Questions? Call 888-624-8373

PAPERBACK
list:$125.50
Web:$112.95
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

TCRP Web Doc 1 Bus Operator Workstation Evaluation and Design Guidelines: Final Report (1997)
Transportation Research Board (TRB)

Page
133
bottomleft bottomright
  E-mail
 Facebook
 Digg
 Stumble
 Twitter
More
Page
133

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 133
CHAPTER 4. CONCLUSIONS 4.! Cost-Benefit Analysis . Many factors need to be included to estimate the costs of the prototype workstation. The proposed workstation contains instrument panels that move. Therefore, increased maintenance will result due to the devices that provide the movement. Also, the wires and cable going into the instrument panels will require sheathing to protect from vandalism and large loops to prevent failure due to fatigue. Other cost issues are shown In Table 4.~. The instrument pane] supports will have to be strong for sufficient durability such that they can withstand the vibration levels found on a typical transit bus route. During the development of the workstation design guidelines, attention has been paid to these issues. Of course, each manufacturer will have their own particular method for implementation. The cost investment can be broken down into five parts: fabrication, assembly, installation, initial inventory, and tooling. Table 4. ~ shows the material costs and labor costs. Blank spaces indicate no increase in cost over the conventional. The material costs include initial inventory, while the labor costs include fabrication, assembly, and installation. The prototype did not require any special tooling. - 4.!

OCR for page 134
Table 4. I: Material and Labor Costs (unit: $) Group | Itern | Material cost | Labor cost Misc. Material plywood for instrument panels - 2 sheets 1/2x2x2 birch 10.34 2 inch corner braces -2 4.44 wood screws - 4 boxes 3.52 l 14 AWG wire, 170 ft 10.00 electrical tape- 1 roll 0.47 glue- 1 tube 1.88 duct tape - 1 roll 2.66 wire connectors - 3 boxes 7.83 spray paint - 2 cans 5.68 Al. sheet, 14 g, 24x36 25.44 Talking Bus System* installation (100 unit cost): $5400* RIP fabrication, box (2 furs) 70.00 (right instrument panel) fabrication lid (2 furs) 70.00 additional switch for door 0.75 18 wood screws see above 2 solenoids for door 35.02 ea.) 70.04 Rl P Mount Al stock, 1 x3x1 /4x6ft 34.54 4 coaster wheels 0.76 ea 3.04 11 nuts, bolts, washers, 3/8x4 grade 8 6.62 6 nuts, washers, bolts, 1/4x4 grade 8 2.60 Al angle, 2x2x1/4x2ft (3/16, aft) 23.94 1/4 inch knob 0.93 Al bar stock, 2x7x1 /2 (aft) 35.52 fabrication and assembly, including 30 holes drilled 16.90 install, drill 4 1/2 holes in floor 36.40 Brakes Pedal tubing, connectors, etc. installation Accelerator 227.00 Cl P wood accounted for above (center instrument panel) fabricate - 0.5 day 140.00 20 wood screws see above = 2.33 Pedestal fabrication and material 633.94 4grade8 1/2x4 4.05 6grade8 1/4x2 0.87 handle with knob 10.22 all thread - 1/2x16, 2 It 1.39 install, drill 4 1/2 holes in floor 106.40 steering column - ZF (100 unit cost) 1379.00 steering wheel 170.00 LIP wood and Al sheet already accounted for above (left instrument panel) 4 clamps 29.76 18 1/4x2 grade 8 bolts 2.62 fabrication time 1 day installation plus 16 holes 145.60 sunrise sign system 1 sign 600.00 seat upgrade 600.00 hands-free communication mic and power 175.00 set up time, rigging, layout, etc. 2 days 560.00 mirrors left and right 464.73 35.00 Sum $3917.21 $1814.24 Grand Total (Material and Labor) $5731.45* * Talking bus is an electronic system integration tool as well as stop enunciator and data collection device. If system integration is not included then the ODA is about $1400, for a total cost of $613 1. - 4.2

