April 2003 Mechanical Engineering: Editorial

editorial

Finding the Right Fit

By
John G. Falcioni, Editor-in-Chief

We've all sat in coach, in the middle seat of three on a flight that seemed interminable. The guy on your left is snoring, legs spilling over into your space, and elbows sprawled on what's meant to be a shared armrest. On your right sits someone who's not the frequent flyer you are, is nervous about being on a plane, and is determined to talk from the moment she plops next to you to the minute the plane lands safely at your destination.

You're uncomfortable, tense, clumsy, and just plain miserable. The only escape is to fantasize about a flight attendant coming back to row 26 to say that you've been upgraded to first class. But what brings you back to your uncomfortable reality is the crick in your neck from the hard and comfortless headrest.

"Can't anyone make an airplane seat that's more comfortable?" you ask yourself.

At best, having any part of your body contorted in an awkward position,whether on a plane, at your desk, in the car, at the movies, or anywhere else, may result in the occasional pain in the neck or in your back. But more serious consequences can occur when someone is subjected to these unnatural contortions for long stretches or on a regular basis. The pain can become chronic and studies show that in the workplace it can impact mood and morale. These are some of the reasons why engineers are taking the topic of ergonomics seriously.

A headline in The Wall Street Journal last month caught my eye: "Among the ingredients for success: flexibility, realism and passion." While the article had nothing to do with engineering, the three ingredients are essential in a discourse on ergonomics, the topic of this month's Feature Focus.

Ergonomic engineering has some of each of the three ingredients: Flexible designs must be developed for different populations; a realistic approach to designing ergonomically effective products must include a workable manufacturing process that won't bog down the rest of the production lines; and passion is essential for working toward a noble enterprise, despite the pushback from naysayers.

Companies like AlliedSignal, for example, have discovered that an ergonomic working environment not only helps employees, but also makes good business sense. Reports show that the company saves about $2 million per year in worker compensation costs. The flip side to the AlliedSignal story is that many corporate ergonomic initiatives incur costs stemming from ineffective training, from solutions that fail to solve problems, or from wasted management time. The surest way to incorporate a successful ergonomic environment into a company is to address it as a business initiative with a clear objective and a lucid set of implementable processes.

In one of this month's two Feature Focus articles, "New Wheels for Grandma," associate editor Gayle Ehrenman looks at initiatives by carmakers to create consumer-friendlier products, from seats to trunks. One of the most interesting aspects of the article is an initiative by Ford Motor Co. to equip some of its designers with mobility-restricting outfits that enable them to feel the way an older person might feel inside a vehicle.

As we all live longer, companies besides Ford and industries other than the automotive will have to focus more on creating ergonomically sensitive products. As a spokesman for an ergonomics-based Web site said, the emphasis will shift to "fitting products, tasks, and environments to people, rather than the other way around." Those of us who fly a lot can hardly wait.