. Since most (if not all) of the earth has been modified by human action (even
‘wildness’) all landscape are cultural landscapes and one could sa y that much of the planet is really design.” 2

For example, let us observe the differences between the traditional forms of houses, in Indonesia and Korea, which have
very different localities and cultural landscapes from each other. (Figure 1, Table 1) In spite of the common purpose of
‘housing’, there are many differences in architectural design such as forms, materials, construction methods, etc. Those
differences are created by different localities and the effects are adapted to all local context. From the viewpoint of climate,
Indonesia has a tropical climate with a constantly high temperature, a high percentage of humidity, heavy rainfall (squall),
and strong sunshine. But Korea has a monsoon climate, with four clearly distinguishable seasons, a various change of tem-
perature, humidity, angles of solar incidence, and various amounts of rainfall in a year.

500
30

450

25
400

350
20

300

15
250

200 10

150
5
100

50 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -5

Indonesia Korea Indonesia Korea

Figure 1 Comparison with a annual average climate between in Indonesia and Korea (Left: amount of rainfall, Right: temperature)

Figure 2. Comparison with house forms of between in Indonesia and Korea (Left: Indonesian house, Right: Korean house)

2
Rapoport, A. (2000), Using Culture in Environmental Design, World Congress on Environmental Design for the New Millennium -
Session Cultural Design, pp. 173-194.
 As a spontaneous result, Indonesian houses take on a form with a steeply slanting roof to bear heavy rainfall and high ceil-
ings, piloti, and courtyards to ventilate and cool down the hot air. On the contrary, Korean houses take on a form with long
cantilevered eaves to cope with changes of sunlight incidence each of the four seasons, a high floor to not only prevent over-
flow in the summer rainy season but also to make burning spaces under the floor for heating in wintertime. Besides the cli-
mate, there are many other factors to determine the form of a house. These other factors can be extended to influence archi-
tectural design as a whole and their cumulative effects over time finally produce something we can call tradition.
The importance of tradition, today, is related to the matter of a design process: the matter of how spontaneous or deliberate
a design form is created from a cultural point of view. Why are we concerned with this matter today? This might be due to
the fact that we want to increase the influence of a designer’s intention on architectural design mo re than in the past.
Rapoport recognizes the difference between the past design process that succeeds from and promotes ‘tradition’and the pre-
sent process that is a departure from traditional ways.

“All cultural landscapes are the result of the apparently independent decisions of numerous people over long periods of
time, yet they become recognizable and easily identifiable if one knows the cues. … Cultural landscapes are still the result
of what one might call selectionist processes, evolving over time, although more constrained by formal laws, regulations,
codes etc. Traditionally most vernacular environments (ie most environments) were the outcome of selectionist processes.
Most environment, however, are today the result of instructionist processes, developed over short time-spans with (teams
of) designers providing instruction (drawings, specifications etc) to teams of constructors.” 3

To investigate traditional identities are therefore very important; and more important is to find the knowledge and rules in-
herent in traditional design. This study concentrates on a method to find the traditional identities in architectural design from
a culturally whole perspective.

KOREAN SITUATIONS OF TRADITIONAL IDENTITY IN ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN

In Korea, arguments concerning traditional identity started to arise in the 1920s, a period of reconsideration of the tradi-
tions relatively neglected during the decades of colonial modernization. From the 1960s, after independence in politics and
stability in the economy, the fully systematic arguments of traditional identity have been arising as one of the links of tradi-
tionalism. 4 An expert in Traditional Korean architecture, Y.H. Shin, expressed tradition as a kind of creation. To Shin, tradi-
tion, as a content of imitation as well as a content of the classics, assists creation. Tradition and creation are based on the
same mental process. 5

However, most Koreans now believe that they did not have much time to explore and deeply understand their ancestors ’
work during the last decades. In fact, in relation to Traditional Korean architecture, it has been remarked that information
has not been fully explored in a systematical manner, and furthermore is not shared efficiently. Information sharing might
be, we believe, an essential part or at least the first step to understanding traditional architecture. Currently all but a few ex-
perts keep their knowledge exclusively and transfer it to few people in a limited and traditional manner.
We can take two viewpoints on the Korean architectural tradition. One consists of an effort to retain the original forms
with traditional identities; the other an effort to represent the traditional identities in present architecture. While the former
is a matter of forms, the latter is a matter of rules constructing the forms related to diverse considerable factors. Both of the
two points are important to promote the architectural design with regard to tradition. Yet we mostly fail to find effective de-
sign methods for both retaining and representing the traditional identities.