OCR for page 135
Cost-benefit analysis is a quantitative methodology used to justify the expenditure of funds in controlling a problem situation or, more simply, the dollars spent per negative utility reduction (Brown, 1976). Cost can be defined as the dollar outlay for the incorporation of a device, method, or procedure for a given period of exposure. In this particular study, it was the retrofitting of a standard bus with an ergonomic bus operator's workstation, i.e., the material and labor costs (perhaps, also, increased maintenance costs) for acquiring and installing the necessary components such as an ergonomic seat, a three- degree-of-freedom steering column, and so on. There is a negative utility or dollar cost associated with every injury. This could include direct costs such as medical expenses and Workers Compensation and indirect costs such as lost time, replacement operator training, etc. The benefit is defined as the reduction in the negative utility or decreases in injuries and medical costs. The effectiveness of the corrective measure is then evaluated by the ratio of benefit to cost with larger numbers indicating better utility or effectiveness. For the evaluation of the ergonomic prototype the actual costs incurred and expected benefits from similar efforts pursued at various transit systems were utilized. Thus, the costs of the materials, parts and components purchased for the prototype, plus labor costs (A $30.00/hr) are summarized in Table 4.1 and total $6131. This cost is very similar to the average cost of $6,901 incurred by BC Transit (Vancouver, BC) in their redesign of the operator's workstation. An important aspect is that BC Transit did not incur any increased maintenance costs from their improved workstation. The benefits are projected on injury rate data, direct medical and Workers Compensation costs and per cent decrease of injuries expected due to ergonomic redesigns. Injury data - CTTRANSIT (Connecticut Transit) accumulated a total of 32 injuries over a 6 month period for 515 employees. This amounts to a yearly injury rate per 100 workers of:

OCR for page 136
' ~= ~ 2.43 9 or an injury rate of 0. ~ 243 per worker. 515x 1,000 Direct costs - CTTRANSTT expended a total of $87,000 ($42,000 in direct medical costs and $45,000 in Workers Compensation costs) for these 32 injuries for an average cost of $2,718. Data from BC Transit indicated average direct costs of $5,962. However, these data were primarily back injuries (which tend to more expensive that other types of injuries), as BC Transit had frequent problems with the seats bottoming out. Both values will be utilized so as to give a range of expected benefit/cost ratios. Injury reduction - The projected decrease in injuries due to the redesigned ergonomic operator's workstation prototype is based on data from a similar venture at the BC Transit system. They were experiencing a considerable number of back injuries due to seats bottoming out and implemented a Recaro seat with additional workstation modifications. In the year following the implementation of the modifications they found a 78°/O decrease in the injury rate (from 1.92 to .43 per 1,000,000 km) and an 88% decrease in the severity rate (from 29.42 to 2.72 days lot per 1,000,000 km). These values are very similar to those experienced by one of the investigators (A. FreivaIds) in industry. Over a three year period after implementation of an ergonomic program (workstation redesign, tool changes, training) in an automobile carpet manufacturing facility, the number of injuries decreased by 74%. Therefore, a projected injury reduction rate of 80% for this prototype is not unusual. The benefit/cost ratio is then defined as the dollar cost reductions per workstation implemented per cost of a workstation, or: t°rs~shifts~b )< {injury_ rate_ per_ wor ker } x {average_ injury_ cos ~ } x {°/0_ reduction } workstation cos - 4.4

