Preiser W., Smith K.H. Universal Design Handbook
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
30.8 PUBLIC SPACES, PRIVATE SPACES, PRODUCTS, AND TECHNOLOGIES
These bathrooms reflect the social and inclusive philosophy of universal design. They have
the potential to unify diverse population groups, so no one user group is excluded by their design.
Existing bathrooms, with permanently installed fixtures, symbolize the idea that one bathroom
design fits all users. They tend to homogenize through uniformity. The two innovative bathrooms, on
the other hand, encourage individualization through flexibility and choice, so users can adapt their
bathrooms to suit their personal tastes and preferences.
30.5 THE FUTURE OF THE UNIVERSAL BATHROOM
The current approach to bathroom development has focused on designing task-oriented fixtures—
sink, toilet, and tub/shower—with little consideration for their use, placement, and how they make
up the bathroom environment. These fixtures require people to use them individually and move
around to perform bathroom activities. Emphasis on task-oriented fixture design, rather than on the
bathroom as a place to carry out daily hygiene, undermines the relationships between fixtures and
forces moving around to perform bathroom activities. For example, shower designs do not support
shaving and brushing when showering, even though it is quite common among bathroom users to
shave and shower at the same time. Users are forced to groom at the sink and travel to the shower
for showering. Similarly, many people, including those who catheterize themselves, seek access to the
sink when using the toilet. This access is denied because of the fixtures’ distant placement. The task-
oriented fixture design approach has produced distinctly different products that do not relate well
to one another. Unlike the machines for contemporary industrial production, these fixtures do not
interface well with one another, and bathroom activity requires time, movement, and effort. This may
be fine for most people, but it can be very demanding for many others. Fixtures that allow perform-
ing multiple and related tasks can produce improved bathroom environments and provide significant
benefits for everyone. Better fixture design will diminish time in the bathroom, reduce unnecessary
movement, and benefit not only people with disabilities, but also many other user groups. Everybody
will benefit from well-designed fixtures.
30.6 CONCLUSION
The future of the universal bathroom lies in recognizing that smart technology can ease bathroom
use and add convenience to daily living for everyone. The successful universal bathroom will employ
smart digital technology to establish communication within and between fixtures, so the bathroom
environment would adapt to users and not the other way around. For example, smart technology in
the IDEA Center’s movable fixtures bathroom has the potential to make instantaneous fixture adjust-
ment for stature variations, and to move them for better bathroom layout and fixture relationships. By
activating coded information, it is possible for digital technology to customize the movable fixtures
bathroom to suit people’s individual and collective needs. Better integration of smart technology
in the bathroom will increase convenience, eliminate unnecessary human intervention, facilitate
hygiene maintenance, produce improved bathroom environments, and offer significant benefits for
everyone.
30.7 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Design Continuum, Inc., “The Metaform Personal Hygiene System: Universal Accessibility,” Boston, MA,
2000.
Dychtwald , K., The Age Wave: How The Most Important Trend of Our Time Can Change Your Future. Published
by Sage Publication, 1990.
UNIVERSAL BATHROOMS 30.9
Mullick, A., “Universal Bathroom Design,” unpublished report to the National Institute on Disability and
Rehabilitation Research, 2000.
Singer, L. (ed.), A Bathroom for the Elderly, Blacksburg, Va.: Virginia Polytechnic Institute, 1988.
30.8 RESOURCES
Bakker, R., Elder Design: A Home for Later Years, New York: Penguin, 1997
Bath Ease, http://www.bathease.com/be_main.html.; 2010.
Bathroom safety checklist, http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=Bathroom+safety+checklist&
aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=;2010.
Parents-Care; http://www.parents-care.com/pdf/elderly_bathroom_safety_free_checklist.pdf.; 2010.
Leibrock, Cynthia, “Kohler UD Bathroom” (video); http://www.kohler.com/video/index.jsp?bcpid=823619074&
bclid=1803311448&bctid=647738275; 2010.
