Identyfikacja i opis bioinnowacji w architekturze za pomocą dedykowanego narzędzia CLM

Radosław Achramowicz, Ewa Kuhnert

doi:10.37190/arc260108

Streszczenie

Czym jest działalność innowacyjna w architekturze? To pytanie leży u podstaw identyfikacji problemu badawczego, ulokowanego na przecięciu wielowątkowego procesu decyzyjnego i twórczego podejmowanego przez różne podmioty, których aktywność koncentruje się na komercjalizacji wiedzy. Przeprowadzona kwerenda potwierdza brak rozwiązania systemowego służącego identyfikacji i walidacji innowacji związanych z tą wiedzą. To spostrzeżenie pozwala autorom postawić hipotezę, że możliwa jest budowa potencjalnie obiektywnego, uniwersalnego oraz intuicyjnego systemu diagnostycznego, dostosowanego do specyfiki interdyscyplinarnych innowacji projektowych. Artykuł stanowi rewizję ram teoretycznych i metod pomiaru innowacji, opierając się na autorskim modelu badawczym nazwanym Centryfugową Maszyną Logiczną (CLM). Celem autorów tekstu jest identyfikacja i opis różnorodnych aspektów innowacji w formie syntetycznej diagnozy. W pierwszym z serii artykułów przedstawiono ogólne przyczyny zastosowania nowatorskiego aparatu oraz wyniki testowania go w trzech skalach: architektonicznej, urbanistycznej i wzornictwa przemysłowego, które reprezentują trzy przykłady bioinnowacji, charakteryzujące się poziomem złożoności adekwatnym dla skutecznego testu CLM. Dzięki przeprowadzonemu badaniu wykazano możliwość porównywania innowacji z różnych perspektyw: społecznej, kulturowej, technologicznej i przede wszystkim twórczej za pomocą jednego aparatu, który umożliwił uzyskanie ujednoliconego obrazu myśli innowacyjnej, mimo skrajnie odmiennych projektów poddanych testowi. Diagnozę poszczególnych aspektów innowacji wykonano poprzez wyznaczenie indywidualnych ich ścieżek za pomocą CLM. Wielość tych ścieżek utworzyła mapę innowacji, charakterystyczną dla danego obiektu, dając w efekcie unikalny układ „linii papilarnych”. Ich różnorodność i złożoność świadczy o tym, iż innowacje w sztukach projektowych tworzą swoiste sieci złożonych trajektorii, których odkrywanie jest rodzajem dekodowania myśli.

Podgląd pełnego artykułu jest możliwy wyłącznie na większych ekranach.

2026

1(85)

Radosław Achramowicz*, Ewa Kuhnert**

Identification and description of bio-innovations in architecture

using the dedicated CLM Tool

DOI: 10.37190/arc260108

Published in open access. CC BY-NC license.

Abstract

What is innovative activity in architecture? This question lies at the core of identifying a research problem situated at the intersection of the mul-

tithreaded decision-making and creative processes undertaken by various entities focused on the commercialization of knowledge. The conducted

review conrms a lack of a systemic solution for identifying and validating innovations related to this knowledge. This observation allows the authors

to hypothesize that it is possible to construct a potentially objective, universal, and intuitive diagnostic system, adapted to the specic of interdisci-

plinary design innovations.

The article provides a revision of the theoretical framework and methods for measuring innovation, based on an original research model called the

Centrifuge Logic Machine (CLM). The aim of the paper is to identify and describe various aspects of innovation in the form of a synthetic diagnosis.

As the rst in a series of articles, it presents the general rationale for applying this novel apparatus and the results of testing it across three scales:

architectural, urban planning, and industrial design. These represent three examples of bio-innovation characterized by a level of complexity adequate

for an eective CLM test.

The study demonstrated the ability to compare innovations from various perspectives: social, cultural, technological and creative, above all, using

a single apparatus. This allowed for a unied image of innovative thought, despite the radically dierent projects tested. The diagnosis of individual

innovation aspects was performed by determining their specic paths using the CLM. The multiplicity of these paths created the map of innovation,

characteristic of a given object, resulting in a unique pattern of “ngerprints”. Their diversity and complexity demonstrate that innovations in design

create networks of complex trajectories, the discovery of which is a form of decoding thought.

Key words: architecture, innovation, processuality, personalization, organicity

Introduction

What is innovative activity in architecture? This seem-

ingly simple question, which any architect will intuitive-

ly answer correctly, hides a research question that is less

obvious and much more complicated. At the outset of its

analysis, one should refer to the origins of the word “in-

novation”, which comes from the Latin word innovare,

meaning “to renew or introduce something new”. Its mod-

ern interpretation dates back to the middle of the previous

century, when the term was relatively quickly adopted in

the economy (OECD 2015). As a result, economic cate

gories – hard and quantiable − began to be used to de-

scribe innovation issues, with a simultaneous lack of space

for creative – soft and non-quantiable – categories. And

yet, paradoxically, the greatest “innovative” capability that

humans possess is abstract thinking. Many denitions and

interpretations of innovation have been proposed to date;

however, they can be ignored, because none of them are

complete from the point of view of the architecture and

twin disciplines. The interpretations that have been present-

ed to date are at best quantitative and statistical (EC 1995),

but there is much more to innovative thought, as is well-ex-

plained by the concept formulated more than sixty years

ago by art theorist George Kubler, who claimed that the

existence of unmet needs while having the means to meet

them, can, under the right conditions, foster innovation

(1962). Kubler illustrated this with the example of Chicago

ORCID: 0000-0002-3923-4504. Faculty of Architecture, War saw

University of Technology, Poland, e-mail: radoslaw.archramowicz@

pw.edu.pl

** ORCID: 0000-0001-7446-181X. Faculty of Architecture, Warsaw

University of Technology, Poland.

