Evaluation of motion comfort using advanced active human body models and efficient simplified models
June 20, 2023 Β· Declared Dead Β· π 2023 IEEE 26th International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC)
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Raj Desai, Marko CvetkoviΔ, Georgios Papaioannou, Riender Happee
arXiv ID
2306.11399
Category
cs.HC: Human-Computer Interaction
Cross-listed
math.NA
Citations
3
Venue
2023 IEEE 26th International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC)
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
Active muscles are crucial for maintaining postural stability when seated in a moving vehicle. Advanced active 3D non-linear full body models have been developed for impact and comfort simulation, including large numbers of individual muscle elements, and detailed non-linear models of the joint structures. While such models have an apparent potential to provide insight into postural stabilization, they are computationally demanding, making them less practical in particular for driving comfort where long time periods are to be studied. In vibrational comfort and in general biomechanical research, linearized models are effectively used. This paper evaluates the effectiveness of simplified 3D full-body human models to capture comfort provoked by whole-body vibrations. An efficient seated human body model is developed and validated using experimental data. We evaluate the required complexity in terms of joints and degrees of freedom for the spine, and explore how well linear spring-damper models can approximate reflexive postural stabilization. Results indicate that linear stiffness and damping models can well capture the human response. The results are improved by adding proportional integral derivative (PID) and head-in-space (HIS) controllers to maintain the defined initial body posture. The integrator is shown to be essential to prevent drift from the defined posture. The joint angular relative displacement is used as the input reference to each PID controller. With this model, a faster than real-time solution is obtained when used with a simple seat model. The paper also discusses the advantages and disadvantages of various models and provides insight into which models are more appropriate for motion comfort analysis.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Human-Computer Interaction
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Improving fairness in machine learning systems: What do industry practitioners need?
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Identifying Stable Patterns over Time for Emotion Recognition from EEG
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Questioning the AI: Informing Design Practices for Explainable AI User Experiences
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Learning for Sensor-based Human Activity Recognition: Overview, Challenges and Opportunities
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Educational data mining and learning analytics: An updated survey
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted