人体与城市空间再连接——阅读工具和设计实践

米凯利·博尼诺，马塔·曼奇尼/Michele Bonino, Marta Mancini

邓慧姝 译/Translated by DENG Huishu

1 引言

尽管存在不同的本体论概念和文化视角，但人体在建筑和城市空间的概念中始终扮演着重要的角色。空间，反过来，应对了人类的生理、心理和社会需求，塑造了居住和生活的方式。

1994年，社会学家理查德·塞尼特就现代建筑师和城市规划专家的“职业失败”展开了辩论。塞尼特批评他们越来越无法促进身体的整体性感知，以及在当代城市中具身空间体验的扁平化。尽管他的考虑基于西方背景，但今天的全球化动态已经在世界各地引发了类似的城市挑战，导致人类身体和设计空间之间的分离状况反复出现。

如何界定这种“分离”？如何从“分离”走向“高品质”的生活空间？本文介绍了一些设计工具和实践，作为策略和案例研究，以提出一种“通过”身体来看待设计空间的新方式。

本段简要介绍3年联合研究的情况。2017年，意大利都灵理工大学和中国清华大学的学者团队合作建立了“人体与城市空间”的联合研究项目。基于该项目产生的理论和设计成果，其研究目标是在新兴的城市人因工程学框架内，定义以人为中心概念下的建筑和城市空间研究工具和设计方法。

2 身体和空间：一种“分离”的关系

纵观历史，人体的中心地位或多或少是明确的和直接的。在欧洲语境中，拟人主义和维特鲁威美学将建筑美的概念塑造在均衡的人体比例上。文艺复兴时期和后来的现代主义理论都借鉴了这些概念来实现一个理想化的身体模型，试图定义一系列普遍适用于建筑的和谐尺寸[1-2]。在1960年代，这种想法受到了社会学研究和知觉研究[3-5]的挑战，它流入了建筑和城市领域，并促进了设计的转变：从美学和功能转向“集合感官、形式、身体和图像的实践”[6]。尽管有这种渐进的变化，但理论思维转化为建筑空间的过程仍然延迟了，现在的城市继承了并在某些情况下仍在产生“分离的”空间：即与人体缺乏积极联系的空间[7]。

这种“分离”的根源可以追溯到19世纪欧洲出现的早期工业化和相应的城市化。尽管城市已经存在，但这些进程导致了对居住地区建筑形式的深刻重组。工厂成为新的城市有机体核心，生活的其他细节都服从于它[8]。城市变成了不健康的地方，河流变成了露天的下水道，工人阶级的生活空间也缺乏有益健康的保证[9]。几十年之后，工业化与城市动态在不同的地缘政治背景下，在集中化与分散化、趋同与重新定位之间发展。它导致了现有城市空间的改造和新空间的产生，日益增强了城市与人体的分离: 即与人体尺度无关的空间，在这些空间中视觉刺激占主导地位，身体体验被扁平化（图1）。

历史学家和城市规划学家多纳泰拉·卡拉比在1979年观察到，城市规划作为一门学科（1859-1913）的早期方法是根据对“城市疾病”[10]的应对而构思产生的。它暗示了身体和城市疾病之间的隐喻对应。此外，城市规划学科的发展与公共卫生体系的成熟有关:两者都旨在保持城市和人体的健康[9]。

17世纪威廉·哈维关于血液循环和呼吸的研究发现为理解人体提供了一种新的方式，而这反过来又影响了城市形态和功能的概念。开明的规划者将生物概念与有关个人、商品和金钱流动的资本主义思想相结合，试图将城市塑造成一个人们可以自由穿行于城市动脉[7]的场所。后来，现代主义又重申了类似的原则。勒·柯布西耶和CIAM在1933年的《雅典宪章》中提出了“功能城市”的理念，在生活、工作、休闲和交通这四大城市功能[11]的基础上引入了城市标准和分区（图2）。大多数欧洲国家的道路建设都是由公共资金资助的，这促进了以汽车为中心的无障碍交通和交通工具的泛滥[9]。从基础设施出发的城市空间使速度体验成为可能: 身体移动不再有障碍，但也失去了与城市空间的物理接触。功能性的城市规划和公共卫生一度促使了身体从抵抗和害怕与建筑空间进行接触性互动中脱离出来，因为这些接触被认为是潜在的疾病原因。因此，建筑和城市环境日益加深了“感官剥夺”和“触觉贫瘠”[7]（图3）。