Radosław Achramowicz, Ewa Kuhnert

in 1876, when the city became extremely attractive to ar-

chitects after the Great Chicago Fire. This tragic event was

followed by a golden age of the Chicago School, with such

talents as Daniel Burhnam, Louis Henry Sullivan and lat-

er Frank Lloyd Wright. However, the reconstruction of the

city would have been just […] a provincial extension rather

than an epochal renewal of American architecture (Kubler

1962, 117), had it not been for a favourable convergence of

socio-economic and technological-aesthetic needs reaching

beyond purely architectural concerns.

One can agree on the fact that the contemporary param-

eters included in the denitions of innovation, originally

formulated for the economy, do not fully reect the scope

and nature of architectural works that one could declare

to be a novum in their discipline. This observation result-

ed in the formulation of a research problem identied at

the intersection of the multifaceted decision-making and

creative process undertaken by research organizations,

uni versities, and experts as well as accrediting bodies, go-

vern ment administration bodies and other entities. Their

activity focuses on the commercialization of knowledge

produced by the so-called creative class: scientists, in-

ventors, artists, designers and other professionals with the

abi li ty to combine art, modern technology and business,

providing a competitive advantage in their elds (Florida

2010). From this perspective, the entirety of the activities

undertaken by various design disciplines should enhance

the value of human existence, which can be expressed in

innovation. An historical example of this approach is the

visionary Memex system developed by Vannevar Bush

(1945), which anticipated the coding that mimics the way

humans think and associate information, and is used in to-

day’s hypertext and search engines.

Research problem

The research presented herein is based on the assump-

tion that various ways to map the same thing can produce

dierent results. This is inuenced by, among other things,

the research model used, with its strengths and weaknesses,

which is the main tool for conceptual reasoning in shaping

a space, an object, a system and the processes that accom-

pany the designers’ works (Słyk 2018). On the one hand,

specialized issues and the complicated research technique

prevent extensive knowledge of the subject, and on the other

hand, […] despite this impossibility, we still seek to arrive at

a general view (Giedion 1968, 34). Based on this observa-

tion, the following research questions are formulated in this

article: Is it possible to eectively track the evolutionary

paths of design bio-innovation based on a universal research

and diagnostic tool? Are there areas of knowledge from

which one can draw an idea for solutions to such an issue?

Why are architects best able to answer this question? Due

to the specic nature of the tasks entrusted to them and the

learning process they go through, architects are endowed

with the ability to have a dual view: a soft, artistic one that

synthesizes the vision of the world and a hard, technical

one that focuses on solving a complex problem analytically.

Architects therefore operate in a “hybrid” mode that goes

beyond one specialization as well as beyond one scientic

and creative method. This unique “aiction” of a design

er’s mind leads to the creation of original research methods

based on analogy and metaphor − unusual for the world of

innovation, but typical of the language of thought (Arendt

1989). These methods make it possible to assimilate new

concepts: to connect the internal, intuitive and invisible with

the world perceived by the senses, the quantiable and or-

derly world, at a deeper level than, for example, the Tech-

nology Readiness Levels (TRLs), which ignore the potential

of innovative thought while describing and validating the

advanced level of innovation in a technological context.

This discrepancy reveals a gap in the area of interpretation

of what innovation is today.

This gap is addressed by the subject matter of a study

− the Centrifugal Logic Machine (CLM) − a proprietary

research model and at tool at the same time

, the construct

of which is based on a laboratory centrifuge. As in a cen-

trifuge, a selected architectural “sample” is fed into the

machine, where it is ltered sequentially through elds, pa-

rameters and levels, collectively called attributes. The arti-

cle thus presents the hypothesis that the centrifuge-based

principle can be used to examine architectural innovations,

which are ltered and mapped as “samples” (Fig. 1). The

purpose of this article, which constitutes the rst part of

a larger series, is to show the theoretical basis for the CLM

construct and mechanics, and to provide preliminary veri-

cation of its operation based on a test carried out on three

architectural “samples” selected according to three cri-

teria: (I) they are interdisciplinary; (II) they present three

dierent project scales: urban planning, architectural, and

industrial design; and (III) they are considered bio-inno-

vations. Although these three criteria reduce the area of

analysis, they also allow a semantic comparison of “sam-

ples”, which are characterized by unprecedented exibility

and adaptability (example: NSA Muscle), processual nature

and personalization (example: Bone Chair), circularity and

organicity (example: PhotoSynthetica Tower). The analy-

sis carried out resulted in research paths derived from the

three philosophical categories of Motion, Time, and Space,

moving towards three directions describing bio-innovation:

organicity, processuality and personalization. Identifying

paths through a set of attributes allows diagnosing the po-

tential of innovative solutions. This results in the creation

of individual innovation maps − unique diagrams called

“ngerprints”, as shown in the conclusions. Given the so-

phistication of the research model, it should be emphasized

that the test results presented are not intended to clearly

evaluate the “samples”, but are rather intended to show the

general idea and development potential for the CLM. The

next phases of the study, which will include empirical vali-

dation of the tool, its verication in terms of objectivization

of the criteria, and results by comparing them with other

similar systems (e.g., TRIZ, ARIZ, C-K Theory, and KTH),

will be the subject of subsequent articles.

