segway license, turn signals, and no sidewalks?

[Marc P.]

Originally Posted by MikeDubreuil

This discussion has gotten a little absurd. We are now debating at what force it should be legal to collide with another person. It's bad enough when it happens accidentally during natural pedestrian activities, such as walking or running.

It's heavily debatable as to whether the Segway truly stops in its own footprint or even quickly for that matter. Especially when a somewhat scientific test measured a stopping distance of 18 feet. Sure the test driver might not be a Segway user destined for the X-Games but he showed the stopping ability of the average person.

Therefore, we can be reasonably certain that Segway use will increase the risk of pedestrians becoming the participants of accidents. How are Segways being legislated as an EPAMD good for the general public?

I don't want to sound rude, but there are quite a few Segway owners in these forums. Personally, I'd trust their judgment and experience as known everyday users of the device, as opposed to a single random unknown person carrying out scientific research in the name of debunking the value and safety of the Segway. I wouldn't call the stopping distance heavily debatable when we have a number of experienced users and owners here to testify based on personal, everyday use in a real pedestrian environment. And that's all aside from the first hand stories of collisions with Segways yielding little to no damage.

I don't disagree that the Segway can be potentially dangerous when not used properly. But so can a plastic fork, or a baseball bat, or a bike, or anything anyone has a malicious use for. The bulk of the design in the Segway has been around safety, both for the rider, and pedestrians. The footprint of a Segway is no wider than the shoulders of the average person. It has the advantage of subconscious activation, once the user becomes accustomed to riding it, so motions and actions are as fluid and responsive as the person walking. Knowing as much as I've learned about how Segways operate, and from the experiences I've had riding them around for extended periods of time, and hearing stories from owners, I honestly believe there is no more harm in riding a Segway on the sidewalk than there is a jogger running, or a kid carrying a baseball bat. Sure, there are potential malicious uses, but the same goes for virtually anything in this world. But given the design safety, and operational nature of the device, even an intentional head-on collision won't do a terrible amount of damage, certainly far less than a kid wielding a baseball bat.

[mtaman02]

How about we just ban everyone from the sidewalks if we are that focused on what we are trying to accomplish whether its running for a bus / train / cab / jogging etc.... Protect ourselves from ourselves kind of thing

AS I said before in some states there is a bike lane for bike riders to utilize. This is very dangerous --- yeah u keep the people on the sidewalk safe but if a tractor trailer / bus is moving quickly along side you you could get knocked off that bike espicially if the tractor trailer is moving in its lane unsafely (swirving)..... If I could get knocked off my bike by a passing vehicle while riding in the street whether its the same flow or opposite flow of traffic why would I want to ride a segway in the street..... Segways are more then safe enough to be riden on a sidewalk. Kids should not being playing on the sidewalk anyway without parental supervision.

The Main point is that there is no safe place to do anything. Whether ure out jogging / excersing / biking / segway riding.... your main goal is to do everything safely and be aware of ure surroundings. Segways will not get banned from the sidewalks and sent to the streets, the streets are just as dangerous as the sidewalks even if ure operating carefully.

[MikeDubreuil]

Originally Posted by David Kelly

You are the one who started talking about the forces. People are big babies about getting run into. 'Waaaa, I got a boo boo'

Originally Posted by Stu Bloom

You're right about one thing ... this discussion HAS certainly moved toward the absurd, but as David said, you are the one who started talking about impact forces (and using incorrect calculations/units).

I might have been the first person who wanted to quantify the impact force. However, anyone who said getting hit by a Segway wasn't that bad talked about forces ambiguosly.

I welcome anyone who would like to to fix the calculations to do so. The problem is that the calculation will never be accepted because then someone will argue that I neglected how the Segway will try to reverse itself.

Either way, the force issue is a moot point. The most important point is that the Segway will increase sidewalk collisions.

Originally Posted by David Kelly

No test or answer is better than what an actual daily Segway user says and uses them for realworld purposes. If Tom Schindler or Dez say they can stop in a couple feet, then I sure will believe them, not some crazy test person who is doing it according to some calculation.

