Scholarly article on topic 'Proposition of a Supporting Method for the Generation of Ergonomic Specifications'

Proposition of a Supporting Method for the Generation of Ergonomic Specifications Academic research paper on "Computer and information sciences"

CC BY-NC-ND
0
0
Share paper
Academic journal
Procedia Manufacturing
OECD Field of science
Keywords
{"Industrial design" / Methodology / "Ergonomic specifications" / Interaction}

Abstract of research paper on Computer and information sciences, author of scientific article — David Omar Núñez Diban, Leila Amaral Gontijo

Abstract This research proposes the initial form of a method for industrial design development process. The main goal of this method is to help industrial design student to construct product design requirements considering ergonomic information. The proposed method focused on aspects involving interaction behavior process between human and product. Aspects like body movement, contact and abilities are considered inside the method. The method aims to investigate important information of the relationships between user and product, from two ways of comprehension and analysis. The first point of view considers the user and its way he manipulates and interacts with the product. And, the other is about what the product is demanding from human capabilities and what advantages are offered to the user. The proposal applied a pilot test to improve its possibilities of use and effectiveness comprehension by the students. The methodology applied used two questionnaires. The first questionnaire researches the way the student defines his criteria to select the information to build the requirements of conceptual product. The second questionnaire applied at the end of the process evaluates the scope of the method. In the middle of both questionnaires was exposed the methodology, was observed the product development process made by students, and applied the method. Final, analyzed the results of the method, and compared the results of the questionnaires, was identified some benefits on clearance the objective of the ergonomic information, needed to define the product conceptual requirements. The method provides detailed information allowing the student to identify ergonomic aspects that weren’t considered in previous analyzes. These make corrections to the requirements of the project.

Academic research paper on topic "Proposition of a Supporting Method for the Generation of Ergonomic Specifications"

CrossMark

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect

Procedía Manufacturing 3 (2015) 6036 - 6043

6th International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics (AHFE 2015) and the

Affiliated Conferences, AHFE 2015

Proposition of a supporting method for the generation of ergonomic

specifications

David Omar Nunez Dibana*, Leila Amaral Gontijob

aState University of Santa Catarina, Av. Madre Benvenuta 1907, Florianopolis 88035-000, Brasil bFederal University of Santa Catarina, Trindade, Florianopolis, Brasil

Abstract

This research proposes the initial form of a method for industrial design development process. The main goal of this method is to help industrial design student to construct product design requirements considering ergonomic information. The proposed method focused on aspects involving interaction behavior process between human and product. Aspects like body movement, contact and abilities are considered inside the method. The method aims to investigate important information of the relationships between user and product, from two ways of comprehension and analysis. The first point of view considers the user and its way he manipulates and interacts with the product. And, the other is about what the product is demanding from human capabilities and what advantages are offered to the user. The proposal applied a pilot test to improve its possibilities of use and effectiveness comprehension by the students. The methodology applied used two questionnaires. The first questionnaire researches the way the student defines his criteria to select the information to build the requirements of conceptual product. The second questionnaire applied at the end of the process evaluates the scope of the method. In the middle of both questionnaires was exposed the methodology, was observed the product development process made by students, and applied the method. Final, analyzed the results of the method, and compared the results of the questionnaires, was identified some benefits on clearance the objective of the ergonomic information, needed to define the product conceptual requirements. The method provides detailed information allowing the student to identify ergonomic aspects that weren't considered in previous analyzes. These make corrections to the requirements of the project.

©2015TheAuthors.Published byElsevierB.V.This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license

(http://creativecommons.Org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Peer-reviewunderresponsibilityofAHFEConference

Keywords: Industrial design; Methodology; Ergonomic specifications; Interaction

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +55-48-30286277. E-mail address: omar.diban@gmail.com

2351-9789 © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license

(http://creativecommons.Org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Peer-review under responsibility of AHFE Conference

doi:10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.725

1. Introduction

Throughout this research has been made analyses of various methodologies, product design development frameworks, in which studies discuss the various ways in design development and implementation of certain techniques, tools or methods.

The application of a specific method follows the particularities of each development process or specificity that will be done for the project approach. This particular situation does not confine the applied methods to a single or particular and unique stage of the project. This means that if you select a method, for example the Brainstorming in the creative process of the Product Development Process - PDP, doesn't define it to be used always in this stage of the project. This exploratory method, Brainstorming, can be used in advanced stages of the PDP, as the conceptual, depending on the specific situation of the project, where there is the need to explore new ideas without a strict compromise.

This research proposes a method (from Latin methodus), because it is a process to reach knowledge. In this case, the one linked to the product ergonomic specifications. Thus, the method, aims its application according to demand and not according to a specific stage of the PDP. Otherwise, its origins belong to the early stages of the PDP. However, confine its use to these phases, limit its use and deployment to other parts of the PDP, limiting its benefits on exploring unusual products designs.

2. An idea for a method

The present research propose a tool that works with ergonomic characteristics, important not only for its incorporation at the beginning of the PDP, but also for its extensive comprehension whet reaches subjective information levels, which become necessary for the exploration of new product-user interaction. The primary focus of this proposal is on academic training of new professionals in Industrial design (college students). Therefore, it has been defined as a premise a way of working with low complexity, expending less time and using a language within the universe of the students. Then, the final data, generated by the use of the method, will be in an objective and pragmatic language, enabling its materialization and measurement as design requirements.

The information to be worked on it, as anthropometric parameters, are not considered directly, by its extensive knowledge and application in the PDP. But the results obtained by the method may request these anthropometric data.

Another aspect is to avoid an ergonomic analysis restricted as a corrective proposition to the problems occurred when the product is in use, weakness of the product or by comparison with other a similar product. Therefore, the analysis of the product defects will consider improper use, improper interface or misunderstanding of the product functions. The absence of such understanding was detected when analyzed a group of Industrial Design students, in his first experience of design development. In this situation, it is important to know the interaction between the user and product, for a higher comprehension of future function of the product to be developed. Therefore, the target of the proposed method, from now named MESGEER1', is not restricted to existing data of postural approaches or dimensional analysis of the human body in work situations, widely documented in the anthropometric references. The main goal of MESGEER is the comprehension of the product, understanding the product use-end and the interactions that take place in it, providing ergonomic context data for the construction of the project requirements. But, these may generate subjective content of information. So, the MESGEER works to reduce the ambiguity of these subjective parameters. And generate information that can be manipulated within the scope of project development.

MESGEER = from Portuguese Método de Suporte a Gera9ao de Especifica95es Ergonomicas, that means supporting method for the generation of ergonomic specifications

3. The method characteristics

The MESGEER construction is based on information from Iida [1], Hubault [2], Jordan [3], Pheasant [4], Bonsiepe [5], Hoc [6]. These data are important for defining characteristics of the method, allowing it to achieve significant results in the product design and ergonomics.

The method is focused on usability and interaction between the product and its direct user, important for the participation of ergonomics in PDP [1]. Also includes in its configuration, the three aspects of user-centered design presented by Pheasant [4]. Is Participative, by considering the user in the design process. Also, Takes due account of the user's task, because is an activity specified in the product design process. And want to be Pragmatic, search for the best possibility within practicable limits for the design.

The method also incorporates the division of product structure in the three areas proposed by Bonsiepe [5]: working, handling and informational. This division is appreciated when it research about the product handling and their relation with security, from the functional understanding of the product, through its interface. Also, this division will make easier to understand the complexity that the product can reach against user.

Another consideration for the construction of the method is the understanding of the activity exercised by the user over the product and the possible problems arising from it. So if presented two ways to deal with possible problems within the activity, and understand complexity level in this interaction. The first form is to understand the level of difficulty or easiness in using the product. And the second is to understand the user's [2].