Research based on Grant of the Scientic Council of the Sci-

entic Discipline of Architecture and Urban Planning of the Warsaw

University of Technology and connected with Patent Application titled:

“Method and system for determining the level of innovation of a techni-

cal solution” (P.452198, 2025.05.30 Warsaw).

Identification and description of bio-innovations in architecture using the dedicated CLM Tool

State of research

The search conducted revealed the lack of an intuitive

yet universal system for identifying and validating inter-

disciplinary design innovations. Even though there are

various solutions − methods, models and tools − that par-

tially address the problem described herein, none of them

is a single coherent diagnostic solution of a systemic na-

ture, one that responds to the problem comprehensive-

. This is probably due to the fact that the origins of the

de nition of innovation should be sought in the economy

and, as a result, none of the denitions used adequately ad-

dresses architectural innovation. An analysis of available

publications − both domestic and foreign − revealed quite

a few approaches to identifying and describing innovation,

but few of them directly address the architectural context.

Some of the most relevant publications for the research

undertaken include Using Design Thinking for Interdis-

ciplinary Curriculum Design and Delivery (Wang 2024),

which provides empirical insight into interdisciplinary

collaboration and the limitations of existing methods for

evaluating innovation in teaching practice, and the article

titled Research on Interdisciplinary Design Thinking and

Methods Based on Programmable Mechanical Metamate-

rials (Liu et al. 2023), whose authors attempt to capture the

multi-level relationships between dierent disciplines, in

The authors draw this conclusion from a survey of existing pat-

ents worldwide. Due to the nature of this text, we can only cite the names

and numbers of patents that illustrate the thesis, for example: “Method

and system for measuring innovation level of product using part-whole

relations” (KR101546365 B1); “Future technology value appraisal sys-

tem and method” (KR101265975 B); “Method for evaluating technolo-

gy contribution and method and system for evaluating technology using

the same” (KR101228969 B1); “Technological innovation method based

on innovation dimensions and innovation rules” (JP2020510247 A); “In-

novation content evaluation system” (PT118270 A).

which one can see an analogy to the topic addressed here.

On the other hand, in Poland, in the publication titled Wy-

brane narzę dzia pomiaru innowacyjności [Selected Tools

for Measuring Innovation] (2013), Angelika Wodecka-Hy-

jek points to the dispersion of tools for its measurement in

dierent sectors and the diculty of developing universal

indicators. A similar tone is also adopted by the monograph

titled Innowacje a dobrostan społeczeństwa, gospodarki

i przedsiębiorstw [In novation and the Well-Being of Soci-

ety, Economy and Businesses] (Malara, Tutaj 2019), whose

authors emphasize the need to measure the relationship be-

tween innovation and socioeconomic well-being.

One may also consider publications addressing bio-in-

novation in architecture and design, for example: Nature

Design: From Inspiration to Innovation (Museum für Ge-

staltung Zrich, Angeli Sachs 2007) and Biomimetics for

Designers: Applying Nature’s Processes & Materials in

the Real World (Kapsali 2021). Both show the transfer of

conceptual solutions from biology to the broader eld of

creative disciplines at the formal, processual, and ma terial

levels, but they omit the topic of innovation as such. One

should also mention books titled Biomimetics for Architec-

ture and Design (Pohl, Nachtigall 2015), where evolution

is presented as a source of inspiration providing innova-

tive, optimal and sustainable design solutions, Biomimic-

ry: Innovation Inspired by Nature (Benyus 1997), which

does not refer directly to architecture, but broadly describes

the impact of biomimicry on the socio-cultural context,

and Biomimicry in Architecture (Pawlyn 2011), in which

attention is focused on sustainable aspects of design. The

post-conference article titled Biomimetic Approaches to

Architectural Design for Increased Sustainability (Peder-

sen 2007) presents a similar tone. Numerous articles also

include those that focus on only one aspect, for example,

materials (Addington, Schodek 2005) or technology and

production processes (Mang, Reed 2012).

Fig. 1. Centrifugal Logical

Machine – scheme

(elaborated by R. Achramowicz,

E. Kuhnert)

Il. 1. Centryfugowa Maszyna

Logiczna – schemat

(oprac. R. Achramowicz,

E. Kuhnert)

Radosław Achramowicz, Ewa Kuhnert

there are dedicated classication frameworks and tools, such

as Biomimicry Design Lens and Biomimicry Taxonomy/

Ask Nature. They segregate biological solutions by function

and principles of operation. Although they provide concrete

solutions that refer to the “function” and “strategy” of na-

ture, they do not operate in the eld of architectural creation.

Two conclusions can be drawn from the above discus-

sion. First, despite the considerable number of studies de-

voted to the technical and economic aspects or describing

the transfer of solutions transferred from the biological sci-

ences to architecture, there are basically no studies that syn-

thetically address the issues of identication and de scription

of novum with respect to the interdisciplinary na ture of ar-

chitectural matter. Second, there is not a single systemic re-

search approach that would result in an eective analytical

tool for the identication and in-depth qualitative analysis

of this type of innovation.