Besides many historical factors such as destruction by invasions, there are other factors to account for difficulties in retain-
ing the traditional architecture. One of the reasons is the way traditional architecture relies heavily on the traditional craft-
man’s man-to-man communication of inheritance, rather than exploring a more systematic process. Consequently it is not
so easy to access data/information on traditional Korean architecture even for architecture students and building experts.
Another reason is related to the problem of the information media in which the information is incorporated. Traditional Ko-
rean architecture is mostly based on complex wooden construction assembled with prefabricated components (Figure 3). But
currently the media of most architectural information consist of two-dimensional drawings, inadequate to present prefabri-
cated three-dimensional components. Two-dimensional drawings also have obvious limitations in describing the joints and
relations among the components, so it is almost impossible to understand at a glance the whole construction process and can
only refer to it generally (Figure 4).

3
Rapoport, A. (2000), Using Culture in Environmental Design, World Congress on Environmental Design for the New Millennium -
Session Cultural Design, pp. 173-194.
4
Lee, K. H. (2000), A Study on Method to Develop How Overseas Korean Public Buildings can Reflect Traditional Korean Architecture.
5
Shin, Y. H. (1967), Problems of Succeeding and Promoting Traditions in Korean Traditional Architecture.
 Figure 3. The construction process by assemblage prefabricated components

Figure 4. The media of architectural information (drawings in 16C and 1989)

At the same time, there are some problems in the modern representation of traditional identities. Kim B.Y. holds the opin-
ion that Korean identity is founded on actual space in the present.

“Now we have to give up to find Korean identity anymore under the congregate situations in architectural culture.
Instead, we must accept architecture as an individual realization, and explore the unique ideas and solutions. Arguing the
Korean identities in some premises, such as ‘in the present’and ‘in Korean Architecture’, means to implement a practical
result based on an actual requirement.” 6

Most of all, there is not any clear definition of ‘tradition’ from an architectural viewpoint. Most of the consideration of
‘tradition’ these days proceeds from approaches7 based mainly on forms and shapes without wider and deeper investigation
into the formation and rules consisting of visual forms. And the weak point of those approaches is that they regard tradition
as only a matter of the past in disregard of current architectural situations. This is why Korean traditional identities have not
had significant and positive influences on today’s architecture. So the demand for design tools and/or methods are arising to
support analysis and synthesis of whole factors related to traditional identities.

A COMPUTATIONAL METHOD FOR DESIGN

The advance of computer technology brings a lot of changes to architectural design. There are potentially available comp u-
tational solutions for the problems of promoting Traditional Korean architecture we mentioned above. The ultimate purpose
of the study is to classify information on Traditional Korean architecture, including the forms and their complex determinants,
in a systematic and computational manner in order to share the information efficiently. Even though the most popular ap-
proach to present visual information on the Internet is to use still images and animation clips, we take a different and innova-

6. Kim, B.Y., (1997) Some Premises on the Creation of Practical Theories, Plus Magazine
7 For example, overseas public buildings, museums
tive approach. In order to simulate traditional buildings in advanced and intelligent ways, we apply a computational tech-
nique, called data modeling. A data model is a conceptual model that includes a mechanism to fully describe a certain do-
main of data in a semantically fluent way. Thus databases are constructed based on the model. We also investigate effi-
cient media forms to present the information of traditional buildings in a computational fashion. We already described the
problem of current architectural media – mainly two-dimensional drawings. Media that can fully deliver three-dimensional
data could solve the problem mentioned above. If the information on Traditional Korean architecture is presented as and
shared with three-dimensional data, it would be very helpful to understand the building information and to communicate the
architectural knowledge with others. Moreover, a design tool can be developed to generate new types of buildings by the
formation rules we investigate in this study. The formation rules are not only rules of outward shapes - they have wider and
deeper implications considering whole cultural situations as design determinants.

