You are on page 1of 23

A generic shape grammar for the Palladian Villa,

Malagueira House and Prairie House

Deborah Benrs and Sean Hanna


University College London, United Kingdom

Jose Pinto Duarte


T U Lisbon, Portugal
Shape grammars are formulations consisting of transformation rules that describe
design. Previous studies have focused on recreating the style of family-related
solutions [1], [2], [3]. This study does not aim to recreate a specific architectural
style but is part of wider research aimed at inferring shape grammars.
It is believed that more than one grammar can be developed for the same style, but
no one has ever demonstrated this possibility. In addition, no one has ever
developed a grammar that can describe more than one style. The aim of this work
is to demonstrate both possibilities. Firstly, it proposes a shape grammar that can
produce three different design styles, and, secondly, it uses a process that is
distinctively different from other tested examples yet still produces the same
corpus of designs. It also enables a new corpus of designs to be produced, which
had not been possible using the previous (or original) grammars.
A selected case study of three grammars, namely for Palladian, Prairie and
Malagueira houses, allowed for comparison and observation of the different
processes and shape rules and for a new set of rules to be proposed, combined in a
shape grammar. This was followed by the recreation of a new subdivision type of
grammar with a top-down approach and a set of generic design rules.
The result is a generic shape grammar that enables three different house styles to
be designed from the same formulation.
Shape grammars, generic grammar, generic shape rules, housing grammars

Introduction
Shape grammars, like rule systems, are formalisms that allow rules to be
combined in a structured way to create a set of designs that share a similar
root, are part of the same family or, in stylistic terms, belong to a certain

Design Computing and Cognition DCC12. J.S. Gero (ed),


pp. xx-yy. Springer 2012

D. Benros, J.Pinto Duarte and S. Hanna

style [4]. Beiro [5], working on urban shape grammars, proposed a


generic grammar for design and illustrated an application for urban design.
Stiny [6] showed how shape grammar rules may be classified into a finite
set of rule types or schemas expressed algebraically to suggest how
different grammars may share a common structure.
In the past, many different shape grammars were used to describe a certain
architectural style or signature design. The concept was first introduced by
Stiny and Mitchell [1], [7] as a response emerging from the architectural
and computing world to address the study of grammars described by
Chomsky [8]. The controversial Palladian grammar showed how a style
could be recreated using a set of rules. This enabled a set of housing
layouts originally designed by the architect and a new corpus of solutions
to be produced which obeyed the same rules and were intrinsically related
to the existing corpus
The same grammar theory was later put into practice by Duarte using the
work of a living master, the Malagueira housing project [3]. This allowed
expert feedback on the rule inference process from the author and, also for
the trial and criticism of the new solutions by the creator of the system, as
a quality control check.
This study does not aim to recreate any specific architectural style
previously tested by others but is part of wider research aimed at inferring
generic rules and exploring a generic grammar.
No one has ever tried to create two grammars for the same style. Usually,
when capturing a particular style, researchers try to create the most elegant
grammar, that is, the one that contains the smaller number of rules. Once a
valid grammar is developed for a particular style, the need to create
another, less elegant grammar becomes redundant.
In addition, no one has ever developed a grammar that can describe more
than one style. It is believed that a grammar needs to be exclusive of a
particular style or it fails its descriptive, analytical, and synthetic purposes.
This work aims to demonstrate the possibility of developing more than one
grammar for the same style and the possibility of one grammar being able
to generate more than one style. Firstly, it proposes a shape grammar that
can produce three different design styles and, secondly, it uses a process
that is distinctively different from the shape grammars previously inferred
for these styles, yet still produces the same corpus of designs. It also
enables a new corpus of designs to be produced, which had been
impossible using the previous grammars (or the original forms).
The methodology started with the selection of three grammars for a case
study, the comparison and observation of their different processes and
shape rules and, finally, the proposal for a new set of rules combined into a
new shape grammar.

