多维舒适与设计智慧

范路/FAN Lu

多维舒适与设计智慧

Multidimensional Comfort and Design Wisdom

范路/FAN Lu

维特鲁威在《建筑十书》中认为，人类对火带来舒适的反应，是语言、社区、建筑和艺术的起源。这种看法不免主观，但仍然有力地表明了，提供舒适属于建筑的本质内容与核心目标。因此，本期《世界建筑》就关注当代建筑中对于舒适问题的思考与应对。

今天提及舒适性，最容易想到的便是建筑设备体系。而纵观历史，人们能清晰看到建筑设备演变对建筑发展的影响。在古罗马的许多建筑中，透明玻璃窗的设置，让温暖的阳光照亮了室内。而地暖火坑的发明，在提供温暖的同时消除了室内烟雾，甚至还能加热浴室用水。随着罗马帝国的灭亡，地暖火坑技术也跟着消失了。但在12世纪初的西欧，壁炉与烟囱体系的使用，极大促进了文明的发展。贯穿建筑的烟囱能加热房屋的多个楼层。而多个壁炉能同时加热各个房间，由此产生了更多私密小房间，让房屋内部格局和公共生活发生了变化。

到了第一次工业革命时期，室内环境控制技术有了巨大发展。18世纪末19世纪初，许多英国城市已开始使用煤气灯并建立地下输气管网。而锅炉和蒸汽机，不仅带动了火车头和工厂机械，也使流动蒸汽的管道温暖了詹姆士·瓦特的办公室。此后发展成熟的热水加热系统，已可以使污染性的锅炉房完全移出建筑主体，在使用空间中仅留下散热器与管道。第二次工业革命中的电气化，进一步促进了建筑设备的快速发展。19世纪末20世纪初，白炽灯和荧光灯的使用，为建筑室内带来了前所未有的人工照明。电力风扇和制冷机的发明，让人类在能够制造温暖的同时，还具有了生产凉爽的能力。正是有了这种技术，人们才能够有效应对全玻璃幕墙建筑室内的热负荷。而通过精确控制通风、温度、湿度和照度，人类已经能在建筑室内创造出“人工天气”。还值得一提的是，19世纪末发明的升降电梯和自动扶梯。前者带来了库哈斯眼中摩天楼楼层的“相邻的不连续性”，而后者让人们对室内大型公共空间有了新的体验。

舒适：多少算多？提供舒适的建筑与设备是物，而舒适是人的感受。物的标准易定，而人的感受难测。人性的复杂，带来了多维的舒适感受。

舒适，但建筑给人的舒适却远不止于此。优秀的建筑设计需要合理的功能安排、流线组织、结构类型；恰当的场地应对、风景对话、文脉表达；美好的建筑形式和空间体验。而所有这些基本的建筑设计要求，不也都让人感到舒适吗？在一个过于看重技术手段的时代，难道我们不应该反思，人的舒适到底需要多少技术？正如阿里亚纳·威尔逊在主题文章中所指出的，“在工业社会到来之前，建筑、气候和社会行为在对热舒适性的追求上是互相作用的。建筑应对不同气候的方法具有社会和文化上的双重重大意义：这既表现在建筑的环境适应性上，也融入到了建筑设计中。各个房间在夏季和冬季、白天和夜晚会有不同的使用方式，人们则根据热环境的变化在一栋建筑的朝南侧到朝北侧、底层到顶层中不停移动着。壁炉、阳台、百叶和窗帘、窗洞口和四柱床等与热性能相关的元素同时也成为了建筑中的装饰要素”。而在后现代时期路易·康的建筑哲学中，“服务与被服务”的空间区分，不止为建筑设备找到了藏身之所，更重要的是带来了难以度量的精神舒适。

在维特鲁威的建筑起源传说中，为了不让火熄灭，原始人把原木放到火堆上。这充分说明获得舒适是要消耗能源的。工业革命后，室内环境控制技术的快速发展也导致了建筑能耗的快速增长。自1970年代的石油危机起，人们开始意识到能源的有限和保护地球资源的重要。一方面，建筑的保温节能技术得到快速发展，各个国家开始建立法规控制建筑能耗；另一方面，人们也开始反思现代化的舒适概念。人们从获得简单的生理舒适环境，转而追求更为综合的舒适感。

