A research paper presented to

The Department of Architecture

College of Engineering and Design

Silliman University

Dumaguete City

In partial fulfillment of the requirement for

Architecture 51: Architecture Design 9

Integrated adult day care and senior citizen center: Anthropometric and ergonomic standards for the elderly

Bien Carlos E. Via

Bachelor of Science in Architecture

Silliman University

Dumaguete City

October 13, 2017

 Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION

Rationale

As people age, there are certain circumstances that are associated with it. Some refer to ageing as having more experiences and having privileges. Some expressed that getting older means
you are getting wiser. However, some people expressed that ageing means change, loss and not being able to do anything. They felt that when they age, they lose their dignity and independence
(Chen, 2001). Hough (2010) Reports that there are more people who feared being ill and incapable in their old age rather than dying. He states that there are three out of four people who feared
getting ill in ageing while only 29 percent feared dying. According to Elizabeth (2015) the elderly is quietly suffering because of the independence they have lost. The side effects of limiting the
freedom of dignity of seniors are serious. A decline in ability to perform daily activities, increased reliance on others for assistance, and increased risk of social isolation are factors that takes
away the elderlys sense of independence. According to Lifespeak (2017), loss of independence in ageing is also a possible cause of mental illnesses among the elderly along with pharmaceutical
interactions. No longer feeling as vital or capable can have negative effects on your psyche, especially when you were former active. Basing on these evidences, it can be inferred that ageing is
mostly associated with the loss of independence because of the emerging physical disabilities. This association is not supposed to be taken lightly as all of us age through time and that the risk for
these disabilities as we age is not avoidable. In other words, all of us at some point in our lives, have the risk losing independence.

Based on the nature and definition of ergonomics and anthropometrics, we can say that this elderly issue can be addressed through it. Ergonomics is the science of work of the people
who do it and the ways it is done, the tools and equipment they use, the places they work in, and the psychosocial aspects of the working situation. If an object, a system or an environment is
intended for human use, then its design should be based upon the physical and mental characteristics of those who use it (Pheasant, 2003). Pheasant (2003) also defines anthropometry as the
branch of human sciences that deals with body measurements particularly with measurements of body size, shape, strength and working capacity. Anthropometrics and ergonomics can be of help
in providing and keeping the elderlys sense of independence. Through these sciences and applications, the elderly will be able to do more even in basic tasks that will diminish their feeling of
isolation and the feeling of no longer vital in the society.

The study will be about the anthropometric and ergonomic standards of the Filipino elderly within Dumaguete City. It aims to come up with a standard of body measurements and
ergonomic standards for the elderly to be used in achieving an ergonomic design of a Senior Citizen and Adult day care center in Dumaguete city.

The anthropometric data that is to be synthesized in this study will be used to come up with an ergonomic design of an integrated senior citizen and adult day care center. This will
demonstrate standards of measurements that are convenient either on a long-term care facility or a government facility. By integrating the senior citizen and adult day care center, these
ergonomic applications will be demonstrated in two scenarios: 1.) Ergonomic standards for long-term care facilities such as adult day care centers, nursing homes, hospice and palliative care
facilities etc. since these facilities are designed in specific for the elderly. And 2.) Ergonomic standards in public spaces such as government facilities. In hypothesis, the two scenarios may have
varying use of the standards as the second standards involved the general public and the other involves specifically the elderly in majority.

This study aims to fill in the gaps in the previous works of Vitruvius, Le Corbusier and Salvan in terms of the lack of anthropometric data specified for the elderly. Attempts by recent
researches also has gaps such as the methodology in the synthesis of anthropometric data. Sims (2003) points out the most researches are based on Static figures rather than those in the
dynamic posture. Applying this methodology invalidates the purpose of anthropometric standardization as it is applied in ergonomic design. Researches also considered gender variation but
has gaps in terms of the ratio of their respondents. This study that is to be conducted will also be specific in ethnical background and the population such as the Filipino elderly. Basing from the
previous researches, anthropometric data of the Filipino elderly has not yet been attempted despite the need for the standard.

This study will use quantitative methods such as the percentile and the mean of body measurements by the elderly in coordination with the Dumaguete City Senior Citizen Center based
on the Pheasants (2003) suggested methods in his book Bodyspace. Respondents to this methods will be from the Senior Citizens of Dumaguete city and will be categorized according to other
factors such as age, health conditions and etc.

Review of Related Literature

The Vitruvian Man (Vitruvius), the Modulor (Le Corbusier) and the Furnicube (Salvan) are theories of anthropometry, despite the flaws and gaps, became very significant and was
regarded with high value in the development of architecture. These methods are very general and has overlooked the needs of coming up with anthropometric data for the elderly. Certain
researches have attempted to create a standard anthropometric data and have varied methodology. Sims (2003) points out the value of coming up with anthropometric data as a whole and negates
the notion that these data are based on static figures rather than dynamic in various posture. The consideration of population and ethnical background is also vital in the methodology of Hu,
et al. (2007). Kothiyal & Tettey (2001) considered gender variation in the anthropometric standards of the elderly.

