Reflective vests not as effective as generally thought

tomasrojo

Found this link in a comment on the Guardian's bike blog. Thought it was quite interesting. I couldn't find a handy thread to append it to.

http://203.88.115.73/bikes-&-riding/10000023/

Flashing lights are by far the best solution, but visibility aids which take advantage of biological motion can be a great supplement.

Riders seem generally have a poor understanding of what makes them visible.
Reflective vests, rated highly by many riders, were nowhere near as effective as reflective strips worn on the ankles and knees, which riders thought poorly of.

The study found that adding reflective ankle and knee markings provided a powerful enhancement of the cyclist¹s conspicuity.
That the cyclist only wore the reflectors on the ankles and knees and yet was still easily recognised suggested for the successful recognition of cyclists, marking just the ankles and knees may be sufficient.

The relatively low conspicuity levels of the cyclists when wearing the reflective vest alone is likely to be attributable to the lack of perceptible torso motion signifying the presence of a cyclist.

Personally I have suspected for some time that the wall-of-hi-viz is not all that effective. It enhances visibility, but it doesn't enhance conspicuity. Something bright in motion works better.

I'm not aware of any knee- or ankle-reflectors on the market though. Some bikeboots and rain trousers have a reflective patch by the heel, I suppose.

Victor

I suppose its down to the eye picking up parallax (apparent motion) - an approaching cyclist presents little parallax to the viewer.

http://www.adband.co.uk/19-slap-wristbands.html?gclid=CKivkpirhqUCFYFH4wodj1_HOQ
http://www.tradekey.com/ks-snap-bands/

Dublin Cycling Campaign have these on sale for €2.

tomasrojo

Victor wrote: »

http://www.adband.co.uk/19-slap-wristbands.html?gclid=CKivkpirhqUCFYFH4wodj1_HOQ
http://www.tradekey.com/ks-snap-bands/

Dublin Cycling Campaign have these on sale for €2.

Ah, now you mention them, yes, I'd forgotten about those!

ednwireland

tomasrojo wrote: »

Found this link in a comment on the Guardian's bike blog. Thought it was quite interesting. I couldn't find a handy thread to append it to.

http://203.88.115.73/bikes-&-riding/10000023/

I'm not aware of any knee- or ankle-reflectors on the market though. Some bikeboots and rain trousers have a reflective patch by the heel, I suppose.

i got some from here - never worn them though

http://www.beseenonabike.co.uk/acatalog/reflective-fluorescent-arm-leg-bands.html

get some ones with the boards logo on!

positron

http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.25498
http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.33012

positron

ednwireland wrote: »

get some ones with the boards logo on!

Great idea!

100Suns

Another option is reflective tape which can be bought in Halfords etc. Stick it on the back of the pedals, sides and face of the crank arms, and 5 cm strips on the wheel rims. You could also stick strips on the sides of the forks and seat stays if you're not too worried about the astethics. Halfords have it in luminous yellow and grey.

cdaly_

tomasrojo wrote: »

I'm not aware of any knee- or ankle-reflectors on the market though.

Lidl / Aldi do this sort of thing from time to time.

HivemindXX

I have these:
http://www.wiggle.co.uk/respro-reflective-ankle-bands/

Velcro is a lot better than any of the snap-on type in my opinion, since my experience is that they snap-off very easily and get lost. This one is reflective on one side and hi-viz on the other.

From Wiggles details: "Ankle bands are one of the best ways to improve your visibility on the road, as the constant movement attracts attention and gets you noticed. Highly recommended as a safety aid, even if you don't need them to prevent your trousers from flapping around."

Ankle bands are great for identifying yourself as a cyclist to cars that are approaching from behind that might think you were a road sign or a walker or something otherwise. Masses of bright clothing is needed if you want to be seen when someone thinks a fraction of a second is enough to check if the road is clear.

