Perceived discomfort and neuromuscular fatigue during long-duration real driving with different car seats.

INTRODUCTION: Identification of the seat features that could improve driving experience is a main issue for automotive companies. OBJECTIVE: Long duration real driving sessions were performed to assess the effect of three seats (soft-S1, firm-S2 and suspended-S3) on perceived discomfort and neuromuscular fatigue (NMF). MATERIALS & METHODS: For each seat, the muscular activity of bilateral Trapezius Descendens (TD), Erector Spinae (ES) and Multifidus (MF) muscles of twenty-one participants was recorded during real driving sessions of 3-hours each lasting approximately 3 hours and following the same itinerary. During each driving session, participants were also regularly asked to self-evaluate their level of whole-body and local discomfort. In addition, an endurance static test (EST) was performed before (ESTpre) and after (ESTpost) each driving session to assess the seat effect on physical capacity. RESULTS: Whole-body discomfort increased with driving time for all seats, but this increase became significant latter for S3. The highest scores of local discomfort occurred for neck and lower back. Contrary to S1 and S2, the duration of ESTpost was not significantly lower compared to ESTpre with the S3. Interestingly, muscular activity of S1 remained stable throughout the driving task which could be attributed to sustained muscular contraction, while muscular recruitment adjustments occurred for S2 and S3 from 1H00 of driving. This muscular compensation concerns mostly the right side for S2 and S3 but with different profiles. On the left side, the muscular adjustments concern only the MF with S2 and the ES with S3. CONCLUSION: Overall, our results demonstrated that S3 could be considered as the most suitable seat to delay discomfort and NMF appearance.

Influence of car seat firmness on seat pressure profiles and perceived discomfort during prolonged simulated driving.

During a driving task, the seat-driver interface is particularly influenced by the external environment and seat features. This study compares the effect of two different seats (S1 - soft & S2 - firm) and the effect of visual simulation of different road types (city, highway, mountain, country), on pressure distribution and perceived discomfort during prolonged driving. Twenty participants drove two 3-h sessions (one per seat) on a static simulator. Contact Pressure (CP), Contact Surface (CS), and Seat Pressure Distribution Percentage (SPD%) were analyzed throughout, using two pressure mats positioned on seat cushion and backrest. Whole-body and local discomfort for each body part were rated every 20 min. The softer seat, S1, induced a greater contact surface on cushion and backrest and a lower SPD%, reflecting better pressure distribution. Pressure profiles were asymmetrical for both S1 and S2, with higher CP under left buttock (LBu) and right lower back (RLb) and greater CS under thighs and RLb. Pressure distribution was less homogeneous on mountain and city roads than on monotonous roads (highway and country). Despite the pressure differences between the seats, however, both led to similar increases in perceived whole-body discomfort throughout the driving session. Moreover, the highest discomfort scores were in the neck and the lower back areas, whatever the seat. These findings on pressure variables may have implications for the design of backrests and cushions to ensure more homogeneous pressure distribution, even though this is not shown to minimize perceived driver discomfort.

Car seat impact on driver's sitting behavior and perceived discomfort during prolonged real driving on varied road types.

Prolonged driving under real conditions can entail discomfort linked to driving posture, seat design features, and road properties like whole-body vibrations (WBV). This study evaluated the effect of three different seats (S1 = soft; S2 = firm; S3 = soft with suspension system) on driver's sitting behavior and perceived discomfort on different road types in real driving conditions. Twenty-one participants drove the same 195 km itinerary alternating highway, city, country, and mountain segments. Throughout the driving sessions, Contact Pressure (CP), Contact Surface (CS), Seat Pressure Distribution Percentage (SPD%) and Repositioning Movements (RM) were recorded via two pressure mats installed on seat cushion and backrest. Moreover every 20 minutes, participants rated their whole-body and local discomfort. While the same increase in whole-body discomfort with driving time was observed for all three seats, S3 limited local perceived discomfort, especially in buttocks, thighs, neck, and upper back. The pressure profiles of the three seats were similar for CP, CS and RM on the backrest but differed on the seat cushion. The soft seats (S1 & S3) showed better pressure distribution, with lower SPD% than the firm seat (S2). All three showed highest CP and CS under the thighs. Road type also affected both CP and CS of all three seats, with significant differences appearing between early city, highway and country segments. In the light of these results, automotive manufacturers could enhance seat design for reduced driver discomfort by combining a soft seat cushion to reduce pressure peaks, a firm backrest to support the trunk, and a suspension system to minimize vibrations.

Neuromuscular fatigue profiles depends on seat feature during long duration driving on a static simulator.

Prolonged driving could induce neuromuscular fatigue and discomfort since drivers have little opportunity to adjust their position. However, better car seat design could play a major role in limiting these effects. This study compared the effect of two different seats (S - soft and F - firm) on neuromuscular fatigue and driver's perceived discomfort during prolonged driving, also assessing the effect of different road types on neuromuscular activity. Twenty participants performed two 3-h driving sessions, one for each seat, on a static simulator. Every 20 min, participants self-evaluated their level of whole-body and individual body-area discomfort. Surface electromyography (sEMG) was recorded for eight muscles including Trapezius descendens (TD), Erector spinae longissimus (ESL), Multifidus (MF), Vastus lateralis (VL) and Tibialis anterior (TA) throughout the driving sessions. Moreover, an endurance static test (EST) was performed prior to and after each driving session. Whole-body discomfort increased with time with both seats, but no difference in discomfort scores was observed between seats throughout the driving sessions. The highest discomfort scores were for neck and lower back areas with both seats. Neuromuscular fatigue was revealed by a shorter endurance time in post-driving EST for both seats. EMG recordings showed different neuromuscular fatigue profiles for the two seats, with earlier onset of fatigue for S. Despite the lack of difference in perceived discomfort level, the two seats have different impacts: the softness of S induces greater activity of the lower back muscles, while F offers greater support for the lower back.