今天，快速的交通工具和技术设备过滤了人与建筑环境之间的接触。然而，对身体作用的新关注，将人因工程学研究从建筑延伸到城市尺度，从功能主义性目的延伸到更综合的目的，可能产生一种构思和设计城市的新方式：从以人为中心的角度理解建筑和城市空间。克里斯蒂娜·比安切蒂在其著作《空间与项目之间的身体》（图4）中指出：“城市项目一直关注的是身体，但总将身体置于其临界边界的边缘……。如果设计就是设计身体和空间的关系，那么设计意味着什么？”[12]

3 移动的身体：研究和工具

社会学家和城市学家提出的空间问题在建筑领域的现象学和知觉研究中得到了第一次回应。施泰因·埃勒·拉斯姆森（《体验建筑》，1959）、诺伯格·舒尔兹（《场所精神：迈向建筑现象学》，1979；《居住的概念》，1985）的著作以及最近的彼得·卒姆托（《思考建筑》，1998；《建筑氛围》，2006）的著作有助于培养对人体更全面的理解，增强其与空间的内在关系（图5-7）。

尤哈尼·帕拉斯玛在《肌肤之目：建筑与感官》（1996）一书中指出：“建筑清楚地表达了我们在这个世界上的体验，加强了我们的现实感和自我意识。（它）使我们从完整的具身化和精神实体的角度来体验自己”[13]。不过，他也认为，视觉在西方世界的历史突出性导致了身体与周围的设计空间的距离。对非视觉感官的抑制产生了一个加深分离和异化的建筑环境，一个剥夺了感官品质的建筑。相反，设计师应该通过触觉系统更好地将人体与空间结合起来。

人因工程学研究有助于对人体进行测量，为建筑设计和产品设计提供参考依据。然而，空间和功能图示已经形成了一个静态的规范主体，一个不考虑空间创造性参与的标准化度量模型。通常，人因工程学以几何形式关注人体周围的可居住空间，从而对它们之间的积极关系有更广泛的理解。如何挑战并丰富这一观点？

尽管在文化、社会和个人方面存在差异，但人类通常共享相似的生理结构。身体是与空间、建筑、城市和其他人进行互动的手段，它使运动成为可能，并塑造着我们对自身和周围世界[14-16]的认知。作为人类，我们通过对自己的具身化了解到占据空间是什么感觉，我们通过运动的方式来体验空间[17]。运动使主体在表面和物体之间建立深度关系，构成空间的概念。

与西方建筑理论不同的是，基于持久性和稳定性[18]，本文提出通过一种对人体运动进行考察的独特的视觉方法来看待空间。身体运动分析图可以作为研究现有空间和提取空间数据的操作工具。目的是研究人体空间相互作用的微妙的和潜在的动态关系，并将其转化为显性知识。

图8显示了贯穿都灵理工大学-清华大学联合研究项目的身体-空间关系概念的三维图式。身体运动可以用速度来描述，换句话说，是测量身体/物体位置变化率的矢量，是时间的函数。事实上，正如布鲁诺·赛维所论证的那样，时间是建筑的本质，它使人能够移动，从而理解空间[19]。将时间、空间和作为第三个维度的“身体”系统化，旨在传达人体运动的概念。它们共同构建了人类的空间体验。进而，通过这张三维图的阐述，探讨了构成身体、空间和时间的子因素。它们分别被分解成身体感知的层次、空间交互的尺度、被测量或被个人感知的时间，并被详细分析。

身体是运动和建筑理念之间的中介。身体-主体根据个人需要移动，并在途中或多或少创造性地接触一个空间。“空间是运动的隐藏特征，运动是空间的可见部分。”[20]通过将身体例举为一个棍状图形，我们的目标是建立一种具象的视觉语言，它可以作为一种工具来“解读”人们通过设计空间的特征所建立的隐含动态。