The Substance of the Study

This study develops the two data models in a concrete way: one for the geometric forms and the other for the cultural de-
terminants that shape the geometric forms. The relationships among components in these data models are also specified.
For this study we select a well-known temple building, Buseoksa Muryangsujun as a prototype (Figure 5). Buseoksa Mury-
angsujun is known for the second oldest building among the existing Korean traditional wooden structures, and over the past
600 years has never been renovated. So it is proper to regard Buseoksa Muryangsujun as a representative example and proto-
type of traditional Korean architecture.

We first build an accurate three-dimensional model of the building with an aid of a traditional building expert, categorize
its building components, and then analyze their forms and design determinants by focusing specifically on the capital order
system. Like the Greek order system, the Korean order system, called Gongpo (Figure 6), is both structural and ornamental,
and plays a key role in constructing the wooden structure.
The forms of Gongpo include components shapes, their connectivity, and the connectivity patterns and rules. What might
determine the forms are what we call the design determinants, such as cultural factors (including climate, anthropological
factors, political situations, etc.)

Figure 5. An exterior view of Buseoksa Muryansujun.

Figure 6. Gongpo, the capital order system in Muryangsujun .

 Finally, in this study, we aim to supply the core technology of managing information on traditional Korean architecture
with a prototype system with an effective and robust data model of forms and their complex determinants based on three-
dimensional data. KotaSys, a tentative name of the prototype system, is an intelligent Korean traditional architectural de-
sign system and is under development as a computational design tool to promote design with traditional identities through
systematic analysis and synthesis.

A Data Model for Geometric Forms

THE ANALYSIS OF THE GONGPO STRUCTURE

The component shapes composing a Gongpo do not always correspond to the names and types. Some comp onents have
different names or roles from those with an identical shape, while some have the same role with diffe rent shapes. Thus it is
more efficient to create a shape-type for each shape. A list of shape-types will construct a database for component shapes.

After listing the component shapes, we unfold all of the components in a Gongpo and analyze them by the construction or-
ders. There could be some repetitive rules in the connecting orders such as in Jegong. In general, a Gongpo is composed of
a Judu, Jegongs, Chobangs, DanJangyeos, and JusimDories. A Jegong is a sub-structure composed of repetitively layered
subsets such as ChoJegong, YiJegong, SamJegong, and SaJegong. Each Jegong is also made up by a repeated rule of as-
semblage. We have now developed several schematic diagrams representing all the components and sub-structures with the
connecting rules (Figure 7, 8, and 9). Table 1 presents component-types, shape-types, names, and the terms used in the dia-
grams.
Table 1. The Shape-type List of Buseoksa Muryangsujun Gongpo

Component Terms used in

Shape-type Name
-type the diagrams

Judu ShJuduA WeojinjuJudu Judu

SoChumcha S_Chumcha
ShChumchaA ChulmokChumcha CH_Chumcha
SalmiChumcha P_S_Chumcha
Chumcha
DaeChumcha L_Chumcha
ShChumchaB JusimdaeChumcha J_L_Chumcha
SlamidaeChumcha P_L_Chumcha
ShSoroA YangalSoro SoroA
Soro
ShSoroB NegalSoro SoroB

