CC BY
0
Architecture
DOI: 10.23968/2500-0055-2023-8-4-3-18
SUITABILITY OF REFERENCE STANDARDS TO INTEGRATE ERGONOMICS IN ARCHITECTURE: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY
IN BANGLADESH
Sudipti Biswas
Military Institute of Science and Technology (MIST), Dhaka, Bangladesh E-mail: sudipti.biswas@arch.mist.ac.bd
Abstract
Introduction: Buildings are a very important part of our lives because we spend so much time there. A primary job of an architect is to assure that the buildings we live in accommodate the human activities that take place within them. Therefore, anthropometric datasets are important tools for the architect. Unfortunately, anthropometric datasets relevant to the functions that take place in buildings are relatively scarce, even as part of the architect's academic experience. Architects mostly depend on a few reference standards that may not fit the local population. The purpose of the research described here is to contribute to the filling of this gap with an anthropometric dataset for the Bangladeshi population that can serve as a source of data in the field of architecture. Methods: Body measurements of 130 people, 66 male and 64 female, are taken at 38 different postures. The postures are selected from the reference standards and considering the local practice. Then the measurements are examined with descriptive statistics and compared with the reference standards to check the differences. Results: This comparison indicates that the Bangladeshi people are considerably smaller; therefore, the practiced reference standards are not appropriate for Bangladesh, and presumably South Asia. Further research is required for a comprehensive anthropometric database. The presented dataset can serve as a source of data for the design of residential and other buildings in Bangladesh as well as other South Asian countries.
Keywords: reference standard, anthropometry, body dimension, Bangladeshi population, architecture, ergonomics.
Introduction
The need for consideration of human factors and ergonomics (HFE) in the design of built environment is obvious, as has been much discussed (Attaianese, 2012, 2014, 2022; Attaianese and Duca, 2012; Charytonowicz, 2000; Costa et al., 2012; Eilouti, 2021; Garneau and Parkinson, 2016; Hendrick, 2008; Olgunturk and Demirkan, 2009; Remijn, 2006). Scholars agree that integrating HFE into the design process of built environment can contribute to, among other things, sustainability (Attaianese, 2014, 2016, 2017; Attaianese and Duca, 2012; Hedge and Dorsey, 2013; Hedge et al., 2010; Radjiyev et al., 2015). Although the need is recognized, there is a relative scarcity of relevant research (Attaianese and Duca, 2012; Costa et al., 2012; Fross, 2014). There are few studies regarding HFE in the built environment, and those that have been done tend to focus on the healthcare sector (for example, Codinhoto et al., 2009; Pinto et al., 2000; Rogers et al., 2013; Springer, 2007; Villeneuve, 2000; Yeoman and Ashmore, 2018). Since good architecture accommodates different human functions expected in the built environment, thus, ergonomic considerations should logically be
incorporated into every aspect of the design process. Designers do it sometimes consciously, sometimes intuitively (Fross, 2014; Fross et al., 2015). However, for effective integration of HFE into architecture, it is necessary for the architect to avail good data specific to the local context.
Despite the necessity of anthropometric database for local population, it does not always exist in reality. In the case of Bangladesh, the national building code (BNBC/MoHPW/GoB, 2021), the regulations for building construction in the Dhaka Metropolitan area (MoHPW/GoB 2008) as well as Dhaka Cantonment area (Cantonment Board, 2020) provide guidelines for building design that may contain some ergonomic considerations, although they are not explicitly mentioned. However, good architecture-relevant anthropometric data for Bangladesh simply do not exist.
The present research is an attempt to address this gap. This paper describes an anthropometric study for the Bangladeshi population aimed to determine the male and female body dimensions. Although the study covers only the Bangladeshi population, it is expected to be useful for the populations of other countries with similar anthropometric features.
For citations: Biswas, S. (2023). Suitability of reference standards to integrate ergonomics in architecture:
an empirical study in Bangladesh. Architecture and Engineering, No 4 (8), pp. 3-18. DOI: 10.23968/2500-0055-2023-8-4-3-18.
Anthropometric considerations for architecture
Considerations for HFE in architecture differ somewhat from those of other disciplines, such as industrial design, in the way that architects must consider the space within which activities take place. For architecture, a very clear understanding of human activities for any given function is the starting point. Architectural design starts with a comprehensive understanding of human activities and the space requirements for those activities. Relevant information includes a wide range of attributes such as body dimensions, flexibility, working procedures, equipment to be used, furniture and fixtures, behavioral expectations, sensory abilities, environmental needs, etc. All these considerations require data on specific body dimensions at specific postures related to the activities to be performed. Different types of anthropometric dimensions are required to accommodate different types of human activities.
Integrating HFE into the built environment is not an easy task; it requires proper training. Usually, such training is introduced in architecture education. Scholars agree that teaching ergonomics in design school can improve performance, productivity, safety, and health in the built environment (Attaianese, 2012, 2016; Garneau and Parkinson, 2016; Olgunturk and Demirkan, 2009). The typical curriculum attempts to impart a clear understanding of ergonomic issues to the students at the early stage of the academic program. Topics covered include human activities, movements, postures, relevant body dimensions, etc. Through this training, the students can learn to generate space requirements and determine appropriate dimensions for the relevant furniture and fixtures and design the space in which the intended functions can be performed efficiently.
This study proposes that the HFE education of architects, as well as professional practice, would be enhanced if better data was available. Such data would logically include different dimensions of the human body at different postures (depending on the specific human activity) for different ages, genders, races, nationalities, etc. Although, a perfect design for the user is seldom, if ever, possible, proper considerations of relevant anthropometric data should be able to better ensure comfort and efficiency and avoid discomfort and inefficiency (Klamklay et al., 2008; Mokdad, 2002; Pentikis et al., 2002; Pheasant and Haslegrave, 2006; Sanders and McCormick, 1993).
Anthropometric data in Bangladesh
Unfortunately, in Bangladesh, no holistic dataset of anthropometric features is available, although several research projects have covered specific features. There are various studies on anthropometric characteristics relevant to the field of health and nutrition. A large portion of such research relates to malnutrition, particularly in women and children. Research topics
that deal with anthropometric features of adults tend to involve maternal anthropometry (Karim and Mascie-Taylor, 1997; Nahar et al., 2007), nutrition (D'Souza and Tandon, 2019; Islam et al., 2004; Mitra et al., 2018; Sultana et al., 2015), age at menarche (Akter et al., 2012; Chowdhury et al., 2000; Hossain et al., 2010; Islam et al., 2017), menstrual health (Hossain et al., 2011b), hypertension (Ali et al., 2018; Choudhury et al., 2014; Chowdhury et al., 2016; Simmons et al., 2021, obesity (Bhowmik et al., 2013, 2014; Biswas et al., 2017; Flora et al., 2009; Ge et al., 2014; Hussain et al., 2013; Islam et al., 2020; Qureshi et al., 2017), diabetes (Asghar et al., 2007; Chowdhury et al., 2015; Fottrell et al., 2018; Islam et al., 2015; Siddiquee et al., 2015), and/or some other issues like gut microbiomes (Osborne et al., 2020), fatty liver diseases (Alam et al., 2014, 2019), etc. However, despite the plethora of studies in the health sector, there is a dearth of adult anthropometric data other than weight and body mass index (BMI) (Flora et al., 2009).
There are also studies that cover detailed dimensions of body parts: for example, the face of Garo women (Akhter et al., 2013), face height of Garo and non-Garo women (Tania et al., 2020), hand of Garo men and women (Asadujjaman et al., 2019), head of Garo women (Akhter et al., 2009), hand anthropometry of men (Imrhan et al., 2006, 2009), hand anthropometry of women (Razzaque et al., 2021), hand of both men and women (Hossain, 2015; Imrhan et al., 2009; Shahriar et al., 2020), various body parts of Santal men (Shah et al., 2015), arm span of Garo men and women (Hossain et al., 2011a), arm span of women (Laila et al., 2010a), forearm of women (Laila et al., 2010b), external ear anthropometry (Asadujjaman et al., 2019), upper limbs of Manipuri women (Hussain et al., 2019), etc. The limitations of these studies are that they only focus on specific body parts and/or specific tribal population in Bangladesh.
More complete studies of anthropometric features are rare. Khadem and Islam (2014) created a dataset with 37 dimensions of Bangladeshi men. Khan (2014) reported data on 37 dimensions for both men and women, and, in a recent study, Parvez et al. (2022a) prepared a dataset with 37 dimensions for male and female university students. These studies are relevant, however, more for industrial engineering and occupational therapy than for architecture. A few studies have also covered anthropometry in relation to furniture, such as classroom and library furniture (Hoque et al., 2014, Parvez et al., 2021, 2022b, 2022 c; Shah et al., 2013), hospital beds (Chakrabortty et al., 2014; Islam et al., 2013), vehicle seat (Hoque et al., 2017), etc. However, again, the relevance to architecture is limited.
