Biomimicry-Based Design of Temporary Structures Inspired by Birds Nest Architecture: A Case Study of Exhibition and Emergency Relief Spaces

Kazemi, Shabnam; Nouri, Abdollah

doi:10.22034/ijumes.2025.736087

Biomimicry-Based Design of Temporary Structures Inspired by Birds Nest Architecture: A Case Study of Exhibition and Emergency Relief Spaces

Document Type : Case Study

Authors

Shabnam Kazemi ¹

Abdollah Nouri ²

¹ Department of Architecture, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

² Department of Architecture, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

10.22034/ijumes.2025.736087

Abstract

Temporary architectural structures, particularly those deployed in exhibition and emergency relief contexts, demand a convergence of structural performance, ecological sensitivity, and rapid adaptability. This study examines the application of biomimicry principles derived from bird nest architecture as a design strategy for optimizing temporary structures. Bird nests represent one of nature's most sophisticated structural systems, integrating material efficiency, adaptive geometry, resilience under dynamic loading, and ecological compatibility within a unified organizational logic. The primary objective of this research is to empirically evaluate the relative influence of ten biomimetic design criteria encompassing structural efficiency, lightweight construction, adaptability, environmental responsiveness, material optimization, rapid assembly and modularity, spatial integration, sustainability, computational design capability, and resilience on the overall performance of temporary biomimicry-based structures. A quantitative research methodology was employed using Structural Equation Modeling with Partial Least Squares estimation (SEM-PLS) in SmartPLS software. Data were collected through a structured five-point Likert-scale questionnaire distributed among 220 architects, structural engineers, biomimicry researchers, and temporary architecture specialists, yielding 198 valid responses. Bootstrapping with 5,000 subsamples confirmed the statistical robustness of all path coefficients. Findings reveal that Resilience and Structural Stability (β = 0.61), Sustainability and Ecological Performance (β = 0.56), and Adaptability and Flexibility (β = 0.52) are the three most influential predictors of biomimetic performance. The model demonstrated strong explanatory power (R² = 0.79) and confirmed predictive relevance (Q² = 0.51). These results provide empirically grounded guidance for architects and engineers seeking to integrate avian nest-inspired structural logic into the design of high-performance, ecologically responsible temporary environments.

Graphical Abstract

Biomimicry-Based Design of Temporary Structures Inspired by Birds Nest Architecture: A Case Study of Exhibition and Emergency Relief Spaces

Highlights

· Resilience and Structural Stability (β = 0.61) is the strongest predictor of biomimicry-based temporary structure performance, reflecting the biological logic of interwoven, load-distributing avian nest systems.

· Sustainability and Ecological Performance (β = 0.56) and Adaptability and Flexibility (β = 0.52) together account for the dominant variance in overall architectural performance, confirming that ecological embeddedness and morphological adaptability are core design imperatives.

· The SEM-PLS model explains 79% of variance in overall performance (R² = 0.79) with confirmed predictive relevance (Q² = 0.51), demonstrating strong explanatory and predictive power of the proposed biomimetic framework.

· All ten independent constructs achieve statistical significance (p < 0.001) with t-values ranging from 4.96 to 11.37, validating the comprehensive influence of bird-nest-inspired design principles on temporary structure performance.

· Spatial Integration and Connectivity (β = 0.29) represents the least operationalized principle, identifying a critical gap and productive direction for future biomimetic design research and experimental prototyping.

Keywords

Adaptability

Bird Nest Architecture

Biomimicry

Computational Design

Emergency Relief Structures

PLS-SEM

· AlAli, M., Mattar, Y., Alzaim, M. A., & Beheiry, S. (2023). Applications of biomimicry in architecture, construction and civil engineering. Biomimetics, 8 (2), 202. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics8020202

· Contreras, G. S., Lezcano, R. A. G., Fernández, E. J. L., & Gutiérrez, M. C. P. (2023). Architecture learns from nature: The influence of biomimicry and biophilic design in building. Modern Applied Science, 17 (1), 58–70. https://doi.org/10.5539/mas.v17n1p58

· Cruz, E., Blanco, E., Aujard, F., & Raskin, K. (2022). Has biomimicry in architecture arrived in France? Diversity of challenges and opportunities for a paradigm shift. Biomimetics, 7 (4), 212. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics7040212

· Dixit, S., & Stefańska, A. (2023). Bio-logic, a review on the biomimetic application in architectural and structural design. Ain Shams Engineering Journal, 14 (1), 101822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2022.101822

· Fatima, K. (2024). Sustainable and resilient architecture: Prioritizing climate change adaptation. Civil Engineering and Architecture, 12 (1), 577–585. https://doi.org/10.13189/cea.2024.120141

· Ilieva, L., Ursano, I., Traista, L., Hoffmann, B., & Dahy, H. (2022). Biomimicry as a sustainable design methodology—Introducing the ‘Biomimicry for Sustainability’ framework. Biomimetics, 7 (2), 37. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics7020037

· Jamei, E., & Vrcelj, Z. (2021). Biomimicry and the built environment: Learning from nature’s solutions. Applied Sciences, 11 (16), 7514. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11167514

· Linnemann, S. K., Friedrichs, L., & Niebuhr, N. M. (2024). Stress-adaptive stiffening structures inspired by diatoms: A parametric solution for lightweight surfaces. Biomimetics, 9 (1), 46. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics9010046

· Othmani, N. I., Mohd Yunos, M. Y., Ramlee, N., Abdul Hamid, N. H., Mohamed, S. A., & Yeo, L. B. (2022). Reviewing biomimicry design case studies as a solution to sustainable design. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29 (46), 69327–69340. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-22342-z

· Phocas, M. C., Christoforou, E. G., & Matheou, M. (2023). New perspectives in architecture through transformable structures: A simulation study. Frontiers in Built Environment, 9 , 1051337. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2023.1051337

· Siddique, S. H., Hazell, P. J., Pereira, G. G., Wang, H., Escobedo, J. P., & Ameri, A. A. H. (2023). On the mechanical behaviour of biomimetic cornstalk-inspired lightweight structures. Biomimetics, 8 (1), 92. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics8010092

· Street, S. E., Jaques, R., & De Silva, T. N. (2022). Convergent evolution of elaborate nests as structural defences in birds. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 289 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2022.1734

· Verbrugghe, N., Rubinacci, E., & Khan, A. Z. (2023). Biomimicry in architecture: A review of definitions, case studies, and design methods. Biomimetics, 8 (1), 107. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics8010107

· Zhu, G., Fialho Teixeira, F., & Loh, P. (2025). Parametric FEM-based analysis on adaptive vein morphology of dragonfly wings toward material efficiency. Biomimetics, 10 (12), 799. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics10120799