A generic shape grammar for the Palladian Villa, Malagueira Houses and
Prairie House

The grammars selected reflect the three types of shape grammars identified
and described in Knights grammar classification as quoted by Prats [9].
The grammars, namely the Palladian villas by Palladio [1], [11], the Prairie
houses by Wright [2] and the Malagueira houses by Siza [3], address the
grid, addition and subdivision types respectively.
One important feature that influenced the case study selection was the fact
that all the grammars are applied to single-family housing and, at the same
time, featured distinctive differences in style, layout, history, and
architects background and signature, in addition to different geographic
locations and periods of construction.
The next step involved comparing the study case data and identifying
differences and similarities within the rule sets.
The proposal for the new set of rules addressed and encoded all three
styles. The process selected was the one that seemed more flexible and
allowed for the production of all three types the subdivision process. The
subdivision grammar type used is clearly distinct from previous attempts
to recreate new Palladian-like designs since involves a grammar
formulation and proposes a method combining parametric shape rules
based on polygon division. This was the system used to generate the
original Malagueira grammar, and also the process selected and described
in an alternative Palladian grammar [12]. The alternative grammar for the
Palladian villas grammar is, to the extent of our knowledge, the first
attempt to propose a grammar that being intrinsically different in structure,
rule formulation, and derivation process, still allows the design of the same
corpus of designs described by the original grammar, the existing corpus
designed by Palladio and a group of villas not addressed by the original
grammar. The grammatical structure developed for the Palladian Villas, a
top-down subdivision of rectangles, was then applied to the Prairie houses.
The house starts with the inclusion of a house boundary and production
opts for a top-down approach to the generative process. The system
proposes a self-contained boundary shape that encompasses the limits of
the building work. Subdivision starts as process of refining a succession of
recursive divisions that generate different space subdivisions. A series of
parametric shape rules are proposed to provide accuracy in the generation

D. Benros, J.Pinto Duarte and S. Hanna

process. It is the manipulation of these parameters that enables a specific


house type, either Palladian, Wright or Siza, to be produced. The rules are
generic, but potentially specific. Within each rule the parameterisation
assures that the right house type is designed even though the same rule is
put to practice. Labels and other agents maintain and propose restrictions.
In addition to shape, function was also taken into account (unlike the
Palladian grammar). The existing plans were observed and analysed in
order to introduce functional spatial meaning. Segregation and integration
were considered in the spatial assessment [13]. The spatial adjacency of
each room, its dimensions and communication with other rooms were also
considered.
As original research, the work aimed to automatically infer shape rules,
starting by reflecting on three distinct shape grammars. All three original
grammars were extensively tested and proved to be operational. However,
the scope of their design was specific and bound by the limits of each
designer. As formulations encompass a large amount of information,
design know-how and consistent design style, they are not much use
outside their corpus of action. This study attempts to make full use of the
potential of these generative formulations, commonly known as shape
grammars, by attempting to come up with a generic shape grammar
formulation. The first step was to prove that one specific style can be
produced by more than one formulation. The second step was to create one
grammar that can produce more than one style, thus refuting certain
assumptions concerning the hermetic nature of these structures. This paper
is divided into five sections. The introduction is followed by a description
of the case study and of the generic grammar formulation. The fourth
section concerns the generation of solutions and derivations and the paper
concludes with comments on the results and on future work.

The case study and grammar comparison


Three grammars were used as a case study: the Palladian villa [1], Prairie
house [2] and Malagueira house [3] grammars. The differences between
them enriched the study and the similarities allowed for comparisons to be
made, since all refer to single-family housing.
The Palladian grammar a grid grammar
The formulation of the Palladian grammar atypically resembles the grid
grammar type. It is atypical because in order to generate a grid it goes
through an addition process whereby cells are added individually to the
design. The basis of the design begins with the construction of a grid or
matrix that reflects the interior design. This resembles a traditional
orthogonal grid, even though it is constructed by adding individual cells.

A generic shape grammar for the Palladian Villa, Malagueira Houses and
Prairie House

The original and first grammar formulation for the Palladian grammar had
eight design stages. The grammar formulation is illustrated in Figure 1 as a
grammar tree diagram. The first stage combines ten rules for grid
definition. These rules are additive processes that allow a grid scheme to
be recreated by cell addition. The second stage proposes the introduction
of a containing boundary shape and the inclusion of a single rule for
defining the exterior walls. The third stage incorporates the room layout
rules. This stage proposes seven concatenation rules. Special rooms are
designed by joining consecutive cells to create larger spaces with spatial
complexity. Stage 4 allows for wall realignment. At this point, the
manipulation of the grid cell borders can be altered to create less rigid

