Rising incomes, shorter work weeks, longer vacations, more holidays, earlier retirement, increased longevity, smaller families, greater affluence, and a host of other socioeconomic factors have resulted in a change in lifestyle and value systems. For many, the so-called work ethic has given way to the emerging leisure ethic. By the year 2000, for example, it has been estimated that over 2 billion people will be traveling and that tourism may well rank among the world’s largest industries. Some $160 billion were spent in 1977 on leisure and recreation, and some sources contend that measured by people’s spending, leisure time activities have become the nation’s number one industry.
This leisure and recreation boom will increase the demand for the design of private and commercial interior spaces to house the various facilities and/or systems. These may range from traditional sports and games to sophisticated exercise and body building equipment and thermally controlled environments. Some may involve intensely vigorous participation, while others may be relatively passive. Other facilities may include arts and crafts and do-it-yourself activities. Some pursuits of the future may be similar to those with which we are familiar today. Many may not. For certain, all will involve human dimension and interior space and the interface between people and the components of that space. The height of a workbench or drawing table for comfortable and practical use, the nature of the exercise equipment, and the anthropometric requirements for the user’s interface with that equipment are just a few of the factors that must be considered.
Human body size and dimension are a particularly significant factor in the more physical and active sports. The avid sports fan need not refer to published anthropometric data to tell you that the size of the professional athlete has undergone a dramatic increase over the last forty years. The 176-lb, or 80-kilo, defensive football player, once considered large, is now thought by many to be too small to play as a wide receiver. The tall 73-in, or 185-cm, basketball center of the 1930s is now too short to play the guard position. The Olympic track records of forty and fifty years ago are now being easily broken by women. The size, physical strength, speed skills, training methods, and diet of today’s athlete have improved to such an extent that dimensional standards and space requirements that once were adequate must be recalculated.
The drive for health and physical fitness has made exercise activities a popular pastime for many and a major business enterprise for others. Some activities require no equipment, while others involve equipment ranging in levels of sophistication and cost from a simple set of fixed-weight dumbbells to precision-engineered nine-station exercise machines costing thousands of dollars. In all situations, however, the spaces designated to house these activities must respond to human dimension. The drawings on the following pages illustrate some of the more fundamental exercise activities and suggest clearances and other dimensional data for use in making preliminary design assumptions. The major anthropometric measurements to consider are indicated in the matrix on the preceding page.
Saunas and hydrotherapeutic whirlpool equipment are also frequently provided within exercise spaces. A few representative models illustrating the relationship of the human body to the equipment are also included in the drawings in this section.
Most exercise spaces also include locker facilities of one type or another and their design must respond to human dimension and body size as well. The height of the benches must conform to the general anthropometric requirements for seating. Of principal concern is the popliteal height of the user. Buttock-heel length and/or buttock-toe length data of the user having a larger body size are useful in determining the extent to which the body of the seated user will project into the space between the edge of the bench and the face of the locker. This dimension plus the maximum body breadth of a larger person can then be used in establishing a comfortable overall clearance between bench and locker for circulation as well as accommodation of the person seated on the bench.
The drawing shown above indicates in side and front view the clearances required by the human body while engaged in sit-up exercises. Although it is recommended that in establishing clearances, the person of larger body size be used as a model, the ranges shown reflect small and large male and female data. The 5th and 95th percentile vertical grip reach measurements were used as the basis of the dimensions, with an allowance to compensate for the fact that the anthropometric measurement does not quite extend to the tip of the fingers. The authors suggest that even if the design is intended for a particular population of smaller body size, the larger measurements be used. The largest clearance required would be for the large male, and is shown as 91.5 in or 232.4 cm.
| in | cm | |
| A | 80–91.5 | 203.2–232.4 |
| B | 75–87 | 190.5–221.0 |
| C | 65–74 | 165.1–188.0 |
| D | 60–69 | 152.4–175.3 |
| E | 32–37 | 81.3–94.0 |
| F | 27–37 | 68.6–94.0 |
| G | 33.2–38.0 | 84.3–96.5 |
| H | 30.9–35.7 | 78.5–90.7 |
| I | 58–68 | 147.3–172.7 |
| J | 54–76 | 137.2–193.0 |
| K | 29.7–35.0 | 75.4–88.9 |
| L | 26.6–31.7 | 67.6–80.5 |
| M | 6–12 | 15.2–30.5 |
| N | 63–73 | 160.0–185.4 |
| O | 61–67 | 154.9–170.2 |
| P | 79–85 | 200.7–215.9 |
| Q | 73–79 | 185.4–200.7 |
| R | 23–38 | 58.4–96.5 |
| S | 10–16 | 25.4–40.6 |
The following drawing provides the designer with the dimensional information necessary to establish basic spacing for an exercise class.