1960年代，编舞师鲁道夫·拉班编纂了“拉班记谱法”，这是最常用的动作评分方法之一。他描绘了人体及其沿着6个轴和面的运动，这些轴和面被嵌入一个球体和一个立方体中，也就是所谓的“个人空间球”（kinesphere）：“身体周围的球体，它的外围可以被伸展的四肢轻易地从我们的支撑或站立的地方到达。”[20]（图9）这个身体模型成为一种清晰的象征性视觉语言的基础，它允许记录整个舞蹈动作。然而，拉班记谱法关注的是身体部位的动力学，而很少考虑它们的空间作用。空间被认为是次要的空场舞台，直接与躯干的宽度和四肢的运动联系在一起。因此，我们的想法是利用个人空间球的图解表现方式，并通过对身体更全面的理解来重新阐述它，给它的物质化增加知觉的维度。

重新诠释的个人空间球不仅包含了身体的有形空间性，还包含了6个被选出的瞬时的感知层次。每一层次都以一种独特的、系统的方式被处理和进一步研究。从内到外，它们对应着：平衡，与身体姿势有关；本体感觉或身体姿势；动觉，指在运动中思考；触觉或触感表面的知觉；听觉；视觉。前4个共同构成触感系统。这种方法旨在解构西方静态的几何概念，提出一种更全面的“通过”身体来诠释空间的方式。

总之，运动分析图和知觉体验图有助于识别影响身体-空间关系的关键空间要素，并创造新的显性知识。对身体运动表现的系统化和深入分析(这里仅作简要介绍)有可能支持空间设计向更以人为中心的概念发展，推动传统的人因工程学原则在多个尺度上对身体-空间关系的广泛理解。

4 接触身体：设计实践

在为期3年的都灵理工大学-清华大学联合研究项目中，理论思维与设计策略一起发展，最近的建筑项目是将研究工具转化为设计策略的实践机会。

2019年深圳城市建筑双城双年展关注“城市之眼”的主题[21]。策展人旨在探讨在新科技的推动下，城市关系如何从人与人之间的关系演变为人与城市之间的关系；即一个现在能够“看”、感知并因此能够互动的城市。

展出的项目主要致力于人们与城市空间建立的视觉关系，这受到了面部识别等新技术的青睐。然而，一些装置也考虑了其他的感觉。临时装置“城市肌肤”是都灵理工大学-清华大学合作的成果（图10）。该装置详细阐述了帕拉斯玛的“肌肤之目”概念，其由182个传感器覆盖，可以记录游客身体对装置进行物理接触的次数[22]。这个实验的目的是研究什么样的城市空间类型更能吸引身体与之互动。空间和表面的不同结构提供了探索和挑战身体意识和物理能力的可能性。装置作品将“城市之眼”的主题诠释为城市空间获得触觉能力、变得敏感和善于接受信息的可能性。通过触摸量的记录来揭示空间与人体的接触，并对其进行实时显示，旨在解决新兴领域“城市人因工程学”的主要问题之一：哪种类型的城市空间更受青睐，与人体的接触更多？

深圳双年展让我们有机会从设计的角度来思考城市人因工程学的一些主要原则。“城市之眼”双年展传统上致力于优化室内空间或家具，这是第一次有机会将人因工程学原则“释放”到更广泛的城市公共规模。在上述理论阐述的基础上，通过对现有实际案例的研究，导出了城市人因工程学作为以人为中心的空间概念建立的4个主要原则：

室内/室外：城市人因工程学旨在关注人体的能力，直觉地创造对功能的解释和对空间限制因素的解决方案，创造性地协调内部和外部空间。人体的这些特性对于将人因工程学释放到外部空间是至关重要的。遵循这一概念，在对都灵附近的一些谷仓的改造（2012）中，MARC工作室设计了现存建筑的剖面，让日常的身体活动（如坐、运动、工作）发生在内外之间的界限上，模糊了边界（图11）。

