Category: Transportation

Ergonomists and engineers are considering ways to design autonomous vehicles to include a diversity of users. That includes people with disability and impairments. However, it’s not just a case of adding universal design principles into the design process. Designing an inclusive autonomous vehicle requires attention to many other factors. It’s an interdisciplinary design process.

Researchers in Europe have come up with a way to integrate relevant design data to ensure designs meet standards and the diversity of users. Overall user perception is linked to user perception and satisfaction and this is where ergonomics come into play. The paper is very technical and mainly of interest to engineers and ergonomists. The researchers claim that this platform will turn attention to “human-centric” design rather than engineering design.

For those who advocate for inclusive vehicle design, it shows the complexity designers have to deal with. However, it is good to see this important issue addressed at this early stage of future mass production.

The title of the paper is, Inclusive Autonomous Vehicle Interior Design (IAVID) Platform. Click on the “Article” button to download the open access copy.

From the abstract

Passenger comfort in vehicles is a complex, human-centric segment of the vehicle interior design process. Autonomous vehicles (AVs) present an opportunity for redefining standard design approaches. There are options for improved ergonomics and meeting the needs of a wide range of users, including persons with impairments.

However, the complexity of incorporating universal design principles together with all other interdisciplinary information in the development process requires a suitable method to systematize the data and simplify their use.

This paper proposes a platform for inclusive autonomous vehicle interior design (IAVID) which can be used as a tool to support the creation of ergonomic and inclusive AV interiors. The proposed IAVID platform is based on model-based systems engineering. It is intended for organizing and updating all relevant interdisciplinary information to input in the AV interior development. By doing so, the interdisciplinary collaboration among vehicle development teams is strengthened.

On the road with autonomous vehicles

What will the future of transport look like post COVID-19 pandemic and what will it mean for autonomous vehicles? For people who don’t or can’t drive, autonomous vehicles seem a wonderful invention. But will the designs and technology be inclusive?  

It’s not that no-one is thinking about access and inclusion – they are. But it’s not all about the technology. Some of the problems are related to the way vehicles connect with the built environment. Wheelchair accessible features, such as a ramp, can be rendered unsafe on steep inclines. If the wheelchair is not locked down, bumps in the road could cause the chair to tip or fall. 

Some riders will need specific assistive technologies for eye tracking, gesture recognition, and voice control. These would give people with tactile, mobility, and hearing impairments a sense of control without the need to make physical contact. Other practical challenges are around pick up and drop-off, and loading and unloading groceries. Some people will still require human assistance at certain points of the journey. 

These issues and others are discussed in an article, Autonomous vehicles should benefit those with disabilities, but progress remains slow.

Related articles

For a more academic study and design details see, Accessible Personal Transportation for People with Disabilities Using Autonomous Vehicles. They include the principles of universal design in the text and conclude with a list of recommendations. 

The motoring body, NRMA, predicted in 2017 that autonomous vehicles will be rolling out in significant numbers by 2020. Their report on the Future of Car Ownership shows the step by step progress. You can also get a summary of the report in an infographic. 

UTT: A Conceptual Model to Guide the Universal Design of Autonomous Vehicles requires institutional access for a free read.

Abstract

Autonomous vehicles (AVs) are closer to becoming a reality in changing the landscape of commercial and personal transportation. The launch of these vehicles comes with the promise of improved road safety, reduced traffic fatalities, and enhanced mobility. However, there are questions as to whether the design of AVs will meet the needs of everyone, including people with disabilities and older adults.

We argue that there exists no conceptual model that guides the inclusive design of autonomous vehicles to benefit all intended users. This paper proposes such a model, called the User Transportation-Activity Technology (UTT) model, which supports the inclusive design of AVs. We present a review of current models of assistive technology design and their drawbacks followed by an introduction of the UTT model and its application in AV design.

This paper may benefit researchers, designers, and developers of autonomous vehicles interested in addressing accessible design issues in such vehicles.

Will we have truly inclusive automated vehicles (AVs) or will we need specialised vehicles for some people with specific disabilities? According to a research paper, several companies are creating prototypes of AVs for people with disability. These include both micro-transit and paratransit services.

Under the right circumstances, automated vehicles can offer a decrease in social isolation, access to vital services, and personal independence. But it will take more than access standards – it requires a universal design approach.

Basically there are seven trip-making stages in three categories when thinking about Accessible Automated Vehicles (AAVs).

