Ergonomic Analysis of the Cornell Library Collaborative Learning Computer Laboratory Project conducted by DEA 470 (Ian Colahan; Iris Dulay; Jessica Elias;

Ergonomic Analysis of Ergonomic Analysis of thethe

CCornell ornell LLibrary ibrary CCollaborative ollaborative LLearning earning CComputer omputer LLaboratoryaboratory

Project conducted by DEA 470 Project conducted by DEA 470 (Ian Colahan; Iris Dulay; Jessica Elias; Yachen Hwang; (Ian Colahan; Iris Dulay; Jessica Elias; Yachen Hwang; Kaori Ito; Jennifer Kim; Erin Lawler; Chiu Wah Jodi Lee; Kaori Ito; Jennifer Kim; Erin Lawler; Chiu Wah Jodi Lee;

Elizabeth Popolo, Xin Wang)Elizabeth Popolo, Xin Wang)

Under the supervision of Professor Alan Hedge and Under the supervision of Professor Alan Hedge and Melissa BraunMelissa Braun

Spring 2006Spring 2006

Overview of Overview of Presentation:Presentation:

Our three main interests in CLOur three main interests in CL33

– The physical arrangement and ambient The physical arrangement and ambient environment as it relates to the intent of environment as it relates to the intent of CLCL33

– The dynamics of collaboration in CLThe dynamics of collaboration in CL33

– The preferences of current users in CLThe preferences of current users in CL33

Environment of CLEnvironment of CL33

Physical Arrangement of Physical Arrangement of CLCL33

Dimensions of the stationDimensions of the station

2.3ft 2.2 ftAdjustableMin: 1.3ftMax: 1.7ft

1.6ft1.4ft

STANDARD REQUIREMENTSDesk height: 2.3ft-2.5ft above the floor

Chair height: 1.3ft - 1.7ft above the floor Leg room: 2.5ft wide by 1.6ft deep by 2.25ft high Work area top: 2.5ft by 5ft Top of monitor casing 2-3 inches above eye level


Various sitting arrangements Various sitting arrangements 1) Facing forwards and looking at both 1) Facing forwards and looking at both

screensscreens 95% man 5% woman


2) Sitting to one side and looking forwards2) Sitting to one side and looking forwards 95% man 5% woman

Top view

Front view


3) Sitting to one side and rotate to look at 3) Sitting to one side and rotate to look at the screens at an anglethe screens at an angle

95% man 5% woman Monitors angled at 45 degrees


How often do you adjust the following furniture?

0

5

10

15

20

25

Every time Most of thetime

Some of thetimes

Only when Iam told to

Chair height

Screen viewingdistance

Screen angle

Survey Results (n=57)Survey Results (n=57) Ability to customize work area by moving chairs, Ability to customize work area by moving chairs,

tables, and computerstables, and computers

How often do you rearrange the computer tables in How often do you rearrange the computer tables in CL3?CL3?

Reasons to move tableReasons to move table– 31.5% Create better working station31.5% Create better working station– 28% To improve collaboration28% To improve collaboration– 33% Never moved tables33% Never moved tables

EverytiEverytimeme

Most of Most of the timethe time

Some of Some of the timethe time

When When I’m toldI’m told

Never Never movedmoved

N/AN/A

FrequencFrequencyy

3.5%3.5% 5%5% 28%28% 10.5%10.5% *35%*35% 18%18%

Not so Not so ImportantImportant

SomewhaSomewhat t ImportantImportant

ImportantImportant

Very Very ImportaImportantnt

N/AN/A

12%12% *28%*28% 21%21% 18%18% 21% 21%

Survey Results (n=57)Survey Results (n=57) If you have never rearranged the tables in CL3 If you have never rearranged the tables in CL3

before, why not?before, why not?– 37% I didn’t need to37% I didn’t need to– 22% Didn’t know it was allowed 22% Didn’t know it was allowed – 15% Didn’t know it was movable15% Didn’t know it was movable

