The XXV Annual Occupational Ergonomics and Safety Conference

Atlanta, GA, USA

June 6-7, 2013

Analysis of Whole-Body Vibration Exposures Associated With

Commonly Used Land and Aquatic Vehicles
Steve D. Fleming1, George B. Page1, Greg G. Weames2, John M. Vanderpool1, and Jonathon N.
Frohlich1
1

Page Engineering, Inc., Jackson, Michigan, United States of America

2

Page Engineering, Inc., Georgetown, Ontario, Canada

steve@pageengineering.net

Authors Note: The authors wish to thank the numerous equipment owners, operators, and supervisors who were involved in
this data collection effort.
Abstract: This article describes an analysis of whole-body vibration (WBV) exposure as it relates to everyday travel,
recreational, and home utility vehicles. WBV data were collected under typical driving/operating conditions. GPS and video
data were also collected during WBV data collection. Vehicles tested included a city bus (passenger seat), a 2-door sport
coupe, a riding lawnmower, a motorized pontoon boat, and a 3-person personal watercraft (PWC). The data from these tests
were compared with similar data collected by other researchers. Vibration metrics reported include frequency-weighted
RMS, vibration dose value (VDV), and static compression dose (S ed ). The results provide an expanded list of contemporary,
objectively determined variety of vehicle operators exposure to WBV. The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate
exposures typically experienced through the use of common-life vehicles, and compare these exposures with occupational
WBV exposures associated with North American locomotive train crews. Of the vehicles tested in this article, the pontoon
boat was the only vehicle to present lower WBV exposure (under normalized exposure durations) in comparison to an
average of 58 railroad freight locomotives operated during typical train runs.
Keywords: Whole-body vibration, Recreational vehicle WBV, Passenger vehicle WBV, Locomotive WBV, Occupational WBV

1. INTRODUCTION
WBV has been researched for approximately three decades. However, it has only been within the past few years that
advancements in instrumentation technology have made this type of analysis more universally accessible to the applied
Ergonomist. Some of these advancements include smaller form factor and therefore greater portability of data capture
hardware, memory expansion for longer-duration continuous data recording, GPS infrastructure, as well as waterproof highdefinition miniature video cameras. Given these several improvements in contemporary WBV exposure measurement
equipment, it is now more accessible to measure several different types of personally and publically used vehicles to continue
to expand the available WBV exposure knowledge.
For many Ergonomists and Health and Safety practitioners, WBV exposure knowledge is important for efforts to
determine the probability of adverse health effects of the lumbar spine. For this purpose, there are consensus-based standards
that provide direction for the measurement, analysis and interpretation of results (ANSI, 2002; ISO, 1997; ISO 1997/2010;
ISO 2004). These standards are critical for the research community to follow, as efforts to date for determining increased risk
consistently support the need for objectively determined WBV exposure. It has been shown that environment descriptors as
well as self-reporting of exposure are not scientifically reliable determinants of WBV risk, and that it is required that actual
measurement of vibration is necessary for an accurate and reliable analysis (Village et al., 2012). Waters et al (2007) in their
review of the scientific literature on epidemiology of exposure to shocks and jolts, including analysis with ISO 2631-5,
concluded that, Current scientific knowledge on the measurement, damage mechanisms and health effects of exposure to
repeated mechanical shock needs to be strengthened in order to provide evidence-based guidelines for injury prevention. In
a more recent review, Bible et al (2012) discuss that the epidemiologic literature is still not yet at a level of quality whereby
any cause-and-effect relationship to spine degeneration may be documented, and as such, currently available and generally
accepted relevant standards on WBV exposure measurement, analysis, and health guidance should be used.
Ongoing research has documented exposures to WBV as it relates to occupational exposures. However, WBV
studies that focus on commonly used land and aquatic vehicles for everyday travel, recreation, and home utility are far less
prevalent, particularly for analysis using ISO 2631-5. In response to this shortage of data, this article presents the results of
ISBN: 97819384865-1-6

10

The XXV Annual Occupational Ergonomics and Safety Conference

Atlanta, GA, USA
June 6-7, 2013
analyses investigating exposure to WBV for a variety of common-life activities. Original data for five different vehicles are
compared to data from seven different vehicles as studied by other researchers. The aggregate of this common-life data can
also be compared to occupational exposures, in this case, the exposures experienced by railroad train crews.