The next drawing shows the clearance required for push-up exercises. Stature would be the most useful anthropometric measurement to consider.
The drawing above should be helpful in establishing minimum center spacing for standing exercises in place. The drawing is not intended as a standard, but rather as a base of reference for preliminary design assumptions. The nature of the particular exercise and the intensity of body movements involved should all be taken into consideration.
| in | cm | |
| A | 65–80 | 165.1–203.2 |
| B | 61–88 | 154.9–223.5 |
| C | 31–37 | 78.7–94.0 |
| D | 29–41 | 73.7–104.1 |
| E | 3–6 | 7.6–15.2 |
| F | 144 | 365.8 |
| G | 120 | 304.8 |
Certain exercises require significant head room. Dance and similar activities, for example, require considerable clearance to avoid accidents. The following drawing shows only two such possibilities. There are, obviously, many variations. The tables in Part B should provide the necessary data with which to establish clearances appropriate to those variations.
The two corresponding drawings show typical exercise equipment available on the market. The drawing shown above typifies the classic exercise bicycle and shows some of the clearances required in a commercial installation. The following drawing is representative of the many weight-lifting devices presently in use.
The front and side views indicate some of the overall dimensions as well as the relationship of the human body to the equipment. Dimensions and general configuration vary with model and manufacturer, but the information shown can be used for making preliminary design assumptions.
| in | cm | |
| A | 83–104 | 210.8–264.2 |
| B | 35–48 | 88.9–121.9 |
| C | 30 | 76.2 |
| D | 18–26 | 45.7–66.0 |
| E | 55–68 | 139.7–172.7 |
| F | 25–30 | 63.5–76.2 |
| G | 30–38 | 76.2–96.5 |
| H | 46 | 116.8 |
| I | 36–48 | 91.4–121.9 |
| J | 58–76 | 147.3–193.0 |
| K | 12–18 | 30.5–45.7 |
| L | 12 | 30.5 |
| M | 6–12 | 15.2–30.5 |
| N | 4–10 | 10.2–25.4 |
| O | 48–54 | 121.9–137.2 |
| P | 9–14 | 22.9–35.6 |
| Q | 18–20 | 45.7–50.8 |
Most hydrotherapy pools provide turbulent hot water massage. Some models, such as the ones shown above and in the following drawing, have been anthropometrically contoured to provide proper support for the back, particularly in the lumbar region.
The pools are manufactured in a variety of profiles to accommodate different body positions. The height of the pools is between 33 and 38 in, or 83.8 and 96.5 cm. The lengths and widths vary with the model.
| in | cm | |
| A | 33–38 | 83.8–96.5 |
| B | 9–12 | 22.9–30.5 |
| C | 38–44 | 96.5–111.8 |
| D | 13–16 | 33.0–40.6 |
| E | 12–15 | 30.5–38.1 |
| F | 11–14 | 27.9–35.6 |
| G | 8–11 | 20.3–27.9 |
The sauna is essentially a thermal bath using dry heat, unlike the low heat and high humidity of the steam bath. Although there are many complete prefabricated models on the market, the heater units can be purchased separately. It is therefore relatively simple to custom design an individual installation.
