Peter Vink

Co-creation has become increasingly important as companies strive to develop more customer-centric products and services by involving stakeholders throughout the design process. This paper introduces XR-CO, a multi-sensory, multi-user mixed reality co-creation platform. XR-CO utilizes an optical see-through head mounted display to create a 1:1 immersive mixed reality environment over essential physical prototypes, allowing stakeholders to physically interact with functional prototypes inside the digital environment. By incorporating visual, auditory, somatosensory and vestibular senses, XR-CO maximizes collaboration and triggers meaningful interactions among stakeholders, leading to improved co-creation quality. To validate XR-CO’s effectiveness, a study was conducted involving 32 participants in co-creation sessions for the development of cabin interiors of a new concept aircraft, the Flying-V. Half of the participants used XR-CO platform, while another half used the conventional desktop co-creation setups. The participants appreciated the XR-CO platforms, as indicated by their high scores in CSI, SUS, co-creation experience, and quantity of ideas in terms of quantitative data analysis. Additionally, 4D scanning of participants movements demonstrated that XR-CO provided a true-to-life perception of the digital space. XR-CO facilitated the discovery of more design issues compared to conventional setups, a finding affirmed by an expert panel using qualitative Delphi techniques. The positive user experience and meaningful outcomes observed in these co-creation sessions serve as strong evidence of the efficacy of the XR-CO platform, particularly the newly introduced somatosense. In summary, our study highlights the significance of XR-CO in co-creation processes. The platform’s immersive nature, combined with the integration of multiple sensory inputs, fosters collaboration, enriches interactions, and ultimately leads to improved outcomes.

Background: In recent years in-chair movements (ICM) have gained attention in comfort and discomfort studies, but the role of these movements in preventing and/or alleviating discomfort remains unclear. Furthermore, differences in study design and terminology make cross-study comparisons difficult. Objective: This study aims to synthesize current research on ICM, particularly the categorization of different ICM types. It also aims to provide an overview of ICM over time, focusing on their progressions, characteristics, and possible patterns. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted based on the PRISMA framework using Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science databases. Data from the included studies were extracted and organized according to three ICM descriptors: frequency, amplitude, and posture change. Results: Eighteen out of 230 identified papers met the inclusion criteria. Substantial heterogeneity in terminology and measurement partly explains inconsistencies in findings. Across most studies, ICM frequency increased over time, although a minority reported decreased movement or a “stiffening effect”. Findings regarding ICM amplitude were inconsistent, while a shift or change toward more slumped posture appears to be especially common during driving activities. These variations suggest that ICM patterns are influenced by task demands, seat characteristics, and individual differences. Conclusion: ICM patterns are not solely time-dependent but are shaped by seat characteristics, task demands, and individual factors. While several studies suggest correlations between ICM strategies and discomfort, the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. Developing a comprehensive ICM framework that integrates movement strategies, and active or dynamic seating approaches will benefit cross-study comparability and provide directions for future ICM research.

The comparatively environmentally friendly turboprop aircraft should be used more often, but still need some improvements, especially regarding noise. To facilitate research into these improvements, an On-Ground Regional Passenger Cabin Demonstrator was built and validated through a comparison with passengers’ reactions to real turboprop flights. Seventy-three subjects answered questions on various environmental factors during a simulated flight in the Cabin Demonstrator. Subject testing revealed that the Cabin Demonstrator was overall perceived as realistic compared to real flights, and the comfort level was comparable to the previously conducted in-flight subject test. Thus, the Cabin Demonstrator can be used for multiple future tests.

Automated driving frees users from the task of driving, allowing them to engage in new activities. Using keywords related to Non-Driving-Related Activities (NDRAs) and automated vehicles (and their variants), with reference to the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) levels 3, 4, and 5, the authors identified 2430 studies from various databases and sources. Of these, 47 were included in this study, with 39 included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis of the included studies shows a positive correlation between automation levels and the diversity of NDRAs. Communication and interaction with passengers are the most common activities, followed by media consumption, rest, and relaxation. Food and drink consumption slightly surpasses working and productivity, while personal habits and hygiene are less prioritized. Although some users still value vehicle monitoring, this need decreases with higher automation levels. Key activities such as communication, laptop use, and sleeping are highlighted as significant benefits of automation, as users transition away from situational awareness and are able to perform cognitively intensive tasks. The review also addresses potential design implications to support these NDRAs and discusses related regulatory challenges.

To reduce the weight of a seat of a city car (A-segment), a car seat was developed. First, a questionnaire was used to define the main functions the occupants prefer to have in the seat. The reclining and forward afterwards movement of the seat were seen as most important. Therefore, a reclining mechanism was built into the lightweight chair. This seat was tested by 39 participants and compared with a benchmark seat of the Toyota Aygo. It was clear that comfort testing is difficult comparing a full developed car seat with a prototype, which still needs development. Nevertheless, the comfort was comparable between the two seats and the shoulder space of the new seat was appreciated. The conclusion is that it is possible to develop a lighter weight car seat, which has the main features preferred by occupants, but further development is needed.