Methods

The course of the research is presented in the diagram

(Fig. 2), within which the following steps can be distin-

guished: dening the need for research, conceptualizing the

Thanks to the search carried out, it was also shown that

there are numerous approaches and tools for identifying and

verifying innovation, which can serve as a reference point

for “calibrating” the CLM. Among the most recognizable are

well-established methods in engineering and design, such as

the TRIZ (Russian: Теория решения изобретательских

задач, The Theory of Solving Inventive Problems) and its al-

gorithms (ARIZ), which systematize the detection of design

contradictions and indicate paths for transforming solutions;

they provide a useful example of a systemic approach to in-

novation analysis. Another approach is the Concept-Knowl-

edge (C-K) theoretical framework, which provides a formal

way of thinking about the relationship between the space

of concepts and knowledge resources and is widely used

to generate and validate new concepts in the design pro-

cess. Of particular note is the KTH Innovation Readiness

Level™ tool, which is provided on an open access basis. It

oers a ready-made methodical framework for monitoring

and evaluating the progress of innovations in multiple elds:

technology, market, business model, intellectual property,

teams, and funding, while having a clear visual representa-

tion of the results changing over time. If one were to focus

on biomimicry and biomimetics, it is worth mentioning that

Fig. 2. Diagram illustrating

the process of research

(elaborated by R. Achramowicz,

E. Kuhnert)

Il. 2. Schemat przedstawiający

przebieg badań

(oprac. R. Achramowicz,

E. Kuhnert)

Identification and description of bio-innovations in architecture using the dedicated CLM Tool

problem, and outlining the theoretical framework, which

ultimately leads to the creation of a CLM idea. In the next

step, the machine is tested with three sample designs-sam-

ples. The general idea is that the structure of the CLM is

based on the philosophical categories of Movement, Time,

and Space, which are reected in Organicity, Processuality,

and Personalization, which in turn establish an envelope to

which innovation paths lead through various elds and lev-

els (Fig. 3). The individual study paths lead to a total of nine

elds of innovation: Movement towards adaptability, re-

sponsiveness, and mobility; Time towards feeling, circular-

ity, and transience; and Space towards comfort, context and

form. To the various elds of innovation are assigned nu-

merous parameters (adaptability, interactivity, functionality,

recyclability, simulation, comfort, among others, as well as

purely formal issues), which can be considered at three lev-

els: entry, development and implementation, as alternatives

to the technological readiness levels (TRLs) adopted today

that are inadequate for design disciplines. In this context, the

rst level is interpreted as a conceptual phase and therefore

a barely initiated path of innovation; the second level shows

the potential of a particular pathway for evaluation, for ex-

ample, by prototyping or developing partial technologies;

and the implementation level involves the implementation

of fully developed innovative solutions in practice.

Initially the CLM model was shaped through microtests

conducted on a larger set of architectural cases

. In sub-

Sample projects used as microtests included built works as well

as design experiments associated with the work of the following design-

ers: Greg Lynn (Embryological House, RV PROTOTYPE House), Kas

sequent iterations of the model, the relationships between

elds, parameters and levels were veried, both changing

their number and scope of impact, and introducing alterna-

tive evaluation criteria. This allowed the CLM’s construct

and mechanics to be gradually rened. The verication pro-

cess was open and heuristic, e.g., in the course of the work

on subsequent designs, it turned out that the parameters in

the Comfort eld, initially included as a set of rigid input

parameters, had to be expanded with additional variables.

This is because the design tests demonstrated that some as-

pects of comfort are much more complex than originally en-

visioned in the model. As a result of the CLM modelling, its

various elements − such as the parameter layout, hierarchy

and levels of advancement − were replaced, simplied or

expanded, so as to produce the most universal model possi-

ble, adapted to dierent types of design innovations − for-

mal, processual or material alike.

In the diagnosis produced with the CLM, two extremes

− understood here as two extreme views of innovation

− were distinguished, which can be described as follows:

(A) high innovation potential, but low entry level (Fig. 4)

− as represented by the example of Photosythetica Tower;

(B) low innovation potential, but high level of implementa-

tion (Fig. 5) − as represented by the example of Bone Chair.

Thesis A can be found in the following situation: innovation

Oosterhuis and ONL Rotterdam (Saltwater Pavilion, Muscle), the group

R&Sie(n) (Water Flux), Lars Spuybroek / NOX (D-Tower, Son-O-House),

François Roche (Dustyrelief), Peter Cook (Graz Kunsthaus), and Terre-

form ONE (In Vitro Meat Habitat, Fab Tree Hab). Research pavilions of

the ICD/ITKE Institute at the University of Stuttgart were also analysed.

Fig. 3. Detailed description

of CLM

(elaborated by R. Achramowicz,

E. Kuhnert)

Il. 3. Szczegółowy opis CLM

(oprac. R. Achramowicz,

E. Kuhnert)

Radosław Achramowicz, Ewa Kuhnert

of a multifaceted nature, combining multiple disciplines and

technologies, stopped at the conceptual level, but with de-

velopment potential in a broad spectrum. Thesis B can be

found in the following situation: innovation of a single-fac-

eted (narrow) nature, which is brought to the level of im-

plementation. For a complete image of the operation of the

CLM, Thesis C of an intermediate nature is proposed, which

has a multifaceted nature and, at the same time, involves

a path of innovation leading to implementation, as repre-

sented by the NSA Muscle design. The test of the machine

therefore involves proving the three theses described above

(A, B, C), which illustrate its eectiveness. The tests-diagno-

ses carried out resulted in three unique “ngerprint” images.