Fig1. Original Palladian Grammar tree diagram

D. Benros, J.Pinto Duarte and S. Hanna

configurations. Stage 5 proposes 23 set of rules to introduce the main


entrance. These are additive rules which add an obtrusion to the main
envelope in the shape of a portico, loggia or ornamented column entrance.
Stage 6 is dedicated to the decoration of the faade true to the classical
style and is also an additive step that includes classical features. Stage 7
constitutes a typical subtractive process that involves creating openings in
the walls for windows and doors. Stage 8 is a technical stage for deleting
labels and terminating the design.
The grid grammar described effectively produces design solutions that fit
the style criteria. The rules are coherent but the formulation does not
necessarily follow an intuitive architectural design procedure.
The Prairie house grammar an addition grammar
The Prairie house grammar was one of the first implementations of a 3D
grammar and uses a typical addition process. The design follows the
prescriptions of Frank Lloyd Wright and is initiated by the insertion of the
main focal point of the family dwelling - the fireplace. Spaces are
sequentially arranged around it in an orthogonal, biaxial manner, from the
living and dining areas (the social areas) to the kitchen and pantries (the
service areas) and the intimate family divisions (bedrooms, closets and
bathrooms). This grammar structure is shown in Figure 2.
The grammar is mainly composed of additive steps, as shown in the
illustrative tree diagram. The first stage combines four rules for positioning
the fireplace. Two possible fireplace placements are available. The second
addition stage involves the insertion of the first social area adjacent to the
fireplace. This constitutes another innovation in terms of the Palladian
grammar, which did not address spatial function. There are four rules for
this first room design. The third stage adds and extends the core living
space, proposing the addition of an extra space adjacent to the one
previously allocated. The fourth stage is responsible for the so-called
obligatory extensions to the social area immediately adjacent to the spaces
previously added. It is another additive step. The fifth stage, with six
addition rules, allows for the creation of functional social zones. The
overall ground floor layout is then concluded. The seventh stage adds
detail to address the style features of Wrights Prairie creations. The
concave corners of the envelope are filled with exterior elements such as
terraces, porches, verandas or small extensions decorated with features that
are true to the original style. The other rules are mainly subtractive and
address certain issues relating to the ornamentation of this style.

A generic shape grammar for the Palladian Villa, Malagueira Houses and
Prairie House

Fig2. Original Prairie houses Grammar tree diagram

Some corners are truncated, chamfered or simply subtracted to create the


level of detail and refinement evident in the existing design corpus. The
eighth stage terminates the design with the deletion of labels. Other stages
are proposed by the grammar to design the top floor. However, as it is
similar to the entrance floor and the upstairs design recursively repeats the

D. Benros, J.Pinto Duarte and S. Hanna

main level procedure, the need to address this is minimal. It can be


concluded that the Prairie house generation is mainly an addition process,
with the exception of the detailing, for which uses subtraction as the
operative means, and the termination stage. The design is conceived using
a bottom-down approach in which a single element (such as the fireplace)
is included at an early stage and the whole design subsequently develops
from this. It is a very different approach to the grammar previously
described in which the self- contained boundary is proposed at the outset.
This addition grammar drives its formulation directly from Frank Lloyd
Wrights design concept and intentions. It is therefore intuitive and spaces
are created in a sequential manner. The additive process seems to an
appropriate choice which is easy to implement.
The Malagueira house grammar a subdivision grammar
The Malagueira house grammar uses a top-down approach and a
subdivision grammar type to address plot and house design. The design is
driven from the fixed plot space and adjacencies between surrounding
buildings. The design concept inspired by Siza is based on the plot
available. A percentage is allocated for exterior space and for the
remaining indoor construction. The indoor construction is then detailed
progressively through a series of divisions. The original grammar tree
diagram can be seen in Figure 3.
Although it consists mainly of subdivision stages, the first stage is an
additive stage. The design is initiated by the addition of the plot layout and
boundary, which establishes the design limits. The second stage is a
fundamental step in the design concept. The grammar allows for two
subdivision rules that determine the location of the house within the plot
and the exterior yard. That is achieved by dividing the surrounding
polygon into two smaller elements and is replicated further in the
following steps with different aims. The third step starts detailing and
assigning functional areas for the interior. Living spaces are designed and
selected. The fourth stage, also proposing subdivisions, creates circulation
spaces such as corridors or staircases.

A generic shape grammar for the Palladian Villa, Malagueira Houses and
Prairie House

Fig3. Original Malagueira houses Grammar tree diagram

The fifth stage subdivides the space further by creating and allocating
service areas such as kitchens and pantries.
The sixth stage is the last subdivision stage and applies to small rooms and
divisions, utilizing the remaining spaces. It is a design refinement stage
that uses particular division rules.