2. METHODS
WBV assessments were conducted and analyzed following procedures specified by ISO and ANSI standards (ANSI,
2002; ISO, 1997; ISO 1997/2010; ISO 2004).

2.1 Instrumentation and Data Collection

WBV data was collected using a Biometrics DataLog data acquisition device. The DataLog system uses a
multimedia card to store data as it is collected in real time. A DataLog indent cable was also used to keep track of relevant
occurrences during data collection and to allow for synchronization with collected video. Two 10G tri-axial accelerometers
were used with the DataLog. One of the 10G triaxial accelerometers was placed inside a seat pad and positioned directly
below the test subjects ischial tuberosities. The seat pad was affixed to the seat pan using duct tape. The other 10G triaxial
accelerometer was affixed to the frame of the vehicle directly beneath the drivers seat using a magnetic mounting plate. A
GlobalSat DG-100 data logger was used to collect GPS information throughout the duration of the data collection. An
external antenna was used to provide stronger connectivity with GPS satellites. Position, time, date, speed, and altitude
information was stored to internal memory on one-second intervals. At least one video camera was used throughout the
duration of the data collection. In some instances, multiple cameras were used to collect other relevant information
simultaneously. The 10G tri-axial accelerometers were set to record vibration data in the range of 0-100Hz. The sampling
rate was set to 500 Hz.

2.2 Data Analysis

Software developed by Biometrics Ltd. was used to interpret the WBV raw data. Seat pad accelerations were
compared to acceleration measurements on the frame. Significant variations in the acceleration recorded by the two
accelerometers could indicate the presence of operator-induced motion, which is known as an artifact (Cooperrider &
Gordon, 2008; DiFiore, Zaouk, Mansfield, & Punwani, 2011). In these instances, video observation was used to confirm that
the event was the result of an artifact rather than the motion of the vehicle. Some examples of artifacts include ingress/ egress
or other significant movements such as repositioning ones self on the seat. Artifact removal is critical to achieving accurate
vibration metrics, especially VDV, which is more sensitive to transient motion than other metrics. Biometrics Analysis
Software was used to remove data related to artifacts as well as irrelevant data such as instances where the operator was not
seated. The remaining exposure data was processed using Vibration Analysis Tool Set (VATS) software, developed by
NexGen Ergonomics, Inc. The software performs calculations in accordance to ISO 2631-1 in order to produce the relevant
WBV assessment metrics.
GPS data is retained in case it becomes useful for additional analysis, such as testing the effects of speed or roadway
surface, etc.

3. RESULTS
In terms of basic vibration (RMS), the ISO 2631-1 Health Guidance Caution Zones boundaries are exposure time
dependent. The upper and lower boundaries of the Health Guidance Caution Zone (HGCZ) for each exposure time are
reported along with the acceleration data for the x-, y-, and z-axes, as shown in Table 1.

11

The XXV Annual Occupational Ergonomics and Safety Conference

Atlanta, GA, USA
June 6-7, 2013
Table 1. Basic Vibration (RMS) For Commonly Used Land and Aquatic Vehicles

The Boat, ATV, and Motorcycle exceed the lower boundary of the HGCZ for relatively short exposure times when
compared with occupational exposures.
In terms of vibration dose value (VDV), the HGCZ is defined by a lower boundary of 8.5 and an upper boundary of
17.0. The VDVs for the x-, y-, and z-axes are shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Vibration Dose Value (VDV) For Commonly Used Land and Aquatic Vehicles

12

The XXV Annual Occupational Ergonomics and Safety Conference

Atlanta, GA, USA
June 6-7, 2013
Note that the RMS and VDV values were adjusted using the health multiplier of 1.4 in the x- (for/aft) and y- (sideto-side) axes for comparison to the HGCZ per ISO 2631-1. The ATV, Motorcycle, Moving Truck, Lawn Tractor, and PWC
all exceed the lower boundary of the HGCZ for relatively short exposure times when compared with occupational exposures.
The boat was in excess of the upper boundary of the HGCZ.
In terms of daily equivalent compression dose (s ed ), the lower boundary is 0.5 and the upper boundary is 0.8. The
S ed values are shown in Table 3.
Table 3. Daily Equivalent Static Compression Dose (S ed ) For Commonly Used Land and Aquatic Vehicles

