As automated vehicles evolve, seating designs must accommodate a wider range of postures, particularly for non-driving-related activities such as relaxing and sleeping. This study aims to model human back shapes in seated and reclined positions to improve ergonomic seat designs. Human back contour data were collected from 36 participants using a custom measurement device in two setups: a 25° backrest angle and a seat pan angle of 15°, simulating a driving posture, and a 50° backrest angle with the same seat pan angle, representing a reclined posture. Statistical Shape Models (SSMs) were developed to analyze the variability of back contours. The 25° setup exhibited a flatter spinal curve and higher compactness, capturing 79.7 % of the variance with the first principal component (PC1), compared to 74.6 % in the 50° setup. The combined setup balanced these differences, providing a comprehensive model for diverse postures. Overall, PC1, PC2, and PC3 together captured more than 96 % of total contour variance, indicating that variations in back height, neck bending, and lumbar prominence constitute the dominant sources of geometric diversity. These findings offer actionable dimensions for designing ergonomic backrests that support diverse users and postures. Future research should investigate whether implementing these guidelines enhances comfort and should include more diverse populations and a broader range of postures.

Co-creation has become increasingly important as companies strive to develop more customer-centric products and services by involving stakeholders throughout the design process. This paper introduces XR-CO, a multi-sensory, multi-user mixed reality co-creation platform. XR-CO utilizes an optical see-through head mounted display to create a 1:1 immersive mixed reality environment over essential physical prototypes, allowing stakeholders to physically interact with functional prototypes inside the digital environment. By incorporating visual, auditory, somatosensory and vestibular senses, XR-CO maximizes collaboration and triggers meaningful interactions among stakeholders, leading to improved co-creation quality. To validate XR-CO’s effectiveness, a study was conducted involving 32 participants in co-creation sessions for the development of cabin interiors of a new concept aircraft, the Flying-V. Half of the participants used XR-CO platform, while another half used the conventional desktop co-creation setups. The participants appreciated the XR-CO platforms, as indicated by their high scores in CSI, SUS, co-creation experience, and quantity of ideas in terms of quantitative data analysis. Additionally, 4D scanning of participants movements demonstrated that XR-CO provided a true-to-life perception of the digital space. XR-CO facilitated the discovery of more design issues compared to conventional setups, a finding affirmed by an expert panel using qualitative Delphi techniques. The positive user experience and meaningful outcomes observed in these co-creation sessions serve as strong evidence of the efficacy of the XR-CO platform, particularly the newly introduced somatosense. In summary, our study highlights the significance of XR-CO in co-creation processes. The platform’s immersive nature, combined with the integration of multiple sensory inputs, fosters collaboration, enriches interactions, and ultimately leads to improved outcomes.

Background
Turboprop aircraft offer the possibility of lower emissions for regional travel in comparison to jets. Future low-carbon aircraft concepts include propeller-generated thrust powered from fuel cells, hydrogen, biofuel, battery or hybrid power. The noise and vibration experienced in a turboprop cabin is different to that experienced in a jet, with signals characterised by tonal components related to the propeller blade pass frequency. These components have been associated with noise and vibration discomfort. There are few published studies of aircraft cabin vibration measured on the seat surface according to ISO2631-1; none report data for the whole flight.

Objective
The objective was to measure and evaluate the vibration experienced by passengers for complete turboprop flights and compare vibration data with standards associated with vibration comfort.

Methods
Vibration data was measured on the surface of three occupied seats during two turboprop aircraft flights. Measurements were made on full flights, and covered the entire duration from gate-to-gate.

Results
Data showed that the vibration is highly tonal, and is affected by position and flight phase. Frequency-weighted vibration showed magnitudes below thresholds for health risk. The highest magnitudes of vibration occurred at the blade pass frequency and its harmonics. These frequencies are rejected by standard comfort assessment methods that use frequency weightings.

Conclusions
Whole-body vibration exposure in the turboprop tested in this study did not approach health risk thresholds using ISO2631-1. Analysis of the vibrational comfort requires use of band-limited vibration assessment methods to include the dominant vibration components in analysis.

Background
Current jet airplanes are not sustainable, and turboprop aircraft can be a more sustainable alternative for regional travels. However, the noise levels in turboprops can range from 83 to 92 dB(A), which is higher than jets and is the largest contributor to discomfort in turboprops.

Objective
The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy of utilizing noise-cancelling headphones or earplugs in mitigating (dis)comfort experienced by passengers aboard turboprop aircraft.

