Combining human factors and design to deliver successful rail interiors

Article by Paul Rutter Transport Sector Manager

Published in Rail Professional

Countries and cities around the world take great pride in announcing large scale transport projects: think HS2 in the UK, the Shinkansen in Japan and China High Speed Rail. These are promoted with exciting concepts, which are a critical part of the design process. Early sketches and glossy renders help to grab public attention, build expectations and generate slick visions of what is to come. All too often though, the human element, or the impact it has on users, can be overlooked or left out. Adding it later to the design process is likely to cause friction and change, often to the detriment of the original design vision, and it can also be time consuming and costly.

Of course, the design of trains, high speed or metro, does not have to follow down this welltrodden path. There is another way whereby the human element is factored in from the outset. This greatly reduces any issues and potential conflicts and often helps fuel the creative process.

The argument for more human focused designs is clear. It leads to better trains and services for all. Developing services that more people can use makes ethical and financial sense. A big incentive for inclusive train design, beyond the ethical imperatives, is a greater target audience and increased ridership as well as potentially happier passengers. With an ageing global population, this becomes particularly relevant in driving passenger numbers up worldwide.

Alongside the ethical and commercial incentives though, there exists an ever-increasing legislative burden. Since the 1990s public awareness of disabilities and the right to equal access has become a central focus of public transport design. The introduction of the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) 1995 followed by the Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations (RVAR) and now the Persons with Reduced Mobility (PRM TSI) has brought legislation and guidelines that describe and define best practice and minimum acceptable levels. Issues such as step heights, colour contrasts, access ramps, and wheelchair accessible spaces have all become commonplace. Train operators and manufacturers have to consider these issues very carefully and make sure that the correct provision is in place.

Historically the initial focus of these standards was on physical capabilities – suggested in the title PRM (Persons with Reduced Mobility). However, this acronym is misleading as many of the requirements are in place to address sensory capabilities as well. More recently still, we are seeing a much greater recognition for cognitive capabilities. The latest topic, currently attracting far more attention, is neurodiversity – design for mind and the impact that the built environment has on our perceptions of the world around us. Sensory stimulation, such as audible or visual noise can cause dizziness, headaches or disorientation.

Design intervention to improve the environment is complicated because a solution for one type of sensory difference might be to the detriment of another. It is very important that, as designers, we engage with stakeholders representing a range of capabilities to ensure all needs can be reasonably met.

Human Factors (HF), as a design discipline, covers everything from anthropometrics, usability, psychological and physiological principles to the engineering and design of products. HF design advocates an explicit consideration of people’s capabilities (from a physical, sensory, and cognitive perspective) from the outset of a project. Applying HF ‘best practice’ is one of the challenges that falls to designers, as a duty of care, to ensure that the train and the service it delivers meet the HF needs of the widest possible audience and, importantly, the laws and regulations surrounding their use and operation.

Our experience of HF design, as one of the leading transport design consultants, is to treat the subject as a creative problem-solving exercise. It is very easy to criticise and reject design proposals on the grounds that they don’t meet a particular standard or specified criteria. This critical rejection cycle hinders the design process and acts as a brake on progress often causing project deadlines to slip while alternative solutions are sought.

DCA recognises the importance and benefits of integrating multifaceted skill sets, including Human Factors, to solve problems and bring a project to a successful outcome. HF design can be seen as a key driver in decision-making right from the start of a project. Our approach is to make Human Factors integral to each stage of the design process beginning with a clear definition of the HF related standards and requirements that have to be met.

A human Factors Integration Plan (HFIP) should be created at the outset of a project. It outlines the process required to meet the standards and identifies the key milestones in the design process at which information and evidence will be available to allow the sign off of a design or concept.

Safety and legal requirements are applied to the design subject in a creative and practical approach to ensure that the key metrics are met. It is important to decide before a project starts which data sets (human anthropometric measurement data) and what size populations need to be considered. Design solutions are generated and applied to the product or service, with sizes matched to user populations, contrast values applied to colour choices, and spatial clearance for user activities.

However, compliance with standards and guidelines should not be viewed as the end goal, rather as the minimal requirement. True inclusive design actually takes creativity and imagination. It involves working with a broad range of stakeholders, testing designs and running through different use cases and scenarios. User trials can be conducted to demonstrate and test the ideas not only against the standards, but also to find better ways of doing things. Trials can be carried out on simple mock-ups or rigs or using Virtual Reality (VR). A combination of VR and simple spatial rigs, used to define fixed hard points, can create an Augmented Reality (AR) environment that can often work very well at an early stage of the design process as a check to establish compliance before committing to detailed engineering development.

How does this differ from the usual design process?

In a rail context, the key difference is the way in which a design brief or specification is used at the beginning of a project. Often the manufacturer or supplier provides just a series of technical requirements, for instance in the form of a Train Technical Description or TTD. As designers, our role then is to interpret these requirements to guide and manage the design outcome. This is where the difference comes in. We add HF into the mix of design activities to ensure that the TTD requirements related to Human Factors are met throughout the development cycle. Feedback is applied to the design using the outcome of the HF activities and user trials, and the HF compliance process is clearly documented alongside the design development rather than attempting to bolt it on retrospectively at the end of the design programme.

The final output would usually be a consolidated design book that tells the story of the development process combining the visual rendered images and the design evidence gathered through the HF review process. This would show how compliance is achieved against each HF requirement in the TTD that governs the train operation, and from a visual perspective it would also show how the design achieves the operator’s service brand aspirations.

Successful design projects, in our view, integrate the design and HF activities into the development cycle so that, when concepts are generated, a balanced combination of visual, practical and HF elements is achieved in order that they can all work together for mutual benefit. We see this as an iterative process that informs each stage of the project, ticking off HF compliance issues as early as we can to provide an inclusive perspective throughout. This ensures that the final product represents a truly holistic design that meets the needs of its users and retains the early aspirational ideas and excitement that originated the project.

Hitachi Rail

Nexus Metro

Tender support proposals

Design research

Industrial design

Visual brand language

Mechanical engineering

Model making

Usability and HF

Productionisation

Industrial design

Usability and HF

Mechanical engineering

Visual brand language

Colour, material and finish

Testing and evaluation

Production support

Research

Interaction Design

Our multidisciplinary approach delivers user interactions across physical and digital platforms that are simple, intuitive and a delight to use, and form an integrated part of your transport service offering.

We explore, develop and evaluate interaction solutions across product, application and service layers in order to address user needs with the correct balance of digital and physical touchpoints.