Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Çizim Stüdyolari İçin En Uygun Koltuk Seçimi: Bartın Üniversitesi Peyzaj Mimarlığı Örneği

Year 2022, , 386 - 393, 15.08.2022
https://doi.org/10.24011/barofd.1122564

Abstract

Günümüzde kullanılan mekan ve mekan donatı elemanlarını ergonomik kriterlere göre tasarlanması fizyolojik konfor ve psikolojik açıdan önem arz etmektedir. Özellikle zamanlarının büyük bir kısmını okullarda geçiren öğrencilerin kullandıkları koltuk ve masaların ergonomik kriterlere uygun olması gerekmektedir. Bu çalışmada Bartın Üniversitesi Peyzaj Mimarlığı Bölümü öğrencilerine anket çalışması yapılarak talep ve istekleri belirlenmiştir. Belirlenen kullanıcı talep ve isteklere göre AHS (Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci) modeli kurulmuş, modele ait ana ve alt faktörler oluşturularak çizim stüdyolarında kullanılacak en uygun koltuk seçiminin yapılması hedeflenmiştir. AHS modeli sonucunda koltuk seçiminde ergonomikliğin (% 77), ekonomikliğin (%16) ve estetiği (%7) koltuk seçiminde etkili ana faktörlerden olduğu belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca farklı yönlerde ayarlanabilen, kolçaklı ve bel destekli koltukların çizim mekanlarında kullanılacak en uygun koltuk özellikleri olarak tespit edilmiştir. Çalışma sonunda çizim mekanları için kullanılabilecek en uygun koltuk özellikleri ortaya konulmuş ve gelecekte yapılacak çalışmalar için ait öneriler geliştirilmiştir.