Originally Posted by Stu Bloom

How do you know that your "somewhat scientific test" was not biased. You said yourself that "The purpose of the paper was to prove that the Segway should be legislated as a vehicle."

I find it amusing that in a forum that deals with engineering you want to disregard tests and measured numbers and trust judgement calls. I'm not saying these guys are right or wrong. They just haven't quantified their results following any type of scientific method. The test may be biased because it does prove their hypothesis. However, if you watch the video I see no problems with his stops. I think he demonstartes the stops of the average Segway user.

Originally Posted by David Kelly

That is not true. That what you have been saying the whole time and haven't had much to back it up.

Perhaps, I haven't made a good argument to a Segway loyalist. However, I have used reasonable judgement and presented facts and figures. Some people have made responses simalar to "you don't get it", "you're wrong", "your logic is faulty"; with absolutely nothing to back up their statements.

Originally Posted by Marc P.

I don't want to sound rude, but there are quite a few Segway owners in these forums. Personally, I'd trust their judgment and experience as known everyday users of the device, as opposed to a single random unknown person carrying out scientific research in the name of debunking the value and safety of the Segway.

Haha, yeah, I understand why you wouldn't want to accept their research. Unfortunately, it's the only rearch that supports my argument. It also happens to be the only scientific research presented in this thread. The evidence that I presented appears to be following the scientific method: create a hypothesis, test hypothesis, draw a conclusion. Seems like decent research

Originally Posted by mtaman02

AS I said before in some states there is a bike lane for bike riders to utilize. This is very dangerous --- yeah u keep the people on the sidewalk safe but if a tractor trailer / bus is moving quickly along side you you could get knocked off that bike espicially if the tractor trailer is moving in its lane unsafely (swirving).....

I think something you have to realize is that the safety of pedestrians who are walking are of the most utmost concern of legislators. They don't care what kind of device you create, if it's unsafe for pedestrians it ends up in the road. The bicyclists are lucky to be in a state with bike lanes because if they didn't they'd be driving in the road with normal traffic.

Think of it this way... I probably would not be allowed to ride a unicycle down the sidewalk of a city that doesn't allow bicycles on the sidewalk. I would be forced to ride my unicycle in the road. Obviously, I wouldn't ride the unicycle in the road, injury would be certain. Therefore, I can't use my unicycle for transportation. The legislators would say too bad, we're keeping the pedestrians safe.

[Tuba4]

I am not a Segway user (although I must admit it looks like a lot of fun and if I had the extra bucks I'd probably buy one!). And I am not a master of the physics of motion and collision, nor do I claim to be. It seems to be logical and reasonable that, if a Segway rider has sufficient time to react, due to how a Segway responds (according to the Segway users who have participated in this thread), a collision can be avoided or at the very least minimized.

What happens in the scenario where a Segway rider rounds a corner and unexpectedly impacts a pedestrian? If the impact is what would stand a Segway up or tilt it backward, then since the impact has already taken place, wouldn't the potential injury to the pedestrian have already occurred?

I am not taking a side of the argument here. I am just asking the question for the sake of debate.

The reality is lawmakers will do what lawmakers do. They will make a law without truly understanding the law, the need for it or it's consequences. Segway users must make sure their lawmakers become informed. Visit your local and state lawmakers. Take your Segway and show them how safe it is. Better yet, show them how to use it!!!

[RogerR]

Originally Posted by mtaman02

...AS I said before in some states there is a bike lane for bike riders to utilize. This is very dangerous --- yeah u keep the people on the sidewalk safe but if a tractor trailer / bus is moving quickly along side you you could get knocked off that bike espicially if the tractor trailer is moving in its lane unsafely (swirving)..... If I could get knocked off my bike by a passing vehicle while riding in the street whether its the same flow or opposite flow of traffic why would I want to ride a segway in the street...

is this why the majority of segway users are so violently opposed to moving off of the sidewalks? any experienced road cyclist will tell you that its the intersections that you have to worry about. the majority of motor vehicle and pedestrian involved collisions happen at intersections, crosswalks, and in front of driveways. in fact, that link that mikedubreuil provided ( http://www.humantransport.org/bicyc...gway/Segway.htm) made an interesting point, stating that "At intersections, motorists are often not looking for bicyclists (who are traveling at higher speeds than pedestrians) entering the crosswalk area, particularly when motorists are making a turn." people typically don't expect anything on sidewalks to be traveling faster than a walking human (3-4 mph). this may be the reason that some joggers and speedwalkers choose to exercise in the street, rather than on the sidewalk.