ShJangyeoA TeunJangyeo T_Jangyeo

Jangyeo
ShJangyeoB DanJangyeo D_Jangyeo

Bo ShBoA TeuBo T_Bo

ShChobangA
Chobang Chobang Chobang
ShChobangB

JusimDori J_Dori
Dori ShDoriA
ChulmokDori CH_Dori

TYPES OF COMPONENT SHAPES

Figure 7 is a diagram featuring the types of component shapes. The lines represent the composition hierarchy. Comp o-
nents are presented in gray color and sub-structures or groups of components in white. One component always has a single
shape-type.
? Legend of Symbols
Order
B Group A is
composed of
A group B and
C component C
Gongpo
Component X is
X S hY classified in
Y Shape-type
JuDu Jegong ChoBang D_Jangye J_Dori
o

1_Jegong 2_Jegong 3_Jegong 4_Jegong

Soro Chulmok J_L_Chu Chobang Soro Chulmok

S_Chumc P_S_Chu Soro L_Chumc P_L_Chu Soro T_Jangye T_Bo
Group Group mcha Group Group
ha mcha Group ha mcha Group o

CH_Chu Soro D_Jangye CH_Dori

0
mcha Group 0 2 3 4 o
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4

0 2 4

Sh JuduA Sh ChumchaA S hChumchaB S hSoro A S h Soro B S hJangyeo A S h JangyeoB S hB oA S hChobangA S hChabangB S hDoriA

Figure 7. A schematic diagram for types of component shapes of Buseoksa Muryangsujun Gongpo.

TYPES OF CONNECTION ROLES BY THE ASSEMBLAGE ORDERS

While connecting a component to another component by the assemblage order, we can recognize some comp onents (or
groups) acting as constructors that determine a primary structure, and the others acting as connectors that bind two constru c-
tors. The concepts of connectors and constructors would play a key role in generative rules for a later version of a Kotasys
generative system.
? Legend of Symbols
Order

A B A is composed of B

Gongpo A B B is connected next to A

A constructor A connector
D_Jangy
JuDu Jegong ChoBang J_Dori
eo

1_Jegong 2_Jegong 3_Jegong 4_Jegong

Soro L_Chumc P_L_Chu Soro T_Jangye Soro Chulmok J_L_Chu Soro Chulmok
S_Chumc P_S_Chu T_Bo Group Group mcha Chobang Group Group
ha mcha Group ha mcha Group o

CH_Chu Soro D_Jangy CH_Dori

mcha Group eo
0 1 2 3 4 0 0 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4

0 2 4

Figure 8. A schematic diagram for types of connection roles in Buseoksa Muryangsujun Gongpo.

TYPES OF RULES OF ASSEMBLAGE

In Jegongs in particular, we can decipher the repetitive rules of assemblage. A subset of Jegongs is composed of both Dori-
directional and Bo-directional components, a Soro group evenly, and a Chulmok group occasionally. Figure 9 presents this
rule.
 ? Legend of Symbols
Order

A is composed B
A B

Gongpo
Component A is
A B classified in B type

JuDu Jegong ChoBang D_Jangye J_Dori

o

1_Jegong 2_Jegong 3_Jegong 4_Jegong

Soro Chulmok J_L_Chu Soro Chulmok

S_Chumc P_S_Chu Soro L_Chumc P_L_Chu Soro T_Jangye T_Bo Chobang
Group ha mcha Group o Group Group mcha Group Group
ha mcha

D_Jangye CH_Dori
0 CH_Chu Soro
mcha Group o
0 1 2 3 4 0 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4

0 2 4

Dori_Direction Bo_Direction Soro

Figure 9. A schematic diagram for types of the assemblage rules in Buseoksa Muryangsujun Gongpo.

THE CLASSFICATION OF COMPONENTS

After considering all the analyzed factors, we can classify the components of Gongpo (Figure 10). We develop possible
component classes and investigate their dependencies on each other, and then link them to each other based on the rules al-
ready described above. This will be implemented to develop the KotaSys system that manages the component databases of
Traditional Korean architecture.
Figure 11 shows the complex relationships between components (or groups) by the various notations of the paths and ex-
plains types of classes.

KaSeokarae Legends of Relationship

KaRoof
type one-one
type
name name
position one-many
position
is_constructor is_constructor
first_seokarae .
. .
. .

