Archives

  • 2018-07
  • 2018-10
  • 2018-11
  • 2019-04
  • 2019-05
  • 2019-06
  • 2019-07
  • 2019-08
  • 2019-09
  • 2019-10
  • 2019-11
  • 2019-12
  • 2020-01
  • 2020-02
  • 2020-03
  • 2020-04
  • 2020-05
  • 2020-06
  • 2020-07
  • 2020-08
  • 2020-09
  • 2020-10
  • 2020-11
  • 2020-12
  • 2021-01
  • 2021-02
  • 2021-03
  • 2021-04
  • 2021-05
  • 2021-06
  • 2021-07
  • 2021-08
  • 2021-09
  • 2021-10
  • 2021-11
  • 2021-12
  • 2022-01
  • 2022-02
  • 2022-03
  • 2022-04
  • 2022-05
  • 2022-06
  • 2022-07
  • 2022-08
  • 2022-09
  • 2022-10
  • 2022-11
  • 2022-12
  • 2023-01
  • 2023-02
  • 2023-03
  • 2023-04
  • 2023-05
  • 2023-07
  • 2023-08
  • 2023-09
  • 2023-10
  • 2023-11
  • 2023-12
  • 2024-01
  • 2024-02
  • 2024-03
  • 2024-04
  • 2024-05
  • 2024-06
  • 2024-07
  • 2024-08
  • 2024-09
  • 2024-10
  • br Space syntax method for interpreting mosque layouts The s

    2018-11-12


    Space syntax method for interpreting mosque layouts The space syntax method is an approach developed to analyze spatial configuration. Space syntax aims to describe spatial models (e.g., mosque layouts) and represent these models in numerical and graphical forms, thus facilitating scientific interpretation (Hanson, 2003; Franz et al., 2005; Manum, 2009). This method was adopted to deal with the syntactical characteristics of the spatial configuration of mosque layouts because of the following reasons:
    Results and discussion The following data are obtained by examining the results of the analyses using the space syntax methodology (specifically the gamma analysis method). The MD value is 2.067 for mosques with single dome layouts, 2.722 for mosques with earring layouts, 2.879 for mosques with multiple dome layouts, 2.356 for mosques with Cynomolgus ANGPTL7 / Angiopoietin-like 7 Protein (His Tag) dome layouts, 2.517 for mosques with courtyard dome layouts, and 3.042 for mosques with earring dome courtyard layouts. The overall spaces in the courtyard dome and earring dome courtyard layouts are more integrated than those in the other remaining layouts. This finding is supported by the high mean value of RRA for the courtyard dome and earring dome courtyard layouts, that is, 0.946 and 1.009, respectively. This finding demonstrates the tendency of the system (i.e., layouts) to be significantly integrated (i.e., more accessible, efficient, and flexible) compared with other cases that have low mean RRA values. Therefore, the spatial configuration of layouts with low mean RRA values tend to be segregated, controlled, and less efficient in terms of function. The justified graphs (i.e., gamma maps) reveal that 33.33% of mosque layouts have tree-like structures (i.e., having a small number of rings within their configurations). The mean R value of the layouts with tree-like structures is 1.000, suggesting that these mosque layouts are generally non-distributed. For the other mosque layouts (66.66%) with “ringy” structures, the mean value of R is greater than 1.000, indicating that these layouts are spatially and functionally distributed structures (i.e., having more rings within their configurations) (Table 1). The values of H* for all cases can be obtained from the values of RRA in Table 1. These values are presented as follows. H* is 0.685 for mosques with single dome layouts, 0.744 for mosques with earring layouts, 0.658 for mosques with multiple dome layouts, 0.702 for mosques with duplication dome layouts, 0.562 for mosques with courtyard dome layouts, and 0.695 for mosques with earring dome courtyard layouts. These findings indicate that mosques with courtyard dome layouts have the lowest difference factor value among all types of mosque layouts (Table 2). With regard to space type (i.e., spaceness), Table 3 shows the mean values for the four types of spaces (i.e., a, b, c, and d) in mosque layouts and patterns adopted in the analysis to facilitate comparison. The adopted approach reveals that mosques with courtyard dome layouts are the most important because the values of the c- and d-types of spaces are the highest, whereas the values of the a- and b-types of spaces are the lowest.
    Conclusions Descriptive analysis reveals that the pendentive dome is an important element in the layout design of the Ottoman mosque architecture during the 13th to 15th centuries. The pendentive dome refers to the construction of a dome above the construction system of a dome, creating vast interiors and multiple volume spaces. However, design emphasis is focused not on the dome (except in the single dome layout design) but on the number of square plan units to determine the dimension of prayer halls. A higher number of square plan units used in a layout design correspond to larger prayer halls. Although dome size influences the size of the square plan unit, dome size does not play a significant role in specifying the size of the plan layout. Master builders adopted a hierarchical ordering system by integrating primary, secondary, and tertiary (riwaq) square plan unit modules in the design to specify the dimensions of prayer halls and variations of layouts. The latest design integrates a courtyard that functions as an exterior prayer area with riwaqs at its perimeters. This design concept has led to the development of Cynomolgus ANGPTL7 / Angiopoietin-like 7 Protein (His Tag) the pendentive dome mosque architecture in the later Ottoman period. The following conclusions are drawn based on the space syntax analysis: