...
首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics >Human-seat interface analysis of upper and lower body weight distribution
【24h】

Human-seat interface analysis of upper and lower body weight distribution

机译:上下体重分布的人机界面分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

The human-seat interfaces were analyzed to determine the differential distribution of the body weight to the components of seat. Fifteen volunteers were tested on a simulated seat system with two piezoelectric force platforms, one placed as chair seat pan and the other placed on the floor surface as footrest. The seated configurations included back inclines (75° and 80°), upright (90°) and reclines (95°, 105° and 115°), absence or presence of armrest (adjusted at 62-68 cm of height), forward and backward sloping of the seat pan, and supported and unsupported back. The armrest and backrest assemblies were isolated from the force platforms. The difference in the body weight (kgf) to the sum of forces recorded at seat pan and feet yielded the extent of weight transferred to other features (e.g., backrest and armrest). The weight distributed at seat was 10-12% less at back inclines (p<0.01) as compared to upright unsupported sitting. With the backrest reclined beyond 95°, the weight at seat gradually decreased by 9% at 115° recline. The load distributed at feet varied narrowly; however, it was significantly greater (p<0.01) at upright supported back, compared to unsupported back. The height of the armrest was optimized at 68 cm, since the weight distribution at seat pan consistently reduced by 12% at that height, as compared to the absence of armrest (F{sub}(4,524) = 8.80, p<0.05). The suggested height of the armrest corresponded to 40% of the body stature of the selected volunteers. The-load distributed at feet was 18% greater with the presence of armrest, indicating that a part of the weight of the upper leg fell on the seat pan, when the armrest was absent. The weight fell on the seat in slouch posture was 5% less than in upright sitting, while the weight at feet was marginally higher in slouch than in upright posture. The study maintained that the horizontal as well as 5° forward slope of the seat might be the preferred choice, since the load distributed at seat was highest at backward sloping seat for all conditions of supported and unsupported back. The study reaffirms that the backrest and armrest have conjoint influence in reducing the load distributed at seat, which in turn might help in mitigating stress on the spinal and other paraspinal structures.
机译:分析人机界面,以确定体重与座椅组件的差异分布。 15名志愿者在模拟的座椅系统上进行了测试,该系统具有两个压电推力平台,一个作为椅子座椅盘放置,另一个作为脚凳放置在地板上。座椅配置包括后倾斜(75°和80°),直立(90°)和倾斜(95°,105°和115°),不存在或存在扶手(调整为62-68 cm的高度),向前和向后倾斜。座椅底板向后倾斜,以及支撑和不支撑的靠背。扶手和靠背组件与受力平台隔离。体重(kgf)与座板和脚上所记录的力之和的差得出了转移到其他功能部件(例如靠背和扶手)上的重量范围。与无支撑的直立坐位相比,后背坐位的重量减轻了10-12%(p <0.01)。靠背倾斜超过95°时,座椅的重量在115°倾斜时逐渐减少了9%。分布在脚上的负载变化很小;但是,与无支撑的背部相比,立式支撑的背部明显更大(p <0.01)。扶手的高度优化为68厘米,因为与没有扶手的情况相比,在该高度处座板的重量分布始终减小了12%(F {sub}(4,524)= 8.80,p <0.05)。建议的扶手高度相当于所选志愿者身高的40%。在没有扶手的情况下,脚上的负载分配增加了18%,这表明在没有扶手的情况下,大腿的一部分重量落在了座板上。懒散姿势的座椅重量要比直立坐的重量少5%,而懒散脚的重量要比直立姿势的重量略高。该研究认为,座椅的水平和向前倾斜5°可能是首选,因为在所有有支撑和无支撑的靠背情况下,向后倾斜的座椅在座椅上分配的载荷最高。该研究重申,靠背和扶手对减少座椅上的负荷分布具有共同的影响,这反过来可能有助于减轻脊柱和其他脊柱旁结构的压力。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号