Journal of the Ergonomics Society of Korea (대한인간공학회지)

Ergonomics Society of Korea (대한인간공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Ergonomic Evaluation and Improvement of Bus Seat Armrest Design

  • Jung, Hayoung (POSTECH, Department of Industrial and Management Engineering) ;
  • Lee, Seunghoon (POSTECH, Department of Industrial and Management Engineering) ;
  • Kim, Moonjin (Hyundai Motor Group, Division of Bus Body Engineering Team) ;
  • Choi, Hoimin (Hyundai Motor Group, Division of Bus Body Engineering Team) ;
  • You, Heecheon (POSTECH, Department of Industrial and Management Engineering)
  • Received : 2016.09.02
  • Accepted : 2016.12.09
  • Published : 2017.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The present study is intended to develop an improved bus seat armrest design by evaluating various bus armrest designs from ergonomic aspects. Background: An ergonomic armrest design which considers the sitting postures and body shapes of passengers can improve the convenience and comfort of a bus seat. Method: Subjective satisfaction of each of five design dimensions (length, width, height from seatpan, shape, and angle) was evaluated for seven bus seat armrest designs in various sizes and shapes by 58 participants (28 males and 33 females) using a 7-point scale (1: very dissatisfied, 4: neutral, and 7: very satisfied). Improved bus seat armrest designs adjustable in length and rotatable to the left or right (sliding and rotating armrest, SRA) with a concave, flat, or convex shape of the upper part were developed by considering the preferred design features and the body size and shape in sitting posture and needs of passengers and then compared with a conventional armrest. Results: A bus seat armrest with a wide width (40~50mm), a long length (360mm), a lower height (213mm), and a curved shape was found significantly preferred in terms of comfort. The proposed armrest designs (SRA-convex, SRA-flat, and SRA-concave) improved satisfaction by 46~62% for length suitability, 184~216% for width suitability, 205~214% for angle suitability, 138~181% for contact area suitability, and 49~64% for height suitability, 138~174% for comfort, and 93~111% for overall satisfaction. Conclusion: The preferred design features and passengers' needs of bus seat armrest were identified and the SRA designs were recommended for better usability. Application: The ergonomic design process of bus seat armrest employed in the present study can be applied to designing armrests in various vehicles for better convenience and comfort.

Keywords

References

  1. Bush, T.R. and Hubbard, R.P., Support force measures of midsized men in seated positions. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering, 129(1), 58-65, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2401184
  2. Delisle, A., Lariviere, C., Plamondon, A. and Imbeau, D., Comparison of three computer office workstations offering forearm support: impact on upper limb posture and muscle activation, Ergonomics, 49(2), 139-160, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1080/10610270500450739
  3. Fredericks, T.K., Butt, S.E., Kumar, A.R., Amin, S.G., Utkan, F. and Belingar, T., Influence of armrest width and task on armrest usage, In Proceedings of IIE Annual Conference and Expo 2014, 2326-2335, 2014.
  4. Groenesteijin, L., Ellegast, R.P., Keller, K., Krause, F., Berger, H. and de Loose, M.P., Office task effects on comfort and body dynamics in five dynamic office chairs, Applied Ergonomics, 43(2), 320-328, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2011.06.007
  5. Harih, G. and Dolsak, B., Comparison of subjective comfort ratings between anatomically shaped and cylindrical handles, Applied Ergonomics, 45(4), 943-954, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2013.11.011
  6. Hasegawa, T. and Kumashiro, M., Effects of Armrests on Workload with Ten-key Operation, Applied Human Science: Journal of Physiological Anthropology, 17(4), 123-129, 1998. https://doi.org/10.2114/jpa.17.123
  7. Kim, J., Na, H., Cho, D., Shin, Y., Park, S. and Kim, J., Development of questionnaire for automobile seat comfort evaluation, Korean Journal of the Science of Emotion and Sensibility, 13(2), 381-390, 2010.
  8. Kim, M., Choi, Y. and You, H., The arm rest of a seat. Patent Application Number: 10-2014-0152184, 2014.
  9. Kolich, M., Automobile seat comfort: occupant preferences vs. anthropometric accommodation, Applied Ergonomics, 34, 177-184, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-6870(02)00142-4
  10. Korean Agency for Technology and Standards (KATS), 2010. The Report on the 6th Size Korea (Korean Body Measurement and Investigation), Seoul, Korea: Size Korea, Ministry of Knowledge Economy
  11. Kuijt-Evers, L.F.M., Vink, P. and de Looze, M.P., Comfort predictors for different kinds of hand tools: Differences and Similarities, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 37, 73-84, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2006.09.019
  12. Lee, W., Jeong, J., Park, J., Jeon, E., Kim, H., Jung, D., Park, S. and You, H., Analysis of the facial measurements of Korean Air Force pilot for oxygen mask design, Ergonomics, 56, 1451-1464, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2013.816376
  13. Mahmoudi, N. and Bazrafshan, M., A Carpet-Weaver's Chair Based on Anthropometric Data, International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 19(4), 543-550, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2013.11077006
  14. McCormick, D.A. and Tubergen, R.G., System to Monitor Task Chair Seating, Clinical Biomechanics, 18(10), 981-984, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0268-0033(03)00177-3
  15. Nag, P.K., Pal, S., Kotadiya, S.M. and Gosai, N.K., Human-seat interface analysis of upper and lower body weight distribution, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 38(5-6), 539-545, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2007.10.024
  16. Nag, P.K., Vyas, H., Nag, A. and Pal, S., Postural Stability of Sitting Women, International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 19(4), 583-595, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2013.11077022
  17. Park, J., Lee, H., Choi, Y., Park, K., Kim, M. and You, H., Development of an Evaluation Protocol for a Bus Seat. Journal of the Korean Institute of Industrial Engineers, 41(1), 74-78, 2015. https://doi.org/10.7232/JKIIE.2015.41.1.074
  18. Smith, D.R., Andrews, D.M. and Wawrow, P.T., Development and evaluation of the Automotive Seating Discomfort Questionnaire (ASDQ), International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 36, 141-149, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2005.09.005
  19. Son, H., Jeong, B. and Sin, M., Safety Armrest Bar for Skid Steer Loader, Patent Registered Number: 30-2014-0044239, 2015.
  20. Van Veen, S.A.T., Van Mastrigt, S.H., Kamp, I. and Vink, P., Improving car passengers' comfort and experience by supporting the use of handheld devices, Work, 49(2), 215-223, 2014.
  21. Vos, G.A., Congleton, J.J., Moore, J.S., Amendola, A.A. and Ringer, L., Postural versus chair design impacts upon interface pressure, Applied Ergonomics, 37(5), 619-628, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2005.09.002
  22. Zhao, J. and Tang, L., An evaluation of comfort of a bus seat, Applied Ergonomics, 25(6), 386-392, 1994. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-6870(94)90058-2