Suppr超能文献

由飞机内饰专家利用飞机座椅舒适度知识设计平面图。

Designing a floor plan using aircraft seat comfort knowledge by aircraft interior experts.

机构信息

Faculty of Industrial Design Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Work. 2021;68(s1):S7-S18. doi: 10.3233/WOR-208001.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Recent research indicated that an 18'' ×30'' aircraft seat resulted in nearly the same level of comfort as a 17'' ×34'' seat. However, it took less space in the floor plan.

OBJECTIVES

This study explores seat layouts preferred by experts regarding different criteria. Those results of the experts are later compared to layouts produced by computational algorithms to evaluate the advantages of each method.

METHODS

Eighty-eight experts in the field of aircraft interior were invited to make a floor plan of a part of a Boeing 777 aircraft where comfort was one of the main goals. Participants worked in groups of 3 and are given the freedom to design a section of the cabin between economy and first-class (5.87 m wide and 3.7 m long), where besides these two types of seats, an old business-class size seat of 20'' ×36'' was introduced as well for more flexibilities in design. Computational algorithms were also applied with the same inputs and constraints to generate layouts as a comparison.

RESULTS

In total, 29 floor-plans were made, and these plans were analysed to compare against the complexity of the operations, the number of passengers on board, the revenue of the airline, and the width of the aisle. Results showed that 14 groups opted for the economy seats, while the rest utilized a hybrid setup where the business class seats were used in the configuration. These results are compared to the 126 computerized layouts generated.

CONCLUSIONS

Among all layouts designed by experts, a combination of 28 18'' ×30'' seats and 20 17'' ×34'' seats had the highest potential revenue of US$21,984. This floor plan fits the regulations with an aisle width of 0.93 m. The computerized layout had a better outcome in maximizing profit of US$22,416 with 32 18'' ×30'' seats and 16 20'' ×36'' seats. However, the comfort of such results was to be explored as some seats were rotated 90 degrees.

摘要

背景

最近的研究表明,18 英寸×30 英寸的飞机座椅在舒适度方面与 17 英寸×34 英寸的座椅几乎相同,但在飞机座位布局中所需空间更小。

目的

本研究探讨了专家根据不同标准对座椅布局的偏好。然后将专家的结果与计算算法生成的布局进行比较,以评估每种方法的优势。

方法

邀请了 88 名飞机内饰领域的专家参与设计波音 777 飞机的一部分座位布局,舒适度是主要目标之一。参与者以 3 人为一组工作,可以自由设计经济舱和头等舱之间的机舱部分(5.87 米宽,3.7 米长),除了这两种类型的座椅外,还引入了一种旧的商务舱大小的 20 英寸×36 英寸座椅,以提高设计的灵活性。同样应用计算算法并输入相同的限制条件来生成布局作为比较。

结果

总共制作了 29 个座位布局图,并对这些布局图进行了分析,以比较操作的复杂性、飞机上的乘客数量、航空公司的收入和过道的宽度。结果表明,14 个小组选择了经济舱座椅,而其余小组则使用混合配置,将商务舱座椅用于该配置。这些结果与生成的 126 个计算机化布局进行了比较。

结论

在专家设计的所有布局中,28 个 18 英寸×30 英寸座椅和 20 个 17 英寸×34 英寸座椅的组合具有最高的潜在收入 21984 美元。该布局符合过道宽度为 0.93 米的规定。计算机化布局通过使用 32 个 18 英寸×30 英寸座椅和 16 个 20 英寸×36 英寸座椅,实现了 22416 美元的更高利润,效果更好。然而,需要进一步探讨这些结果的舒适度,因为一些座椅旋转了 90 度。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1f66/7902944/499b5ccabe3d/wor-68-wor208001-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验