The Vitruvian Man, the Modulor & the Furnicube

Vitruvius, Le Corbusier and Salvan assumed major roles in the development of architecture through their works towards standardization of anthropometry the study of body
measurements applied through ergonomics, the study of work. Vitruvius points out that the human body is in harmony through symmetry the proper agreement between the members and
relation between the parts and the whole general scheme with a certain part selected as standard. He concludes that the human body is a kind of symmetrical harmony between forearm, foot,
palm, finger and other small parts and so it goes with the perfect building (Vitruvius: The ten books on Architecture, 1914). Panzera (2009) reiterates that it was Vitruvius conception that the
proportions of the human form were the source and foundation of architecture. He also stated that the human form was seen during the Italian Renaissance as the measure of all things. It became
the framework for order and harmony in all art, while the proportions of the human form were rationalized into the ideal figures of circle and square which eventually became the basis of
architectural design in both religious and public buildings. Like Vitruvius, Le Corbusier aims to entwine biology with architecture through geometry (Otswald, 2001) while Salvan (1999)
develops the Furnicube inspired from the works of Le Corbusier.
Although, these works of anthropometric standards are on the common ground on the belief of the proportionality of the human body, the three innovators who conceptualized various
theories of body proportions, (Vitruvius, Le Corbusier and Salvan) uses different methodologies of proportionality through geometry and mathematical calculations. Vitruvius wrote in his book
in the human body the central point is naturally the navel. For if a man placed flat on his back, with his hands and feet extended, and a pair of compasses centered at his navel, the fingers and
toes of his hands and feet will touch the circumference of a circle described therefrom. And just as the human body yields a circular outline, so too a square figure may be found from it. For if we
measure the distance from the soles of the feet to the top of the head, and then apply that measure to the outstretched arms, and breadth will be found as the height, as in the case of plane surfaces
which are perfectly square (Vitruvius: The ten books on Architecture, 1914). It can be inferred that Vitruvius conception of the human form revolves around the proportionality of basic
geometric forms such as the square and the circle. While Le Corbusier uses a more intensive approach of mathematics in his conception of the Modulor. Monteagudo (2013) confirms this by
stating that Le Corbusier draws heavily upon mathematical concepts used by Da Vinci such as the Golden ratio and the Fibonacci series which he believed is the basis of architectural
proportions. By using an intensive application of mathematics in devising the standardization of the human body, architects, engineers and designers would find it relatively simple to produce
forms that were both commodious and delightful and would find it difficult to produce displeasing and impractical forms (Otswald, 2001). Otswald (2001) also points out that Le Corbusier
defined the Modulor as a measure based on mathematics and the human scale. Salvan (1999) coined the Furnicube from Furniture and Cube which is formed by perfect squares. While the
Modulor uses 1.83 meters (6-0) height of a person, which became the standard of all furnitures in the market, Salvan sees the relevance of coming up with a formula to create convenient
heights for an individual person, from midget to giants, and not necessarily be forced to use the standard heights for 6 footers. Salvan also stated in his book his way of calculating the proportions
of the human body.

It is found out that human being is composed of 7.85 times his head size. And so to get your head dimension, measure your barefoot height in meters next divide your height by 7.85 this
will give your head size of H. By using the table below, multiply your H with the corresponding formula given for each Furniture desired this is your most comfortable heights.

In looking at the methodologies of the different works of Vitruvius, Le Corbusier and Salvan, it is observed that as these methods and strategies of standardization develops, the
application of mathematics became more intensive, hence a closer step towards accuracy and standardization of the human body proportions. As aforementioned, Le Corbusier mentions the
significance of standardization and proportionality to beauty, it is also observed that as these works are developed by different authors it becomes more standardized through mathematical
principles therefore it becomes more essential in the creation of beauty in the architectural setting.

Criticisms and feedbacks for Vitruvius, Le Corbusier and Salvan

The standardization of human body proportions plays significant impacts on the study of architectural design. However, these theories, despite the significance, is still found as subjects to
criticisms by different authors and architects with regards to the methodology and scope in their conception. Otswald (2001) emphasizes that Le Corbusier settled for a six-foot-tall English male
body with one arm upraised. He argues that the French male was too short for the geometry to work well and that the female body was rejected as a source of proportional harmony. He also
conveys that the use of the Modulor in construction has very small impractical dimensions. In addition, Otswald adds that Le Corbusier also had the tendency to abandon the Modulor when it
does not suit and continuously reminds people that because it is based on perception, its usage must be limited by practical perception. Large dimensions are impossible to sense with any
accuracy and does not advocate the use of the Modulor for this scales. In the same way, the use of the Modulor in construction techniques for very small dimensions are impractical. Because of
this, it has become evident that even the author of this theory of proportionality was able to recognize its limitations. Ghabash (2014) agrees with Otswald stating that Le Corbusiers basis of a
six-foot-tall Modulor man might exclude certain users notably women and anyone who doesnt meet the height requirement at a certain intimate scale. Ghabash also adds that this limitation of Le
Corbusiers work also excludes the anthropometric standards for the elderly despite the intensity of their need for safety and comfort through ergonomic design. She also states Alvar Aaltos
belief in contrary to Le Corbusiers work. Aalto does not believe that it was the architects job to prescribe universal rules or acceptable social behavior through design such as Le Corbusiers
doing. Aalto believes in individualism and particularism as he saw the militant calls for standardization as a slippery slope in the standardization of human beings, activities and bodily
experience. However, Ghabash also criticizes this belief by stating that the architect had no way of knowing the needs of every present and future user. Aalto assumed that individuality is
something architecture could provide in contrast to something inherent in a person or that a person would assert on their own. In this comparison, the standardization of human body proportions
through the anthropometric data is more agreeable than that of Aaltos philosophy. Anthropometric standards do not seek to identify and dictate the individual needs of its users but rather to
provide for their needs in the general sense unlike Aaltos philosophy of individuality. Ergonomics and Anthropometric standards seeks to provide comfort and safety for its users which
classifies as a general need rather than an individual need as referred by Aalto.
These works may lack certain aspects that is required in fully attending to the needs of Man. However, these works are not supposed to be stagnant on their current state as it calls for
further study and development. Basing on these findings, the ideas of Vitruvius, Le Corbusier and Salvan remains valuable despite their flaws as it signifies the moral responsibility architects for
the potential users of buildings and that their needs, such as comfortability and safety, is paramount.
Methods of anthropometric standardization in modern era