OCR for page 137
Typically one bus would be used for approximately 14 shifts a week. With each operator working 5 shifts a week, we would expect 14/5=2.8 operators per buss The injury rate per worker from CTTRANSIT is 0.1243. Average injury cost ranges from $2,718 to $5,962 and an 80% injury reduction is expected. This results in a benefit/cost ratio ranging from: 2.8 x 0.1243 x $2,71 ~ x 0.~/$6, ~ 3 ~ = 0.123 2.8 x 0.1243 x $5,962 x 0.8/$6,131 = 0.27 These are calculated on a yearly basis, therefore taking the inverse would result in the number of years it would take to pay off the cost of a workstation with decreases! medical costs. The payoff time would range from I/.27=3.69 to I/.123=~.] years. These values are probably low and payoff time could be expected to be shorter because of several variables that are most likely true but difficult to account for in the direct calculations. Only direct costs are utilized. There are many indirect costs such as lost time, need for replacement operators, training costs for replacement operators, etc. that impact a transit authority. Also. medical and hospitalization costs have been skyrocketing over the past few years and will likely to continue to do so in the future. Therefore, the above costs may be considerably on the low side and payoff time may be considerably faster. - 4.5

OCR for page 138
4.2 Final Design Specifications and Guidelines The workstation should contain several features that are essential to accommodate the population extremes. Figure 4. ~ -4.4 show photos of the prototype workstation. Also, the workstation concept for the guidelines can be found in Chapter 2.~. The necessary components are: a 457 mm (! ~ inch) steering wheel hanging pedals tilt-telescoping steering column (minimum requirement), (tilt-telescoping-tilt ideal) · low profile farebox · pin joint suspension operator seat · seat with air actuated lumbar and back side bolster support features preferred turn signal platform located on the floor angled at 30 degrees housing the turn signals, and high beam switch · adjustable (height and fore-aft adjust) instrument panels that are divided into left, center and right. Operator Digital Assistant (ODA) to act as the central interface to the bus electronics system Remotely activated mirrors Annunciator system which allows push button activation of pre-recorded announcement messages (similar to the Talking Bus system) is preferred (A "hands free" communication system would be ideal). - 4.6

OCR for page 139
- - - Figure 4. i: Left and Right Instrument Panels _ ~ Am. ,,,~6,-~ ~`:- ~ __ ~ :: Hi ... ., ., v. ~ .~, ~ OO ] O:H ~.~ _ A_ r- it: ~ If' Hi" 'A-__ ~c;< ~.:~ . . Figure 4.2: Center Instrument Panel - 4.7

OCR for page 140
~ ~ _ Hi. ~ <' ~ ~ { t: ~:' ~::: ~ .' : ~ - I: ail: ::: ~' ~ ~ ~' :: Hi-: : :: . ~ ,-., ? ~4 _ _ Figure 4.3: Hanging Pedals Figure 4.4: Prototype Workstation - 4.8 r.~. :-, .._

OCR for page 141
The following figures and tables detail the necessary locations and adjustment ranges for the proposed workstation design. Figure 4.5 - 4.7 below are drawings of the The reference points are listed in terms of 5th percentile female, 50th percentile, and 95th percentile male, and are defined in Table 4.3. Also, Table locations listed in Table 4.2. 4.4 details all of the design specifications necessary for the workstation. .v Table 4.2: Guidelines - Component Locations (units: cm) Reference SAE 5% Female SAE 50% SAE 95% I\ dale Point x I y I z x l Y T z x I Y BURP9.3 1 0.0 1 29.6 0~0 1 00 T 36.7 -9.3 T °~° SWRP 48.8 0.0 63.2 44.3 0.0 66.3 39.8 0.0 1LIPRP 43.1 33.0 47.6 38.1 33.0 49.6 33.2 33.0 RIPRP 51.9 -39.0 65.0 45.2 -37.0 67.2 38.6 -39.0 BPPRP ~ 86.6 8.9 11.6 86.6 8.9 ~ 1.6 86.6 8.9 APPRP 86.4 -21.8 9.0 86.4 -21.8 9.0 86.4 -21.8 z 43.9 69.5 . 51.6 69.5 .6 9.0 - 4.9