因为人的舒适需求，才有了建筑设备。然而，就像所有技术一样，该体系自诞生起就有自己的演化逻辑。它要物质般地成长，形成自己的梦想和风格。库哈斯的《垃圾空间》在理论上赋予设备系统以统治地位，而高技派典型作品——巴黎蓬皮杜艺术中心或伦敦的劳埃德大厦——的“设备与管道立面”，则给人们带来了最直接的现实感受。现代技术无限扩张，释放了人内心深处的某种贪婪欲望。但它也在不断损害人的其他感受，甚至是最基本的生理健康。清华大学朱颖心教授的研究表明，“舒适”并不意味着健康。恒温恒湿的中性环境不仅浪费能源，而且对人体健康不利，倒是略为偏离舒适的、对人体有一定刺激作用的环境更加健康。而张昕教授则针对全球人工环境不断变亮的现状，分析用照度作为评价标准的不适用性。进而他从人的“暗感知”出发，构建了面向使用者与东方空间文化的整体式照明设计方法。或许回到本源的舒适，回归人自身，才能更合理地使用技术。

舒适：多少算多？面对多维的舒适要求，又该如何选择？作为从事务实职业的一群人，建筑师需要的不是彻底的虚无主义，也不是简单的量化指标。他们需要的是面对具体问题时的设计智慧，一条整合多个维度的向上的思想之路。本期收录的13个作品各不相同，它们或是城市中的公司总部，或是郊野自然的休憩小屋；或是表现未来的办公空间，或是文明古国的文化遗产。然而在这些不同背后，我都能看到某种面向舒适的设计智慧—— 一种对生理和心理、物质与非物质、个人与环境之间微妙平衡的把握。□

In Vitruvius' De Architectura libri decem (The Ten Books on Architecture), human response to the comfort caused by fire is the origin of language, community, architecture and art. This opinion, though subjective and somewhat arbitrary, convincingly indicates that providing comfort could be regarded as the essence and central purpose. So in this issue we focus on the thoughts and strategies on comfortmaking in contemporary architectural design.

The building services system is most likely to be mentioned when discussing the topic of providing comfort nowadays. And people can recognize clearly the influence which building services evolution made on architecture development during history. In ancient Roman times, clear window glass was used in many buildings which let warm sunlight poured in. The development of hypocaust was also a major innovation then. The heated masonry radiated pleasantly uniform warmth, and smoke was eliminated form occupied spaces. The method was also used to heat water for baths. Although Roman hypocaust heating disappeared with the empire, a new development in interior heating appeared in Western Europe at the beginning of the 12th century. The widespread use of masonry fireplace and chimney promote the development of civilization tremendously. Chimneys penetrating a building could heat multistory spaces and many rooms could have their own fireplaces. By using this heating system, people could acquire more private smaller spaces in a building, which decisively altered the interior spatial arrangement of a house and the communal lifestyle of early medieval times.

Environmental control technologies developed dramatically in the first Industrial Revolution time. From late 18th century to early 19th century, coal gas lighting was brought into use in many British cities and large amounts of underground pipes were laid to form gas distribution network. The development of the steam engine and its associated boilers did not only drive factory machines working or locomotives moving, but also heated James Watt's office with steam running through pipes. In the hotwater heating system fully developed later, only radiators and pipes were localized in occupied spaces and the polluting boiler room could be eliminated out of the main part of a building. In the second Industrial Revolution age, the use of electric power further promoted technologies of building services. In late 19th century and early 20th century, the artificial indoor illumination increased rapidly with the use of incandescent lamps or fluorescent lamps. The invention of powered fans and refrigeration machines empowered people to produce pleasant cooling for the first time. And only with this method of air conditioning, could people deal effectively with the large interior heat loads imposed by the building's all-glass curtain walls. Then people could create complete "man-made weather" by controlling precisely interior temperature, humidity, ventilation and illumination. It is also worth mentioning the invention of elevators and escalators at the end of 19th century. Without high-speed electricpowered roped elevators, Rem Koolhaas would have not discovered the contiguous discontinuity of multistory space in skyscrapers. And on the electricpowered moving staircases, or escalators, people living over a century ago could have a new way of experiencing the large indoor public space.