It's also necessary to include the capability to generate data that contribute on the construction of clear and quick identification characteristics of the product. For this, Rabardal [7] defines this as operational transparency, important in product usability, providing to the user: feedback, full knowledge of the technical operation of the product and facilities in the interaction process.

The process of interaction between product and user is dynamic. So, are included procedures defined by Leplat [7]. Firs of all, undertake a review of actions to be done by the user. Then define correctly, the actions that will be allocated to the product, and it's consequences. Finally, the predisposition of the user to learning through the accumulation of experiences and not repetitive processes.

By considering the dynamic situations existing on the relationship between product and user, is suggests to incorporate, to the method, the functions of the GSD [6]. Therefore, the method already incorporates the function of guiding the design requirements actions, and the search of integration between usability and design conception. Also try to increase the reliability of the results, which will be used in the interface construction. And finally, promote originality in the methodological approach.

Will be incorporated the features of compatibility, parity and affordance, for a better understand of high complex situations, [7].

On the other hand, also incorporates two main sources to its construction; functional analysis of the product and usability. Are these two knowledge fields, which provide the basis of the elements to be included in MeSGEEr's development process. The references used for this development are from Bomfim [8], Bonsiepe [5], Burdeck [9], Fonseca [10] and Jordan [3]. These authors approach the understanding of the product from their Functional, Practice, Aesthetic and symbolic attributes, as well as its Formal deployment, Perception, Security, and Convenience. Also are added the usability features of: Consistency, Feedback and Visual Clarity among others.

The presented method seeks the compatibility of these attributes ratings in a unique pragmatic and simplified approach. There will be data related to usability and functionality of the product, confronted between them, so they will allow to get a sense of the size that can achieve within the future product specifications.

An important characteristic of MeSGEEr is there isn't an specific stage to by used within the PDP. The method can contribute to the development (new data to be applied), evaluation (existing data) or validation (and not applied existing data) of product requirements. Therefore, the method being proposed will help in the construction process of the ergonomic specification data for a new product.

4. The method architecture

One of the premises is the simplification and easy understanding of MeSGEEr. However, as seen in the case of the method of Kansei Engineering Type I [11], the inclusion of subjective profile, will require the deployment of analysis in several stages, which in the initial setting as a single step.

Fig.1. MeSGEEr flowchart.

Then, the discussion, analysis and proposal, is restricted to a single aspect: the parameters related to the functional usability of the product. However, working with them involves a process divided into several stages. This division aims a gradual comprehension, as well as procedural documentation, important for any corrective and / or incremental feedbacks along the data analysis process. Thus, the MeSGEEr initial presents a structure consisted of eight (8) steps, after some tests reduced to six (6), with a simplified configuration - Fig. 1.

The six steps of the MeSGEEr are:

Step 1. Design Problem (DP) - This method is not intended to define the problem. So, here corresponds only to have a clear definition of the product development area.

Step 2. Sequential Use (SU) - This phase focuses on the definition of one or more sequences of actions taken by the user when interact with the product.

Step 3. Body Data (BD) - Information based on the identification of parts of the human body involved in the act of using the product.

Step 4. Sensory Data (SD) - Information refers to the identification of the human senses involved why using the product.

Step 5. Functional Use (FU) - This stage aims to identify the activities performed by the user, from two points of view: from the product potential data (future expectations), and from the user know-how (qualities and their expectations about the product). This is considered the most important stage of the MeSGEEr. Here were defined 25 points of analysis of the Human - product interaction, which are:

From the user analysis:

• Activity to be developed by the user.

• Existing User's skills.

• Known activities.

• Easy learning activities

• How to keep under control the product in the act of using it.

• How can user fix a misuse of the product.

• What elements Contribute to user satisfaction.

• The most important information to be detected.

• Ways to realize the functions and priority product information.

• Technologies required for the product and compatible with the skills and knowledge.