10

D. Benros, J.Pinto Duarte and S. Hanna

The seventh stage breaks the routine proposing subtraction. It is a detain


stage in which openings are created in interior walls for doors and in
exterior walls to generate windows, and other elements such as risers and
chimneys are detailed. The eighth stage terminates the design and erases
the construction labels. Despite the approved efficiency and operability of
this subdivision grammar, close observation led to the possibility of
converting this into a grid grammar, as the floor plan resembles a complex
grid plan. The key question concerned which grammar would be more
efficient and thus more economical and the answer is probably
subdivision, due to the level of grid complexity involved. However, this
gave rise to the idea that more than one grammar could lead to the same
design, as explained in the next section.
The case study analysis, methodology and comparison
The three grammars presented above describe three different processes and
approaches to shape grammar inference. Firstly, they describe different
content and styles. These differences derive from the fact that the existing
designs were originally created by three different architects, of different
nationalities, working at different periods, with dissimilar social and

cultural backgrounds, specific clients, aesthetics and, more importantly, a characteristic, easily identifiable design language.
The common ground they shared was that all the grammars focussed on
single family housing and which allowed comparison.
Their processes follow different approaches. The Palladian villa and
Malagueira house grammars use a top-down approach, starting with the
general aspect of the building and detailing it as they progress, whilst the
Prairie house grammar uses a bottom-up approach starting with one
particular feature, the fireplace, and progressing to the other parts of the
design. This is intrinsically related to the nature of each grammar. Grid and
subdivision grammars first consider the big picture, either the boundary or
design limits, and then work their way inwards, whereas an additive
grammar typically starts with one of its parts and adds other elements
sequentially. This also leads to another assumption, namely that grid and
subdivision grammars often start with a self-contained element, whereas
addition grammars is much harder to envisage the future containing
shapes. If all three tree diagrams from each grammar are juxtaposed as
shown in Figure 4, the main differences and similarities between them can
be seen. Despite the differences, all three grammars appear to start from a
common point. They also present a similar number of steps from start to
finish. The first stage is usually an addition process. This initial step
always involves the addition of an element to start the design.

A generic shape grammar for the Palladian Villa, Malagueira Houses and
Prairie House

11

Fig4. Grammar tree diagram comparison

Fig5. Generic Grammar Shape Rules

Likewise, the final step, involving the deletion of labels and the
termination of the design, is very similar. The penultimate or seventh
stage, which is the detailing stage and is subtractive, is also very similar in
all the grammars. . The main purpose of the detailing that occurs in these

12

D. Benros, J.Pinto Duarte and S. Hanna

housing grammars is to create openings, such as windows and doors, in the


walls. Other conclusions reflect the similarities between grid and
subdivision grammars. They share the same top-down approach and main
addition processes. Grid and addition grammars also have some
formulations in common. As shown in the comparison tree, both have six
additive processes in the early design stages. Despite the differences in the
top-down and bottom-up approaches, both mainly use addition to achieve
design solutions.
Close observation of the set of shape rules for the grammars revealed other
similarities. Four types of rules were identified as very common: addition,
offset, subtraction and concatenation. These could be observed countless
times in all the grammars, sometimes involving certain particularities and
on other occasions with different parameterizations. However, it seemed
that a generic rule could be implemented to address all cases. The idea of a
generic grammar now seemed feasible.
These core studies on each grammar also led to other conclusions. If so
many similarities were found, it seemed only reasonable that there could
be more than one way to generate a design. The Palladian grammar proved
to be operative and effective in reproducing existing designs and
generating a new corpus of solutions. However, it was less intuitive than
expected and the grid creation process did seem particularly complex at
times. A grammar does not have to recreate the designers vision and
process to produce consistent results, but sometimes this can be an
effective way of tackling design or even helping to create a more
economical grammar. The idea of developing an alternative grammar for
the Palladian grammar seemed feasible when the research indicated that
there could be more than one way of achieving results. Due to the
similarities between the grid and subdivision grammars and due to the
intuitive manner in which subdivision operates, it was chosen for this
endeavour. Furthermore, this methodology was also extended to the Prairie
house grammar. However, it implied an added level of complexity to
obtain the same corpus of results. The overall rules were reconfigured, replanned and parameterized to accommodate all the examples from the
three-grammar case study, as will be explained in the following section.

Generic Shape Grammar formulation


A generic shape grammar was developed for the creation of Palladian
villas, Prairie houses and Malagueira houses, supported by the choice of a
top-down approach using a subdivision grammar. A new grammar
structure and a new set of parametric shape rules were developed.

