Task Chair Evaluations: The Ratings Explained
The rating system here was created at the University of North Carolina to take into account the specific needs of task chairs within a university setting.
Documents used for reference:
- BSR/HFES 100 Draft Standard: Human Factors Engineering of Computer Workstations
- ANSI/HFS 100 American National Standard for Human Factors Engineering of Visual Display Terminal Workstations
- BIFMA's Ultimate Test for Fit
- The Ergonomic Seating Evaluation Form from the Cornell University Ergonomics Web
- The State of North Carolina Department of Administration Division of Purchase and Contract Specification for Chairs, Ergonomic (Specification # 7110-5)
Evaluators rated each chair's seat, back, arms, lumbar support, instruction, construction/material, and the evaluator's overall impression. The rating for each category was placed into one of five categories (Very Good, Good, Average, Fair and Poor). The scores were combined and normalized to a percentage of the perfect score (Overall Score).
While evaluating the chair, the evaluators kept the following criteria in mind:
Seat: The seat category refers to the height, depth, and tilt adjustments of the seat.
Back: The back category refers to the height, angle and tension adjustments for the backrest.
Arms: Height, width and angle adjustability were evaluated.
Lumbar Adjustability: This refers to the ability to adjust the lumbar support. The ability to adjust firmness, amount of curve and height of the curve were evaluated. Adjustable lumbar supports are still relatively new for chairs, so many chairs only allow adjustment of the lumbar support by adjusting the entire chair backrest.
Instructions: This category refers to how easy the adjustments are to figure out and how well-marked the adjustments are. In some cases, manufacturers included instructions built-in with the chair.
Material: North Carolina state contract has a number of material requirements for chairs, such as a waterfall front seat. These requirements and the construction of the armrests were considered.
Overall Impression: The evaluator's impression of the chair and feedback from users at UNC were rated in this category.