4 ms·

Using only averages can lead to pretty misleading results. https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2016/01/16/when-us-air-force-discovered-the-flaw-of-averages.htm

Using only averages can lead to pretty misleading results. https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2016/01/16/when-us-air-force-discovered-the-flaw-of-averages.html https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2016/01/16/when-us-air-...

hirundo 4y ago
Which is a good argument for using a range of test values, not for using less representative values.
- kolbe 4y ago
  Cars aren't cheap
  - thfuran 4y ago
    Compared to the cost of designing a car then manufacturing hundreds of thousands or millions of them, a handful of cars are pretty cheap.
    - kolbe 4y ago
      Depends on how far down you want to go with all the people sizes in all the various combinations of positions. I imagine the cost-benefit is based on the marginal change of information you get by changing the dummy size/shape, and based on their revealed behavior, they don't think more sizes add more information.
  - sgtnoodle 4y ago
    When I worked at Toyota, they used "number of Highlanders" equivalence when shaming people for not picking up their large format paper schematic prints.
Tade0 4y ago
According to this: https://dqydj.com/weight-percentile-calculator-men-women/ https://dqydj.com/weight-percentile-calculator-men-women/ That female dummy would have been in the 24th weight percentile, while the male in the 57th female weight percentile.
randomcarbloke 4y ago
exacty, they shoud be testing the heaviest, tallest, and the shortest, lightest.
- SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
  But how about a tall and light person and short and heavy person? The permutations are endless. Not arguing against testing, I think it's great to get more test dummies in the seat, but I don't know where/how one should draw the line.
  - thfuran 4y ago
    If you're testing those two dimensions, there are four corner cases. It may be that for some reason somewhere in the middle is a worse case, but the extremes should certainly be tested.
  - panda88888 4y ago
    I think somewhere along the lines of 20, 50, and 80 percentile would work.
    - kelseyfrog 4y ago
      Across how many dimensions?

hirundo 4y ago

Which is a good argument for using a range of test values, not for using less representative values.

kolbe 4y ago
Cars aren't cheap
- thfuran 4y ago
  Compared to the cost of designing a car then manufacturing hundreds of thousands or millions of them, a handful of cars are pretty cheap.
  - kolbe 4y ago
    Depends on how far down you want to go with all the people sizes in all the various combinations of positions. I imagine the cost-benefit is based on the marginal change of information you get by changing the dummy size/shape, and based on their revealed behavior, they don't think more sizes add more information.
- sgtnoodle 4y ago
  When I worked at Toyota, they used "number of Highlanders" equivalence when shaming people for not picking up their large format paper schematic prints.

Tade0 4y ago

According to this: https://dqydj.com/weight-percentile-calculator-men-women/ https://dqydj.com/weight-percentile-calculator-men-women/ That female dummy would have been in the 24th weight percentile, while the male in the 57th female weight percentile.

randomcarbloke 4y ago

exacty, they shoud be testing the heaviest, tallest, and the shortest, lightest.

SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
But how about a tall and light person and short and heavy person? The permutations are endless. Not arguing against testing, I think it's great to get more test dummies in the seat, but I don't know where/how one should draw the line.
- thfuran 4y ago
  If you're testing those two dimensions, there are four corner cases. It may be that for some reason somewhere in the middle is a worse case, but the extremes should certainly be tested.
- panda88888 4y ago
  I think somewhere along the lines of 20, 50, and 80 percentile would work.
  - kelseyfrog 4y ago
    Across how many dimensions?