Computer-Aided Design 39 (2007) 5159

www.elsevier.com/locate/cad

The application of fractal geometry to the design of grid or

reticulated shell structures
M.A. Vyzantiadou a , A.V. Avdelas a, , S. Zafiropoulos b
a Department of Civil Engineering, Aristotle University, GR-541 24 Thessaloniki, Greece
b Department of Architecture, Aristotle University, GR-541 24 Thessaloniki, Greece

Received 14 April 2006; accepted 24 September 2006

Abstract
The paper proposes an approach where structural systems can be developed according to the mathematical theory of fractals. Architecture
can take advantage of the complexity sciences, by the use of present day computer technology, where algorithms of mathematical and geometric
functions can produce new motifs of design. In order to demonstrate this, examples of the use of the elliptic and hyperbolic paraboloid, and the
design of a tree on the surface of an elliptic paraboloid, are given. Further, the way to compose relevant algorithms is described.
c 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Fractal geometry; Architectural design; Computer-aided design

1. Introduction
The evolution of non-linear dynamics and the complexity
sciences have extended, in recent years, engineering thought
beyond the basic forms of Euclidean geometry such as
lines, spheres and circles. Architecture can use the hierarchy
of fractal geometry to generate new rhythms in design.
At the beginning of the 20th century, new mathematical
structures were discovered, which were at the time regarded as
exceptional objects that did not fit the patterns of Euclid and
Newton. These new structures were regarded as pathological,
as a gallery of monsters. As shown by Mandelbrot, many
of these monsters do have, in fact, counterparts in the real
world. Mandelbrot introduced, for these shapes in 1975, the
word fractals, derived from the Latin fractus, the adjectival
form of frangere, which means, break into pieces of random
form. Finally, they have been recognized as some of the basic
structures in the language of natures irregular shapes: the
fractal geometry of nature [14].
Fractal shapes can have dimensions between the 0, 1, 2 or 3
to which we are accustomed [5]. Groups of points that follow a
Corresponding address: Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of
Engineering University Campus, Aristotle University, GR-541 24 Thessaloniki,
Central Macedonia, Greece. Tel.: +30 2310 995784; fax: +30 2310 995642.
E-mail address: avdelas@civil.auth.gr (A.V. Avdelas).

c 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

0010-4485/$ - see front matter
doi:10.1016/j.cad.2006.09.004

line are fractal dust, which have a dimension between 0 and 1, a

terrain has dimensions greater than 2 but less than 3, and crosssections through terrains generate fractal lines with dimensions
between 1 and 2 [6], but they are described in either 2-manifold
patterns or 3-d structures. Fractals are self-similar, which means
that each part of a structure is similar to the whole shape at
many different scales. The Koch curve, for example, is exactly
self-similar, but if a little bit of randomness is introduced, as
in a coastline, the object might be statistically self-similar or
self-affine (Fig. 1). Thus, seemingly, random and transformed
shapes can repeat themselves across scale, and are thus fractals
in the formal sense. The self-similarity dimension D, which is
given by the power relation between the number of pieces and
the reduction factor is:
a = 1/(s) D = (1/s) D .

(1)

Thus, D = log a/ log (1/s),

(2)

where a is the number of pieces and s is the reduction factor. For

nonfractal structures, the exponent D is an integer. For example,
if a line is divided in 3 equal parts using a reduction factor of
(1/3), then relation (1) becomes:
3 = 1/(1/3) D = 3 D ,

and

D = 1.

(3)

52

M.A. Vyzantiadou et al. / Computer-Aided Design 39 (2007) 5159

Fig. 1. The Koch curve and its generator.

But in a typical fractal scheme, e.g. in the Koch curve, the

scaling factor is (1/3), and the number of pieces is 4 [4,7]:
Thus, D = log a/ log (1/s) = log 4/ log 3 = 1.26.

(4)

Any form that is self-similar is likely to be fractal. If there is

a regular motif or design, which repeats itself as the structure
grows or scales through time or across space, then the
structure can be envisaged as a hierarchy, and thus a fractal
organization is a hierarchical organization [6]. Self-similar
shapes can be found in nature, from trees to galaxies [7]. Since
some of them are quite complex, computerized algorithms are
often used in order to render realistic models. In this context,
several procedural techniques have been established. Among
a variety of methods, PL-systems (Parametric Lindenmayer
Systems) are capable of producing images of objects that have a
more or less repetitive structure, such as plants, terrains, shells,
crystals, branching structures or even buildings [2,8,9].
In the past few years, computers have helped with the application of fractals in many sciences: Physics, Biology, Mechanics etc. Architecture also, concerned with the control of rhythm,
can benefit from the use of this relatively new mathematical
tool. The fractal dimension provides a quantifiable measure of
the mixture of order and surprise in a rhythmic composition [7].
2. Fractal geometry in architecture
Fractal geometry in architectural composition is related to
the formal study of the progression of interesting forms, from
the distant view of the facade to the intimate details [7].
Under this concept, significant periods in architecture, such
as the Classical or Art Nouveau, tend to be explicitly fractal,
since the buildings of these areas are characterised by the
progression of self-similar details from large to small scales,
and by mathematical subdivisions. The houses of Frank Lloyd
Wright provide an example of this progression of detail from
the large to the small. He often referred to the central idea that
coordinated the design, and this idea came from nature [7].
The roofline of the Robie house by Frank Lloyd Wright has

self-similar textural characteristics, though of a limited range

of scale. It eventually flattens into straight lines, Fig. 2(a).
However, there is a progression of interesting detail if one
approaches the buildingfor example, in the window mullion
pattern, there is a smaller detail to be seen, Fig. 2(b).
Some contemporary buildings approach the idea of fractal
architecture by reintroducing both curvatures and subdivisions
at different scales, or a self-similar structure of the same motif,
thus producing complexity and formal variety. In this way,
there exist structures that do not show a self-similar repetition
of a module, as e.g. the work of Mies van der Rohe, but a
subtle variation, like the petals of a fern or a snowflake. Some
examples that can be mentioned are: The Guggenheim Museum
in Bilbao by Frank Gehry, where 26 self-similar petals of a
metallic flower are unfolded, twisted and curved, generating
a formal and spatial geometry. The Arms Storey Hall in
Melbourne, where pentagon metallic patterns form a selforganising and simultaneously chaotic system in the internal
and external space, is another example Fig. 3(a) [10,11]. These
fractal shapes are the development of the Penrose tiling pattern
into an order that connects facade, floor, walls and ceiling into a
single ornamental system. Roger Penrose created an aperiodic
tiling system, using a fat and thin rhombus, which, however far
it is extended, never results in a cyclical pattern. This unusual,
self-organizing order was later discovered to exist in nature,
in quasicrystals [12]. The Federation Square project designed
by the Lab and Bates Smart Architecture Studio, where the
facade, is based on the geometry of a triangular pinwheel grid,
making up a self-similar panel of five single triangles. This
modular system is repeated across two scales, Fig. 3(b) [13].
Another aspect is the inspiration of forms from nature
and biology as sources for creativity in design, which is also
related with the notion of fractals in architecture. For example,
the work of Gaudi originates the organic development of
contemporary architecture [14], and expresses a new sculptural
form consisting of continuous self-similar patterns inspired
from nature.
For many centuries, a variety of forms, which in many cases
present fractal geometry in their structural appearance, such as
trees, cells, crystals etc., have been creatively used by architects
and engineers in projects like shells, light structures, arcs, tents,
nets and bridges. Examples by Otto and Calatrava are given in
Fig. 4 [1517].
Although there are several ways to connect fractal concepts
with architecture, this idea leads to the question of how
complicated forms of design could give information for
fabrication using the advantages of contemporary computer
technology. Generally, if an enclosure is to be constructed as
a non-linear structure with curved lines, there are three ways
for the geometry to be chosen: (1) the sculptural, an approach
based on free-form artistic sculpting, (2) the physical, a method
based on a physical modelling process, such as hanging cables
or sheets and (3) a procedural, generative approach, based on
a composition of mathematical functions [18]. Gaudi used the
second way of hanging models, which, when inverted, defined
the shape of masonry arches and vaults for the Colonia Guell
and the Sagrada Familia. Frei Otto used also this method

M.A. Vyzantiadou et al. / Computer-Aided Design 39 (2007) 5159

53

Fig. 2(a). Robie house by Frank Lloyd Wright.

Fig. 2(b). Robie house by Frank Lloyd Wright, the window mullion pattern.

to produce forms for fabric structures, cable nets and grid

shells [18]. In the last method, the desired shapes and designs
can be produced by computer programs, and the limit of
curves and surfaces depends on the mathematical knowledge
and the imagination of the user [18,19]. The generation of
the geometric design of the British Museum Great Court roof
is a contemporary example of the use of a new algorithm
based on functions, weighted and added together (Fig. 5) [18,
20]. This shell structure, constructed with a complex shape
design, contains no two bars or meshes that are exactly alike. It
was created thanks to the use of high-performance computers,
specialized software, and to the use of sophisticated planning
and technology [21]. In addition, the technique of Geometric
Substitutions can be mentioned as a geometric automatic
method that uses simple concepts of geometric and topological
transformations in order to build details on an initial simple
shape, and to thus create finally complex models [22].
This paper follows the mathematical and geometrical path,
by applying a set of rules of nonlinear transformations to simple
shapes in a repetitive way, in order to create models close to the
fractal notion.

Fig. 3(a). The Arms Storey Hall in Melbourne.

3. Generation of fractal, dome-shaped shells

The approach proposed here uses mathematical procedures
in the computer language C++ in order to produce elliptical,
dome-like sells. The results are 3-d designs accessible to further
manipulation. The compilation of these programs produces
each time an .exe file in DOS, or a file in Windows, where
the user can choose the basic dimensions, degree of scaling,
curvature, size etc. The program asks the user for:
the number of points on the periphery
the number of rings

Fig. 3(b). The Federation Square, Bates Smart and the Lab Architecture Studio,
Melbourne.

the number of periods of the waves along the radial distances

the width of the band of the z-level along the radial distance
and
the big Axial-A and the big Axial-B.
In this way, the automatic repetition of motives and designs
in different scales is effective. The representations of the plans

54

M.A. Vyzantiadou et al. / Computer-Aided Design 39 (2007) 5159

Fig. 4(a). The skeleton of marine protozoa (radiolarian).

Fig. 5. The glass roof over the courtyard of the British Museum in London, by
Foster and Partners Internal view.

Fig. 4(b). The Heart Tent, Frei Otto, Riyadh.

Fig. 6(a). A Serre at La Villette by P. Rice in Paris.

Fig. 4(c). Galleria and Heritage square, S. Calatrava, Toronto.

are obtained through DXF files, which can be transformed into

.dwg files in AutoCAD, or in other drawing programs.
These drawings represent shells that are organized by
an evolutionary and hierarchical process in space, which is
inspired by nature, as for example in a wave periodical
movement or a tree formation. The variety of structural systems
of steel and glass that exist nowadays give further possibilities
for the construction of shells. Especially the point-fixed glazing
system, which follows a hierarchical process, is proposed here
as an ideal structural frame for fractal shapes.

Applications of point-fixed glazing systems range from

simple structures, such as shop windows and shelters, to more
complicated ones, such as multi-storey buildings and large
atria. Although there are different types of point-fixed glazing
systems, each one of them consists of four basic components.
These main components may be defined as follows: glazing
panels, bolted fixings, glazing support attachments and the
main support structure [23]. In these systems, the geometrical
configuration and the structural performance are important
aspects in the architectural composition, and follow a
hierarchical process (e.g. the Serres of the National Museum
of Science, Technology and Industry at La Villette in Paris
by Peter Rice), which in several cases is described from the
geometry of fractals, Fig. 6(a), [24].
Following this system, the geometry of the shells is related
to the manufacturing and construction system, whereas the

55

M.A. Vyzantiadou et al. / Computer-Aided Design 39 (2007) 5159

Fig. 7(a). Elliptic paraboloid.

4. The elliptic paraboloid and hyperbolic paraboloid

shapes

Fig. 6(b). Point-fixed glazing system: axonometric, scale 1.

To generate computerized fractal forms, geometric shapes

have been used as a basis. Such examples are the elliptic
paraboloid (e.p.) and the hyperbolic paraboloid (h.p.) shapes,
Figs. 7(a) and 8(a) respectively. They are based on the following
mathematical relations.
The e.p. and h.p. for the Euclidian space E 3 are respectively
described by
Elliptic paraboloid :

y2
x2
+
2z = 0,
a2
2

Hyperbolic paraboloid :

x2
y2

2z = 0.
a2
2

(5)
(6)

The Cartesian coordinates x and y for a point on the surface of

the e.p. or h.p., at a level
z = z0

are given as

x = j cos( i)
y = j sin( i).

Fig. 6(c). Point-fixed glazing system: axonometric, scale 2.

supporting system, the static analysis and the progressive

morphological subdivision of the structural components are
important parameters in the generation of self-similarity. The
dimensions of the various lines, as they are computed by the
program, can be used in practice as dimensions of the various
components of the structural system.
In order to examine whether the idea of the creation of
an organized hierarchical process, by the use of the point
fixed glazing systems, is possible in practice, an algorithm has
been created that simulates an existing structure with a fractal
hierarchy in its supporting system: the facade of a Serre at
La Villette by P. Rice in Paris. The structural system of this
building can be used as a model, and be applied to the shells,
which are described further, or to other similar ones, Figs. 6(b)
and 6(c) [25].
Therefore, these examples exploit a new design technique,
which applies the idea of fractal geometry in 3-d structures.
The geometrical configuration, the structural morphology and
the hierarchical subdivision of the support system generate a
new architectural expression [2527].

and

(7)
(8)

where i = 1, 2, . . . Num Points, and is the angle of rotation

around the axis zz 0 [0 , 360 ], which depends on the number of
points (Num Points) the user gives along a ring. A ring is every
level z that subtracts, from the surface of the e.p. or h.p., a curve
of the Euclidian space E 3 . The user gives the number of rings
(Num Rounds)
2
360
or =
.
(9)
Num Points
Num Points
The coefficients j and j represent the axes of the ellipse. The
following relations give their values
=

j
(10)
Num Rounds
j
j =
,
(11)
Num Rounds
where j = 1, 2, . . . Num Rounds
and , are the axes of the ellipse of the biggest ring, because
for
j = Num Rounds then j and j .
In the program, is the value of Big Axial-A, and is the value
of Big Axial-B.
By substituting relations (9) and (10) into relations (7) and (8),
the following coordinates are obtained


j
x =
cos ( i) ,
(12)
Num Rounds
j =

56

M.A. Vyzantiadou et al. / Computer-Aided Design 39 (2007) 5159

Fig. 8(b). Hyperbolic paraboloid with wave.

Fig. 7(b). Elliptic paraboloid with wave.

Fig. 8(c). Hyperbolic paraboloid with wave Front view.

have along the total number of rings. Above every 2-rings of the
original mesh, a parameterized height is added. These heights
vary according to the following function:
2 Num Periods
.
(19)
Num Rounds
The coordinates x, y, z are obtained by combining Eqs.
(12)(18)


j
x =
cos ( i) ,
(20)
Num Rounds


j
y=
sin ( i) ,
(21)
Num Rounds

2  
q
j
1
2
2

z = B +
sin ( j) ,
Num Rounds
2
for the e.p.
(22)
=

Fig. 8(a). Hyperbolic paraboloid.

y=

j
Num Rounds

sin ( i) ,

(13)

z = z0.