• It is effective in meeting basic needs - fulfills the user.

• It is efficient in meeting the basic needs - optimizes the user energy use.

• What the user sees as beneficial aspect to his health and that is within its financial perspective.

• The product, at what level is required.

From the product analysis:

• Priority functions to be made.

• Important components for understanding the purpose of the product.

• More repetitive activities.

• Activities that the user can perform.

• Kind of information provided.

• The supplied information is clearly displayed.

• How to avoid confusing information.

• Signal as feedback of action that has be done.

• How to express what he does or can do.

• How to avoid misuse - uncontrolled.

Step 6. Reflective Construction (RC) - In this step is done the writing of measured demands. That process begins by selecting each one of the topics developed on step 5 plus the information, related to the item, from steps 2,3 and 4. At final, this joined information will be a list of guidelines data that can help the construction or definition of the product design requirements.

5. MéSGEEr in action

The operation of MéSGEEr is considered as a dynamic process, with constant modifications by influence of the complexities of the project and from the human behavior of the design team. The Fig. 2 illustrate this dynamic process and the constantly relationship between the steps.

Fig. 2. Dynamic performance of the MéSGEEr.

Fig. 3. Sequential Use frame.

Step 3: Body Data

It relates It relates to the pro* J net

to another part of the body? KIND OF INTENSITY DURATION OF

Part of the active body jjumi CONTACT OF THE CONTACT THE CONTACT

WHICH? (TIME)

(*ï M

Fig.4. Body Data frame.

INTERATIVE DATA

ANSWER 1 ANSWER 2 ANSWERS ANSWER 4 ANSWERS

STIMULUS RECEIVED FORM THE PRODUCT

BODY PART ENGAGED

DIRECT

FISIC INDIRECT

INTENSITY

DURATION

REQUESTED SENSE

DIRETO

SENSORIAL INDIF1ETO

WHICH SENSE

INTENSITY

DURATION

SKILL REQUIRED

WHICH ONE

COASSE PSYCOMOTOR HOW IT HAPPEN

INTENSITY

DURATION

WHICH ONE

FINE PSYCHOMOTOR HOW IT HAPPEN

INTENSITY

DURATION

WHICH ONE

INTELECTUAL/COGITIVE HOW IT HAPPEN

INTENSITY

DURATION

0TE- Fill as many answers as necessary for each set item (if it exists)

Fig. 5. Sensory Data frame.

Since the design problem is identified, the product family field can be defined and the possible kind of product to be developed too. Them, to execute the SU (step 2), is used a frame (Fig. 3) to fill full all the possible ways of use thought for the product. Here is possible to identify common factors, shared activities through the different listed sequences, which can explain possible behavioral patterns.

The next frames are used for the BD - step 3 (Fig. 4) and SD - step 4 (Fig. 5). There are filled with information of the target user for the future product to be developed.

Understood the physical participation of the product target user, the data requests on FU - step 5 is more clearly to be defined. The predecessors' steps hold the analysis of the human-product interaction, necessary to answer the requests of the FU - Fig. 6. For each request could be more than one possibility of answer.

The final stage of the MeSGEEr is the RC - step 6, where are built the guidelines for the future design requirements. The construction of the data, to be filled in the frame - Fig. 7 follows the equation 1.

RCn(1-25) = FUn(1-25) + SU(a(1-!0) - d^^ ) + CDx + IDy (1)

This means that for each one of the FU exists at least one RC, but could be more. And these information is the result of a fusion of each one of the FU answers with the relevant and linked information from step 2, step 3 and step 4, if they really has a real familiarity with the FU analyzed. Finally, the information obtained is checked with the design problem, and listed as the final guidelines for the product requirements.

STEP 5: Functional Use

n the User's Point of View

Activity to be developed by the user

Existing skills User

known activities Easy to learn Activities

How to keep under control the product in the act of using it

How the user can fix a misuse of the product

What elements contribute to user satisfaction

Most important information to be perceived.

