Dynamic Anthropometrics of Preschool Children in Taiwan for Playground Equipment Designs



Dynamic anthropometry can be applied in equipment/environment designs related to human motions. Since younger children are prone to accidents due to their less-developed physical control and lack of proper judgment of danger. This study aimed to establish a dynamic anthropometric resource for playground safety for preschoolers in Taiwan.


We recruited 500 preschoolers aged 2–6 in Taiwan and utilized an eight-camera Motion Analysis System to survey five common movements of playing. Each subject performed three types of tasks including movement on all-fours, jumping and climbing over obstacles, respectively. All tasks are common movement of playing and associated with the playground injuries. Dynamic anthropometric data of the movements were calculated and presented in the form of statistical data by means, standard deviations and percentiles.


The results of this study provided a novel and useful dynamic anthropometric database of preschoolers from 3 to 6. Most of the anthropometric parameters in the same direction of the movement were found relevant to ages. Besides, preschoolers at different stages of motor development demonstrate movements with variations. The 5th and the 95th percentiles are more suitable for applications in playground equipment designs for the safety of maximum numbers of preschoolers.


The dynamic anthropometric data of this study can serve as a reference for applications in playground equipment and environmental designs. It will help increase the safety of playgrounds for local preschoolers. More dynamic anthropometric databases of preschoolers are required to create a safe and healthy environment for children to grow up.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.


  1. 1.

    Wang, E. M. Y., Wang, M. J., Yeh, W. Y., Shih, Y. C., & Lin, Y. C. (1999). Development of anthropometric work environment for Taiwanese workers. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 23(1–2), 3–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Pheasant, S., & Haslegrave, C. M. (2005). Bodyspace: Anthropometry, ergonomics and the design of work. CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Dianat, I., Molenbroek, J., & Castellucci, H. I. (2018). A review of the methodology and applications of anthropometry in ergonomics and product design. Ergonomics, 61(12), 1696–1720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Fathallah, F., Chang, J., Pickett, W., & Marlenga, B. (2009). Ability of youth operators to reach farm tractor controls. Ergonomics, 52(6), 685–694.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Lin, T., Ekanayake, A., Gaweshan, L. S., & Hasan, Z. A. (2016). Ergonomics product development of over bed table for bedridden patients. Computer-Aided Design and Applications, 13(4), 538–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Dianat, I., Karimi, M. A., Hashemi, A. A., & Bahrampour, S. (2013). Classroom furniture and anthropometric characteristics of Iranian high school students: proposed dimensions based on anthropometric data. Applied Ergonomics, 44(1), 101–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Coblentz, A., & Ignazi, G. (1975). Dynamic anthropometry and design of a vehicle driver's control area. SAE Technical Paper.

  8. 8.

    Makarkin, A. I. (1996). Computerized human model for helicopter crew station design: The application of the dynamic anthropometry data.

  9. 9.

