The vibration of inclined backrests: perception and discomfort of vibration applied parallel to the back in the z-axis of the body

This study determined how backrest inclination and the frequency of vibration influence the perception and discomfort of vibration applied parallel to the back (vertical vibration when sitting upright, horizontal vibration when recumbent). Subjects experienced backrest vibration at frequencies in the range 2.5 to 25 Hz at vibration magnitudes up to 24 dB above threshold. Absolute thresholds, equivalent comfort contours, and the principal locations for feeling vibration were determined with four backrest inclinations: 0° (upright), 30°, 60° and 90° (recumbent). With all backrest inclinations, acceleration thresholds and equivalent comfort contours were similar and increased with increasing frequency at 6 dB per octave (i.e. velocity constant). It is concluded that backrest inclination has little effect on the frequency dependence of thresholds and equivalent comfort contours for vibration applied along the back, and that the W (d) frequency weighting in current standards is appropriate for evaluating z-axis vibration of the back at all backrest inclinations. STATEMENT OF RELEVANCE: To minimise the vibration discomfort of seated people, it is necessary to understand how discomfort varies with backrest inclination. It is concluded that the vibration on backrests can be measured using a pad between the backrest and the back, so that it reclines with the backrest, and the measured vibration evaluated without correcting for the backrest inclination.     

The vibration of inclined backrests: perception and discomfort of vibration applied parallel to the back in the z-axis of the body

This study determined how backrest inclination and the frequency of vibration influence the perception and discomfort of vibration applied parallel to the back (vertical vibration when sitting upright, horizontal vibration when recumbent). Subjects experienced backrest vibration at frequencies in the range 2.5 to 25 Hz at vibration magnitudes up to 24 dB above threshold. Absolute thresholds, equivalent comfort contours, and the principal locations for feeling vibration were determined with four backrest inclinations: 0° (upright), 30°, 60° and 90° (recumbent). With all backrest inclinations, acceleration thresholds and equivalent comfort contours were similar and increased with increasing frequency at 6 dB per octave (i.e. velocity constant). It is concluded that backrest inclination has little effect on the frequency dependence of thresholds and equivalent comfort contours for vibration applied along the back, and that the W _d frequency weighting in current standards is appropriate for evaluating z-axis vibration of the back at all backrest inclinations.

Statement of Relevance: To minimise the vibration discomfort of seated people, it is necessary to understand how discomfort varies with backrest inclination. It is concluded that the vibration on backrests can be measured using a pad between the backrest and the back, so that it reclines with the backrest, and the measured vibration evaluated without correcting for the backrest inclination.     

The influence of seat backrest angle on perceived discomfort during exposure to vertical whole-body vibration

National and International Standards (e.g. BS 6841 and ISO 2631-1) provide methodologies for the measurement and assessment of whole-body vibration in terms of comfort and health. The EU Physical Agents (Vibration) Directive (PAVD) provides criteria by which vibration magnitudes can be assessed. However, these standards only consider upright seated (90°) and recumbent (0°) backrest angles, and do not provide guidance for semi-recumbent postures. This article reports an experimental programme that investigated the effects of backrest angle on comfort during vertical whole-body vibration. The series of experiments showed that a relationship exists between seat backrest angle, whole-body vibration frequency and perceived levels of discomfort. The recumbent position (0°) was the most uncomfortable and the semi-recumbent positions of 67.5° and 45° were the least uncomfortable. A new set of frequency weighting curves are proposed which use the same topology as the existing BS and ISO standards. These curves could be applied to those exposed to whole-body vibration in semi-recumbent postures to augment the existing standardised methods. PRACTITIONER SUMMARY: Current vibration standards provide guidance for assessing exposures for seated, standing and recumbent positions, but not for semi-recumbent postures. This article reports new experimental data systematically investigating the effect of backrest angle on discomfort experienced. It demonstrates that most discomfort is caused in a recumbent posture and that least was caused in a semi-recumbent posture.     