A case study illustrating each thesis

Thesis A: PhotoSynthetica Tower (2019) represents bio-

innovation of a multifaceted nature, with the potential for

multifaceted development, but stopped at the conceptual

level. The authors from ecoLogicStudio studied the use of

photosynthetic processes occurring in algae to cleanse the

air in a city. They proposed façades tted with photobio-

reactors (ecoLogicStudio 2025, 20) that could respond to

urban smog, dust and particulate matter in the atmosphere.

An algae suspension placed in the façades would capture

and store carbon dioxide molecules. This biochemical pro-

cess would be digitally controlled, and the resulting algal

biomass, in addition to producing oxygen, could be used

to produce biofuels, biodegradable materials, and even an-

imal feed (Wang et al. 2024). The innovations identied

are primarily related to the issues of transitoriness, feeling,

circularity and adaptability. In this vision, architecture be-

comes an active participant in the biotope, submitting to the

life cycle like any other living organism. The project also

touches on aspects of innovation relating to responsiveness

and mobility, among other things, demonstrating a broad

spectrum of innovation issues, many of which remain at the

conceptual level (Fig. 6).

Thesis B: the bio-innovations identied in the case of

the Bone Chair (2006) are single-faceted − narrow and

specialized, dealing primarily with shaping of the form and

comfort relative to user-imposed contexts made possible

by the simulation level (Fig. 7). As a result of these de-

sign and production processes, the assembly line eventually

manufactured a customised piece of furniture (Stals et al.

2015). The author of the design, Joris Laarman, inspired

by the bone growth, created a personalized process for

manufacturing chairs that feature an organic shape and ho-

mogeneous structure resulting from material optimization

(Laarman 2006). The entire cycle, from design to prototyp-

ing and manufacturing, took place at the Adam Opel AG’s

International Developed Centre, which used simulation of

the bone-growing process to produce car bodies. Of note is

the fact that the algorithm itself copied the path of evolu-

Fig. 4. Diagram presenting

thesis A: high innovation

potential but a low level of entry

(elaborated by R. Achramowicz,

E. Kuhnert)

Il. 4. Schemat prezentujący

tezę A: potencjał innowacji wysoki,

ale niski poziom wejścia

(oprac. R. Achramowicz,

E. Kuhnert)

Fig. 5. Diagram presenting

thesis B: low innovation

potential but a high level

of implementation

(elaborated by R. Achramowicz,

E. Kuhnert)

Il. 5. Schemat prezentujący

tezę B: potencjał innowacji niski,

ale wysoki poziom wdrożenia

(oprac. R. Achramowicz,

E. Kuhnert)

Identification and description of bio-innovations in architecture using the dedicated CLM Tool

ness, and adaptability. Individual components of the build-

ing, such as sensors connected to a pneumatic system, have

the potential for economic implementation, independent

of the conceptual thought (Biloria 2010). The project also

addresses issues relating to formal and contextual matters

connected with real-time sensing, and integrates architec-

tural space with biomechanics and digital technologies into

a single space. The biotechnological sensor technology de-

veloped by Oosterhuis over the course of more than three

decades is the foundation for shaping sentient architecture

tionary development quite precisely, and yet, as the author

points out (Troika 2008, 25), this unique software was not

only used to create a perfect and optimized chair, but also

enabled achieving a biomorphic form.

Thesis C: the bio-innovation pathways in the case of the

NSA Muscle (Oosterhuis, Biloria 2008) are characterized

both by multifaceted nature at the entry level and by bring-

ing some paths to the level of a fully functioning prototype

(Fig. 8). In this case, the aspects of innovation primarily

concern organicity, revealed through mobility, responsive-

Fig. 6. Bioinnovations identified

in the case of

PhotoSynthEtica Tower

(elaborated by R. Achramowicz,

E. Kuhnert)

Il. 6. Bioinnowacje

zidentyfikowane w projekcie

PhotoSynthEtica Tower

(oprac. R. Achramowicz,

E. Kuhnert)

Fig. 7. Bioinnovations identified

in the case of Bone Chair

(elaborated by R. Achramowicz,

E. Kuhnert)

Il. 7. Bioinnowacje

zidentyfikowane w projekcie

Bone Chair

(oprac. R. Achramowicz,

E. Kuhnert)

Fig. 8. Bioinnovations identified

in the case of NSA Muscle

(elaborated by R. Achramowicz,

E. Kuhnert)

Il. 8. Bioinnowacje

zidentyfikowane w projekcie

NSA Muscle

(oprac. R. Achramowicz,

E. Kuhnert)

Radosław Achramowicz, Ewa Kuhnert

(Lan, Luo 2006). In this case, the physical variability of the

building is conditioned by the work of dozens of pneumatic

actuators that form a unique architectural muscle. The arti-

cial organ tightens, contracts and stretches in response to

user-set stimuli coming from sensors placed on the shell.

The concept is part of a larger project named Hyperbody

− a study focused on bio-architecture shaped and operat-

ing like a living organism sensitive to stimuli. According

to the architect’s idea, the prototype is to be just one link in

a chain of many such buildings, which will form a muscular

ecosystem, freed from one place and context.