(14)

The level z is written as

 2

y2
x
+
2
2
a

, for the e.p. and

z=A
2
 2

y2
x

2
2
a

z=A
, for the h.p.
2

(15)

The coefficient A is given by

q
A = B a2 + 2,

or
(16)

(17)

where B is the scale factor of the axis zz 0 that produces different

levels for the same axes and .
The complexity of the model can be increased if a variable
equation is added in order to give a wave form along the
axis zz 0 . The simple e.p. and h.p., Figs. 7(a) and 8(a), are
transformed to fractal forms by the introduction of the angle
of the wave. The height of the wave depends on the distance of
the wave from the centre of the ellipse and on the number of
periods along the axis of the ellipse, Fig. 7(b), 8(b) and 8(c).
These shapes are similar to the waves created in water when a
stone is thrown.
In this case, Eq. (17) is written as
q
A = B a 2 + 2 sin( j),
(18)
where j = 1, 2, . . ., Num Rounds.
Angle depends on the number of rings (Num Rounds) and
on the number of periods (Num Periods) the user chooses to

2
j
Num Rounds
!
2
cos ( i) sin2 ( i)
sin ( j) ,

z = B

2 + 2

for the h.p.,

where i = 1, 2, . . . Num Points, j = 1, 2, . . . Num Rounds.

5. A tree on the surface of an elliptic paraboloid
In this section, the structural and geometrical transformation
of the surface of an elliptic paraboloid based on a tree fractal
configuration [28], Fig. 9, is studied. The evolution of the tree
system generates two different models, depending on the rule
that is applied for the development of the model. So e.g. factor
2 (relation (28)) and factor 2+ (relation (29)) give different
results, as shown in Figs. 10 and 11 respectively. In order
to produce the design representations of these 3-d shells, the
following rules and mathematical formulas have been used:
As it has been described in the previous section, the elliptic
paraboloid scheme is given by Eq. (5). On the above surface,
a suitable number of points are chosen, so that a tree form
is produced. To achieve this, the coordinates of the elliptic
paraboloid are estimated in relation to the angle of rotation
around the axis z, Eq. (9), and the number of levels z.

M.A. Vyzantiadou et al. / Computer-Aided Design 39 (2007) 5159

57

Fig. 11(a). Tree on the surface of an elliptic paraboloid. Model of arithmetical

progression-Axonometric, view 1.

Fig. 9. Generation of the tree fractal.

Fig. 10(a). Tree on the surface of an elliptic paraboloid. Model of geometrical

progression.
Fig. 11(b). Tree on the surface of an elliptic paraboloid. Model of arithmetical
progression-Axonometric, view 2.

Fig. 10(b). Tree on the surface of an elliptic paraboloid. Model of geometrical

progression Front view.

The Cartesian coordinate z, that represents each time one ring

(level z), is parameterized according to the number of rings
(Num Rounds) the user instructs the algorithm to develop, and
is estimated by the paraboloid equation
z = a x 2 + b x + c,
where x i = 1, 2, . . . , Num Rounds.

(23)

The user has to select the appropriate values for the coefficients
a, b and c.
For a given value of the coordinate z (level z), which has
been estimated by Eq. (23), and according to the equation of
the elliptic paraboloid, Eq. (5), the parametric equations of the
Cartesian coordinates x and y result in
x = z cos( j)

and

(24)

Fig. 11(c). Tree on the surface of an elliptic paraboloid. Model of arithmetical

progression View from below.

y = z sin( j),
where j = 1, 2, . . ., Num Points.