KaOrder KaGongpo KaUpperJegong

type type
type KaBoDir
name name
name
position location type
position
is_constructor position name
is_constructor
fisrt_gongpo is_constructor position
bodir
uppergegong is_constructor
doridir
jegonggroup
jangyeo
judu

KaDoriDir
type
KaJegongGroup KaJegong KaSoro KaCenterCross name
type type position
type type
name name is_constructor
name name
position position position position
is_constructor is_constructor is_constructor bodir
story fist_soro location doridir
first_jegong prejegongpart
KaJangyeo
KaColumn KaGidung type
name
type type position
name name KaJudu KaJegonPart KaOuterCross is_constructor
position location
conn_point position type type type
is_constructor is_constructor name name name
first_gidung . position position position
. . is_constructor is_constructor doridir
. . centercross jangyeo
outercross

Figure 10. The classification of the components of Gongpo.

 ? The Legend of Relationships
A is connexted
KaRoof KaSeoKarae A B condition A is connected
next to B A B next to B in the
type Paljack type Jangyeon A B A is composed of B condition
C is
A B A is connected A B connected
with B by C next to B
(connecting
B with A)
C C

KaUpperJe
gong KaDoriDir
Until ( last_jegong-1 )
KaBoDir

KaJangyeo
KaOuterCross KaDoriDir

KaJangyeo
When last_jegong

KaSoro
When ChulMok

KaOrder KaGongpo
KaJegong
KaJegong KaJegongPart KaCenterCross KaBoDir
type Jusimpo type GyiGongpo Group

KaJudu
When fist_jegong KaDoriDir

? The Legend of Data Symbols

Component Component
Group of
Category Prototype as as
components
constructor connector

single
type

plural
KaColumn KaGidung
type
type Pyungju type Pyngju

Figure 11. The relationships between the components.

connect
to roof UpperJeagong is located on
Jegong(KaJegongGroup), between
the roof and Jegong. It is
composed of Chobang,
DanJangyeo, JusimDori.
KaUpperJegong

SaJegong: last_jegong
is located on SamJegong under
UpperJangyeo. It is composed of
KaSoro JusimDaeChumcha, Chobang as a
KaJegong CenterCross and DanJangyeo,
last_Jegong ChulmokDori as a OuterCross, and
KaJegongPart SoroGroup

SamJegong: 3rd_Jegong
is located on YiJegong under
KaSoro SamJegong. It is composed of
type PyungjuGongpo

TeunJangyeo, TueoBo as a
KaGongpo

KaJegong
3rd_Jegong CenterCross, ChulmokChumcha as
KaJegongGroup

KaJegongPart a OuterCross, and Soro Group.

YiJegong: 2nd_Jegong
KaSoro
is loacated on ChoJegong under
SamJegong. It composed of
KaJegong
2nd_Jegong DaeChumcha and
KaJegongPart SalmidaeChumcah as a
CenterCross and null as a
OuterCross
KaSoro
KaJegong
first_Jegong
KaJegongPart
KaSoro
KaJegong
KaJudu first_Jegong

KaOuterCross
connect
column KaJegongPart
KaBoDir

KaCenterCross
ChoJegong: first_Jegong
KaDoriDir
is loacated on Judu under Yi Jegong. KaJangyeo
It is composed of SoChumcha,
SalmiSoChumcha as a CenterCross
and null as a OuterCross.
KaJudu

Figure 12. The whole feature of the Gongpo structure corresponding to component classes.
A Data Model For Design Determinants
THE ANALYSIS OF THE BACKGROUND FOR THE GONGPO FORMATIONS

1) Climate: Need for roles of structurally bearing the eaves.

