G. Vledder
Please Note
17 records found
1
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.
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.
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.
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.
...
Changes in Non-Driving-Related Activities from Conditional to Full Automation and Their Implications for Interior Design
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
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.