(25)

58

M.A. Vyzantiadou et al. / Computer-Aided Design 39 (2007) 5159

On both the above relations, parameter is given as

previously, Eq. (9).
The coefficients z and z represent the axes of the ellipse.
Their values are given by the following functions
p
(26)
z = 2 |z| and
p
z = 2 |z|,
(27)
where z and z are the axes of the ellipse of the ring whose
|z| = 1/2, and thus z = and z = . In the program,
is the value of Big Axial-A and is the value of Big Axial-B,
which are chosen by the user.
The user has also to select the number of points on each
ring. This parameter is different for each ring (level) and
different models can describe the method of transformation. In
the present case, the following models are chosen:
5.1. Model of geometrical progression, Figs. 10(a) and 10(b)
Num Points(i + 1) = 2 Num Points(i),

(28)

where i = 1, 2, . . ., Num Rounds, with the following initial

values
Num Points(0) = 1

and

Num Points(1) = 2.

5.2. Model of arithmetical progression, Fig. 11

Num Points(i + 1) = 2 + Num Points(i),

(29)

where i = 1, 2, . . ., Num Rounds, with the following initial

values
Num Points(0) = 1

and

Num Points(1) = 2.

The coordinates x, y, z are obtained by combining Eq. (5) with

Eqs. (24)(27) and the following Eq. (32)


q
2
j , (30)
x = 2 |a i 2 + b i + c| cos
Num Points


q
2
2
y = 2 |a i + b i + c| sin
j , (31)
Num Points
z = a i 2 + b i + c,

(32)

where i = 1, 2, . . ., Num Rounds and j = 1, 2, . . .,

Num Points.
Fractal geometry is observed in the tree form of the surface.
The more the number of rings is increased, the more subdivisions and points on each ring are taken (either by geometrical progression or by arithmetical progression). In Fig. 10,
the number of points in each level is twice the number
in the previous level. The triangles are similar in each
level, and they can be either glass panels, or other materials with a steel frame system, or they can represent a
reticulated supporting system as a point-fixed glazing system with cables. It must be noted that the model of geometrical progression is morphologically better than the model
of arithmetical progression. The complex scheme of Fig. 11
could be a basis for a spiral building.

6. Conclusions
The new geometry, the geometry of Nature, has opened
new routes in science, economics, urban-planning, biology
etc. This geometry has recently influenced architecture also.
The proposed computational method produces algorithms
using fractal mathematics, and can generate forms applicable
to shells. Modern building technology can support such
applications, e.g. it has been applied for the construction of
the glass roof of the atrium in the British Museum, where
each different node and bar was constructed according to the
dimensions given by a computer program [20].
Considering the development of recent technologies in
design and building construction, and the introduction of
complex new forms in the architectural design, a new
architectural mode of expression is generated.
This new morphology is produced digitally, according to
the algorithmic potential of software programs, the structural
performance of the building materials, the support systems and
users demand. The applications of this method are unlimited,
given the enormous capacities of computer technology, and the
possibilities for form generation are stretched far beyond the
limits of purely manual techniques. They are variable, since
they are used either for the whole building design or for parts
of the construction, e.g. the roof or the profile of a wing, the
roofs of atria, the cladding of a facade, or space installations like
pavilions, shelters, tents, domes etc., and in large-scale planning
like the design of a plaza or small-scale design like the pattern
of a pavement.
Therefore, this idea is used for further improvement of the
design of shells and other larger scale projects that arise in
architecture or the engineering sciences. The benefit of such an
approach is that when an algorithm is suggested for a structure,
then the whole project is analysed and determined in such a
way that every rule it contains can be fully described for
example, the coordinates of each node, or the dimensions of
each bar. The result is a spatial structure providing a system
with technological coherence and aesthetic value, rather than
merely an interesting prototype. The challenge for the architects
and the engineers is to be inspired by the computer results,
either by simplifying the undesirable complexity involved, or
by using in their design small parts of the whole computer
product, applicable in real projects, that can be realised using
new materials and modern structural technology.
References
[1] Mandelbrot B. The fractal geometry of nature. New York: Freeman & Co;
1983.
[2] Peitgen HO, Saupe D. The science of fractal images. New York: SpringerVerlag; 1988.
[3] Artemiadis N. The geometry of fractals. Proceedings of the Academy of
Athens 1988;63:479500 [in Greek].
[4] Peitgen HO, Jurgens H, Saupe D. Fractals for the classroom. New York:
Springer-Verlag; 1992.
[5] Ho MW. The new age of the organism. Architectural Design 1997;
67(910):4451.
[6] Batty M, Longley P. The fractal city. Architectural Design 1997;67(910):
7483.