Per the ISO Standard 2631-5 (ISO 2004), S ed values for the Lawn Tractor exceed the level whereby there is a low
probability of an adverse health effect. Further, the exposures for the PWC Rough Water exceed the level whereby there is
a high probability of an adverse health effect. The ergonomist or health and safety practitioner must bear in mind that these
S ed values are based on 240 days of equal exposure per year, beginning at age 20 and continuing through age 65.
WBV exposures at the locomotive cab seat, as associated with the operation of locomotives, have been measured
and quantified for a variety of locomotive types. In all, 58 entire shifts of typical freight locomotive operation have been
analyzed using data that was collected by the authors of this paper as well as other researchers, including the Federal Railroad
Administration, whose methodology is consistent with consensus-based standards (ANSI, 2002; ISO, 1997; ISO 1997/2010;
ISO 2004; Cooperrider, Fries, & Larson, 1991; Cooperrider & Gordon, 2008; Cooperrider & Gordon, 2006; DiFiore, Zaouk,
Mansfield, & Punwani, 2011; Fries, Cooperrider, & Larson, 1993; Johanning, Fischer, Christ, Gores, & Landsbergis, 2002;
Johanning, Fischer, Christ, Gores, & Luhrman, 2006; Johanning et al., 2006; Larson, Raasch, & Pierce, 2006; Larson, Fries,
& Cooperrider, 2001; Page, Fleming, Weames, Vanderpool, & Frohlich, 2010a; Page, Fleming, Weames, Vanderpool, &
Frohlich, 2010b). Studies include both primary locomotive manufacturers: GE and EMD, as well as both locomotive cab
types: AAR control stand cab and Comfort Cab. Studies also include different service types, including through-freight and
yard service. Different operating conditions (e.g., speed, seat type, track conditions) have also been considered. The RMS,
VDV, and S ed vibration metrics for the 58 tests conducted on the Union Pacific Railroad and Burlington Northern Santa Fe
Railway are shown in Table 4.

13

The XXV Annual Occupational Ergonomics and Safety Conference

Atlanta, GA, USA
June 6-7, 2013
Table 4. RMS, VDV, and S ed vibration metrics for 58 locomotives tested under normal operating conditions

Whether one considers the average results by locomotive model or the average of all 58 train runs, Table 4 shows
that the vibration exposures at the locomotive cab seat were all either below or substantially below the lower boundary of
health guidance caution zone defined by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and the International Standards
Organization (ISO) for both basic RMS and VDV in all three orthogonal directions. According to ISO (ISO, 1997; ISO,
1997/2010) and ANSI (2002), for exposures below the zone, health effects have not been clearly documented and/or
objectively observed. The zone is in reference to the area between the lower and upper boundaries.
WBV assessment that accounts for a careers exposure, according to the ISO methodology (2631 Part 5) was 0.23
when considering the average of all 35 train runs whereby this measure was made or reported. Per the ISO Standard 2631-5
(ISO 2004), Sed values below 0.5 pose a low probability of an adverse health effect.

4. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The aim of this study was to provide objectively determined evidence of typical exposures to WBV for commonly
used land, aquatic, and home utility vehicles. Consideration of the results of this study may be used as a comparison to other
common-life activities or occupational exposures to WBV.
The vibration metrics of the five common-life vehicles that were assessed for this paper show many similarities with
the seven common-life vehicles assessed by Gibson and Gibbons (2006). Generally speaking, outdoor recreational vehicles
had the greatest WBV exposures, while passenger vehicles had lower WBV exposures. Exposure data for the passenger
vehicles studied by Gibson and Gibbons (2006) were very similar to the sport coupe that was assessed for this study. The
greatest variation occurred among the aquatic vehicles, which is to be expected due to the wide variation in vehicle design,
vehicle operation, and variations in water conditions. For instance, the PWC is capable of much greater speed and
maneuverability than the pontoon boat and is capable of both skipping along the surface of rough, choppy water and barreling
into large wakes.
Locomotive cab WBV characteristics at the seat pan are substantially below those found among recreational
vehicles such as: motorcycles, boats, and snowmobiles (Waters, 2008). In fact, the vibration characteristics in the seated
locomotive cab environment are comparable to other common on-road passenger vehicles, like a sedan, SUV, and pickup
truck (Gibson & Gibbons, 2006). This is true despite the fact that the occupational exposures in the locomotive cab
environment are generally longer in duration than the exposures found among commonly used land and aquatic vehicles.
Exposure times are of the utmost importance when considering the health effects of WBV exposure. Recreational
exposures are not likely to be as regular or as prolonged as occupational exposures. The VDV is a useful metric, not only
because it places the greatest emphasis on shocks and jolts but also because the duration of exposure is integrated into its
calculation. One could normalize VDV results to a fixed exposure time to facilitate the comparison between exposures,
however in doing so, one would risk diminishing the applicability of that exposure to real life circumstances. For instance, if

