3.9 Article

Pressure Measurements and Comfort of Foam Safety Cushions for Confined Seating

期刊

AVIATION SPACE AND ENVIRONMENTAL MEDICINE
卷 80, 期 6, 页码 565-569

出版社

AEROSPACE MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.3357/ASEM.2320.2009

关键词

Seat comfort; viscoelastic foam; ischemia; glider; aircraft; energy-absorbing foam; pilot comfort

向作者/读者索取更多资源

JACKSON C, EMCK AJ, HUNSTON MJ, JARVIS PC. Pressure measurements and comfort of foam safety cushions for confined seating. Aviat Space Environ Med 2009; 80:565-9. Introduction: Glider flights may require the pilot to sit for many hours in a cramped cockpit that allows little movement. Experiments were undertaken to evaluate the performance of different seat cushions in a glider simulator. Methods: Subjects were male glider pilots with a maximum height of 1.85 m (6.07 ft) who participated in simulated glider flights lasting 1.5 h. A pressure-mapping device Was used to determine cushion performance. By analyzing 15 Subjects we calculated the pressure threshold for comfort, above which fidgeting provided objective evidence of discomfort. To determine cushion performance relative to that threshold, 20 other pilots then sat on 5 different viscoelastic foam cushions in the simulator. Results: The time-averaged peak pressure below which no discomfort-induced fidgeting occurred was 8.8 kPa (1.28 psi). The highest peak pressure at which discomfort could be relieved by fidgeting was I 1.0 kPa (1.6 psi). Of the five Cushions tested, pressure remained below the discomfort threshold for almost all subjects for only one type of cushion. Discussion: The best-performing Cushion had a layered structure made up of approximately 25 mm of Confor C47 foam with an overlay of approximately 13 mm of Confor C45. The other types of energy-absorbing cushions tested, either with or without a softer top layer, are unlikely to provide comfortable seating solutions for most pilots. We conclude that satisfactory cushions are available for this application and that they can be objectively evaluated using this technique.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据