The preceding drawing illustrates some of the critical dimensions involved. Two possible ceiling heights are indicated. The alternate height will allow more comfortable access to the second tier bench, while the normal height will permit installation within the conventional 96-in, or 243.8-cm, ceiling limitations of most residential interior spaces.
| in | cm | |
| A | 108 | 274.3 |
| B | 24 | 61.0 |
| C | 84 | 213.4 |
| D | 36–40 | 91.4–101.6 |
| E | 44–48 | 111.8–121.9 |
| F | 12–14 | 30.5–35.6 |
| G | 18–20 | 45.7–50.8 |
| H | 78 min. | 198.1 min. |
| I | 56–64 | 142.2–162.6 |
| J | 12–15 | 30.5–38.1 |
| K | 42–48 | 106.7–121.9 |
| L | 12–18 | 30.5–45.7 |
| M | 30 | 76.2 |
| N | 14–16 | 35.6–40.6 |
| O | 4–6 | 10.2–15.2 |
| P | 14–17 | 35.6–43.2 |
| Q | 60–72 | 152.4–182.9 |
The following drawing shows a section through a typical locker room. The restricted circulation zone shown at the right would require either the seated or the standing person to move out of the way to avoid body contact. The circulation zone at the left would allow more comfortable passage without body contact.
Aside from the basic anthropometric considerations involved to accommodate most sports and game activities, certain of these activities present some unique problems. Can basketball, for example, be truly considered a “sport” if most players must have a 99th percentile stature to participate? A player with a 90th or 95th percentile stature, although possessing skills and agility, would be at an obvious disadvantage for no reason but the body size of his opponent. A tall player may use a stuff shot, since his tremendous height enables him to jump high in the air. With both hand and ball positioned slightly above the rim of the basket, he is then able in one swift downward thrust to literally stuff the ball through the basket. A proposal is presently under consideration to raise the height of the rim to deny the tall player the use of this shot. It is doubtful that Dr. James Naismath, when he conceived the game in 1891, envisioned an 84-in, or 214-cm center, with the ability to forcefully stuff a round ball into a wooden basket. This condition is one of the many explored in the text and the drawings on the following pages. Perhaps the relationships between human dimension and the degree to which it impacts on the intended spirit of competitive sports should be studied across the board in all areas of athletics—surely a novel and interesting investigation for designer and anthropometrist alike.
The present lack of enforceable building code regulations to ensure that the design of interior spaces housing active sports corresponds to human dimension and the dynamics of people in motion constitutes a potential threat to the safety of the participant. There are, for example, no code regulations that establish the minimum space needed between the basketball court boundary lines and the nearest obstruction to allow a player running off the court to reduce his rate of speed to avoid crashing head-on into a wall or other obstacle. Similarly, there are no code requirements establishing minimum clearances between a diving board and any overhead obstruction or between a tennis court baseline and back fence. Nor do minimum ceiling height requirements exist for spaces where a gymnast practices or performs.
The absence of regulations of the type mentioned not only poses a serious threat to the safety of the users, but it makes both client and designer legally responsible in the event of injury or death if it can be demonstrated that reasonable clearances were not provided. Moreover, in cases where extra-legal guidelines, recommended standards, or simple rules of thumb are the only criteria available, the designer should seriously question and reevaluate them in terms of current published anthropometric data and the nature and character of the materials and physical arrangement of the equipment involved. Included among the drawings on the pages that follow are examples of some of the problems mentioned. The matrix above indicates some of the more relevant anthropometric measurements applicable to spaces used for sports and game activities.
The drawing above indicates side clearance requirements for a table tennis installation within a residential environment: 48 in, or 121.9 cm, is the absolute minimum, while 72 in, or 182.9 cm, is preferred. The following drawing indicates the clearances required at either end of the table.
In a close-up position, the player usually functions within 24 to 36 in, or 61 to 91.4 cm, of the edge of the table. An overall clearance between the edge of the table and the wall or nearest physical obstruction—between 84 and 120 in, or 213.4 to 304.8 cm—is suggested.
| in | cm | |
| A | 48–72 | 121.9–182.9 |
| B | 60 | 152.4 |
| C | 30 | 76.2 |
| D | 6 | 15.2 |
| E | 36 | 91.4 |
| F | 84–132 | 213.4–335.3 |
| G | 54 | 137.2 |
| H | 60–96 | 152.4–243.8 |
| I | 24–36 | 61.0–91.4 |
The smaller figure should be regarded as an absolute minimum, and the larger figure as the preferred clearance. The latter, however, may be difficult to provide in terms of the room size required. The extent of clearance is a function of the size of the players and the intensity and skill with which the game is played. What must be considered is not only the space required for low-key volleying but the space required, for example, to chase a strategically placed ball, return it, decelerate, and ultimately stop, all in enough time to avoid colliding into the wall at the rear or side of the playing area.