References

  • Akın, G. (2012) Ergonomi, Tiydem Yayıncılık: Ankara.
  • Akın, G., Gültekin, T., Bektaş, Y., Önal, S., Tuncel, E., (2014). Ünı̇versı̇te Öğrencı̇lerı̇ İçin Sıra Tasarımı, Ankara Üniversitesi Dil ve TarihCoğrafya Fakültesi Dergisi 54, 1 (2014), 269-286.
  • Aşkın, A., Imren, E., Kurt, R. (2021). “Relationship Between Furniture Design and Ergonomics”, 13th International Conference of Strategic Research on Scientific Studies and Education (13th ICoSReSSE) Tam Metin, 26-29 May 2021 Antalya-Turkey, 307-314.
  • Brewer, J. M., Davis, K. G., Dunning, K. K., Succop, P. A. (2009). Does ergonomic mismatch at school impact pain in school children?. Work, 34(4), 455-464.
  • Castellucci, I., Gonçalves, M. A., Arezes, P. (2010). Ergonomic design of school furniture: challenges for the Portuguese schools. CRC Press.
  • Cengiz, C., Karaelmas, D., Keçecioğlu Dağlı, P. (2018). The Examination of Urban Furniture in Bülent Ecevit University Farabi Campus in Terms of Landscape Design. Journal of Bartin Faculty of Forestry, 20(3), 465-476.
  • Dianat, I., Karimi, M. A., Hashemi, A. A., Bahrampour, S. (2013). Classroom furniture and anthropometric characteristics of Iranian high school students: proposed dimensions based on anthropometric data. Applied Ergonomics, 44(1), 101-108.
  • Dul, J., Weerdmeester, B. (2003). Ergonomics for beginners: a quick reference guide. CRC press.
  • Ertaş, Ş., Khosroshahi, A. N., Akbarihamed, N., Kalemci, F. (2015) The Determination of the Anthropometrical Measurements of 5-7 Ages Depending on the New Education System in Trabzon, Turkey. Journal of Selçuk University Natural and Applied Science, 4(3), 12-24.
  • Feathers, D. J., Rollings, K., Hedge, A. (2013). Alternative computer mouse designs: Performance, posture, and subjective evaluations for college students aged 18-25. Work, 44 Suppl 1(Suppl 1), SS115–22. doi:10.3233/wor-121487
  • Grandjean, E., Burandt, U., (1962). “Das Sitzverhalten von Büroangestellten”, Industr. Organisation, 31, 243-250.
  • Harris, C., Straker, L. (2000). Survey of physical ergonomics issues associated with school childrens’ use of laptop computers. International journal of industrial ergonomics, 26(3), 337-346.
  • Hastürk, E.,Y., (2013), “ Statik Antropometrik Verilerle Ergonomik Oturma Mobilyası Tasarımı” Doktara Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü
  • Hedge, A., Lueder, R. (2008). School furniture for children. Ergonomics for children: designing products and places for toddlers to teens, Taylor & Francis, 721-751.
  • Imren, E., Karayilmazlar, S., Kurt, R., Çabuk, Y. (2017). Yatırım Kararı Almada AHS Yönteminin Kullanımı: Bartın İli Örneği. Bartın Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(2), 107-114.
  • Imren, E., Karayılmazlar, S., Kurt, R. (2016). Selection of optimal establishment place using AHP (analytical hierarchy process): An application of furniture industry. Journal of Bartın Faculty of Forestry, 18(2), 48-54.
  • Kahya, E., Gülseren, E., Gelen, E., Aydın, S. (2011). “Yükseköğretim öğrencileri için ergonomik sıra ve masa tasarımı”, 17. Ulusal Ergonomi Kongresi, Eskişehir.
  • Kaya, Ö. (2015). Design of work place and ergonomics in garment enterprises. Procedia Manufacturing, 3, 6437-6443.
  • Kaygın, B., Demir, M. (2017). Mobilyada Kullanıcı Odaklı Tasarımın Önemi Üzerine Bir Araştırma. Bartın Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(2), 20-29.
  • Kaygın, B., Kurt, R., Imren, E. (2015). Bartin Üniversitesi Orman Endüstri Mühendisliği Mezunlarinin Istihdam Durumu Üzerine Bir Araştirma. Bartın Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 17 (25), 54-61.
  • Kiliç, S. (2012). Sample size, power concepts and sample size calculation. Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, 2(3), 140.
  • Knight, G., Noyes, J. A. N. (1999). Children's behaviour and the design of school furniture. Ergonomics, 42(5), 747-760.
  • Kurt, R. (2020). Determining the priorities in utilization of forest residues as biomass: an A'wot analysis. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining, 14(2), 315-325.
  • Linton, S. J., Hellsing, A. L., Halme, T., Åkerstedt, K. (1994). The effects of ergonomically designed school furniture on pupils' attitudes, symptoms and behaviour. Applied ergonomics, 25(5), 299-304.
  • Naing, L., Winn, T., Rusli, B. N. (2006). Practical issues in calculating the sample size for prevalence studies. Archives of Orofacial Sciences, 1:9-14.
  • Odunaiya, N. A., Owonuwa, D. D., Oguntibeju, O. O. (2014). Ergonomic suitability of educational furniture and possible health implications in a university setting. Advances in medical education and practice, 5, 1.
  • Pheasant, S., Haslegrave, C. M. (2018). Bodyspace: Anthropometry, ergonomics and the design of work. CRC press.
  • Ramadan, M. Z. (2011). Does Saudi School Furniture Meet Ergonomics Requirements?. Work, 38(2), 93-101.
  • Saaty, T.L. (2000). Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory, 2. Edition. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh.
  • Saes, M. D. O., Ribeiro, C. D., Muccillo-Baisch, A. L., Soares, M. C. F. (2015). Prevalence of musculoskeletal pain and its association with inadequate school furniture. Revista Dor, 16, 124-128.
  • Tunay, M., Melemez, K., Dizdar, E. N. (2005). Yüksek öğrenimde kullanılan okul sıra ve masalarının antropometrik tasarımı (Bartın Orman Fakültesi Örneği). Technology, 8(1-2), 93-99.
  • Schobert, H. (1962). “Sitshaltung, Sitzschaden, Sitszmöbel”, Industr. Organisation, Berlin: Springer, 74-86.
  • Souza, I. T. G., Buski, C. R. B., Batiz, E. C., Hurtado, A. L. B. (2015). Ergonomic analysis of a clothing design station. Procedia Manufacturing, 3, 4362-4369.
  • Toksarı, M. (2007). Analitik Hiyerarşi Prosesi Yaklaşımı Kullanılarak Mobilya Sektörü İçin Ege Bölgesi’nde Hedef Pazarın Belirlenmesi. Celal Bayar Üniversitesi İ.İ.B.F., Yönetim ve Ekonomi, Cilt: 14, Sayı: 1, s. 171-180.
  • Yıldırım, K., Kasal, Ö. (2005). Çizim Mekanlarında İnsan–Eylem–Donatı Elemanı İlişkileri Üzerine Bir Araştırma. Politeknik Dergisi, 8(3), 289-299.

