Operational Human Performance Graduate Program, Brazilian Air Force University, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Department of Environmental Medicine, Program of Ergonomics and Biomechanics, New York University, New York, NY, USA.
Ergonomics. 2020 Sep;63(9):1133-1149. doi: 10.1080/00140139.2020.1765029. Epub 2020 May 18.
Designing aircraft cockpits to accommodate the wide range of body sizes and shapes existing in the world population has always been a difficult problem for crew station engineers. There is no consensus on the best method for obtaining measurements for body forms that statistically represent the variation within a population. The aim of this research is to compare the two most commonly used anthropometric approaches for dimension specification and flight deck design: the boundary cases multivariate and the percentile univariate. The multivariate approach captured more subjects than the percentile approach ( < .05) for all accommodation assessments using Brazilian Air Force pilots' anthropometry, but was not as effective as had been suggested in the literature. This study showed that the Boundary Cases Multivariate Method was better at evaluating design criteria for cockpit accommodation than the Percentile Univariate Method for accommodation of the central 90% envelope for the Brazilian Air Force crew application. The findings show that the Multivariate Boundary Cases approach can better provide anthropometric limits for the desired accommodation level when multiple body dimensions need to be simultaneously considered in a design. It will help researchers, designers, and engineers to solve complex design situations, make improved judgement and take right decisions. FAR: federal aviation regulation; CS: certification specification; FAA: federal aviation administration; EASA: European union aviation safety agency; EMB: embraer; FAB: Brazilian Air Force; CAD: computer-aided design; MAM: multivariate anthropometric method; USAF: United States Air Force; PCA: principal component analysis; PC: principal component; JSF: joint strike fighter; NATO: North atlantic treaty organization; ISO: International Organization for Standardization; BPAD: Brazilian pilots anthropometric database; RD: radial distance; Error = A-E: error = achieved - expected; SPSS: statistical package for the social sciences; IBM Corp.: International business machines corporation; Acr. Ht, st: acromion height, sitting; But-kn lgt: buttock-knee length; Eye Ht, sit: eye height, sitting; Knee Ht, sit: knee height, sitting; Sitting Ht: sitting height; Thumbtip rch: thumbtip reach; Accom %: accommodated percentage; Af, Am, …, Zf, Zm: cases A-D and W-Z ("f" for female subjects and "m" for male subjects); T: trainer; A: atack; KC: anker and cargo; F: fighter; NG-BR: new generation - Brasil; PPE: personal protective equipment.
为适应世界人口中存在的各种体型，设计飞机驾驶舱一直是机组人员设计工程师面临的难题。对于能够代表人群变化的体型测量方法，目前尚无共识。本研究旨在比较两种最常用的人体尺寸规范和驾驶舱设计方法：边界情况多元法和百分位单变量法。使用巴西空军飞行员的人体测量数据，边界情况多元法在所有住宿评估中都比百分位单变量法（<.05）捕获更多的受试者，但效果不如文献中所建议的那样好。本研究表明，对于巴西空军机组人员应用，边界情况多元法在评估驾驶舱住宿设计标准方面优于百分位单变量法，用于评估中央 90%的住宿包络。研究结果表明，当在设计中需要同时考虑多个身体尺寸时，多元边界情况方法可以更好地为所需的住宿水平提供人体测量限制。它将帮助研究人员、设计师和工程师解决复杂的设计情况，做出改进的判断并做出正确的决策。FAR：联邦航空条例；CS：认证规范；FAA：联邦航空管理局；EASA：欧洲联盟航空安全局；EMB：巴西航空工业公司；FAB：巴西空军；CAD：计算机辅助设计；MAM：多元人体测量方法；USAF：美国空军；PCA：主成分分析；PC：主成分；JSF：联合攻击战斗机；北约：北大西洋公约组织；ISO：国际标准化组织；BPAD：巴西飞行员人体测量数据库；RD：径向距离；Error = A-E：误差=实现-预期；SPSS：社会科学统计软件包；IBM Corp.：国际商业机器公司；Acr. Ht，st：肩峰高度，坐姿；But-kn lgt：臀膝长；Eye Ht，sit：眼高，坐姿；Knee Ht，sit：膝高，坐姿；Sitting Ht：坐姿；Thumbtip rch：指尖伸展；Accom %：适应百分比；Af、Am、…、Zf、Zm：案例 A-D 和 W-Z（“f”代表女性受试者，“m”代表男性受试者）；T：教练机；A：攻击机；KC：锚和货物；F：战斗机；NG-BR：新一代-巴西；PPE：个人防护设备。