Methods
An experiment was designed in a grounded Boeing 737 cabin with the sound source inside. Twenty-four participants experienced four conditions: jet sound (Boeing 737), turboprop (ATR 72) sound, turboprop sound with active noise-cancelling (ANC) headphones, and turboprop sound with earplugs. The sound level used for all conditions in this test ranged between 84.2 and 86.3 dB(A). Passenger experiences were measured using questionnaires, including a newly developed Ear Local Discomfort questionnaire.

Results
The comfort and discomfort scores for the conditions involving ANC headphones and earplugs are significantly improved compared to the conditions without hearing protection. The impact of noise on discomfort is mitigated in these two conditions, though it remains the most prominent factor. ANC headphones cause more discomfort around the ear, while earplugs cause discomfort inside the ear.

Conclusion
The use of ANC headphones and earplugs in a turboprop airplane might increase the acceptance of these airplanes. ANC headphones are slightly preferred over earplugs, but both solutions have specific limitations.

Background
A quantitative comfort model will aid in evaluating comfort levels of various target groups before the actual flight of an airplane. However, constructing the model is always a challenge due to the complexity of the phenomenon.

Objectives
In this paper, we present quantitative comfort models to predict the (dis)comfort of passengers flying with turboprops based on objective measures.

Methods
Ninety-seven participants took part in two experiments conducted during real flights, during which forty of them had environmental and personal factors recorded using (self-developed) measurement tools. The collected data were analyzed to model the relations between objective measures and subjective feelings.

Results
Two preliminary models based on gradient boosting regression were developed. The models were able to predict the changes in comfort and discomfort of individual passengers with an accuracy of 0.12±0.01 and 0.21±0.01 regarding normalized comfort and discomfort scores, respectively. Additionally, contributions of different factors were highlighted.

Conclusion
The outcomes of the models show that we took a step forward in modeling the human comfort experience using objective measurements. Anthropometry (including age), seat positions, time duration, and row (noise) emerged as leading factors influencing the feeling of (dis)comfort in turboprop planes.

To establish guidelines for sleeping space in vehicles, the sleeping postures of 189 participants are studied, 105 of them were asked to take the position in which they fall asleep and 84 have been asked to assume the position in which they lie most of the time. Seven percent slept on the stomach, 19% on the back and 74% on the side and 49% slept on the side with both legs flexed. For all participants a bed size of 200 × 90 cm will do. It is discussed that for one night while travelling a bed size of 171 × 76 cm might be sufficient as it results in a reasonably good sleep according to another study and in almost half of the cases in this study people sleep on the side with both legs folded. Apart from the sleeping space for a good sleep, attention is needed for a dark environment with a good temperature and relative silence.

The comparatively environmentally friendly turboprop aircraft should be used more often, but still need some improvements, especially regarding noise. To facilitate research into these improvements, an On-Ground Regional Passenger Cabin Demonstrator was built and validated through a comparison with passengers’ reactions to real turboprop flights. Seventy-three subjects answered questions on various environmental factors during a simulated flight in the Cabin Demonstrator. Subject testing revealed that the Cabin Demonstrator was overall perceived as realistic compared to real flights, and the comfort level was comparable to the previously conducted in-flight subject test. Thus, the Cabin Demonstrator can be used for multiple future tests.

The idea for this special section started during the Environmental Design Technical Group (EDTG) meeting at the 2023 Human Factors and Ergonomics Society's (HFES) annual conference in Washington, DC, USA. The group discussed how to engage more researchers and practitioners, and one member expressed curiosity about whether people truly understood the expansive nature of environmental design research. Thus, a special issue was proposed to highlight these differences. [...]

Background
In recent years in-chair movements (ICM) have gained attention in comfort and discomfort studies, but the role of these movements in preventing and/or alleviating discomfort remains unclear. Furthermore, differences in study design and terminology make cross-study comparisons difficult.

Objective
This study aims to synthesize current research on ICM, particularly the categorization of different ICM types. It also aims to provide an overview of ICM over time, focusing on their progressions, characteristics, and possible patterns.

Methods
A systematic literature search was conducted based on the PRISMA framework using Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science databases. Data from the included studies were extracted and organized according to three ICM descriptors: frequency, amplitude, and posture change.

Results
Eighteen out of 230 identified papers met the inclusion criteria. Substantial heterogeneity in terminology and measurement partly explains inconsistencies in findings. Across most studies, ICM frequency increased over time, although a minority reported decreased movement or a “stiffening effect”. Findings regarding ICM amplitude were inconsistent, while a shift or change toward more slumped posture appears to be especially common during driving activities. These variations suggest that ICM patterns are influenced by task demands, seat characteristics, and individual differences.

