Revision of the design of a standard for the dimensions of
school furniture
J. F. M. MOLENBROEK*, Y. M. T. KROON-RAMAEKERS and C. J. SNIJDERS*
Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Industrial Design Engineering,
Section Applied Ergonomics and Design, Landbergstraat 15, 2628 CE, Delft,
The Netherlands
Keywords: Anthropometry; School furniture; Standard; Body height; Popliteal
height.
In this study an anthropometric design process was followed. The aim was to
improve the fit of school furniture sizes for European children. It was
demonstrated statistically that the draft of a European standard does not cover
the target population. No literature on design criteria for sizes exists, and in
practice it is common to calculate the fit for only the mean values (P50). The
calculations reported here used body dimensions of Dutch children, measured by
the authors’ Department, and used data from German and British national
standards. A design process was followed that contains several steps, including:
Target group, Anthropometric model and Percentage exclusion. The criteria
developed in this study are (1) a fit on the basis of 1% exclusion (P1 or P99), and
(2) a prescription based on popliteal height. Based on this new approach it was
concluded that prescription of a set size should be based on popliteal height rather
than body height. The drafted standard, Pren 1729, can be improved with this
approach. A European standard for school furniture should include the exception
that for Dutch children an extra large size is required.
1. Introduction
In schools a conflict exists between the natural impulse of children to physical
movement and the need to maintain a prolonged sedentary position for education
purposes. Experiments in this field showed that on-task behaviour changed after
introduction of a newly-designed furniture (Knight and Noyes 1999). Ergonomically
designed furniture resulted in a higher rating for features like ‘chair height’ and
‘writing position’ (Troussier et al. 1999). Headache, neck pain, low back pain and
concentration impairment are all negative effects, which result from prolonged
sitting (Faassen 1978, Liebisch 1990, Snijders et al. 1995). To reduce these negative
effects the school curriculum can be adapted to encourage physical activity.
Attention should also be paid to the design of school furniture. A variety of designs
are being promoted for the improvement of body posture and/or motility/mobility,
see figure 1.
*Authors for correspondence. e-mail: j.f.m.molenbroek@io.tudelft.nl and c.j.snijders@io.
tudelft.nl
Ergonomics ISSN 0014-0139 print/ISSN 1366-5847 online # 2003 Taylor & Francis Ltd
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
DOI: 10.1080/0014013031000085635
ERGONOMICS, 2003, VOL. 46, NO. 7, 681 – 694

However, the vast majority of chairs and tables used in schools are still of a
classical design, figure 2. The fixed slanted desk, widely used in the past, is now
almost non-existent.
Discussions about the usability of a possible tilted desk and or seat are ongoing
also in standard committees (Aagaardhansen and Storrpaulsen 1995).
The main purpose of setting standards for school furniture, apart from safety and
stability requirements, is to define a series of increasing sizes, which will
accommodate children with different body heights. In practice, children often use
seats that are too high (Aardoom 1987). This means children actually prefer to sit on
a higher seat height then the one according to their lower leg length (popliteal
height). Also mismatches between the body dimensions in general of the children and
the furniture are reported by Parcells et al. (1999). Apart from the right size an
additional instruction seems necessary concluded Linton et al. (1994). One problem
is that standards become outdated because the height of children in western
countries increases. A committee, with representatives from most EEC countries,
was set up to determine a new European standard. This committee presented a draft,
which the authors wanted to compare with the actual sizes of Dutch children. It was
decided to design a study to answer the questions: (a) which system of sizes of
furniture best fits this population, and (b) which body dimensions should be
measured in the classroom in order to find the best prescription. The aim of this
study was to optimize the European standard especially with respect to the basic
anthropometry. The effect of the tilted seat or desk was not included in this study.
2. Methods and Materials
The design process in our school has four major components: construction, ‘form
giving’ (shaping, major aesthetics), marketing and ergonomics (including anthro-
pometry). The process of product design and development is an interactive
integration; often a compromise between these four aspects (Roozenburg and
Eekels 1995) and frequently the result of working in teams (Buijs and Valkenburg
2002). The design of a standard for school furniture is focussed on the dimensions
of the furniture in relation to the body dimensions of the students. For the
structural development of a new system of sizing for school furniture the
Anthropometric Design Process discussed by Molenbroek (1993) was used as
outlined in figure 3.
Figure 1. Designs aiming for improvement of posture and/or motility. (A) Seat-ball (also
called Fitball). (B) Back-up furniture. (C) Kneel-chair (also called Balance chair).
682 J. F. M. Molenbroek et al.