Korea has a monsoon climate, with four clearly distinguishable seasons; a various change of temperature, humidity, angles
of solar incidence, and amounts of rainfalls in a year. Therefore one of the aims of Korean architecture is to deal with the
climate changes, especially in the hard season. Summer has a high temperature with a high angle of solar inc idence, a high
percentage of humidity, and is a rainy season with typhoons. Winter has a low temperature under sub-zero with a low angle
of solar incidence and a low percentage of humidity. One of the basic purposes of architecture is to cool down in summer
and to heat up in winter. As illustrated in Figure 13, eaves are devised to control the amount of incident sunlight with the
changes of the angle of solar incidence. Gongpo is invented to address the need for eaves. Gongpo is a kind of bracket
system lying on the column supporting the roof system. Gongpo must be developed soundly especially for supporting long
cantilevered eaves.

Figure 13. The need for eaves as a sunshade in Korea

2) Geographical factors: The materials and the construction method.

Korea has a mountainous topography, so it is quite natural to regard wood as common materials. Buseoksa Muryansujun
is mainly constructed of wood, and so Gongpo is incorporated. Geographical factors influence not only the selection of mate-
rials but also the physical properties of the materials. Therefore the physical limitation in size is determined by various fac-
tors such as the maximum size of a tree, an intensity bearing collapse, etc.. Further, the limitations influence various aspects
of construction method such as a joint, a connection, and assemblage. There is an additional reason for a joint, connection,
and assemblage: to bear the physical changes wrought by changes of temperature and humidity. All the components in
Gongpo follow these rules.

3) Anthropological Factors: A measurement system based on the average body size of Koreans.
Using the body as a unit of measurement is a very common fact across the world. Like feet and inches in the American
system, Korea has a unit called Cheok(尺). While changes have occurred throughout history, it is essentially based on the
body size of Koreans. A measurement system has very important implications for design, because it is a unit of the propor-
tions, balances, and harmonies.

ANALISYS OF DESIGN DETERMINANTS IN GONGPO OF BUSEOKSA MURYANGSUJUN

Based on the determinants we analyzed above, we could arrange the relationship between the forms and the determinants.
Figure 14 illustrates the rules of presenting the relationship between design determinants, formation factor and motivation.
Finally figure 15 shows the relationship, showing both how Gongpo forms and what influences the form of Gongpo. The de-
terminants motivate the formation by diverse reasons. In this study, we are summing up Gongpo’s formation at two points
of motivation, one is environmental, and the other is structural.

Design Formation
Motivation
Determinants Factors

Figure 14. The rules of presenting the relationship between design determinants, formation factors
 Climate Environmental Stuructural Justification for
Changes of Motivation Motivation Gongpo
Four Seasons Structure
The Needs for
The Need for
Supporting the
Eaves as a
Sunshader Eaves as a
Braket System

The Shapes of
Anthropology Components
Environmental Stuructural
Motivation Motivation
Body Size
The Need for Assembling by
Bearing Climatic Only Wood, Not
Distortion of Joining with
Materials Other Materials
The Construction
Method

Geography Environmental
Landform & Motivation
Natural
Products Wood:
Properties of Materials
Materials

Ideology Ideological Stuructural

Motivation Motivation
Buddhism Finishes
Proper The Needs for
Composition as Proper Spatial
a Temple Volume

Figure 15. Relationship between design determinants and formation factors with motives in Gongpo of Buseoksa Muryangsujun

THE CLASSIFICATION OF DESIGN DETERMINANTS REALATED WITH THE FORMS

After considering all the analyzed factors, we can classify the design determinants related with the forms (Figure 16). We
develop possible determinants classes and investigate their relationships on each other, and then link them to each other based
on the rules already described above. This will be implemented to develop the KotaSys system.
Design Determinants

Climate Geography Anthropology Ideology

type landforms body size ideology
temperature nature of soil custom of society religion
humidity natural products geography taboo
sunlight incidence climate ideology custom

Formation Factors

Material Structure Measurement Planning Concern

type type System spatial volume
property role unit circulation
manufacturing connection point proportion equipment
. . . propotion
. .

Element Type Construction

column Method
beam
girder type
braket joint
roof connection
.