Mullick, A., “Bathroom Lifts,” Buffalo, N.Y.: Center for Inclusive Design and Environmental Design, University
at Buffalo, 1993.
———, “Bathroom Seats and Benches,” Buffalo, N.Y.: Center for Inclusive Design and Environmental Design,
University at Buffalo,1993.
Steinfeld, E., and S. Shae, “Accessible Plumbing,” technical report, Buffalo, N.Y.: Center for Inclusive Design
and Environmental Design, University at Buffalo, 1994.
This page intentionally left blank
CHAPTER 31
UNIVERSAL DESIGN OF
AUTOMOBILES
Aaron Steinfeld
31.1 INTRODUCTION
In most North American cities, automobile transportation is the means by which most people travel
when trips are too far to walk. The basic fact is that people with disabilities and older drivers will
need to use automobiles for the foreseeable future (Schieber, 1999), and automobiles are especially
critical for rural residents due to the general lack of transit. Lack of mobility within the commu-
nity corresponds to lack of access to employment, social interaction, and daily activities such as
shopping and entertainment. This chapter examines the major issues related to universal design of
automobiles.
In recent years, increased attention to applying universal design to automobiles has been moti-
vated by awareness of the aging of populations in developed countries and the impact that this
demographic shift will have (Waller, 1991). While the term universal design has not been popular
in the automotive industry, there is interest in the subject. This language gap reflects an underlying
ambivalence about addressing the needs of older people and people with disabilities directly. Too
close an association with aging and disability has been perceived as a marketing liability, particularly
if such features conflict with styling goals.
Despite their ambivalence and priorities, companies in the industry are now aware that the dis-
ability community and older adults are a growing consumer force. Some responses have been made
in recent years. Modifications include the use of tools such as the “Third Age Suit,” which allows
designers to experience the limitations in performance associated with aging and makes them more
sensitive to the impact of aging on driving and riding experiences (Block, 1999). Other automobile
companies have similar efforts underway (Parker, 1999). Unfortunately, most developments in
universal design of automobiles focus on interiors and have not addressed conflicts with structural,
aerodynamic, performance, and stylistic design goals.
31.2 PHYSICAL ASPECTS
Limitations in motor abilities cause significant problems in entering and exiting vehicles for both
drivers and passengers (James, 1985). About 50 percent of one large sample of the frail older popu-
lation reported difficulties getting in and out of vehicles (Steinfeld et al., 1999). Vehicles with high
floors are more common nowadays, and senior citizen transportation services frequently use vans
and minivans. Many older adults have difficulty getting in and out of these vehicles. Another popular
style is the sport coupe that is usually styled to look sleek and low. These require enough agility to
31.1
31.2 PUBLIC SPACES, PRIVATE SPACES, PRODUCTS, AND TECHNOLOGIES
bend the body under low ceilings and to rise up out of very low seats. This problem, combined with
wheelchair access, has led the Vehicle Production Group (2009) to focus on a new vehicle design
called MV-1 that supports easy entry and egress by all passengers. The vehicle includes a low floor,
retractable wheelchair ramp, and a dedicated wheelchair parking area in the main cabin.
Back seats with narrow doors are impossible for many older passengers to use, and the rear seats
of two-door models are particularly difficult for older frail people to use. Drivers who use wheel-
chairs and can transfer on their own, on the other hand, find that two-door models are best for enter-
ing and exiting and loading and unloading their chairs. The doors of these models are very wide, and
having only one door on each side makes it possible to get the chair into the rear of the automobile.
Models with small rear-hinged doors behind the driver’s seat are also popular.
Seating and positioning play major roles in supporting driving tasks. The size of the “useful field
of view,” the “spatial area within which an individual can be rapidly alerted to visual stimuli,” has
been linked directly to accident frequency and driving performance in the older population (Owsley
and Ball, 1993). Consumers in focus groups reported using cushions to prop themselves up to get
a better view of the road (Steinfeld et al., 1999). Positioning also affects interaction with roadside
devices and tollbooths. Limitations in range of reach or grasping strength can make it very difficult
or impossible to use drive-in banking or restaurants. One solution is electronic toll collection. These
wireless payment systems were originally designed to increase efficiency at tolls, but also have sig-
nificant benefit to people with upper limb impairments.