    Wagner, D. R., & Heyward, V. H. (2000). Measures of body composition in blacks and whites: A comparative review. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 71(6), 1392–1402.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Kagawa, M., Binns, C., & Hills, A. P. (2007). Body composition and anthropometry in Japanese and Australian Caucasian males and Japanese females. Asia Pacific Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 16(Suppl 1), 31–36.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Ball, R., Shu, C., Xi, P., Rioux, M., Luximon, Y., & Molenbroek, J. (2010). A comparison between Chinese and Caucasian head shapes. Applied Ergonomics, 41(6), 832–839.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Stewart, A., Ledingham, R., & Williams, H. (2017). Variability in body size and shape of UK offshore workers: A cluster analysis approach. Applied Ergonomics, 58, 265–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Lin, Y. C., Wang, M. J. J., & Wang, E. M. (2004). The comparisons of anthropometric characteristics among four peoples in East Asia. Applied Ergonomics, 35(2), 173–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Chuan, T. K., Hartono, M., & Kumar, N. (2010). Anthropometry of the Singaporean and Indonesian populations. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 40(6), 757–766.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Sadeghi, F., Mazloumi, A., & Kazemi, Z. (2015). An anthropometric data bank for the Iranian working population with ethnic diversity. Applied Ergonomics, 48, 95–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Suh, D., Jung, J. H., Chang, I., Lee, J. H., Jung, J. Y., Kwak, Y. H., et al. (2018). Epidemiology of playground equipment related/unrelated injuries to children: A registry-based cohort study from 6 emergency departments in Korea. Medicine, 97(50), e13705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Schwebel, D. C., & Brezausek, C. M. (2014). Child development and pediatric sport and recreational injuries by age. Journal of Athletic Training, 49(6), 780–785.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Naeini, H. S., Lindqvist, K., Jafari, H. R., Mirlohi, A. H., & Dalal, K. (2011). Playground injuries in children. Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine, 2, 61.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Yang, J. J., Verma, U., Marler, T., Beck, S., Rahmatalla, S., & Harrison, C. (2009). Workspace zone differentiation tool for visualization of seated postural comfort. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 39(1), 267–276.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Kurillo, G., Chen, A., Bajcsy, R., & Han, J. J. (2013). Evaluation of upper extremity reachable workspace using Kinect camera. Technology and Health Care, 21(6), 641–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Kuo, L. C., Cooney, W. P., III., Kaufman, K. R., Chen, Q. S., Su, F. C., & An, K. N. (2004). A quantitative method to measure maximal workspace of the trapeziometacarpal joint—normal model development. Journal of Orthopaedic Research, 22(3), 600–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Cheng, I. F., Kuo, L. C., Lin, C. J., Chieh, H. F., & Su, F. C. (2019). Anthropometric database of the preschool children from 2 to 6 Years in Taiwan. Journal of Medical and Biological Engineering, 39(4), 552–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Chang, J. J., Wu, T. I., Wu, W. L., & Su, F. C. (2005). Kinematical measure for spastic reaching in children with cerebral palsy. Clinical Biomechanics, 20(4), 381–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Chang, H. W., Lin, C. J., Kuo, L. C., Tsai, M. J., Chieh, H. F., & Su, F. C. (2012). Three-dimensional measurement of foot arch in preschool children. Biomedical Engineering Online, 11(1), 76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Wang, L. H., Kuo, L. C., Shih, S. W., Lo, K. C., & Su, F. C. (2013). Comparison of dominant hand range of motion among throwing types in baseball pitchers. Human Movement Science, 32(4), 719–729.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Cherng, R. J., Chou, L. S., Su, F. C., Shaughnessy, W. J., & Kaufman, K. R. (2007). Using-motion of the whole-body center of mass to assess the balance during gait of children with spastic cerebral palsy. Journal of Medical and Biological Engineering, 27(3), 150–155.

    Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Openshaw, S., & Taylor, E. (2006). Ergonomics and design a reference guide. Allsteel Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Khaspuri, G., Sau, S., & Dhara, P. (2007). Anthropometric consideration for designing class room furniture in rural schools. Journal of Human Ecology, 22(3), 235–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Taifa, I. W., & Desai, D. A. (2017). Anthropometric measurements for ergonomic design of students’ furniture in India. Engineering Science and Technology, An International Journal, 20(1), 232–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Reedy, A. (2014). A Guide to the Playground Standard AS 4685–2014. https://www.natureplaywa.org.au/library/1/file/Guide%20to%20AS%204685-2014.pdf.

  31. 31.

    Peter Heseltine, K. D., Rob Davies. (2016). All you need to know about Playground Equipment & Under-surfacing Safety. https://www.playgrounds.co.nz/media/1466/playground-people-pink-book-all-you-need-to-know.pdf.

  32. 32.

    US Consumer Product Safety Commission. (2008). Public playground safety handbook (Vol. 325). DIANE Publishing

  33. 33.

    The Play Inspection Company. (2018). An Essential Guide to EN 1176 and EN 1177 Children's Playground Equipment & Surfacing: Updated for 2018. the United Kingdom: The play inspection company.

Download references


The grant support from Ministry of Education is greatly appreciated. Thanks also go to Mr. Yin Lu for his help and support in data collection of children.

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fong-Chin Su.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 251 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cheng, IF., Lin, CJ., Kuo, LC. et al. Dynamic Anthropometrics of Preschool Children in Taiwan for Playground Equipment Designs. J. Med. Biol. Eng. 41, 273–284 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40846-021-00623-1

Download citation


  • Dynamic anthropometry
  • Preschool children
  • Playground