Geometric Forms
assem
origin object
scale blage rotate
point type order

Figure 16. A classifications and relationship of design determinants, formation factors, and geometric forms
Conclusion: Applications For Design
This study investigates the possibility of promoting ‘the new traditional identities’ in architectural design, particu larly from
a methodological viewpoint. In the current Korean situation, there are some problems for understanding and creating the
traditional design of architecture. Most of the problems are a matter of method such as the information sharing and collec-
tive analysis and synthesis for all around design factors.

We suggest the availability of solutions to such problems in computational methods. We mentioned some computational is-
sues inherent in traditional Korean architecture: 1) the use of three-dimensional data as a new media of architectural commu-
nication; 2) a robust data model structurally representing accurate architectural knowledge that includes geometric forms and
their constructing methods; 3) another robust data model that expresses cultural backgrounds as design determinants; 4) the
database, as a knowledge base, managed by the data models; 5) an intelligent design system that is not only form-oriented but
also determinant-oriented.

This study focuses on the data modeling, and it is a starting point and a core issue of the system features as a whole. As a
prototype for deep investigation, we select the Gongpo, a capital structure, in Buseoksa Muryangsujun. We then analyze the
forms of Gongpo, and categorize them by types of component shapes, connection roles, and assemblage rules. The result of
synthesis for all of the analyzed items suggests a classified data model that represents the geometric forms effectively. At
the same time we analyze and categorize the cultural backgrounds by geographical, anthropological, and ideological factors
as well as climate. We also develop a data model that explains design determinants, as the result of synthesis for analyzed
items. The result shows how the forms are determined by complex cultural factors, especially in a situation where a new
form is generated. It would offer some guidelines to designers for making design decisions with traditional identities. We
expect that our effort will provide a new methodology to promote ‘tradition’ in architectural design practices.

Further Study and Development

Further research issues identified are as follows:
1) To expand the data model to explain the whole building's structure. We need to analyze other parts including the roof
system and its components.
2) To develop a VR-based design and simulation system. The virtual reality technology could be applied to develop our de-
sign system. It would help develop a more interactive and multi-modal design system.
3) To develop KotaGen, a generative design system as a subsystem of KotaSys, which can intelligently generate a new type
of building that could actually be built.
4) To refine the data model for design determinants.
5) To conduct cross-cultural research on geometric forms and design determinants.
KotaSys
An Intelligent
Design System
for Traditional
Korean
Architecture

KotaView Kota
An Interactive
Viewer
Viewer System

KotaGen
Forms
An Intelligent
Generative
System
Kota
Shaper

Kota
Formation
Design Kota
Determinan Inverter
ts

Kota
Surveye
r
KotaSurv
A
Comprehensive
Analysis and
Synthesis
System

A Sub-System
of KotaSys A Data Model An Application

Figure 17. The Overview of KotaSys

Acknowledgements
This research has the financial support of the Korea Science and Engineering Foundation and the Virtual Reality Research
Center at Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology.

REFERENCE

Rapoport, A. (2000), Using Culture in Environmental Design, World Congress on Environmental Design for the New Millen-
nium -Session Cultural Design, pp. 173-194.
Lee, K. H. (2000), A Study on Method to Develop How Overseas Korean Public Buildings Can Reflect Traditional Korean
Architecture.
Shin, Y. H. (1967), Problems of Succeeding and Promoting Traditions in Korean Traditional Architecture.
Rapoport, A. (1969), House Form and Culture, Prentice-Hall,inc., London.
Chang, G.I.(1993), Wooden Structure, Bosunggak, Seoul.
Chang, G.I.(1993), A Glossary of Traditional Korean Architecure, Bosunggak, Seoul.
Arismunandar, A.Et.al(1999), Architecure, Indonesian Heritage, Archipelago Press, Jakarta.
Kim, J.I. (1997), A Study of Mixed-Type Architecture in 1876~1905
Owen,C.L.(1998), Design Research: Building the knowledgebase, Design Studies 19, pp.9-20
Austin,S. Et al.(1999), Analytical Design Planning Technique: a model of the deailed buildng design process, Design Studies
20, pp.279-195