Safety restraints have also been identified as a major problem. People over 55 who had been in
accidents have a significantly higher proportion of deaths even though a higher proportion of the
older group used seat belts (Cushman et al., 1990). One proposed explanation is that the incidence
of inappropriate use of seat belts by older people is much higher than that in the younger popula-
tion. Older people with disabilities have reported not using seat belts or moving the shoulder belt to
a different location because the belts are uncomfortable or cause pain (Steinfeld et al., 1999). The
difficulty of acquiring, moving, and buckling the belt was also a common complaint due to arthritis
and limitations in range of motion. Participants also identified the location of controls for adjusting
seat position as a problem. Many automobiles have the control lever located under the front edge of
the seat. Participants reported that this position was very difficult for them to reach.
Recommendations Box 31.1 Physical Design
• Accommodate passengers with mobility impairments by reduced fl oor height, high door
openings, and wide doors.
• Seats should be high enough to reduce the need to extend legs and reduce the need to
push up while exiting and bend down while entering.
• Include adequate handholds and consider improving access by designing new seating
systems such as swivel seats.
• Seating controls should be easy to understand and operate. Whenever possible, controls
should be located in a visible and easy-to-reach location.
• Roadside devices and tollbooths should be designed to accommodate drivers with limited
reach and upper limb mobility.
• Seat belt buckles should be located and designed so that they can be easily found and
fastened by people with limited upper limb mobility without favoring one side of the
body.
31.3 CASE STUDY: LEAR TransG
Lear Corporation, a major supplier of interior components to the global automobile industry, devel-
oped a concept interior that demonstrated how seating, instrument panels, environmental controls,
and window and door controls can be made more usable for older people (Fig. 31.1). Lear called
UNIVERSAL DESIGN OF AUTOMOBILES 31.3
their concept interior the “TransG” for transgenerational. It had features such as swiveling power
front seats, enhanced graphic display of instruments, and a storage cart that could be stowed in the
trunk.
The seats rotated out at a 45° angle to facilitate getting in and out and reduced dependence on
good balance or strength. The integrated seat belts had a four-point arrangement with a center-positioned
buckle that was easy to latch and see. This design made the act of fastening the belt much easier for
people with limited dexterity or a limited range of head movement. They secured the occupant more
uniformly and were more comfortable. The TransG instrument pod and pedals moved toward and
away from the driver rather than having the seat move. A memory control automatically adjusted
the seat, instruments, and pedals for each user. The floor of the concept interior had a lower step-up
height and a flat load floor to enhance ease of ingress and egress.
FIGURE 31.1 Lear TransG interior.
Long description: Two photos of the Lear TransG concept car. The
doors open at each end of the passenger compartment so that there is
a lot of room to enter and egress the vehicle. The seats rotate toward
the opening for even greater mobility. The steering wheel and instru-
ment cluster is designed to support reduced vision.
31.4 PUBLIC SPACES, PRIVATE SPACES, PRODUCTS, AND TECHNOLOGIES
31.4 PERCEPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Aging, sensory disabilities, and in-vehicle factors such as loud car radios all can result in impaired
perception of the surrounding environment. For example, when distracting stimuli are present, older
drivers can exhibit reduced performance with respect to visual field size, dynamic visual acuity,
velocity estimation, as well as other perceptual and cognitive factors (Hakamies-Blomqvist, 1996).
The effects of multiple disabilities exaggerate limitations in performance. These drivers can have a
reduced ability to detect horns, emergency vehicles, and other unusual events. Parabolic rear-view
mirrors can sometimes help.
Night vision aids (Fig. 31.2) are particularly attractive to drivers who have impaired night vision.