I've been told that cyclists are "practically invisible, even in daylight" and "flashing lights are no good because you're invisible half the time with them". I think this is clear evidence that some (hopefully few but who knows) motorists give the absolute minimum attention required to see a car coming. If they nearly hit (or hit) a cyclist they'll blame the cyclist for being hard to see not themselves for paying insufficient attention.

Ankle bands are great. Be sure to use them. Don't leave the high viz vest at home because of them though.

niceonetom

In the pursuit of accuracy can the title of this thread be amended to:
Reflective vests not as effective as generally thought by idiots

Muller_1

I got these for my pannier

http://www.wiggle.co.uk/respro-hi-viz-camoflage-reflective-stickers/

and the snap around ankle straps which are great.

seamus

Appropriate that this topic has come up because I was thinking about it last night and there's a similar topic elsewhere.

High-vis vests are of limited use in the city. Why? Because high-vis clothing is reliant on Retroreflective material, which when exposed to a light source, reflects that source back to the observer.

In the city, you have ambient light from the street lights. This is not focussed and even it were, it does not create a photoreflective effect on a high-vis jacket. Cars and other vehicles drive with dipped headlights. So they're not shining any light on the vest either.

So the whole point of the vest is lost. That's not to say they're useless. A big yellow jacket is going to stick out to people's eyes, both during the day and night, but not much more so than any other bright colour which reflects a lot of light. Cycling in a bright white jacket or jersey would be as effective (if not more so) than a high-vis jacket in city lights.

Reflectors on your ankles and knees work because there are a number of things at play - the car's headlights are focussed down that low, triggering the retroreflective properties of the material, and your ankles are moving in an up-motion within the driver's field of vision. In terms of visibility, this is like having two medium-power lights moving up and down on rails at the back of your bike.

kenmc

Muller_1 wrote: »

I got these for my pannier


http://www.wiggle.co.uk/respro-hi-viz-camoflage-reflective-stickers/

"Hi vis camoflage" must surely qualify for oxymoron of the year.

CramCycle

Flashing lights are by far the best solution, but visibility aids which take advantage of biological motion can be a great supplement

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

It's troll time

Boardsie 1: Flashing
Boardsie 2: Solid
Boardsie 1: Flashing
Boardsie 2: Solid
Boardsie 1: Flashing
Boardsie 2: Solid
........ad infintum

Personally I find flashing lights on long spins dangerous as they distract other cyclists, in fact I've overheard several warnings while in Wicklow that your inviting the cyclist behind you to crash as they become unknowingly fixated on the light :pac::pac::pac:

Good point by Seamus though, Hi Vis are only useful in a situation where there is little or no ambient light, just the beams of the approaching vehicle, and even then, IMO, they are still quite sh1t.

seamus

CramCycle wrote: »

Personally I find flashing lights on long spins dangerous as they distract other cyclists, in fact I've overheard several warnings while in Wicklow that your inviting the cyclist behind you to crash as they become unknowingly fixated on the light :pac::pac::pac:

I have two of these on the way, to be affixed to my seat stays.

They come with an "epileptic fit strobe" setting...

tomasrojo

I think the bit about flashing lights is some editorialising by a third party. The study doesn't seem to look at flashing lights at all. I only included that quote because it was in big print at the top.

CramCycle

seamus wrote: »

They come with an "epileptic fit strobe" setting...

Mine have 2 settings:


CYLON

and


DISCO

tomasrojo

seamus wrote: »

So the whole point of the vest is lost. That's not to say they're useless. A big yellow jacket is going to stick out to people's eyes, both during the day and night

One of the points that came up in the study was that the fluorescent part of the jacket wasn't much use at night:

The researchers said fluorescent materials had little visibility benefit at night, as they are activated only by UV radiation, which is lacking in headlights and streetlights.

"Cyclists appear to assume incorrectly that the visibility advantage of fluorescent materials is equivalent irrespective of lighting. Thus, cyclists who habitually wear fluorescent * as opposed to reflective * materials may considerably overestimate their visibility at night," they said.