As the previous works of Vitruvius, Le Corbusier & Salvan became the foundation and starting point of the standardization of anthropometrics and its ergonomic applications, researchers
conducted and attempted to come up with their versions of anthropometric data to fill the gap of the previous works. Anthropometric data are essential to ergonomic design. However, available
anthropometric data for aged people are quite limited (Hu , et al., 2007). Aravindakhshan (2012) initially used a Human factors and Ergonomics software for postural assessment in coming up
with an anthropometric data of the elderly in the workplace. The software was used to identify human joints that are likely to exceed its comfort range for each workstation, using appropriate
design and task decisions. He then analyzes that the use of Stature to predict relevant anthropometric body segment lengths is better associated with widths and girth. Head, hand or feet
dimensions have better correlations with anyone of its own association rather than stature and weight. In contrast to Aravindakhshans methodogy, Sims (2003) believes in a different form of
synthesizing elderly anthropometric data. Sims believes in the principle of Design for all a philosophy with the aim of producing products, environments, services and systems that are usable
by all people, whatever their age, size and abilities. She states that it is desirable for designers to include as many people as possible, starting from the knowledge and abilities of the least abled
sections of the population to be included in design. According to her, it is relatively easy for designers to make minor modifications to existing designs or models that would enable a larger
percentage of the population to utilize it with little constraints. Although Sims has a strong hold of the principle, she also considers the fact that a designer cannot merely design for all in the
literal sense but designers should be aware of who they are excluding, rather than simply designing with no consideration of who can or cannot use the design. This simply means that knowing
who to exclude gives a better chance of creating a compromise and signifies that the designer has considered the delimited user. On the other hand, not recognizing who to exclude means that the
attempt to consider all has failed therefore Designing for all did not take place. In her firm belief of the principle of designing for all, she also points out the limitations of using percentiles in
coming up with anthropometric standards for the elderly as it removes the possibility of a designer considering a whole person. She observed that data for measurements of arms, legs, torsos,
and heads are all split into different tables for the entire population measured. It is difficult to collate data from separate tables or diagrams to make a real, whole, person with the variance of
percentiles for the different dimensions that are found in real people. In her opinion, keeping data sets for individuals, would allow designers to see real people in terms of dimensions and
abilities. She stated that anthropometry in tables of data is usually static and that data becomes limited from people holding themselves in a fixed standard posture. Whilst these data can be
useful in this form, a designer needs to be aware that static arm length is not the same as dynamic anthropometry. Sims aims to come up with a methodology in a Design for all approach using a
multivariate analysis in anthropometry. She does not believe in the traditional anthropometry as it is only univariate in nature. On the contrary, Pheasant (2003) establishing a range of sizes for
certain garments that involve anthropometry is necessary but only for a limited extent. This is implying that anthropometry itself is limited. However, Pheasant states that, as designers, it is
rather obvious, despite the limitations, that how we should choose the best compromise dimensions for equipment to be employed by a range of user, and at what point should we conclude that
adjustability is essential. Basing on Sims statement of Designing for all and that recognizing who are excluded in the design is also relevant in Pheasants method and perception of
anthropometry. Pheasants method also recognizes the excluded population and creates an opportunity to come up with a compromise and evaluation if adjustability is necessary. Therefore,
Pheasants method is a way of Designing for all.
There are researches of anthropometry that has adapted Pheasants work. According to Jarosz (1998) anthropometric data for the elderly has never been developed in Poland and such
data should also be used for the needs of transgenerational design. She synthesized measurements of 33 anthropometric characteristics of 106 women aged 60 and above for the design of
functional space and devices, such as clothes. She used the 5th percentile of elderly women in Poland in determining the lower limit of the anthropometric standard for the whole adult and thus
allow transgenerational design. Hu, et al. (2007) studies the variation of anthropometric standards based on ethnical background of the population. A comparison between Chinese and Japanese
elderly shows that Chinese (Beijing) are larger in dimensions of the body trunk and Japanese elderly are larger in dimensions of the head and extremities. The conclusions are based on a limited
number of subjects in the Beijing area, and the in-depth reasons for the above findings remain a subject for further study. (Kothiyal & Tettey (2001) also conducted a partly-similar study. They
argue that stature is on one of the most important anthropometric characteristics affected by ageing. They compared the mean stature of elderly Australian males and females from other countries.
In their study, gender variation is also involved in their comparison through stature and compared male and female stature for different populations. In their findings, differences can be noticed in
the stature of Australian males and females when compared with those of British population. On the other hand Australian males and Dutch males have nearly the same stature, but the data for
females show a considerable difference of about 20 mm. Despite these findings, they have pointed out a gap on their research. They observed that the participation of elderly males in the study
was relatively small compared to female participants. There was a low level of interest in the male population for the anthropometric data collection. Although, they stated an observation that
lower participation of elderly male participants appears to be common in most anthropometric studies. This gap in their research suggests further improvement when conducting a similar study as
gender may also be a variable in coming up with an anthropometric data for ergonomic design.
In conclusion, the works of Vitruvius, Le Corbusier and Salvan, although widely accepted has gaps in terms of the scope of research. These works are limited to their basis of the ideal
man and does not attend to the needs of Man as a whole and specifically the needs of the elderly. However, these works are attempts in standardizing anthropometric data that would eventually
comply with the needs Man in the building. It signifies that Vitruvius, Le Corbusier and Salvan have realized their moral obligations to Man in terms of designing spaces.

