101–110 of 352 posts
When I designed car seats we optimized them for the federal tests. The biggest load on a seat back was represented by a large 95% man leaning back to get at his wallet. We were ready for production when the car had it's first sled test. Basically mimic what happens to the occupants when hitting a solid barrier at 30 MPH. The front seat occupants flew forward, bounced back, and completely broke the seat backs, crushin…
What's a 95% man?
The article reminds me of a story from a friend that was an engineer at a major water heater company. Modern electric water heaters are already fairly efficient, but every model gets tested by the government to be given an efficiency rating. The test consists of replacing the anode with a rod that has a series of temperature probes to measure the water at different levels in the water heater. Since water would form l…
Isn't this a symptom of the exact testing procedure being a white box that rarely changes? Many students would score 100% on the ACT if the entire question and answer set were widely published. Also that seems like a silly test. Couldn't you just measure the differential after mixing? TFA also mentions it, but noise is also a factor. For the water-heater example, the limited number of probes introduces a known amount…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The same discrepancy appears in the 2014 data as well so it's probably not a statistical fluke. Maybe there's a real design flaw in the Juke 4WD model?
The person is not suggesting it's a statistical flaw -- but that it's a self-selection bias. Hypothesis: The people who opt to spend more for a 4wd version are people who know they will use it because they operate the vehicle in inclement conditions, and/or they are uncomfortable with their ability to operate a 2wd vehicle in those conditions and/or they do not have the option to stay home when the weather is bad.
4x4 drivers might do offroading: so the figures could be much lower than if those people had 4x2 (2wd) vehicles.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's hard to generalize that living in Manhattan without a car is safer and healthier than living in, say, Vermont with one--especially if you rent cars for weekend and other vacations. Depends of course on location, lifestyle, commute, etc.
Yes you’re right, and a big factor I didn’t think of is pollution. The car accident death rate may be low enough that it’s really not worth mitigating against. But also, I don’t mean Manhattan specifically. When I say “city” maybe you are thinking high rises. A neighborhood with predominately 2-4 story buildings can be incredibly walkable. You just have to stop designing everything to accommodate cars ahead of all el…
So long as that is the requirement it won't be done, nobody will do it. You need to find a different starting place.
Start by not requiring buildings be far apart and have parking. Right not the neighborhood you envision isn't legal to build if you want to. Make it legal.
Make tax codes encourage building high. Charge higher taxes for the ground floor.
Allow everyone to build by right (meaning no public hearings, permits must be approved by buerocrats) up to the road/sidewalk or property line.
Even if the building is setback from the property line require the outside walls be built to up the lot line on all sides standards. That means fireproof if the building next door burns. That means can be demolished without anything falling to the outside, or even a need to do anything outside to demolish it.
For bonus points define places where a door to the next building must be located. (you might never visit your neighbors that way but the door still exists and can be repurposed to a public walkway when you leave and the new owner has other ideas.
There must be stats for injuries or deaths by car. Is it public?
When I designed car seats we optimized them for the federal tests. The biggest load on a seat back was represented by a large 95% man leaning back to get at his wallet. We were ready for production when the car had it's first sled test. Basically mimic what happens to the occupants when hitting a solid barrier at 30 MPH. The front seat occupants flew forward, bounced back, and completely broke the seat backs, crushin…
What's a 95% man?
The whole car safety topic is very confusing. Car accidents is top1-top2 death reason in US for people in 20-40 age group [1]. Probably less in Europe but still one of the leading ones. I was thinking about how I can make myself safer. Which car brand/model is better? Which seat is better for passenger? How much riskier it is to drive during the night? In the rain? How dangerous is it to overtake on road with 1 lane…
Some tips: Dress like a motor-cyclist. Wear a helmet and airbag suit. This is probably also useful when traveling by airplane. I have no data on the effectiveness, however.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The big difference with VW is that they put in a mechanism that detects the test and completely changed the behavior of the car for the test.
So they _intentionally_ set themselves up to lie to regulatory agencies and consumers about real world efficiency. That honestly sounds basically the same to me. In both cases the tests are poor approximations, and in both cases someone could accidentally optimize the test, and in both cases someone did it intentionally to deceive people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks! That’s really a great source. I am so glad I asked. Highlights: - Fishing seems to be quite dangerous!!?? - Swimming is less dangerous than living (all other causes)!
Swimming vs 'living' seems intuitively weird to me too. I guess people who are otherwise in poor health tend to avoid swimming?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're right that there aren't meaningfully significant differences between car brands. Driving itself is just very dangerous. Other forms of transportation like buses, trains, and airplanes are orders of magnitude safer.[0] If you want to make yourself safer, avoid driving as much as possible. [0] https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/home-and-community/safety-topics...
For almost everyone 18-40 year old, driving less is one of the healthiest decisions you can make. A little nitpick: Motorcycling, cycling, and walking are all significantly worse than traveling by car. If this interests you, it's possible to find a lot more interesting research by searching for "microlife" and "micromort".