Discussion on innovation paths

The rst element of the CLM envelope toward which

the innovation paths lead is Organicity, which is linked to

the Movement category. There is no doubt that everything

that is alive is in motion (Aristotle 1937, 441 [698a]). In

architecture, it is generally accepted that movement can be

interpreted in one of two traditional (dating back to the mid-

century) ways: imagined and real (Bloomer, Moore

1977). With the advent of the digital age, there appeared

a new approach to simulated movement that is inextricably

linked to digital processes. In the public awareness, which is

based on the established classical model, space is associated

with mathematics, while time and movement are linked to

physics; geometric (Platonic) shapes give the impression of

being static, while objects in motion are perceived as dy-

namic. In the case of the Photosynthetica Tower, one can

look at movement as a change in composition of elements

and the transitivity in time of entire organisms. The issue of

time is developed slightly dierently in the case of the Bone

Chair, which arises from an evolutionary process, where the

initial bone tissue evolves to yield a series of dierentiated

target objects. As if coincidentally, the design shows that

new tools dene the production and design processes, fun-

damentally aecting also the aesthetics of the objects them-

selves (Museum fr Gestaltung Zrich, Sachs 2007, 74). In

the NSA Muscle, innovation aspects are related to the com-

munication between the object, the user, and the environ-

ment. In this case, the search for innovative thought leads

to the tactile dimension of space that is not so much visual

as tactile and responsive. In this case, the tactile properties

of an articial muscle cause its shell to take on the char-

acteristics of a skin capable of receiving stimuli from the

environment, and consequently the architectural space itself

becomes, in a way, an extension of the human being and

takes on the characteristics of a medium (McLuhan 1964).

This observation leads to the second element of the CLM

envelope, Processuality, which delineates the paths of inno-

vation derived from the category of Time, according to the

principle that time inscribed in the design process makes

all movement possible. Looking from a philosophical per-

spective, one can refer to Deleuze and Guattari’s description

of an abstract machine, which consists of a certain kind of

code that is embedded and stored in it (Deleuze, Guattari

2017, 44) − this code records of all the transformations tak-

ing place within the body (here: architecture). In the context

of architecture, which is pertinent to this article, time simu-

lated in design processes is the crucial factor. This approach

is reected in the case of the Bone Chair, developed through

computational coding. One can also look at the issue of time

in a dierent way, as a matter of experiencing it in the work,

as reected by the Photosyntetica Tower and the pneumatic

structure of the NSA Muscle, whose deformations occur in

real time. On the one hand, the shell is active in terms of

senses, like a real muscle, but on the other it adapts to the

behaviour of the interacting entity − the participant in the

game with the building. Such “smart cities and biodomes”

(ecoLogicStudio 2025) lead toward Personalization, the

third path set out based on the category of Space.

Personalization directs attention to the user rather than

to geometry, and thus appears less obvious than the previ-

ous two directions − after all, in public awareness, architec-

ture is dened as the art of space shaping. The breadth of

this concept has been shown by the digital revolution, due

to which reality has become an organization of information.

This resonates particularly strongly in NSA Muscle, where

the three-dimensional deformations of a building taking

place in physical space are nothing more than the manifes-

tation of information transmitted between the environment,

the user, and the architecture. Another example of adapta-

tion of an object to the user’s need is Bone Chair, in which

the establishment of an interactive connection between the

conceptual (modelling) and manufacturing (material pro-

cessing) phases has made it possible to simplify the prod-

uct customization process. The result is an object that rep-

resents a unique type and is diverse at the same time − in

other words, no single piece of furniture can be assumed to

be perfect. Each is unique in its own mutation, which meets

the conditions imposed at the time − whether it be context,

comfort, or formal issues. In contrast, in Photo Synthetica

Tower, personalization refers to the behaviour of living al-

gae, which can be controlled to a smaller degree. In the

context of the deliberations on form, there is a shift in em-

phasis from a mechanistic approach to an organic approach

and a transition from abstract to natural forms.

Conclusions

The test conducted showed the functionality of the CLM

and its potential for further evaluation to achieve the fol-

lowing objectives:

− the objectivization of the conceptual apparatus, which

will serve to oset the subjectivity of evaluation of innova-

tion initiatives;

− the universality of the research model, which will im-

prove the transfer of content between dierent design dis-

ciplines; and

− the intuitiveness of the way of depicting innovative

thought, which will facilitate the work of individual stake-

holders.

It was shown that CLM makes it possible to diagnose

individual aspects of innovation on the basis of designated

individual decoding paths. The multiplicity of these path-

ways creates an arrangement of “ngerprints” unique to

each example tested (Fig. 9), which indicate the complexity

of bio-innovation. Despite the fact that the study concerned

only three selected designs, the test showed that CLM has

the potential to identify novum in twin disciplines, in dif-

Identification and description of bio-innovations in architecture using the dedicated CLM Tool

ferent types of designs and at dierent scales for which

bio-innovation is the common thread. The proposed tool

also has its limitations related to the geometry and mechan-

ics of the centrifuge, which were found to work for the pro-

posed designs-samples, but they could be transformed to

test other areas of science, such as robotics. The answer to

this problem is the exibility embedded in the CLM con-

struct, based on interchangeable bricks – the aspects. This

will make it possible to adapt the tool to the conditions of

a rapidly evolving world, where keeping up with innova-

tive thought is correlated with going beyond rigid criteria

and beyond accepted ways of thinking.