[Stu Bloom]

Originally Posted by Tuba4

... The reality is lawmakers will do what lawmakers do. They will make a law without truly understanding the law, the need for it or it's consequences. Segway users must make sure their lawmakers become informed. Visit your local and state lawmakers. Take your Segway and show them how safe it is. Better yet, show them how to use it!!!

BRAVO!

[MikeDubreuil]

Originally Posted by Tuba4

The reality is lawmakers will do what lawmakers do. They will make a law without truly understanding the law, the need for it or it's consequences.

Judging by the consequences of this thread being posted...
Segway users will pout, present an argument based on unscientific evidence and then become elitist and claim everyone else just doesn't get it.

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by MikeDubreuil

I might have been the first person who wanted to quantify the impact force. However, anyone who said getting hit by a Segway wasn't that bad talked about forces ambiguosly.

The main problem with the way you tried to "quantify the impact force" is that you implicitly assumed that the Segway would impart all its momentum in the collision. That would happen only if it was out of control and lost power at the moment it hit.

Originally Posted by MikeDubreuil

I welcome anyone who would like to to fix the calculations to do so.

Okay. The first thing to realize is that the impact force is (approximately) proportional to the velocity. Not to the square of the velocity; kinetic energy is not the relevant quantity (unless you want to assume that people are equivalent to brick walls). We want to consider the momentum of the moving rider and Segway, mv. For the purposes of argument, I'll accept a mass of 200 pounds (yes, pounds are actually a valid measure of mass, and indeed the legal definition of a pound specifies a specific mass, not a specific force) and a velocity of 18 feet per second. Converting to metric is about 90 kg and 5.5 meters per second, for a momentum of slightly less than 500 kg*m/s.

Second, the force depends on the amount of time the Segway is in contact with the person. How does half a second sound? (Note that assuming a longer time decreases the applied force, so I'm being very pessimistic here.)

Finally, the Segway will almost certainly be braking itself during the collision, so a good portion of the total force will be transferred through its wheels to the ground rather than through its frame to the pedestrian. According to the video, it takes less than half a second to come to a full stop, even without running into something. If the Segway is also pushing the pedestrian during the entire time, a simplistic integration shows that more than three fourths of the momentum is dissipated through the wheels, so the momentum transferred to the person can be no more than about 125 kg*m/s. To do that in one half second requires less than 250 Newtons of force, or about 1100 pounds.

Does that sound like a lot? It's not. It's about what you'd get if you rolled out of bed. For comparison, it's only a little more than twice the amount of force the 167-pound rider's feet would absorb if he jumped off the Segway.

Originally Posted by MikeDubreuil

The problem is that the calculation will never be accepted because then someone will argue that I neglected how the Segway will try to reverse itself.

If you do neglect that fact, then your calculation is missing an important -- perhaps the most important -- term.

Originally Posted by MikeDubreuil

Either way, the force issue is a moot point. The most important point is that the Segway will increase sidewalk collisions.

That's not a "point". It's a claim, for which I have seen no support. Have you ever ridden a Segway for more than a few minutes, Mike? A rider on a Segway is not some juggernaut having a limited ability to accomodate his surroundings. He's not like a bicycle rider who needs to go fast in order to remain stable. He is in many ways just another pedestrian, but with a little higher view and the benefit of increased speed when desired.

Originally Posted by MikeDubreuil

The bicyclists are lucky to be in a state with bike lanes because if they didn't they'd be driving in the road with normal traffic.

Um...I think mtaman02's comment was complaining that the bike lanes in those states are in the road next to motor traffic.

