汽車座椅舒適度是本研究之主題。在汽車產業蓬勃發展的今天，汽車座椅乘坐的舒適與否已經變成一個消費者重視的指標，許多先進國家車商在座椅舒適度方面也投入許多時間與成本，嘗試設計出更符合消費者之需求座椅，故汽車座椅舒適度研究是非常重要的。
座椅舒適度之研究在許多文獻中都包含主觀指標與生理指標之量測。本研究針對現今四張台灣市面上之車輛座椅來做量測，並使用問卷形式量測主觀指標;而生理指標則是利用溫度變化與壓力分佈來了解人體乘坐在座椅時溫度與壓力變化情形，並提出對座椅舒適度改善建議。
本研究之實驗挑選45位具有駕駛經驗之受測者，男女各半，分別量測座椅之溫度與壓力，並填寫主觀問卷，其中溫度量測20位、壓力量測25位，身高與體重則是使用勞工安全研究所的「台灣人體計測資料庫」，為了達到比較全面的人體資料收集，所以總共在身高與體重分別挑出25%、50%、75%三個等級、依照人數比例分配身高與體重，受測場地將會在實驗室內進行以更加良好控管溫度濕度等外在因素。
資料收集完成後會進行多因子變異數分析，用以了解身高、體重是否會影響受測者之主觀感受，接下來將會分析壓力「峰值」，觀察受測者在實驗過程中之動作變化與峰值壓力變化狀況。綜合以上之觀察與主觀問卷分析，將了解四張座椅之優劣，並且給予座椅設計或往後實驗或之建議。

This study aims to investigate the comfort car seats and to provide seat comfort improvement suggestions based on rigorous experiments and findings. As the automobile industry continues to flourish today, the comfort of a car seat has become an important indicator to the consumers. Car companies has been investing tremendous amounts of money and time to improve the seat comfort , in an effort to make a better seat as well as to meet the customers’ needs attract picking
The comfort of the seats were commonly compared with subjective ratings on comfort and physiological indexes. This research studied and compared driver’s seats of four well selling vehicles on the market in Taiwan. Questionnaires were used to measure the subjective comfort and preferences. Physiological indexes were created to measure the change of temperature and pressure distribution when the human subjects sat on the seat.
This study used20 experienced drivers to measure the temperature and another 25 to measure pressure separately. All of them filled in the subjective questionnaire. The subject was stratified according to the weight and height distribution of the Taiwanlabor anthropometric database from the Institute of occupational safety & health of Taiwan. The number of subjects was proportional to the distribution within theheight and weight combination, each with 3 levels: 25, 50, and 75percentile.
Seat, height, and weight were subjected to statistical analyses to understand whether they affect the subjective comfort of the driver, the pressure on the seat, and the temperature change. This report presents the advantages and disadvantages about the four seatsand future design improvement suggestions.

1. Akerblom, B. (1948)., Standing and sitting posture with special reference to the construction ofchairs, Unpublished doctoral dissertation (KarolinskaInstitutet, Stockholm: A.B.NordiskaBokhandeln).
2. Andersson, B.G.J., and Ortengren, R. (1974), Lumbar disc pressure and myoelectric back muscle activity during sitting. Scand. J. Rehab. Med., 6115–121.
3. Branton, P. (1969). Behaviour, body mechanics and discomfort. Ergo-nomics 12, 316–327.
4. Buckle, P., and Fernandes, A. (1998). .“Mattress Evaluation – Assessment of Contact Pressure, Comfort and Discomfort.”, Journal of Applied Ergonomics, 29(1), 35-39.
5. Cranmer, K. (1999). Vehicle seat with temperature and ventilation control and method of operation, U.S Pat., 5934748.
6. Andersson, G.B.J., Murphy, R.W., Ortengren, R., and Nachemson, A.L. (1979). The influence of backrest inclination and lumbar support on lumbar lordosis. Spine, 4. 52–58.
7. Gyi, D.E., 1996. Driver Discomfort: Prevalence, Prediction and Preven-tion. Loughborough University, UK.
8. Hanson, L., Sperling, L., Akselsson, R., (2006). Preferred car driving posture using 3-D information. International Journal of Vehicle Design 42 (1–2), 154–169.
9. Kolich, M. (1999). Reliability and validity of an automobile seat comfort survey. Technical Paper No. 990132. Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc., Warrendale, PA, USA.
10. Kourinka, B(1987). Jonsson, A. Kilbom, H. Vinterberg, F. Biering-Sorenson, G. Andersson and K. Jorgensen, Standardised Nordic questionnaires for the analysis of musculo-skeletal symptoms. ApplErgon, Vol 18 , pp. 233–237.
11. Kim, D.J., Lee, Y.S., Kim, S.C., Yang, H.S., Lee, K.S., Lee, K.C., Park, C.M., 1997. National anthropometric survey of Korea. KRISS-97-114-IR
12. Reed, M.P., Manary, M.A., Schneider, L.W.,(1999). Methods formeasuring and representing automobile occupant posture. SAE Technical Paper Series 1999-01-0959.
13. Reed, M. P., Saito, M., Kakishima, Y., Lee, N. S., and Schneider, L. W. (1991a).An investigation of driver discomfort and related seat design factors inextended-duration driving. SAE Technical Paper 910117. Warrendale, PA:Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.
14. Sekiguchi, T.M., Nisimatsu, T., and Toba, E, (1998), Measurement and evaluation of sitting comfort of automotive seat, IEEE Instrumentation and Measurement Technology Conference Minnesota, 316-319
15. Shackel, B., Chidsey, K.D., Shipley, P., 1969. The assessment of chaircomfort. Ergonomics 12 (2), 269–306.
16. Technical Paper No. 970595 (Warrendale, PA: Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.).
17. Wachsler, R.A., Learner, D.B., 1960. An analysis of some factors influencing seat comfort. Ergonomics 3 (4), 315–320.
18. Yamazaki, N. (1992). Analysis of sitting comfortability of driver’s seat by contact shape. Ergonomics 35(5–6), 677–692.
19. Zhang, L., Helander, M., & Drury, C. (1996). Identifying factors of comfort and discomfort, Human Factors 38(3),377–389.
20. Zhang, L., Helander, M., & Drury, C. (1996). Identifying factors of comfort and discomfort, Human Factors 38(3),377–389.
21. Cengiz, T.G., Babalik, F.C., (2007). An on-the-road experiment into thethermal comfort of car seats. Applied Ergonomics 38 (3), 337–347
22. Schneider, L.W.; Anderson, C.K; and Olson, P.L. (1979) Driver anthmpometry a n d vehicle design characteristics related to seat positions selected under driving and non-driving conditions. SAE paper no. 790384.
23. Grieco,A.,(1986). Sitting posture: an old problem and a new one. Ergonomics 29 (3),345–362.
24. Buckle, P., Fernandes, A., (1998). Mattress evaluation—assessmentof contact pressure, comfort and discomfort. Applied Ergonomics 29 (1), 35–39.
25. Helander, M. G. and Zhang, L. 1997, Field studies of comfort and discomfort in sitting, Ergonomics, 40, 895–915.
26. de Looze, M.P., Kuijt-Evers, L.F.M., van Dieen, J., 2003. Sitting comfort and discomfort and the relationships with objective measures. Ergonomics 46 (10), 985–997.