OCR for page 142
Table 4.3: Reference Point Definitions Ref. Point Definition APPRP Accelerator Pedal Plate Reference Point. Located on the center of the top surface of the accelerator pedal plate. if the pedal plate pivots about the pedal arm, then the reference point is to be located at the pivot location projected normal onto the pedal plate surface. BPPRP Brake Pedal Plate Reference Point. Located on the center of the top surface of the brake pedal plate. If the pedal plate pivots about the pedal arm, then the reference point is to be located at the pivot location projected normal onto the pedal plate surface. LIPRP Left instrument Pane! Reference Point. Located in the center of the top surface of the left instrument panel. RIPRP Right Instrument Panel Reference Point. Located in the center of the top surface of the right instrument panel. SRP Seating Reference Point. The point on the sagittal plane located by two intersecting planes - the compressed seat pan and seat back. If SgRP | (Seating Rei erence Point, which is the H-point (hip pivot point) of the 95th percentile person of the US population as defined by SAE J1 100) is known from seat manufacturer data, can use the following equations (SAE J1 100, SAE J826): horizontal distance of SgRP from SRP = HL12 - HL1 1 x cos(SB1 1) vertical distance of SgRP from SRP = HL1 1 + HL12 x sin(SP9) where: SB 11 is the seat back neutral vertical angle SP9 is the seat pan neutral horizontal angle HE1 ~ is the vertical length from hip pivot to SRP (9.8 cm) HL12 is the horizontal length from hip pivot to SRP (13.4 cm) SWRP Steering Wheel Reference Point. Located in the center of the plane of the steering wheel WO Workstation Origin. Located on the workstation platform directly underneath the NSRP. - 4.10

OCR for page 143
Table 4.4: Complete Guideline Specifications for an Ergonomic Bus Operator's Workstation Design Variables Code Design Value seat horizontal distance of NDEP from NSRP SH9 5.9 cm vertical distance of NDEP from NSRP SH10 75.8 cm seat back neutral vertical angle SB11 10 deg. seat back angle adjustment range SB12 10 deg. seat pan neutral horizontal angle SP9 5 deg. seat pan angle adjustment range SP10 0 deg. seat fore/aft adjustment range SP1 1/ 1 8.5 cm for total of fore- and SP12 aft- adjustments Went range SP13/ 14.3 cm for total of upward SP14 and downward adjustments vertical distance of NSRP from WO SP15 36.7 cm steering wheel diameter TW1 45.7 cm wheel wheel plane neutral horizontal angle 1W5 40 deg. wheel telescope adjustment range iW7 11.0 cm wheel plane horizontal angle adjustment range 1W8 20 deg. horizontal distance of NSWRP from NSRP TW10 44.3 cm vertical distance of ~Y TW11 29.6 cm Brake ~ _ PB1 8.0 cm Pedal brake pedal plate width PB2 10.0 cm brake pedal plate shape PB4 curved brake pedal plate lateral angle PB5 0 deg. brake pedal plate horizontal angle PB6 40 deg. brake pedal plate pivot angle range PB7 0 deg. lateral distance of BPRP from NSRP PB8 8.9 cm horizontal distance of BPRP from NSRP PB9 86.6 cm vertical distance of BPRP from WO PB10 1 1.6 cm brake pedal actuation angle PB20 30 deg. brake pedal actuation force PB21 66.8 ~ 155.8 N brake pedal recovery force PB22 Accelerator accelerator pedal plate length PA1 Pedal accelerator pedal plate width PA2 5.6 cm accelerator pedal plate shape PA4 flat accelerator pedal plate lateral angle PA5 12 deg. accelerator pedal plate horizontal angle PA6 30 deg. accelerator pedal plate pivot angle range PA7 10 deg. lateral distance of APRP from NSRP PA8 21.8 cm horizontal distance of APRP from NSRP PA9 86.4 cm vertical distance of APRP from WO PA10 9.0 cm accelerator pedal actuation angle PA20 20 deg. accelerator pedal actuation force PA21 31.2 ~ 40 N accelerator pedal recove~ force PA22 .~ i Left left instrument panel horizontal angle IL5 5 deg. Instrument left instrument panel horizontal adjustment range IL6 9.9 cm Panel left instrument panel vertical adjustment range IL7 4.0 cm lateral distance of NLIRP from NSRP IL8 33.0 cm horizontal distance of NLIRP from NSRP IL9 38.1 cm vertical distance of NLIRP from NSRP IL10 12.9 cm Right right instrument panel horizontal angle IR5 30 deg. Instrument ~ _ _ IR6 13.3 cm Panel right instrument panel vertical adjustment range IR7 4.5 cm lateral distance of NRIRP from NSRP IR8 37.0 cm horizontal distance of NRIRP from NSRP IR9 45.2 cm vertical distance of NRIRP from NSRP IR10 30.5 cm - 4. ~ ~

