Suppr超能文献

汽车座椅舒适性:乘客偏好与人体尺寸适应性

Automobile seat comfort: occupant preferences vs. anthropometric accommodation.

作者信息

Kolich Mike

机构信息

Department of Industrial & Manufacturing Systems Engineering, University of Windsor, Windsor, Ont, Canada N9B-3P4.

出版信息

Appl Ergon. 2003 Mar;34(2):177-84. doi: 10.1016/S0003-6870(02)00142-4.

Abstract

Automobile seat design specifications cannot be established without considering the comfort expectations of the target population. This contention is supported by published literature, which suggests that ergonomics criteria, particularly those related to physiology, do not satisfy consumer comfort. The objective of this paper is to challenge ergonomics criteria related to anthropometry in the same way. In this context, 12 subjects, representing a broad range of body sizes, evaluated five different compact car seats during a short-term seating session. Portions of a reliable and valid survey were used for this purpose. The contour and geometry characteristics of the five seats were quantified and compared to the survey information. Discrepancies were discovered between published anthropometric accommodation criteria and subject-preferred lumbar height, seatback width, cushion length, and cushion width. Based on this finding, it was concluded that automobile seat comfort is a unique science. Ergonomics criteria, while serving as the basis for this science, cannot be applied blindly for they do not ensure comfortable automobile seats.

摘要

如果不考虑目标人群对舒适度的期望,就无法制定汽车座椅设计规范。已发表的文献支持这一观点,这些文献表明,人体工程学标准,尤其是那些与生理学相关的标准,并不能满足消费者的舒适度要求。本文的目的是以同样的方式挑战与人体测量学相关的人体工程学标准。在此背景下,12名代表各种体型的受试者在短期就座过程中对五种不同的紧凑型汽车座椅进行了评估。为此使用了一份可靠且有效的调查问卷的部分内容。对这五个座椅的轮廓和几何特征进行了量化,并与调查信息进行了比较。在已发表的人体测量适应标准与受试者偏好的腰部高度、座椅靠背宽度、坐垫长度和坐垫宽度之间发现了差异。基于这一发现,得出的结论是汽车座椅舒适度是一门独特的科学。人体工程学标准虽然是这门科学的基础,但不能盲目应用,因为它们并不能确保汽车座椅的舒适性。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验