Selection of a single design to delight customers may not be always possible due to the anthropometric differences in humans, wherein a hybrid design can benefit. Using adjustability, we demonstrate our approach for developing a novel forklift backrest to accommodate drivers with a wide range of body sizes. Field and laboratory evaluations were conducted to assess and improve the design. Our results indicated that the new design could provide improved comfort for longer durations. This study reveals the possibilities for human factors professionals to consider adjustability in vehicle operator compartment interiors, especially backrests and seating, of similar industrial vehicles.
DianatI.NedaeiM.Mostashar NezamiM. A. (2015). The effects of tool handle shape on hand performance, usability and discomfort using masons’ trowels. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 45, 13–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2014.10.006
3.
DuffyV. G. (Ed.). (2009). Digital Human Modeling: Second International Conference, ICDHM 2009, Held as Part of HCI International 2009, San Diego, CA, USA, July 19–24, 2009 Proceedings (Vol. 5620). Springer Science & Business Media.
4.
EltawilM. A.HegazyR. A. (2011). Ergonomic studies on controls layout, drivers anthropometric and noise exposure for egyptian farm tractors. Egyptian Journal of Agricultural Engineering, 28(October), 898–916. https://doi.org/10.21608/mjae.2011.102600
5.
FryarC. D.GuQ.OgdenC. L.FlegalK. (2016). Anthropometric reference data for children and adults: United States, 20011-2014. Vital and Health Statistics. Series 11, Data from the National Health Survey, 3(39). https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_03/sr03_039.pdf
6.
HarihG.DolšakB. (2014). Comparison of subjective comfort ratings between anatomically shaped and cylindrical handles. Applied Ergonomics, 45(4), 943–954. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2013.11.011
KuberP. M.RashediE. (2020a). Assessing the ergonomic benefits of a new adjustable forklift backrest. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 64(1), 976–980. https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181320641235
10.
KuberP. M.RashediE. (2020b). Preparing future human factors engineers for developing ergonomic products using computer aided design and prototyping. In 2020 ASEE St. Lawrence Section Annual Conference Proceedings (pp. 220–221).
11.
LeP.MarrasW. S. (2016). Evaluating the low back biomechanics of three different office workstations: Seated, standing, and perching. Applied Ergonomics, 56, 170–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2016.04.001
LeeW.YangX.JungD.ParkS.KimH.YouH. (2018). Ergonomic evaluation of pilot oxygen mask designs. Applied Ergonomics, 67(October), 133–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2017.10.003
14.
LinC. (2011). Ergonomic assessment of excavator seat. International Journal of Applied Science and Engineering, 9(2), 99–109.
15.
RislundC.HemphäläH.HanssonG. Å.BaloghI. (2013). Evaluation of three principles for forklift steering: Effects on physical workload. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 43(4), 249–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2013.04.011
16.
RoyR.GoatmanM.KhanguraK. (2009). User-centric design and Kansei Engineering. CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology, 1(3), 172–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirpj.2008.10.007
17.
SchubertC.Van LangeveldM. C.DonosoL. A. (2014). Innovations in 3D printing: A 3D overview from optics to organs. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 98(2), 159–161. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2013-304446
WelcomeD.RakhejaS.DongR.WuJ. Z.SchopperA. W. (2004). An investigation on the relationship between grip, push and contact forces applied to a tool handle. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 34(6), 507–518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2004.06.005