In sum, the available studies are not of much use for architecture. As a consequence, the architecture schools tend to rely on a few reference standards for HFE
training (Biswas, 2022; Biswas et al., 2021) rather than robust datasets. What the available studies do indicate, though, is that anthropometric features of Bangladeshi people, such as stature, hand dimensions, and weight, are significantly different from the populations associated with published anthropometric datasets: they are generally somewhat smaller (Imrhan et al., 2009; Khadem and Islam, 2014; Parvez et al., 2022a; Shahriar et al., 2020). Therefore, blind application of reference design standards may result in inappropriate designs for Bangladesh.
Method
The research involved taking a series of measurements of Bangladeshi men and women. The measurements were taken as a part of an academic exercise at the Department of Architecture, Military Institute of Science and Technology (MIST). The exercise was to design a small residential building. Therefore, only the measurements relevant for residential use were considered. All the participants participated in the survey voluntarily with informed consent. The exercise was approved by the academic wing of MIST.
Participants
Measurements were taken from 130 individuals—66 men and 64 women (Table 1). The age range was from 15 to 65 years, thus covering the range of working age population able to join the labor market. Convenience sampling fitted best to obtain the participants as it was conducted within an academic exercise. The age breakdown of participants is as follows.
Selection of Body Dimensions
For space design, the first task is to know what body dimensions are to be considered for the activities performed and what furniture/fixtures are to be accommodated in that space. The furniture/ fixtures are also related to the body dimensions at different postures. For this study, body dimensions were taken at standing, sitting in a chair, and sitting/ crawling on the floor positions. The postures were selected based on the relevance for residential functions and on a review of three reference books that are commonly consulted in the practice and education of architecture. The books consulted are:
1. Time Saver Standards for Building Types (De Chiara and Callender, 1990);
2. Human Dimension & Interior Space: A Source Book of Design Reference Standards (Panero and Zelnik, 1979);
3. Architects' Data (Neufert and Neufert, 2012).
The study included 38 body dimensions that
are very basic for space designing. 32 of them
were derived from the reference books and 6 were added as relevant for the local context. The selected dimensions are presented in Figure. Although residential functions were the focus, the data is expected to be helpful for designing other spaces such as offices, small commercial spaces, etc.
Data Analysis
Statistical analysis involved simple examination of the dataset through descriptive statistics. This included the mean, mode, range, standard deviation, coefficient of variation and selected percentiles. Mean values were compared with reference standards with Z-test and t-test.
For comparison, Human Dimension & Interior Space: A Source Book of Design Reference Standards (Panero and Zelnik, 1979), referred to as HD hereinafter, had preference because of its gender specific and elaborate data. Time Saver Standards for Building Types (De Chiara and Callender, 1990), referred to as TSS hereinafter, and Architects' Data (Neufert and Neufert, 2012), referred to as NAD hereinafter, mostly provide dimensions with gender-neutral figurative drawings, although NAD provides occasional gender identification in the illustrations (such as clothing, body shape, hair style, etc.).
Limitations
This study has some limitations. The number of participants was relatively small, and it did not represent the South Asia or even Bangladesh. This study was conducted within the framework of an academic exercise in architecture education, and it was particularly oriented towards residential architecture in the local context. Additionally, state of the art measurement tools were not available for this study.
Results and Discussion
The results are shown in Tables 2-7: both the measured dimensions and comparison to reference standards. Tables 2 and 3 provide mean, mode, range, standard deviation, reference standards and the difference between the mean and reference standard for men and women. Table 4 provides selected percentile values for both men and women. Tables 5 and 6 present comparison of different body dimensions with the reference standards and Table 7 shows comparison of different ratios with the reference standards.
A vital question is how the data reported here differs from that of reference standards. It is observed that all dimensions are smaller than the reference standards, with three exceptions — side width for women and hand length and vertical reach (standing) for men. However, these latter dimensions are slightly
Table 1. Age distribution of the participants
Age (years) 15-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-65 Total
Male 17 26 4 5 13 1 66
Female 10 20 8 13 10 3 64
♦I I t ti MM ♦
suture Eye Level Shoulder Height Elbow Hsghi Knee Height Shoulder Breadlh Arm Length Upper Arm Forearm
* i 111 tflTt
Hand Length SideWid:h Bsckto blbow Raised Forward-streatched Vertical Reach Side Arm Artr Span Elboiv ^pari
(Body Depth) Elbow Height Ann Reaci (Fingertip) ISianding) Reach
M di1 n I»
Sittirg I leight Shoulder I leight [ye Height Popliteal I leigit Knee Neigh: Buttock-toe Buttock-popliteal I lip Breadth Ve it cal Reach Buttock-heel (Sitting) (Sittirg] (Sitting] [Sitting) Length (Sitting) Length (Sitting) (Silting) (Sitting) Length ■Sitting}
441 ill jT^-rr 4 41
Lross Legged i. eggi Kneeling Length Kneeling Urawllng Length Ltdwllng Height Bent Length Bent Height Squatting length S-quathng height
Length I leight I leight
Anthropometric dimensions measured in the study
larger only when the reference is taken from the TSS as the unisex dimensions. In fact, unisex dimensions in references are generally smaller compared to the gender-specific dimensions for reasons that are not clear. The derived dataset suggests that the body dimensions are smaller than those of standard references, sometimes dramatically. Tables 5 and 6 show that most of the comparisons with reference values reach statistical significance.
The dataset is again compared with the reference standards with different ratios. Table 7 shows a comparison of all the derived dimensions and their ratios with stature and arm span for both men and women against the references. This shows that the body dimensions are considerably smaller than the reference values, p-value is 5.42654E-09 for men and 7.00667E-09 for women. The ratio comparison shows an interesting trend: stature ratio for men (p = 0.6036852) and arm span ratio for women (p = 0.07259) are strikingly similar, while stature ratio for women (p = 0.02970065) and arm span ratio for men (p = 0.0001983) are not that close. This may happen because proportions of different body parts may differ for different races and ethnic groups (Akhter et al., 2013; Goel and Tashakkori, 2015; Hovinga and Lerner, 2009; Hussain et al., 2019; Karmegam et al., 2011; Rossion and Michel, 2011, Tania et al., 2020).
This also indicates that a comprehensive anthropometric database is required for
application in architecture and other sectors. Further studies can investigate the variations for ethnic groups and comparisons with references to find if multipliers can be used until a widespread database is prepared.
The results suggest that the reference standards are not appropriate for Bangladesh, and, presumably, for other countries in South Asia. Space design standards are vital for integrating HFE in the built environment to ensure users' comfort and health benefits; they are also essential for such architectural design considerations as functional efficiency, workability, space optimization, etc. It follows that the data presented here provides better guidance than the reference standards when one is designing for Bangladesh, or as said above, for South Asia in general.
Conclusion
In this article, an anthropometric dataset is presented that is specifically tailored for architectural design in Bangladesh. Considering the importance of local data, it highlights the significance of using the Bangladeshi dataset when designing for Bangladesh, rather than relying on reference standards that are relevant for other populations.
Although the focus is on architecture and Bangladesh, the data can be applied to other fields, such as product design, and to other populations, such as other countries in South Asia.