The Most Suitable Office Chair Alternative For Drafting Studios: The Sample of Bartın University Landscape Architecture Department

Year 2022, , 386 - 393, 15.08.2022
https://doi.org/10.24011/barofd.1122564

Abstract

In today’s drafting areas the design of interior elements in line with ergonomical criteria holds great importance from physiological and psychological aspects. Especially the chairs and desks, used by the students who spend most of their times in schools, should be designed in line with ergonomical criteria. In this study, a survey study was carried out with undergraduate students of Bartin University Landscape Architecture Department to determine their demands and requests on the issue. The AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) model was built in accordance with the user demands and requests, and accordingly the main and sub-factors of the model were determined as a means to make the most suitable chair selection for use in draft studios. According to the outcomes of AHP model, ergonomy (77%), economy (16%) and aesthetics (7%) were found to be the main effective factors in chair selection. Also, the chairs with adjustment function, armrest and lumbar support were determined as the most suitable ones for use in draft areas. In the results section of the study, the most suitable chair features for use in draft rooms, as well as suggestions for future studies are proposed.

References

  • Akın, G. (2012) Ergonomi, Tiydem Yayıncılık: Ankara.
  • Akın, G., Gültekin, T., Bektaş, Y., Önal, S., Tuncel, E., (2014). Ünı̇versı̇te Öğrencı̇lerı̇ İçin Sıra Tasarımı, Ankara Üniversitesi Dil ve TarihCoğrafya Fakültesi Dergisi 54, 1 (2014), 269-286.
  • Aşkın, A., Imren, E., Kurt, R. (2021). “Relationship Between Furniture Design and Ergonomics”, 13th International Conference of Strategic Research on Scientific Studies and Education (13th ICoSReSSE) Tam Metin, 26-29 May 2021 Antalya-Turkey, 307-314.
  • Brewer, J. M., Davis, K. G., Dunning, K. K., Succop, P. A. (2009). Does ergonomic mismatch at school impact pain in school children?. Work, 34(4), 455-464.
  • Castellucci, I., Gonçalves, M. A., Arezes, P. (2010). Ergonomic design of school furniture: challenges for the Portuguese schools. CRC Press.
  • Cengiz, C., Karaelmas, D., Keçecioğlu Dağlı, P. (2018). The Examination of Urban Furniture in Bülent Ecevit University Farabi Campus in Terms of Landscape Design. Journal of Bartin Faculty of Forestry, 20(3), 465-476.
  • Dianat, I., Karimi, M. A., Hashemi, A. A., Bahrampour, S. (2013). Classroom furniture and anthropometric characteristics of Iranian high school students: proposed dimensions based on anthropometric data. Applied Ergonomics, 44(1), 101-108.
  • Dul, J., Weerdmeester, B. (2003). Ergonomics for beginners: a quick reference guide. CRC press.
  • Ertaş, Ş., Khosroshahi, A. N., Akbarihamed, N., Kalemci, F. (2015) The Determination of the Anthropometrical Measurements of 5-7 Ages Depending on the New Education System in Trabzon, Turkey. Journal of Selçuk University Natural and Applied Science, 4(3), 12-24.
  • Feathers, D. J., Rollings, K., Hedge, A. (2013). Alternative computer mouse designs: Performance, posture, and subjective evaluations for college students aged 18-25. Work, 44 Suppl 1(Suppl 1), SS115–22. doi:10.3233/wor-121487
  • Grandjean, E., Burandt, U., (1962). “Das Sitzverhalten von Büroangestellten”, Industr. Organisation, 31, 243-250.
  • Harris, C., Straker, L. (2000). Survey of physical ergonomics issues associated with school childrens’ use of laptop computers. International journal of industrial ergonomics, 26(3), 337-346.
  • Hastürk, E.,Y., (2013), “ Statik Antropometrik Verilerle Ergonomik Oturma Mobilyası Tasarımı” Doktara Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü
  • Hedge, A., Lueder, R. (2008). School furniture for children. Ergonomics for children: designing products and places for toddlers to teens, Taylor & Francis, 721-751.
  • Imren, E., Karayilmazlar, S., Kurt, R., Çabuk, Y. (2017). Yatırım Kararı Almada AHS Yönteminin Kullanımı: Bartın İli Örneği. Bartın Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(2), 107-114.
