Equal sensation curves for whole-body vibration expressed as a function of driving force.

Previous studies have shown that the seated human is most sensitive to whole-body vertical vibration at about 5 Hz. Similarly, the body shows an apparent mass resonance at about 5 Hz. Considering these similarities between the biomechanical and subjective responses, it was hypothesized that, at low frequencies, subjective ratings of whole-body vibration might be directly proportional to the driving force. Twelve male subjects participated in a laboratory experiment where subjects sat on a rigid seat mounted on a shaker. The magnitude of a test stimulus was adjusted such that the subjective intensity could be matched to a reference stimulus, using a modified Bruceton test protocol. The sinusoidal reference stimulus was 8-Hz vibration with a magnitude of 0.5 m/s2 rms (or 0.25 m/s2 rms for the 1-Hz test); the sinusoidal test stimuli had frequencies of 1, 2, 4, 16, and 32 Hz. Equal sensation contours in terms of seat acceleration showed data similar to those in the literature. Equal sensation contours in terms of force showed a nominally linear response at 1, 2, and 4 Hz, but an increasing sensitivity at higher frequencies. This is in agreement with a model derived from published subjective and objective fitted data.

[1]  N J Mansfield,et al.  Models of the apparent mass of the seated human body exposed to horizontal whole-body vibration. , 1999, Aviation, space, and environmental medicine.

[2]  S. Smith,et al.  Modeling differences in the vibration response characteristics of the human body. , 2000, Journal of biomechanics.

[3]  Toshisuke Miwa EVALUATION METHODS FOR VIBRATION EFFECT , 1968 .

[4]  M J Griffin,et al.  Difference thresholds for automobile seat vibration. , 2000, Applied ergonomics.

[5]  Subhash Rakheja,et al.  A BODY MASS DEPENDENT MECHANICAL IMPEDANCE MODEL FOR APPLICATIONS IN VIBRATION SEAT TESTING , 2002 .

[6]  Michael J. Griffin,et al.  Non-linear dual-axis biodynamic response to vertical whole-body vibration , 2003 .

[7]  D. J. Saunders,et al.  Equal comfort contours for whole body vertical, pulsed sinusoidal vibration , 1972 .

[8]  K C Parsons,et al.  Vibration and comfort. IV. Application of experimental results. , 1982, Ergonomics.

[9]  M J Griffin,et al.  The apparent mass of the seated human body: vertical vibration. , 1989, Journal of biomechanics.

[10]  M J Griffin,et al.  Difference thresholds for intensity perception of whole-body vertical vibration: effect of frequency and magnitude. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  J Giacomin Apparent mass of small children: experimental measurements , 2004, Ergonomics.

[12]  R. W. Shoenberger,et al.  Psychophysical Assessment of Whole-Body Vibration , 1971, Human factors.

[13]  N J Mansfield,et al.  The apparent mass of the human body exposed to non-orthogonal horizontal vibration. , 1999, Journal of biomechanics.

[14]  M. Griffin,et al.  Whole-body vibration perception thresholds , 1988 .

[15]  Michael J. Griffin,et al.  A REVIEW OF THE TRANSMISSION OF TRANSLATIONAL SEAT VIBRATION TO THE HEAD , 1998 .

[16]  Suzanne D. Smith Nonlinear Resonance Behavior in the Human Exposed to Whole-Body Vibration , 1994 .

[17]  Setsuo Maeda,et al.  Comparison of the apparent mass of the seated human measured using random and sinusoidal vibration. , 2005, Industrial health.

[18]  Neil J. Mansfield,et al.  Human Response to Vibration , 2004 .

[19]  B Hinz,et al.  The nonlinearity of the human body's dynamic response during sinusoidal whole body vibration. , 1987, Industrial health.

[20]  M. Griffin,et al.  Non-linearities in apparent mass and transmissibility during exposure to whole-body vertical vibration. , 2000, Journal of biomechanics.

[21]  Toshisuke Miwa,et al.  EVALUATION METHODS FOR VIBRATION EFFECT:PART 8. THE VIBRATION GREATNESS OF RANDOM WAVES , 1969 .

[22]  Patrik Holmlund Absorbed Power and Mechanical Impedance of the Seated Human Measured within a Real Vehicle Environment Compared with Single Axis Laboratory Data , 1999 .