Table 2. Male anthropometric dimensions and reference standards Male (n=66)__Male Reference__Unisex Reference_
SI Derived Dimension Mean Mode Max Min STDEV. Reference Dimension Reference Book Ref -Mean difference Reference Dimension Reference Book Ref-Mean difference
1 Stature 169.34 170.00 183.00 150.00 7.39 188.6 HD 19.3 175.3 TSS 6.0
2 Eye height 158.02 160.00 173.00 138.00 7.27 174.2 HD 16.2 - - -
3 Shoulder height 141.40 143.00 159.00 125.00 7.41 155.7 HD 14.3 - - -
4 Elbow height 108.26 107.00 135.00 96.00 7.52 120.1 HD 11.8 - - -
5 Knee height 49.43 49.00 61.00 41.00 3.83 - - - 53.3 TSS 3.9
6 Shoulder breadth 43.96 44.00 54.00 37.50 3.31 52.6 HD 8.6 45.7 TSS 1.7
7 8 Arm length Upper arm 75.93 32.00 72.00 30.00 90.00 39.00 63.00 22.00 4.66 2.70 - - - - - -
9 Forearm 26.28 27.00 32.00 23.00 1.78 - - - - - -
10 Hand length 18.53 18.00 21.70 15.00 1.32 20.5 HD 2.0 17.8 TSS -0.7
11 Side width (body depth) 24.04 24.00 35.00 16.00 3.58 33.0 HD 9.0 24.1 TSS 0.1
12 Back to elbow 42.36 41.00 58.00 34.00 4.08 - - - 43.2 TSS 0.8
13 Raised elbow height 131.86 135.00 156.00 108.00 8.23 - - - 137.2 TSS 5.3
14 Forward-stretched arm reach (fingertip) 78.17 80.00 90.60 68.00 4.27 88.9 HD 10.7 87.5 NAD 9.3
15 Vertical reach (standing) 214.73 220.00 235.00 191.00 10.81 224.8 HD 10.1 213.4 TSS -1.3
16 Side arm reach 88.33 90.00 101.00 77.00 4.75 99.1 HD 10.7 - - -
17 Arm span 173.52 174.00 190.00 154.00 8.48 - - - 182.9 TSS 9.4
18 Elbow span 87.49 94.00 98.90 69.00 5.83 - - - 100.0 NAD 12.5
19 Sitting height 86.58 86.00 146.00 73.00 8.35 96.5 HD 9.9 - - -
20 Shoulder height (sitting) 58.44 56.00 68.00 52.00 3.79 69.3 HD 10.9 - - -
21 Eye height (sitting) 75.18 74.00 84.00 64.00 3.73 86.1 HD 10.9 - - -
22 Popliteal height (sitting) 45.26 45.00 53.00 40.00 2.71 49.0 HD 3.7 - - -
23 Knee height (sitting) 53.42 55.00 60.00 45.00 3.13 59.4 HD 6.0 - - -
24 Buttock-toe length (sitting) 69.15 69.00 90.00 58.00 6.44 94.0 HD 24.9 - - -
25 Buttock-popliteal length (sitting) 46.72 46.00 55.00 39.00 3.31 54.9 HD 8.2 - - -
26 Hip breadth (sitting) 35.25 38.00 45.00 24.00 3.31 40.4 HD 5.1 - - -
27 Vertical reach (sitting) 130.79 127.00 143.00 110.00 6.48 131.1 HD 0.3 - - -
28 Buttock-heel length (sitting) 103.94 97.00 123.00 89.00 7.31 117.1 HD 13.2 - - -
29 Cross legged length 69.60 72.00 82.00 60.00 5.34 - - - 75.0 NAD 5.4
30 Cross legged height 83.56 86.00 100.00 51.00 6.76 - - - 87.5 NAD 3.9
31 Kneeling length 56.88 55.00 71.00 47.00 5.50 - - - 62.5 NAD 5.6
32 Kneeling height 99.08 105.00 115.00 86.00 6.76 - - - 100.0 NAD 0.9
33 Crawling length 119.60 121.00 143.00 100.30 9.69 147.8 HD 28.2 - - -
34 Crawling height 69.24 69.00 92.00 58.00 6.02 77.5 HD 8.3 76.2 TSS 7.0
35 Bent length 79.30 81.00 91.50 62.50 7.20 - - - - - -
36 Bent height 106.02 101.00 128.80 90.00 7.81 - - - - - -
37 Squatting length 82.43 79.00 111.40 66.00 12.09 - - - - - -
38 Squatting height 94.91 95.00 118.00 84.00 6.35 - - - - - -
Female (n=64) Female Reference Unisex Reference
SI Derived Dimension Mean Mode Max Min STDEV. Reference Dimension Reference Book Ref-Mean difference Reference Dimension Reference Book Ref-Mean difference
1 Stature 155.84 156.00 172.70 135.00 7.12 172.8 HD 16.96 175.3 TSS 19.46
2 Eye height 145.11 145.00 160.90 127.00 6.99 162.8 HD 17.69 - - -
3 Shoulder height 129.95 142.00 152.00 117.00 6.82 141.4 HD 11.45 - - -
4 Elbow height 98.98 98.00 113.00 86.00 5.26 110.7 HD 11.72 - - -
5 Knee height 45.45 46.00 53.00 39.50 3.31 - - - 53.3 TSS 7.85
6 Shoulder breadth 39.11 37.00 49.00 31.00 4.06 43.2 HD 4.09 45.7 TSS 6.59
7 8 Arm length Upper arm 69.81 29.98 74.00 31.00 79.00 35.00 59.00 24.00 4.04 2.42 - - - - - -
9 Forearm 23.59 23.00 27.00 20.00 1.56 - - - - - -
10 Hand length 16.79 16.00 19.70 14.00 1.25 - - - 17.8 TSS 1.01
11 Side width (body depth) 26.70 30.00 37.00 20.00 3.58 - - - 24.1 TSS -2.60
12 Back to elbow 39.34 39.00 49.40 31.00 3.72 - - - 43.2 TSS 3.84
13 Raised elbow height 120.36 127.00 134.20 105.00 6.57 - - - 137.2 TSS 16.80
14 Forward-stretched arm reach (fingertip) 73.15 74.00 88.70 59.00 5.74 80.5 HD 7.35 87.5 NAD 14.35
15 Vertical reach (standing) 194.74 202.00 225.00 108.80 14.19 213.4 HD 18.66 213.4 TSS 18.66
16 Side arm reach 79.11 80.00 90.50 69.00 4.65 96.5 HD 17.39
17 Arm span 156.78 153.00 177.00 138.00 7.71 - - - 182.9 TSS 26.12
18 Elbow span 79.71 80.00 93.00 69.00 5.11 - - - 100.0 NAD 20.29
19 Sitting height 81.46 78.00 117.50 68.00 8.05 90.7 HD 9.24 - - -
20 Shoulder height (sitting) 55.57 56.00 64.00 45.00 3.85 62.5 HD 6.93 - - -
21 Eye height (sitting) 69.07 69.00 79.00 53.00 4.90 80.5 HD 11.43 - - -
22 Popliteal height (sitting) 42.14 46.00 53.00 34.40 4.18 44.5 HD 2.36 - - -
23 Knee height (sitting) 49.67 49.00 58.00 43.00 3.42 54.6 HD 4.93 - - -
24 Buttock-toe length (sitting) 65.13 67.00 82.20 49.00 5.90 94.0 HD 28.87 - - -
25 Buttock-popliteal length (sitting) 45.02 43.00 54.00 38.30 3.97 53.3 HD 8.28 - - -
26 Hip breadth (sitting) 36.88 37.00 46.50 29.90 3.54 43.4 HD 6.52 - - -
27 Vertical reach (sitting) 119.90 117.00 139.00 100.00 7.79 124.7 HD 4.80 - - -
28 Buttock-heel length (sitting) 98.34 93.00 122.00 81.80 7.87 124.5 HD 26.16 - - -
29 Cross legged length 65.31 65.00 114.00 55.50 10.91 - - - 75.0 NAD 9.69
30 Cross legged height 78.16 81.00 88.30 59.00 4.91 - - - 87.5 NAD 9.34
31 Kneeling length 53.98 53.00 68.00 41.00 6.37 - - - 62.5 NAD 8.52
32 Kneeling height 89.40 89.00 106.00 67.00 8.21 - - - 100.0 NAD 10.60
33 Crawling length 109.91 100.00 135.50 80.00 10.64 - - - - - -
34 Crawling height 65.59 64.00 76.00 52.00 5.25 - - - 76.2 TSS 10.61
35 Bent length 73.69 78.00 88.30 55.00 7.80 - - - - - -
36 Bent height 102.39 97.00 119.00 84.00 8.35 - - - - - -
37 Squatting length 82.43 79.00 111.40 66.00 9.30 - - - - - -
38 Squatting height 94.91 95.00 118.00 84.00 6.91 - - - - - -
Table 4. Selected percentiles for male and female anthropometric dimensions and reference standards
si
Derived Dimension
Male (n=66) Percentile
Mean Mode 90th 50th 10th Reference (M/Unisex) Mean Mode 90th 50th 10th Reference (F/Unisex)
1 Stature 169.34 170.00 178.5 170.0 159.7 188.6 155.84 156 165.0 155.8 147.4 172.8
2 Eye height 158.02 160.00 167.0 159.3 148.3 174.2 145.11 145 155.0 145.0 137.6 162.8
3 Shoulder height 141.40 143.00 150.1 142.0 131.5 155.7 129.95 142 138.8 129.0 122.2 141.4
4 Elbow height 108.26 107.00 117.00 107.00 98.85 120.1 98.98 98.00 106.20 98.45 93.00 110.7
5 Knee height 49.43 49.00 54.00 49.35 44.55 53.3 45.45 46.00 49.35 45.45 40.48 53.3
6 Shoulder breadth 43.96 44.00 48.50 44.00 40.00 52.6 39.11 37.00 44.35 38.50 34.30 43.2
