An MPC-based motion planner recreates on-road acceleration profiles on a compact test track, and a 47-participant study found no significant subjective motion sickness difference between track and road, though objective exposure was 12% lower.
The impact of body and head dynamics on motion comfort assessment
1 Pith paper cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
abstract
Head motion is a key determinant of motion comfort and differs substantially from seat motion due to seat and body compliance and dynamic postural stabilization. This paper compares different human body model fidelities to transmit seat accelerations to the head for the assessment of motion comfort through simulations. Six-degree of freedom dynamics were analyzed using frequency response functions derived from an advanced human model (AHM), a computationally efficient human model (EHM) and experimental studies. Simulations of dynamic driving show that human models strongly affected the predicted ride comfort (increased up to a factor 3). Furthermore, they modestly affected sickness using the available filters from the literature and ISO-2631 (increased up to 30%), but more strongly affected sickness predicted by the subjective vertical conflict (SVC) model (increased up to 70%).
citation-role summary
citation-polarity summary
fields
cs.RO 1years
2024 1verdicts
CONDITIONAL 1roles
background 1polarities
support 1representative citing papers
citing papers explorer
-
Efficient Motion Sickness Assessment: Recreation of On-Road Driving on a Compact Test Track
An MPC-based motion planner recreates on-road acceleration profiles on a compact test track, and a 47-participant study found no significant subjective motion sickness difference between track and road, though objective exposure was 12% lower.