• Pre-trip concierge (Information system Design)
  • Trip planning and booking
• Wayfinding and naviagions (Accessible Infrastructure Design)
  • Navigating to the AAV pick-up point
  • Waiting at the AAV pick-up point
  • Navigating from the AAV drop-off point to the destination
• Robotics and Utomating (Vehicle Design)
  • Boarding AAV
  • Riding AAV
  • Alighting AAV

In terms of accessibility, there are three distinct but interconnected areas of concern. The pre-trip concierge relates to the design of information systems that will inform the travellers; wayfinding and navigation relate to accessible infrastructure design; and the boarding, riding, and alighting from AAV without any human attendant relates to the design of the vehicles themselves.

The paper discusses all aspects of the design and operation of autonomous vehicles and access for people with a range of disabilities. It references a wide range of existing research on the topic and mobility, sensory and cognitive disabilities.

The case studies

Nine short case studies include five customised models and four paratransit prototypes. Briefly they are:

1. Wheelchair accessible AV – for a shuttle service
2. Customised minivans – oversize vehicles are more flexible
3. Luxury concept car with tall roof and wide doors
4. Urban robo-taxi – hail using an app
5. Single occupancy design – best suited for city travel
6. Detroit medical campus shuttle – fits 15 people
7. US Army Catapult – for wounded veterans
8. Jacksonville Transportation Authority – specified full ADA compliance
9. ELATE project – purpose-built AAV in two sites

The authors conclude that AAVs offer promise of mobility for people with disability through on-demand options. In Stockholm an automated shuttle bus has been sharing the roads alongside cyclists, pedestrians and vehicles. Apps should be compliant with web content accessibility as a minimum. The design simplicity of vehicles must also account for cognitive disabilities. Simple and intuitive layouts and system controls are good for everyone.

The title of the paper is, On-demand Microtransit and Paratransit Service Using Autonomous Vehicles: Gaps and Opportunities in Accessibility Policy.

From the abstract

Autonomous vehicle (AV) technology can help disabled Americans achieve their desired level of mobility. However, vehicle manufacturers, policymakers, and state and municipal agencies have to collaborate to achieve support disabled individuals. It requires collaboration for different stages of trip making through information system design, vehicle design, and infrastructure design.

Integrating accessibility at this stage of the AV revolution would finally allow us to develop a transportation system that treats accessibility as a guiding principle, not as an afterthought.

The review of regulations is followed by a review of nine case studies, five corresponding to the on-demand microtransit service model and four corresponding to the paratransit service model. These case studies are essentially different prototypes currently being deployed on a pilot basis.

Recommendations are based on the review of relevant research, ADA regulations, and case studies. Researchers, private firms, policymakers, and agencies involved in AV development and deployment are covered in the recommendations.

The recommendations include better collaboration and adoption of best practices to address the needs of individuals with different disability types. ADA regulations are one of the tools in addition to universal design principles and assistive technologies.

Norway has a long-held commitment to universal design across all sectors. However, with the best will in the world the concept is still poorly understood in transport infrastructure. When Trondheim initiated its new rapid bus transit system, universal design underpinned the design parameters. But designing bus transit infrastructure requires some joined up thinking and joined up standards.

The Trondheim infrastructure experience

The case study of Trondheim in Norway shows how the best laid plans can go awry if there isn’t joined up thinking at the planning stage. Once this was realised the next step was finding ways to remedy the situation. That’s because Trondheim replaced their whole fleet with the new metro buses.

Photo of the Trondheim bus transit

In a conference paper Jacob Deichmann outlines the issues and the different ideas and lists them in a handy table. All the stations were built to Norwegian State guidelines for accessible design. The “kneeling” buses were designed and built in Belgium. But there was a big gap between bus and kerb edge. The size of the gap also depended on the skill of the driver in getting as close as possible to the kerb.

Once this discrepancy was discovered advocacy groups complained to the media and to politicians. The response was that they met the access standards, but manual flip ramps would be added. However, this does not provide equitable access as someone has to deploy the ramp taking up valuable travel time. And efficient travel times was a key element of the system.

The paper has a chart giving an overview of the different remedies suggested based on product research. It lists the various ramp systems, gap-fillers and bus pads at kerbside. The chosen solutions were training of drivers in the short term. In the medium term there was to be a trial of motorised ramps, the bus pad and a guiding system. Longer term solutions were the gap-filler method and raised platforms.

When standards and guidelines aren’t enough

Both the platform designer and the bus manufacturer followed valid guidelines and best practice. The lack of consistency in the guidelines makes it difficult for non experts in universal design to make the best choices. In the worst case scenario, following standards can prevent a universal design approach.