  • Imren, E., Karayılmazlar, S., Kurt, R. (2016). Selection of optimal establishment place using AHP (analytical hierarchy process): An application of furniture industry. Journal of Bartın Faculty of Forestry, 18(2), 48-54.
  • Kahya, E., Gülseren, E., Gelen, E., Aydın, S. (2011). “Yükseköğretim öğrencileri için ergonomik sıra ve masa tasarımı”, 17. Ulusal Ergonomi Kongresi, Eskişehir.
  • Kaya, Ö. (2015). Design of work place and ergonomics in garment enterprises. Procedia Manufacturing, 3, 6437-6443.
  • Kaygın, B., Demir, M. (2017). Mobilyada Kullanıcı Odaklı Tasarımın Önemi Üzerine Bir Araştırma. Bartın Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(2), 20-29.
  • Kaygın, B., Kurt, R., Imren, E. (2015). Bartin Üniversitesi Orman Endüstri Mühendisliği Mezunlarinin Istihdam Durumu Üzerine Bir Araştirma. Bartın Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 17 (25), 54-61.
  • Kiliç, S. (2012). Sample size, power concepts and sample size calculation. Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, 2(3), 140.
  • Knight, G., Noyes, J. A. N. (1999). Children's behaviour and the design of school furniture. Ergonomics, 42(5), 747-760.
  • Kurt, R. (2020). Determining the priorities in utilization of forest residues as biomass: an A'wot analysis. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining, 14(2), 315-325.
  • Linton, S. J., Hellsing, A. L., Halme, T., Åkerstedt, K. (1994). The effects of ergonomically designed school furniture on pupils' attitudes, symptoms and behaviour. Applied ergonomics, 25(5), 299-304.
  • Naing, L., Winn, T., Rusli, B. N. (2006). Practical issues in calculating the sample size for prevalence studies. Archives of Orofacial Sciences, 1:9-14.
  • Odunaiya, N. A., Owonuwa, D. D., Oguntibeju, O. O. (2014). Ergonomic suitability of educational furniture and possible health implications in a university setting. Advances in medical education and practice, 5, 1.
  • Pheasant, S., Haslegrave, C. M. (2018). Bodyspace: Anthropometry, ergonomics and the design of work. CRC press.
  • Ramadan, M. Z. (2011). Does Saudi School Furniture Meet Ergonomics Requirements?. Work, 38(2), 93-101.
  • Saaty, T.L. (2000). Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory, 2. Edition. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh.
  • Saes, M. D. O., Ribeiro, C. D., Muccillo-Baisch, A. L., Soares, M. C. F. (2015). Prevalence of musculoskeletal pain and its association with inadequate school furniture. Revista Dor, 16, 124-128.
  • Tunay, M., Melemez, K., Dizdar, E. N. (2005). Yüksek öğrenimde kullanılan okul sıra ve masalarının antropometrik tasarımı (Bartın Orman Fakültesi Örneği). Technology, 8(1-2), 93-99.
  • Schobert, H. (1962). “Sitshaltung, Sitzschaden, Sitszmöbel”, Industr. Organisation, Berlin: Springer, 74-86.
  • Souza, I. T. G., Buski, C. R. B., Batiz, E. C., Hurtado, A. L. B. (2015). Ergonomic analysis of a clothing design station. Procedia Manufacturing, 3, 4362-4369.
  • Toksarı, M. (2007). Analitik Hiyerarşi Prosesi Yaklaşımı Kullanılarak Mobilya Sektörü İçin Ege Bölgesi’nde Hedef Pazarın Belirlenmesi. Celal Bayar Üniversitesi İ.İ.B.F., Yönetim ve Ekonomi, Cilt: 14, Sayı: 1, s. 171-180.
  • Yıldırım, K., Kasal, Ö. (2005). Çizim Mekanlarında İnsan–Eylem–Donatı Elemanı İlişkileri Üzerine Bir Araştırma. Politeknik Dergisi, 8(3), 289-299.
There are 35 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Ergonomics Design, Forest Industry Engineering
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Erol İmren 0000-0003-2789-9119

Publication Date August 15, 2022
Published in Issue Year 2022

Cite

APA İmren, E. (2022). The Most Suitable Office Chair Alternative For Drafting Studios: The Sample of Bartın University Landscape Architecture Department. Bartın Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 24(2), 386-393. https://doi.org/10.24011/barofd.1122564


Bartin Orman Fakultesi Dergisi Editorship,

Bartin University, Faculty of Forestry, Dean Floor No:106, Agdaci District, 74100 Bartin-Turkey.

Tel: +90 (378) 223 5094, Fax: +90 (378) 223 5062,

E-mail: bofdergi@gmail.com