多維舒適與設計智慧

范路/FAN Lu

多維舒適與設計智慧

Multidimensional Comfort and Design Wisdom

范路/FAN Lu

維特魯威在《建筑十書》中認為，人類對火帶來舒適的反應，是語言、社區(qū)、建筑和藝術的起源。這種看法不免主觀，但仍然有力地表明了，提供舒適屬于建筑的本質內容與核心目標。因此，本期《世界建筑》就關注當代建筑中對于舒適問題的思考與應對。

今天提及舒適性，最容易想到的便是建筑設備體系。而縱觀歷史，人們能清晰看到建筑設備演變對建筑發(fā)展的影響。在古羅馬的許多建筑中，透明玻璃窗的設置，讓溫暖的陽光照亮了室內。而地暖火坑的發(fā)明，在提供溫暖的同時消除了室內煙霧，甚至還能加熱浴室用水。隨著羅馬帝國的滅亡，地暖火坑技術也跟著消失了。但在12世紀初的西歐，壁爐與煙囪體系的使用，極大促進了文明的發(fā)展。貫穿建筑的煙囪能加熱房屋的多個樓層。而多個壁爐能同時加熱各個房間，由此產生了更多私密小房間，讓房屋內部格局和公共生活發(fā)生了變化。

到了第一次工業(yè)革命時期，室內環(huán)境控制技術有了巨大發(fā)展。18世紀末19世紀初，許多英國城市已開始使用煤氣燈并建立地下輸氣管網。而鍋爐和蒸汽機，不僅帶動了火車頭和工廠機械，也使流動蒸汽的管道溫暖了詹姆士·瓦特的辦公室。此后發(fā)展成熟的熱水加熱系統(tǒng)，已可以使污染性的鍋爐房完全移出建筑主體，在使用空間中僅留下散熱器與管道。第二次工業(yè)革命中的電氣化，進一步促進了建筑設備的快速發(fā)展。19世紀末20世紀初，白熾燈和熒光燈的使用，為建筑室內帶來了前所未有的人工照明。電力風扇和制冷機的發(fā)明，讓人類在能夠制造溫暖的同時，還具有了生產涼爽的能力。正是有了這種技術，人們才能夠有效應對全玻璃幕墻建筑室內的熱負荷。而通過精確控制通風、溫度、濕度和照度，人類已經能在建筑室內創(chuàng)造出“人工天氣”。還值得一提的是，19世紀末發(fā)明的升降電梯和自動扶梯。前者帶來了庫哈斯眼中摩天樓樓層的“相鄰的不連續(xù)性”，而后者讓人們對室內大型公共空間有了新的體驗。

舒適：多少算多？提供舒適的建筑與設備是物，而舒適是人的感受。物的標準易定，而人的感受難測。人性的復雜，帶來了多維的舒適感受。

舒適，但建筑給人的舒適卻遠不止于此。優(yōu)秀的建筑設計需要合理的功能安排、流線組織、結構類型；恰當的場地應對、風景對話、文脈表達；美好的建筑形式和空間體驗。而所有這些基本的建筑設計要求，不也都讓人感到舒適嗎？在一個過于看重技術手段的時代，難道我們不應該反思，人的舒適到底需要多少技術？正如阿里亞納·威爾遜在主題文章中所指出的，“在工業(yè)社會到來之前，建筑、氣候和社會行為在對熱舒適性的追求上是互相作用的。建筑應對不同氣候的方法具有社會和文化上的雙重重大意義：這既表現在建筑的環(huán)境適應性上，也融入到了建筑設計中。各個房間在夏季和冬季、白天和夜晚會有不同的使用方式，人們則根據熱環(huán)境的變化在一棟建筑的朝南側到朝北側、底層到頂層中不停移動著。壁爐、陽臺、百葉和窗簾、窗洞口和四柱床等與熱性能相關的元素同時也成為了建筑中的裝飾要素”。而在后現代時期路易·康的建筑哲學中，“服務與被服務”的空間區(qū)分，不止為建筑設備找到了藏身之所，更重要的是帶來了難以度量的精神舒適。

在維特魯威的建筑起源傳說中，為了不讓火熄滅，原始人把原木放到火堆上。這充分說明獲得舒適是要消耗能源的。工業(yè)革命后，室內環(huán)境控制技術的快速發(fā)展也導致了建筑能耗的快速增長。自1970年代的石油危機起，人們開始意識到能源的有限和保護地球資源的重要。一方面，建筑的保溫節(jié)能技術得到快速發(fā)展，各個國家開始建立法規(guī)控制建筑能耗；另一方面，人們也開始反思現代化的舒適概念。人們從獲得簡單的生理舒適環(huán)境，轉而追求更為綜合的舒適感。

因為人的舒適需求，才有了建筑設備。然而，就像所有技術一樣，該體系自誕生起就有自己的演化邏輯。它要物質般地成長，形成自己的夢想和風格。庫哈斯的《垃圾空間》在理論上賦予設備系統(tǒng)以統(tǒng)治地位，而高技派典型作品——巴黎蓬皮杜藝術中心或倫敦的勞埃德大廈——的“設備與管道立面”，則給人們帶來了最直接的現實感受?，F代技術無限擴張，釋放了人內心深處的某種貪婪欲望。但它也在不斷損害人的其他感受，甚至是最基本的生理健康。清華大學朱穎心教授的研究表明，“舒適”并不意味著健康。恒溫恒濕的中性環(huán)境不僅浪費能源，而且對人體健康不利，倒是略為偏離舒適的、對人體有一定刺激作用的環(huán)境更加健康。而張昕教授則針對全球人工環(huán)境不斷變亮的現狀，分析用照度作為評價標準的不適用性。進而他從人的“暗感知”出發(fā)，構建了面向使用者與東方空間文化的整體式照明設計方法。或許回到本源的舒適，回歸人自身，才能更合理地使用技術。

舒適：多少算多？面對多維的舒適要求，又該如何選擇？作為從事務實職業(yè)的一群人，建筑師需要的不是徹底的虛無主義，也不是簡單的量化指標。他們需要的是面對具體問題時的設計智慧，一條整合多個維度的向上的思想之路。本期收錄的13個作品各不相同，它們或是城市中的公司總部，或是郊野自然的休憩小屋；或是表現未來的辦公空間，或是文明古國的文化遺產。然而在這些不同背后，我都能看到某種面向舒適的設計智慧—— 一種對生理和心理、物質與非物質、個人與環(huán)境之間微妙平衡的把握?！?/p>

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.□

清華大學建筑學院 /《世界建筑》

2015-07-01