More training on universal design is required at the planning and procurement stage. The underlying concept of providing an equitable and accessible means of transport needs to be fully understood.

The title of the conference paper is Universal Design in the Metrobuss System of Trondheim, Norway – Challenges and Solutions.

The short video below shows the convenience of an automated Perth bus ramp deployed for a wheelchair user and then everyone else used it.

A better example of universal design is the Bergen Light Rail project.

Transport services are only useful for people who can access and use them effectively. Groups that could benefit most from improved access to transport are more likely to lack access to technology to plan travel. This was a finding by the Inclusive Design Team at the University of Cambridge.

A survey carried out in Germany asked questions about access to technology, ability to use the technology, and using it for transport planning. Vulnerable and excluded groups included women, older people, people with low education, and people with low incomes. Older people and people with disability were the least likely to use a device to access information about transport.

The research paper is detailed with many variables. Three groups – people with low education, older people and people with disability had the lowest level of interaction with technology. If these groups also have low incomes, acquiring devices and being able to afford internet connections would also be a factor.

The title of the article is Toward Inclusive Digital Mobility Services: a Population Perspective. This research project is one of four similar projects conducted in Europe and UK. The reference list is useful for further reading.

Abstract

Digital mobility services have great potential to increase passengers’ transportation options, improve their experiences and reduce exclusion. However, these advantages are only available to those who can access and use these services effectively.

To facilitate the development of inclusive services, information is needed on the range of potential users’ technology access, use, attitudes and capabilities. A population-representative survey examining these characteristics was carried out with 1010 participants in Germany in 2020.

The results are examined for groups and intersections of groups identified in previous work as particularly vulnerable to either digital or mobility exclusion. Older people, people with disabilities and people with low education levels had particularly low levels of all technology variables.

Caution is thus required when rolling out digital mobility services. Non-digital alternatives are needed to ensure an inclusive service and any digital interfaces need to be designed carefully to be usable by and reassuring to digital novices.

Public transport is the focus of the latest quarterly magazine from the Association of Consultants in Access. The articles cover streetscapes, buses and trains, and the personal experiences of a wheelchair user.

The opening article is by Kiersten Fishburn who is Deputy Secretary, Cities and Active Transport at Transport for NSW. She covers a lot of ground: improvements to infrastructure, micro-mobility, on-demand service and the taxi subsidy scheme.

Julie Sawchuk is Chair of the Ontario Standards Development Committee in Canada. She discusses her experiences as a traveller using a wheelchair. She makes an important point:

You’ll have noticed that my tales have addressed only my own experiences as a wheelchair user: that is, after all, my area of expertise. We need to listen to all users.

Julie Sawchuk

Jane Bryce’s topic is accessible streetscapes and public transport for people who are blind or vision impaired. Silent e-vehicles are an obvious issue for this group, as are shared pathways.

Francis Lenny talks about his view of accessible bus travel. He reiterates the need for passengers to be at the centre of design decision-making processes. Confusion with the Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport (DSAPT) is a key issue.

Inter-city train design and the outcomes achieved is the topic of Jen Barling’s article. Designers and operators are encouraged to go beyond the DSAPT. Indeed, DSAPT encourages alternative means of access to public transport, not just the specified standards:

…using methods, equipment and facilities that provide alternative means of access to the public transport service concerned (but not using separate or parallel services) with equivalence of amenity, availability, comfort, convenience, dignity, price and safety.

DSAPT 33.3 Equivalent Access

Howard Moutrie discusses handrail height and Cathryn Grant covers off the Smart Cities for All Toolkit.

You can access the online version of the magazine or download the 8MB PDF version.

It’s common for people with dementia to become less confident when using public transport and airports. The noise, the lights, and the crowds are distractions that can cause disorientation. Dementia Singapore found a way to help orientate and guide people through busy stations and interchanges through the “Find Your Way” initiative.

The aim of the Find Your Way initiative is to help people with dementia use public transport independently. The Find Your Way project uses colour coding for district zones. The colour makes it easier to perceive the space and find information in a busy complex environment.

Working group

Dementia Singapore set up a working group of local dementia advocates, two members of Dementia Alliance International, and the major bus operator SBS Transit.

The technical advice focused on designs that are intuitive and easy to understand. Emily Ong’s short article has more on the technical group, the Environmental Design Special Interest Group (ED-SiC) that worked on the project.

The incorporation of a childhood game is part of providing information in multiple formats. Large directional arrow markings on the floor also aid people in orientating themselves and finding their way. The photographs show how colour and icons are used.