[Greg McCoy]

I'm not a highly experienced Segway rider, but I rode the TechnoKats raffle Segway around the pits at IRI. You can't have much worse a traffic situation on your average sidewalk (even in large cities) than what you have in pits at FIRST events (people using power tools, scouts, very limited space, etc.) Despite probably having only about an hour of experience on the Segway, I felt I was totally in control of the machine and posed no risk to people around me in the pits. Could I go 15+ MPH in the parking lot outside? Sure. You can also probably run about 15 MPH if you sprinted. As mentioned in previous posts, just because you have the potential to travel rapidly doesn't mean that you'll do it. Also, the Segway is far more maneuverable at low speeds than a bicycle, and far more visible than the average pedestrian.

In any case, I'm skeptical there are really enough Segways on the road to warrant a change in traffic laws.

</ramble>

[Stu Bloom]

OK ... this is it - I wanted to wait with this reply to an earlier post as I have been working on it for several days on and off (I do have a life outside of CD, albeit not too exciting) and it is not quite "ready" for publication ... but here it is ...

But first ... Mike, Judging by your recent post:

Originally Posted by MikeDubreuil

Judging by the consequences of this thread being posted...
Segway users will pout, present an argument based on unscientific evidence and then become elitist and claim everyone else just doesn't get it.

it is REALLY starting to look to me like you are just trying to be a jerk.

... I've had enough ... I'm finished with this debate ...

************************************************** ********

Originally Posted by MikeDubreuil

I have been asked to post the facts...

...

To put out a bad analogy- regular citizens aren't allowed to own automatic weapons. It might be easier to take down a buffalo with an automatic, that's a benefit. However, for the safety of the majority of Americans, politicians have chosen to make them illegal.

First of all Mike, you are right about the bad analogy - how about all of the LEGAL firearms and other weapons that have killed and injured so many - of course that makes perfect sense when you realize that legislators' real priority is NOT the "safety of the majority" (not that I pretend to know what their priorities are ... but there sure are a ton of ridiculous laws on the books).
... And now I will start back at the top of your post ...

The facts are that someone needs to prove to me why the Segway is not unsafe for pedestrians. Why it should not be classified differently from a Honda motor scooter and why it should be given EPAMD status (Electric Personal Assistive Mobility Device).

Proof? ... well what type of proof do you need? What would be adequate? Nearly a year ago there had been 6000 Segways sold (info from the September 26 "U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission and Segway LLC Voluntary Recall to Upgrade Software on Segway™ Human Transporters"), and although Segway LLC does not release sales numbers, I would say that now, nearly a year later, 10,000 would be a conservative estimate of the number of Segways currently in service. I have not heard of a single documented case of a pedestrian being injured by a Segway. If you have, I would appreciate you enlightening us. The FACT is that no one needs to prove anything TO YOU. I doubt any logical arguement would change your mind anyway, but as I said before, I think if you spent a week (or even just a day) using a Segway your perspective would be much different.

You might think why bother? "Mike doesn't get it and he's an ignorant fool."

It's true ... YOU DON'T GET IT ... however I have never heard/seen anyone call you either ignorant, OR a fool. You just don't understand what the Segway is, or what it is all about. I guess I shouldn't hold that against you - some people "get it" and some dont. But I have never known of anyone who has spent any significant time on a Segway who didn't recognize the inherent safety of this incredible piece of machinery, and realize many useful applications for it. And again I will say, spend some time on one and you will understand.

It looks like there's a lot of politicians in Massachusetts who don't get it either. Or maybe, they are legislating the minority for the safety of the majority. Either way, you need to convince someone why you should be able to ride your Segway in Massachusetts and many other states in the United States.

Regarding the politicians, Massachusets is currently also considering legislation similar to what 41 OTHER STATES HAVE ENACTED (see http://www.segway.com/general/regulatory.html), which defines the classification of EPAMD, specifically for the Segway, with special status different from other motorized vehicles. There are a lot more places where you can legally use a Segway on the sidewalk, than places you can't.

************************************************** ********

As the Segway is a new and unique application of technology, is very difficult for most of us to adequately explain the differences between it and some other motorized transportation devices. I will paraphrase from a post by a fellow Segway owner on SegwayChat.com who does a great job with this explanation...

paraphrased ...
The Segway HT is welcome pretty much everywhere in this country, however there are a few places where policies or people do not understand the physics of an equilibrium machine and (often innocently) ignorantly lump it in with conventional motorized machines.

Bicycles and conventional motorized scooters operate by propulsion and braking. When a person accelerates the device it is propelled forward, pulling the operator with it. When the same person applies the brakes, friction or electronic mechanisms slow the vehicle down. The person is slowed down by/with the device, while their momentum would otherwise keep them moving. When the gears are disengaged, the vehicle will "free wheel," moving in whatever direction it is moving until gravity and friction bring it to a stop.

In other words, the vehicle is "carrying" the person. Rapid braking will result in the occupant(s) of the vehicle being thrust forward. The vehicle will continue driving right through something, at the hazard of its occupants and the target.

On the other hand, people move around in their native state by balancing. Balance is a beautiful thing. If a person leans forward, their legs will move underneath them to keep them from falling. Gravity is pulling them forward(/down), and their legs are keeping them safe. AS A RESULT OF MAINTAINING BALANCE the person moves forward.

The Segway HT works like a person. When a person on a Segway HT wants to stand in place, the Segway HT's motors, responding to signals generated by the balance/tilt sensors (1000 times per second) move very slightly back and forth, keeping the person balanced in place. When the rider thinks, leans, or otherwise wills themselves forward, their center of gravity moves forward, and they are in essence falling forward by the force of gravity--just like walking on their feet. So, just like a pair of legs, the Segway HT will move forward to "catch" the rider, keeping them safe. The result of this "dynamic balancing" is motion in the direction of the lean.

[MikeDubreuil]

Originally Posted by Stu Bloom

it is REALLY starting to look to me like you are just trying to be a jerk...

Regarding the politicians, Massachusets is currently also considering legislation similar to what 41 OTHER STATES HAVE ENACTED (see http://www.segway.com/general/regulatory.html), which defines the classification of EPAMD, specifically for the Segway, with special status different from other motorized vehicles. There are a lot more places where you can legally use a Segway on the sidewalk, than places you can't.

Your post was pretty hostile. You also seem to think that things are rosy with the EPAMD legislation. I took a look at your home state of Indiana's legislation on Segway use and it appears operators can't weigh more than 170 pounds.

[David Kelly]

Originally Posted by MikeDubreuil

Your post was pretty hostile.

Gimme a break.. You haven't been quite the inniocent person yourself...

You also seem to think that things are rosy with the EPAMD legislation. I took a look at your home state of Indiana's legislation on Segway use and it appears operators can't weigh more than 170 pounds.

It does not say anything about a maximum of 170 pounds. It just says this: (2) A maximum speed of less than twenty (20) miles per hour when operated on a paved level surface, when powered solely by the propulsion system referred to in subdivision (1), and when operated by an operator weighing one hundred seventy (170) pounds.The maximum in that paragraph refers to the speed and not the weight of the rider..

[MikeDubreuil]

Originally Posted by David Kelly

It does not say anything about a maximum of 170 pounds. It just says this: (2) A maximum speed of less than twenty (20) miles per hour when operated on a paved level surface, when powered solely by the propulsion system referred to in subdivision (1), and when operated by an operator weighing one hundred seventy (170) pounds.The maximum in that paragraph refers to the speed and not the weight of the rider..

Why does it list a weight than? It seems like there is indeed some kind of mistake in the sentence. Or they are saying you have to weigh exactly 170 pounds Weight restrictions are not unprecedented, the state of Alabama also restricts operators to 170 pounds.

[Billfred]

No, it's not saying that.

What it is saying is that they're gonna measure the speed of that Segway with a guy on it weighing 170 pounds. You can weigh whatever you want when you personally drive a Segway...although sometimes it wouldn't be too healthy for the Segway itself.

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by MikeDubreuil

Why does it list a weight than? It seems like there is indeed some kind of mistake in the sentence. Or they are saying you have to weigh exactly 170 pounds Weight restrictions are not unprecedented, the state of Alabama also restricts operators to 170 pounds.

You're misreading the legislation. The weight given is not a restriction; it is a test parameter. Both the Alabama and Indiana laws are specifying the conditions under which the speed of the device is to be measured. The measured maximum speed, under those conditions, is one of the criteria for qualifying as an EPAMD.