7 Arm length 75.93 72.00 81.50 76.00 70.00 - 69.81 74.00 74.00 69.90 64.36 -
8 Upper arm 32.00 30.00 35.00 32.00 29.00 - 29.98 31.00 33.00 30.00 27.01 -
9 Forearm 26.28 27.00 28.00 26.00 24.00 - 23.59 23.00 26.00 23.50 21.35 -
10 Hand length 18.53 18.00 20.00 18.45 17.00 20.5 16.79 16.00 18.30 17.00 15.20 17.8
11 Side width (body depth) 24.04 24.00 28.25 24.00 20.00 33.0 26.70 30.00 30.91 26.45 22.00 24.1
12 Back to elbow 42.36 41.00 46.00 42.00 37.50 43.2 39.34 39.00 43.00 39.70 34.37 43.2
13 Raised elbow height 131.86 135.00 140.75 132.05 123.00 137.2 120.36 127.00 129.00 120.75 111.65 137.2
14 Forward-stretched arm reach (fingertip) 78.17 80.00 83.85 78.00 72.90 88.9 73.15 74.00 80.40 74.00 67.09 80.5
15 Vertical reach (standing) 214.73 220.00 227.90 214.50 200.60 224.8 194.74 202.00 206.51 196.15 183.50 213.4
16 Side arm reach 88.33 90.00 93.15 88.65 82.40 99.1 79.11 80.00 84.70 79.10 73.12 96.5
17 Arm span 173.52 174.00 185.00 174.00 162.00 182.9 156.78 153.00 165.35 157.00 146.60 182.9
18 Elbow span 87.49 94.00 94.00 87.70 80.10 100.0 79.71 80.00 85.85 80.00 74.00 100.0
19 Sitting height 86.58 86.00 90.25 86.00 81.00 96.5 81.46 78.00 85.71 80.15 74.65 90.7
20 Shoulder height (sitting) 58.44 56.00 63.55 58.00 54.00 69.3 55.57 56.00 61.00 56.00 50.58 62.5
21 Eye height (sitting) 75.18 74.00 80.00 75.00 70.00 86.1 69.07 69.00 75.80 69.00 64.00 80.5
22 Popliteal height (sitting) 45.26 45.00 49.00 45.00 42.00 49.0 42.14 46.00 47.00 42.15 36.30 44.5
23 Knee height (sitting) 53.42 55.00 57.00 54.00 49.75 59.4 49.67 49.00 54.35 49.30 45.43 54.6
24 Buttock-toe length (sitting) 69.15 69.00 78.00 69.00 61.50 94.0 65.13 67.00 72.14 65.75 58.72 94.0
25 Buttock-popliteal length (sitting) 46.72 46.00 51.00 46.00 42.70 54.9 45.02 43.00 51.00 44.00 41.00 53.3
26 Hip breadth (sitting) 35.25 38.00 39.85 35.00 30.00 40.4 36.88 37.00 41.35 36.50 33.00 43.4
27 Vertical reach (sitting) 130.79 127.00 138.90 130.00 124.30 131.1 119.90 117.00 127.76 119.95 110.12 124.7
28 Buttock-heel length (sitting) 103.94 97.00 114.25 105.00 95.50 117.1 98.34 93.00 109.00 97.25 89.30 124.5
29 Cross legged length 69.60 72.00 76.00 70.10 61.30 75.0 65.31 65.00 71.33 63.80 57.00 75.0
30 Cross legged height 83.56 86.00 89.90 85.00 77.50 87.5 78.16 81.00 83.00 79.00 72.09 87.5
31 Kneeling length 56.88 55.00 65.00 56.00 50.50 62.5 53.98 53.00 62.00 54.00 46.18 62.5
32 Kneeling height 99.08 105.00 108.50 99.00 91.00 100.0 89.40 89.00 98.70 89.50 79.36 100.0
33 Crawling length 119.60 121.00 130.48 120.60 106.20 147.8 109.91 100.00 124.40 110.00 97.36 -
34 Crawling height 69.24 69.00 74.60 69.00 63.00 77.5 65.59 64.00 72.00 64.55 59.59 76.2
35 Bent length 79.30 81.00 87.00 81.00 70.05 - 73.69 78.00 81.97 75.00 60.60 -
36 Bent height 106.02 101.00 115.40 106.00 97.50 - 102.39 97.00 113.28 102.25 90.00 -
37 Squatting length 82.57 94.00 95.50 85.30 64.00 - 82.43 79.00 94.00 82.00 70.86 -
38 Squatting height 99.69 99.69 106.50 100.50 92.00 - 94.91 95.00 103.97 94.00 87.00 -
Female (n=64) Percentile
SI Derived Dimension Mean Mode STDEV Male (n=66) CV SEM Reference (M/Unisex) Z score p value p<.05
1 Stature 169.34 170.00 7.39 0.04 0.91 188.60 -2.61 0.0046 *
2 Eye height 158.02 160.00 7.27 0.05 0.89 174.20 -2.23 0.0130 *
3 Shoulder height 141.40 143.00 7.41 0.05 0.91 155.70 -1.93 0.0268 *
4 Elbow height 108.26 107.00 7.52 0.07 0.93 120.10 -1.57 0.0577
5 Knee height 49.43 49.00 3.83 0.08 0.47 53.30 -1.01 0.1561
6 Shoulder breadth 43.96 44.00 3.31 0.08 0.41 52.60 -2.61 0.0045 *
7 Arm length 75.93 72.00 4.66 0.06 0.57 - - -
8 Upper arm 32.00 30.00 2.70 0.08 0.33 - - -
9 Forearm 26.28 27.00 1.78 0.07 0.22 - - -
10 Hand length 18.53 18.00 1.32 0.07 0.16 20.50 -1.50 0.0670
11 Side width (body depth) 24.04 24.00 3.58 0.15 0.44 33.00 -2.50 0.0061 *
12 Back to elbow 42.36 41.00 4.08 0.10 0.50 43.18 -0.20 0.4200
13 Raised elbow height 131.86 135.00 8.23 0.06 1.01 137.16 -0.64 0.2595
14 Forward-stretched arm reach (fingertip) 78.17 80.00 4.27 0.05 0.53 88.90 -2.51 0.0060 *
15 Vertical reach (standing) 214.73 220.00 10.81 0.05 1.33 224.80 -0.93 0.1756
16 Side arm reach 88.33 90.00 4.75 0.05 0.59 99.06 -2.26 0.0120 *
17 Arm span 173.52 174.00 8.48 0.05 1.04 182.90 -1.11 0.1345
18 Elbow span 87.49 94.00 5.83 0.07 0.72 100.00 -2.14 0.0160 *
19 Sitting height 86.58 86.00 8.35 0.10 1.03 96.50 -1.19 0.1174
20 Shoulder height (sitting) 58.44 56.00 3.79 0.06 0.47 69.30 -2.87 0.0021 *
21 Eye height (sitting) 75.18 74.00 3.73 0.05 0.46 86.10 -2.92 0.0017 *
22 Popliteal height (sitting) 45.26 45.00 2.71 0.06 0.33 49.00 -1.38 0.0838
23 Knee height (sitting) 53.42 55.00 3.13 0.06 0.39 59.40 -1.91 0.0281 *
24 Buttock-toe length (sitting) 69.15 69.00 6.44 0.09 0.79 94.00 -3.86 0.0001 *
25 Buttock-popliteal length (sitting) 46.72 46.00 3.31 0.07 0.41 54.90 -2.47 0.0068 *
26 Hip breadth (sitting) 35.25 38.00 3.31 0.09 0.41 40.40 -1.55 0.0602
27 Vertical reach (sitting) 130.79 127.00 6.48 0.05 0.80 131.10 -0.05 0.4811
28 Buttock-heel length (sitting) 103.94 97.00 7.31 0.07 0.90 117.10 -1.80 0.0358 *
29 Cross legged length 69.60 72.00 5.34 0.08 0.66 75.00 -1.01 0.1560
30 Cross legged height 83.56 86.00 6.76 0.08 0.83 87.50 -0.58 0.2802
31 Kneeling length 56.88 55.00 5.50 0.10 0.68 62.50 -1.02 0.1532
32 Kneeling height 99.08 105.00 6.76 0.07 0.83 100.00 -0.14 0.4456
33 Crawling length 119.60 121.00 9.69 0.08 1.19 147.80 -2.91 0.0018 *
34 Crawling height 69.24 69.00 6.02 0.09 0.74 77.50 -1.37 0.0850
35 Bent length 79.30 81.00 7.20 0.09 0.89 - - -
36 Bent height 106.02 101.00 7.81 0.07 0.96 - - -
37 Squatting length 82.57 94.00 12.09 0.15 1.49 - - -
38 Squatting height 99.69 99.69 6.35 0.06 0.78 - - -
SI Derived Dimension Mean Mode STDEV Female (n=64) CV SEM Reference (F/Unisex) Z score p value p<.05
1 Stature 155.84 156.00 7.12 0.05 0.88 172.80 -2.38 0.0086 *
2 Eye height 145.11 145.00 6.99 0.05 0.86 162.80 -2.53 0.0057 *
3 Shoulder height 129.95 142.00 6.82 0.05 0.84 141.40 -1.68 0.0466 *
4 Elbow height 98.98 98.00 5.26 0.05 0.65 110.70 -2.23 0.0129 *
5 Knee height 45.45 46.00 3.31 0.07 0.41 53.30 -2.37 0.0089 *
6 Shoulder breadth 39.11 37.00 4.06 0.10 0.50 43.20 -1.01 0.1568
7 Arm length 69.81 74.00 4.04 0.06 0.50 - - -
8 Upper arm 29.98 31.00 2.42 0.08 0.30 - - -
9 Forearm 23.59 23.00 1.56 0.07 0.19 - - -
10 Hand length 16.79 16.00 1.25 0.07 0.15 17.80 -0.81 0.2085
11 Side width (body depth) 26.70 30.00 3.58 0.13 0.44 24.10 0.73 0.7663
12 Back to elbow 39.34 39.00 3.72 0.09 0.46 43.18 -1.03 0.1508
13 Raised elbow height 120.36 127.00 6.57 0.05 0.81 137.16 -2.55 0.0053 *
14 Forward-stretched arm reach (fingertip) 73.15 74.00 5.74 0.08 0.71 80.50 -1.28 0.1003