The influence of seat backrest angle on human performance during whole-body vibration

This study investigated the effects of reclined backrest angles on cognitive and psycho-motor tasks during exposure to vertical whole-body vibration. Twenty participants were each exposed to three test stimuli of vertical vibration: 2-8 Hz; 8-14 Hz and 14-20 Hz, plus a stationary control condition whilst seated on a vibration platform at five backrest angles: 0° (recumbent, supine) to 90° (upright). The vibration magnitude was 2.0 ms(-2) root-mean-square. The participants were seated at one of the backrest angles and exposed to each of the three vibration stimuli while performing a tracking and choice reaction time tasks; then they completed the NASA-TLX workload scales. Apart from 22.5° seat backrest angle for the tracking task, backrest angle did not adversely affect the performance during vibration. However, participants required increased effort to maintain performance during vibration relative to the stationary condition. These results suggest that undertaking tasks in an environment with vibration could increase workload and risk earlier onset of fatigue. PRACTITIONER SUMMARY: Current vibration standards provide guidance for assessing exposures for seated, standing and recumbent positions, but not for semi-recumbent postures. This paper reports new experimental data systematically investigating the effect of backrest angle on human performance. It demonstrates how workload is elevated with whole-body vibration, without getting affected by backrest angle.     

The effect of posture and vibration magnitude on the vertical vibration transmissibility of tractor suspension system

The efficiency of suspension seat can be influenced by several factors such as the input vibration, the dynamic characteristics of the seat and the dynamic characteristics of the human body. The objective of this paper is to study the effect of sitting postures and vibration magnitude on the vibration transmissibility of a suspension system of an agricultural tractor seat. Eleven (11) healthy male subjects participated in the study. All subjects were asked to sit on the suspension system. Four (4) different sitting postures were investigated – i) “relax”, ii) “slouch”, iii) “tense”, and iv) “with backrest support”. All subjects were exposed to random vertical vibration in the range of 1–20 Hz, at three vibration magnitudes - 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0 m/s² r.m.s for 60 s. The results showed that there were three pronounced peaks in the seat transmissibility, with the primary resonance was found at 1.75–2.5 Hz for every sitting postures. The “backrest” condition had the highest transmissibility resonance (1.46), while the “slouch” posture had the highest Seat Effective Amplitude Transmissibility (SEAT) values (64.7%). Changes in vibration magnitude for “relax” posture from 0.5 to 2.0 m/s² r.m.s resulted in greater reduction in the primary resonance frequency of seat transmissibility. The SEAT values decreased with increased vibration magnitude. It can be suggested that variations in posture and vibration magnitude affected the vibration transmission through the suspension system, indicating the non-linear effect on the interaction between the human body and the suspension system.Relevance to industry: Investigating the posture adopted during agricultural activities, and the effects of various magnitudes of vibration on the suspension system's performance are beneficial to the industry. The findings regarding their influence on the human body may be used to optimize the suspension system's performance.     

Transmission of vertical vibration through a seat: Effect of thickness of foam cushions at the seat pan and the backrest

The perception of vehicle ride comfort is influenced by the dynamic performance of full-depth foam used in many vehicle seats. The effects of the thickness of foam on the dynamic stiffness (i.e., stiffness and damping as a function of frequency) of foam cushions with three thicknesses (60, 80, and 100 mm), and the vibration transmitted through these cushions at the seat pan and the backrest were measured with 12 subjects (6 males and 6 females). With increasing thickness, the stiffness and the damping of the foam decreased. With increasing thickness of foam at the seat pan, the resonance frequencies around 4 Hz in the vertical in-line and fore-and-aft cross-axis transmissibilities of the seat pan cushion and the backrest cushion decreased. For the conditions investigated, it is concluded that the thickness of foam at a vertical backrest has little effect on the vertical in-line or fore-and-aft cross-axis transmissibilities of the foam at either the seat pan or the backrest. The frequencies of the primary resonances around 4 Hz in the vertical in-line transmissibility and the fore-and-aft cross-axis transmissibility of foam at the seat pan were highly correlated. Compared to sitting on a rigid seat pan with a foam backrest, sitting with foam at both the seat pan and the backrest reduced the resonance frequency in the vertical in-line transmissibility of the backrest foam and increased the associated transmissibility at resonance, while the fore-and-aft cross-axis transmissibility of the backrest was little affected. Compared to sitting without a backrest, sitting with a rigid vertical backrest increased the resonance frequency of the fore-and-aft cross-axis transmissibility of the seat pan cushion and increased the transmissibility at resonance.Relevance to industryThe transmissibility of a seat is determined by the dynamic properties of the occupant of the seat and the dynamic properties of the seat. This study shows how the thicknesses of foam at a seat pan and foam at a backrest affect the in-line and cross-axis transmissibilities of the foams at the seat pan and the backrest. The findings have application to the design of vehicle seats to minimise the transmission of vibration to the body.     