In our modern era, researchers have attempted to continue their works in compliance to the moral before them by Vitruvius, Le Corbusier and Salvan. Although, these researchers have
attempted to specify methodologies in coming up with elderly anthropometric standards and does not hold automatically efficient and compliant to elderly needs. Some researches
aforementioned in this literature are also applicable such as the suggestion of Sims (2003) that anthropometric data when applied in ergonomics is not Static but rather dynamic and that stature
is not enough basis in collecting data. The methodology used by Hu, et. Al (2007) is also relevant as they have considered the ethnical backgrounds and population variations in anthropometrics.
Certain researches such as by Kothiyal & Tettey (2001) were also relevant as they have considered the variation of gender in the anthropometric standards despite the gap of the ratio of the
respondents in their findings.
Conceptual Framework
 Chapter 2: THE PROBLEM

Statement of the Problem

Anthropometric data for the Filipino elderly is used for the basis of ergonomic design in terms of long-term care facilities and public buildings in the Philippines that will give them a
sense of independence in doing the basic human activities such as walking, sitting, reaching and etc.

However, there is a standard anthropometric data specific for the Filipino elderly is not yet existent and so far, there has been no attempt despite the need. Building laws and accessibility
laws that are supposed to be beneficial for PWDs in general are not implemented thus, more buildings specifically long-term care facilities and government buildings are not ergonomic for the
Filipino elderly.

This non-compliance and neglect for ergonomic design of spaces in which the Filipino elderly is mostly involved brings forth psychological, mental and emotional impact in their part.
Elizabeth (2015) states that the elderly are suffering due to the loss of independence. She mentions that the factors for this loss of independence is the ability to perform activities and the
increased reliance on assistance to do simple tasks.

Pheasant (2003) defines ergonomics as the science of fitting the job to the worker and the product to the user. In the context of this research, product refers to spaces for the elderly.
Pheasant also states that the objective of ergonomic design is to achieve the best possible match between the product (ergonomic spaces) and its users, in the context of the task that is to be
performed. Ergonomic design will enable the elderly to be more capable of doing simple tasks and decrease their reliance on others for assistance which are vital factors contributing to their
sense of independence. If the spaces are non-ergonomic, it will lead them to thinking otherwise. (Elizabeth, 2015)

Secondly, government buildings such as senior citizen center and other public spaces must be universal in design. Senior citizens need to feel a sense of independence in interacting with
the society and doing their day-to-day activities (Elizabeth, 2015). Government buildings and other public spaces such as the Senior Citizen Center can be part of their day-to-day activities and
social interaction. The current senior citizen center of the city should follow ergonomic standards.

The current senior citizen center of Dumaguete, unfortunately, fails to be ergonomic and compromises the safety and comfortability of the senior citizens engaging into activities and
programs by the Office of the Senior Citizen Center affairs.
 The set-up of the Office of the Senior Citizen Affairs and the Senior Citizen center as shown
in figure 1 is that they are facing each other in opposite sides of the road. This becomes unsafe for its
users, particularly the senior citizens as they are put to risk in crossing the roads. According to Butler,
Lord and Fitzpatrick (2016), crossing a road is a complex task requiring good sensorimotor function
and integration of information about traffic speed, distances and ones own speed. Poor judgement
through age-related sensorimotor or cognitive impairment or a predisposition to take risks could lead
to errors with serious consequences. Road crossing should be paramount in considering the elderly
for design. Figure 1. The Activity Area of the
facility
The ramp in Figure 2 used in the senior citizen center is also inconvenient and
uncomfortable especially for the senior citizens who have impairments and walking disability
therefore rendering it non-ergonomic.

The conversion of the activity area into parking space in Figure 3 manifests the lack of
convenient parking facilities in the facility. This is very vital as activity areas done on the senior
citizen center. Therefore should be convenient in space and safety.

