Search Results

It is generally accepted that all postures obtained from motion capture technology are realistic and accurate. Physical props are used to enable a subject to interact more realistically within a given virtual environment, yet, there is little data or guidance in the literature characterizing the use of such physical props in motion capture studies and how these effect the accuracy of postures captured. This study was designed to evaluate the effects of various levels of physical prop complexity on the motion-capture of a wide variety of automotive assembly tasks. Twenty-three subjects participated in the study, completing twelve common assembly tasks which were mocked up in a lab environment. There were 3 separate conditions of physical props: Crude, Buck, and Real. The Crude condition provided very basic props, or no props at all, while the Buck condition was a more elaborate attempt to provide detailed props. Lastly, the Real condition included real vehicle sections and real parts.

This study addressed the effect of scaling subjects in a virtual reality (VR) environment when performing ergonomic evaluations for assembly automotive tasks. Subjects were selected to fit into one of 4 anthropometric groups, ranging in size from a 5th percentile female to a 95th percentile male. Each subject performed 3 tasks while interacting with a digital rendering of a vehicle. Subjects were represented as a human manikin (Classic Jack 4.0, UGS) whose actions were driven by motion tracking (EvaRT, MotionAnalysis). Each subject performed the tasks under 4 different conditions; once with unscaled anthropometry and in three conditions where they were made to appear either larger or smaller than their actual height. Peak and cumulative low back loads and shoulder moments, as well as joint angles, were calculated and compared (ANOVA). In some cases subject scaled to a particular size performed differently than those that were actually that size.