Assessment of Types of Prototyping in Human-Centered Product Design

  • Salman AhmedEmail author
  • Jianfu Zhang
  • Onan Demirel
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10917)


One of the challenges that human-centered product designers face while generating and validating a design concept is the dilemma of whether to build a full physical prototype, a full computational simulation or a combination of both. A full physical prototype can assist designers to evaluate the human-product interactions with high-fidelity, but it requires additional time and resources when compared to a computational prototype, which is a cheaper option but provides low-fidelity. Human-product interactions often require complex motions and postures, and the interaction can vary due to multiple reasons such as individual differences, routine and emergency procedures, environmental conditions etc. In this paper, reach postures of a pilot during a routine and an emergency procedure are evaluated through a full computational and a mixed prototype. It is found that pilot’s reaching strategy, based on the joint angles, during the emergency procedure is different than that of the routine procedure for the same reaching posture. It is also found that the full computational prototype that utilizes the empirical whole-body posture prediction has limitations in reflecting the individual variations in reaching strategies during the emergency procedure. However, the mixed prototype can simulate the emergency procedure and can capture the difference of reaching posture that occurs during an emergency event.


Human-centered product design Prototyping Emergency event 



This research is supported by The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) award number 80NSSC17M0019. Any opinions or findings of this work are the responsibility of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsors or collaborators.


  1. 1.
    Beevis, D., Denis, G.S.: Rapid prototyping and the human factors engineering process. Appl. Ergon. 23(3), 155–160 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Meister, D.: Systems design, development and testing. In: Handbook of Human Factors (1987)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Andriole, S.: Storyboard Prototyping: A New Approach to User Requirements Analysis. QED Information Sciences, Wellesley (1989)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bi, Z.M.: Computer integrated reconfigurable experimental platform for ergonomic study of vehicle body design. Int. J. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 23(11), 968–978 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bullinger, H.-J., Dangelmaier, M.: Virtual prototyping and testing of in-vehicle interfaces. Ergonomics 46(1–3), 41–51 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Colombo, G., Cugini, U.: Virtual humans and prototypes to evaluate ergonomics and safety. J. Eng. Des. 16(2), 195–203 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pham, D., Gault, R.: A comparison of rapid prototyping technologies. Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 38(10–11), 1257–1287 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lim, Y.-K., Stolterman, E., Tenenberg, J.: The anatomy of prototypes: prototypes as filters, prototypes as manifestations of design ideas. ACM Trans. Comput. Interact. 15(2), 1–27 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Broek, J.J., Sleijffers, W., Horváth, I., Lennings, A.F.: Using physical models in design. In: Proceedings of CAID/CD 2000 Conference, pp. 155–163 (2000)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ferrise, F., Bordegoni, M., Cugini, U.: Interactive virtual prototypes for testing the interaction with new products. Comput. Aided. Des. Appl. 10(3), 515–525 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mutambara, A.G.O., Durrant-whyte, H.F.: Estimation and control for a modular wheeled mobile robot. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 8(1), 35–46 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Binnard, M.: Design by Composition for Rapid Prototyping. Stanford University, Stanford (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zorriassatine, F., Wykes, C., Parkin, R., Gindy, N.: A survey of virtual prototyping techniques for mechanical product development. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part B J. Eng. Manuf. 217(4), 513–530 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Demirel, H.O., Duffy, V.G.: Applications of digital human modeling in industry. In: Duffy, Vincent G. (ed.) ICDHM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4561, pp. 824–832. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). Scholar
  15. 15.
    Demirel, H.O., Duffy, V.G.: Digital human modeling for product lifecycle management. In: Duffy, V.G. (ed.) ICDHM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4561, pp. 372–381. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sundin, A., Ortengren, R.: Applications conclusions and the future system development. In: Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics, pp. 1053–1074 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Webber, B.L., Phillips, C.B., Badler, N.I.: Simulating Humans: Computer Graphics, Animation, and Control, p. 288. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1993)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zhang, X., Chaffin, D.B.: Digital human modeling for computer-aided ergonomics. Interv. Control Appl. Occup. Ergon. (2006). (Chapter 10)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Desjardins, P., Plamondon, A., Gagnon, M.: Sensitivity analysis of segment models to estimate the net reaction moments at the L5/S1 joint in lifting. Med. Eng. Phys. 20(2), 153–158 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Riemer, R., Lee, S.-W., Zhang, X.: Full body inverse dynamics solutions: an error analysis and a hybrid approach (2002)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chaffin, D.B., Erig, M.: Three-dimensional biomechanical static strength prediction model sensitivity to postural and anthropometric inaccuracies. IIE Trans. 23(3), 215–227 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chaffin, D.B., Faraway, J.J., Zhang, X., Woolley, C.: Stature, age, and gender effects on reach motion postures. Hum. Fact. J. Hum. Fact. Ergon. Soc. 42(3), 408–420 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Barbieri, L., Angilica, A., Bruno, F., Muzzupappa, M.: Mixed prototyping with configurable physical archetype for usability evaluation of product interfaces. Comput. Ind. 64(3), 310–323 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Morris, C.: Academic Press Dictionary of Science and Technology. Gulf Professional Publishing, Houston (1992)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Grajewski, D., Górski, F., Zawadzki, P., Hamrol, A.: Application of virtual reality techniques in design of ergonomic manufacturing workplaces. Procedia Comput. Sci. 25, 289–301 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pahl, G., Beitz, W.: Engineering design: a systematic approach. In: Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach, vol. 11, p. 544 (2013)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wood, K.L., Otto, K.N.: Product Design: Techniques in Reverse Engineering and New Product Development. Tsinghua University Press, Beijing (2001)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Stowe, D.T.: Investigating the role of prototyping in mechanical design using case study validation (2008)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jönsson, A., Broman, G.: lean prototyping of multi-body and mechatronic systems. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, p. 133 (2004)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tseng, M.M.: A framework of virtual design for product customization. In: IEEE 6th International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation Proceedings, EFTA 1997, pp. 7–14 (1997)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Duffy, V.G.: Modified virtual build methodology for computer-aided ergonomics and safety. Hum. Fact. Ergon. Manuf. 17(5), 413–422 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Demirel, H.O.: Modular human-in-the-loop design framework based on human factors. Purdue University, 2015Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    How a faulty heater caused the windshield in the Cockpit of a passenger jet to shatter - thousands of feet above the Atlantic – Daily Mail Online. Accessed 23 Jan 2018
  34. 34.
    Incidents, events involving Boeing Cockpit fires - The San Diego Union-Tribune. Accessed 23 Jan 2018
  35. 35.
    Cockpit fire: historical examples - MH370debris. Accessed 08 Feb 2018
  36. 36.
    Fire in the Cockpit - Plane & Pilot Magazine. Accessed 23 Jan 2018
  37. 37.
    Chevalot, N., Xuguang, W.: An experimental investigation of the discomfort of arm reaching movements in a seated position. SAE Trans. 113(1), 98–103 (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Oregon State UniversityCorvallisUSA

Personalised recommendations