HUMAN PERCEPTION OF SINUSOIDAL

ROTATIONAL STEERING WHEEL VIBRATION.

M.S. Shayaa , J.A Giacomin, E. Dormegnie * and L. Richard **

Department of Mechanical Engineering * Centre de Technologies ** Centre Technique Renault

The University of Sheffield Michelin Ladoux , Le Parc de Gaillon, Service 0076
Mappin Street, Sheffield S1 3JD 63040 Clermont-Ferrand F 27940 Aubevoye
United Kingdom. Cedex 9, France. France.

Abstract
This study investigated the human perception of rotational automobile steering wheel
vibration. Three equal sensation tests were determined using sinusoidal test signals with
reference amplitudes of 0.2 ms-2, 0.4 ms-2 and 0.5 ms-2 respectively. An annoyance
threshold test was performed to find the maximum vibration amplitude that subjects were
willing to be exposed to for a duration of approximately 10 seconds. A total of 70 human
subjects participated in this experiment and 30 subjects were chosen randomly for each
test. Tests were performed on a laboratory steering wheel vibration rig using sinusoidal
signals in the range from 5Hz to 315 Hz, using center frequencies on the 1/3 octave scale.
The equal sensation test results showed decreased sensitivity with increasing frequency.
Age, gender, height, weight, driving position and driving experience were found to have no
influence on perception for the sample size used in this study. Large data variance was
found in most tests, particularly above 100Hz. Regression lines were fitted (R2=0.97 on
average) to the experimental values of each curve. A steering wheel frequency weighting
curve, W s , was constructed using the normalized value of the equal sensation curves.
Finally, W s was compared to the hand vibration filter W h taken from BS 6842.

1. Introduction

In the automotive industry significant effort has been made in recent years to define comfort indices, or
quality indices, for vehicle subsystems. The sensations produced by the vibration stimuli which reach the
vehicle driver can provide important information regarding the dynamic state of the vehicle, but can also
provide annoyance and discomfort. Figure 1a illustrates the three main interfaces by which a vehicle
transmits tactile information to the driver; namely the foot interface (floorpan and pedals), the body
interface (seat cushion and backrest) and the hand-arm interface (steering wheel and gearshift).

Of the various vehicle subsystems, the steering [13,17] is very important due to its central role in
controlling the vehicle and due to the importance of the hand-arm system as a source of information to
the driver. Vibration can be transmitted in the x, y and z direction of a steering wheel (see Figure 1 b),
depending on the irregularities of different types of roads through the interaction of different tyres [20, 21].
The energy transmitted to the steering wheel covers a wide range of frequencies, often up to 300 Hz [21].
In certain cases, the steering column and wheel can exhibit large amplitudes due to resonances above 20
Hz [20] . Although the vibrational response of the steering may not present a hazard, the hand-

Presented at the 36th United Kingdom Group Meeting on Human Responses to Vibration, held at Centre
for Human Sciences, QinetiQ, Farnborough, UK, 12 – 14 September 2001.
transmitted vibration can cause discomfort, annoyance and fatigue [11]. For what regards perceived
comfort, research has shown sinusoidal hand vibration will produce similar levels of discomfort to whole
body vibration when the vibration level is 5 to 7 times larger. Given the vibration levels typically
measured in road vehicles, this indicates that the hand is likely to be a potential source of discomfort [19].

Steering Wheel
Vibration
Vertical

Fore-aft
Lateral
Seat Vibration Floor and Pedal
Vibration

Figure 1a) Main sources of vibration disturbances in a vehicle. 1b) Axis of vibration on a steering wheel

When the hand is in contact with a vibrating surface, perception occurs largely due to the action of the
skin mechanoreceptors. Psychophysical studies have shown that there are at least two
mechanoreceptors responsible for the perception of vibration stimuli of the skin; Pacinian corpuscles and
Meissner’s corpuscles [27] . Studies have shown that the Pacinian system responds to a wide range of
frequencies; 20 – 2000 Hz [7], but the peak sensitivity of the Pacinian corpuscles is believed to occur in
the region from 60 Hz to 400 Hz [27]. On the other hand, the non-Pacinian system, believed to be
dominated by Meissner corpuscles, is thought to respond mainly at frequencies below 45 Hz [28] . In the
range of 40 Hz to 80 Hz, either the Pacinian or the Meissner’s corpuscles may be responsible for
perception depending on the contact area, pressure, and other test conditions. [9].

Several studies have been performed to investigate the interaction between vibrating surfaces and the
hand-arm system [9]. Reynolds et al, [22 - 25] investigated hand-arm response to vibrating handles by
analyzing the mechanical and subjective responses of 8 subjects. The method of constant stimuli was
used where subjects were required to adjust the vibration stimuli until it produced the same sensation as
the reference vibration signal. They found that vibration at frequencies above 100 Hz was isolated
primarily to the hands and fingers. For annoyance tests, they found that vibration in the y-axis (i.e along
the tubular handle according to basicentric [2] coordinate system) caused the least discomfort while
vertical (z-axis) caused the greatest discomfort. For equal sensation contours, 100 Hz was used as the
reference frequency and vibration levels were 1.0, 10.0 and 50.1 ms-2 rms.
Miwa [15] performed equal sensation tests and annoyance threshold tests for 10 subjects holding their
palm flat against a vibrating plate for vertical and horizontal vibration. The measurements of threshold and
equal sensation were performed using the method of paired comparisons. He found that the equal
sensation curves of the hand above 10Hz showed good agreement with those of the whole body; the
acceleration threshold reached a maximum sensitivity at 100 Hz. He also concluded that the sensation for
both horizontal and vertical vibration was equal at the same vibration acceleration level and frequency.

Burstrom and Lundstrom [3] have performed several studies which investigated the influence of vibration
direction, grip force, vibration level, and hand-arm posture on the energy absorption of the hand-arm
system. They concluded that energy absorption was dependent mainly on the frequency and direction of
vibration. Absorption increased with both higher energy levels and firmer handgrips. They also stated that
varying hand-arm postures produced only small changes in the absorption of the translational energy,
while the size and mass of the subject’s hand and arm greatly affects energy absorption.

A recent study by Giacomin and Onesti [10] produced equal sensation curves in the frequency range from
8 Hz to 125 Hz using reference amplitudes of 1.86 and 5.58 ms-2. They concluded that a linear iso-
comfort weighting might be acceptable at 5-10% accuracy for evaluating typical steering wheel vibration
signals over the frequency range considered, and that grip tightness would not greatly effect the
evaluation. Mechan and Versmold [14] performed an investigation using 30 subjects which produced
equal sensation curves for the frequency range 4 Hz to 32 Hz and they found a linear behaviour within
the frequency range considered.

Studies such as those by Miwa have lead to the development of a frequency weighting filter for the hand,
W h , as defined in BS 6842 [2]. British Standard 6842 provides guidance on measuring and evaluating
hand-transmitted vibration exposure in three orthogonal axes over the frequency range 8Hz to 1000Hz.
The objective is to evaluate the potential for tissue damage to the hand due to the presence of vibration.
The weighting function W h is band-limited with low pass and high pass filters at 6.3 Hz and 1250 Hz
respectively. The shape of the function appears to be based on Miwa’s equal sensation curves [16] ; i.e
constant acceleration below 16 Hz and constant velocity above 16 Hz.

The study described in this paper represents an extension of previous research regarding the perception
of steering wheel rotational vibration performed at The University of Sheffield. The main objective of this
study was to investigate the human perception and to define a frequency weighting curve for the
evaluation of steering wheel vibrational comfort. Equal sensation and annoyance tests were performed in
the range from 5 Hz to 315 Hz using sinusoidal rotational vibration signals . A frequency weighting filter,
W s, for the steering wheel was defined and compared to the existing hand filter, W h .
2. Experimental Method

2.1 Test Apparatus

The tests were performed using the rig shown in Figure 2 which consisted of a rigid steering wheel
connected to a shaft supported by 3 radial bearings. The shaft incorporates a lever arm which is
connected to an electrodynamic shaker unit by means of a stinger rod. All mechanical components (i.e
steering wheel, shaft, bench) were modeled using the finite element method and were found rigid to
frequencies in excess of 300 Hz. The seat, guide-rail and the bench geometric dimensions (see Table 1)
were chosen based on average data from European B-segment automobiles. Seat horizontal travel and
back-rest inclination were fully adjustable.

Figure 2. Steering wheel rotational vibration test rig.

