Hey,

I wanted some community feedback. I'm a long time cyclist living in New York City. The conditions here are pretty harsh for cyclist. Doors swing open all the time and can be dangerous if we are unaware of our distance between us and parked cars.

So we're working on a prototype for a helmet that vibrates to let a cyclist know when he/she is to close to a stationary vehicle. In use, the cyclist will experience a gentle vibration when the sensor detects a stationary object of a certain width and size. After the initial vibe it will go into awareness mode. Once it feels the old disturbance is gone , only then will it vibe again on the next object if there has been about a 10second or 20second gap. So there won't be an annoyance of constant vibrations or a random buzzer that goes of by anything near it.

Is this something we as a community would be in need of? I have not seen anything like this on the market.

I would love some feed back and Thank you in advance.

J

I have senors in my helmet to detect stationary vehicles and which I use for guidance to move far enough away to prevent getting doored. They are called eyeballs and they are wired directly to my brain.

+1

The only real benefit for anything like this would be to detect stuff approaching from the rear - but due to speed &c. the best sensors here are again eyes (over shoulder or in a mirror) and ears.

This however opens up a new market, as an aid to people with impairments.

I've been bike commuting in NYC for over 5 years now,
honestly I don't think I have any use for a product you're
describing. I don't even use mirrors Before biking, I
was riding motorcycles/scooters in the area for over 20
years.

What existing problem does this solve?

Sounds like a solution in search of a problem. If you can't focus on where you are riding you probably shouldn't be riding in city traffic as you are a danger to yourself and others.

Over the years I've read of a number of projects that use vibration (haptics) to warn people of people rapidly approaching from the rear. They might use ultrasonic sensors. Note this was not on a motor vehicle, it was on foot.

People who only have one eye dont have depth perception so they have to estimate distances based on size. They might be able to use something like that. The eyes are better for objects in front.

In the rear I think this kind of thing makes a lot of sense but it requires something with more precision like microwaves or lidar. Which could be fairly expensive. The cost on all electronics is typically falling fairly fast (Moore's Law) so what isn't cost effective today may well be cost effective "tomorrow". (18 months, is the period for value to double in CPU value for dollar) Cost of high precision GPS and Networking bandwidth is also falling so it might also be possible to do mapping-related things with haptics. I think its quite valuable safety wise not to have to look at a GPS, for example, in navigation. (navigation by feeling)

For Electromechanical parts the rate is much slower.

If you include a GPS in this thing, think ahead and use one that can do raw data and 10 or 20 Hz. Because then the possibilities for accurate positioning improve greatly with the right software and antenna and a correction signal available.

Specific raw-data capable modules from ublox and skytraq (S1315f) are popular in apps like that. Check out https://gpspp.saku ra.ne.jp/indexe.html for more on that.

in NYC wouldn't the helmet be buzzing non-stop?

I live in London (England) and would have no use for such a thing. I can judge for myself how close I am to a parked car. If for some reason I have decided to ride close to something the last thing I want is my helmet buzzing.

Honestly, if you're unaware of the distance between yourself and a parked car (i.e. a large stationary object) I'd question whether you should be cycling in the city at all.

Instead, put it on cars so it alerts the driver to provide sufficient separation when passing a cyclist.

ftw

That would be a big design challenge! How to convey a spatial map of the moving things behind them to the bicyclist. Perhaps it could be done with a matrix of vibrating pins on their back of their neck

>" Instead, put it on cars so it alerts the driver to provide sufficient separation when passing a cyclist".

thats what I was discussing in that other thread recently.. some kind of verifiable loggable cross-notification.

The OP is probably not just a bicyclist, he's also by implication a student, an inventor or similar who is also a bicyclist. His device is an electronic device, he's trying to design a new device that in a best case scenario (that it works, that it provides good value, that it sells, etc) might someday help many of us, he's not a dangerously blind cyclist risking his life in NYC traffic.

NYC, because of what it is, just provides a state of the art testbed for experiments.

"if it works in NYC, it will work anywhere"

Exactly. And we're saying he's barking up the wrong tree.

I'm sure he is, but I still stand by my point that if someone (be it the OP or anyone else) can't judge how close they are to a large non-moving object they shouldn't be on a bike in the city at all, with or without a fancy helmet that buzzes at them.

With something like this I'd also offer that "If there's no use for it in London there's no use for it anywhere". The fact something might work doesn't make it worthwhile.

Thanks everyone for taking the time to reply.

Very good points were made— I love the brutal honesty, thank you for staying true. I'd prefer to hear it on this forum, then go to market and have a costly fail.

btw, We've dropped the idea—something similar has already been done.

https://revision3.com/tbhs/bikesafety

He didn't have a vision problem, he was trying to design a device to augment our physical senses.

He used bicycling as an example, but his device might be useful in a lot of situations. Its an engineering prototype.

Sure, but bicycling is a bad example because there's just no need for it. If you want to suggest alternative situations where it might be useful, go for it. Otherwise all you've got is a solution desperately looking for a problem.