Yes not every user is the same, but they generally fit into 2 categories with a few outliers that cannot use the toilet or use the toilet eccentrically, and of those 2 main categories, 1 is weighted higher than the other.
On one end, 100% of users sit, on the other end, approximately 50% of users sit. This assumes that the other users never sit, which is improbable. Realistically, 60-75% of users will sit when using the toilet, depending on their use case.
Therefore, by normalizing the seat so that the majority of the time it doesnt have to be moved, it is most efficient for most situations. However, there will be a point where adjusting the seat based on usage choice is more efficient than leaving the seat normalized.
Edit:
Once standing requires lifting and lowering the seat, normalization always incurs the maximum possible movement cost per stander, while leaving the seat as-is incurs at most that cost and often less. Therefore, for any population with at least one stander, leaving the seat as-is is movement-optimal.
Statistics prove your original comment was correct.
Yes not every user is the same, but they generally fit into 2 categories with a few outliers that cannot use the toilet or use the toilet eccentrically, and of those 2 main categories, 1 is weighted higher than the other.
On one end, 100% of users sit, on the other end, approximately 50% of users sit. This assumes that the other users never sit, which is improbable. Realistically, 60-75% of users will sit when using the toilet, depending on their use case.
Therefore, by normalizing the seat so that the majority of the time it doesnt have to be moved, it is most efficient for most situations. However, there will be a point where adjusting the seat based on usage choice is more efficient than leaving the seat normalized.
Edit:
Statistics prove your original comment was correct.