人工/自然：与传统的人因工程学相比，城市人因工程学可以从自然的形态中学习到很多东西，典型的是使外形和材料有机地适应人体的节奏和需要。在这方面，在都灵的多拉公园项目（2007-2011）中，彼得·拉茨描述了工业遗产的人工元素和新的自然元素之间强烈的互动方式，使旧工厂的空间高度人性化（图12）。

个人/集体：如果说传统的人因工程学主要是关于个人身体的问题，那么城市人因工程学首先是关于许多身体之间的关系（身体的、视觉的、心理的），即市民的身体。由Heatherwick Studio 在纽约设计的“Vessel”项目（2019），是在45m高的开放空间中最大化人的视觉和身体关系的例子，促进了对城市空间的身体探索（图13）。

形状/空间：身体与城市的关系并不仅仅通过表面和材料的接触，而是通过一种更复杂的关系。与传统人因工程学相比，城市人因工程学的目标是更加关注空间的概念。作为参考，藤本壮介在其为东京NA住宅（2015）设计的项目中，创造了身体与空间关系的宣言，其在不同高度布置了21个平台，并向城市开放（图14）。

在过去的3年里，我们作为都灵理工大学中国室研究中心（China Room Research Center）的成员，受清华大学的邀请，为北京2022冬奥会首钢滑雪大跳台场馆区域的旧制氧厂进行了合作改造[23]。由于设计主题涉及体育运动，并需要将巨大的工业建筑调整为符合人体尺度的结构，我们有机会对上面讨论的一些原则进行实验。

我们的设计理念是开放原有的工业建筑，使其能够向公众渗透。首层成为整个项目的关键空间：一个有顶的运动场，聚集人群并使公众参与体育活动和户外运动（图15）。首层的设计将“人”置于建筑话语的核心，克服了对空间的几何性理解，为使用者提供了与城市空间的多重潜在互动关系。人们在室内和室外（在屋顶下却是户外的）、自然和人工（在工厂仅离水域几米远）、个人和集体（在小而“家庭式”的空间中却流畅地相互连接）之间找到了自己的位置。他们体验运动场柔软的曲面，同时感受沉浸式的空间维度（图16）。人们的存在激活了漂浮体量下的区域，与这个空间的“游戏性”保持一致。通过这种方式，改造后的建筑成为身体-空间创造性接触的载体，激发了互动和愉悦，嵌入了城市人因工程学旨在促进和培育高品质生活的关键特征。□

1 意大利都灵菲亚特林格托工厂的卫星图像，突出了工业厂房在城市肌理中的比例失调/Satellite image of FIAT Lingotto,Turin, Italy. Highlight of industrial plant"s out-of-scale proportions within the urban fabric （图片来源：Google Maps）

1 Background

Despite different ontological notions and cultural perspectives, the human body has always played an essential role in the conception of architectural and urban spaces. Space, in turn, has dealt with human physical, psychological, social needs, shaped to dwell and to be lived in.

In 1994 sociologist Richard Sennett debated about the "professional failure" of modern architects and urbanists. He criticised them for being increasingly unable to foster bodily sensory holism and for flattening embodied spatial experiences in contemporary cities. Although his considerations referred to the Western context, today"s global dynamics have led to similar urban challenges all over the world, causing a recurring condition of detachment between human bodies and designed spaces.

How to frame this "detachment"? How to evolve from "detached" towards "high-quality" living spaces? A number of design tools and practices are here presented as strategies and case studies,proposing a new way of looking at designed space"through" the body.

The following text proposes a synthetic outline of the main topics investigated throughout a threeyear academic research. In 2017 a team of scholars from Politecnico di Torino (including the authors of this paper) and Tsinghua University collaborated to set up the Joint Research Project "Human body and urban space". Among the theoretical and design outcomes that have originated from the project,the objective has been to define tools and design approaches towards a human-centred conception of architectural and urban space, within the emerging frame of Urban Ergonomics.

