This document discusses research into designing more comfortable experiences for future airplane cabins using virtual reality prototyping. The researchers conducted three studies: an online comfort survey of design elements, an immersive concept selection study using VR prototypes, and an immersive comfort evaluation of the selected concept. The studies found that elements like tap basin height, storage, and number of facilities most influenced comfort. Male and female participants showed some differences in comfort preferences in VR. Virtual reality prototyping helped identify nuances between concepts and supported better decision making through collecting user feedback to improve designs. The researchers conclude VR prototyping can help design more comfortable long-haul flight experiences and plan to compare VR to physical prototyping in future work.

1. 1
How to design a comfortable
experience for future airplanes?
Meng Li, Doris Aschenbrenner, Daniëlle van Tol, Daan van Eijk, Peter Vink
Applied Ergonomics & Design
A Human-Centered Design Procedure for Conceptualization
Using Virtual Reality Prototyping Applied in An Inflight Lavatory
6/16/2021

2. 2
Comfort Design for future long-haul fights
• Unique V-shape and oval cross-
section
• Large-scale;
• Privacy and safety issues;
• Complexity and importance of
comfort perception;
• Human-Centered Design

3. 3
How concept design could improve comfort from using VR
and if it enabled potential users to better compare
alternative concepts and select a better solution?
RQ
RQ1: Which design elements of the hygiene experience influence the comfort in long-
haul flight?
RQ2: Which concepts are perceived more comfortable by end-users via showing them
in VR prototyping?
RQ3: Whether VR prototyping helps to improve a comfortable experience?

4. 4
Processes of research
• Step 1: Online Comfort Study
– ten design elements, twenty-item Kano questionnaire, 101
responses;
• Step 2: Immersive Concept Selection
– Five design elements, Ten-VR concepts with Kano
questionnaire, 28 participants
• Step 3: Immersive Comfort Evaluation
– Final VR concept, comfort questionnaire, realism questionnaire
and simulation sickness questionnaire, 33 participants

5. 5
5

6. 6
RESULTS
online survey, immersive selection, immersive evaluation

7. 7
Online Survey

8. 8
Immersive Concept Selection
Male (12) Female (16) Total(28)
Mean(SD) p value Mean(SD) p value Mean(SD) p value
With seat 3.83(1.403) 0.077 3.87(1.727) 0.309 3.85(1.562) 0.056
No seat 4.75(1.545) 4.56(1.459) 4.64(1.471)
Light3000k 4.42(1.621) 0.357 4.25(1.342) 0.070 4.32(1.442) 0.053
Light3500k 4.75(0.965) 4.00(1.088) 4.82(1.020)
Tap-basin28cm 5.00(1.279) 0.083 4.69(1.448) 0.163 4.78(1.368) 0.036*
Tap-basin24cm 5.58(0.996) 5.27(0.884) 5.41(0.931)
Storage shelves 5.08(1.443) 0.055 4.69(1.448) 0.171 4.86(1.433) 0.021*
Storage box 4.08(1.240) 4.06(1.389) 4.07(1.303)
More facilities 5.58(1.505) 0.224 5.69(1.078) 0.004** 5.64(1.254) 0.002**
Fewer facilities 4.75(1.422) 4.25(1.183) 4.46(1.290)
*indicates that p value <0.05; **indicates that p value <0.01.

9. 9
Immersive Concept Evaluation
*indicates that significant p value <0.05; **indicates that p value <0.01, ***indicate that p value<0.001.
(a) the comfort perception and (b) the realistic level of the final prototype
No significant differences between the people with or without VR experience on realism rating.
No significant simulation sickness symptoms.

10. 10
Conclusion & Next Step
• Every design element contributed positively to the long-hual
flight comfort, especially tap-basin height, storage, and
facilities.
• The male and female participants showed different comfort
preferences in VR, as standing posture and storage are key
for males, high-end facilities and warm lighting for females.
• The first-person immersion (VR prototyping) helps to identify
the nuances between concepts, thus supports better decision-
making via collecting rich and reliable user feedback to make
faster and more satisfying improvements.
• The next step: comparisons between VR and physical
prototyping.

11. 11
Applied Ergonomics & Design Section in IDE
Daan van Eijk
Doris Aschenbrenner
Thanks and Questions
Meng Li
m.li-4@tudelft.nl
Landbergstraat 15, 2628CE, Delft, Netherlands
Daniëlle van Tol Peter Vink