COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF AXIAL MAP DRAWING METHODS: ELAZIĞ APPLICATION

Authors

  • Emrah Şıkoğlu

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2021.155

Abstract

Purpose

There are three basic methods used for creating axial maps in Space Syntax studies. Manual drawing is the first and most grounded method. The second method is the production of automatic axial maps with a tool, known as the Axial Map in the Depth Map program. The third and most modern method is the use of lines named Road Center Line (RCL). The primary goal of this study is to reveal the relationship between manual drawing, which is the first method used in creating axial maps and still regarded as the most reliable one, and other methods used in drawing axial maps. The other purposes of the study are analysing the features of methods used in creating axial maps, presenting the advantages and disadvantages of these methods, and comparing the methods. Accurately analysing wide spaces such as urban settlements and supporting Space Syntax studies for preventing drawing differences resulting from users in manual drawings are the other goals of this study.

Design/Methodology/Approach

The above mentioned three methods used for creating axial maps are compared in the study in terms of the period, morphological similarity, and analysis results. Analyses are carried out in Depth MapX and the MapInfo program is used for arrangements.

Findings

The manual drawing method is the most time consuming one while the RCL maps technique is the least time-consuming. Automatic drawing creates the axial maps based on the very same rules, which makes it the closest technique to the traditional drawing method in terms of textural similarity. However, it is believed that both automatic drawing and RCL need improvement.

Research Limitations/Implications

Manuel Drawing takes a very long time. Therefore, only one application city (Elazig) could be selected in the study.

Social/Practical Implications

The practitioner who wants to decide which of these methods to choose can decide this by looking at this study. He/she can also have an idea of what to pay attention to when using the methods.

Originality/Value

In this study, three different axial map-drawing techniques were applied to a city. Besides, for the first time, three drawing techniques were compared and discussed in this study.

Author Biography

Emrah Şıkoğlu

Emrah Şikoğlu (PhD) is currently working as an assistant professor at FU Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Geography Department. His researches mainly focus on Urbanization, Space Syntax, GİS and Behavioural Geography.

References

Al_Sayed K. (2018). Space Syntax Methodology, Bartlett School of Architecture, UCL.

Atak, Ö. (2009). Mekan Dizim ve Görünür Alan bağlamında Geleneksel Kayseri Evleri. (Unpublished master’s thesis). İTÜ Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul.

Canpolat F. A. (2019). İmarPlanlarınınKentselAraştırmalardaKullanımı, II. Uluslararası Sosyal Bilimler ve İnovasyon Kongresi, Bildiriler Kitabı, 26-27 Nisan 2019, Elazığ.

Czerkauer-Yamu, C. (2010). Space Syntax Understanding, Hiller’s Concept of a Spatial Configuratiın and Space Syntax Analysis, Unıversite de Franche-Comte, Unıversity College London, İngiltere.

Çil,E.(2006). Bir Kent Okuma Aracı Olarak Mekan Dizim Analizinin Kuramsal ve Yöntemsel Tartışması, MEGARON, YTÜ mim. Fak. E-Dergisi, Cilt 1, Sayı,4, s. 218-233, İzmir.

Çil, E. (2008). Kula Tarihsel Kentinin Yirminci Yüzyıldaki Fiziksel Dönüşümünün Mekan Dizim Analiziyle İncelenmesi, Gazi Üniv. Müh. Mim. Fak. Dergisi, Cilt: 23, No: 2, s. 283-293, Ankara.

Dalton, N. S. (2001). Fractional configuration analysis and a solution to the Manhattan problem, In Peponis,J., Wineman, J., Bafna, S. (eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd International Space Syntax Symposium, Atlanta, U.S.A.: Georgia Institute of Technology, p.26.1-26.13klay

Dhanani A., Vaughan L., Ellul C., Griffiths S. (2012). From the axial line to the walked line: evaluating the utility of commercial and user‐generated street network datasets in space syntax analysis, Eighth International Space Syntax Symposium, p.8211: 1-32, Santiago de Chile.

Graham, M. (2010). Neogeography and the palimpsests of placeWeb 2.0 and The Construction of Avirtual Earth. Tijdschriftvoor Economischeen Sociale Geografie, 101(4), 422-436.