Figure 2. The office of the Senior Citizen Figure 4 supports the given point on figure 3. The lack of convenient parking space facilities
Affairs and the Senior Citizen Center
lead to the unsafe placement of cars in the senior citizens. Senior citizens, especially those who have Figure 3. The Lack of parking space
facilities in the center
walking disabilities, visual impairment and etc. will find this set-up inconvenient as the proper dimension
of the space is needed in order to comply with the safety needs of this users.

Both situations in figure 3 and figure 4 do not adhere to the provisions of the Batas Pambansa blg. 344 or the law to Enhance Mobility of the
Disabled Persons an act to enhance the mobility of disabled persons by requiring certain buildings; institutions, establishments, and public facilities
to install facilities and other devices. According to the BP 344, parking areas should allow enough space for a person to transfer to a wheelchair grom
a vehicle. As observed in the picture, the cars parked do not have the adequate space as provided for the BP 344 and there are no parking slots

Figure 4. The ramp used in the Senior

Citizen Center
assigned to delineate the area required for Persons with Disabilities (PWDs) in order to regulate this provision. It is also important, according to the act,that pavement markings, signs or other
means shall be provided to delineate the parking spaces for the handicapped which, unfortunately isnt provided in the current facility. The act also states that a walkway should have walkways
from accessible spaces of 1.20 m of clear width shall be provided. However, there are no walkways provided in the current facility of the city. Although the current parking layout of the Senior
Citizen Center is already at a proper orientation in accordance to the BP 344 that locations of the parking areas must be near the areas, it does not proper curbs with appropriate widths provided
and pathways provided by the law.

In this situation of the parking area of the current Senior Citizen Center of the city, it can be inferred, despite the unfortunate fact, that the comfort and safety of the PWDs were after-
thoughts in the design of the facility. It was not considered a priority despite that the facility should take care of the welfare of the PWDs such as the senior citizens.

Failure to improve the current facility will compromise the safety and comfortability of its users in which the senior citizens of Dumaguete city majorly classifies. The Senior Citizen
Center is a major facility that adheres to the welfare of the elderly community of the City hence, a regard for high value for it through ergonomic design.

In conclusion, this study will aim to address these current scenarios by coming up with an anthropometric data specified for the Filipino Elderly. The data synthesized will be used for the
design of an integrated senior citizen and adult day care center to demonstrate ergonomic models for the elderly in both long-term care and public facilities based on the findings of this study.

The main objective of this research is to answer the research question: What should be the Anthropometric Data of the Filipino Elderly that can be used in achieving an ergonomic design
of spaces that majorly involves the Filipino Elderly?

The following are some supporting specific questions:

1. What are qualitative methods to be used that is appropriate in standardizing the anthropometric data knowing that there are varied methods synthesized and used by
previous researches that are deemed effective and accurate?
2. What specific part of the elderly body dimensions should be measured in coming up with an anthropometric data for the elderly?
3. What are specific postures and body dimensions that are most relevant in coming up with an ergonomic standard for the design of an adult day care and senior citizen
center.
4. How do we use these anthropometric data in coming up with ergonomic standards for the elderly
5. Are there attempts of studies about the anthropometric data specific for a population of another ethnical background from other countries in the ASEAN region?
6. Is there a difference in body measurements as compared to standardized measurements by other countries particularly those that belong in the ASEAN region?
 7. Would there be a difference in ergonomic design models or schemes to be used in government/public buildings or spaces that are specified for the elderly knowing that the
general public is involved in these spaces?

Significance of the Study

The study on the Anthropometric and Ergonomic standards for the Filipino elderly is significant. This is because the study will be a starting point in standardizing the anthropometric
aspect of the elderly that will be used in designing facilities such as public and long-term care facilities ergonomically. It will raise more potential in improving the current standards such as the
Accessibility Law or the Batas Pambansa blg. 344 by conducting an in depth study of the limitations and capabilities of the Filipino elderly. The study will mitigate the issues associated with
ageing such as physical impairments, shrinkage of stature and other body measurements and the mental, psychological and emotional struggles of the Filipino associated with it.

Scope and Limitation

The scope of the study will involve the Filipino senior citizens as its respondents residing in Dumaguete City, Philippines aged 60-85 years. The study will also entail specific body
measurements and ergonomic standards that is to be applied in long term care and government facilities such as an adult day care center and a senior citizen center respectively.

There are some limitations to this research study. The study is limited to the following ways:

1. The subjects of the study are limited to certain physical conditions that will bring major alterations to their body such as amputations, osteoporosis and etc. This study only aims to
come up with ergonomic standards for the members of the senior citizen in general. Amputations and other impairments will require a specific ergonomic standard that this study will
not cover.
2. The subjects of the study are limited to the classification or categories that pertains to their social status, genetics, diet and nutrition as this study aims to find out the frequency of the
specified body dimensions which will be mentioned in the latter parts of this paper.
3. The methodology in coming up with ergonomic standards for the elderly is limited to the Fitting Trial Test as suggested by Pheasant (2003) as the method pertains to subjective
perceptions of the subjects which will be contradictory to the qualitative nature of this study. The instruments to be used in a fitting trial test is also limited in terms of availability due
to time and financial constraints met along the production of this study.
 Chapter 3: METHODOLOGY