Conclusion
ICM patterns are not solely time-dependent but are shaped by seat characteristics, task demands, and individual factors. While several studies suggest correlations between ICM strategies and discomfort, the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. Developing a comprehensive ICM framework that integrates movement strategies, and active or dynamic seating approaches will benefit cross-study comparability and provide directions for future ICM research.

Most long-haul passengers want to sleep but experience the economy class as uncomfortable. This study explores dimensions of beds and using flat beds in economy class by using the space of four seats and replace these with stacked beds. While feasible, key challenges include safety during taxi, take-off and landing, comfort while using devices, and difficulty getting into the beds. A pilot test with a low fidelity prototype showed that passengers could access the beds, but privacy and space issues are more an issue. The study concludes that, besides seat and bed design, sleep quality also depends on recline angle, temperature, noise, and lighting—factors that airlines should consider.

To reduce the weight of a seat of a city car (A-segment), a car seat was developed. First, a questionnaire was used to define the main functions the occupants prefer to have in the seat. The reclining and forward afterwards movement of the seat were seen as most important. Therefore, a reclining mechanism was built into the lightweight chair. This seat was tested by 39 participants and compared with a benchmark seat of the Toyota Aygo. It was clear that comfort testing is difficult comparing a full developed car seat with a prototype, which still needs development. Nevertheless, the comfort was comparable between the two seats and the shoulder space of the new seat was appreciated. The conclusion is that it is possible to develop a lighter weight car seat, which has the main features preferred by occupants, but further development is needed.

Automated driving frees users from the task of driving, allowing them to engage in new activities. Using keywords related to Non-Driving-Related Activities (NDRAs) and automated vehicles (and their variants), with reference to the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) levels 3, 4, and 5, the authors identified 2430 studies from various databases and sources. Of these, 47 were included in this study, with 39 included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis of the included studies shows a positive correlation between automation levels and the diversity of NDRAs. Communication and interaction with passengers are the most common activities, followed by media consumption, rest, and relaxation. Food and drink consumption slightly surpasses working and productivity, while personal habits and hygiene are less prioritized. Although some users still value vehicle monitoring, this need decreases with higher automation levels. Key activities such as communication, laptop use, and sleeping are highlighted as significant benefits of automation, as users transition away from situational awareness and are able to perform cognitively intensive tasks. The review also addresses potential design implications to support these NDRAs and discusses related regulatory challenges.

BACKGROUND:
In vehicles there is often limited space for seats. This might mean that reclining the back rest reduces the legroom. The second row in a cargo van has this problem and in this limited space an upright seat and a reclined seat with less legroom was developed and tested.

OBJECTIVE:
The research question of this study is: Does a reclined backrest with less leg room result in the same comfort and/or discomfort as an upright backrest with more leg room?

METHODS:
Twenty participants are asked to sit 45 minutes in the upright seat with 8 cm more legroom and 45 minutes in the reclined seat. Ten participants started in the upright seat and ten in the reclined. Participants had to complete a comfort and discomfort questionnaire every 15 minutes and a qualitative interview was conducted after experiencing both seats.

RESULTS:
For comfort no statistically significant differences were found between both seats. For discomfort statistically significant differences were found where discomfort was lower in the reclined seat. Half of the participants preferred the upright and half the reclined seat. The interviews showed that the reclined position was more related to relaxation.

CONCLUSIONS:
This study indicates that a more reclined back rest results in less discomfort, but that does not lead to a clear preference of participants. The reclined position is associated with relaxing, and this study indicates that for the relaxing state the more reclined seat is preferred. For more active situations the upright posture seems better.

Turboprop aircraft should be improved as they are more environmentally friendly aircraft compared to turbojet aircraft but noise and vibration are often too high for passengers. A simple and uncomplicated way to carry out experiments is using a demonstrator. To determine whether the demonstrator represents the reality, it must be validated. In this project, real flights were first conducted in a turboprop aircraft. During two 70-minute flights, 94 subjects answered questions about symptoms, mood or comfort levels related to noise and vibration, among other things. In the next step, investigations will be carried out in the demonstrator under the same conditions as the real flights. Both results will be compared with each other. If the data from the demonstrator corresponds to that of the real flights, the demonstrator is considered to have been successfully validated. The requirement for this is that the demonstrator data lies within the confidence intervals of the results from the real flights. The aim is to validate a full-scale on-ground demonstrator of a regional turboprop aircraft cabin that will be used for multiple tests like subject tests and comfort evaluation, composite materials and structures, systems and energy consumption.

