kscarbel2

Truck Design 101 - Ergonomics

Recommended Posts

Why in the world would one locate the AMT controls on a far away dashboard panel, rather than place them at the driver's fingertips on a steering column-mounted stalk ???

.

The wrong way:

.

The right way:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only tell you our experience is that the position of the AMT switches are fine.. the real question is why would they need to be closer then switches used more often like wipers or lighting. The basic idea of an AMT is not to have a need to manually do anything. having said that, the integration of the AMT buttons had to be installed into a cab and interior that hasn't changed much. the MV AMT doesn't require any attention. it really is push and go. Every driver that we took out of a standard said that they were going to quit. None did and we   never had anyone switch back to standard. they just are that good. So the need for the switches to be close is a non-issue. I suspect when mack finally redesigns the cab and interior, they will study each control and position it for maximum utilization. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right, the CH/Vison/Pinnacle hasn't changed much. Volvo has spent next to nothing over the last 16 years. And that's why the Mack brand ranks 6th, behind Freightliner, Navistar, Kenworth, Peterbilt and Volvo. If one wants to maintain and grow market share...............you have to impress and lead.

With the Scania, all controls including windshield wiper and lighting at your fingertips. Always with the driver in mind, proper ergonomics are at the core of Scania design.

This video reflects the new R-Series of 2009. The just introduced "next generation" takes form and function to a new level.

.

.

Scania NG - interior (2c).JPG

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer the I-shift controls at the side of the seat in the Volvo. Much more intuitive and natural for transmission controls compared to the Mack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

many things come into play when designing an interior. I prefer to drive one our cxu macks over a freightliner cascadia but that is my preference. the mack seat and wheel position just fit better. the visibilty in a mack for me is good but i can also appreciate the scenic view from a freightliner or a volvo. a mass produced truck has to be designed for X? percentage of people. favoring one brand over another is like favoring ford over chevy. the real thing is safety, engine platform, drive train, then driver comfort and technology. Mack and volvo both suffer from unreliable engine platforms and that is why the loose market share. most drivers would tolerate less comfort in exchange for more relaibilty. most company owners would as well. ergonomics are not very important when sitting on the side of the road. ergonomics and creature comforts are only taken into account out when reliability is not an issue. I believe that some of the truck manufacturers have lost sight of this basic concept. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the driver's environment, take particular note from 1:00. Respectfully speaking, there is no better heavy truck interior in the world today. If everyone here was able to spend even as little as five minutes behind the wheel, most would become believers. Paired with the V-8, this is heaven.

Also note the redesign Opticruise (AMT) control stalk..........the industry best made even better by Scania engineers who constantly challenge their own benchmarks.

.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those rows of generic switches we got used to seeing in flat panels were that way because big trucks were low volume products, same with the boxy cabs. And being low volume products, they couldn't afford the tooling to have switches and dashboards custom made, so they had to use off the shelf junk for switches, dashboards, and cabs. Scania has invested a couple billion dollars in making these trucks right, and Scania is going to easily make over a million of them to pay off that investment. Don't complain, enjoy...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish Scania had the 51plus percent Mack market share in stead of the Volvo dudes at least we would be building a Mack worthy truck by this point. As for the shifter I refer the Volvo trash setup to the Mack set up .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Volvo VN also offers the I shift controls mounted under the radio on the dash. It's the same key pad as the M drive. The seat shifter has its own set of issues internally and with drivers crushing them getting in and out of the seat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/11/2016 at 11:33 PM, Dirtymilkman said:

This is all opinion. Personally I like my truck interior to be that of a truck. Just my preference. I like the rows of switches so everything is laid out and easy to see, I miss the power window switches on the dash, my newer Mack's are on the doors and I feel on the dash is more convenient. But that's just preference. I know for the new breed of driver they have to make these car like. But personally I like it truck like. Does the inside of a Boeing cockpit look like a Honda Accord? No, because that's a jet not a car

Scania actually offers several trim flavors regarding instrument panels. I imagine you would enjoy the wood grain version.

I wouldn't call the Scania layout car-like, not at all. A truck driver has a different requirement.

The next time you're across the pond, take a drive in the new Scania. I wish you'd attend IAA.

.

Speaking of Boeing cockpits............

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is the author of this so excited about Scania on a  mack site. They might build an ergonomically comfortable truck but Scania engineers are the ones who designed and engineered the boat anchors known as Maxxforce engines as well as the new international engine. Comfort on the side of the road because of numerous breakdowns is really important. 

An old mack or freightliner with wind whistling thru the cab going up and down the road is still better then the nicest truck in a dealers garage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jcalesan said:

Why is the author of this so excited about Scania on a mack site. They might build an ergonomically comfortable truck but Scania engineers are the ones who designed and engineered the boat anchors known as Maxxforce engines as well as the new international engine. Comfort on the side of the road because of numerous breakdowns is really important. 

An old mack or freightliner with wind whistling thru the cab going up and down the road is still better then the nicest truck in a dealers garage. 

When you say author, are you referring to me?

About Navistar's MaxxForce engines, they are license-built MAN D20s and D26s (since 2005). Scania has no connection with Navistar and those engines.

Those MAN engines are very good powertrains though. The issue arose when Navistar's own engineers, under former CEO Dan Ustian's orders, tried to go the MEGR (Massive EGR) route, meaning EGR levels from 35% to 50%, to meet EPA2010.

Scania engines are extremely good. In fact, the superb V-8 is legendary.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Give me a truck with over 1 mil on the clock and 10 years old, then we can talk about interior quality. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now