P. Vink
Please Note
143 records found
1
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.
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. ...
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.
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. ...
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.
Facilitating and enhancing co-creation through multi-sensory mixed reality experiences
A paradigm shift in stakeholder engagement
New frontiers in comfort research
Integrating human needs and design in future mobility
Comfort is a pivotal construct in human-centered design, connecting technical functionality with well-being across products, services, and systems. The 2023 International Comfort Congress (ICC2023) brought together researchers and practitioners to explore how new contexts of use, predictive approaches, and user diversity are reshaping this field. Contributions in this special issue address comfort in automated driving and turboprop aviation, where physical, psychological, and environmental factors converge. Advances in predictive comfort science demonstrate how objective measures, physiological sensing, and modeling complement traditional self-reports. At the same time, inclusive design approaches—ranging from XR-based co-creation to analyses of posture and movement variability—highlight the importance of accounting for heterogeneous user needs and comfort trade-offs. Together, these studies illustrate a shift toward more adaptive, accessible, and sustainable systems, underscoring comfort as a multidimensional construct that evolves with technological innovation and societal change.
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. ...
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.
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. ...
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.
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.
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. ...
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.
Changes in Non-Driving-Related Activities from Conditional to Full Automation and Their Implications for Interior Design
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Dense 3D pressure discomfort threshold (PDT) map of the human head, face and neck
A new method for mapping human sensitivity
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. ...
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.
BACKGROUND: A valid distribution of key anthropometric parameters among participants is often a perquisite of ergonomics research. OBJECTIVE: In this paper, we investigated the accuracy of self-reported stature and body mass of the population in the Netherlands. METHODS: Data from 4 experiments was synthesized where in each experiment, participants self-reported their stature and body mass prior to being measured, of which they were not notified before. RESULTS: Statistical analysis of 249 records indicated that on average, participants overreported their stature by 1.31 cm and underreported their mass by 1.45 kg. This is especially true for people with a BMI ≥ 25. CONCLUSION: Two models were proposed to adjust the self-reported stature and body mass for ergonomic researchers in a survey or recruitment. Limitations in using the models are highlighted as well.