add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
It occured to me that if the driver were at the center of a vehicle the impact would have to travel further to cause harm. Also a moving seat actuated either electromagnetically or chemically like airbags could move to compensate for the impact acceleration to minimize physical harm.
Just replace
the windshield with full surface flatscreen monitors so the center driver has perfect vision. there are less windshield debris, as well as greater structural strength that way as well.
At less than $100 per sq ft LCD (computer monitors) 20 sq ft of visual field would be around 2k$. If the car was proven to be a tenth as deadly at a crash as a result of central positioned driver (with chemical motion compensation) that would be a rather affordable feature.
There is another feature as well. It is possible the vehicles monitor view mode reduces cardiovascular disease as well. The Economist notes a .996 correlation between miles driven n plumpness. I think it is possible that a vigilance while stationary activity could cause a physiological program that responds to hours of wariness plus waiting as a cue to store food as plumpness.
I do not know how to drive yet the idea that several hours a week of watchful acitvity absent physical movement could cause plumpness has some support. The opposite, merely walking rapidly three times a week .5 hour makes people thinner. Thus 3 or 4 times the amount of the physical opposite plus the watchfulness part could be a physiological cue to store food as energy.
Thats where the monitors bring benefit. It is possible a redrawn sims-like view of the drivers path could cause less stress or be decorated with augmented reality amusements that soothe.
I think it highly likely that a third less vehicle plumpness effect would save vastly more person years (millions) than ending all accidents.
Have drivers use photorealistic simulators compared with augmented reality simscapes to see if body mass moves towards wellness. Also its possible that simplified augmented reality could actually improve driving with reduced distractions.
early prototype
http://www.bing.com...first=0&FORM=IDFRIR
[beanangel, Jun 17 2011]
Drive time causes plumpness, perhaps from hours of alert nonmobility
http://www.economis...obesity-and-driving
[beanangel, Jun 17 2011]
Related...
Add-on_20pseudo_20SUV_20kit
[normzone, Jun 17 2011]
It's gonna cost you.
http://www.tennodai...renF1_cockpit04.jpg
[DIYMatt, Jun 18 2011]
[link]
|
| |
If the driver is in the middle of the cabin, where
are the passengers? |
|
| |
Also, I'm not sure that a "moving seat" will help. (I
presume you mean that the seat moves during the
impact, to control the deceleration?). |
|
| |
Suppose the car is travelling at 20m/s and hits a
solid object. The driver has to decelerate from
20m/s to 0m/s. The distance over which he/she
can do this is equal to his/her distance from the
nose of the car, at most; in reality, the engine is
not compressible and so the available distance is
less. A good crumple-zone will deform
progressively so that this available distance is
used up smoothly, with a fairly uniform
deceleration. |
|
| |
I don't see how actively moving the seat will help:
if you move it backward (relative to the floor) at
the time of impact, that simply steepens the
deceleration. If you move it forward, you delay
the deceleration but then have to endure a
steeper deceleration as the chair reaches its limit
of travel. |
|
| |
I didn't follow the thing about vehicle plumpness. |
|
| |
And what happens when the camera gets a wet
leaf on it? |
|
| |
[ ] because I'm in a [ ] mood. |
|
| |
regarding acceleration, airbags as well as those building shake earthquake compensators as well as dragster netting all use gradualized deceleration to minimize harm. With possibly a few feet of chair movement to gradually decelerate the force of impact is reduced. For really wild results consider someone getting a push on round rotating thing, they would just rotate; with a center position driver its possible the two components of the force of the collision could be physically configured as angular momentum with a direction as well. |
|
| |
the big lifesaving benefit is from finding out what causes the correlation between drive time and body mass. Perhaps a tenth less body mass may mean a tenth less cardiovasular disease which likely represents several times more person years saved than averting all traffic accidents. |
|
| |
I think the driving causes plumpness effect the Economist link notes could have something to do with alertness with nonmobility. Thus the augmented reality version of a windshield could possibly be stress minimized. |
|
| |
// With possibly a few feet of chair movement to
gradually decelerate the force of impact is
reduced.// |
|
| |
Beany, beany, beany - this doesn't answer my point.
The person has a finite distance over which to stop,
and a good crumple zone will use up as much as
possible of that distance in a smooth decelleration.
How is your chair going to move in order to reduce
the peak deceleration? |
|
| |
I imagine that a sliding chair could allow a more fine-tuned deceleration, using a computer and/or various accelerometers, than a crumple zone. |
|
| |
[FT] But it has to slide in different directions
according to the direction of impact. |
|
| |
Perhaps the chair could slide in tracks which ran
along a diameter of an eccentrically weighted
turntable, so that, whatever the direction of
impact, the tracks spun to the correct orientation.
Would have sort of wrenching motion, though, which
might tend to unscrew people's heads. |
|
| |
//a sliding chair could allow a more fine-tuned
deceleration, using a computer and/or various
accelerometers, than a crumple zone.// |
|
| |
True enough. On the other hand, unless the car is
driven using a very long, telescopic collapsible
steering wheel, the chair hasn't got much room to
work in. |
|
| |
A seatbelt already fulfils this sliding seat advantage by stretching, and airbags also aid the crumple zone. Some cars do even have seats that absorb impact by moving forward, like convertobles that have a seat-integrated seatbelt. From a safety standpoint this idea is kind of pointless. Almost all modern cars are incredibly safe with existing safety equipment. |
|
| |
Further isloating the driver from reality in the name of perceived safety. |
|
| |
//airbags aid the crumple zone//
No they don't. They're there to spread out a deceleration restraint across the body and to keep your head from flying off. |
|
| |
I'm in favour of center-steering mostly because it's more balanced esthetically, but drivers trained on such would also have an easier time tracking the vehicle to lane-width. Poorer drivers tend to either line their bodies up instead of the vehicles, resulting in people crowding the left-side who are following the line, and people crowding the right who are placing themselves in the middle of the lane. |
|
| |
Best, of course, would be that adopted by some older small/medium-sized aircraft: the steering wheel mounted on an arm extending from a center post, which can be passed from left-side to right. |
|
| |