Al Wright

In the article, a distinction is made between 'fluorescent' and 'reflective'. Generally, the term fluorescent is a misnomer as most of the hi-vis vests do not fluoresce. The effective high-vis vests are those fitted with two or more horizontal and usually two vertical (across shoulder) 50mm wide reflective strips and available from builders/tool suppliers.
The garish colour is predominant in strong daylight, but in the dark it is the reflective strips that are of value.

tomasrojo

The point being made is that neither the reflective nor the fluorescent part of the jacket are all that effective at night.

I also thought that "fluorescent" was a loose use in connection with hi-viz, but Wikipedia also uses the word in its entry on High-visibiliy Clothing. Of course, it's always possible it also is using the term loosely, but I think the principle is that incident UV light is re-emitted at a visible wavelength, which is what gives the green part its vibrancy in daylight.

tomasrojo

http://www.bluecollarworkwear.com/catalog/Safety-Apparel/

Fluorescent colors have the properties needed to address daytime visibility. The high visibility of fluorescent materials is due to their unique ability to absorb energy in the near-ultraviolet and visible regions of the electromagnetic spectrum, then reemit the energy as longer wavelength visible light. This light emissive property makes fluorescent signing brighter, higher luminance and makes it more colorful than ordinary traffic colors. Fluorescence results in a high visual contrast with the driving environment, making fluorescent signs not only more visible, but also much more conspicuous than ordinary traffic colors.

Except when you have little UV in the incident light, I guess.

kumate_champ07

I wear my high vis jacket everytime I'm on my bike, even if its a sunny afternoon. it does make a difference as the bright color stands out.

anyone know the cheapest place to get them, you know the waist coat type thats very light and you wear it over your jacket? they actually lose some their effect after multiple washing

Victor

The usual rule is that these thigns need to be hi-vis and replective.

Victor

The usual rule is that these thigns need to be hi-vis and reflective.

Those strobing lights are a nuisance - they need a flash rate of less than 1 per second.

tomasrojo

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

I wear my high vis jacket everytime I'm on my bike, even if its a sunny afternoon. it does make a difference as the bright color stands out.

I've some sympathy with this point of view -- wearing hi-viz during daylight -- since it's obvious that it makes you more visible.

However, my personal point of view is that I'm already quite visible on a sunny day. The problem, again, is making yourself conspicuous. It's more important than mere visibility.

The difference essentially is: good visibility means being able to see a cyclist when you're trying to see one; good conspicuity means that your attention is drawn to the cyclist. That's why the biomotion of a small body of reflective gear or lights is more effective than a large wash of the same. The motorist doesn't have to make a conscious decision to look out for the cyclist; the brain picks up on the motion and focuses attention on it.

Again, everyone is free to wear hi-viz 24/7 if they wish, but it's another of those memes that's proliferated to the point that hi-viz on sunny days is championed over functioning brakes by the RSA.

Alanstrainor

I only wear my high Vis jacket as a rain coat really. If it's not raining i'm just wearing my jersey. I have two of these on my bike at the moment. About €5 each and they are fantastic. Unbelievably bright. One flashing and one constant.
LINKY

BostonB

Theres a flaw in the logic of that article because most hi viz jackets have reflective strips. As do leggings and shoe covers. Its also flawed because, the kinda of people with hi vis, and/or reflective strips, or bright cycling gear, tend to have decent lights aswell anyway.

The real problem is the ninja's, in dark clothes and sometimes a feeble flicker of a light that they got in the €1 shop. Its not just cyclists either, in park theres loads of ninja runners and walkers on the cycle paths in the dark.

As a driver I feel I notice the hi vis jackets a lot more than people without them. Perhaps not as much in the city, but in the Phoenix Park, or on country roads, once a light hits them, they are like a beacon in the dark. A flash of yellow in against the black. Stronger than many lights. In the city they don't stand out as much, but they still stand out. In the day light, any bright coloured cycling gear has much the same effect. Most cyclists though are in dark colours. In the city and traffic, I find flashing lights get more notice, but road position is almost more important.