A generic shape grammar for the Palladian Villa, Malagueira Houses and
Prairie House

13

The alternative grammar for the Palladian villa used a methodology


developed by Duarte [4] for the Malagueira house and later adapted to an
urban context for the Marrakech grammar [14]. The subdivision grammar
famously implemented by Stiny in the Ice-ray grammar [15] encompasses
a very simple shape rule set of sequential subdivisions of polygons. The
grammar showed how a polygon could be divided in two, generating
complexity just by introducing diagonal cuts into a rectangle and
sequential cuts to triangles and pentagons. The end result was a complex
ice-ray window frame that resembled the traditional Chinese ice-ray
lattices. This proved how a simple five-rule grammar could lead to an
almost endless set of new solutions. The Malagueira grammar used a
similar process, starting with the boundaries of the plot and evolving
through subdivision into smaller inner spaces.
Since Palladios villas always propose a rectangular envelope geometry,
and taking into account that the use of subdivision is a common design
choice for architects, it was the process selected to accomplish this task.
A new set of rules was developed to address all three grammars. The
selected grammar does not try to replicate the process of the designers
work or methodology. It aims for a generic formulation that can
accommodate three instances of design that are not only independent but
also dissimilar. It attempts to achieve a consistent solution as efficiently as
possible, whilst also creating a system that is easy to use. The grammar
adopts a top-down approach and uses subdivision. The new generic
grammar allows for eight stages from start to completion and the design of
three types of houses, namely Palladian, Prairie and Malagueira. Any
misuse of the grammar or rule manipulation will generate a hybrid version
of the houses. This does not mean that the grammar implies an intelligent
and careful use. The parametric mechanisms embedded in the grammar
account for that, avoiding the occurrence of undesirable hybrids that do not
represent any of the three styles. The shape rules should therefore be used
intelligently but not freely. The generic grammar does not classify as

14

D. Benros, J.Pinto Duarte and S. Hanna

Fig6. Generic Grammar tree diagram Palladios Villa La Malcontenta

unrestricted since it does follow a strict ordering process and imposes


several restriction in the shape of parametric rules according to Knights
classification [9]. As shown in the tree diagram, the first stage designs the
envelope or container shape. In all cases it is a 4-sided polygon or
rectangle. For non-rectangular envelope geometries such as those of the
Prairie houses, further geometric transformations are required to detail the
envelope. The second stage introduces the subdivision. Two rules can be
applied at this stage, namely horizontal divisions or vertical divisions.
Vertical divisions provide double divisions for cases like the Palladian
villas, where bi-symmetry has to be observed. At this stage, both rules can
be applied a number of times recursively to the point where the maximum
grid with the maximum number of cells is reached (a condition for the
Palladian villas) or the divisions reach the minimum space needed to
accommodate a living or circulation area. Other proportional aspects are
monitored to ensure that design consistency is maintained. At the end of
this stage the outline of the interior layout should be patent or at least
foreseeable. This outline will be made clearer in the next stage.
Stage Three encompasses two basic design rules of concatenation and cell
merging or, to be more accurate, cell border deletion. Both rules follow the

A generic shape grammar for the Palladian Villa, Malagueira Houses and
Prairie House

15

symmetry conditions for the Palladian villas and involve a simple


formulation for the Prairie and Malagueira houses. Rules Four and Five
present two simple border deletion methods for vertical and horizontal
situations, as shown in Figure 5. The final interior layout is now complete
and the design progresses to other aspects of construction.
The fourth stage proposes wall thickening. Limits and spaces had
previously been represented by bi-dimensional lines but at this point, Rules
6 to 9 are responsible for converting either lines or corners into proper wall
representations with a double line to represent a specific thickness.
In the Palladian case, the thickness of the interior walls reflects the
masonry technology used and they are relatively thick in comparison with
the other examples, whilst the exterior walls are incrementally thicker. The
rules address these differences and convert corners and intersections from
2D abstractions to standard thicknesses.
The fifth stage of the generic grammar proposes an addition step. This
allows for certain features of each style to be added to the exterior,
complementing the envelope with entrances, porticos, porches, exterior
spaces and/or ornamentation. In the case of the Palladian villa, this is the
stage when the entrance is defined and porticos and ornamentation, such as
decorative classic columns or loggias, are added. For the Prairie house,
elements such as the corner volumes occasionally fitted to concave corners
of verandas or terraces are now incorporated. For the Malagueira houses,
the small divisions or service spaces also added to concave corners can be
introduced at this stage. This constitutes the second additive process in the
procedure.
The sixth stage includes internal functions. The introduction of functions
constituted an innovation in terms of the original Palladian grammar.
Space and function is the issue covered least in Palladios Four Books [11]
and never addressed or labelled in plans or other drawings. It relates to the
social nature of the 16th century aristocratic Italian villas built for the
purpose of entertaining, whose main floors contained a series of rooms
ranging from ante-chambers to ballrooms, drawing rooms, libraries and
studies that are not always easy to identify. It was therefore necessary to
research this area. Observation and comparison allowed for some spatial