The study conducted an anthropometric survey among the members of the Senior Citizen community that is currently residing in Dumaguete City. The survey is in coordination
with the Federation of Senior Citizens Association of the Philippines Dumaguete City Chapter. In their interpersonal development program held on September 22 and 29, 58
respondents out of the 120 target were surveyed. The respondents are composed of 25 men and 33 women. Gender variation is considered in the survey of anthropometric data to make it
more cohesive in terms of the results aimed. There were 35 body measurements that were suggested by Pheasant (2003) that were surveyed. These are as follows:

1. Stature 17. Hip bredth

2. Eye height 18. Chest (bust) depth
3. Shoulder height 19. Abdominal depth
4. Elbow height 20. Shoulder-elbow length
5. Hip height 21. Elbow-fingertip length
6. Knuckle height 22. Head length
7. Fingertip height 23. Head Breadth
8. Sitting height 24. Hand length
9. Sitting eye height 25. Hand breadth
10. Sitting shoulder height 26. Foot length
11. Sitting elbow height 27. Foot breadth
12. Thigh thickness 28. Span
13. Buttock-knee length 29. Elbow Span
14. Popliteal height 30. Vertical grip reach (Standing)
15. Shoulder breadth (Bideltoid) 31. Vertical grip reach (Sitting)
16. Shouler breadth (Biacromial) 32. Forward grip reach
 Chapter 4: PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

A. RESULTS

This study is aimed to create a standard anthropometric data to be used in the designing of the Dumaguete City Senior Citizen Center and Adult Day care. This is one of among
the many studies from various countries (Aravindakhshan, 2012) (Hu , et al., 2007) (Kothiyal & Tettey, 2001) with the same pattern of methodology. All of these studies are all patterned
after Pheasants methodology of anthropometry and ergonomic design (Bodyspace: Anthropometry, ergonomics and the design of work , 2003). Pheasant has suggested 35 body
dimensions to be measured in the standard. Although not all of the body dimensions can be used in the ergonomic design for the said facility, it will be essential in future establishments
that involves the senior citizens of Dumaguete City.

Table 1. Percentile values of Anthropometric Dimensions of Filipino Males and Females Aged 60-85 years old

MEN WOMEN

Dimension 5th %tile 50th %tile 95th %tile SD 5th %tile 50th %tile 95th %tile SD
1. Stature 1498 1572 1646 45 1407 1492 1577 52
2. Eye height 1404 1486 1568 50 1312 1408 1505 59
3. Shoulder height 1244 1349 1454 64 1116 1262 1408 89
4. Elbow height 908 1014 1120 65 427 886 1345 280
5. Hip height 732 834 936 62 717 815 914 60
6. Knuckle height 615 714 813 60 597 671 744 45
7. Fingertip height 515 627 739 68 374 583 792 127
8. Sitting height 684 762 839 47 677 739 800 37
9. Sitting eye height 385 694 1003 188 542 620 699 48
10. Sitting shoulder height 126 398 671 166 128 368 608 146
11. Sitting elbow height 271 326 380 33 54 280 506 138
12. Thigh thickness 96 125 154 18 86 113 140 16
13. Buttock-knee length 461 514 568 33 219 514 809 180
14. Buttock-poplteal length 352 402 452 31 340 385 431 28
15. Knee height 335 493 651 96 432 498 565 40
16. Popliteal height 366 463 560 59 398 478 558 49
17. Shoulder breadth (bideltoid) 342 416 490 45 315 391 467 46
18. Shoulder breadth (biacromial) 264 328 391 39 246 290 333 27
19. Hip breadth 274 338 403 39 293 335 376 25
20. Chest (bust) depth 151 189 226 23 146 205 264 36
21. Abdominal depth 125 223 320 60 132 208 284 46
22. Shoulder-elbow length 271 326 380 33 251 319 386 41
23. Elbow-fingertip length 331 450 569 73 321 400 478 48
24. Upper limb length 617 735 852 72 613 724 835 68
25. Shoulder-grip length 552 681 810 79 527 645 763 72
26. Head length 165 200 236 22 79 125 170 28
27. Head breadth 153 176 200 14 135 165 194 18
28. Hand length 95 145 195 31 79 125 170 28
29. Hand breadth 55 93 132 24 69 82 95 8
30. Foot length 164 234 305 43 185 222 258 22
31. Foot breadth 86 102 118 10 68 100 132 20
32. Span 1319 1607 1895 176 702 1368 2035 406
33. Elbow Span 543 769 995 138 519 737 954 133
34. Vertical grip reach (Standing) 1673 1856 2039 112 1572 1746 1920 106
 35. Vertical grip reach (Sitting) 872 1176 1480 185 770 1241 1712 287

The specified body measurements surveyed were categorized into either sitting or standing positions. After the dimensions from the 58 respondents were gathered, they were
computed according into the 5th-95th percentiles using Microsoft Excel. The author of this paper was also assisted by 4 students as it takes a lot of time to survey one of the respondents.