Would you move the table more often if:Would you move the table more often if:– 30% Fewer wires30% Fewer wires– 29% Easier to plug and unplug wires and cables29% Easier to plug and unplug wires and cables– 19% Signs instructing them to move 19% Signs instructing them to move

(i.e. How to move tables & re-plug, random positioning of (i.e. How to move tables & re-plug, random positioning of stations)stations)

– 19% tables were lighter19% tables were lighter– 22% still wouldn’t move22% still wouldn’t move

How did you find out the tables were movable?How did you find out the tables were movable?– 33% Figured it out themselves33% Figured it out themselves– 17.5% Was told by instructor17.5% Was told by instructor– 17.5% Saw other people move17.5% Saw other people move– 14% Didn’t know they are movable14% Didn’t know they are movable


Desk Moving Force Requirement:Desk Moving Force Requirement:

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

PositionReading 1 (kg)

Reading 2 (kg)

Reading 3 (kg)

Max.(kg)

Avg. (kg)

A 17.1 16.9 16.0 17.1 16.7

B 16.5 12.1 11.8 16.5 13.5

C 17.5 15.8 16.8 17.5 16.7

D 17.0 15.5 16.0 17.0 16.2

E 16.2 16.9 16.0 16.9 16.4

F 15.1 13.3 11.2 15.1 13.2

G 18.6 13.8 11.6 *18.6 14.7

H 11.1 11.8 12.6 12.6 11.8

14.9

Liberty Mutual Manual Table PushingGuideline:

http://libertymmhtables.libertymutual.com/CM_LMTablesWeb/pdf/LibertyMutualTables.pdf

RULA (Rapid Upper Limb RULA (Rapid Upper Limb Assessment)Assessment)

Score: 2(Acceptable)

Score: 3Investigate Further

Score: 4Investigate further

Score: 6Investigate Further and Change Soon

Sound Level AnalysisSound Level Analysis The survey concluded that sound was not The survey concluded that sound was not

a problem or concern for CLa problem or concern for CL33 users. users.

3/143/14

4:55PM4:55PM 61.161.1 6 users6 users

4/54/5

12:55PM12:55PM

CIS 300CIS 30080.580.5

18 18 studentsstudents

1 teacher1 teacher

4/114/11

2:15PM2:15PM 65.265.2

4/64/6

2:15PM2:15PM 68.668.6 18 users18 users

4/114/11

2:20PM2:20PM 69.269.2 15 users15 users

4/174/17

6:30PM6:30PM 81.281.2

CL3 Uris Computer Lab

Average sound level is higher in the Uris Average sound level is higher in the Uris computer lab under all conditions.computer lab under all conditions.

Sound Level AnalysisSound Level AnalysisUnless there is a class, CL3 is relatively quiet. More talking and interaction can be seen in the Uris computer lounge at all times. Possible explanations include its open/bright atmosphere, ability for people to walk through to get to/from the Cocktail Lounge, and to the shape of the computer desks.

CL3 desks: sitting space closes in

Uris desks: sitting space open

Survey ResultsSurvey Results

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Not important Somewhatimportant

Important Very important

Quiet conditions tohelp withconcentration andconversation

Being able to overhearother groups

Ability to discussprojects freely withoutfear of disruptingothers


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Never Some ofthe time

Most ofthe time

Always

Feel crowded in CL3

Lose concentration dueto the number ofpeople in CL3

Feel your privacy isaffected by the numberof people in CL3

Have your workaffected by noise levelsin CL3

Feel your group workis affected by thenumber of people inCL3


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Notimportant

Somewhatimportant

Important Veryimportant

Having 2 screensHaving 2 keyboardsHaving 2 mice

Collaboration in Collaboration in CLCL33

Collaboration in CLCollaboration in CL33

Questions to Answer:Questions to Answer:– To what extent do people collaborate in CLTo what extent do people collaborate in CL33??

