BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS Archives

The listserv where the buildings do the talking

BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
The listserv where the buildings do the talking <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 9 Dec 2015 13:44:37 -0500
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (12 kB) , text/html (17 kB)

I have been pondering the question of whether brownstone developers favored 
 the right or left side for their stoops (absent other  considerations), 
and then I realized I don't know if there is a  "correct" (or even just 
dominant) way to hinge an exterior door - so the  knob meets the right hand, or 
meets the left hand?   Any takers on  this?     
 
Christopher
 
PS Also found this interesting, although distantly related, piece of  
research, from 1969, below:  




_lightbox_ (http://vads.ac.uk/lightbox.php) 
 

 (http://vads.ac.uk/diad/index.php)  
(http://vads.ac.uk/diad/magazine.php?year=1969)  (http://vads.ac.uk/diad/diadmagazine.php?title=241&year=1969)  
(http://vads.ac.uk/diad/article.php?title=241&year=1969&article=d.241.34)  
(http://vads.ac.uk/diad/article.php?title=241&year=1969&article=d.241.36)  
(http://vads.ac.uk/diad/diad_help/help.html)  

Home1969241171819

      Title: Waiting for the air curtain:  an ergonomic survey of door 
handles and locks

Pages: 50 - 53

 (http://vads.ac.uk/diad/article.php?title=241&year=1969&article=d.241.35)  
(http://vads.ac.uk/diad/article.php?title=241&year=1969&article=d.241.35)  
(http://vads.ac.uk/diad/article.php?title=241&year=1969&article=d.241.35)  
(http://vads.ac.uk/diad/article.php?title=241&year=1969&article=d.241.35) 

Author: Alan  Parkin

Text: Air curtains and foot-operated doors may  eventually replace 
conventional doors in public places, but that time is  still far off. For privacy 
and security there is as yet no substitute for  locks. Recent ergonomic 
research, discussed by Alan Parkin, suggests areas  for change in current 
equipment.

A study recently carried out at  the University of Manchester by Beatrice 
Yaffe* answers some questions  about how people use doors, and throws doubt 
on the adequacy of existing  designs of handles and locks. "It is clear," 
writes Miss Yaffe, "that  there is ample scope for redesigning door furniture. 
The problem can be  approached in two ways - it can be a complete redesign 
considering door  furniture as an integral part of the door, or the design of 
handle lock  and key can be considered as separate pieces of hardware 
bought  individually and fixed on a ready-made door." The first approach is  
essential from the user's point of view, because Miss Yaffe discovered  user 
difficulties with every type of conventional door tested. The second  approach 
demands ergonomic research on handles which can be operated with  parts of 
the body other than hands, locks with indicators for direction of  turn, etc. 
and keys designed for the ways they are u sed rather than the  way they are 
thought to be used.

The study was made in two parts:  door handles and then door locks. The 
method was to observe, unnoticed, a  total of over 400 people using doors of 
different types in normal  surroundings. The findings are of major interest to 
industry as well as  architects and interior designers.

The handles study examined six  situations: double two-way swing doors in a 
large store, made of glass,  with pushplates standing an inch away from the 
glass; double one-way swing  doors in a smaller shop, made of glass, with 
horizontal pushbands and one  door bolted shut; double two-way swing doors in 
a students' refectory with  pushplates on a wood frame and glass panels; 
two single doors in a  students' building with lever handles, one having a 
springloaded closing  device; and a single door in a private house with a knob  
handle.

The swing doors brought out some strong preferences in user  behaviour. 
Nearly everyone would rather push a door than pull it. This is  to be expected 
when faced with a pushplate; but many people tried to push  the one-way 
doors, even though the handle was clearly designed to be  pulled. Most people 
push a door with a plate on the right with their left  hand, and a left-plate 
door with their right hand. Miss Yaffe found that  the preferred height for 
pushing a door is about two inches below shoulder  level.

People with prams, trolleys, or bundles of shopping had  difficulty with 
the swing doors. "Their methods were either to wait for  some kind person 
polite enough to hold the door open, or more commonly to  use a part of the body 
other than the hands to open the door. The most  popular method was to push 
with the side of the body and shoulders,  walking forwards and following 
the door round. This appeared to be very  difficult with a pram, and most mums 
had a special technique. They walked  backwards, pulling the pram with 
them, and pushed the door open by walking  into it. The drawback was that the 
doors closed on the side of the pram.  Some mothers seemed to have this method 
down to a fine art. They gave a  sharp flick to the door with their thigh, 
pulling the pram smartly through  the door at the same time. (This 
relatively sophisticated approach is fine  on weekdays, but not so good in battling 
Saturday  crowds.)"

Twenty-five per cent of users tried to push the bolted  door going in 
-there was no indication that it was locked; but no-one  tried to come out of the 
bolted door - evidently they remembered their  mistake on the way in. The 
report points out that observations showed that  there were particular 
difficulties for old and disabled people using swing  doors, and

[page 51]

One of the doors examined for the  survey was a two-way swing door in a 
large. From left: a tall person  pushes the glass above the plate; a small girl 
pushes the glass; the door  handles awkwardly when pulled. Bottom, from 
left: the method used by most  users; difficulty for the heavily laden and the 
disabled.

For those  trying to pull open a one-way door with their hands full. The 
results for  one-way lever-handled doors show a clear pattern of preferred 
door  control. Either hand was used to operate the handle then push, or pull,  
the door open. The same hand was then moved to grip the edge of the door a  
little above handle height, to check the swing, and dropped as the person  
passed through the door. Either hand was then used to pull, or push, the  
door closed and fasten it, without turning round. "If the person was in a  
hurry, he appeared to 'throng' the door between his two hands, using the  finger 
tips - or he pulled the door shut as he walked away (which often  failed to 
close the door properly)."