However, the targeted respondents of 120 people were not met due to some factors that hindered them from cooperating. It was observed that female respondents were more
responsive than men. Kothiyal and Tettey (2001) also faced the same problem in their research of anthropometry. The limited time of the author and his assistants were also constraints
in getting more respondents as the survey was conducted in the middle of their program. The author was able to conduct the survey in the middle of their event as it was suggested by the
FSCAP, along with other chapter presidents, considering that the respondents were in a hectic schedule due to their upcoming affairs and it would be hard for them to decide a schedule
within the suggested dates by the author wherein the survey is to be conducted.

The data collected by from the 58 respondents (25 men and 33 women) were computed through Microsoft excel with the following formulas:

Mean

Where = is the mean or the average; = the sum of the values in the results and = is the number of terms to be computed in the results.

Standard Deviation

( )2
=
1

Where = is the mean; =any individual of dimension concerned; and = is the number of subjects in the sample.

Percentile rate

() = +
 Where =is the constant for the percentile concerned.

Table 1 shows the 5th %tile, 50th %tile, 95th %tile and the Standard Deviation (SD) for each dimension. The data collected among the survey is tabulated as of Table 1, in
percentile ranking from the 5th-95th percentile. This means that at a given percentile, the respective body dimension under it scores greater than the given percentage. For example, the
stature of male respondents aged 60 years old and above has a dimension of 1646 mm under the 95th percentile. That means that 95% of the male respondents aged 60 years and over has
a stature lower than this number. The stature of the male respondents aged 60 and over has a dimension of 1572 mm under the 50th %tile. That means to say that a male respondent that
has a stature dimension of 1572 mm is taller than the 50% of the population. While respondents who has a stature height of 1498 mm is taller than the 5% of the population.

Table 1 also shows standard deviations in their respective dimensions. Standard deviations represent how further the value (as for this study, the dimensions) is from the mean. It
represents the variation among the dimensions of the population in the results. The larger the standard deviation, the further the value deviates from the mean hence, the greater variety
among values. In the table, the male populations vary in the following body dimensions in descending order with the standard deviation (SD) enclosed in brackets:

1. Sitting Eye height 694 mm [188]

2. Vertical grip reach (sitting) 1176 mm [185]
3. Span 1607 mm [176]
4. Sitting shoulder height 398 mm [166]
5. Elbow span 769 mm [138]
6. Vertical grip reach (standing) 1856 [112]

Meanwhile the female population varies in the following dimensions:

1. Span 1386 mm [406]

2. Sitting vertical grip reach 1241 mm [287]
3. Buttock-knee length 514 mm [287]
4. Sitting shoulder height 368 mm [146]
5. Sitting elbow height 280 mm [138]
6. Elbow span 737 mm [133]
 7. Fingertip height 583 mm [127]
8. Vertical grip reach (standing) 1746 mm [106]

B. ANALYSIS

From Table 1, we can infer that there is an evident difference of dimensions between the male and female respondents. This goes to show that gender variation in anthropometric
data is significant in standardizing anthropometric dimensions to create a more cohesive data.

Table 2. Design implications of Anthropometric Data and Applications

CLEARANCE CRITERIA LIMITING USER/S RECOMMENDED DIMENSION

1. Must accommodate the widest elbow
span 2. the distance between users sitting
95%tile, elbow span, men
elbow space (dining and meetings) will be half the widest elbow span 482 mm maximum distance O.C.
(995 mm)
3. Allowance of 5 mm to avoid contact
between users.
1. accommodate the widest shoulder
breadth (bideltoid)
2. Allowance of 10 mm on each side for
Clearance (bet. Chairs) 95 %tile (490 mm) 1020 max distance between chairs
extra arm movement
3. distance of chairs shall be twice the sum
of shoulder breadth and 10 mm allowance
1. Accommodate the widest shoulder 510 mm max distance bet chair and
Clearance (bet. Chair and walls) 95 %tile men (490 mm)
breadth (bideltoid) wall

Clearance (Bet. Tables)
Clearance Bet. Tables (w/ chairs)
Door width (w/ wheel chairs and crutches)
Door height
Clearance bet. Facing equipment and counters)
2. allowance 10 mm on each side
1. Accommodate the widest elbow span
2. Additional 10 mm allowance to avoid
contact and disruption with another user 95 %tile elbow span, men
2010 max. Clearance bet. Tables
3. the distance shall be twice the sum of (995),
the allowance the elbow span to
accommodate clearance for 2 people
95 %tile buttock-popliteal
1. Longest buttock-popliteal length
length, men (452), 95
2. add half of the widest elbow span for 950 mm distance between tables
%tile elbow span, men
aisle clearance
(995 mm)
1. Widest elbow span 2. 5 mm allowance 95%tile elbow span
1000 mm maximum distance.
on each side (995mm) men + 5 mm
1. Tallest stature among the users 95%tile, stature, men
2146 mm max. height
2. allowance of 500 mm for headroom (1646 mm)
1. Longest buttock-popliteal length from
counters and equipment.
95 %tile buttock-popliteal
2. 400 mm allowance to allow clearance 852 mm maximum distance
length, men (452)
for passing through and safety of
equipment
 1. Longest buttock-popliteal length from
counters and equipment
95 %tile men, buttock
Clearance bet. Two people to pass and work with each other 2. The length multiplied twice to 1104 mm
popliteal length (452)
accommodate two users
3. allowance of 200 mm to avoid contact
95%tile, elbow span, men
Stairs width 1. widest elbow span per person 1000 mm/ person
(995)
REACH
1. must accommodate the shortest 5%tile, vertical grip reach,
Cabinet height 1600 mm
dimension in terms of the vertical grip rich women
POSTURE
1. Shortest popliteal height to allow
seating unassisted 2. additional 100 mm 5 %tile, popliteal height
Seat height 440 mm
for convenience of the longer popliteal (340) female
height
Stage height
1. Shortest sitting elbow height
5 %tile, sitting elbow
Table height (for dining and Conference) 2. additional 150 mm 544 mm
height (54 mm) female,
3. additional 340 mm sitting height
1. lowest elbow height
5 %tile elbow height, male
Height of knobs/locksets 2. additional 100 mm for maximum height 908 mm min. 1008 mm max.
(908 mm)
of lockset
 1. Must be high enough to prevent falling.
2. Must not be too high for the reach of the
user. 5th-95th percentile elbow upper handrail: 1014-1120 mm lower
handrail height from nosing
3. Bet. 50 %tile and 95 %tile men height handrail: 908 mm maximum
4. Lower handrail using the 5th percentile
elbow height.

