Design method for multi-user workstations utilizing anthropometry and preference data

Applied Ergonomics

Volumn 46, Issue Part A, 2015, Pages 60-66

  Mahoney, Joseph M ^a   Kurczewski, Nicolas A ^b   Froede, Erick W ^b  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b The Pennsylvania State University   (United States)

Author keywords

Engineering anthropometry; Group interaction; Workstation design parameters

Indexed keywords

ANTHROPOMETRY; DESIGN; INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS; STUDENTS;

DESIGN METHOD; EXTENDED REACHES; GROUP INTERACTION; GROUP SIZE; PREFERENCE DATA; SHARED SPACES; SINGLE USERS; WORKSTATION DESIGN;

MONTE CARLO METHODS;

ADULT; ANTHROPOMETRY; ARTICLE; COLLEGE STUDENT; CONSTRUCTION WORK AND ARCHITECTURAL PHENOMENA; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; GROUP DYNAMICS; HUMAN; MALE; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PLACE PREFERENCE; VIRTUAL REALITY; WORK ENVIRONMENT; WORKPLACE; BIOENGINEERING; COMPUTER; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; PROCEDURES; SEX DIFFERENCE; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ANTHROPOMETRY; COMPUTER PERIPHERALS; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMAN ENGINEERING; HUMANS; MALE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; SEX FACTORS;

EID: 84908207242     PISSN: 00036870     EISSN: 18729126     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2014.07.003     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Choi H.J., Mark L.S. Scaling affordances for human reach actions. Hum. Mov. Sci. 2004, 23(6):785-806.
2. Das B., Grady R.M. Industrial workplace layout design an application of engineering anthropometry. Ergonomics 1983, 26(5):433-447.
3. Das B., Grady R.M. The normal working area in the horizontal plane a comparative analysis between farley's and squires' concepts. Ergonomics 1983, 26(5):449-459.
4. Das B., Sengupta A. Industrial workstation design: a systematic ergonomics approach. Appl. Ergon. 1996, 27(3):157-163.
5. Faulkner T.W., Day R.A. The maximum functional reach for the female operator. AIIE Trans. 1970, 2(2):126-131.
6. Garneau C., Parkinson M. Including preference in anthropometry-driven models for design. J.Mech. Des. 2009, 131:101006.
7. Goldberg D., Deb K. Acomparative analysis of selection schemes used in genetic algorithms. Found. Gen. Algorit. 1991, 1:69-93.
8. Gordon C., Churchill T., Clauser C., Bradtmiller B., McConville J., Tebbetts I., Walker R. Anthropometric Survey of US Army Personnel: Methods and Summary Statistics 1989, US Army Natick Research Development and Engineering Center Natick Massachusetts Technical Report.
9. HFES 300 Committee, et al. Guidelines for using anthropometric data in product design. Hum. Fact. Ergon. Soc. 2004, Santa Monica, CA.
10. Hoegl M., Proserpio L. Team member proximity and teamwork in innovative projects. Res. Pol. 2004, 33(8):1153-1165.
11. Jung K., Kwon O., You H. Development of a digital human model generation method for ergonomic design in virtual environment. Int. J. Indust. Ergon. 2009, 39(5):744-748.
12. Massey F.J. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for goodness of fit. J.Am. Stat. Assoc. 1951, 46(253):68-78.
13. Meteopolis N., Ulam S. The Monte Carlo method. J.Am. Stat. Assoc. 1949, 44(247):335-341.
14. Nadadur G., Parkinson M. Extrapolation of anthropometric measures to new populations. SAE Int. J. Passeng. Cars Elect. Elect. Syst. 2009, 1(1):567.
15. Parkinson M.B., Reed M.P. Optimizing Vehicle Occupant Packaging 2006, SAE Technical Paper 2006-01-0961.
16. Parkinson M.B., Reed M.P. Creating virtual user populations by analysis of anthropometric data. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 2010, 40(1):106-111.
17. Pheasant S. Some anthropometric aspects of workstation design. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 1987, 24(4):291-298.
18. Pheasant S., Haslegrave C.M. Bodyspace: Anthropometry, Ergonomics and the Design of Work 2005, CRC Press.
19. Reed M., Manary M., Flannagan C., Schneider L. Astatistical method for predicting automobile driving posture. Hum. Fact. J. Hum. Fact. Ergon. Soc. 2002, 44(4):557-568.
20. Ressler S. Anthrokids-anthropometric Data of Children 1977, National Institute of Standards and Technology. http://ovrt.nist.gov/projects/anthrokids.
21. Robinette K.M., Blackwell S., Daanen H., Boehmer M., Fleming S. Civilian American and European Surface Anthropometry Resource (Caesar), Final Report 2002, vol. 1. summary. Tech. rep., DTIC Document.
22. Scott S.D. Territory-based Interaction Techniques for Tabletop Collaboration. Conference Companion of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology UIST 2003, vol. 3:2-5. Citeseer.
23. Scott S.D., Grant K.D., Mandryk R.L. System guidelines for co-located, collaborative work on a tabletop display. Proceedings of the Eighth Conference on European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work 2003, 159-178.
24. Scott S.D., Sheelagh M., Carpendale T., Inkpen K.M. Territoriality in collaborative tabletop workspaces. Proceedings of the 2004 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work 2004, 294-303. ACM.
25. Sengupta A., Das B. Human: an AutoCad based three dimensional anthropometric human model for workstation design. Int. J. Indust. Ergon. 1997, 19(5):345-352.
26. Sengupta A.K., Das B. Maximum reach envelope for the seated and standing male and female for industrial workstation design. Ergonomics 2000, 43(9):1390-1404.
27. Squires P. The Shape of the Normal Work Area 1956, Navy Department, Medical Research Laboratory, Report 275.
28. Sulaiman Kharrufa A., Olivier P. Exploring the requirements of tabletop interfaces for education. Int. J. Learn. Technol. 2010, 5(1):42-62.
29. Tang J.C. Findings from observational studies of collaborative work. Int. J. Man-mach. Stud. 1991, 34(2):143-160.
30. The Pennsylvania State University About the Penn State College of Engineering 2012, URL. http://www.engr.psu.edu/AboutCOE/Publications/Facts2012.pdf.
31. Toney A., Thomas B.H. Considering reach in tangible and table top design. TableTop 2006. First IEEE International Workshop on. IEEE 2006, 2.
32. Toney A.P., Thomas B.H. Modeling reach for use in user interface design. Proceedings of the Eight Australasian Conference on User Interface-volume 64 2007, 27-30. Australian Computer Society, Inc.
33. U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2008, National Center for Health Statistics, URL. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes.htm.
34. U.S. News Pennsylvania State University-University Park 2011, URL. http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/pennsylvania-state-university-university-park-6965.
35. Wang Y. Normal horizontal working area: the concept of inner boundary. Ergonomics 1999, 42(4):638-646.