Fascinating article, Beth. I wonder if Jack might be able to avoid some of the ridiculous design problems that come up in the Made by Monkeys blog. Often we see problems that arise because people just didn't think things through. Perhaps Jack can avoid some of those problems.
Jack might be able to help companies avoid some of the design miscues that are centered more around ergonomics and how products come together. The simulation tool is really aimed at laying out an efficient and optimal factory floor, making it safer and more expedient for workers to assemble product and perform other tasks on the production line.
This looks like a cool app, Beth. I wasn't aware of human simulation software efforts, and it sure makes a lot of sense. My question is, considering how radically different the sizes and shapes of people can be, does this software allow tweaking of dimensions? Is it based on certain fixed "average" dimensions, or does it vary around the world, as average size varies within different populations?
In my experience, human factors has always been relegated to a tangential role (indeed, it's often an afterthought) in the design process. It does get significant lip service, but unless you're talking about a software UI, generally usage scenarios are not considered seriously enough. Maybe for washing machines (consumer appliances), although judging by our Made By Monkeys sagas, there've been more than a few problems there. But certainly not in most other (and particularly non-consumer, such as factory) scenarios, so this is a good think, adding it front and center into the simulation tool.
Beth: Are Jack and Jill (or something similar) used by the auto industry, especially for seat and dashboard design? Imagine all the different size of people who have to be accommodated by one automotive seat. Seems like automotive would be the perfect application for this.
Chuck and Ann, you definitely hit on an issue in terms of digital avatars accommodating the various sizes of people based on a variety of human factors, including age, sex, and nationality. Jack and Jill and other human simulation applications definitely take these differences into account via the use of anthropemetric databases. In fact, one of the primary enhancements in this release was accommodation for the Japanese and Korean markets with new anthropometric databases that best represent the size and stature of those populations.
Simulation can be a very powerful tool. Working at a simulation company many years ago, we started an effort to include the field engineers in the design phase. This helped to ensure that they knew the products when they went out the door. It also helped to identify maintenance problems early in the design phase.
This is a step further in that type of effort. Get "human" feedback in the simulation phase.
Good point, Chuck. During times I've rented cars frequently, I've noticed that American sedans seemd to have everything in the wrong place in the driver's seat. I would keep bumping my elbows and knees. With Japanese cars I never ran into these problems. I've often suspected Japanese engineers paid more attention to whether you bump you elbow on the arm rest when you reach for something on the dash.
Interesting, as a tall person, I remember the very first Japanese cars sold in the US in the 1970s as being quite uncomfortable. And for my (then) husband, who was 6'7", they were unusable.To Rob's point, I wonder if that gave the Japanese a head start on designing for different populations? I've continued to buy Japanese cars all this time because they're just better, and partly, I guess, because they did adapt to market feedback on so many features.
Festo's BionicKangaroo combines pneumatic and electrical drive technology, plus very precise controls and condition monitoring. Like a real kangaroo, the BionicKangaroo robot harvests the kinetic energy of each takeoff and immediately uses it to power the next jump.
Design News and Digi-Key presents: Creating & Testing Your First RTOS Application Using MQX, a crash course that will look at defining a project, selecting a target processor, blocking code, defining tasks, completing code, and debugging.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.