Response of the seated human body to whole-body vertical vibration: discomfort caused by sinusoidal vibration

Frequency weightings for predicting vibration discomfort assume the same frequency-dependence at all magnitudes of vibration, whereas biodynamic studies show that the frequency-dependence of the human body depends on the magnitude of vibration. This study investigated how the frequency-dependence of vibration discomfort depends on the acceleration and the force at the subject–seat interface. Using magnitude estimation, 20 males and 20 females judged their discomfort caused by sinusoidal vertical acceleration at 13 frequencies (1–16 Hz) at magnitudes from 0.1 to 4.0 ms^? 2 r.m.s. The frequency-dependence of their equivalent comfort contours depended on the magnitude of vibration, but was less dependent on the magnitude of dynamic force than the magnitude of acceleration, consistent with the biodynamic non-linearity of the body causing some of the magnitude-dependence of equivalent comfort contours. There were significant associations between the biodynamic responses and subjective responses at all frequencies in the range 1–16 Hz.

Practitioner Summary: Vertical seat vibration causes discomfort in many forms of transport. This study provides the frequency-dependence of vibration discomfort over a range of vibration magnitudes and shows how the frequency weightings in the current standards can be improved.     

Vibration and comfort HI. Translational vibration of the feet and back

The effects on discomfort of the frequency and direction of the translational vibration of a footrest and flat firm backrest have been studied in two experiments. At frequencies in the range 2.5-63 Hz, the first experiment determined the levels of fore-and-aft, lateral and vertical vibration of the feet of seated subjects which caused them discomfort equivalent to that from 0.8 m/s² r.m.s. 10 Hz vertical vibration of a firm flat seat. The levels of fore-and-aft, lateral and vertical vibration at the back of a seat which were equivalent to 0.8 m/s² r.m.s. 10 Hz vertical seat vibration were determined in the second experiment. The vibration of the feet or back occurred without simultaneous vibration at the seat.

Individual and group equivalent comfort contours are presented. It is concluded that the data provide a useful initial indication of the relative contribution of foot and back vibration to discomfort. Equivalent comfort contours for foot vibration were similar for all three directions of vibration. The contours for vibration of the back show a high sensitivity to fore-and-aft vibration. The results obtained from two additional studies show that vibration from a backrest and other variations in seating conditions can influence subject comfort.     

Discomfort of seated persons exposed to low frequency lateral and roll oscillation: Effect of seat cushion

The discomfort caused by lateral oscillation, roll oscillation, and fully roll-compensated lateral oscillation has been investigated at frequencies between 0.25 and 1.0 Hz when sitting on a rigid seat and when sitting on a compliant cushion, both without a backrest. Judgements of vibration discomfort and the transmission of lateral and roll oscillation through the seat cushion were obtained with 20 subjects. Relative to the rigid seat, the cushion increased lateral acceleration and roll oscillation at the lower frequencies and also increased discomfort during lateral oscillation (at frequencies less than 0.63 Hz), roll oscillation (at frequencies less than 0.4 Hz), and fully roll-compensated lateral oscillation (at frequencies between 0.315 and 0.5 Hz). The root-sums-of-squares of the frequency-weighted lateral and roll acceleration at the seat surface predicted the greater vibration discomfort when sitting on the cushion. The frequency-dependence of the predicted discomfort may be improved by adjusting the frequency weighting for roll acceleration at frequencies between 0.25 and 1.0 Hz.     

Frequency-dependence of discomfort caused by vibration and mechanical shocks

The frequency content of a mechanical shock is not confined to its fundamental frequency, so it was hypothesised that the frequency-dependence of discomfort caused by shocks with defined fundamental frequencies will differ from the frequency-dependence of sinusoidal vibration. Subjects experienced vertical vibration and vertical shocks with fundamental frequencies from 0.5 to 16 Hz and magnitudes from ±0.7 to ±9.5 ms^–2. The rate of growth of discomfort with increasing magnitude of motion decreased with increasing frequency of both motions, so the frequency-dependence of discomfort varied with the magnitudes of both motions and no single frequency weighting will be ideal for all magnitudes. At the frequencies of sinusoidal vibration producing greatest discomfort (4–16 Hz), shocks produced less discomfort than vibration with same peak acceleration or unweighted vibration dose value. Frequency-weighted vibration dose values provided the best predictions of the discomfort caused by different frequencies and magnitudes of vibration and shock.

