• Tamara Reid Bush and Robert P Hubbard.
• Biomechanical Design Research Laboratory, Mechanical Engineering Department, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA. reidtama@msu.edu
• Hum Factors. 2008 Aug 1; 50 (4): 629-42.

ObjectiveThe authors sought to use biomechanical measures, including motion and pressure, to compare four office chairs.BackgroundThe fit of a person to a chair is related to the geometric and kinematic compatibility between the two. This geometric compatibility influences the motions that are allowed or prohibited and the support pressures at the body-chair interface. Thus, during evaluation, it is necessary to treat the chair and user as a system.MethodFour dynamic test conditions were evaluated with 14 participants of varying anthropometries. Test conditions were selected to compare the ability to accommodate primary and secondary motions (recline and spinal articulation) of seated occupants. The ability of a chair to allow recline, yet maintain head and hand positions, was compared across chairs. Also, the ability of each chair to allow and support spinal articulation was evaluated. Motion data for the chair, head, thorax, pelvis, and extremities were collected along with chair back pressures. Upon completion of testing, subjective assessments were also conducted.ResultsStatistically significant differences were found between chairs relative to head and hand motions. Also, significant differences were noted for the chairs' ability to move with the body during spinal articulation and the ability to provide support. Subjective assessments also yielded differences.ConclusionsBiomechanical analyses using motions and pressures can be conducted on office chairs with significant differences detected in their performance.ApplicationBiomechanical assessments can be used to compare and contrast office chairs in terms that are relatable to fatigue reduction as well as operator performance.

14 keywords...

hide…