2 Body & Space: A "Detached" Relationship

Throughout history, the centrality of the human body has been more or less explicit, more or less direct. In the European context, anthropomorphism and Vitruvian aesthetics moulded the concept of architectural beauty on the proportional balance of the human body. Renaissance and, later, modernist theories drew on these notions to implement an idealised bodily model that attempted to define a range of harmonious measurements, universally applicable to architecture[1-2]. In the 1960s, this thinking was challenged by social and sensory studies[3-5]that flowed into architecture and urban disciplines and fostered a transition in design: from aesthetics and functionality towards "practices that assemble senses, forms, bodies and images."[6]Despite this gradual change, theoretical thinking has delayed to translate into built space and nowadays cities inherit and, in some cases still produce, "detached" spaces: spaces that lack of active connection with the human body[7].

The roots of this "detachment" can be traced back to early industrialisation and related urbanisation that first took place in Europe in the 19thcentury. Although cities already existed, these processes led to a deep restructuring of the way built-up areas where lived. "The factory became the nucleus of the new urban organism. Every other detail of life was subordinate to it."[8]Cities turned into unhealthy places, where rivers became openair sewers and the living spaces of the working class did not guarantee salubrity[9]. A few decades apart, industrialisation evolved along with urban dynamics in different geopolitical contexts, between centralisation and decentralisation, convergence and relocation. It led to the transformation of existing urban spaces and the production of new ones, increasingly enhancing the detachment from human bodies: spaces with no relation to human scale, where the visual stimuli dominated, flattening encompassing body experiences (Fig. 1).

Historian and urbanist Donatella Calabi observed in 1979 that the early approach to urban planning as a discipline (1859-1913) was conceived in terms of response to the "sickness of the city"[10].It implied a metaphorical correspondence between body and urban illness. Moreover, the developing discipline of urban planning was associated with the maturation of public health: both aimed to maintain healthyurbanandhumanbodies[9].

2 勒·柯布西耶与“模量”，在他位于法国巴黎Sèvres街35号的办公室，1959年/Le Corbusier and the "Modulor" in his office, 35 Rue de Sèvres, Paris, France, 1959（©Rene BURRI）

William Harvey"s discoveries in the 17thcentury about blood circulation and respiration provided a new way of understanding the body that, in turn, influenced the conception of urban form and functioning. Enlightened planners coupled such biological notions with capitalistic ideas concerning the movement of individuals, goods and money, and sought to shape the urban as a place where people could move freely through the city"s arteries[7].Later on, Modernism reclaimed similar principles.TheAthens Charter(1933) by Le Corbusier and CIAM advocated the idea of the Functional City,introducing urban standards and zoning, based on living, working, recreational functions and circulation[11](Fig. 2). Road building was publicly financed in most European countries, promoting car-centred accessibility and the overflow of bodies in motion[9]. Infrastructural urban spaces made the experience of speed possible: bodies moving with no obstruction, but also, with no physical engagement.Functional urban planning and public health boosted, at once, the body"s freedom from physical resistance and fear of touching-interacting with architectural space, as a potential cause of disease.Consequently, buildings and urban environments increasingly deepened "sensory deprivation" and"tactile sterility"[7](Fig. 3).

To d ay, fast means o f trans p or t and technological devices filter the engagement between people and the built environment. Yet,new emerging attention to the role of the body,extending ergonomic studies from architectural to urban scale, from functionalist purposes to more integrated ones, could lead to an original way of conceiving and designing the city: a human-centred understanding of architectural and urban space.In the bookCorpi tra spazio e progetto(Bodies between Space and Project), Cristina Bianchetti observed: "The urban project has always been concerned with bodies, but has kept the body at the edge of its critical perimeter […]. What does it mean to design, if design is to design the relationship between body and space?"[12](Fig. 4)

3 理查德·森内特,《肉体与石头：西方文明中的身体与城市》，1994年；详见参考文献[7]/Richard SENNETT, Flesh and Stone: The Body and the City in Western Civilization, 1994.See to Reference[7]

4 克里斯蒂娜·比安切蒂，《空间与工程之间的身体》，2020年；详见参考文献[12]/Cristina BIANCHETTI, Corpi tra spazio e progetto, 2020. See to Reference[12]

5 诺伯格·舒尔茨，《居住的概念: 通往具象建筑的道路》，1985年/Christian NORBERG-SCHULZ, The Concept of Dwelling:On the Way to Figurative Architecture, Rizzoli, 1985