Geometric Parameter Value

Steering column angle with respect to floor 23°
Steering wheel hub centre height above floor 710 mm
Seat H point height from floor 275 mm
Horizontal distance from H point to steering wheel hub centre 390 – 450 mm
Steering wheel handle diameter 12.5 mm
Steering wheel diameter 325 mm
Natural Frequency of the test bench 310 Hz.

Table 1. Geometric dimensions of the steering wheel test rig.

The steering wheel was vibrated by means of a G&W V20 electrodynamic shaker driven by PA 100
amplifier [8], using the internal sine wave generator. The acceleration obtained at the steering wheel was
measured using an Entran EGAS-FS-25 accelerometer located on the top left side of the steering wheel.
The accelerometer signal was amplified by means of an Entran MSC6 signal-conditioning unit [6] and
monitored by Tektronix TDS210 digital oscilloscope [26].
2.2 Test Signals

Three equal sensation tests; namely test 1, test 2 and test 3 were performed at different frequency and
amplitude values. The selection of test frequencies and amplitudes was based on the analysis of steering
wheel vibration levels obtained from tests of a Renault automobile on 7 road surfaces using 175/65 R14
and 225/45 R16 tyres driven at 45 m.p.h. [21]. An annoyance threshold test was also performed to
measure the maximum level of steering wheel vibration that the subjects were willing to withstand for 10
seconds of exposure time. The frequency range of interest was chosen to be from 5Hz to 315 Hz, using
the center frequencies of the 1/3 octave band scale. The reference frequencies for equal sensation test 2
and 3 were chosen at 0.2 and 0.4 ms-2 r.m.s respectively, both at 10 Hz. However, due to the limitation of
the shaker, equal sensation test 1 was performed with reference amplitude of 0.5 ms-2 r.m.s at 40 Hz.
Table 3 summarizes the reference frequencies and amplitude levels.

Types of Test Reference Reference Amplitude

Frequency (Hz) Acceleration (m/s2 r.m.s)
Equal Sensation Test 1 40 0.5
Equal Sensation Test 2 10 0.2
Equal Sensation Test 3 10 0.4

Table 3. Frequencies and amplitudes of the reference signals.

2.3 Test Methods

A variation of the method of constant stimuli [4, 9] was used for the equal sensation tests. A reference
vibration stimuli was used for generating each of the three equal sensation curves. The three reference
stimuli were 0.5 ms-2 r.m.s at 40 Hz, 0.2 ms-2 r.m.s at 10 Hz and 0.4 ms-2 r.m.s at 10 Hz. Each reference
stimuli was presented to the test subjects for 20 seconds, then the frequency of the stimulus was
changed and the subjects were asked to give verbal instructions so as to adjust the amplitude of the new
stimuli until it produced a similar sensation to the reference. During each test, the subject was required to
compare the test signal to the reference within a 30 second time interval so as to remain within human
short term memory [1]. All 1/3 octave band frequencies in the range from 5 Hz to 315 Hz (i.e 5, 10, 12.5,
16, 20, 25, 31.5, 40, 50, 63, 80, 100, 125, 160, 200, 250 and 315 Hz) were tested. Since human
judgement has been shown to be relative rather than absolute [4 ], stimuli comparisons were limited to
occur between frequencies which were no more than one full octave (i.e doubling of frequency) apart.

For each octave band, a set of test frequencies was defined. Each equal sensation test consisted of
exposing a subject to the reference then to one of the test frequencies chosen randomly from the set for
the octave band in question. When all test frequencies for the band were completed, the highest
frequency was set as the new reference signal for the next octave band under investigation and the
amplitude given by the test subject during their test of that frequency was taken as the new reference
amplitude. By means of this procedure, and starting from the lowest reference frequency of the particular
equal sensation curve (either 10 or 40 Hz), the tests were propagated to higher frequencies until all 1/3
octave band frequencies were tested from 5 to 315 Hz. Setting new reference signals after every doubling
of frequency produced reference signals at 10, 20, 40 ,80 160 and 315 Hz. By means of this procedure
every frequency from 10 Hz to 160 Hz was tested twice, once with reference to a lower frequency and
once with reference to a higher frequency. The average of the two results was taken for all calculations.

For the annoyance threshold tests, an approach known as “Up and Down” Method of Limits (i.e Von
Bekesy Method) was used [4,9]. In this approach the experimenter made adjustments which depended
on the response of the subject. The adjustments involved three steps. The magnitude of vibration was
first increased in small increments until the subjects perceived it as “annoying”. The subjects were asked
to indicate the vibration level which produced an annoyance that they could withstand for 10 seconds.
Then the magnitude was decreased until they perceive it as “not annoying”. To increase the accuracy and
avoid overshooting the magnitude by the experimenter, the vibration level was increased again until the
subjects perceive it as “annoying”. All center frequencies of 1/3 octave band from 5 Hz to 315 Hz were
used as the test signals. Signals were presented in a random order to avoid learning effects.

2.4 Test Protocol

Each equal sensation test lasted approximately 30 minutes and each annoyance test lasted about 20
minutes. Each test consisted of 7 main phases as outlined in Table 4. Prior to testing, a consent form was
given and information was gathered from each subject regarding their anthropometry, health, driving
experience and previous vibration exposure. A trial run was conducted to familiarize the subjects with the
method before acquiring any data. Not more than two tests were allowed for each subject in a day to
avoid fatigue and learning effects. During all tests, subjects were asked to wear ear protectors and blind
glasses to avoid visual and audio interferences.
 Phase Tasks performed and information obtained
Consent Form and The subject was asked to read the intended purpose of the experiments and to
Questionnaire sign a consent form. Each subject furnished all personal details by means of a
(~3 minutes) short questionnaire.

Adjustment of The subject was asked to remove heavy clothing, watches, and jewellery. They
Driving Posture were then asked to adjust the sitting posture to a comfortable position,
(~1 minute) simulating the driving task as realistically as possible.

Measurement of Four postural angles; arm, wrist, back and shoulder angles were measured
Posture Angles using a full circle goniometer.
(~1 minute)
Preparation for Test Instructions were given to the subject. Each subject was asked to wear ear
(~1 minute) protectors and to wear blind glasses before gripping the steering wheel. They
were also required to maintain a constant grip force with both hands on the
steering wheel as if they were driving over a winding country road at 50 m.p.h.

Familiarization The test subjects were familiarized with the signals and methods used. A
(~2 minutes) maximum of two test runs were performed.

Equal Sensation Test * * To avoid fatigue and learning effects, each subject was allowed to perform a
( 25 minutes) no more than two equal sensation tests on a given day.

Break A short break was given after finishing the first set of tests to avoid fatigue.
( ~ 3 minutes)

Annoyance Test An annoyance test was performed on each subject.

(15 minutes)

Table 4. Main phases of the test protocol.

2.5 Test Subjects

30 subjects were chosen randomly for each test from a database of 70 subjects. The 70 subject
population consisted mostly of students and staff from within the University of Sheffield. 49 of them were
male and 21 females aged from 18 – 50 years with an average of 21.5 years and standard deviation of
6.5 years. Their height ranged from 1.5 to 2.0 metres, with an average of 1.7 metres and standard
deviation of 0.1 metres. Weight of the subjects ranged 45 to 90 kg, with an average of 62.6 kg and
standard deviation of 13.1 kg. More than 50% of the subjects ranked the comfort level of their vehicles as
being “good” based on the questionnaires given. Only one subject responded “slight discomfort”. On
average, 55% of the subjects drove 1 to 2 hours daily, but 10% had no driving experience. All subjects
were in good health and physically fit to undergo the vibration experiments.

3. Results

3.1 Effect of Frequency and Amplitude

Figure 5 presents the average equal sensation contours and the annoyance curve for 30 subjects plotted
in terms of r.m.s acceleration amplitude as a function of frequency from 5 to 315 Hz. The results show
approximately linear behaviour in all tests from 5 to 60 Hz. Above 60 Hz the curves were observed to
increase rapidly in a non-linear manner. The equal sensation curves, except for test 1, were found to
converge towards the annoyance threshold level above 100 Hz.

To investigate whether the equal sensation curves varied as a function of reference signal amplitude,
statistical significance tests were performed using a one-factor ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey Test [12] at
0.01 confidence level for each equal sensation curve. Results of paired comparison Tukey tests showed
equal sensation test 2 and test 3 may come from the same distribution. However, significant differences
were found for equal sensation test 1 (p<0.0001).