The title of the short article is, Designing public transit systems for accessibility and inclusion of people with cognitive impairments. It’s a quick overview of the project by Emily Ong, Project Lead and Co-Chair of DAI ED-SiG. You can find out more from Dementia Singapore website where there are more photos of the project.

Airport travel guide for people with dementia

Airports are confusing places at the best of times, particularly for the first visit. The size, noise, and number of people don’t help. If the signs aren’t in a language you understand it can be bewildering. Knowing what to expect before you go is a great help. Brisbane Airport  airport travel guide for people with dementia is also good for first time visitors.

The guide is easy to follow. It covers preparing for the journey, getting to the airport, checking in and flying out. Coming home again addresses, passport, baggage claim, and domestic transfers among other things. There is a list of dementia friendly symbols at the end of the guide. As with most guides, this one is applicable to other airports.

Airports and autism

Autistic people/people with autism need similar design considerations to people with dementia. Vancouver airport has introduced a simulated rehearsal program to help families with the whole pre-flight process so it becomes more predictable. People who are likely to feel overwhelmed by the whole process like to know beforehand what is going to happen and how it all works. This could also include people who are new to air travel, especially now that most processes are automated.

Vancouver airport has an “Autism Access Sticker” that can be placed on boarding passes. The sticker ensures a smooth transition through screening and customs. It also communicates the specific needs of passengers to airport employees. See the video series below. Very well done – a good model that can be applied to all airports.

What role do shared spaces play in “successful places”? And what are shared spaces anyway? A report compiled by the Transport Research Centre at UTS for the NSW Government attempts to answer these questions. The focus of the report was to understand how shared spaces can enhance the development of “successful places”, a key strategic priority of Transport. 

Varied terminology on the topic of shared spaces is not helpful and needs a standard definition. Another issue is whose opinion counts most. Is it user perceptions or transport performance measurements? And implementation is difficult even though there are many guidelines and there are few case studies.

What is a shared space?

The report offers the following definition.

“A public street or intersection that is intended and designed to be used by all modes of transport equally in a consistently low-speed environment. Shared space designs aim to reduce vehicle dominance and prioritise active mobility modes. Designs can utilise treatments that remove separation between users in order to create a sense of place and facilitate multi-functions.”

 Findings

Broadly, high level critical findings include:

• • • The shared space design concept is one tool for forming successful places across the community.
    • A spectrum of intervention and design options are available to transport professionals to achieve a shared space within the road network.
    • Defining relationships between design parameters and performance metrics are key to determining the factors leading to implementing successful shared space.
    • Current guidelines, standards and practical processes limit the application of novel shared space solutions.

The title of the Shared Spaces Review is, Evaluation and Implementation of Shared Spaces in NSW: Framework for road infrastructure design and operations to establish placemaking. Examination of existing Shared Space knowledge. The Transport Research Centre, University of Technology Sydney conducted the research for Transport for NSW. 

The report is comprehensive and detailed with some international case studies to illustrate issues and findings. The report provides recommendations and current best practice for Transport for NSW. 

Intergenerational shared spaces 

Having interaction between generations, particularly older and younger people is beneficial for everyone. Julie Melville and Alan Hatton-Yeo discuss the issues in a book chapter, Intergenerational Shared Spaces in the UK context. 

The authors discuss how the generations are separated by life activities and dwelling places. The design of the built environment is a major concern because is not conducive to sharing spaces across the generations.

While this book is not specifically about universal design, it is about inclusive practice and social inclusion.

Google Books has the full book, Intergenerational Space, edited by Robert M Vanderbeck and Nancy Worth.

Jane Bringolf participated in a webinar or the Australian Institute of Traffic Planning and Management, which includes anyone involved in transport. She covered 5 basic features older people need to encourage them to continue getting out and about. The content of the presentation, Ageing and Mobility, is on the YouTube video below.

After running 23 workshops with older people and local government across NSW, five key elements emerged. They are footpaths, seating, lighting, wayfinding and toilets. In rural areas, parking was also an issue. These were covered in a previous post along with a straightforward checklist on do’s and don’ts. 

The car becomes a mobility device as people get older, which puts them at odds with the policy push to get out of the car. Older people feel safer either as a driver or a passenger. The fear of tripping and falling reduces their confidence for walking on uneven footpaths.

Parking adjacent to shops and services in rural towns was also an issue. This was sometimes due to the main street also being the main highway where street parking is restricted. 

Ageing and mobility is more than cycles, buses and trains. Many older people just want to access their local neighbourhood to shop and socialise.