15 Vertical reach (standing) 194.74 202.00 14.19 0.07 1.75 213.40 -1.32 0.0942
16 Side arm reach 79.11 80.00 4.65 0.06 0.57 96.50 -3.74 0.0001 *
17 Arm span 156.78 153.00 7.71 0.05 0.95 182.90 -3.39 0.0003 *
18 Elbow span 79.71 80.00 5.11 0.06 0.63 100.00 -3.97 0.0000 *
19 Sitting height 81.46 78.00 8.05 0.10 0.99 90.70 -1.15 0.1253
20 Shoulder height (sitting) 55.57 56.00 3.85 0.07 0.47 62.50 -1.80 0.0359 *
21 Eye height (sitting) 69.07 69.00 4.90 0.07 0.60 80.50 -2.33 0.0099 *
22 Popliteal height (sitting) 42.14 46.00 4.18 0.10 0.51 44.50 -0.56 0.2865
23 Knee height (sitting) 49.67 49.00 3.42 0.07 0.42 54.60 -1.44 0.0747 *
24 Buttock-toe length (sitting) 65.13 67.00 5.90 0.09 0.73 94.00 -4.89 0.0000 *
25 Buttock-popliteal length (sitting) 45.02 43.00 3.97 0.09 0.49 53.30 -2.09 0.0183 *
26 Hip breadth (sitting) 36.88 37.00 3.54 0.10 0.44 43.40 -1.84 0.0327 *
27 Vertical reach (sitting) 119.90 117.00 7.79 0.07 0.96 124.70 -0.62 0.2690
28 Buttock-heel length (sitting) 98.34 93.00 7.87 0.08 0.97 124.50 -3.32 0.0004 *
29 Cross legged length 65.31 65.00 10.91 0.17 1.34 75.00 -0.89 0.1872
30 Cross legged height 78.16 81.00 4.91 0.06 0.60 87.50 -1.90 0.0284 *
31 Kneeling length 53.98 53.00 6.37 1.05 0.78 62.50 -8.86 0.0000 *
32 Kneeling height 89.40 89.00 8.21 0.09 1.01 100.00 -1.29 0.0982 *
33 Crawling length 109.91 100.00 10.64 0.10 1.31 - - -
34 Crawling height 65.59 64.00 5.25 0.08 0.65 76.20 -2.02 0.0217 *
35 Bent length 73.69 78.00 7.80 0.11 0.96 - - -
36 Bent height 102.39 97.00 8.35 0.08 1.03 - - -
37 Squatting length 82.43 79.00 9.30 0.11 1.14 - - -
38 Squatting height 94.91 95.00 6.91 0.07 0.85 - - -
Male (n=66) Female (n=64)
SI Derived Dimension Survey Mean Reference (M/Unisex) Survey Mean/ Stature Ratio Reference/ Stature Ratio Survey Mean/Arm Span Ratio Reference/ Arm Span Ratio Survey Mean Reference (M/Unisex) Survey Mean/ Stature Ratio Reference/ Stature Ratio Survey Mean/Arm Span Ratio Reference/ Arm Span Ratio
1 Stature 169.34 188.6 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.03 155.84 172.8 1.0 1.0 0.99 0.94
2 Eye height 158.02 174.2 0.93 0.92 0.91 0.95 145.11 162.8 0.9 0.9 0.93 0.89
3 Shoulder height 141.40 155.7 0.83 0.83 0.81 0.85 129.95 141.4 0.8 0.8 0.83 0.77
4 Shoulder breadth 43.96 52.60 0.26 0.28 0.25 0.29 39.11 43.20 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.24
5 Elbow height 108.26 120.1 0.64 0.69 0.62 0.66 98.98 110.7 0.64 0.64 0.63 0.61
6 Knee height 49.43 53.3 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.29 45.45 53.3 0.29 0.31 0.29 0.29
7 Hand length 18.53 20.5 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 16.79 17.8 0.11 0.10 0.11 0.10
8 Side width (body depth) 24.04 33.0 0.14 0.17 0.14 0.18 26.70 24.1 0.17 0.14 0.17 0.13
9 Back to elbow 42.36 43.2 0.25 0.23 0.24 0.24 39.34 43.2 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.24
10 Raised elbow height 131.86 137.2 0.78 0.73 0.76 0.75 120.36 137.2 0.77 0.79 0.77 0.75
11 Forward-stretched arm reach (fingertip) 78.17 88.9 0.46 0.47 0.45 0.49 73.15 80.5 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.44
12 Vertical reach (standing) 214.73 224.8 1.27 1.19 1.24 1.23 194.74 213.4 1.25 1.23 1.24 1.17
13 Side arm reach 88.33 99.1 0.52 0.53 0.51 0.54 79.11 96.5 0.51 0.56 0.50 0.53
14 Arm span 173.52 182.9 1.02 0.97 1.00 1.00 156.78 182.9 1.01 1.06 1.00 1.00
15 Elbow span 87.49 100.0 0.52 0.53 0.50 0.55 79.71 100.0 0.51 0.58 0.51 0.55
16 Sitting height 86.58 96.5 0.51 0.51 0.50 0.53 81.46 90.7 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.50
17 Shoulder height (sitting) 58.44 69.3 0.35 0.37 0.34 0.38 55.57 62.5 0.36 0.36 0.35 0.34
18 Eye height (sitting) 75.18 86.1 0.44 0.46 0.43 0.47 69.07 80.5 0.44 0.47 0.44 0.44
19 Popliteal height (sitting) 45.26 49.0 0.27 0.26 0.26 0.27 42.14 44.5 0.27 0.26 0.27 0.24
20 Knee height (sitting) 53.42 59.4 0.32 0.31 0.31 0.32 49.67 54.6 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.30
21 Buttock-toe length (sitting) 69.15 94.0 0.41 0.50 0.40 0.51 65.13 94.0 0.42 0.54 0.42 0.51
22 Buttock-popliteal length (sitting) 46.72 54.9 0.28 0.29 0.27 0.30 45.02 53.3 0.29 0.31 0.29 0.29
23 Hip breadth (sitting) 35.25 40.4 0.33 0.21 0.20 0.22 36.88 43.4 0.37 0.25 0.24 0.24
24 Vertical reach (sitting) 130.79 131.1 0.77 0.70 0.75 0.72 119.90 124.7 0.77 0.72 0.76 0.68
25 Buttock-heel length (sitting) 103.94 117.1 0.61 0.62 0.60 0.64 98.34 124.5 0.63 0.72 0.63 0.68
26 Cross legged length 69.60 75.0 0.41 0.40 0.40 0.41 65.31 75.0 0.42 0.43 0.42 0.41
27 Cross legged height 83.56 87.5 0.49 0.46 0.48 0.48 78.16 87.5 0.50 0.51 0.50 0 48
28 Kneeling length 56.88 62.5 0.34 0.33 0.33 0.34 53.98 62.5 0.36 0.36 0.34 0.34
29 Kneeling height 99.08 100.0 0.59 0.53 0.57 0.55 89.40 100.0 0.57 0.58 0.57 0.55
30 Crawling length 119.60 147.8 0.71 0.78 0.69 0.81 109.91 - 0.71 - 0.70 -
31 Crawling height 69.24 77.5 0.41 0.41 0.40 0.42 65.59 76.2 0.42 0.44 0.42 0.42
p-value for paired f-test 5.42654E-09 0.6036852 0.000198362 7.00667E-09 0.029700651 0.072590005
References
Akhter, Z., Begum, J. A., Banu, M. L. A., Alam, M., Hossain, S., Amin, N. F., Uddin, M., and Yasmin, Q. S. (2009). Stature estimation using head measurements in Bangladeshi Garo adult females. Bangladesh Journal of Anatomy, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 101-104. DOI: 10.3329/bja.v7i2.6096.
Akhter, Z, Banu, M. L. A, Alam, M. M., Hossain, S., and Nazneen, M. (2013). Photo-anthropometric study on face among Garo adult females of Bangladesh. Bangladesh Medical Research Council Bulletin, Vol. 39, No. 2, pp. 61-64. DOI: 10.3329/ bmrcb.v39i2.19643.
Akter, S., Jesmin, S., Islam, M., Sultana, S. N., Okazaki, O., Hiroe, M., Moroi, M., and Mizutani, T. (2012). Association of age at menarche with metabolic syndrome and its components in rural Bangladeshi women. Nutrition & Metabolism Vol. 9, 99. DOI: 10.1186/1743-7075-9-99.
Alam, S., Gupta, U. D., Alam, M., Kabir, J., Chowdhury, Z. R., and Alam, A. K. M. K. (2014). Clinical, anthropometric, biochemical, and histological characteristics of nonobese nonalcoholic fatty liver disease patients of Bangladesh. Indian Journal of Gastroenterology, Vol. 33, Issue 5, pp. 452-457. DOI: 10.1007/s12664-014-0488-5.
Alam, S., Anam, K., Islam, S., Mustafa, G., Al Mamun, A., and Ahmad, N. (2019). Clinical, anthropometric, biochemical and histological character of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease without insulin resistance. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hepatology, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 176-181. DOI: 10.1016/j.jceh.2018.06.011.
Ali, N., Mahmood, S., Manirujjaman, M., Perveen, R., Al Nahid, A., Ahmed, S., Khanum, F. A., and Rahman, M. (2018). Hypertension prevalence and influence of basal metabolic rate on blood pressure among adult students in Bangladesh. BMC Public Health, Vol. 18, 58. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-017-4617-9.
Asadujjaman, M., Rashid, M. H. O., and Rana, S. (2019). Anthropometric measurement of external ear and correlation with age in north regional people of Bangladesh. Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 206-210. DOI: 10.3329/bjms.v18i2.40686.
Asghar, S., Hussain, A., Ali, S. M. K., Khan, A. K. A., and Magnusson, A. (2007). Prevalence of depression and diabetes: a population-based study from rural Bangladesh. Diabetic Medicine, Vol. 24, Issue 8, pp. 872-877. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2007.02136.x.
Attaianese, E. (2012). A broader consideration of human factor to enhance sustainable building design. Work, Vol. 41, pp. 2155-2159. DOI: 10.3233/WDR-2012-1020-2155.
Attaianese, E. (2014). Human factors in design of sustainable buildings. In: Ahram, T., Karwowski W., and Marek, T. (eds.). Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics AHFE 2014, July 19-23, 2014, Krakow, Poland. DOI: 10.54941/ahfe1001330.
Attaianese, E. (2016). Ergonomic design of built environment. Anais do VI Encontro Nacional de Ergonomia do Ambiente Construido & VII Seminario Brasileiro de Acessibilidade Integral [= Blucher Design Proceedings, v. 2 n. 7], May 23-25, 2016, Sao Paulo, Brazil, Blucher. pp. 1-5. DOI: 10.5151/despro-eneac2016-PALAMB1.
Attaianese, E. (2017). Ergonomics of built environment i.e. how environmental design can improve human performance and well - being in a framework of sustainability. Ergonomics International Journal, Vol. 1, Special Issue 1, 000S1-001. DOI: 10.23880/EOIJ-16000S.
Attaianese, E. and Duca, G. (2012). Human factors and ergonomic principles in building design for life and work activities: an applied methodology. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, Vol. 13, Issue 2, pp. 187-202. DOI: 10.1080/1463922X.2010.504286.
Bhowmik, B., Munir, S. B., Ahmed, K. R., Siddiquee, T., Diep, L. M., Wright, E., Hassan, Z., Debnath, P. R., Mahtab, H., Azad Khan, A. K., and Hussain, A. (2014). Anthropometric indices of obesity and type 2 diabetes in Bangladeshi population: Chandra Rural Diabetes Study (CRDS). Obesity Research & Clinical Practice, Vol. 8, Issue 3, pp. e220-e229. DOI: 10.1016/j. orcp.2013.06.001.
Bhowmik, B., Munir, S. B., Diep, L. M., Siddiquee, T., Habib, S. H., Samad, M. A., Azad Khan, A. K., and Hussain, A. (2013). Anthropometric indicators of obesity for identifying cardiometabolic risk factors in a rural Bangladeshi population. Journal of Diabetes Investigation, Vol. 4, Issue 4, pp. 361-368. DOI: 10.1111/jdi.12053.
Biswas, S. (2022). Teaching ergonomics in the online studio. Journal of Design Studio, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 237-247. DOI: 10.46474/jds. 1183490.
Biswas, T., Garnett, S. P., Pervin, S., and Rawal, L. B. (2017). The prevalence of underweight, overweight and obesity in Bangladeshi adults: Data from a national survey. PloS one, Vol. 12, No. 5, e0177395. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177395.
Biswas, S., Kundu, G. and Imam, C. A. (2021). Learning human factors/ergonomics (HFE) in architectural education: a study of studio approach in Bangladesh. Creative Space, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 29-41. DOI: 10.15415/cs.2021.91003.
BNBC/MoHPW/GoB (2021) Bangladesh National Building Code, BNBC. Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh. Available at: http://www.dpp.gov.bd/upload_file/gazettes/39201_96302.pdf. [Date accessed September 12, 2022].
Cantonment Board (2020). Dhaka Cantonment Building Construction Rules, 2020. Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh. [online] Available at: https://www.dpp.gov.bd/upload_file/gazettes/35221_57392.pdf [Date accessed August 24, 2022].
Chakrabortty, R. K., Asadujjaman, M., and Nuruzzaman, M. (2014). Fuzzy and AHP approaches for designing a hospital bed: a case study in Bangladesh. International Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Vol. 17, Issue 3, pp. 315-328.
Charytonowicz, J. (2000). Architecture and ergonomics. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, Vol. 44, Issue 33, 6-103-6-106. DOI: 10.1177/154193120004403305.
Choudhury, K. N., Mainuddin, A. K. M., Wahiduzzaman, M., and Islam, S. M. S. (2014). Serum lipid profile and its association with hypertension in Bangladesh. Vascular Health and Risk Management, Vol. 10, pp. 327-332. DOI: 10.2147/VHRM.S61019.
Chowdhury, M. A. B., Uddin, M. J., Haque, R., and Ibrahimou, B. (2016). Hypertension among adults in Bangladesh: evidence from a national cross-sectional survey. BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, Vol. 16, 22. DOI: 10.1186/s12872-016-0197-3.
Chowdhury, M. A. B., Uddin, M. J., Khan, H. M. R., and Haque, R. (2015). Type 2 diabetes and its correlates among adults in Bangladesh: a population based study. BMC Public Health, Vol. 15, 1070. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-015-2413-y.
Chowdhury, S., Shahabuddin, A. K. M., Seal, A. J., Talukder, K. K., Hassan, Q., Begum, R. A., Rahman, Q., Tomkins, A., Costello, A., and Talukder, M. Q. K. (2000). Nutritional status and age at menarche in a rural area of Bangladesh. Annals of human biology, Vol. 27, Issue 3, pp. 249-256. DOI: 10.1080/030144600282136.
Codinhoto, R., Tzortzopoulos, P., Kagioglou, M., Aouad, G., Cooper, R. (2009). The impacts of the built environment on health outcomes. Facilities, Vol. 27, No. 3/4, pp. 138-151. DOI: 10.1108/02632770910933152.
Costa, A. P. L., Campos, F., and Villarouco, V. (2012). Overview of ergonomics built environment. Work, Vol. 41, pp. 41424148. DOI: 10.3233/WDR-2012-0710-4142.
De Chiara, J. and Callender, J. H. (1990). Time saver standards for building types. 3rd edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
D'Souza, A. and Tandon, S. (2019). Intrahousehold nutritional inequities in rural Bangladesh. Economic Development and Cultural Change, Vol. 67, No. 3, pp. 625-657. DOI: 10.1086/698311.
Eilouti, B. (2021). A framework for integrating ergonomics into architectural design. Ergonomics in Design: The Quarterly of Human Factors Applications, Vol. 31, Issue 1, pp. 4-12. DOI: 10.1177/1064804620983672.
Flora, M. S., Mascie-Taylor, C. G. N., and Rahman, M. (2009). Conicity index of adult Bangladeshi population and their socio-demographic characteristics. Ibrahim Medical College Journal, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 1-8. DOI: 10.3329/imcj.v3i1.2910.
Fottrell, E., Ahmed, N., Shaha, S. K., Jennings, H., Kuddus, A., Morrison, J., Akter, K., Nahar, B., Nahar, T., Haghparast-Bidgoli, H., Azad Khan, A. K., Costello, A., and Azad, K. (2018). Distribution of diabetes, hypertension and non-communicable disease risk factors among adults in rural Bangladesh: a cross-sectional survey. BMJ Global Health, Vol. 3, Issue 6, e000787. DOI: 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000787.
Fross, K. (2014). Ergonomics in the practice of project architect on selected examples. In: Kurosu, M. (ed.). Human-Computer Interaction. Theories, Methods, and Tools. HCI2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 8510. Cham: Springer, pp. 7785. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-07233-3_8.
Fross, K, Winnicka-Jastowska, D., Guminska, A., Masty, D., and Sitek, M. (2015). Use of qualitative research in architectural design and evaluation of the built environment. Procedia Manufacturing, Vol. 3, pp. 1625-1632. DOI: 10.1016/j. promfg.2015.07.453.
Garneau, C. J. and Parkinson, M. B. (2016). A survey of anthropometry and physical accommodation in ergonomics curricula. Ergonomics, Vol. 59, Issue 1, pp. 143-154. DOI: 10.1080/00140139.2015.1052853.
Ge, W., Parvez, F., Wu, F., Islam, T., Ahmed, A., Shaheen, I., Sarwar, G., Demmer, R. T., Desvarieux, M., Ahsan, H., and Chen, Y. (2014). Association between anthropometric measures of obesity and subclinical atherosclerosis in Bangladesh. Atherosclerosis, Vol. 232, Issue 1, pp. 234-241. DOI: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2013.11.035.
