Usability of Rowenta Intensium Bag-Less Vacuum Cleaner - Assignment Example

Usability of Rowenta Intensium Bag-less Vacuum Cleaner Number Rowenta Intensium Bagless Vacuum Cleaner(RIBVC) is an important home appliance for maintaining the hygiene of surfaces such as the floor and walls. The usability of the appliance is a highly imperative ergonomic ideology for the manufacturer, especially the designers who are usually charged with the responsibility of determining the usefulness and efficiency of the product. In light of these paramount qualities of the new technology tool this project seeks to explore the concept of the product’s usability and suggests basic tools after carrying out user experiments as one of the ways of assessing the usability of the product. By the end of the report a clear evaluation of the appliance achieved by experimenting it with users will be covered. The report also offers an analysis of performance in regard to ergonomic principles. Introduction Although, it is widely thought that bag-less vacuums were developed just the recently, the features have been in use since time immemorial. The previous vacuums, for example used bag-less qualities until about three decades ago, when the feature was discarded.  The manufacturers abandoned making bag-less vacuums on hygienic grounds.  The usability of such appliances was low. One had to remove the bag part off and empty the dirt in the garbage. This was a daunting task, especially when a dustbin or refuse disposal was not near. Additionally, the appliance’s use over time would result in the clogging of the filtration in the bag, following more dust accumulation (Gavriel, 2012). Most users were prompted to wash the cloth bag in order to achieve adequate efficiency when the cloth had become dirty. The current world has, however, seen the comeback of the bag-less vacuum. Rowenta Intensium Bag-less Vacuum Cleaner is arguably one such equipment that is as well-liked as before due to its effective usability qualities. According to Gavriel (2012), the primary reason behind the widespread use of the appliance is that one does not need to purchase vacuum bags to operate it. This implies more savings on the part of the user. Additionally, as the chamber in which dirt collects becomes increasingly filled with dirt, it should just be removed and emptied in the refuse bin. Another advantage of using the Rowenta appliance is that any more accumulation of dirt in the chamber does not impact its continued functionality, and that one can practically read the amount of dirt being absorbed by the vacuum cleaner, hence the ease to tell whether the appliance is functioning well, and the level of dirt on the surfaces being cleaned (Trakumas et al, 2001). This practical way of judging the appliance offers real-time efficiency in terms of its usability over other company brands. Methodology Participants A group of 6 participants from the XYZ town were randomly selected by the researcher. The participants were of different stature, purposely to enable the research to get a glimpse of the wide range of the differences that the end-user group makes. They possessed no professional knowledge on professional cleaning, and their understanding of the cleaning work was mainly restricted to that of ordinary household chores. The group of six healthy individuals comprised three males and three females between the ages of 29 and 44 years. And adjunct to these participant qualifications, the following measures had to be fulfilled in order to make it to the final six: clean health record - the participants were not supposed to have experienced musculoskeletal health problems or other health cases and fluent in French or English. English translators were involved to make the work easier (Trakumas, 2001). All participants took part freely on their own volition and appended their signature on a consent form to this effect. They expressed no reservations regarding the employment of the data gathered from the research, elsewhere. Their particulars such as the average value and median height, body mass and age were taken down and listed in table one. Materials The following items were used in the study: a big, well-padded hip-belt that can be adjusted according to the body size of each participant; broad, well-padded shoulder that can be adjusted; large-sized fastens; a moveable and modifiable waist strap within a distance of about 12 inches; an adjustable plastic frame whose design can guarantee the users of more freedom when moving the lower extremities, some level of shock-resistance and for easy adjustment by the participants according to their height; quick-release buckles made of plastic material on all fastens (Trakumas et al, 2001). The accessory of the appliance pipe slotted into the attachment area with a free range of movement, covering 360 degrees; the exact pipe had the conventional plastic make. The machine