14

The XXV Annual Occupational Ergonomics and Safety Conference

Atlanta, GA, USA
June 6-7, 2013
one were to normalize the duration of exposure of all of the commonly used land and aquatic vehicles to 5.55 hours of
exposure in order to be consistent with the occupational exposure time for the locomotive cab environment, then the pickup
truck, SUV, sport coupe, and pontoon boat would be the only vehicles with VDVs below the lower boundary of the HGCZ.
Further, the boat, ATV, and PWC (both smooth and rough water conditions) would have VDVs in excess of the upper
boundary of the HGCZ. This comports with the fact that these vehicles are among the least likely to be used for 5.55 hours
per day.
To conclude, in some instances, avocational and other recreational exposures to WBV are high enough that caution
with respect to potential health risks is indicated (ISO, 1997; ISO, 1997/2010). In comparison to one extensively measured
occupational environment, WBV exposure is, on average, low enough to be reasonably safe against adverse health effects of
the lumbar spine.
The authors intend to continue their research in the areas of commonly used land and aquatic vehicles. Studies
involving additional passenger vehicles, a city bus driver seat, a pontoon boat on rough water, and a motorcycle are currently
in progress.

5. REFERENCES
ANSI (2002). Mechanical vibration and shock-Evaluation of human exposure to whole-body vibration, part 1: General
requirements (S3.18-2002). American National Standards Institute, N.Y.
Batti, M.C., Videman, T., Gibbons, L.E., Manninen, H., Gill, K., Pope, M., & Kaprio, J. (2002). Occupational driving and
lumbar disc degeneration: a case-control study. The Lancet, 360: 1369-1374.
Bible, J.E., Choemprayong, S., ONeill, K.R., Clinton, J.D., & Spengler, D.M. (2012). Whole-body vibration: is there a
causal relationship to specific imaging findings of the spine? Spine, 37(21): 1348-1355.
Bovenzi, M. (1996). Low back pain disorders and exposure to whole-body vibration in the workplace. Seminars in
Perinatology, 20(1): 38-53.
Cooperrider, N.K., Fries, R.H., & Larson, R.E. (1991). Ride Quality Assessments For a 6-Axle Locomotive and a Heavy
Truck, American Society of Mechanical Engineers (Reprinted From RTD-Vol. 4, Rail Transportation, Book No.
H00724), 153-160.
Cooperrider, N.K., & Gordon J.J. (2008). Shock and impact levels on North American locomotives. Journal of Sound and
Vibration, 318: 809-819.
Cooperrider, N.K., & Gordon, J.J. (2006). Shock and impact on North American locomotives evaluates with ISO 2631 Parts
1 and 5. Proceedings of the First American Conference on Human Vibration, NIOSH Publication No. 2006-140: 7778.
DiFiore, A.M., Zaouk, A.K., Mansfield, N.J., & Punwani S.K.J. (2011). Whole-body vibration in locomotive cabs.
Proceedings of the ASME 2011 Rail Transportation Division Fall Technical Conference (RTDF2011-67016),
September 21-22, 2011, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA, 1-10.
Drerup, B., Granitzka, M., Assheuer, J., & Zerlett, G. (1999). Assessment of disc injury in subjects exposed to long-term
whole-body vibration. European Spine Journal, 8: 458-467.
Fries, R.H., Cooperrider, N.K., & Larson, R.E. (1993). Locomotive and Road Vehicle Ride Quality Assessments, American
Society of Mechanical Engineers (Reprinted From RTD-Vol. 6, Rail Transportation, Book No. 100359), 219-227.
Gibson, R.G. & Gibbons, J.D. (2006). A case-study of whole-body vibration exposures associated with ordinary passenger
and recreational vehicles. Proceedings of the First American Conference on Human Vibration, NIOSH Publication
No. 2006-140: 48-49.
ISO (1997). Mechanical vibration and shock-Evaluation of human exposure to whole-body vibration, part 1: General
requirements (2631-1). International Organization for Standardization, Switzerland.
ISO (1997/2010). Mechanical vibration and shock-Evaluation of human exposure to whole-body vibration, part 1: General
requirements (2631-1), Amendment 1. International Organization for Standardization, Switzerland.
ISO (2004). Mechanical vibration and shock-Evaluation of human exposure to whole-body vibration, part 5: Method for
evaluation of vibration containing multiple shocks (2631-5). International Organization for Standardization,
Switzerland.
Johanning, E., Fischer, S., Christ, E., Gores, B., & Landsbergis, P. (2002). Whole-body vibration exposure study in U.S.
railroad locomotives: an ergonomic risk assessment. American Industrial Hygiene Journal, 63: 439-446.
Johanning, E., Fischer, S., Christ, E., Gores, B., & Luhrman, R. (2006a). Railroad locomotive whole-body vibration study:
vibration, shocks, and seat ergonomics. Proceedings of the First American Conference on Human Vibration. NIOSH
Publication No. 2006-140: 150-151.