A transition was found to occur in the behaviour of all the curves in the frequency region between 50 Hz
to 80 Hz. The behaviour of the curves in this region was assumed to occur due to the combined
behaviour of the Pacinian and non-Pacinian systems. As reported by Verillo [27], the strongest action of
the Pacinian corpuscles is believed to occur in the frequency range from 60Hz to 400 Hz. Meissner’s
corpuscles are believed to be the main contributors to the perception of skin vibration at frequencies
approximately below 45 Hz. The transition which was found to occur in all four curves somewhere in the
neighbourhood of 60 Hz to 80 Hz can be hypothesized to be due to the action of the Pacinian corpuscles
which begin to dominate the nervous response to the vibration stimuli.

100
Equal Sensation Test 1 at 0.5 m/s2

Equal Sensation Test 2 at 0.2 m/s2

Acceleration (m/s2 r.m.s)

Equal Sensation Test 3 at 0.4 m/s2

10
Annoyance Threshold Test

0.1
1 10 100 1000
Frequency (Hz)

Figure 5. Mean experimental values of the equal sensation tests and annoyance threshold test
for 30 subjects.

The standard deviations were observed to increase with increasing frequency, with large values being
found above 100 Hz for all tests except for equal sensation test 1 (See Table 5). Above 100Hz, the
vibration stimuli was localized primarily to the hands and fingers [22].
 Frequency Equal Sensation Tests Annoyance
(Hz) Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Threshold Test
5 - 0.10 0.19 0.15
10 - 0.06 0.08 0.09
12.5 - 0.16 0.19 0.10
16 - 0.21 0.29 0.15
20 - 0.32 0.45 0.16
25 - 0.42 0.63 0.29
31.5 0.01 0.61 0.70 0.29
40 0.01 0.78 1.08 0.26
50 0.02 1.01 1.30 0.30
63 0.02 1.51 1.21 0.33
80 0.03 3.16 1.84 0.33
100 0.03 4.11 1.92 0.60
125 0.03 7.13 3.84 1.02
160 0.06 22.04 13.19 2.33
200 0.09 28.11 27.34 6.96
250 0.27 47.87 96.97 24.91
315 0.24 64.70 129.70 32.28
Table 5. Mean standard deviation (ms –2 r.m.s) calculated for each frequency for 30 subjects.

3.2 Effect of Test Subject Anthropometry, Driving Posture and Experience

One Factor ANOVA and pos-hoc Tukey tests were applied to the data to determine whether age, gender,
height, weight, driving posture or driving experience significantly effected the vibration test results. At a
0.05 confidence level and for the sample size (n=30) considered, no significant differences were found.
Although the vibration testing results were unaffected by the above factors, gender was found to be a
significant factor affecting the driving posture. Significant differences were found for the arm and the back
angle of the driving posture between male and females (p=0.031 and p<0.0001 respectively). Female
subjects preferred driving postures with smaller arm and back angles; 133° and 102° on average. Male
subjects, on the other hand, preferred a more open posture [19] with arm angle of 143° and back angle of
110° on average.

3.3 Regression Lines

The equal sensation and annoyance curves were modeled as consisting of three distinct segments as
shown in Figure 6. Below 6.3 Hz a line of constant acceleration was fitted as an extrapolation based on
Miwa’s equal sensation curves [15]. A line of constant velocity (i.e acceleration increasing in proportion
with frequency) was fitted by linear regression from 6.3 Hz to 63 Hz. From 63 Hz to 315 Hz a line of
constant displacement (i.e acceleration increasing in proportion with the square of the frequency) was
fitted using a 2nd order polynomial. Regression lines at 0.05 confidence level showed good fit on all
curves with R2 = 0.97 on average. The regression lines were fitted using the least square method [12]
performed in Analyze-it ™ [30].
 100 100

Experimental Values Experimental Values

Acceleration (m/s2 r.m.s)

Regression Line
Acceleration (m/s2 r.m.s)

10 Regression Line R2=0.99

10
2
R =0.98
1

1
0.1 2
R =0.99
R2=0.99

0.01 0.1
1 10 100 1000 1 10 100 1000
Frequency (Hz) Frequency (Hz)

Figure 6a. Equal Sensation Test 1 Figure 6b. Equal Sensation Test 2
(0.5 ms-2 r.m.s at 40 Hz reference signal) (0.2 ms-2 r.m.s at 10 Hz reference signal)

100 100

Experimental Values
Experimental Values
Acceleration (m/s2 r.m.s)

Acceleration (m/s2 r.m.s)

