Journal of the Ergonomics Society of Korea (대한인간공학회지)

Ergonomics Society of Korea (대한인간공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Evaluation of Integral Seat Desk used in Universities based on KS/ISO Standard and Questionnaire Survey

  • Kee, Dohyung (Department of Industrial and Management Engineering, Keimyung University)
  • Received : 2014.02.13
  • Accepted : 2014.04.11
  • Published : 2014.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study is to evaluate integral seat desk used in universities through comparison of real dimension values of the desk with KS/ISO standard and questionnaire survey. Background: School furniture that helps students sit comfortably for longer periods of time and allows for better concentration on learning is important. However, seat and desk have been generally designed based on the industry practice rather than user's anthropometry, and seats and desks used in universities of Korea have not been ergonomically evaluated. Method: Real 13 dimensions of the desk used in K University were measured using tape measure and inclinometer, and the dimension values were compared to the KS standard of desk and chair for lecture room (KS G 4210) and ergonomic design principles found in relevant references. Subjective appropriacies and preference for the desk were investigated based on questionnaire survey, in which 121 (male: 91, female: 30) college students participated. Results: Several dimensions for the desk and chair investigated except desk depth and width, leg room width, seat width have not met the KS standard, but all dimensions satisfied ergonomic design principles available in references. The questionnaire survey revealed that appropriacies for desk surface size, seat pan depth, seat pan cushion and backrest curvature were under middle point of 3.0, and that those for the other dimensions showed higher scores exceeding 3.0. Conclusion: The integral seat desk widely used in universities showed some design problems in terms of standards of KS G 2010 and KS G 4210, and ergonomic design principles. Compared to the general desk with separated desk and seat, subjective preference on the integral seat desk was low. Application: This would be used as a valuable guideline when designing or choosing new integral seat desk with high satisfaction of students.

Keywords

References

  1. Agha, S.R., School furniture match to students' anthropometry in the Gaza Strip, Ergonomics, 53, 344-354, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130903398366
  2. Castellucci, H.I., Arezes, P.M. and Viviani, C.A., Mismatch between classroom furniture and anthropometric measures in Chilean schools, Applied Ergonomics, 41, 563-568, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2009.12.001
  3. Corlett, E.N., Background to sitting at work: research-based requirements for the design of work seats, Ergonomics, 49, 1538- 1546, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130600766261
  4. Dianat, I., Karimi, M.A., Hashemi, A.A. and Bahrampour, S., Classroom furniture and anthropometric characteristics of Iranian high school students: Proposed dimensions based on anthropometric data, Applied Ergonomics, 44, 101-108, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2012.05.004
  5. Drury, C.G. and Coury, B.G., A methodology for chair evaluation, Applied Ergonomics, 13(3), 195-202, 1982. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-6870(82)90006-0
  6. Fernandez, J.E. and Poonawala, M.F., How long should it take to evaluate seats subjectively? International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 22, 483-487, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-8141(97)90014-7
  7. Geldhof, E., De Clercq, D., De Bourdeaudhuij, I. and Cardon, G., Classroom postures of 8e12 year old children, Ergonomics, 50, 1571-1581, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130701587251
  8. Jeong, B.Y. and Park, K.S., Sex differences in anthropometry for school design, Ergonomics, 33(12), 1511-1521, 1990. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139008925350
  9. KATS (Korean Agency for technology and Standard), Sizes and dimensions of fixed desk and chair for lecture rooms (KS G 4210), 2005.
  10. KATS (Korean Agency for technology and Standard), Furniture-Chairs and tables for educational institutions-Functional sizes (KS G 2010), 2011.
  11. Kee, D., Lee, K.T., Park, J.H. and Choi, K.I., Ergonomics for industrial safety and health managers, 3rd ed., Hankyungsa, 2011.
  12. Kim, E.H. and Park, J.H., A survey on the students' discomfort to school desks and chairs, Proceedings of Fall Conference of Korea Society of Emotion and Sensibility, 2009.
  13. Koskelo, R., Vuorikari, K. and Hänninen, O., Sitting and standing postures are corrected by adjustable furniture with lowered muscle tension in high-school students, Ergonomics, 50, 1643-1656, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130701587236
  14. Milanese, S. and Grimmer, K., School furniture and the user population: an anthropometric perspective, Ergonomics, 47, 416-426, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1080/0014013032000157841
  15. Murphy, S., Buckle, P. and Stubbs, D., A cross-sectional study of self-reported back and neck pain among English schoolchildren and associated physical and psychological risk factors, Applied Ergonomics, 38, 797-804, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2006.09.003
  16. Niebel, B. and Freivalds, A., Methods standards & Work design, 10th ed., McGraw-Hill Inc., 1993.
  17. Pheasant, S., Bodyspace: Anthropometry, Environments and the design of work, Taylor & Francis, 1995.
  18. Trevelyan, F.C. and Legg, S.J., Risk factors associated with back pain in New Zealand school children, Ergonomics, 54, 257-262, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2010.547608
  19. Troussier, B., Tesniere, C., Fauconnier, J., Grisons, J., Juvin, R. and Phelip, X., Comparative study of two different kinds of school furniture among children, Ergonomics, 42, 516-526, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1080/001401399185612
  20. Saarni, L., Nygård, C.H., Kaukiainen, A. and Rimpelä, A., Are the desks and chairs at school appropriate? Ergonomics, 50, 1561-1570, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130701587368
  21. Savanur, C.S., Altekar, C.R. and De, A., Lack of conformity between Indian classroom furniture and student dimensions: proposed future seat/table dimensions, Ergonomics, 50, 1612-1625, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130701587350
  22. Sanders, M.S. and McCormick, E.J., Human factors in engineering and design, 6th Ed., McGraw-Hill Inc., 1987.
  23. Size Korea Home Page, http://sizekorea.kats.go.kr/ (retrieved January 10, 2014).