Subjective response to seated fore-and-aft direction whole-body vibration

Abstract

Subjective response to seated, fore-and-aft direction, whole-body vibration of the type experienced in automobiles was investigated. Fore-and-aft acceleration was measured at the seat guide of a small automobile when driving over two representative road surfaces, and was replicated in a laboratory setting using a whole-body vibration test rig and rigid seat. A single 15-second section of each of the two acceleration time histories was band-pass filtered to the frequency interval from 0.5 to 50.5 Hz, and was used as a base stimulus. Thirteen test stimuli were then constructed for each base stimulus by rescaling to BS 6841 W d frequency-weighted r.m.s. amplitudes from 0.01 to 0.86 m/s 2 . Two groups of 16 participants (8 male and 8 female in each case) rated the discomfort of the test stimuli. The first group was asked to use the psychophysical method of magnitude estimation while the second used a Borg CR-10 scale. The order of presentation of the test stimuli was fully randomised and each was repeated 3 times. For each group of participants, regression analysis was used to determine both the individual and the group mean Stevens' Power Law exponent describing the relationship between stimulus amplitude and subjective response. All mean power exponents were found to be less than unity, with the CR-10 scale having produced smaller exponents than magnitude estimation. The power exponents ranged from 0.66 to 0.91, corroborating the value of 0.84 obtainable from the guidelines of standard BS 6841.The results suggest that the numerical response scale provided in the BS 6841 guidelines is appropriate for use in the case of automobile fore-andaft vibration, but that the semantic labels under-represent the actual human subjective response in this direction. Psychophysical test method, vibration stimulus range and test participant gender were all found to affect the Stevens' Power Law exponent achieved from subjective testing. Each factor may therefore require control when attempting to compare human responses to vibration originating from different automobiles. Keywords

A Quasi-static Discomfort Measure in Whole-body Vibration

“…Traditionally, in single-axis WBV, discomfort is measured subjectively 12) using verbal or paper-based techniques such as the judgment method 13) . Many researchers, however, are more interested in finding objective measures that can be later embedded inside a computer human model to assess discomfort and modify designs.…”

Role of Neuron-Specific Splicing Regulators as Modifiers of Neurofibromatosis Type 1

“…and their interactions (e.g., Grether et al, 1971). There are other considerable bodies of research on whole-body motion in humans (e.g., on the subjective experience of vibratory motion) (c.f., Hacaambwa & Giacomin, 2007;Ingre et al, 2006;Mansfield et al, 2000;Oborne & Boarer, 1982a, 1982b and the influence of sustained acceleration (c.f., Albery, 1989Albery, , 2004Grether, 1971a). However, because of the experimental conditions used and variables reported, much of this other literature is less directly applicable to the issue of Soldier performance in tactical military ground vehicles.…”

Quantification of Human Discomfort in a Vehicle Using a Four-Post Rig Excitation

“…The exposure time used is not consistent in the studies so far. For example, the subjective response of a seated human participant was measured in a small automobile driven on a road and the analysis of a 15 second segment used to quantify discomfort [5]. The road tests in a vehicle, however, may have significant uncertainties as: a) the inputs may not be repeatable and statistics not consistent and b) the uncertainties in human perception may be difficult to quantify.…”