OCR for page 156
4.5 Conclusion From the above results the key conclusions are: 1) The bus operator workstation can feasibly be redesigned using ergonomic principles so as to accommodate individuals ranging from the 5th percentile female to the 95th percentile male; 2) The specific prototype designed and constructed by this project was judged superior to the existing workstation by a representative jury of actual bus operators; 3) It is estimated that the additional cost to incorporate the final design guidelines of this research in new buses will be more than offset by savings in terms of reduced operator injuries and worker's compensation claims. The final result of the above work is a guideline for the design of a bus operator workstation that can accommodate the population extremes. This report develops the guideline through rigorous analysis, synthesis and testing. The guideline is presented in two formats; a simple to use version that is essentially a set of engineering drawings which can be incorporated directly into a bus specification and a set of functional relationships which can be used a guide to design workstations with specific features or requirements. Future enhancements can be designed into the workstation as costs permit. Some of these enhancements may include, a memory such that operators can type in a number into the ODA and the components automatically move to preset locations, active vibration control in the seat to accommodate the wide variety of road roughness as well as population, a more adjustable seat pan such that all population ranges are accommodated, and a steering wheel tilt. The prototype constructed in this work did not include a steering wheel tilt because a suitable commercial product could not be located. It was elected for safety reasons not to use an "in-house" construction. In other works that included a steering wheel tilt, the tilt was a physical distance from the hub of the wheel. However, it is felt that the steering wheel tilt would provide improved visibility as well as comfort. - 4.24

OCR for page 157
Future research is required to develop a further understanding of issues involved and to develop cost effective solutions. Each aspect of this project could be expanded to become research projects unto themselves. However, the significant recommendations for future research include the following: 1) The development of an anthropometric data set focused towards the industry. This would allow refinement of the above guidelines. 2) A critical in-depth study of seating comfort including vibrations and long term static comfort. This work should also identify the influence of the operator manipulating the controls on the vibration levels. in addition, the vibration levels found in a typical transit bus should be characterized. 3) This project dealt with the operator's immediate work areas. Future studies should take a comprehensive approach to the entire bus and its layout. For example, can the farebox be reconfigured to provide more visibility and room ? Is the door in the optimal location ? Is the vehicle dynamic properties such as its pitch natural frequency optimal ? 4) Education programs should be developed to educate operators about ergonomics, safe postures, and proper use of equipment like seats that have a variety of adjustments. - 4.25