In using a lever handle, "the  fingertips touched first, and were then slid 
forward until the base of the  fingers and the finger tips were in position 
on the handle. The palm of  the hand did not appear to be used." In using a 
knob handle, there was  preference for turning the knob away from the body 
right hand clockwise,  left hand anti-clockwise. Difficulties with 
lever-handled doors arose when  people had to open or close them with their hands 
full. Knob handles were  impossible to open. To push doors shut with full 
hands, the favoured  methods were the elbow swing, the shoulder swing, and the 
kick. Pulling  doors shut without hands was the most difficult of all. 
"Methods used were  catching the elbow or forearm on the lever handle and pulling 
(the elbow  tended to slip off the shiny lever handle), or catching the edge 
of the  door with the foot and trying to pull it shut without catching the 
foot in  the door."

The report found that, people opening lever handles used  in conjunction 
with a door-closing device "were quick and

[page  52]


[caption]
The drawing shows the pattern of preferred  coo. control discovered by the 
survey. Either hand is used to operate the  handle, then push the door open. 
The same hand is then moved to grip the  edge of the door a little above 
handle height, to check the swing, and  dropped as the person passes through. 
Either hand is then used to pull the  door closed and fasten it, without 
turning  round.


[text]

ingenious in using other parts of the body  to operate the lever. Forearms 
and elbows were used by various women.  There was a particular difficulty in 
that the door had to be kept open for  the length of time needed to get 
out. A good backwards kick appeared to  work, or an extra strong pull backwards 
just gave the girl time to squeeze  out. Some people were able to wedge 
their elbows in between the frame and  the door, and give a good shove. There 
was no full control over the door  movement, so it was liable to knock the 
user."

Handles are related  to one function of a door, allowing passage; the other 
function of a door,  preventing passage, is normally mediated by a lock. 
The second part of the  study examined four types of lock end key: three-lever 
mortice lock on  interior door with keyhole below lever handle at right of 
door; as before,  but with keyhole at left of door; five-lever mortice lock 
on interior door  with keyhole beside handle; and cylinder lock on front 
door of  house.

The mortice locks provoked considerable confusion as to  which way to turn 
a key:the away-from-the-body preference found in turning  a knob seemed to 
be more important than thinking which way the bolt might  move. Two locks had 
keys which turned some way before biting, and this led  to much more 
confusion and slower learning about the correct turning  direction than the key 
which bit immediately. After practice with the  difficult locks, five subjects 
"were still not able to unlock the door  immediately." The

[captions]

The lock on this door is  positioned awkwardly high for the user; a 
cylinder lock needs very careful  placing if the hand is to be balanced when 
turning the key. The upper  picture shows pressure on the finger when turning a 
cylinder lock key,  which is then used as a handle.

[text]

keyholes below the  handles were moredifficult to locate then the one 
beside the  handle.

With the cylinder front door lock, all subjects used the  key as a handle 
to push open the door. "Pulling the key out of the lock  was often difficult 
without using one hand to hold the door steady. This  led two of the 
subjects to carry the parcels into the house, leaving the  key in the lock, then 
come back to take it out. It is possible to forget  the key is in the lock, 
and shut the door leaving the key on the outside.  This is particularly likely 
if two people enterusing one key."

The  findings are summed up as a set of design requirements. Future  
developments may provide a solution that makes doors redundant. If doors  are 
necessary, then they should if possible push open both ways, and not  swing shut 
on prams or slow-moving people. Among Miss Yaffe's  recommendations are 
that pushplate tops should be five feet above floor  level; that bolted and 
pull swing doors should have clear indication of  how they are to be used; and 
that one-way lever-handled doors should be  easy to use with either hand or 
without hands.

Miss Yaffe also  suggests that locks should have indicators showing which 
way the key  turns, and whether it is locked or not. Movements should have 
immediate  bite, and keyholes be easily visible. Keys for cylinder locks 
should be so  designed that they are also suitable for use as handles and are  
comfortable for use as such. In addition they should be easy to remove  from 
the lock.

This study shows what can be done by intelligent  application of modest 
resources. Certainly it raises as many questions as  it answers, and this is 
part of its value. One begins to wonder why so  many double doors are kept 
bolted on one side: do shop and office owners,  for instance - or architects go 
for grandiose entrances which are not in  fact needed ? And whether it's 
really necessary for so many two-way swing  doors to be labelled PUSH on one 
side and PULL on the other: the report  found that the majority of people 
push whatever the label says, without  creating havoc. Could lessons for door 
handles be learned from hospital  taps, designed to be operated with the 
elbows or wrists ? What would a  cylinder lock key-handle be like: what would a 
bunch of them be  like?

It would be useful now to have economic comparisons of the  different types 
of doors and fittings, related to their ergonomic aspects.  It would be 
interesting to see the same line of inquiry carried over into  quite different 
types of door - rotating, sliding, remote-operated,  air-curtain - and into 
other areas of design. Design can never afford to  base itself on what 
people are supposed to do: they often  don't.

[footnote]

*The Functional and Ergonomic Requirements  of Door Furniture, by Beatrice 
Yaffe, post-graduate course in industrial  design technology, University of 
Manchester Institute of Science and  Technology.

[caption]

This mortice lock is placed so that  the user has to peer under the handle 
to insert the key. Her left hand  obscures her right as she turns the  key.

--
**Please remember to trim posts, as requested in the Terms of Service**

To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
<http://listserv.icors.org/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html>


ATOM RSS1 RSS2