The drawing shown above indicates the clearance required from the edge of a pool or billiard table to the wall or nearest physical obstruction. A clearance of 60 to 72 in, or 152.4 to 182.9 cm, is suggested to allow the possibility for some circulation behind the active player. The activity zone shown applies for most shots. In some instances, due to the nature of the play, the stance of the player, and the length of the cue stick, there may be some intrusion into the circulation zone.
| in | cm | |
| A | 60–72 | 152.4–182.9 |
| B | 30 | 76.2 |
| C | 30–42 | 76.2–106.7 |
| D | 33–34 | 83.8–86.4 |
| E | 142–172 | 360.7–436.9 |
| F | 94–124 | 238.8–315.0 |
| G | 48 | 121.9 |
| H | 4–8 | 10.2–20.3 |
| I | 90–116 | 228.6–294.6 |
Safety zones and clearances around the perimeter of a basketball court are not included in codes and ordinances that presumably deal with the public safety. In relatively passive sports and games, the problem is not serious. In sports where the action is more intense, such as basketball, the lack of adequate safety zone clearances may cause injuries to the players and may even prove fatal.
The following drawing suggests minimum clearances to allow the player, running and/or dribbling the ball at full speed, sufficient time and space to decelerate and stop before colliding with the wall.
The preceding drawing provides some useful information about human dimension and the sport of basketball. Aside from the dimensional data indicated, the subject serves as an excellent example of how anthropometric considerations relate to almost every facet of our daily life and, in fact, to most human activity. Many of the top professional basketball players have 99th percentile stature and reach dimensions. The extraordinary height and reach of some of these athletes, as well as jumping ability, enable them to do a so-called stuff shot. The player leaps high into the air, slightly above the rim of the basket, and literally stuffs the ball through. Such a player has a distinct advantage, totally unrelated to skill. To compensate for this, a proposal to raise the height of the rim on AAU and NCAA basketball courts is presently under consideration. The drawing shows the present rim height of 120 in, or 304.8 cm, and the proposed rim height of 144 in, or 365.8 cm. It is interesting to note that the top of the head of a player with a stature of 88 in, or 223.5 cm, is only 32 in, or 81.3 cm, below the rim.
| in | cm | |
| A | 72 | 182.9 |
| B | 18 | 45.7 |
| C | 144 | 365.8 |
| D | 120 | 304.8 |
| E | 91–115 | 231.1–292.1 |
| F | 72–88 | 1829–223.5 |
| G | 9.6 | 24.4 |
| H | 48 | 121.9 |
The drawings on the following pages illustrate the clearances suggested for use in making preliminary design assumptions about various types of work and craft spaces. The types involved are areas designed for painting, drafting, children’s arts and crafts, and general workbench activities. It should be noted, however, that the drawings are not necessarily intended to show all the work and craft space types possible, nor in the spaces illustrated are all the tools or equipment normally associated with the activities necessarily indicated. To do so would require an entire volume of drawings dealing exclusively with work and craft spaces. The spaces included, however, were selected as representative of certain types of activities in order to illustrate some typical interface situations and the anthropometric considerations involved. One interesting anthropometric problem that applies to any child-oriented work and craft space is the obvious, radical difference in body size between the child and the instructor or teacher. If worksurfaces are designed exclusively to accommodate the body dimensions of the child, the height of the worksurface will be too low to accommodate the adult during any instructional activity or individual demonstration that involves the use of that surface. The approach, therefore, is a design that will reconcile the differences in body size and accommodate the needs of each. The problem is a difficult one and perhaps there is no perfect solution. A higher worksurface height and adjustable seat are one approach. Another may be of a more architectural nature and involves changes in floor levels within the space.
Most artists have individual preferences regarding the arrangement of their particular studio or workplace. In regard to human dimension and the artist’s interface with his or her space, the factors to consider also vary greatly. Techniques, media, style, process all impact on the anthropometric requirements. The preceding drawing, therefore, should not be taken too literally. It is not intended to illustrate in detail a specific plan that will necessarily be responsive to the personal needs of all artists. It is intended simply to illustrate some of the components of the space. The anthropometric considerations involved must be examined with respect to the individual artist and the specific activities involved.