7 尤哈尼·帕拉斯玛，《皮肤之眼：建筑与感官》， 2005年；详见参考文献[13]/Juhani PALLASMA, The Eyes of The Skin:Architecture and The Senses, 2005. See to Reference[13]

3 The Moving Body: Research and Tools

Spatial questions raised by sociologists and urbanists have found a first respond in phenomenological and sensory studies carried out in the field of architecture. The work of Steen Eiler Rasmussen (Experiencing Architecture,1959), Christian Norberg-Schulz (Genius Loci,Towards a Phenomenology of Architecture,1979;The Concept of Dwelling, 1985) and, more recently, Peter Zumthor (Thinking Architecture,1998;Atmospheres: Architectural Environments,Surrounding Objects, 2006) have contributed to foster a more comprehensive understanding of the human body and enhance its intrinsic relationship with space. (Fig. 5-7)

8 人体运动维度图/Diagram of bodily movement dimensions（绘制：Marta MANCINI）

Drawing on existentialist and phenomenological thinking, Juhani Pallasmaa inThe Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses(1996) claimed:"Architecture articulates the experience of our beingin-the-world and strengthen our sense of reality and self. (It) makes us experience ourselves as complete embodied and spiritual essence."[13]Nevertheless, he also argued that the historical prominence of sight in the western world has caused the distancing of the body from the surrounding designed space. The suppression of non-visual senses has generated a built environment that deepens detachment and alienation, an architecture deprived of sensory qualities. Designers, instead, would better integrate the body in space by addressing its haptic system.

Ergonomics studies have contributed to measure the body and make it a reference for architectural and product design. However,dimensional and functional diagrams have codified a static normative body, a model of standardised measures that does not consider any creative engagement with space. Typically, ergonomics focuses on the immediate habitable space around the body in geometrical terms, leaving behind a wider understanding of their active relationship.How to challenge and enrich this viewpoint?

Despite cultural, social and personal differences,human beings generally share a similar biological structure. The body is the means of action and interaction with space, with architecture, with the city, with others. It enables movement and shapes the resulting cognition of ourselves and the surrounding world[14-16]. We, as human beings, know what it feels like to occupy space by virtue of our own embodiment and we make the experience of space motorically[17]. Movement allows the subject to establish depth relations among surfaces and objects, constituting the notion of space.

Differently from Western architectural theory, based on permanence and stability[18],the proposition is to elaborate an original visual method to look at space through the investigation of moving bodies. Diagrams of bodily movement can be employed as operative tools for studying existing spaces and extracting spatial data. The aim is to investigate the subtle and implicit dynamics of body-space interaction and turned them into explicit knowledge.

Figure. 8 shows a three-dimensional schema regarding the conception of body-space relationship developed throughout the PoliTo-Tsinghua Joint Research Project by Marta Mancini. Body movement can be described in terms of velocity or, in other words, the vector quantity that measures the rate of change of a body/object position, and is the function of time. In fact, time, as argued by Bruno Zevi, is the essence of architecture that enables movement and,thus, spatial apprehension[19]. The systematisation of time and space with "body", as a third dimension,aims to convey the notion of bodily movement. All together, they contribute to building up human"s spatial experience. Furthermore, through the elaboration of this three-dimensional diagram, the sub-factors that constitute body, space and time, are explored. They are broken down respectively into layers of bodily perception, into scales of interaction with space, into measured or individually perceived time and analysed in detail.

The body is the means of mediation between the idea of movement and architecture. The bodysubject moves according to personal necessities and meets on his way a space by which is, more or less creatively, engaged. "Space is a hidden feature of movement and movement is a visible aspect of space."[20]By exemplifying the body into a stick figure, the goal is to codify a representational visual language that could serve as a tool to "read" the implicit dynamics that people establish with the features of a designed space.