Regression Line R2=0.93 R2=0.97

Regression Line
10 10

1 1
2
R2=0.97
R =0.92

0.1 0.1
1 10 100 1000 1 10 100 1000
Frequency (Hz) Frequency (Hz)

Figure 6c. Equal Sensation Test 3 Figure 6d. Annoyance Threshold Test
(0.4 ms-2 r.m.s at 10 Hz reference signal)

Figure 6(a-d). Regression lines fitted for the frequency range from 6.3 Hz to 63 Hz and for the frequency
range from 63 Hz to 315 Hz. (Regression line below 6.3 Hz was approximated by Miwa’s work [15].)
3.4 Frequency Weighting Curve of the Steering Wheel Rotational Vibration.

A frequency weighting curve, here called W s , was defined by taking the average values of the asymptotic
weightings of the equal sensation curves. The intended purpose of the W s curve is to weigh the frequency
components measured at the steering wheel for the purpose of quantifying the perceived comfort. The
values were normalized against the lowest value of the r.m.s acceleration and were expressed in terms of
decibels (dB). Three segments were defined : 1, 2, and 3. The segments were from 3Hz to 6.3 Hz, from
6.3 Hz to 63 Hz, and from 63 Hz to 315 Hz respectively (see Figure 7 below). Two transition points were
set at 6.3 Hz and 63Hz.

10 Realizable frequency weighting, Wh

(BS 6842)
0 Asymptotic Weighting of BS 6842

Frequency Weighting Curve of the

-10
Steering Wheel
Decibels (dB)

-20

-30

-40

-50

-60
1 10 100 1000 10000
Frequency (Hz)

Figure 7. Asymptotic weighting curve of rotating steering wheel, W s and

asymptotic weighting of the hand, W h taken from BS 6842

From 3 Hz to 6.3 Hz, the slope of the asymptotic curve was defined as 0 dB per octave based on the
extrapolation of Miwa’s work [15]. From 6.3 Hz to 63 Hz, the slope was found to be approximately -5.5 dB
per octave, and -16.3 dB per octave from 63 Hz to 315 Hz. The values of the slope were rounded to -6 dB
from 6.3 Hz to 63Hz and to -16dB from 63 Hz to 315 Hz.

The W s weighting curve developed as part of the research described in this paper was found to have
significant differences in shape compared to the asymptotic weighting curve of the hand, W h , described
in BS 6842 [2] . It was observed that W s had a lower turning-point frequency at 0 dB compared to W h (i.e
6.3 Hz for W s and 16 Hz for W h respectively). This implies that the decrease in sensitivity to vibration
occurs at a lower frequency for two hands gripping a rotating steering wheel as opposed to a single hand
on a pressing a horizontal vibrating plate.
5. Conclusions.

Equal sensation tests performed at 0.2 ms-2, 0.4 ms-2 and 0.5 ms-2 reference amplitudes and an
annoyance threshold test showed a general tendency of reduced skin sensitivity with increasing
frequency, indicated by the positive slope of the curves. A frequency weighting curve for steering wheel
rotational vibration, W s , was defined using the mean normalized values of the equal sensation curves.
The frequency weighting curve W s showed different shape and characteristics compared to the
asymptotic weighting curve of the hand filter W h [2]. The slope of W s was approximated to 0 dB per
octave from 3 Hz to 6.3 Hz, -6 dB per octave from 6.3 to 63 Hz and -16 dB per octave from 63 Hz to 315
Hz. An investigation is under way to determine a weighting curve for vibration of the steering wheel in the
for-aft direction.

References

[1] Alan Baddeley, 1997, Human Memory; Theory and Practice, Psychology Press, p31 –39.

[2] British Standards Institution 1987, Measurement and evaluation of human exposure to vibration
transmitted to the hand, BS 6842.

[3] Burstrom, L and Lundstrom, R. 1994, Absorption of vibration energy in the hand and arm,
Ergonomics, Vol. 37, No.5, pp 879-890.

[4] Coren, S. and Ward, L.M, 1989, Sensation and Perception, 3rd edition, Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich College Publishers, Fort Worth.

[5] Dupius, H and Zerlett, G, 1986, The effects of whole-body vibration, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

[6] Entran Devices Limited 1991, MSC series multi-channel conditioning unit instruction manual.