There are, however, some basic considerations that apply in most situations. Vertical reach from a standing and sitting position is helpful in locating shelving for art supplies. Side and forward arm reach measurements can be useful in locating various components of the space, relative to each other and the artist, in the most efficient manner possible. The eye height of a seated and standing person can be used to determine the location of visual displays and reference materials above the floor. Elbow height can be extremely helpful in establishing the height of a utility table. The text related to workbenches on the following pages of this section is also applicable to the artist’s utility or prep table.
| in | cm | |
| A | 108 | 274.3 |
| B | 84 | 213.4 |
| C | 24 | 61.0 |
| D | 42 | 106.7 |
| E | 36 | 91.4 |
| F | 48 | 121.9 |
| G | 72 | 182.9 |
| H | 72–86 | 182.9–218.4 |
| I | 30–36 | 76.2–91.4 |
| J | 18 | 45.7 |
Workplaces for drafting and related types of activities for general group use or instructional purposes can be arranged on the basis of individual drafting tables, as shown in the preceding drawing, or as cubicles or workstations, as indicated in the following drawing. The preceding drawing shows the clearances involved between tables as well as the clearances necessary for proper interface between the seated and standing person and the table. A table height of 36 in, or 91.4 cm, as opposed to regular desk height, will permit use of the table from both a seated and a standing position. Proper minimum clearance between the top of the seat surface and the underside of the table, as shown, is essential. An adjustable stool can be extremely helpful in compensating for variability in body size. Provisions for a footrest are also a critical consideration. Because of the height of the table, the distance of the seat above the floor will invariably be higher than normal and exceed the popliteal height of most, if not all, intended users. This will cause the feet to dangle above the floor, resulting not only in a lack of proper body stability but pressure on the underside of the thigh just behind the knee. This pressure will cause irritation of the tissue involved and impede blood circulation, resulting in considerable discomfort. The lack of body stability will require compensatory muscular force to maintain equilibrium, resulting in additional discomfort and pain.
| in | cm | |
| A | 108–120 | 274.3–304.8 |
| B | 36 | 91.4 |
| C | 36–48 | 91.4–121.9 |
| D | 21–27.5 | 53.3–69.9 |
| E | 7.5 | 19.1 |
| F | 48–60 | 121.9–152.4 |
| G | 36–60 | 91.4–152.4 |
| H | 30 | 76.2 |
| I | 12 | 30.5 |
| J | 54–60 | 137.2–152.4 |
| K | 27–30 | 68.6–76.2 |
For standing work height, the height of the elbows above the floor (elbow height) should be considered. If considerable muscular force is required, the distance from the elbow to the top of the bench should be clearly greater. If minimal physical force is involved, a distance between the elbow and the bench top of between 3.5 and 6 in, or 8.9 and 15.2 cm, should be adequate. For preliminary design assumptions, a height of 34 to 36 in, or 86.4 to 91.4 cm, would be reasonable. In regard to bench heights for seated work, 24 to 29 in, or 60.9 to 73.6 cm, can be used for preliminary design assumptions.
| in | cm | |
| A | 18–36 | 45.7–91.4 |
| B | 18 | 45.7 |
| C | 6–9 | 15.2–22.9 |
| D | 7–9 | 17.8–22.9 |
| E | 34–36 | 86.4–91.4 |
| F | 84 | 213.4 |
| G | 18–24 | 45.7–61.0 |
| H | 29–30 | 73.7–76.2 |
| I | 65 | 165.1 |
| J | 36 | 91.4 |
| K | 30 | 76.2 |
| L | 15 | 38.1 |
| M | 21 | 53.3 |
| N | 24 | 61.0 |
| O | 22–27 | 55.9–68.6 |
| P | 29 | 73.7 |
| Q | 34 | 86.4 |
| R | 33 | 83.8 |
| S | 26 | 66.0 |
| T | 16 | 40.6 |
The limitations of human reach must also be taken into account in locating overhead tool storage. The following drawing indicates some of the critical dimensions related to an arts and crafts center for children ranging in age from 6 to 11 years. The critical anthropometric consideration is in making the design responsive to the body size of the child as well as the adult. A teacher forced to bend to the surface of tables scaled down to the body size of a child would suffer fatigue and backache in a short time. Adjustability in both chair and table, however, can reconcile the needs of differing requirements.