Comfort: how much is too much? Building services which bring us comfort are physical objects, while comfort belongs to the realm of human feelings. It is easy for us to estimate objects but difficult to evaluate feelings. The complex humanity results in multidimensional feelings of comfort.

Building services can bring us physiological comfort, but architecture may provide much more dimensional comfort. In outstanding architectural design, such elements are always required –reasonable arrangement of function, circulation and structure; appropriate response to site, landscape and context; wonderful experience of form and space. Could it be said that all those fundamental design requirements do not make us comfortable? Living in an age when technological means are too much emphasized, should not we make reflection on how much technology will be needed for us to live comfortably? It is exactly as what Professor Ariane Wilson indicates in her thematic paper. "In pre-industrial societies,architecture, climate and social behaviour interacted in a quest for thermal comfort. Adapting to different climatic situations within a house took on a ritualised social and cultural meaning, which made environmental sense and was translated expressively in building design. Rooms were used differently in summer and winter, daytime and evening, with migrations from the southern to the northern side, from the bottom to the top of the same house, according to thermal conditions. The hearth fire, the loggia, shutters and blinds, window openings and four-poster beds, are all elements of thermal regulation that became elaborate architectural elements". And in Louis Kahn's architectural philosophy in post-modern period, he differentiates "served and servant spaces" which not only finds hiding places for building services but more importantly brings us unmeasurable spiritual comfort as well.

In Vitruvius' story of the origin of architecture, humans kept throwing logs into flames to preserve the fire. So it is quite clear from the story that we have to consume energy to get comfort. Since Industrial Revolutions, rapid progress of environmental control technologies has led to more and more energy consumption. And after the international oil crisis in 1970s, people began to realise the limitation of energy and importance of global resources conservation. On the one hand, technologies of thermal insulation and energy saving have made fast progresses and regulations to control energy consumption are established in many countries. While on the other hand, the notion of modern comfort is challenged. Human's pursuit of environmental comfort had taken a shift from just physical aspect to comprehensive feelings.

Building services are equipped to meet people's demands of environmental comfort. But like all other technologies, this system has been developing with technological logic since its emergence. It has been evolving materially to fulfill its own vision and style. Such as in Junkspace, Rem Koolhaas argued theoretically that building services system had occupied the dominant position in architecture design. And in typical high-tech buildings – Centre Georges Pompidou in Paris or Lloyd's building in London, the "facades of equipment and pipes" have brought us the most realistic feeling of autonomy of building services. Unrestrained development of modern technologies let people indulge in inner greedy desires. But it is deteriorating some other human feelings, even people's fundamental physical health. In Professor ZHU Yingxin's research from Tsinghua School of Architecture, she indicates that "comfort" does not mean health. The kind of stable and neutral indoor environment is not only energywasting but also unhealthy for people. And the mild discomfort thermal environment is likely to be healthier by training human body and keeping its functions. And Professor ZHANG Xin discusses the interior lighting in a similar stance. Based on the current situation that international artificial environment becomes increasingly brighter, he questions the applicability of illuminance standard in lighting design. Then staring from human's "darkness perception", he sets up a methodology of holistic lighting design suitable for indoor occupants and oriental space culture. We can see from these studies that perhaps people may have a more appropriate way of technology utilization when going back to the origin of comfort and human itself.

Comfort: how much is too much? How shall we make a choice in face of multidimensional comfort? As a group of people who engage in a pragmatic profession, architects require neither complete nihilism nor simple quantitative indexes. What they actually need is the design wisdom when dealing with specific architectural problems. It is an ascending path of intelligence which integrates multiple aspects. The thirteen projects presented here in this issue are of great diversity –from headquarters in urban space to isolated houses in countryside, and from future-expressing office space to cultural heritage in ancient civilizations. But beyond the difference, we can discern a common design wisdom which brings us comfort. And it is the intelligence of keeping a more subtle balance between physical and psychological, material and immaterial, individual and environmental factors.□

清华大学建筑学院 /《世界建筑》

2015-07-01