As such, it is possible that older drivers who, in the past, were unwilling to drive at night may begin
doing so without any increase in risk. However, it is also quite possible that they may make matters
worse. These systems provide only monocular views to the driver, thus reducing depth perception.
Furthermore, night vision systems do not provide images that look normal, and drivers are still sus-
ceptible to glare from oncoming vehicle headlamps.
Head-up displays (HUDs) are sometimes attractive to vehicle designers, because they provide
a means to superimpose visual information on the road scene. Experiments involving HUDs have
shown promise, but there are serious perceptual and cognitive issues that need further research
(Tufano, 1997).
One technology that is particularly promising for drivers who have limited neck motion is the
parking aid. Parking aids include rear proximity sensors and other parking collision avoidance
systems (e.g., Ward and Hirst, 1998). These systems typically utilize audible backup warning alerts
when an object is detected. There is anecdotal evidence that such systems reduce mirror use, so
rear-camera systems may be more appropriate, especially due to the poor performance of many
noncamera systems (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2006).
FIGURE 31.2 BMW night vision system. (Courtesy of BMW NA.)
Long description: A demonstration of the BMW night vision system. There are two pedestrians
in the forward scene. They are hard to see since the picture is taken at dusk. The center console
of the vehicle shows a thermal view of the forward road, and the pedestrians are clearly visible
as white silhouettes.
UNIVERSAL DESIGN OF AUTOMOBILES 31.5
31.5 NAVIGATION
As drivers age, some begin to lose their confidence and/or ability to navigate in unfamiliar territory.
If they acknowledge this difficulty, these drivers only drive on very familiar routes. Thus, in-vehicle
navigation systems are attractive as a means to compensate for poor or impaired way-finding abili-
ties. The user interfaces of most navigation systems are small, flat-panel displays mounted on the
dashboard. Audible directions are included in some systems, and HUDs are being examined as
alternative display devices. Interaction problems can include difficult destination input methods
(Steinfeld et al., 1996), visual attention conflicts, and poor understanding of imagery. The most
serious problem is misinterpretation of instructions. For example, in a real-world experiment of one
system there were four critical incidents in which subjects changed lanes upon instruction from the
system without checking for other cars (Katz et al., 1997).
Clearly, it is important that such technologies not distract drivers or overload their mental capa-
bilities. While systems that use speech output have limited visual impact, they exclude people with
hearing impairments unless visual information is also provided. The task of selecting choices and
commands can also distract the driver. Voice recognition systems are often heralded as the saf-
est input method, but they should be usable for individuals with speech impediments or accents.
Multiple language capabilities are also desirable.
31.6 CASE STUDY: PERSONALIZED NAVIGATION
Current navigation systems offer limited customization of routing preferences and lack robust desti-
nation and route prediction capability. In an ideal case, systems would learn a person’s preferences
and predict desired destinations with minimal input. The former is especially important for drivers
who avoid certain types of intersections and road types (e.g., highways, roundabouts, etc.); the latter
cuts down on data entry and distraction. These features can also support dynamic rerouting based on
prior habits. For example, someone may avoid certain roads during rush hour but favor them at other
times. The system would know this and reroute accordingly. See Fig. 31.3. Research on this front is
advancing considerably, and good results are starting to appear (e.g., Ziebart et al., 2008).
31.7 SAFETY
Crash protection, or “occupant packaging” features, such as airbags and passive restraint systems
will not be addressed here. This subject is heavily studied by a variety of laboratories and tracked by
government agencies. Instead, the focus here is on high-tech, precrash safety developments.
Collision warning systems have been on the market but have mostly been installed on com-
mercial trucks. These systems use forward sensors to determine the presence and trajectories of
potential obstacles. A user interface indicates to the driver when dangerous scenarios exist, thus
prompting corrective action. When tied to cruise control, the vehicle can automatically respond to
forward obstacles by releasing the accelerator, shifting to a lower gear, and/or activating the brakes.
