Journals / ICONARP International Journal Of Architecture And Planning / 2021 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 1

Comparative Analysis of Axial Map Drawing Methods: Elazığ Application

Pages
173–191
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Besides, for the first time, three drawing techniques were compared and discussed in this study.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose There are three basic methods used for creating axial maps in Space Syntax studies.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Accurately analysingwide 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/ApproachThe above mentioned three methods used for creating axial maps are compared in the study in terms of the period, morphological similarity, and analysis results.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Besides, for the first time, three drawing techniques were compared and discussed in this study.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

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 mostreliable one, and other methods used in drawing axial maps. The other purposes of the study are analysingthe features of methods used in creating axial maps, presenting the advantages and disadvantages of these methods, and comparing the methods. Accurately analysingwide 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/ApproachThe 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. FindingsThe 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/ImplicationsManuel Drawing takes a very long time. Therefore, only one application city (Elazig) could be selected in the study.Social/Practical ImplicationsThe 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/ValueIn 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.

🔖

Cite This Article

Şıkoğlu, E. (2022). Comparative Analysis of Axial Map Drawing Methods: Elazığ Application. ICONARP International Journal Of Architecture And Planning, Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 1, 173–191. https://ajindex.com/articles/538236

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Al_Sayed K. (2018).
  2. 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.
  3. Canpolat F. A. (2019). İmarPlanlarınınKentselAraştırmalardaKullanımı, II. Uluslararası Sosyal Bilimler ve İnovasyon Kongresi, Bildiriler Kitabı, 26-27 Nisan 2019,
  4. Elazığ. Czerkauer-Yamu, C. (2010).
  5. 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 OkumaAracıOlarakMekanDizimAnalizininKuramsalveYöntemselTartışması, MEGARON, YTÜ mim. Fak. E-Dergisi, Cilt 1, Sayı,4, s. 218-233,
  6. İzmir.
  7. 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,
  8. Ankara.
  9. 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,
  10. Santiago de Chile. Graham, M. (2010). Neogeography and the palimpsests of placeWeb 2.0 and The Construction of Avirtual Earth. TijdschriftvoorEconomischeenSocialeGeografie, 101(4), 422-436.
  11. Haklay, M., Weber, P. (2008). OpenStreetMap: user-generated street maps. Pervasive Computing, IEEE, 7(4), 12-18.
  12. 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.
  13. Hillier, B. (1999a). Centrality as a process: accounting for attraction inequalities in deformed grids’, In Urban Design International, vol. 4, p. 107-127.
  14. 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.
  15. Jiang, B. (2013). Volunteered geographic information and computational geography: new perspectives, in Sui, D., Elwood, S. & G