was placed on the floor far away from the body of the user for easy moving (Paula, 1996). The battery was fixed on the appliance. The machine weighed 7 kg and its rolling on a surface with low friction resulted in insignificant effort when moved by the participant on dusty surfaces. Procedure The participants were issued with questionnaires for filling after the experiment. In the questionnaire, the participants were required to enter their level of superficial effort (LSE), physical discomfort, and individual ratings of certain design qualities criteria after 10 minutes of vacuum cleaning a carpeted floor and non-carpeted one. The work had to be carried out within the short timeline in order to achieve consistent outcomes (Scott, 2008). All the floors to be cleaned were dirtied with saw dust. Participants were instructed to carry out the task as they would under normal circumstances; they were asked to adapt a normal rate of cleaning comparable to what they normally have and would be able to sustain during any working day. The same criteria were applied for the forward and backward movement pattern. Nonetheless, most of the participants used the stroke movements as opposed to the sideways movements. Each participant was aided in modifying the RIBVC in order to attain a relaxing and acceptable fit. After the experiment of each vacuum cleaner, participants were reminded to fill in their respective questionnaire indicating their degree of LSE during the cleaning task relative to the use of the vacuum cleaner as well as their individual observation of the vacuum cleaners general usability (Trakumas et al, 2001; Reponen et al. 2002). Results The Levels of Superficial Effort (LSE) was generally lower when using the RIBVC as opposed to the ordinary vacuum cleaners without a bag. At first, the participants rated the effort as “a bit exhausting” which equals 10 on the LSE scale. The open–ended quizzes also implied that the bag-less nature of the RIBVC was a disapproving quality of the appliance because the users did not understand the principle behind its manufacture. Nonetheless, the reaction to the bag-less feature was given a clean bill of health by the participants who noted that it reduced the effort of vacuum cleaners by saving them the journey of emptying the bags and cleaning them for re-use in a busy work schedule. The overall participant judgment was that the quality of the bag-less vacuum cleaner enhanced freedom and efficiency, especially when the cleaning time is shorter than one hour (Goggins, 2007). Additionally, on questions related to other aspects such as the modifiability and comfort of the harness, the outcome of the cleaned floor and the general RIBVC usability achieved similar results as the other vacuum cleaners with bags. The bigger harness when used by smaller participants rated poorly in terms of adjustability and freedom (Ciccolella, 1997). In light of this, RIBVC consumers should shop for at least two different sizes to eliminate the chances of user-discomfort during the cleaning exercise. The usability evaluation suggested that RIBVC was seen to be easier to use than the other models, especially the bag-less ones. The inclusion of controls was seen in the eye of the participants as better, as the machine was largely perceived as silent and lacking in noise pollution during use (Goggins, 2007). RIBVC was widely seen to be more efficient in regards to the coziness and the user-friendly interface used to adjustment the handle and the item’s overall simplicity to use. The position and ease of the pipeline’s move-ability earned RIBVC better ratings. The handling and modifiability of the machine’s height was seen participants to be better than the vacuum cleaners using bags for keeping dirt. The data entered on The Nordic Questionnaire on the discomfort on the body parts scale and the vague questions indicated that all RIBVC culminated in discomfort triggered by the machine harnesses (Willeke et al, 2001). The harness of RIBVC generally held in hand, as it is the case for the larger number of participants was the right size. The appliance, nonetheless, gave rise to slight pain in the participant’s shoulders and back. The subjects suggested that the harness irritated and put pressure on the shoulder muscles. Additionally, RIBVC users felt discomfort in the hands as the harness was said to cut into the skin during cleaning, especially while moving the appliance. Discussion The outcome of the study indicated that participant palpitation rates were largely inconsistent to the LSE (Fig 1; Table 2). Perceptions of effort could likely also be linked to other qualities of the vacuum cleaner such as the newness of the machine to some participants. The outcomes from this study further shores-up this theory as the better outcomes regarding various features of the machine simultaneously triggered lower LSE readings for the Rowenta product. The