This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
BUILDING DESIGN Javaria Shaikh – Healthcare Lab, Hangyang University Korea

Passive architectural morphology design

Daylight is a physical aspect for rehabilitation design as it creates a soothing and healing environment for leprosy patients. Focusing on an Asian lepers rehabilitation centre, this article observes the dominance of Evidence- Based Design (EBD) for the rehabilitation of leprosy patients. Since these centres promote healing for highly challenged patients with weak limbs, the classic element on health benefits applied here is daylight. This research shows the effects of the I-type, C-type, L-type, U-type and O-type plan design. The case study focuses on universal designs located at Munghopir Karachi, in Pakistan.

Literature suggests that exposure to natural light provides a positive impact on human health and the wellbeing of leprosy patients. The rehabilitation centres in the study are efficiently functional leprosy centres working as ecologically sustainable healing centres at Manghopeer. The centres are occupied all year round and all activities are conducted both in summer/winter and day/night. The aim is, therefore, to minimise utilisation of electricity and to maximise the use of full spectrum natural light by providing sky lights, windows and sun screens in the corridors. Searching for an answer to the question

‘What explains movement toward the health accessibility?’1

led to the study of leper’s

rehabilitation morphology with continuous and unobstructed orientation. Hence the following statement below best describes this paper:

‘The typo-morphology, C-type, L-type,

U-type and O-type can provide same or even more (i.e. variable degree) level of comfort (vitamin E) for lepers’ in the rehabilitation buildings as that of high energy consumption healthcare setting’.

Methodology and data collection objective A three-month quasi-survey was conducted, on site by the author. The patients were invited to participate in a questionnaire regarding the aesthetics of the rehabilitation centres in relationship to the healing and


wellbeing among the patients. The study was approved by the privacy ombudsman for the research at the Lepers Rehabilitation. Comprehensive results were obtained by

using questionnaire–based interviews, field surveys data analysis and computable models to review the importance of depth, and connectivity of height and width morphologies. Moreover the questionnaire replies were evaluated on the models generated on the space syntax software. The existing building plans of I-type, C-type, L-type, U-type and O-type circulation were analysed, and the limitations, compromises and problem reductions were studied. More than 100 answers were statistically

analysed. Key findings are the quantitative observation and opinion with the data of daylight in the ward environment with regard to vision comfort and increase of patient sleep quality. For social and physical healing, and for practical consideration, an effective design that reduced the need to walk long corridors and distance for supply and medication.2

Along the outskirts of Karachi the annual

temperature remains slightly above or slightly below the thermal comfort zone that is average comfortable 25°C.3

This is a

comfortable and acceptable temperature for lepers, making this the ideal position for rehabilitation centres, and patients from all around Asia join these centres. Surprisingly, not many studies have examined the role of width to depth for the typology of the healthcare building. Further, very few studies have examined the healing effects that views can have for leprosy patients. The O typo-morphology is a courtyard design, which won an Aga Khan Award for Architecture at the, Lepers Hospital, Chopda Taluka, India.4

Limitation of previous research There is a gap for the universal design typo-morpho analysis. Few studies have dealt with the comparative analysis of morphologies based on the Asian concept of front yard, back yard and courtyard rehabilitation centres. These typologies reflect Ulrich’s proposal that a view towards natural elements serves

‘Exposure to natural light provides a positive impact on human health and the wellbeing of leprosy patients.’

to evoke positive emotions and helps manage stress. This paper examines for the first time how healing and soothing leprosy patients can be increased by studying the role of the building plan in terms of airiness, sun path, axial access and connectivity to the environment. Demonstrating the determinants for the existing building plan of I, C, H, L and O on depth map analysis software.

Typo-morphological analysis While designing simple spaces for lepers it is important to have a healing environment which is a complementary treatment, present in all five shapes. A healing environment adds a therapeutic contribution to living space for the course of care for lepers. For this study the healing environment is achieved by applying EBD of five simple strategies – sort, straightening, sunshine standardised, and sustain for the typo- morpho- analysis.

5S analysis determinants • The first determinant is the concept of rational alignment of living spaces to

Javaria Manzoor Shaikh

Javaria Manzoor Shaikh is a PhD student at Healthcare Lab, Hangyang University Korea. Previously, she completed Erasmus Mundus EMDiReB (European Masters of Building Repair and Diagnosis), from Universidad de Sevilla (Spain), Università degli Studi Mediterranea di Reggio Calabria (Italy) and Politechnika Lubelska (Poland). She gained a Master of Architecture (Low Energy House) from the University of Engineering and Technology UET, Lahore and Bachelors of Architecture (Low-rise Apartment) from Indus Valley School of Art and Architecture, Clifton Karachi. She has already published 10 books. Currently she is researching on space syntax modeling for Korean prototype for ICU (Intensive Care Unit) at Junglim.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100