Automated driving: A biomechanical approach for sleeping positions

Stanglmeier, Maximilian J.; Paternoster, Florian Kurt; Paternoster, Susanne; Bichler, Raphael J.; Wagner, Peer-Oliver; Schwirtz, Ansgar

doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2020.103103

Cited by 17 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This low comfort during sleep is probably caused by the aircraft noise and the upright sitting position. The ideal posture for sleeping in a seat has been described by Stanglmeier et al [6] but it differs from the current position in economy class seats.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceived onboard passengers’ experience: Flight attendants’ point of view

Torkashvand

Stephane

Vink

2021

WOR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Cabin research is mostly based on passenger reports. However, it is also important to consider the perceptions of flight attendants as onboard service providers, since they can convey a complementary view shedding light on important aspects related to passenger experience. OBJECTIVE: This study seeks to analyze flight-attendants’ perception regarding passengers’ inflight activities and experience. METHODS: Twenty-eight flight attendants were interviewed on more than twenty-three inflight activities that were extracted from a brainstorming session. A survey was designed based on these activities and was distributed to flight attendants. RESULTS: Overall, flight attendants perceived the activities ‘resting/relaxing’, ‘sleeping’ and ‘using the restroom’ for comfort as the most important activities to passengers, while activities ‘talking to neighbors’ and ‘thinking and observing’ were the least important ones. Interesting was the fact that flight attendants scored satisfaction of some activities higher then passengers. CONCLUSIONS: Flight attendants had a similar idea on importance of activities of passengers, but they valued some activities as more satisfactory.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceived onboard passengers’ experience: Flight attendants’ point of view

Torkashvand

Stephane

Vink

2021

WOR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A relaxed position, with a reclined seatback and an inclined seat pan, is comfortable for sleeping (Stanglmeier et al, 2020). A relaxed position increases seatback inclination compared to what is commonly referred to as reclined position and is more challenging for occupant protection (Östling et al, 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reducing Lumbar Spine Vertebra Fracture Risk With an Adaptive Seat Track Load Limiter

Östling

Lundgren²,

Lübbe³

et al. 2022

Front. Future Transp.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In future fully automated vehicles, sleeping or resting will be desirable during a drive. While a horizontal position currently appears infeasible, a relaxed seating position with a reclined seatback and an inclined seat pan which enables a safe, comfortable position for sleeping or resting is possible. However, the inclined seat pan increases the forces and moments acting on the lumbar spine of the occupant and thereby the risk of lumbar vertebra fractures in a frontal crash. An energy management system integrated into the longitudinal seat adjustment (a seat track load limiter: STLL) that can reduce this risk should be investigated. When evaluating the injury reduction potential of a new restraint system such as a STLL it is important to include variations in both occupant size and crash severity. Otherwise, there is a risk of sub-optimizing, that is, the restraint system is only working for a limited number of situations. The restraint systems addressing these variations are normally referred to as adaptive restraint systems. The first objective of the study is to develop an activation strategy (adaptive release time of the STLL) for different crash severities and occupant sizes, making full use of the available stroke distance without bottoming out the STLL. The second objective is to evaluate the potential of the adaptive STLL to reduce the risk of lumbar vertebra fractures by comparing it to 1) a fixed seat and 2) a passive version of the STLL. Simulated frontal impacts were performed with two male SAFER human body models (HBMs) as occupant surrogates: mid-sized (80 kg and 1.8 m) and large (130 kg and 1.9 m). Three crash pulse severity levels were evaluated: low (40 km/h), medium (50 km/h), and high (56 km/h) impact speeds. The fracture risk was evaluated for the five lumbar vertebrae (L1–L5) in three different seat conditions: 1) a seat fixed to the sled, 2) a passive STLL that moves when a given force is exceeded, and 3) an adaptive STLL which moves at a time that depends on the occupant mass and crash pulse severity. The risk for lumbar vertebra fracture increased with crash pulse severity, while HBM size had no effect on risk. For all conditions, the passive STLL reduced injury risks compared to the fixed seat, and the adaptive STLL reduced risk even further.

show abstract

“…Automated Vehicles (AVs) are developing rapidly, advanced autonomous driving technology provides the possibility for the driver to change his sitting postures [1][2][3][4], creating more room for the legs, to be reclined fully, or tilted to provide more relaxed conditions for socializing and working [5][6][7][8]. As an important part of occupant restraint system, car seat's design should not only satisfy the occupant's comfort, but also consider the protective effect in collision.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research on Occupant Safety in Frontal Collision Based on Different Sitting Positions of Intelligent Vehicles

Zhu

Xiaobing

2022

J. Mod. Mech. Eng. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To study the safety of drivers with different sitting positions in intelligent vehicle collision, the slide model of SUV was established and the precision of the model was verified by slide test. The simulation model of driver's attitude was established by THUMS. According to the results of post mortem human surrogate (PMHS), the sitting postures of THUMS at different seat backrest angles were adjusted and the drivers’ injuries of three sitting postures in frontal collision were analyzed. Simulation results show that when the driver was in semi-recumbent and reclining posture, the protective effect of the airbag on the head was obviously reduced in collisions, and the head and chest will be seriously damaged due to the large seat backrest angle, resulting in increased distance between the head and the wheel. Besides, the tilting sitting posture leads to the risk of sunken seat in the collision. Therefore, with the development of autonomous driving technology, not only should intelligent vehicles meet occupants’ comfort requirements, but the collision safety caused by the change of sitting postures should be considered.

show abstract

Automated driving: A biomechanical approach for sleeping positions

Cited by 17 publications

References 39 publications

Perceived onboard passengers’ experience: Flight attendants’ point of view

Perceived onboard passengers’ experience: Flight attendants’ point of view

Reducing Lumbar Spine Vertebra Fracture Risk With an Adaptive Seat Track Load Limiter

Research on Occupant Safety in Frontal Collision Based on Different Sitting Positions of Intelligent Vehicles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About