Goel, S. and Tashakkori, R. (2015). Correlation between body measurements of different genders and races. In: Rychtar, J., Chhetri, M., Gupta, S., and Shivaji, R. (eds.). Collaborative Mathematics and Statistics Research. Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics, Vol. 109. Cham: Springer, pp. 7-17. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-11125-4_2.
Hedge, A. and Dorsey, J. A. (2013). Green buildings need good ergonomics. Ergonomics, Vol. 56, Issue 3, pp. 492-506. DOI: 10.1080/00140139.2012.718367.
Hedge, A., Rollings, K., and Robinson, J. (2010). "Green" ergonomics: advocating for the human element in buildings. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, Vol. 54, Issue 9, pp.693-697. DOI: 10.1177/154193121005400902.
Hendrick, H. W. (2008). Applying ergonomics to systems: Some documented "lessons learned". Applied Ergonomics, Vol. 39, Issue 4, pp. 418-426. DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2008.02.006.
Hoque, M., Halder, P. K., Fouzder, P. K., and Iqbal, Z. (2017). Ergonomic design of a Bangladesh bus passenger seat. Occupational Ergonomics, Vol. 13, No. 3-4, pp. 157-172. DOI: 10.3233/OER-170249.
Hoque, A. S. M., Parvez, M. S., Halder, P. K., and Szecsi, T. (2014). Ergonomic design of classroom furniture for university students of Bangladesh. Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering, Vol. 31, Issue 5, pp. 239-252. DOI: 10.1080/21681015.2014.940069.
Hossain, Z. (2015). Estimation of hand anthropometry among Bangladesh adults living in four different areas. BSc Thesis. Bangladesh Health Professions Institute.
Hossain, S., Begum, J. A., and Akhter, Z. (2011a). Measurement of stature from arm-span - an anthropometric study on Garo tribal Bangladeshi females. Bangladesh Journal of Anatomy, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 5-9. DOI: 10.3329/bja.v9i1.8139.
Hossain, M. G., Islam, S., Aik, S., Zaman, T. K., and Lestrel, P. E. (2010) Age at menarche of university students in Bangladesh: secular trends and association with adult anthropometric measures and socio-demographic factors. Journal of Biosocial Science, Vol. 42, Issue 5, pp. 677-687. DOI: 10.1017/S0021932010000210.
Hossain, M. G., Sabiruzzaman, M., Islam, S., Hisyam, R. Z., Lestrel, P. E., and Kamarul, T. (2011b). Influence of anthropometric measures and socio-demographic factors on menstrual pain and irregular menstrual cycles among university students in Bangladesh. Anthropological Science, Vol. 119, Issue 3, pp. 239-246. DOI: 10.1537/ase.100903.
Hovinga, K. R. and Lerner, A. L. (2009). Anatomic variations between Japanese and Caucasian populations in the healthy young adult knee joint. Journal of Orthopaedic Research, Vol. 27, Issue 9, pp. 1191-1196. DOI: 10.1002/jor.20858.
Hussain, A., Azad Khan, A. K., and Bhowmik, B. (2013). Anthropometric indicators of obesity for identifying cardiometabolic risks in a rural Bangladeshi population - Chandra diabetes study. Clinical Care, Vol. 58, Issue 2, pp. 46-48.
Hussain, M. S. B., Bashar, F., Akhter, N., Nahid, F. A., Zobayer, M. K., Tuhin, J. (2019). Anthropometric study of correlation between the stature and selected upper limb dimensions in adult Bangladeshi Manipuri females. International Journal of Medical Research Professionals, Vol. 5, No. 5, pp. 72-79. DOI: 10.21276/ijmrp.2019.5.5.015.
Imrhan, S. N., Sarder, M. D., and Mandahawi, N. (2006). Hand anthropometry in a sample of Bangladesh males. In: IIE Annual Conference, May 20-24, 2006, Orlando, USA.
Imrhan, S. N., Sarder, M. D., and Mandahawi, N. (2009). Hand anthropometry in Bangladeshis living in America and comparisons with other populations. Ergonomics, Vol. 52, Issue 8, pp. 987-998. DOI: 10.1080/00140130902792478.
Islam, M. Z., Akhtaruzzaman, M., and Lamberg-Allardt, C. (2004). Nutritional status of women in Bangladesh: comparison of energy intake and nutritional status of a low income rural group with a high income urban group. Asia Pacific Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 13, Issue 1, pp. 61-68.
Islam, S. M. S., Alam, D. S., Wahiduzzaman, M., Niessen, L. W., Froeschl, G., Ferrari, U., Seissler, J., Rouf, H. M. A., and Lechner, A. (2015). Clinical characteristics and complications of patients with type 2 diabetes attending an urban hospital in Bangladesh. Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome: Clinical Research & Reviews, Vol. 9, Issue 1, pp. 7-13. DOI: 10.1016/j. dsx.2014.09.014.
Islam, M. A., Asadujjaman, M., Nuruzzaman, M., and Hossain, M. M. (2013). Ergonomics consideration for hospital bed design: a case study in Bangladesh. Journal of Modern Science and Technology, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 30-44.
Islam, M. S., Hussain, M. A., Islam, S., Mahumud, R. A., Biswas, T., and Islam, S. M. S. (2017). Age at menarche and its socioeconomic determinants among female students in an urban area in Bangladesh. Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare, Vol. 12, pp. 88-92. DOI: 10.1016/j.srhc.2017.03.008.
Islam, F., Kathak, R. R., Sumon, A. H., and Molla, N. H. (2020). Prevalence and associated risk factors of general and abdominal obesity in rural and urban women in Bangladesh. PloS one, Vol. 15, No. 5, e0233754. DOI: 10.1371/journal. pone.0233754.
Karim, E. and Mascie-Taylor, C. G. N. (1997). The association between birthweight, sociodemographic variables and maternal anthropometry in an urban sample from Dhaka, Bangladesh. Annals of human biology, Vol. 24, Issue 5, pp. 387401. DOI: 10.1080/03014469700005152.
Karmegam, K., Sapuan, S. M., Ismail, M. Y., Ismail, N., Shamsul Bahri, M. T., Shuib, S., Mohana, G. K., Seetha, P., TamilMoli, P., and Hanapi, M. J. (2011). Anthropometric study among adults of different ethnicity in Malaysia. International Journal of the Physical Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 777-788. DOI: DOI: 10.5897/IJPS10.310.
Khadem, M. M. and Islam, M. A. (2014). Development of anthropometric data for Bangladeshi male population. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, Vol. 44, Issue 3, pp. 407-412. DOI: 10.1016/j.ergon.2014.01.007.
Khan, M. M. H. (2014). Anthropometric estimation of Bangladeshis living in three different areas. BSc Thesis. University of Dhaka.
Klamklay, J., Sungkhapong, A., Yodpijit, N., and Patterson, P. E. (2008). Anthropometry of the southern Thai population. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, Vol. 38, Issue 1, pp. 111-118. DOI: 10.1016/j.ergon.2007.09.001.
Laila, S. Z., Begum, J. A., Ferdousi, R., Parveen, S., Husain, M. S., Holy, S. Z., and Islam, M. S. (2010a). Anthropometric measurements of the arm span and their correlation with the stature of Bangladeshi adult Muslim females. Mymensingh Medical Journal, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 561-564.
Laila, S. Z., Begum, J. A., Ferdousi, R., Parveen, S., Nurunnobi, A. M., Yesmin, F. (2010b). Anthropometric measurements of the forearm and their correlation with the stature of Bengali adult Muslim females. Mymensingh Medical Journal, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 377-381.
Mitra, D. K., Mistry, S. K., Afsana, K., and Rahman, M. (2018). Demographic, socio-economic and lifestyle determinants of under-and over-nutrition among Bangladeshi adult population: results from a large cross-sectional study. Journal of Epidemiology and Global Health, Vol. 8, Issues 3-4, pp. 134-142. DOI: 10.2991/j.jegh.2018.03.002.
MoHPW/GoB (2008) ^IM^RlIT ftf^RT^oofr, Dhaka Imarat Nirman Bidhimala-2008 [Dhaka Metropolitan Building Construction Rules, 2008]. Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh. Available at: https://rajuk.portal.gov.bd/sites/ default/files/files/rajuk.portal.gov.bd/page/20b761b8_ab9c_4ec7_8692_0877fe834afd/DhakaImaratNirmanBidhimala-2008. pdf. [Date accessed August 24, 2022].
Mokdad, M. (2002). Anthropometric study of Algerian farmers. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, Vol. 29, Issue 6, pp. 331-341. DOI: 10.1016/S0169-8141(01 )00073-7.
Nahar, S., Mascie-Taylor, C. G. N., and Begum, H. A. (2007). Maternal anthropometry as a predictor of birth weight. Public Health Nutrition, Vol. 10, No. 9, pp. 965-970. DOI: 10.1017/S1368980007217975.
Neufert, E. and Neufert, P. (2012). Architects' Data. 4th edition. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 583 p.
Olgunturk, N. and Demirkan, H. (2009). Ergonomics and universal design in interior architecture education. METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 123-138. DOI: 10.4305/METU.JFA.2009.2.7.