Practitioner Summary: Human responses to vibration and shock vary according to the frequency content of the motion. The ideal frequency weighting depends on the magnitude of the motion. Standardised frequency-weighted vibration dose values estimate discomfort caused by vibration and shock but for motions containing very low frequencies the filtering is not optimum.     

Effect of the seating condition on the transmission of vibration through the seat pan and backrest

Changes in the seating condition may change the body posture which could affect the transmission of vibration through a vehicle seat. This study investigates the effect of different seating conditions on the transmission of vibration through a car seat. Ten male subjects sat on the passenger seat of a sedan car driven at 60 km/h adopting one of six conditions at a time. The VDV was measured on the seat and backrest. Backrest contact affected the VDV measured on the seat pan in the z- and y-axis only. Increasing the backrest angle increased the VDV at the backrest in the x-direction and reduced the VDV at the backrest in the z-direction. With the increase in the backrest angle, the total VDV at the backrest became higher than the total VDV on the seat pan. The study showed no effect of foot position and contact with a headrest on the VDVs.Relevance to industryThis research presents the effect of the seating condition on the transmission of vibration through the seat pan and backrest of a car seat. Research of this kind may help seat manufacturers recommend seating conditions that reduce discomfort caused by whole-body vibration.     

Effect of reclining a seat on the discomfort from vibration and shock on fast boats

Passengers and crew on fast boats can experience high magnitudes of whole-body vibration and mechanical shocks that may present risks to health and cause discomfort. This study investigated the influence of reclining a seat on the discomfort caused by fast-boat motion and whether discomfort can be predicted by overall ride values according to current standards. Subjects judged the discomfort of simulations of a recorded fast boat motion in a seat reclined by 0°, 15°, 30°, 45°, or 60°. Reclining the seat caused no significant change in overall discomfort, suggesting that if a reclined seat can be shown to reduce risks of injury it may be acceptable in respect of comfort. The findings are inconsistent with the predictions of standards and show that revised frequency weightings are required to account for seat pan or seat back inclination.     

Subjective discomfort caused by vertical whole-body vibration in the frequency range 2–100 Hz

Current standards assume the same frequency weightings for discomfort at all magnitudes of vibration, whereas biodynamic and psychological studies show that the frequency-dependence of objective and subjective responses of the human body depends on the magnitude of vibration. This study investigated the discomfort of seated human body caused by vertical whole-body vibration over the frequency range 2–100?Hz at relatively high magnitudes from 1.0 to 2.5?ms^?2 r.m.s. Twenty-eight subjects (15 males and 13 females) judged the discomfort using the absolute magnitude estimation method. The rate of growth of discomfort with increasing vibration magnitude was highly dependent on the frequency, so the shapes of the equivalent comfort contours depended on the magnitude of vibration and no single frequency weighting would be appropriate for all magnitudes. The equivalent comfort contours indicated that the standards and previous relevant studies underestimated the vibration discomfort at frequencies greater than about 30?Hz.

Practitioner Summary: The discomfort caused by vertical vibration at relatively high frequencies can be severe, particularly at relatively great magnitudes in transport. This study provides the frequency-dependence of vibration discomfort at 2–100?Hz, and shows how the frequency weightings in the current standards can be improved at relatively high frequencies.     

The effect of seat back inclination on spine height changes

The effect of backrest inclination on spinal height changes was tested during static sitting and seated whole-body vibrations. The vibration input was sinusoidal with a frequency of 5 Hz and an acceleration of 0.1 g rms. The backrest inclinations tested were 110 degrees and 120 degrees . The 110 degrees backrest caused less shrinkage than did the 120 degrees during static sitting, whereas the opposite was true when vibration was present, although the differences between the backrests were not statistically significant. Only when the results were compared with results from exposure to unsupported sitting were the differences statistically significant for both static sitting and seated vibrations when the 110 degrees backrest was used and for vibration with the 120 degrees backrest. Thus we conclude that an inclined backrest reduces the effects of vibration. More importantly, emphasis should be placed upon seats and seat materials that can attenuate vibration.     