M.A. Vyzantiadou et al. / Computer-Aided Design 39 (2007) 5159

[7] Bovill C. Fractal geometry in architecture and design. Boston: Birkhauser;
1996.
[8] Prusinkiewicz P. Graphical applications of L-systems. In: Proceedings on
graphics interface86/Vision interface86. 1986. p. 24753.
[9] Traxler C. Representation and realistic rendering of natural scenes with
directed cyclic graphs, http://www.cg.tuwien.ac.at/research/rendering/
csg-graphs/Description.html; 1998.
[10] Jenks C. Nonlinear architecture. Architectural Design 1997;67(910):7.
[11] Jenks C. Architecture 2000 and beyond. Great Britain: John Wiley &
Sons; 2000.
[12] Jenks C. Landform architecture. Architectural Design 1997;67(910):
1531.
[13] Lab and Bates Smart. Urban regeneration. The Architectural Review
2003;1275:5563.
[14] Giedion S. Space, time and architecture. Cambridge (MA): Harvard
University Press; 1982.
[15] Otto F, Rasch B. Finding form. Stuttgart: Axel Menges; 1995.
[16] Blanco M, editor. Santiago Calatrava. Athens: National Gallery and
Museum Alexandros Soutzos; 2001.
[17] Portoghesi P. Nature and architecture. London: Thames & Hudson; 2000.
[18] Williams CJK. The definition of curved geometry for widespan structures.
In: Barnes M, Dickson M, editors. Widespan roof structures. London:
Thomas Telford; 2000.

59

[19] Nsugbe EAO, Williams CJK. The generation of bone-like forms using
analytic functions of a complex variable. Engineering Structures 2001;
23(1):228.
[20] Williams CJK. Design by algorithm. In: Leach N, Turnbull D, Williams C,
editors. Digital tectonics. UK: Wiley-Academy; 2004.
[21] Lehmann R. Nodal stiffness of structures. In: Behling SS, editor. Glass,
structure and technology in architecture. Munchen: Prestel; 1999.
[22] Glassner AS. Geometric substitution: A tutorial. Computer Graphics and
Applications, IEEE 1992;12(1):2236.
[23] Ryan P, Otlet M, Ogden RG. Steel supported glazing systems. UK: Steel
Construction Institute; 1997.
[24] Rice P, Dutton H. Structural glass. UK: E&F Spon; 1995.
[25] Vyzantiadou MA, Avdelas AV. Point fixed glazing systems: Technological and morphological aspects. Journal of Constructional Steel Research
2004;60:122740.
[26] Vyzantiadou MA. Interaction of glass and steelexamination of function
and morphology by the use of fractal geometry. Doctoral thesis.
Thessaloniki: Aristotle University of Thessaloniki; 2004 [in Greek].
[27] Vyzantiadou MA, Zioupos G, Avdelas AV. Fractal geometry and steel
structures. In: Hoffmeister B, Hechler O, editors. Proceedings of the
4th eurosteel conference 2005 on steel and composite structures. 2005.
Aachen: Mainz GmbH; 2005; vol. A:1.8-171.8-24.
[28] Barnsley M. Fractals everywhere. Boston: Academic Press; 1998.