16

D. Benros, J.Pinto Duarte and S. Hanna

assumptions that were introduced into the generic grammar. Both the
Malagueira and the Prairie house grammars addressed functions and
originally proposed shape rules associated with special meaning.
The seventh stage constitutes a subtractive stage to introduce a greater
level of refinement. At this stage openings are made in walls and interior
walls can be removed to create internal circulation and incorporate doors.
The exterior walls and facades can accommodate entrances and windows.
Geometry, proportion and window positioning varies greatly from one
house type to another. The rules that were written accommodate these
differences and take into account the symmetrical features needed for the
Palladian villa.
A specific function is associated with each space, created in accordance
with the shape rules in order to maintain spatial flow and coherence and
avoid the overlapping of functions, awkward adjacencies or spatial
relations not envisaged as part of the original style.
The eighth and final stage completes the design by deleting the
construction labels.

Generation of solutions and derivation process


The recreation of original designs using the method described above is
illustrated in Figures 6 to 9.
Derivation is the exemplification from start to finish of the phased
application of the shape grammar rules. Often, the faster the derivation, the
more efficient, elegant and easy the grammar is to use.
In this experiment three existing houses designed by the original architects
were selected to illustrate the generic grammar. Villa Malcontenta is an
example of a typical Palladian villa, the Robbie House, one of Wrights
most famous creations, illustrates the existing corpus of Prairie houses and
the Malagueira two-bedroom Ab type house (according to Duartes
labelling) exemplifies a typical Malagueira family housing unit.

A generic shape grammar for the Palladian Villa, Malagueira Houses and
Prairie House

17

Fig7. Generic Grammar derivation Palladios Villa La Malcontenta

La Malcontenta derivation
La Malcontenta was originally designed, built and completed in Venice
between 1559 and 1560 and is pictured in the Il quatro libri [11]. Its
orthogonal features and grid-like floor plan features a matrix that
resembles a 5x3 grid organisation. Whereas the original grammar used a
grid process, achieving the same design with subdivision allows us to
economise on certain steps (namely extensive concatenation). The new
tree diagram featuring the generic grammar is shown in Figure 6 and the
Malcontenta derivation in Figure 7.

18

D. Benros, J.Pinto Duarte and S. Hanna

The envelope is thus designed and established from the start. This results
in the first derivation step with the application of Rule 1 (adding a four
sided polygon). Step 2 addresses the first main stage of the subdivision
process by applying Rule 3, the vertical subdivision. As shown, this
subdivision is doubled to address the symmetrical nature of the design.
Steps 3 to 6 use the division rules 2 and 3 recursively (in the case of Rule
3, repeated again and again). Steps 7 and 8 start the space merging or
concatenation process. This is a fundamental step for spatial configuration
in a Palladian villa. The core space or social area is often the, largest, most
central and geometrically complex area in the villa. This complexity is
achieved by combining adjacent cells to form a broad regular polygon.
Other larger rectangular spaces are allocated at the edges of the
construction facing the facades.
With the layout settled, the 9th derivation step continues with the wall
thickening, applying Rules 6 to 9. Step 10 adds new elements attached to
the exterior of the envelope, namely the entrance portico.
The 12th step assigns functions for the spaces previously designed, and the
next step creates detail and prepares the spatial articulation with the
insertion of openings such as doors and windows. The villa is finished in
Step 14 with the deletion of labels. In comparative terms, the derivation of
the Malcontenta using this alternative method is faster than the derivation
used in the original grammar.
The Robbie House derivation

Fig8. Generic Grammar tree diagram Wrights Robbie House derivation

The derivation of Prairie houses using the generic grammar takes a


certain level of abstraction into account (Figure 8). Most of the existing
Prairie houses have a floor plan composed bt polygonal shapes assembled

A generic shape grammar for the Palladian Villa, Malagueira Houses and
Prairie House