OCR for page 158
REFERENCES Anderson, Robert (! 991~ 'The Back Pain of Bus Drivers, Prevalence in an Urban Area of California', Spine, vol. ~ 7, no. ~ 2, pp. ~ 48 ~ - ~ 488. APTA (1977) Baseline Advanced Design Transit Coach Specifications: A Guideline Procurement Document for New 35 and 40-Foot Coach Dimensions, Washington, D.C., American Public Transit Association. Berger, E. and Gilmore, B.~. (1993) Seat Dynamic Parameters for Ridle Quality, SAE 9301 ~ 5, Warrendale, PA, Society of Automotive Engineers, Boileau, P.E. and Boutin, I. (1990) Vibration Study for the Driver's Work Station in Urban Buses, Quebec, Institut de recherche en sante et en securite du travail du. Boileau, P. E., Scory, H. and Turcot, D. (1989) 'Evaluation of Whole-Body Vibration Exposure Using a Fourth Power Method and Comparison with ISO 2631', Journal of Sounci and Vibration, vol. 129, pp. 143-1 54. Bovenzi, M. and Zadini, A. (1992) 'Self-Reported Low Back Symptoms in Urban Bus Drivers Exposed to Whole-Body Vibration', Spine, vol. 17, no. 12, pp. 1048-1059. Brown, D.B. ~976) Systems Analysis and Design for Safety, Prentice-Hall. Bucciaglia, I., Lowe, B., You, H., Gilmore, B.~., and Freivalds, A. (1995) Work Station Mock-up Evaluation, The Pennsylvania Transporation Institute.

OCR for page 159
Bucciaglia, I. (] 995) Transit Bus Operator Work Station Design Synthesis and Analysis, M.S.M.E. Thesis, The Pennsylvania State University. Burdrf, A. and Swnste, P. (1993) 'The Effect of Seat Suspension on Exposure to Whole- body Vibration of Professional Drivers', Ann. Occup. Hyg. vol. 37, no. ~ ., pp. 45-55. Carrier, R., Gilbert, R. and Gourmain, P. (1992) Ergonomic Study of the Driver's Work Station in Urban Buses, Toronto, Canadian Urban Transit Association. Carson, Roberta, (! 993) 'Ergonomically Designed Chairs Adjust to individual Demands', Occupational Health and Safety, June, pp. 71-75, Chafed, D.B. and Gunnar, B. (1991) Occupational Biomechanics, 2nd ea., New York, John Wiley and Sons, Inc. FMVSS (1993) Code of Federal Regulations, Part 571, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, Washington, DC, Office of The Federal Register National Archives and Records Administration. Computer Graphics Research Laboratory (1994) Jack User's Guide, Computer Graphics Research Laboratory, The University of Pennsylvania. CorIett, E.N. and Bishop, R.P. (1976) 'A Technique for Assessing Postural Discomfort', Ergonomics, vol. ~ 9, pp. ~ 75- ~ 82. Courtney, Ad., and Evans, W.A. (1987) 'A Preliminary investigation of Bus Cab Design for Cantonese Drivers', Journal of Human Ergology, vol. ~ 6, pp. ~ 63-l 71. Davis, I. R. (1959) 'Manual of Surface Electromyography', WADC Technical Report 59-! 84, Wright Patterson Air Force Base Aerospace Medical Laboratory.

OCR for page 160
Diffreint, N., Tilley, A. R., and Harman, D. (1981) Human Scale 7/8/9, Cambridge, MA, The MIT Press. Dimarogonas, A. (1989) Computer Aided Machine Design, Prentice Hall. Evans, G.W. (1994) 'Working on the Hot Seat: Urban Bus Operators', Accident Analysis and Prevention, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. I 81-193. ISO (1985) Evaluation of human exposure to whole-body vibration, ISO 2631, International Standards Organization. Gilmore, B.J. (] 994) Investigate, Develop and Determine the Compressibility Factors for Bus Durability Testing, PTI internal report. Gilmore, B.J.,Bucciaglia, J., Lowe, B., You, H., and Freivalds, A. (1994) Bus Operator Work Station Evaluation and Design Guidelines - Draft Interim Report, submitted to TCRP. Gilmore, B.J., Bucciaglia, J., Lowe, B., You, H. and Freivalds, A. (1995) Bus Operator Workstation Evaluation and Design Guidelines. Workstation Mock-up Evaluation Report, PTI 9521, The Pennsylvania Transportation Institute. Gilmore, J., You, H., Lowe, B., Freivalds, A., and Oesterling, B. (1995b) Bus Operator Workstation Evaluation and Design Guidelines: Instrument Pane! Layout Design, The Pennsylvania Transportation Institute. Griffin, M. J. (1990) Handbook of Human Vibration, San Diego, Hartcourt Brace and Jovanovich.