– How does CLHow does CL33 compare to other collaborative compare to other collaborative spaces on campus. In this case Uris computer spaces on campus. In this case Uris computer area (The Runway). area (The Runway).

Collaborative Data Collaborative Data Gathering MethodologyGathering Methodology

Used a combination of survey Used a combination of survey questions and observational methodsquestions and observational methods– Survey Questions provided easily Survey Questions provided easily

comparable results and detailed datacomparable results and detailed data– Observations provided data on the Observations provided data on the

frequency of various types of frequency of various types of collaborative actionscollaborative actions

– Data was gathered in CLData was gathered in CL3 3 and in the Uris and in the Uris Computer area for comparisonComputer area for comparison

Survey resultsSurvey results Group size ranges from 2 to 9. 66% of those Group size ranges from 2 to 9. 66% of those

surveyed worked in groups of 2 or 3. 16% of surveyed worked in groups of 2 or 3. 16% of respondents worked alone.respondents worked alone.

56% spend ‘most of the group time’ in task related 56% spend ‘most of the group time’ in task related conversation.conversation.

Time spent in task related conversation

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

none some of thetime

most of thetime

all of the time

resp

ond

ents

46.5% spend a lot of time collaborating in a CL3 class, 13 % in other computer labs

Time spent in collaborative activity in Time spent in collaborative activity in CL3 versus other computer labsCL3 versus other computer labs

Survey AnalysisSurvey Analysis

Most people do spend time Most people do spend time collaborating while collaborating while in a class in CLin a class in CL33

During group collaborative periods, During group collaborative periods, there was a high level of there was a high level of conversation between membersconversation between members

Observations of CLObservations of CL33 verses verses UrisUris

Looked at the frequency of talking, pointing, Looked at the frequency of talking, pointing, keying, and mousing of each member in CLkeying, and mousing of each member in CL33 and and comparison groups in a Uris computer areacomparison groups in a Uris computer area

Finalized Observation Finalized Observation ChartChart

CL3 & Uris observation CL3 & Uris observation resultresult

Talking, pointing at screens and Talking, pointing at screens and papers are counted as interactionspapers are counted as interactions

Mean number of interactions per Mean number of interactions per minute in CL3 and Uris are similar minute in CL3 and Uris are similar (5.8 vs. 5.85)(5.8 vs. 5.85)

Mean coefficient of deviation for the Mean coefficient of deviation for the number of interactions in two labs number of interactions in two labs are 8.56% and 5.97% respectively.are 8.56% and 5.97% respectively.

CLCL33 & Uris observation & Uris observation resultresult

Only 2 groups out of 7 from our Only 2 groups out of 7 from our observation used both keyboards observation used both keyboards and miceand mice

Dominant use of keyboard and Dominant use of keyboard and mouse was observed both in CLmouse was observed both in CL33 and and UrisUris

Usually there are more people in Uris Usually there are more people in Uris lab.lab.

Conclusions on Conclusions on CollaborationCollaboration

Survey data suggest that CLSurvey data suggest that CL33 has has provided an effective place for provided an effective place for collaborationcollaboration

Observations suggest that the Uris Observations suggest that the Uris computer area provides an even better computer area provides an even better place for collaborationplace for collaboration

Reasoning:Reasoning: Uris computer area has more Uris computer area has more natural exchange of information as natural exchange of information as people walk through the area, there is people walk through the area, there is naturally more noise of conversations naturally more noise of conversations being held, and the furniture is more being held, and the furniture is more easily arrangedeasily arranged

User Preference in User Preference in CLCL33

Why People Use the CLWhy People Use the CL33

We surveyed to find out why people We surveyed to find out why people come to use the CLcome to use the CL33 lab. lab.

The most common responses were: The most common responses were: – ““Because I have to for class.”Because I have to for class.”– ““The lab is aesthetically pleasing & The lab is aesthetically pleasing &

comfortable.”comfortable.”– ““I enjoy having the option to use dual I enjoy having the option to use dual

monitors, mice and keyboards.”monitors, mice and keyboards.” Other reasons included…Other reasons included…

Moving the WorkstationsMoving the WorkstationsHow Often People Who Do Move the

Workstations Actually Move Them

3, 14%

2, 10%

16, 76%

Every Time

M ost of the Time

Some of the Time

People Who Rearrange Workstations v. Those Who Do Not

27, 57%

20, 43%

People WhoHaveRearranged theWorkstations

People WhoHave NotRearranged theWorkstations

Reasons Why CLReasons Why CL33 Users Users Have Moved The Have Moved The

WorkstationsWorkstations

4

16

18

2 27

7

9

1Didn’t Know It moves

So That People Can't SeeMe Or My Work

To Avoid Disturbing OthersBy Talking

To Avoid Being Disturbed ByOthers Talking

I Needed More Space ForWork

I Was Instructed to Move It

To be Closer/Farther FromtheWhiteboard/Screen//OtherTo Create a Better WorkArrangement

To Improve Collaboration

For Fun

What Would Facilitate What Would Facilitate Moving the Workstations in Moving the Workstations in

CLCL33 More Often? More Often? Top Responses:Top Responses:

– If there were fewer wires to deal withIf there were fewer wires to deal with– If the workstations were easier to plug & If the workstations were easier to plug &

unplugunplug– If the workstations were lighter If the workstations were lighter – If there were signs suggesting to move the If there were signs suggesting to move the

workstationsworkstations

However, 13 respondents said that they simply would However, 13 respondents said that they simply would

not move the workstations.not move the workstations.

Reasons Why People Like Reasons Why People Like CL3CL3

The dual screen optionThe dual screen option The mobile furnitureThe mobile furniture The software and hardware available The software and hardware available

– Fast computersFast computers The ambient environment The ambient environment

– Ample space, high ceilings, quiet work environmentAmple space, high ceilings, quiet work environment The whiteboards The whiteboards The availability of electrical outletsThe availability of electrical outlets The fact that it is a good space for The fact that it is a good space for

collaboration collaboration

Reasons Why People Reasons Why People Dislike CLDislike CL33

The limited hoursThe limited hours The limited table space (for group meetings)The limited table space (for group meetings) The lack of appropriate signageThe lack of appropriate signage The conflict between users who want talkative The conflict between users who want talkative

collaboration and the users who are not aware collaboration and the users who are not aware that it is a collaborative computing lab (and that it is a collaborative computing lab (and who want a quiet study environment)who want a quiet study environment)

The shape of the roomThe shape of the room The fact that the whiteboards do not erase wellThe fact that the whiteboards do not erase well The temperamental projectorThe temperamental projector

Suggestions for Suggestions for Improving CLImproving CL33

Provide accurate signage concerning:Provide accurate signage concerning:– The hours, the equipment available, and the ways to The hours, the equipment available, and the ways to move workstationsmove workstations

Provide more information on resources, software Provide more information on resources, software and equipment available in CLand equipment available in CL33

– Place info cards on the workstations, hang posters, etc.Place info cards on the workstations, hang posters, etc. Increase the hours of operation and staffing to Increase the hours of operation and staffing to

accommodate the demandaccommodate the demand Inform users that this is a collaborative space and Inform users that this is a collaborative space and

not just a typical computer labnot just a typical computer lab Increase the number of workstations or integrate Increase the number of workstations or integrate

laptop use into the spacelaptop use into the space Improve printing options (i.e. 11” x 17”)Improve printing options (i.e. 11” x 17”)

Thank YouThank You

Documents

Ergonomic Analysis of the Cornell Library Collaborative Learning Computer Laboratory Project conducted by DEA 470 (Ian Colahan; Iris Dulay; Jessica Elias;