ABSTRACT
In general, data collection was performed using tri-axial accelerometer (model 356B40; PCB Piezometrics, Depew, NY, USA) (Blood & Johnson, 2012; Bovenzi, 2009; Lewis & Johnson, 2012; Thamsuwan, et al., 2013), although others equipment are refered in literature. The measurements were collected from the seat pan (Blood & Johnson, 2012; Bovenzi, 2009; Lewis & Johnson, 2012; Melo & Miguel, 2000; Okunribido, et al., 2008; Rehn, et al., 2005; Thamsuwan, et al., 2013) and also from the seat backrest (Melo & Miguel, 2000; Paddan & Griffin, 2002b) and the floor of the bus (Lewis & Johnson, 2012; Paddan & Griffin, 2002a, 2002b; Thamsuwan, et al., 2013). In most cases, the evaluation on the backrest is justified by considering that this rout have a most significant on vibration transmission, while measurements obtained to the floor allow quantify the parameter SEAT (Seat Effective Amplitude Transmissibility). In addition, (Blood & Johnson, 2012; Thamsuwan, et al., 2013) use the Global Positioning System (GPS) to collect data in order to record the location and velocity of the bus, and type of road associated with the WBV exposures. Z-axis exposures were consensually the highest (Blood & Johnson, 2012; Bovenzi, 2009; Lewis & Johnson, 2012; Rehn, et al., 2005; Thamsuwan, et al., 2013). According some authors, in addition to z, y-axis is also relevant and these axis exposures tend to be slightly higher than x-axis (Blood & Johnson, 2012; Melo & Miguel, 2000). The standardized tests routs of the studies were defined to include different road types. These include city streets, new freeway, old freeway, and circular route containing speed humps (Blood & Johnson, 2012; Lewis & Johnson, 2012; Thamsuwan, et al., 2013).