On a dark wet night, drive through the park and see what cyclists/runners stand out.

Incidentally I find that more lights spaced widely apart work well. High on the back catches my eye.

BostonB

Alanstrainor wrote: »

I only wear my high Vis jacket as a rain coat really. If it's not raining i'm just wearing my jersey. I have two of these on my bike at the moment. About €5 each and they are fantastic. Unbelievably bright. One flashing and one constant.
LINKY

Did you get them from that site in the US?

Chips Lovell

The more fabulous I look, the more conspicuous I am.

dited

BostonB wrote: »

Did you get them from that site in the US?

Think Dealextreme is in Hong Kong.

Alanstrainor

BostonB wrote: »

Did you get them from that site in the US?

As said that site is in Hong Kong, but ye, i bought from that site. it did take about 3 weeks for delivery though. What could i expect for €10 and free delivery i suppose.

BostonB

Worth a whirl I guess.

Nate--IRL--

Everybody will notice you with a set of these :pac:

http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.23490

Nate

tomasrojo

BostonB wrote: »

Theres a flaw in the logic of that article because most hi viz jackets have reflective strips.

If I understand the article correctly, they look at vests that are merely fluorescent and also look at vests with reflective strips. The fluorescent vests are not much better than black clothing in the dark, and the reflective strips on the jacket are not nearly as effective as reflective strips that move.

I don't think the study is flawed in the sense that you do, because it's about studying each conspicuity aid in isolation. That's the correct approach. They wanted to find out which conspicuity aids are more effective, not how conspicuous you are when you try them all together.

BostonB wrote: »

As do leggings and shoe covers. Its also flawed because, the kinda of people with hi vis, and/or reflective strips, or bright cycling gear, tend to have decent lights aswell anyway.

Oddly enough, now the evenings are dark again, I see an awful lot of cyclists with just a high-viz jacket. Maybe a helmet too. But no lights, a lot of the time.

BostonB wrote: »

As a driver I feel I notice the hi vis jackets a lot more than people without them. Perhaps not as much in the city, but in the Phoenix Park, or on country roads, once a light hits them, they are like a beacon in the dark.

Again, from my reading of the article, they're not claiming that high-viz jackets don't stand out in the dark, but reflective strips in bio-motion get driver attention more.

BostonB wrote: »

A flash of yellow in against the black.

I think it should be a flash of whatever colour your headlights are? The non-reflective part of the jacket is barely visible. At least according to the article!

BostonB wrote: »

Incidentally I find that more lights spaced widely apart work well. High on the back catches my eye.

I think so too.

tomasrojo

I should say that that article is not the actual research, and I'm aware that second-hand reports of research often get details or conclusions wrong.

Civilian_Target

This one seemed pretty obvious. Why rely on the lights of others to guarantee your own safety?
There's just no substitute for lights. I don't think that the gardai would accept "but my car is yellow" as an excuse if you were driving a yellow car around at night, with no lights on.

Similarly, reflective ankle bands are good, but ones with lights built in are even better again: http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=25102

Pet

Anyone got any good eBay links to sellers of reflective bands?

Capt'n Midnight

If you have a racing type bike then reflective vests on backpacks can't be seen from behind.

To be visible from behind you would need to put the vest on the bottom of the backpack too.

Also check the angle of you rear lights, too many people have lights pointing down or up at fourty five degrees and so aren't much use either.

Blowfish

BostonB wrote: »

Theres a flaw in the logic of that article because most hi viz jackets have reflective strips. As do leggings and shoe covers. Its also flawed because, the kinda of people with hi vis, and/or reflective strips, or bright cycling gear, tend to have decent lights aswell anyway.
On a dark wet night, drive through the park and see what cyclists/runners stand out.

