A utility theory-based approach to reducing raw material usage in non-adjustable artifacts, tasks, and environments

In order to accommodate the desired percentage of the target users of a product, decisions must be made to ensure that the design satisfies performance requirements such as user safety, comfort, and ease of use. The marketing concept of "utility theory" is one approach to quantifying the effects of design decisions. It is leveraged in this study to develop a design evaluation approach that considers: a) factors that may be either design-related (design specifications) or user-related (relevant body dimensions) and b) the raw material investment in the design. Based on data collected during a usage behavior study involving doorways of numerous sizes, a conditional logit model was developed to predict the utility of a doorway as a function of its size and the user's stature and shoul- der breadth. Next, an eco-design parameter was incorporated into the model as a penalty based on raw material usage. This approach was found to be useful in studying frequently encountered tradeoffs in decisions that could potentially increase product sustainability but could also reduce the utility of the product to the user.

[1]  K. Adolph,et al.  Perceiving affordances for fitting through apertures. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[2]  Wei Chen,et al.  An Approach to Decision-Based Design With Discrete Choice Analysis for Demand Modeling , 2003 .

[3]  Keith Case,et al.  Virtual fitting trials in 'design for all' , 2000 .

[4]  Hong Liu,et al.  Rapid preliminary helmet shell design based on three-dimensional anthropometric head data , 2008 .

[5]  Matthew B. Parkinson,et al.  A comparison of methodologies for designing for human variability , 2011 .

[6]  J. Chipman.  The Foundations of Utility , 1960 .

[7]  Jeremy J. Michalek,et al.  Should Designers Worry About Market Systems , 2009 .

[8]  Richard Gonzalez,et al.  The construction of preferences for crux and sentinel product attributes , 2007 .

[9]  Matthew B. Parkinson,et al.  Including Preference in Anthropometry-Driven Models for Design , 2007, DAC 2007.

[10]  Matthew B. Parkinson,et al.  Consideration of Demographics and Variance in Regression Approaches to Estimating Body Dimensions for Spatial Analysis of Design , 2010 .

[11]  Matthew B. Parkinson,et al.  Creating virtual user populations by analysis of anthropometric data , 2010 .

[12]  Colin G. Drury,et al.  Adaptation and Sensitivity to Postural Change in Sitting , 2000, Hum. Factors.

[13]  D. McFadden.  Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior , 1972 .

[14]  Gary L. Lilien,et al.  Marketing Engineering: Computer-Assisted Marketing Analysis and Planning , 1998 .

[15]  P. Papalambros,et al.  Preference Inconsistency in Multidisciplinary Design Decision , 2009 .

[16]  Mark D. Uncles,et al.  Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand , 1987 .

[17]  N. Durlach,et al.  Manual discrimination of force using active finger motion , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.