[7] Eric R.k, James H.S, Thomas M.J, 1991, Principles of Neural Science, International Edition, p347

[8] Gearing & Watson Electronics Limited 1995, GW Vibration test system manual.

[9] Griffin, M.J. 1990, Handbook of human vibration, Academic Press.

[10] Giacomin J. and Onesti, C. 1999, Effect of Frequency and grip force on the perception of
steering wheel rotational vibration, ATA 6th Int. Conference on the New Role of Experimentation
in the Modern Automotive Product Development Process, Firenze, Italy, Nov. 17 –19

[11] Giacomin, J, and Abrahams, O, 2000, Human fatigue due to automobile steering wheel vibration,
SIA Conference on Car and train comfort: acoustics, thermics and air quality, Nov. 15-16.
[12] Hinton, P.R 1998, Statistics explained: A guide for social science students, Routledge, New York.

[13] Isomura, A, Hara, T and Kmiya, K. 1995, Human Factors on driver’s steering wheel operation:
three parameters evaluating characteristics of driver’s steering wheel operations, JSAE Review,
Vol. 16, pp. 388 –410.

[14] Merchan, F.P. and Versmold, J. 1999, Human Perception and fatigue due to automobile steering
wheel vibration, Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Sheffield.
[15] Miwa, T. 1967, Evaluation methods for vibration effect, Part3: Measurements of threshold and
equal sensation contours on hand for vertical and horizontal sinusoidal vibrations, Industrial
Health, Vol. 5, pp 213 –220.
[16] Morioka M., 1999, Effect of contact location on vibration perception threshold in the glabrous skin
th
of the human hand, 34 United Kingdom Group Meeting on Human Response to Vibration, Ford
Motor Company, Dunton, Essex England, 22 – 24 September 1999.

[17] Pak, C.H., Lee, U.S, Hong, S.C, Song, S.K., Kim, J.H and Kim, K.S 1991, A study on the
tangential vibration of the steering wheel of passenger car, SAE paper 912565, pp. 961 – 968.
[18] Peruzzetto, P.,1988, Assessing the relative importance of hand vibration with respect to whole-
body vibration,The United Kingdom and French Joint Meeting on Human Response to Vibration
held at I.N.R.S., Vandoeuvre, France, 26 to 28th September 1988.
[19] Porter, J.M and Diane, E.G 1998, Exploring the optimum posture for driver comfort, International
Journal of Vehicle Design, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 255 – 265.
[20] Pottinger, M.G., Marshall, K.D, Lawther, J.M., and Thrasher, D.B., 1986, A Review of Tire /
Pavement Interaction Induced Noise and Vibration; The Tire Pavement Interface, ASTP STP 929,
M.G. Pottinger and T.J. Yager, Eds, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, pp.
183 – 287.
[21] Renault and Michelin, 2000, Road Vibration Signal Database, Human Dynamics Group,
Department of Mechanical Engineering, the University of Sheffield.
[22] Reynolds, D.D. and Angevine, E.N. 1977, Hand-arm vibration, Part 2: Vibration transmission
characteristics of the hand and arm, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 51, No.2, pp. 255-265
[23] Reynolds, D.D. and Keith, R.H. 1977, Hand-arm vibration, Part 1: Analytical model of the
vibration response characteristics of the hand, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 51, No.2 pp.
237-253.
[24] Reynolds, D.D and Soedel, W. 1972, Dynamic Response of hand-arm system to sinusoidal input,
Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 21, No.21, pp 339 – 352.
[25] Reynolds, D.D., Standlee, K.G., and Anegvine, E.N. 1977, Hand-arm vibration, Part 3: Subjective
responses characteristics of individuals to hand induced vibration, Journal of Sound of Vibration,
Vol. 51, No.2 , pp 255-265.
[26] Tektronix Inc. 1999, TDS 210/220 digital real-time oscilloscope user manual.
[27] Verillo, R.T., 1966, A duplex mechanism of mechanoreception. In: The Skin Senses, Proceedings
of the First International Symposium on the Skin Senses, Florida, pp 139 – 159. Springfield,
Illinois : Charles C. Thomas.
[28] Verillo, R.T., 1985, Psychophysics of vibrotactile stimulation. The Journal of the Acoustical
Society of America, Vol. 77, pp. 225-232.

[29] Walkenbach, J, 1998, Excel 97 Bible, IDG Books Worldwide, Inc.