This functionality is referred to as adaptive cruise control and is an option on some luxury cars and
Recommendations Box 31.2 Perception
• Ensure that the introduction of new technology does not introduce side effects with
negative safety impacts that outweigh the benefi ts.
• Whenever possible, systems should provide redundant information in alternative
sensory modalities.
31.6 PUBLIC SPACES, PRIVATE SPACES, PRODUCTS, AND TECHNOLOGIES
commercial trucks. While these systems will likely improve safety for the general public, their cost
is high and some design questions remain.
Some precrash warnings use both visual icons and audible tones. This redundancy is good, since
using only audible signals does not provide sufficient information to drivers with impaired hearing.
Approaches involving haptic sensations and vibration have been used to transmit safety-critical
messages to the driver. The tactile modality is more direct and, like hearing, does not necessarily
depend on selective attention to convey a message. However, there are some concerns that drivers
will misinterpret such signals as maintenance problems.
FIGURE 31.3 Personalized routing based on a learned preference (route that avoids left turns goes around the block occasionally).
Long description: A screenshot of Google Maps showing two different routings between the same endpoints. One has fewer left turns than
the other.
UNIVERSAL DESIGN OF AUTOMOBILES 31.7
31.8 IN-VEHICLE INFORMATION
Consumers are expecting increasingly more complex information and entertainment options.
Unfortunately, the addition of these features can lead to “button overload” and the potential for
unsafe distraction while making selections. This has led to multifunction interfaces that integrate
many in-vehicle features through a limited set of buttons and selections using a “menu tree” (Sumie
et al., 1998). This supports a reduction in buttons and use of simpler interfaces, larger buttons, larger
text, and more logical grouping of functions. However, the tradeoff could be a longer selection
period and additional glances to the dashboard. The need to switch visual attention several times
between the road and the dashboard is problematic for all drivers, especially older adults. Older eyes
require more time to refocus, as attention shifts from a distant object (road scene) to a close object
(control panel).
The main problem with many in-vehicle devices is that they are not accessible to people with
hearing impairments. Some may argue that this is good since there are fewer potential distractions,
but there are significant benefits for some of the features. For example, radio reports of traffic con-
gestion or hazardous weather are immensely beneficial. Besides the time saved by route alterations,
there is a safety benefit because advanced warning of congestion or weather leads to higher levels of
alertness. Text-based alerts are useful to hearing-impaired drivers who have good eyesight, but small
text may lead to difficulty for older drivers. Finally, the lack of entertainment beyond basic driving
tasks during long trips can lead to increased boredom for drivers who cannot hear music or other
audio entertainment due to a lack of mental stimulation.
Recommendations Box 31.3 Safety
• System functionality should be easy to understand.
• Alerts and other interfaces should utilize redundant sensory modalities in a standardized
manner.
Recommendations Box 31.4 In-Vehicle Information
• Provide redundant information in a form accessible to drivers with hearing impairments
whenever possible.
• Activities that require high cognitive demands should be permitted only when the
vehicle is not in motion, or safeguards should be provided to only permit passenger
use while in motion.
31.9 POLICY
One area that could benefit from novel applications of universal design is policy. Many licensing
approaches lack appropriate attention to managing the middle ground between driving and not driv-
ing. Some states have restrictions for younger drivers based on time of day, but do not support similar
restrictions for other drivers based on capability. Likewise, some states explicitly prohibit license
restrictions based on location. Drivers who have trouble on highways or in unfamiliar areas are
forced to relinquish their license for driving scenarios they intentionally avoid. Geographic restric-
tions would permit continued independence and mitigate fear of losing one’s license when consid-
ering driver rehabilitation. This lack of a managed progression from driving to no driving results
in disruptive lifestyle changes and loss of quality of life. Insurance companies have entered this
discourse, exploring concepts such as lowering rates if the driver submits to monitoring. These same
monitoring concepts could be utilized to support managed independence in this middle ground.