In this paper, a procedure for determining the percentage excluded from a seat-console design, given the percentage excluded on individual dimensions is described. Seven critical anthropometric variables for seat-console design were identified. A “computerized accommodated percentage evaluation (CAPE)” model was used to determine the percentage excluded on the total design of a seat console as critical limits were imposed on each individual anthropometric dimension. Results of this paper are applicable to meeting MIL-STD-1472B criteria for accommodating 90 percent of the potential user population.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BittnerA. C.Jr.Computerized Accommodated Percentage Evaluation (CAPE) Model for Cockpit Analysis and Other Exclusion Studies. Point Mugu, California, Pacific Missile Test Center, 1975 (TP-75-49).
2.
BittnerA.C.Jr.. Reduction in Potential User Population as the Result of Imposed Anthropometric Limits: Monte Carlo Estimation. Point Mugu, California, Naval Missile Center, 1974 (TP-74-6).
3.
BittnerA. C.Jr.MoroneyW. F.The Accommodated Proportion of a Potential User Population: Compilation and Comparisons of Methods for Estimation. Proceedings of Human Factors Society-74; Santa Monica, Human Factors Society, 15 October 1974, 6 p. (Paper also read at HFS-74 Symposium).
4.
BittnerA. C.Jr.MorrisseyS. J.MoroneyW. F.Demonstration of an Approach to Evaluate Cockpit/Aircrew Compatability: Advanced Harrier (AV-16A) Analysis. Point Mugu, California, Pacific Missile Test Center, 1975 (TP-75-31).
5.
BittnerA. C.Jr.HalcombC. G.Validation Studies of a Computerized Accommodated Percentage Evaluation (CAPE) Model. Point Mugu, California, Pacific Missile Test Center, 1976 (TP-76-2).
6.
DanielsG. C.The Average Man? Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. Wright Air Development Center, 1952. (Technical Note WCRD-53-7).
7.
DannhausD. M.BittnerA. C.Jr.AyoubM. M.Seating, Console, and Workplace Design: An Integration of the Literature. Point Mugu, Calif., Pacific Missile Test Center, 1976 (TP-76-1B).
8.
Department of Defense (DoD). Human Engineering Design Criteria for Military Systems, Equipment and Facilities (MIL-STD-1472B), 1975.
9.
MorganC. T.CookJ. S.ChapanisA.LundM. W.Human Engineering Guide to Equipment Design. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1963.
10.
MoroneyW. F.SmithM. J.Empirical Reduction in Potential User Population as the Result of Imposed Multivariate Anthropometric Limits. Pensacola, Florida. Naval Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory, 1972. (NAMRL-1164).
11.
MorrisseyS. J.BittnerA. C.Jr.HalcombC. G.Study of the Applicability of a Computerized Accommodated Percentage Evaluation (CAPE) Model to Clothing Variables. Point Mugu, Calif, Pacific Missile Test Center, 1976 (TP-76-37).
12.
RoebuckJ. A.Jr.KroemerK. H. E.ThomsonW. G.Engineering Anthropometry Methods. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1975.
13.
Van CottH. P.KinkadeR. G.Human Engineering Guide to Equipment Design. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972.