15

The XXV Annual Occupational Ergonomics and Safety Conference

Atlanta, GA, USA
June 6-7, 2013
Johanning, E., Landsbergis, P., Fischer, S., Christ, E., Gores, B., & Luhrman, R. (2006b). Whole-body vibration and
ergonomic study of US railroad locomotives. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 298: 594-600.
Larson, R., Raasch, C., & Pierce, J. (2006). Measurement and evaluation of vibration exposure for locomotive crew
members. Proceedings of the First American Conference on Human Vibration. NIOSH Publication No. 2006-140:
121-122
Larson, R.E., Fries, R.H. & Cooperrider, N.K. (2001). A Comparison of Impact and Vibration on Locomotive Crew
Members with Exposures in Activities of Daily Living, Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE/ASME Joint Railroad
Conference (IEEE Catalog Number 01CH37235/ASME RTD Volume 20), April 17-19, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Page, G., Fleming, S., Weames, G., Vanderpool, J., & Frohlich, J. (2010a). Whole-body Vibration Exposure at the Seat Pan:
an investigation of jointed rail upon the locomotive cab. Proceedings of the 22nd Annual International Occupational
Ergonomics and Safety Conference (ISBN #97809652558-7-5), June 10-11, Tempe, Arizona, USA: 169-172.
Page, G., Fleming, S., Weames, G., Vanderpool, J., & Frohlich, J. (2010b). Data compilation and risk analysis for exposure
to occupational physical factors for the North American railroad train crew: part II. Proceedings of the 41st Annual
Conference of the Association of Canadian Ergonomist, Kelona, British Columbia.
Videman, T., Simonen, R., Usenius, J-P., Osterman, K., & Battie, M.C. (2000). The long-term effects of rally driving on
spinal pathology. Clinical Biomechanics, 15: 83-86.
Village, J., Trask, C., Chow, Y., Morrison. J.B., Koehoorn, M., & Teschke, K. (2012). Assessing whole body vibration
exposure for use in epidemiological studies of back injuries: measurements, observations and self-reports.
Ergonomics, 55(4): 415-424.
Waters, T., Genaidy, A., Viruet, H.B., & Makola, M. (2008). The impact of operating heavy equipment vehicles on lower
back disorders. Ergonomics, 51(5): 602-636.
Waters, T., Rauches, C., Genaidy, A., & Rashed, T. (2007). A new framework for evaluating potential risk of back disorders
due to whole body vibration and repeated mechanical shock. Ergonomics, 50(3): 379-395.

16