Summary

Only immovable elements can be arranged. Anything that

changes, especially innovative ideas, eludes rational co gnition

– this observation in the context of innovation ana lysis is rep-

resented by commonly accepted indicators for its measure-

ment, such as TRLs. While existing methods of measuring

innovation serve to determine the state of advancement of

the technology, they also overlook the incalculable potential

of various innovative concepts. Clear examples supporting

the above statement are provided by design bio-innova

tions that go beyond the rigid denition. They abandon the

structured nature of innovations in favour of the responsive,

exible, and communicative ones that the CLM serves to

identify. This research model enabled the comparison of in-

novations across related disciplines, while also considering

them from dierent perspectives. In conclusion, it has been

shown that the CLM can be useful at dierent scales: indus-

trial design, architectural and urban planning, unifying the

image of innovative thought, despite the extremely dierent

projects. One should bear in mind, however, that the rec-

ognition and identication of paths of innovation does not

take place automatically in the CLM and requires explana-

tion − an issue perfectly illustrated by the words of Ludwig

Wittgenstein, that every interpretation rests in the “logic of

representation” (Wittgenstein 1922, 40).

Translated by

Lingua Lab

Fig. 9. Unique image of “fingerprints” that represent three theses (elaborated by R. Achramowicz, E. Kuhnert)

Il. 9. Zestaw unikalnych obrazów „linii papilarnych” reprezentujących trzy przedstawione w artykule tezy (oprac. R. Achramowicz, E. Kuhnert)

References

Addington, Michelle, and Daniel L. Schodek. Smart Materials and New

Technologies: For the Architecture and Design Professions. Archi-

tectural Press, 2005.

Arendt, Hannah. O myśleniu. Translated by Halina Buczyńska-Gare-

wicz. EUROPA, 1989.

Aristotle. Parts of Animals. Movement of Animals. Progression of Animals.

Translated by Arthur Leslie Peck (Parts of Animals) and Edward Sey-

mour Forster (Movement of Animals; Progression of Animals). Loeb

Classical Library, 1937. Accessed June 20, 2024, at https://archive.

org/details/L323AristotlePartsOfAnimalsMovementOfAnimalsPro-

gressionOfAnimals/page/n5/mode/2up.

Benyus, Janine M. Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by Nature. William

Morrow, 1997.

Biloria, Nimish. “Interactive Environments: A Multi-disciplinary Approach

towards Developing Real-Time Performative Spaces.” In Entertain-

ment Computing – ICEC 2010, edited by Hyun Seung Yang, Rainer

Ma laka, Junichi Hoshino, and Jung Hyun Han. Springer, 2010.

Bloomer, Kent C., and Charles W. Moore. Body, Memory, and Architec-

ture. Yale University Press, 1977.

Bush, Vannevar. “As We May Think.” The Atlantic Monthly 176, no. 1

(1945): 101–8.

Deleuze, Gilles, and Félix Guattari. Anty-Edyp. Kapitalizm i schizofre-

nia. Translated by Tomasz Kaszubski. Wydawnictwo Krytyki Poli-

tycznej, 2017.

ecoLogicStudio. Photosynthetic Architecture: Human to Non-Human

Co-Living. The Bartlett School of Architecture, 2025. Accessed May

15, 2025, at https://www.bartlettdesignresearchfolios.com/media/fo-

lio_docs/Design-Research-ecoLogicStudio-Photosynthetic-Architec-

ture.pdf.

European Commission (EC). Green Paper on Innovation. COM (95)688

nal. AEI, 1995. Accessed June 10, at https://aei.pitt.edu/1218/1/in-

novation_gp_COM_95_688.pdf.

Florida, Richard. Narodziny klasy kreatywnej oraz jej wpływ na prze-

obrażenia w charakterze pracy, wypoczynku, społeczeństwa i życia

Radosław Achramowicz, Ewa Kuhnert

Streszczenie

Identykacja i opis bioinnowacji w architekturze za pomocą dedykowanego narzędzia CLM

Czym jest działalność innowacyjna w architekturze? To pytanie leży u podstaw identykacji problemu badawczego, ulokowanego na przecię-

ciu wielowątkowego procesu decyzyjnego i twórczego podejmowanego przez różne podmioty, których aktywność koncentruje się na komercjalizacji

wiedzy. Przeprowadzona kwerenda potwierdza brak rozwiązania systemowego służącego identykacji i walidacji innowacji związanych z tą wiedzą.

To spostrzeżenie pozwala autorom postawić hipotezę, że możliwa jest budowa potencjalnie obiektywnego, uniwersalnego oraz intuicyjnego systemu

diagnostycznego, dostosowanego do specyki interdyscyplinarnych innowacji projektowych.

Artykuł stanowi rewizję ram teoretycznych i metod pomiaru innowacji, opierając się na autorskim modelu badawczym nazwanym Centryfugową

Maszyną Logiczną (CLM). Celem autorów tekstu jest identykacja i opis różnorodnych aspektów innowacji w formie syntetycznej diagnozy. W pierw-

szym z serii artykułów przedstawiono ogólne przyczyny zastosowania nowatorskiego aparatu oraz wyniki testowania go w trzech skalach: architek-

tonicznej, urbanistycznej i wzornictwa przemysłowego, które reprezentują trzy przykłady bioinnowacji, charakteryzujące się poziomem złożoności

adekwatnym dla skutecznego testu CLM.

