Search Results

This paper presents an analysis on the position of driver eye height as a function of their standing height, weight, biological sex, seat back angle and seat bottom angle. Typically, eye heights are estimated based on standing height, or measured from a rigid seated position with a vertical seat back. While reasonably close, these estimated eye heights are generally not correct for individuals seated in deformable vehicle seats with non-vertical seat back angles. Thus, these measurements tend to overestimate the participants eye height in more ecologically probable scenarios, such as driver eye height while operating a vehicle. In this study, eye measurements were taken from a standing position and while seated on a rigid surface and then compared to the same participant’s eye height measured while seated on six different representative vehicle seats with seat back angles of 20, 25, and 30 degrees respectively.

Accident reconstructionists will typically document scenes, evidence, vehicles or objects of interest by using 3-dimensional laser scanners. These techniques are well documented, utilized and can be extremely accurate. However, when the subject of documentation involves surfaces that include intricate, highly reflective, and/or complex geometry (motorcycles, wheelchairs, stairs, etc.) the commercially available laser scanners can produce obscuring dense stray and scattered points which results in point clouds that could require tedious manual registration and/or optimization. This paper compares a FARO Focus laser scanner, Pix4DMapper, and Agisoft’s Photoscan point cloud data to FARO ARM measurements of vehicles, other transportation devices and architectural features. It was shown that the Pix4DMapper and Agisoft’s Photoscan point cloud data resulted in detailed and accurate point cloud data compared to the FARO ARM measurements.