The table 2 are certain ergonomic applications in the anthropometric dimensions gathered in Table 1. In order to determine the probable activities and their respective areas of
applications, information about the yearly activities of the Office of the Senior Citizen Affairs were obtained and categorized these activities into the following:

1. Monthly meetings
2. Interpersonal development program (IPR)
3. Seminar/Lectures
4. Workshops
5. Socio-cultural shows/performances
6. FSCAP and OSCA operations from the RA 7432

Pheasant (2003) suggests that there are 4 constraints in coming up with ergonomic standards using the anthropometric dimensions gathered. These are clearance, reach, posture
and strength. However, strength is not identified with heavy involvement in this study which is the reason for its exclusion. Clearance, Pheasant, is significant because environments
must provide adequate access and circulation space. It is a one-way constraint that is determined by the bulky member of the population or the 95th percentile. In the case of these study,
most artefacts of ergonomics used the 95th percentile with either that of the female or male respondents depending which is minimum. Reach is the ability to grasp and operate controls.
It determines the maximum acceptable dimension of the object. Similar to clearance, it is a one-way constraint. However, it determines the maximum dimension by the small member of
the population or the 5th percentile.
 Also, in determining the recommended dimension to be used, certain criteria was used and determined by the author depending on its practical and logical sense. These criteria
will determine which dimensions under its respective part of the population is to be used.
 Bibliography

Aravindakhshan, M. (2012). Workplace design for elderly Singaporean population using anthropometric modeling. Singapore : Nanyang Technological University .

Butler, A. A., Lord, S. R., & Fitzpatrick , R. C. (2016, April 7 ). Perceptions of Speed and Risk: Experimental studies of road crossing by older people. (B. U. Tieqiao Tang, Ed.)
Retrieved November 17, 2017 , from https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0152617

Elizabeth, A. (2015, July 2). How diminished independence can impact the health & well-being of older adults. Retrieved August 10, 2017, from True Link Financial:
https://www.truelinkfinancial.com/news/diminished-independence-can-impact-health-well-older-adults

Ghabash, I. (2014). The body in modern architecture: Perceptions, philosophies, and design consequences in the work of Le Corbusier and Alvar Aalto. Utah: University of Utah .

Hough, A. (2010, February 8). More people 'fear losing independence in old age than death', survey says. The Telegraph. Retrieved from
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/elder/6836648/More-people-fear-losing-independence-in-old-age-than-death-survey-finds.html

How can aging affect mental health? (2017, May 1). Retrieved August 11, 2017, from LifeSpeak: https://lifespeak.com/can-aging-affect-mental-health/

Hu , H., Li , Z., Yan, J., Wang, X., Xiao, H., Duan, J., & Zheng , L. (2007). Anthropometric measure of the Chinese elderly living in the Beijing area. Beijing: Elsevier B.V.

Jarosz, E. (1998). Anthropometry of elderly women in Poland: dimensions for design . Elsevier B.V. .

Kothiyal , K., & Tettey, S. (2001). Anthropometry and design for the elderly. Sydney: University of New South Wales .

Monteagudo, J. A. (2013). Influence of Le Corbusier in modern architecture .

Otswald, M. J. (2001). Le Corbusier (Charles Edouard Jeanneret): The Modulor and Modulor 2. Nexus Network Journal , 145-147.

Panzera, A. (2009, Winter ). Learning from Leonardo's The Vitruvian Man. Drawing Magazine , p. 37.

Pheasant, S. (2003). Bodyspace: Anthropometry, ergonomics and the design of work (2nd ed.). United Kingdom: The Estate of Stephen Pheasant.

Salvan, G. S. (1999). Architectural Theory of Design . Quezon City : JMC Press, INC. .
Sims, R. E. (2003). 'Design for All' : methods and data to support designers. Ruth Elise Sims .

Vitruvius: The ten books on Architecture. (1914). (M. H. Morgan, Trans.) London: Harvard University Press.