Qualitative models of seat discomfort including static and dynamic factors

Judgements of overall seating comfort in dynamic conditions sometimes correlate better with the static characteristics of a seat than with measures of the dynamic environment. This study developed qualitative models of overall seat discomfort to include both static and dynamic seat characteristics. A dynamic factor that reflected how vibration discomfort increased as vibration magnitude increased was combined with a static seat factor which reflected seating comfort without vibration. The ability of the model to predict the relative and overall importance of dynamic and static seat characteristics on comfort was tested in two experiments. A paired comparison experiment, using four polyurethane foam cushions (50, 70, 100, 120 mm thick), provided different static and dynamic comfort when 12 subjects were exposed to one-third octave band random vertical vibration with centre frequencies of 2.5 and 5.5 Hz, at magnitudes of 0.00, 0.25 and 0.50 m x s(-2) rms measured beneath the foam samples. Subject judgements of the relative discomfort of the different conditions depended on both static and dynamic characteristics in a manner consistent with the model. The effect of static and dynamic seat factors on overall seat discomfort was investigated by magnitude estimation using three foam cushions (of different hardness) and a rigid wooden seat at six vibration magnitudes with 20 subjects. Static seat factors (i.e. cushion stiffness) affected the manner in which vibration influenced the overall discomfort: cushions with lower stiffness were more comfortable and more sensitive to changes in vibration magnitude than those with higher stiffness. The experiments confirm that judgements of overall seat discomfort can be affected by both the static and dynamic characteristics of a seat, with the effect depending on vibration magnitude: when vibration magnitude was low, discomfort was dominated by static seat factors; as the vibration magnitude increased, discomfort became dominated by dynamic factors.     

Qualitative models of seat discomfort including static and dynamic factors

Judgements of overall seating comfort in dynamic conditions sometimes correlate better with the static characteristics of a seat than with measures of the dynamic environment. This study developed qualitative models of overall seat discomfort to include both static and dynamic seat characteristics. A dynamic factor that reflected how vibration discomfort increased as vibration magnitude increased was combined with a static seat factor which reflected seating comfort without vibration. The ability of the model to predict the relative and overall importance of dynamic and static seat characteristics on comfort was tested in two experiments. A paired comparison experiment, using four polyurethane foam cushions (50, 70, 100, 120 mm thick), provided different static and dynamic comfort when 12 subjects were exposed to one-third octave band random vertical vibration with centre frequencies of 2.5 and 5.5 Hz, at magnitudes of 0.00, 0.25 and 0.50 m.s^-2 rms measured beneath the foam samples. Subject judgements of the relative discomfort of the different conditions depended on both static and dynamic characteristics in a manner consistent with the model. The effect of static and dynamic seat factors on overall seat discomfort was investigated by magnitude estimation using three foam cushions (of different hardness) and a rigid wooden seat at six vibration magnitudes with 20 subjects. Static seat factors (i.e. cushion stiffness) affected the manner in which vibration influenced the overall discomfort: cushions with lower stiffness were more comfortable and more sensitive to changes in vibration magnitude than those with higher stiffness. The experiments confirm that judgements of overall seat discomfort can be affected by both the static and dynamic characteristics of a seat, with the effect depending on vibration magnitude: when vibration magnitude was low, discomfort was dominated by static seat factors; as the vibration magnitude increased, discomfort became dominated by dynamic factors.     

(Abstracts)Changing Industrial Demands

Abstract

The frequency dependence of discomfort caused by vertical mechanical shocks has been investigated with 20 seated males exposed to upward and downward shocks at 13 fundamental frequencies (1–16 Hz) and 18 magnitudes (±0.12 to ±8.3 ms^?2). The rate of growth of discomfort with increasing shock magnitude depended on the fundamental frequency of the shocks, so the frequency dependence of equivalent comfort contours (for both vertical acceleration and vertical force measured at the seat) varied with shock magnitude. The rate of growth of discomfort was similar for acceleration and force, upward and downward shocks, and lower and higher magnitude shocks. The frequency dependence of discomfort from shocks differs from that of sinusoidal vibrations having the same fundamental frequencies. This arises in part from the frequency content of the shock. Frequency weighting W_b in BS 6841:1987 and ISO 2631-1:1997 provided reasonable estimates of the discomfort caused by the shocks investigated in this study.

Practitioner Summary: No single frequency weighting can accurately predict the discomfort caused by mechanical shocks over wide ranges of shock magnitude, but vibration dose values with frequency weighting W_b provide reasonable estimates of discomfort caused by shocks similar to those investigated in this study with peak accelerations well below 1 g.     