I'd have to disagree completely with that. This year seems worse than ever in that about 80%+ of cyclists I come across are wearing hi-vis, yet only about 50% have decent lights.

poochiem

I've got one of these and one of these and have to say the front light is surprisingly effective. It illuminates signs hundreds of yards away and gives me confidence in traffic.

I'll agree with others here on the paucity of lights in general, I've actually said it to a few people that I couldn't see them ahead of me and I'm cycling and probably more aware than the drivers coming behind me.

shnoop

I'm quite proud of my setup. On a modified computer mount i have 2 Cateye TL-LD610 and above them i have a TL-LD1100 while upfront i have the Cateye R3 which not only allows me to be seen but illuminates the road well enough for me to see. Also i wear a high vis jacket and reflective strips on my ankles!

Victor

Just watch out for the aircraft trying to land on you.

seeing_ie

shnoop wrote: »

I'm quite proud of my setup. On a modified computer mount i have 2 Cateye TL-LD610 and above them i have a TL-LD1100 while upfront i have the Cateye R3 which not only allows me to be seen but illuminates the road well enough for me to see. Also i wear a high vis jacket and reflective strips on my ankles!

That's some setup, must be like engaging hyperdrive turning all them on together.
Got the TL-LD1100 myself and it's a great rear light.

rp

shnoop wrote: »

I'm quite proud of my setup. On a modified computer mount i have 2 Cateye TL-LD610 and above them i have a TL-LD1100 while upfront i have the Cateye R3 which not only allows me to be seen but illuminates the road well enough for me to see.

you must have the carbon footprint of a BMW X5 with all that lot!

concussion

I cycle to and from barracks (Army Reservist) at night head to toe in camoflage clothing. I have a Blackburn Mars 3 (7 led) and a reflective velcro strap with flashing LED's on my backpack, a Blackburn Mars 1 on the seatpost and another LED/Reflective strap on my right leg. Never had a problem with being seen - hi-vis clothing doesn't make any difference at night IMO.

doozerie

I was cycling along Enniskerry Road this morning at about 10h00. The sun was quite bright but low, so in any tree-lined stretch there were lots of shadows. I saw a runner ahead, coming towards me on my side of the road. She was wearing a bright yellow jacket, which seemed fluorescent in the sunlight. Once she entered a shaded stretch of road though, she virtually disappeared - her jacket became about as visible as her dark leggings. She remained on the road, probably because the footpath was covered in leaves, and if I hadn't spotted her before she hit the shaded patch I might not have realised she was there until I was within a few metres of her (and on a collision course with her as she stayed on the road). The angle of the sun didn't help, and I was wearing sunglasses too, but the difference in visbility of her jacket in the shade versus in the sun was extreme.

Generally speaking, I would agree with the view expressed by many on this thread that there is no substitute for lights on a bike. The hi-viz vest seems to have developed an unwarranted reputation as a safety device - sure it can help, but not in every situation, and there are far too many people that seem to believe that a hi-viz vest obviates the need for actual lights.

BostonB

Going through the park today during the daylight and rain showers, the hi viz really stand out vs those without them. A lot of euro bike gear is the same though, bright colours.

I'm surprised that you think 80% wear hi viz. Its more like 10% on my commute.

BostonB

tomasrojo wrote: »

...
I don't think the study is flawed in the sense that you do, because it's about studying each conspicuity aid in isolation. That's the correct approach. They wanted to find out which conspicuity aids are more effective, not how conspicuous you are when you try them all together....

It might be scientifically sound. But might a problem that isn't significant in the real world. If it was a study on cyclists on the road, rather than controlled experiment it would be more relevant. Thats all I'm saying.

I'm not saying its not good to know. I'm just not sure how big a problem it is. But fair enough, just because I don't see it, doesn't mean its not a huge problem on other routes. I think the bigger problem is cyclists not knowing about road position, and being ninja's. Not Hi Viz ninja's.

BostonB

I'm always puzzed how people cycle or jog in the phoenix park in the pitch black. I mean I can't see that well with lights, they can see nothing. Bizarre.