grounds for the increased palpitation rate, despite poor LSE values in the study when using RIBVC could be attributed to its user being able to clean the floor more quickly when using it (Reponen et al, 2002). Owing to the lack of any discomfort related to the weight of the machine during use, the discomfort, which was previously reported to be caused by carrying the vacuum cleaners on the back, the RIBVC’s feature of being able to be pushed limited the need of making a lighter machine. The weight of the machine is evenly spread on the machine and supported by the surface under cleaning (Trakumas, 2001). A lighter mass that is more uniformly distributed limits the amount of effort that would otherwise be used to carry or push the machine. Figure 1: Showing an increased rate of palpitation despite low LSE values Regarding the differences across gender, this aspect is even more significant. Female participants recorded higher LSE during the use of the machine, and which probably boiled down to the reality that the virtual weight of the vacuum cleaner is naturally higher for females as they are not as better built in body as males. According to Rascoff (2008), women are less muscular than men. Additionally, females are at higher risk of excessively applying the more effort than needed and suffer exhaustion, as vacuum cleaning task is more arduous for the gender than for men (Trakumas et al, 2001). The movable machine, therefore, evenly limits the amount of effort needed to carry out the cleaning work, especially for females who comprise the less energetic group of the participants. Fig 2: The rate of palpitation across gender. In a nutshell, the results of this study revealed that the vacuum cleaner model triggered higher levels of efficiency and higher degree of effort used, in spite of perceived effort being more for the vacuum cleaner using the bag feature. It further demonstrated that the cleaning appliance’s harness needed to be made with softer material, so as to enhance its usability by a bigger range of users without fearing that they might develop blisters in their hands if they used the machine for longer. The outcomes of the significant research suggested that after changing the harness and making the right handle for the variation in efficiency between the product and its rivals with bags further whilst there was a decline in the LSE values. RIBVC was also given a higher rating on virtually all other criteria observed in its design based upon participant group and the size of the harness. Conclusion The model achieved higher usability rating than the rival vacuum cleaners using bags on virtually all design features according to the participant group and harness fitted to it. The appliance was found to save the cleaners the effort of regularly emptying and cleaning the bags filled with dirt. Additionally, the ergonomic assessment further revealed the significance making the correct size of the harness to limit discomfort to the user. The lighter weight of the model and its move-ability by mere pushing may be part of the grounds upon which the participants working with the model premise their easy experiences. The model is less strenuous to work with and, therefore, enables users to save time and energy in cleaning operations. The model is well-liked for its easiness for use by virtually all cleaners including the less muscular cleaners, especially females. Appendix Table 1: Shows the data collected from the six participants. Participants’ Qualities Average value Median Age (years) 35.6 38 Height (feet) 5.5 5.8 Body Mass (kg) 61 58 Table 2: The table showing the low LSE values and increased rate of palpitation LSE values % rate of palpitation 10.3 60 9.8 67 9.5 71 8 71.9 7.6 8.1 Fig 3: A model of a Rowenta Bagless Vacuum Cleaner (Intensium model). References Ciccolella, C. 1997. Regina-brand vacuum cleaners heading back to retail shelves. Twice, 12(7), p44. Gavriel, S. 2012. Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Goggins, R. 2007. Hazards of Cleaning. Professional Safety, 52(3), pp20-27. Paula, G. 1996. Space-age vacuum cleaners. Mechanical Engineering, 118(10), p12. Rascoff, B. 2008.Woman here invents, sells add-on for vacuum cleaners. Journal of Business, 23(6), p6. Reponen et al. 2002. Preview Dynamic monitoring of the dust pickup efficiency of vacuum cleaners. AIHA Journal, 63(6), 689-697. Scott, P. 2008. Managing Door-to-Door Sales of Vacuum Cleaners in Interwar Britain. Business History Review, 82(4), pp761-784. Trakumas et al. 2001. Comparison of filter bag, cyclonic, and wet dust collection methods in vacuum cleaners. AIHAJ, 62(5), pp573-583. Trakumas et al. 2001. Particle emission characteristics of filter-equipped vacuum cleaners. AIHAJ, 62(4), pp482-493. Willeke et al. 2001. Test methods for evaluating the filtration and particulate emission characteristics of vacuum cleaners. AIHAJ, 62(3), 313-321. Read More