Dzięki przeprowadzonemu badaniu wykazano możliwość porównywania innowacji z różnych perspektyw: społecznej, kulturowej, technologicznej

i przede wszystkim twórczej za pomocą jednego aparatu, który umożliwił uzyskanie ujednoliconego obrazu myśli innowacyjnej, mimo skrajnie odmien-

nych projektów poddanych testowi. Diagnozę poszczególnych aspektów innowacji wykonano poprzez wyznaczenie indywidualnych ich ścieżek za po-

mocą CLM. Wielość tych ścieżek utworzyła mapę innowacji, charakterystyczną dla danego obiektu, dając w efekcie unikalny układ „linii papilarnych”.

Ich różnorodność i złożoność świadczy o tym, iż innowacje w sztukach projektowych tworzą swoiste sieci złożonych trajektorii, których odkrywanie

jest rodzajem dekodowania myśli.

Słowa kluczowe: architektura, innowacja, procesualność, personalizacja, organiczność

codziennego. Translated by Paweł Laskowicz. Narodowe Centrum

Kultury, 2010.

Giedion, Sigfried. Przestrzeń, czas i architektura: narodziny nowej tra-

dycji. Translated by Jerzy Olkiewicz. Państwowe Wydawnictwo

Nau kowe, 1968.

Kapsali, Veronika. Biomimetics for Designers: Applying Nature’s Pro-

cesses & Materials in the Real World. Thames and Hudson, 2021.

Kubler, George. The Shape of Time: Remarks on the History of Things.

Yale University Press, 1962.

Laarman, Joris. “Bone Chair (2006).” Accessed April 10, 2025. https://

www.jorislaarman.com/work/bone-chair/.

Lan, Bruce Q., and Xiaoqu Luo. ONL: Hyperbody Logic. Hebei Educa-

tion Publishing House, 2006.

Liu, Chenyang, Song Qiu, Xi Zhang, Chen Zibin. “Research on Inter-

disciplinary Design Thinking and Methods Based on Programmable

Mechanical Metamaterials.” Buildings 13, no. 4 (2023): 933. https://

doi.org/10.3390/buildings13040933.

Malara, Zdzisław, and Jacek Tutaj, ed. Innowacje a dobrostan społeczeń-

stwa, gospodarki i przedsiębiorstw. Próba pomiaru. Ocyna Wy-

dawnicza Politechniki Wrocławskiej, 2019.

Mang, Pamela, and Bill Reed. “Designing from Place: A Regenerative

Framework and Methodology.” Building Research and Information

40, no. 1 (2012): 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2012.621341.

McLuhan, Marshall. Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man.

McGraw-Hill, 1964.

Museum fr Gestaltung Zrich, and Angeli Sachs, eds. Nature Design:

From Inspiration to Innovation. Lars Mller Publishers, 2007.

Oosterhuis, Kas, and Nimish Biloria. “Interactions with Proactive Ar-

chitectural Spaces: The Muscle Projects.” Communications of the

ACM, 51 (2008): 70–8. https://doi.org/10.1145/1349026.1349041.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

Frascati Manual 2015: Guidelines for Collecting and Reporting

Data on Research and Experimental Development. OECD Publish-

ing, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264239012-en.

Pawlyn, Michael. Biomimicry in Architecture. RIBA Publishing, 2011.

Pasquero, Claudia, Marco Poletto, and Terezia Greskova. “Photosyn-

thetic Architecture in Times of Climate Change and Other Global

Disruptions.” In Anthropologic: Architecture and Fabrication in

the Cognitive Age. Proceedings of the 38

eCAADe Conference.

Vo lume 1, edited by Liss Werner and Dietmar Koering. TU Berlin,

2020. https://doi: 10.52842/conf.ecaade.2020.1.583.

Pedersen Zari, Maibritt. Biomimetic Approaches to Architectural Design

for Increased Sustainability. In C/Sustainable Building Confe rence

(SB07), (2007).

Pohl, Göran, and Werner Nachtigall. Biomimetics for Architecture and

Design. Nature – Analogies – Technology. Springer, 2015.

Słyk, Jan. Modele architektoniczne. Ocyna Wydawnicza Politechniki

Warszawskiej, 2018.

Stals, Adeline, Catherine Elsen, Sylvie Jancart, and Frédéric Delvaux.

“Challenges in Teaching Architectural Morphogenesis.” In Proceed ings

of the 3

International Conference for Design Education Re search ers

(LearnXDesign 2015), vol. 3. Design Research Society, 2015.

Troika (Freyer, Conny, Stuart Noel, Eva Rucki). Digital by Design:

Crafting Technology for Products and Environments. Thames and

Hudson, 2008.

Wang, Chia-Chi. “Using Design Thinking for Interdisciplinary Curricu-

lum Design and Teaching: A Case Study in Higher Education.” Hu -

manities and Social Sciences Communications 11 (2024): 307. https://

doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02813-z.

Wang, Min, Ye Xiaoxue, Bi Hongwen, and Shen Zhongbao. “Microalgae

biofuels: illuminating the path to a sustainable future amidst chal-

lenges and opportunities.” Biotechnology for Biofuels and Bioprod-

ucts 17 (2024): 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13068-024-02461-0.

Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. Kegan Paul,

Trench, Trubner and Co., 1922.

Wodecka-Hyjek, Angelika. “Wybrane narzędzia pomiaru innowacyj noś -

ci.” Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie

922 (2013): 63–82.