The application of SEAT values for predicting how compliant seats with backrests influence vibration discomfort

The extent to which a seat can provide useful attenuation of vehicle vibration depends on three factors: the characteristics of the vehicle motion, the vibration transmissibility of the seat, and the sensitivity of the body to vibration. The ‘seat effective amplitude transmissibility’ (i.e., SEAT value) reflects how these three factors vary with the frequency and the direction of vibration so as to predict the vibration isolation efficiency of a seat. The SEAT value is mostly used to select seat cushions or seat suspensions based on the transmission of vertical vibration to the principal supporting surface of a seat. This study investigated the accuracy of SEAT values in predicting how seats with backrests influence the discomfort caused by multiple-input vibration. Twelve male subjects participated in a four-part experiment to determine equivalent comfort contours, the relative discomfort, the location of discomfort, and seat transmissibility with three foam seats and a rigid reference seat at 14 frequencies of vibration in the range 1–20 Hz at magnitudes of vibration from 0.2 to 1.6 ms⁻² r.m.s. The ‘measured seat dynamic discomfort’ (MSDD) was calculated for each foam seat from the ratio of the vibration acceleration required to cause similar discomfort with the foam seat and with the rigid reference seat. Using the frequency weightings in current standards, the SEAT values of each seat were calculated from the ratio of overall ride values with the foam seat to the overall ride values with the rigid reference seat, and compared to the corresponding MSDD at each frequency. The SEAT values provided good predictions of how the foam seats increased vibration discomfort at frequencies around the 4-Hz resonance but reduced vibration discomfort at frequencies greater than about 6.3 Hz, with discrepancies explained by a known limitation of the frequency weightings.     

Biomechanical response of the musculoskeletal system to whole body vibration using a seated driver model

ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess the effects of backrest inclination and vibration frequency on muscle activity in a dynamic environment using a musculoskeletal model.MethodThe muscle activity modeling method was used to analyze a full body musculoskeletal system of a seated person with a public domain rigid body model in an adjustable car seat. This model was established using AnyBody Modeling System, based on the inverse dynamic approach. And the min/max criterion in dealing with the muscle redundancy problem. Ten healthy subjects were exposed to whole body vibration (WBV) with five frequencies (3, 4.5, 6, 7, and 8 Hz) in the vertical direction in a randomized order on three separate days. The displacement of the seat-pan and head was measured using a hybrid Polaris spectra system to obtain the seat-to-head (STH) transmissibility. Muscle oxygenation was measured using near-infrared spectroscopy. The validity of the model was tested using STH transmissibility and muscle oxygenation.ResultsIncreased vibration frequency caused high muscle activities of the abdomen and the right leg with a backrest forward inclination angle. The muscle activities of the left leg decreased at a backrest backward inclination except at inclination angles of 15° and 30°. Muscle activity of the lumbar suddenly increased at a backrest inclination angle of 5° and vibration frequency of 5 Hz. Muscle activities were higher under vibration than that without vibration.ConclusionVibration frequency significantly affected the muscle activity of the lumbar area. Likewise, the inclination degree of the backrest significantly affected the muscle activities of the right leg and the abdomen. The combination of vibration and forward inclination of the backrest can be used to maximize the muscle activity of the leg, similar to the abdomen and lumbar muscles.Relevance to the industryThe musculoskeletal model established in the present study provides a method that can be used to investigate the biomechanical response of seated drivers to WBV. This model helps protect drivers from occupational injury.     

Equivalent comfort contours for fore-and-aft,lateral, and vertical whole-body vibration in the frequency range 1.0 to 10 Hz

Abstract

Standards assume vibration discomfort depends on the frequency and direction of whole-body vibration, with the same weightings for frequency and direction at all magnitudes. This study determined equivalent comfort contours from 1.0 to 10?Hz in each of three directions (fore-and-aft, lateral, vertical) at magnitudes in the range 0.1 to 3.5?ms^?2?r.m.s. Twenty-four subjects sat on a rigid flat seat with and without a beanbag, altering the pressure distribution on the seat but not the transmission of vibration. The rate of growth of vibration discomfort with increasing magnitude of vibration differed between the directions of vibration and varied with the frequency of vibration. The frequency-dependence and direction-dependence of discomfort, therefore, depended on the magnitude of vibration. The beanbag did not affect the frequency-dependence or direction-dependence of vibration discomfort. It is concluded that different weightings for the frequency and direction of vibration are required for low and high magnitude vibration.

Practitioner summary: When evaluating whole-body vibration to predict vibration discomfort, the weightings appropriate to different frequencies and different directions of vibration should depend on the magnitude of vibration. This is overlooked in all current methods of evaluating the severity of whole-body vibration.