OCR for page 161
Hemmings, K. R. (1974) 'Commercial-Vehicle Cabs: Design for Packaging, Access and Visibility', Proc. Instn. Mech. Engrs, vol. 188, pp. 345-356. Jex, H. R., and Zellner, J. W. (1981) Significant Factors in Truck Ride Quality, FHWA/RD-81/139, 240 pp. Koester, D. and Hamilton, R. (1994) A Methodologyfor Evaluating Barriers and Aids to Vehicle Ingress/Egress, SAE 940388, Warrendale, PA, Society of Automotive Engineers. Krantz, G. (1994) Driver Workstation Upgrade on BC Transit Buses, Unpublished Report, B.C. Transit. Kroemer, K., Kroemer, H. and Kroemer-Elbert, K. (1994) Ergonomics: How to Design for Ease and Efficiency, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, ]:nc. Kuorinka, I., Jonsson, B., Kilbom, A., Vinterberg, H., Biering-Sorensen, F., Andersson, G. and Jorgensen, K. (1987) 'Standardized Nordic Questionnaires for the Analysis of Musculoskeletal Symptoms', Applied Ergonomics, vol. 18, pp. 233-237. Lee, M.W., Yun' M.H., Park, D.H., Chun, Y.H., Jung, E.S., and Freivalds, A. (1993) 'EYES - Ergonomics in a Conceptual Design Process for Consumer Electronic Products,' Proceedings of 35th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors Society, pp. 1101 -1 ~ 05. Lowe, B.D., You, H.C., Bucciaglia, J.D., Gilmore B.J., and Freivalds, A. (1995) 'An Ergonomic Design Strategy for the Transit Bus Operstors' Workspace', Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 39th Annual Meeting' Santa Monica, CA, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, pp. 1142-46. Mandell, S.M., Andrew, S.P. and Ross B. (1990) A Historical Survey of Transit Buses in the U.S., Warrendale, PA, Society of Automotive Engineers.

OCR for page 162
Matsuoka, Y. and Hanai, T. (1988) Study of Comfortable Sitting Posture, SAE 880054, Warrendale, PA, Society of Automotive Engineers. McDowell, I. (1994) Personal Conversation, TMC Corporation. Monod, H. and Scherrer, I. (1965) 'The Work Capacity of a Synergistic Muscular Group', Ergonomics, vol. 8, pp. 329-338. Oesterling, B. P. (1997) Evaluation of Transit Bus Operator Seats Based on Vibration Isolation, M.S.M.E. Thesis, The Pennsylvania State University. Patterson, P.K., Eubanks, T.~. and Ramseyer, R. (1986) 'Back Discomfort Prevalence and Associated Factors Among Bus Drivers', AAOHN Journal, vol. 34, no. 10, pp. 481- 484. Peters, G.A., and Peters, B.~. ~993) Automotive Engineering and Litigation, Volumes and 2, Santa Monica, CA, John Wiley and Sons, Inc. Philippart, Am., Kuechenmeister, T.~., Ferrara, R.A. and Arnold, A.~. Ir. (198S) The Effects of the Steering Wheel to Pedal Relationship on Driver-Selected Seat Position, SAE 8503 ~ I, Warrendale, PA, Society of Automotive Engineers. Philippart' N.~., Kuechenmeister, T.J. and Stanick, I.M. (1986) Truck Driver Selected Seat Position Model, SAE 86 ~ ~ 3 I, Warrendale, PA, Society of Automotive Engineers. Pradko, F. and Lee, R.A. (1966) Vibration Comfort Criteria, SAE 660139, Warrendale, PA, Society of Automotive Engineers.

OCR for page 163
Rakheja, S. and Sankar, S. (1984) Suspension Designs to Improve Tractor Ride. 1. Passive Seat Suspension, SAE 841107, Warrendale, PA, Society of Automotive . Engineers. Rebiffe, R. (1966) 'An Ergonomic Study of the Arrangement of the Driving Position in Motor Cars. London', Proceedings of the Symposium of the :Institute of Mechanical Engineers, Institute of Mechanical Engineers, vol. ~ ~I, Pt. 3D, pp. 43-50. Reed, M. P., Saito, M., Kakishima, Y., Lee, N. S., Schneider, L. W. ~ ~ 99 ~ ~ An Investigation of Driver Discomfort and related Seat Design Factors in Extended Duration Driving, SAE 910 1 ~ 7, Warrendale, PA, Society of Automotive Engineers. Rohmert, W. (1 960) 'ErmittIung von Erholungspausen fur Statische Arbeit des Menschen', Int Z angew Physio! einsch! Arbeits-physiol, vol. ~ 8, pp. 123-1 64. Seattle Metro (1993) Request for Proposals, Manufacture and Delivery of Heavy Duty Transit MotorBuses, Contract MB 94-l, Seattle, WA, Seattle Metropolitan Transit Authority. Schneider, L.W., Reed, M.P. and Manary, M.A. (1991) 'Accommodating the Driving Population', The University of Michigan Transportation Research :Institute Research Review, vol. 2 l, no. 4, January-February. Saaty, T. L. (1980) The Analytic Hierarchy Process, Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation, McGraw-HiTI. Saaty, T. 1:,. (1982) Decision Making for Leaders: The Analytic Hierarchy Process in a Complex WorId, Lifetime Learning Publications. Salvendy, G. (lL987) Handbook ofHuman Factors, John Wiley& Sons.

OCR for page 164
Sanders, M. S. and McCormick, E. I. (1993) Human Factors in Engineering and Design, 7th Ed., McGraw-Hill. Sheridan, T. B., Meyer, I. E., Roy, S. H., Decker, K. S., Yanagishima, T. and Kishi, Y. (1991) Physiological and Psychological Evaluations of Driver Fatigue During I=ong Term Driving, SAE 9101 ~ 6, Warrendale, PA, Society of Automotive Engineers. SAE (! 994) 1994 SAE Handbook, Warrendale, PA, Society of Automotive Engineers. Anon. ~ 986) Southern California Rapid Transit District Anthropometric Study, Pasadena, CA. Varterasian, I. H. (1982) On Measuring Automobile Seat Ride Comfort, SAE 820309, Warrendale, PA, Society of Automotive Engineers. Wambold, I. C. ~986) Vehicle Ride Quality--Measurement and Analysis, SAE 86~ ~ ~3, Warrendale, PA, Society of Automotive Engineers. Wilkstrom, B-O., Kjeliberg, A., and Landstrom, U. (! 994) 'Health Effects of Long-term Occupational Exposure to Whole-body Vibration: A Review', International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, vol. ~ 4, pp. 273-292. Winkleby, M.A., Ragland, D.R., Fisher, I.M. and Syme, SO (1988) 'Excess Risk of Sickness and Disease in Bus Drivers: A Review and Synthesis of Epidemiological Studies', :International Journal of Epidlemiology, vol. ~ 7, no. 2. Woodson, W.E. (1981) Human Factors Design Handbook, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company.

OCR for page 165
You, H., Bucciaglia, J., Lowe, B., Gilmore, B.J. and Freivalds, A. (1995) Bus Operator Workstation Evaluation and Design Guidelines. An Ergonomic Design Process for a Transit Bus Operator Workstation, PT] 9523, The Pennsylvania Transportation institute.

OCR for page 166

Representative terms from entire chapter:

steering wheel