Haklay, M., Weber, P. (2008). Open Street Map: user-generated street maps. Pervasive Computing, IEEE, 7(4), 12-18.

Hillier, B., and Iida, S. (2005). Network effects and psychological effects: A theory of urban movement, In Van Nes, A. (ed.), Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Space Syntax, Delft: University of Technology Vol.1, p.553-564.

Hillier, B. (1999a). Centrality as a process: accounting for attraction inequalities in deformed grids’, In Urban Design International, vol. 4, p. 107-127.

Hillier, B. (1999b). The hidden geometry of deformed grids: Or, why space syntax works, when it looks as though it shouldn’t, In Environment and Planning B: Planning & Design, Vol. 26, p.169-191.

Jiang, B. (2013). Volunteered geographic information and computational geography: new perspectives, in Sui, D., Elwood, S. & Goodchild, M. (eds.), Volunteered Geographic Information in Perspective, Springer: Berlin, 125-138.

Jiang, B., Claramunt, C.,Klarqvist, B. (2000). An integration of space syntax into GIS for modelling urban spaces. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 2, 161-171.

Jiang, B., Claramunt, C. (2002). Integration of Space Syntax into GIS: New Perspectives for Urban Morphology, Transactions in GIS, Cilt: 6, Sayı: 3, s. 295-309, USA.

Klarqvist, B. (1993).A Space Syntax Glossary, Nordisk Arkitekturfoskning, 2th Edition, Norway.

Kolovou I., Gil J., Karimi K., Law S., Versluis L. (2017). Road Centre Lıne Sımplıfıcatıon Prıncıples For Angular Segment Analysıs, Proceedings of the 11th Space Syntax Symposium, Chapter 165: p.1-16, Lisbon.

Long, Y., Baran, P. K., Moore, R. (2007). The role of space syntax in spatial cognition: evidence from urban China. Processing of 6th International Space Syntax Symposium, Chapter 129: p.1-6, Istanbul.

Liu, X., Jiang, B. (2011). Defining and Generating Axial Lines from Street Center Lines for better Understanding of Urban Morphologies, Preprint, arxiv. org/abs/1009,5249.

Omer I., Kaplan N., Jiang B. (2017). Why Angular Centralities Are More Suitable For Space Syntax Modeling? ,Proceedings of the 11th Space Syntax Symposium, Chapter 100: p.1-12, Lisbon.

Özkan Özbek, M. (2007). Fizik Mekan KurgularınınSosyal İlişkiler Üzerinden Arnavutköy Yerleşimi Bütününde Mekan Dizimi (Space Syntax) Yöntemi İle İncelenmesi, Mimar Sinan Güzel Sanatlar Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Şehircilik Ana Bilim Dalı, DoktoraTezi, İstanbul.

Pezicca C., Cutini V., Bleıl De Souza C. (2019), Rapid Configurational Analysis Using Osm Data:Towards the use of Space Syntax to orient post-disaster decision making. Proceedings of the 12th Space Syntax Symposium, Chapter 147: p.1-18, China.

Stavroulakı G., Marcus L., Pont M. B., Nilsson L. C. S. (2017). Representations of Street Networks in Space Syntax: Towards Flexible Maps and Multiple Graphs, Proceedings of the 11th Space Syntax Symposium, Chapter 175: p.1-16, Lisbon.

Steadman P. (2004). Developments in space syntax, In Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, Vol31, p.483- 486.

Sun X. (2013). Comparative Analysis of Urban Morphology: Evaluating Space Syntax and Traditional Morphological Methods, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Industrial Development, IT and Land Management, Degree project thesis, Master, Gavle, Sweden.

Turner A., Penn A. İ., Hillier B. (2005). An Algorithmic Definition Of The Axial Map, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, volume 32, pages 425-444.

Turner, A. (2007). From axial to Road Center Line: A new representation for Space Syntax and a new model of route choice for transport network analysis. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, volume 34(3):539–555.

Downloads

Published

21-06-2021

How to Cite

Şıkoğlu, E. (2021). COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF AXIAL MAP DRAWING METHODS: ELAZIĞ APPLICATION. ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning, 9(1), 173–191. https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2021.155

Issue

Section

Articles