Ways to realize the product's priority functions and informations

Technologies required for the product, compatible with the skills and knowledge

It is effective in fulfills basic user needs optimizes the user energy use

What the user sees as beneficial aspect to your health and that is within your financial perspective At what level is required the product Priority functions to be made

n the Product Viewpoint

u V w X relevant components in understanding the purpose of the product

More repeated activities

Activities that the user can perform

Type of offered information

The supplied information is clearly presented

How to avoid confusing information

Signal to be used to notify one made action on it

how it expresses what he does or can do

expresses what he does or can do

Fig. 6. Functional Use frame.

Fig. 7. Reflexive Construction frame.

6. Final considerations

The way this research was planned to be applying includes two (2) questionnaires and a practical test of the MéSGEEr. Were selected two groups of industrial design students from different levels of skills in project. Then was applied the Questionnaire 1 to know the real level of design knowledge and information of the project that they are developing. After this, was made an oral presentation of the MéSGEEr to the students and requested its use in class. At the end, was applied the Questionnaire 2, which aims to evaluate the perception of the method by students.

Unfortunately, the result of this approach does not brought to much information, because were a low number of participant to consider the results for a conclusive firs evaluation of the method. But, the information obtained, also as the students' behaviors, has shown some things to be improved on the MéSGEEr. One thing that was modified is the number of steps, from eight to six, just modified above in the method. Other modification was on the kind of information needed on the Body Data - step 3. Here, was simplified and joined to tables of similar information. Another improvement that must be done is on the visual construction of method, using draws for a more playful perception and understanding.

For a future improvement of the method, is important to reduce the number of frames, to simplify the information management. Either clarify and made more objective the information of the FU - step 5.

The MéSGEEr must be tested with a bigger group of students of industrial design, before its final configuration. Is desirable for the method an architecture that allows many ways of use and application capability in any stage of the PDP. Also, a easily understanding by the students, to prevent a basic error of a rookie industrial designer, consider as true that what serves him also is adequate to the target user.

References

[1] Iida, Itiro. Ergonomia Projeto e Produçao. Sao Paulo: Edgard Blücher, 2005.

[2] Hubault, François. Do que a ergonomia pode fazer análise. pg. 105-140. em A Ergonomia em busca de seus principios. Daniellou, F. Sao Paulo: Edit Blucher, 2004.

[3] Jordan, Patrick W. An introduction to usability. London: Taylor & Francis, 1998.

[4] Pheasant, Stephen. Bodyspace - anthropometry, ergonomics and the design of works. London: Taylor & Francis LTd, 1998.

[5] Bonsiepe, G., Design, Cultura E Sociedade, Sao Paulo: Edgard Blücher, 2011.

[6] Hoc, Jean-Michael. A gestao de situaçao dinámica. pg. 443 - 454. em Ergonomia. Falzon, P. Sao Paulo: Edit Blucher , 2007.

[7] Leplat, Jacques. Aspectos Da Complexidade Em Economia. Pg. 57 - 78, In A Ergonomia Em Busca De Seus Principios, Daniellou, F. Sao Paulo: Edit Blucher, 2004.

[8] Bomfim, G.A. Metodologia para Desenvolvimento de Projetos. Joao Pessoa: Editora Universitária / UFPB, 1995 .

[9] Burdek, B. E. Diseño: historia, Teoria e Prática do Design de Produtos. Barcelona: Sao Paulo: Edgard Blücher, 2006.

[10] Fonseca, Antonio J. H. Sistematizaçao do processo de obtençao das especificaçoes de projeto de produtos industriais e sua implementaçao computacional. - Tese. Florianópolis, PPGEM- UFSC, 2000.

[11] Nagamachi, Mitsuo, Lokman, Anitawati Mohd. Innovations of Kansei Engineering. Boca Raton, FL - USA, CRC Press - Taylor & Francis Group, 2011.