19

orthogonally. With the exception of the rectangular, self-contained Wright


Winslow House that can easily accommodate the rules and derive an
operative alternative derivation in a few steps, most have a
butterfly/crossed shape envelope, this is explained further by Granadeiro
[16]. Prairie houses are created by the generic grammar using a container
that extends to its extreme edges.
A new rule was introduced to erase the container edges after the core
house was completed. For this reason, the example chosen to illustrate the
Prairie house is the Robbie House, which is a singular, characteristic and
well-known example. As in the Palladian example, the containing
envelope shape is inserted in the first step using Rule 1. This rectangular
shape does not contain the construction boundary, but illustrates a
containing shape that encompasses its maximum limits.
Step 2 initiates the subdivision process. The horizontal and vertical
division rules, Rules 2 and 3 respectively, are used recursively in several
stages until all the floor plan lines have been replicated. Step 2, which
extends to the next design stage, resumes the lengthy process of
subdivision and is not the most intuitive or efficient of processes at times.
The process combines analysis of the maximum lines (the lines that
connect opposite sides) and their replication using subdivision. The trick
lies in establishing the butterfly cross placing by using the double division
first, then continuing to the finer details. Once all the lines are illustrated,
the design is one step away from completion. At this point some adjacent
cells need to be concatenated to remain true to the style, creating a flow of
spaces that are oblong and have large areas. This constitutes Steps 9 and
10. In Step 10 all the basic interior design features are represented,
including the container envelope shape. This shape is then modelled to fit
the design criteria for the style. The unwanted edges are erased in
accordance with Rule 10 and the line from the external vertex to the
connecting indoors line is erased, leaving the end results as expected.
Steps 11, 12, 13 and 14 resemble much of what has been described
previously and involve wall thickening, the detailing and creation of
openings, and the completion of the design, respectively.

20

D. Benros, J.Pinto Duarte and S. Hanna

Fig 9. Generic Grammar derivation House type Ab derivation

Malagueira two-bedroom single-family house type Ab derivation


The derivation of Malagueira houses using the generic grammar involves a
slight adaptation of the original Malagueira grammar rules. The original
grammar is a typical subdivision grammar and, as explained, is the driving
force behind the design of this generic grammar [3].
The example illustrates a typical two-bedroom, two-storey, terraced, semidetached house, type Ab under the classification system devised by
Duarte. The proposed derivation uses the subdivision rules previously
explained, plus particular shape rules that address Sizas special
configuration (Figure 8). After the subdivision is performed, the steps that
follow diverge from the original grammar and are closer to those tested in
the previous derivations. Step 1 is the plot insertion, which involves
applying a self-contained rectangular shape. In the case of the Malagueira
houses the envelope shape is not parametric, but has a fixed size that
reflects the available plot space with the same dimensions and area for
each house. Step 2 applies Rule 3 for horizontal subdivision, segregating
interior from exterior space. At this stage the yard/exterior space is
allocated. Step 3 applies the vertical division, creating a division between
the interior functional areas. The house layout now begins with the
allocation of (service versus living) zoning. Due to the true nature of this
subdivision, recursive vertical and horizontal divisions are performed to
carry out the zoning and spacing. Steps 2 to 10 continue the recursive
application of the division rules. Step 10 includes specific rules for the
Malagueira design which replicate Sizas intention to create oblique cuts to
produce smaller spaces and generate some spatial complexity. These rules

A generic shape grammar for the Palladian Villa, Malagueira Houses and
Prairie House

21

are no more than parameterizations or generalizations of the division rules


exemplified. The subdivision continues until Step 14.
In the 14th step concatenation is performed for the first time, offering the
designer the flexibility to generate complex polygons with an incremental
number of sides. This is replicated up to stet 17, where the design
progresses as usual with wall thickening, detailing, the creation of
openings and the completion of the design.

Conclusion Discussion of results and future work


The work described above presents a generic shape grammar that allows
for the generation of not one, but several signature styles. Unlike previous
work, this is not a typical shape grammar, but a generic formulation that
allows for the replication of more than one design style, which is believed
to be a contribution to shape grammar research. To this end, the generic
grammar uses shape grammar structure and shape rules. The rules are
formulated as parametric and that can be manipulated to generate a
particular design. A case study composed of three types of grammars,
namely the Palladian villa, Prairie house the Malagueira house grammars,
was selected to illustrate the scope of this generic grammar. The aim was
twofold: firstly, to produce an alternative grammar that allowed for the
alternative generation of a previously developed grammar, and, secondly,
to use this new grammar as a generic grammar capable of producing more
than one design style. The methodology started with a cross comparison of
the grammars previously inferred and a study of their underlying styles.
Each grammar was decomposed and its structure analysed. The complex
sets of rules for each grammar were also analysed and similar rule
formulations were pinpointed. The grammar comparison and knowledge
acquired led to the idea of using subdivision grammars to construct the
new generic grammar. This choice reflects the ease of use and intuitive
nature of this grammar type and the adaptable nature of the subdivision
process in comparison with other creative concepts. A new set of rules was
developed for this new generic grammar in order to produce stylistically
consistent designs. The set of rules incorporated important subdivision