In the 1960s choreographer Rudolf Laban codified the Labanotation, one of the most employed methods to score movement. He depicted the body and its movements along six axes and planes,inscribed within a sphere and a cube, the so-calledkinesphere: the "sphere around the body whose periphery can be easily reached by extended limbs from that place which is our support or stance."(Fig. 9)[20]This body-model became the base of an articulate symbolic visual language that allow to record entire choreographies. Yet, the Labanotation focuses on the dynamics of body parts with little regard for their spatial action. Space is conceived as an empty stage of secondary importance, directlybound to the width of trunk and limbs" movements.For this reason, the idea is to make use of the schematic representation of thekinesphereand re-elaborate it through a more comprehensive understanding of the body, adding the perceptual dimension to its physicality.

9 鲁道夫·拉班，“个人空间球”，1966年/Rudolf LABAN,Kinesphere, 1966（图片来源：Rudolf Laban）

10 张利，邓慧姝，马塔·曼奇尼，“城市肌肤”，UABB 2019深圳城市建筑双年展/ZHANG Li, DENG Huishu, Marta MANCINI, Urban Skin, UABB - 2019 Bi-City Shenzhen Biennale of UrbanismArchitecture, Shenzhen.（©Dalila TONDO）

11 MARC，谷仓改造，马特伊，意大利，2012年/MARC,Renovation of a barn, Mathi, Italy, 2012（图片来源：MARC）

12 Latz + Partner Landschaftsarchitekten, 多拉公园项目，都灵，意大利，2011年/Latz + Partner Landschaftsarchitekten,Parco Dora project, Turin, Italy, 2011 （©Ornella ORLANDINI）

The reinterpretedkinesphereincorporates not only the tangible spatiality of the body but also six elected ephemeral perceptual layers. Each layer is tackled and further studied both singularly and in a systematic way. From the inner to the outer, they correspond to: balance, linked to body posture;proprioception or body gesture; kinaesthesia intended as thinking in movement; touch or tactile superficial perception; hearing; sight. The first four together constitute the haptic system. This approach aims to deconstruct the static geometrical western notions, advancing a more comprehensive way of interpreting designed space "through" the body.

In conclusion, diagrams of movement and perceptual experience may help to identify key spatial elements influencing the body-space relationship and create new explicit knowledge.The systematisation and the in-depth analysis of bodily movement representation (here only briefly introduced) has the potential to support spatial design towards a more human-centred conception,pushing traditional Ergonomics principles towards an extensive understanding of the body-space relationship, at multiple scales.

4 Engaging the Body: Design Practices

Throughout the three-year PoliTo-Tsinghua Joint Research Project, theoretical thinking has been developed along with design solutions. The notions introduced in the previous two sections of the article, for instance, concerning body-space relationship historical frame and research tools, are the reworking of parts of Ph.D. candidate Marta Mancini"s doctoral work. Following the principles at the base of this academic study, recent projects have been the actual chance to translate research tools into design strategies.

The 2019 edition of the Bi-City Shenzhen Biennale of UrbanismArchitecture was dedicated to the "Eyes of the City"[21]. Through this topic,the curators aimed to investigate how, thanks to new technologies, urban relations can evolve from people-to-people to people-to-city; a city that is now able to "see", perceive and, therefore, interact.

13 Heatherwick工作室，Vessel，美国纽约，2013年/Heatherwick Studio, Vessel, New York, USA, 2013（©Timothy A. CLARY/AFP - Getty Images）

14 藤本壮介建筑事务所，NA House，东京，日本，2010年/Sou Fujimoto Architects, NA House, Tokyo, Japan, 2010（©IWANNAHPIERI）

The projects on display were largely dedicated to the visual relationship that people establish with the spaces of the city, favoured by innovations such as facial recognition. Nevertheless, some installations also considered other senses. The temporary installation "Urban Skin" was a result of PoliTo-Tsinghua collaboration (Fig. 10). Elaborating on Pallasmaa"s "Eyes of the Skin" concept, the installation was covered by 182 sensors that could record the number of physical touches by visitors"body[22]. The goal of such an experiment was to investigate what typologies of urban space mostly engaged the human body. Different configurations of spaces and surfaces offered the possibility of exploring and challenging bodily awareness and physical abilities. The installation interpreted the theme of "Eyes of the City" as the possibility of the urban space to gain a haptic capability, to become sensible and receptive. The engagements with the human body were revealed through the record of the number of touches and displayed in real-time,aiming to address one of the main questions of the emerging field of "Urban Ergonomics": which type of urban space is more preferred and engages the human body the most?