Osborne, G., Wu, F., Yang, L., Kely, D., Hu, J., Li, H., Jasmine, F., Kibriya, M. G., Parvez, F., Shaheen, I., Sarwar, G., Ahmed, A., Eunus, M., Islam, T., Pei, Z., Ahsan, H., and Chen, Y. (2020). The association between gut microbiome and anthropometric measurements in Bangladesh. Gut Microbes, Vol. 11, Issue 1, pp. 63-76. DOI: 10.1080/19490976.2019.1614394.
Panero, J. and Zelnik, M. (1979). Human dimension & interior space: a source book of design reference standards. New York: Watson-Guptill, 320 p.
Parvez, M. S., Shahriar, M. M., Tasnim, N., and Hoque, A. S. M. (2022a). An anthropometry survey of Bangladeshi university students. Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering, Vol. 39, Issue 2, pp. 89-108. DOI: 10.1080/21681015.2021.1963337.
Parvez, M. S., Talapatra, S., Tasnim, N., Kamal, T., and Murshed, M. (2022b). Anthropomorphic investigation into improved furniture fabrication and fitting for students in a Bangladeshi university. Journal of The Institution of Engineers (India): Series C, Vol. 103, Issue 4, pp. 613-622. DOI: 10.1007/s40032-022-00857-1.
Parvez, M. S., Tasnim, N., Talapatra, S., Kamal, T., and Murshed, M. (2021). Are library furniture dimensions appropriate for anthropometric measurements of university students? Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering, Vol. 39, Issue 5, pp. 365-380. DOI: 10.1080/21681015.2021.1998930.
Parvez, M. S., Tasnim, N., Talapatra, S., Runani, A., and Hoque, A. S. M. M. (2022c). Assessment of musculoskeletal problems among Bangladeshi university students in relation to classroom and library furniture. Journal of The Institution of Engineers (India): Series C, Vol. 103, Issue 3, pp. 279-292. DOI: 10.1007/s40032-021-00792-7Pentikis, J, Lopez, M. S., and Thomas, R. E. (2002). Ergonomics evaluation of a government office building. Work, Vol. 18, Issue 2, pp. 123-131.
Pheasant, S. and Haslegrave, C. M. (2006). Bodyspace: Anthropometry, Ergonomics and the Design of Work. Boca Raton: CRC press, 352 p.
Pinto, M. R., De Medici, S., Van Sant, C., Bianchi, A., Zlotnicki, A., Napoli, C. (2000). Technical note: Ergonomics, gerontechnology, and design for the home-environment. Applied Ergonomics, Vol. 31, Issue 3, pp. 317-322. DOI: 10.1016/ S0003-6870(99)00058-7.
Qureshi, N. K., Hossain, T., Hassan, M. I., Akter, N., Rahman, M. M., Sultana, M. M., Ashrafuzzaman, S. M., and Latif, Z. A. (2017). Neck circumference as a marker of overweight and obesity and cutoff values for Bangladeshi adults. Indian Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Vol. 21, Issue 6, pp. 803-808. DOI: 10.4103/ijem.IJEM_196_17.
Radjiyev, A., Qiu, H., Xiong, S., and Nam, K. H. (2015). Ergonomics and sustainable development in the past two decades (1992-2011): Research trends and how ergonomics can contribute to sustainable development. Applied Ergonomics, Vol. 46, Part A, pp. 67-75. DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2014.07.006.
Razzaque L, Ashrafuzzaman M and Hakim M (2021) Study of Age-Related Finger Span and Hand Grip Strength of Adult Female Garment Workers in Bangladesh. Chattagram Maa-O-Shishu Hospital Medical College Journal, Vol. 20, Issue 1, pp. 62-66.
Remijn, S. L. M. (2006). Integrating ergonomics into the architectural design processes: tools for user participation in hospital design. In: Proceedings of the International Ergonomics Association 16th world congress on ergonomics, 2006, p. e14.
Available at: https://www.ergos.eu/inhoud/uploads/2013/01/paper_user_centered_hospital_design.pdf. [Date accessed June 12, 2022].
Rogers, B., Buckheit, K., and Ostendorf, J. (2013). Ergonomics and nursing in hospital environments. Workplace Health & Safety, Vol. 61, Issue 10, pp. 429-439. DOI: 10.1177/216507991306101003.
Rossion, B. and Michel, C. (2011). An experience-based holistic account of the other-race face effect. In: Calder, A. J., Rhodes, G., Johnson, M. H., Haxby, J. V. (eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Face Perception. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 215-244. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199559053.013.0012.
Sanders, M. S. and McCormick, E. J. (1993). Human factors in engineering and design. 7th edition. New York: McGraw Hill, 704 p.
Shah, M. R. I., Anwar, S., Mondal, D. K., Yesmin, S., and Ahmed, S. (2015). Anthropometry of the nose: a comparative study between adult male Santhals and Bengalis in Bangladesh. Mediscope, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 28-32. DOI: 10.3329/mediscope. v2i2.25407.
Shah, R. M., Bhuiyan, M. A. U., Debnath, R., Iqbal, M., and Shamsuzzoha, A. (2013). Ergonomics issues in furniture design: a case of a tabloid chair design. In: Azevedo, A. (ed.). Advances in Sustainable and Competitive Manufacturing Systems. Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 91-103. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-00557-7_8.
Shahriar, M. M., Parvez, M. S., and Lutfi, M. (2020). A survey of hand anthropometry of Bangladeshi agricultural farm workers. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, Vol. 78, 102978. DOI: 10.1016/j.ergon.2020.102978.
Siddiquee, T., Bhowmik, B., Karmaker, R. K., Chowdhury, A., Mahtab, H., Azad Khan, A. K., and Hussain, A. (2015). Association of general and central obesity with diabetes and prediabetes in rural Bangladeshi population. Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome: Clinical Research & Reviews, Vol. 9, Issue 4, pp. 247-251. DOI: 10.1016/j.dsx.2015.02.002.
Simmons, S. S., Hagan, J. E. Jr., and Schack, T. (2021). The influence of anthropometric indices and intermediary determinants of hypertension in Bangladesh. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol. 18, Issue 11, 5646. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18115646.
Springer, T. (2007). Ergonomics for healthcare environments. Knoll Workplace Research. New York: Knoll.
Sultana, T., Karim, M. N., Ahmed, T., and Hossain, M. I. (2015). Assessment of under nutrition of Bangladeshi adults using anthropometry: can body mass index be replaced by mid-upper-arm-circumference? PloS one, Vol. 10, No. 4, e0121456. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0121456..
Tania, I. J., Zaman, F., Morium, U., Akter, M., and Rashid, S. (2020). Anthropometric study of facial height among tribal (Garo) and non-tribal Bangladeshi female of Greater Mymensingh district in Bangladesh. Journal of Current and Advance Medical Research, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 36-39. DOI: 10.3329/jcamr.v7i1.46428.
Villeneuve, J. (2000). The contribution of ergonomics to the design of hospital architecture. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, Vol. 44, Issue 26, pp. 189-196. DOI: 10.1177/154193120004402615.
Yeoman, P. and Ashmore, N. (2018). Moving from pedagogical challenge to ergonomic challenge: Translating epistemology into the built environment for learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 34, No. 6. DOI: 10.14742/ ajet.4502.
ПРИГОДНОСТЬ СТАНДАРТОВ ДЛЯ ИНТЕГРАЦИИ ЭРГОНОМИКИ В АРХИТЕКТУРЕ: ЭМПИРИЧЕСКОЕ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЕ В БАНГЛАДЕШЕ
Судипти Бисвас
Военный институт науки и технологий (MIST), Дакка, Бангладеш
E-mail: sudipti.biswas@arch.mist.ac.bd
Аннотация
Введение: Здания — важная часть нашей жизни, потому что мы проводим в них очень много времени. Основная задача архитектора состоит в обеспечении соответствия зданий, в которых мы живем, происходящей в них человеческой деятельности. Поэтому антропометрические данные — важный инструмент для архитектора. К сожалению, антропометрические данные, относящиеся к функциям, выполняемым в зданиях, относительно скудны даже в рамках академического опыта архитектора. Архитекторы в основном полагаются на несколько стандартов, которые могут не соответствовать местному населению. Цель описанного здесь исследования — внести вклад в восполнение этого пробела с помощью составления справочных антропометрических таблиц для населения Бангладеш, которые могут служить источником данных в области архитектуры. Методы: Антропометрические показатели 130 человек, 66 мужчин и 64 женщин, были измерены в 38 различных позах. Позы выбраны из стандартов и с учетом местной практики. Затем измерения были исследованы с помощью описательной статистики и подверглись сравнению со стандартами для проверки различий. Результаты: Сравнительный анализ показывает, что показатели населения Бангладеш значительно меньше; следовательно, применяемые стандарты не подходят для Бангладеш и, предположительно, Южной Азии. Для создания всеобъемлющей антропометрической базы данных необходимы дальнейшие исследования. Представленные измерения могут служить источником данных для проектирования жилых и других зданий в Бангладеш, а также в других странах Южной Азии.
Ключевые слова: стандарт, антропометрия, параметры тела, население Бангладеш, архитектура, эргономика.