22

D. Benros, J.Pinto Duarte and S. Hanna

rules for the required conditions, such as minimum spacing and bilateral
symmetry.
To the best of our knowledge, all the previous work on shape grammars
has proposed a unique grammar to describe a particular corpus of designs.
No one has proposed more than one grammar for the same style or a
grammar that can describe more than one style. However, we believe that
the effort of developing of an alternative grammar, different from the
original grammar developed for that style, can tell us more about the
essence of the style. We also believe that developing a grammar that can
describe more than one style, which we call generic grammar, helps us to
understand the commonalities among the different styles and the structure
of the common underlying type. In this paper we present a grammar for
single-family homes of three different styles.
This work refutes certain assumptions regarding shape grammars, namely
the uniqueness of the design style that one grammar can produce. Given
that there is more than one way to reproduce designs, more than one
suitable grammar and that one grammar that can produce more than one
style, many different representations are potentially viable.
This represents a breakthrough in shape grammar methodology and
research. Shape grammars are no longer exclusive, but can potentially be
manipulated to generate a larger corpus of new designs. This allows for
efficiency in exploring shapes and analysing results, thus widening the
scope of grammars.
Future work will focus on the effectiveness and implementation of the
generic grammar, such as the exploration of a new corpus of designs and
the analysis of generated design hybrids. It is expected that the mutation of
these design styles or the overlapping of rules will produce new consistent
designs with a new hybrid style. This is currently not allowed by the
restrictions implemented. Moreover, computerised implementation will
represent a positive development, allowing for the exploration of design
solutions and even the enumeration of design corpus results. The potential
of this generic grammar will be fully tested with a computerised tool, as
was the case with previous work developed for housing shape grammars,
such as the ABC system and the Haiti gingerbread house grammar [12].

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the contributions of Prof. Stiny and Prof Knight at
MIT and Prof. Steadman at UCL at different stages of this research project.

A generic shape grammar for the Palladian Villa, Malagueira Houses and
Prairie House

23

References
1. Stiny G, Mitchell WJ (1978). The Palladian grammar. Environment and
Planning B: Planning and Design, 5(1), pp.5 18.
2. Duarte JP, (2001). Customizing mass housing: a discursive grammar for Siza's
Malagueira hous.at: http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/8189 [June10, 2010].
3. Koning H, Eizenberg (1981). Language of the Prairie: Frank Lloyd Wright
Prairie houses. Environment and Planning B: Plan and Design, 8, pp.295-323.
4. Stiny G (1980). Introduction to shape and shape grammars. Environment and
Planning B: Planning and Design, 7(3), pp.343 351.
5. Beiro JN, Duarte JP, Stouffs R (forthcoming Winter 2011). Creating generic
grammars from specific grammars: towards flexible urban design, in Nexus
Network Journal vol. 13, no. 1
6. Stiny G (2010). What rule(s) should I use? in Nexus Network Journal vol. 13,
no. 1 (forthcoming Winter 2011).
7. Stiny G, Mitchell WJ (1978). Counting Palladian plans. Environment and
Planning B: Planning and Design, 5(2), pp.189-198.
8. Chomsky N (1957). Synthatic structures, Cambridge: MIT press.
9. Knight TW (1999) Shape grammars: six types. Environment and Planning B:
Planning and Design, 26(1), pp.15 31.
10. Prats M (2007) Shape exploration in product design Assisting transformation
in pictorical representations, PhD dissertation, The Open University, London
11. Palladio A, (1997) The Four Books on Architecture, Cambridge: MIT Press.
12. Benros D, Duarte, J.P.; Hanna, S.: (forthcoming 2012). An Alternative
grammar for the Palladian Villas shape grammar: in CAADRIA proceedings
13. Hillier B, Hanson J (1984). The social logic of space, Cambridge University
14. Duarte JP, et al (2006) an urban grammar for the medina of Marrakech, in
Design Computing and Cognition 06, 483-502, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/9781-4020-5131-9_25.
15. Stiny G (1977) Ice-ray: a note on the generation of Chinese lattice designs
Environment and Planning B 4 89-98
16. Granadeiro V, Duarte JP, Palensky P (2011) Building envelope shape design
using a shape grammar-based parametric design system integrating energy
simulation, IEEE Africon 2011 - Zambia, 13 - 15 September 2011

You might also like