Taking a nap is a welcome pastime in vehicles such as trains, airplanes, and cars. Flat sleeping cannot always be facilitated because of space and economic constraints, but a larger backrest recline angle is associated with better sleep quality. To define the best and the worst comfort experience and sleep comfort in these settings, and to offer design guidelines to practitioners, six backrest recline angles were compared regarding overall comfort and sleep comfort. The backrest recline angles ranged from 110 to 150 degrees, and 180 degrees was added as a reference. 16 participants were invited to sleep for a duration of 90 min. in each condition. Overall comfort and sleep comfort significantly improve in conditions higher than 120 degrees. Local discomfort is rated relatively low in all angles, but in comparison, people experience high discomfort in the neck, lower back, and lower leg region while in the 110 and 120 degrees condition. It is concluded that in the bigger recline angles the napping comfort experience is higher, with a minimum advised angle of 130 degrees.

When designing wearables that interface with the human head, face and neck, designers and engineers consider human senses, ergonomics and comfort. A dense 3D pressure discomfort threshold map could be helpful, but does not exist yet. Differences in pressure discomfort threshold for areas of the head, neck and face were recorded, to create a 3D pressure discomfort threshold map.

Between 126 and 146 landmarks were placed on the left side of the head, face and neck of twenty-eight healthy participants (gender balanced). The positions of the landmarks were specified using an EEG 10–20 system-based landmark-grid on the head and a self-developed grid on the face and neck. A 3D scan was made to capture the head geometry and landmark coordinates. In a randomised order, pressure was applied on each landmark with a force gauge until the participant indicated experiencing discomfort. By interpolating all collected pressure discomfort thresholds based on their corresponding 3D coordinates, a dense 3D pressure discomfort threshold map was made.

A relatively low-pressure discomfort threshold was found in areas around the nose, neck front, mouth, chin-jaw, cheek and cheekbone, possibly due to the proximate or direct location of nerves, blood veins and soft (muscular) tissue. Medium pressure discomfort was found in the neck back, forehead and temple regions. High pressure discomfort threshold was found in the back of the head and scalp, where skin is relatively thin and closely supported by bone, making these regions interesting for mounting or resting head, face and neck related equipment upon.

The aviation industry needs to reduce CO2 emissions. Turboprop aircrafts consume 10-60% less fuel compared to regional jets. In addition, electric propeller aircrafts are now in development, which can be CO2 neutral. However, in turboprop aircrafts the noise level is high and the space is limited. For flight attendants that work long hours in these aircrafts, this could become demanding. In this paper, the environmental comfort and ergonomics are studied in an experiment in a turboprop aircraft as a base for improving the working conditions for cabin personnel in future propeller aircrafts. In general, it can be concluded that the tasks of the FAs in a turboprop are challenging regarding both physical and mental aspects. Unfavourable postures, high forces required for manoeuvring the trolley, little recovery time and a noisy environment all contribute to increased physical workload levels, which cause discomfort. The work is mentally demanding as resting time is very limited on short flights. When developing aircraft interiors, attention should be paid to reduce cabin noise and to ergonomic designs that require lower physical forces and allow FAs to work with healthy postures.

High-speed rail might be a solution to reduce energy usage and carbon emissions as rail transport consumes less energy than airplanes. However, in choosing a transport system, time is an important factor in making many passengers choose air travel. This paper studies the reasons why passengers choose a transport mode, and compares the comfort of aircraft and train seats. This study shows that time and costs are the most mentioned factors, but comfort and sustainability can play a deciding role between trains and airplanes on time and cost-competitive travel routes. The train seat is evaluated as the most comfortable, but still, part of the passengers choose the aircraft as the length of sitting on the seat is limited.

The sleep quality and (dis)comfort sitting upright was studied among 40 participants who took a nap at home. They were asked to take a nap at 17:00h on three consecutive days. The backrest had to be at a different angle every day: upright, reclined and more reclined. They were asked to record the backrest angle of the three positions and report the length of the sleep, the sleep quality, comfort and discomfort and influence of other factors each during each nap. From the 120 cases (3 conditions, 40 participants), the cases where participants were not able to sleep had an average backrest angle of 110˚, which was significantly different from the cases where participants were able to sleep, who had an average backrest angle of 118˚. The scores in the more upright position (<110˚) resulted in significantly more discomfort and a lower sleep quality than in the reclined positions (>123˚). As the conditions were arranged by the participants, there was much variation in outcomes. Therefore, future research under more standardised conditions is recommended.