The opportunity of the Shenzhen Biennale allowed to think, in terms of design, about some of the main principles of Urban Ergonomics.Being Ergonomics traditionally dedicated to the optimisation of interior spaces or furnishings, the"Eyes of the City" Biennale has been a first chance to "set free" Ergonomics principles into a wider urban public scale. Based on the above-mentioned theoretical elaborations and the study of existing real cases, four main principles towards the establishment of Urban Ergonomics, as a humancentred conception of space, have been derived.

Interior/Exterior.Urban Ergonomics intends to focus on the ability of the human body, instinctively inventive in the interpretation of functions and in the solutions of spatial constraints, to creatively mediate between internal and external spaces. These qualities of the human body are crucial for freeing Ergonomics towards public space. Following this concept, in the renovation of some barns near Turin(2012), studio MARC structured the section of the existing building to let daily bodily actions (such as sitting, playing sports, working) taking place on the threshold between inside and outside, blurring the borders (Fig. 11).

Artificial/Natural.Compared to traditional Ergonomics, indeed not concerned with the design of outer space, Urban Ergonomics can learna lot from the conformation of nature, which typically presents profiles and materials that are organically well adapted to the rhythms and needs of the human body. In this regard, in the project of Parco Dora (2007-2011) in Turin, Peter Latz outlined drastic approaches between the artificial elements of the industrial legacy and new natural elements, highly humanising the space of the former factory (Fig. 12).

15 意大利都灵理工大学中国室研究中心，制氧厂剖面，北京首钢2022年冬奥会滑雪大跳台场馆/Politecnico di Torino-China Room (Italy), Section of Oxygen Factory in Shougang,Big Air Venue, Winter Olympic Games Beijing 2022

16 意大利都灵理工大学中国室研究中心，制氧厂轴测，北京首钢/Politecnico di Torino-China Room, Axonometry- Oxygen Factory, Shougang, Beijing（15.16图片来源：Politecnico di Torino-China Room）

Individual/Collective.If traditional Ergonomics was mostly a matter of the individual body, Urban Ergonomics above all concerns the relationship(physical, visual, psychological) among many bodies: those of citizens. The project of the Vessel(2019) in New York, by Heatherwick Studio, is an example of the maximisation of visual and physical relationships between people in a 45-metre-high open space, promoting the bodily exploration of urban space (Fig. 13).

Shape/Space.The body does not relate to the city only through the touch of its surfaces and materials but through a more complex relationship.Compared to traditional Ergonomics, Urban Ergonomics aims to invest importantly in the notion of space. As a reference, in his project for the NA house in Tokyo (2015), Sou Fujimoto created a manifesto of the body"s relationship with space,arranging 21 platforms at different heights and openly exposed to the city (Fig. 14).

In the past three years, as members of the China Room Research Center at Politecnico di Torino, we were invited by Tsinghua University to collaborate for the renovation of the former Oxygen Factory in Shougang, Big Air Venue, for the XXIV Olympic Winter Games, Beijing 2022[23]. Thanks to a design theme involving sport and the need to resize a huge industrial building to a human scale structure, we had the opportunity to experiment with some of the principles discussed above.

Our design priority was to open the original industrial building and make it permeable to the public. The ground floor became the key-space of the whole project: a roofed playground that gathers and engages the public in physical activities and open-air sports (Fig. 15). The design of the ground floor places"people" at the core of the architectural discourse,overcoming the geometrical understanding of space and providing users with multiple potential relations with urban space. People find themselves in between interior and exterior (under a roof yet open air),natural and artificial (in a factory yet a few metres away from water), individual and collective (in small and "domestic" spaces yet fluently connected to each other). They experience the soft curved surfaces of the playground, yet feeling within an immersive spatial dimension (Fig. 16). The presence of people is what activates the area under the suspended volume and gives consistency to the "playful" nature of this space. In this way, the renovated building becomes the vehicle of body-space creative engagement,stimulating interaction and enjoyment, embedding the key characteristics of the high-quality living that Urban Ergonomics aims to promote and foster.□