HMI Design. SASPENCE Technical Report C20.52. PReVENT Consortium.
Författare
Summary, in English
The objectives of this activity were to propose a number of alternative HMI solutions (visual, auditory and haptic) for the concept of Safe Speed and Safe Distance and to carry out a pre-screening procedure with a number of test persons in order to give recommendations for the alternative building elements of the SASPENCE “warning-package” consisting of the combination of these modes to be tested in driving simulator in a consecutive study.
These pre-screening tests were performed in two European countries (namely, Sweden and Spain) in order to cover a wider group of drivers as well as to investigate potential nationality or cultural differences in HMI preferences.
In each country, two groups of about 30 test persons participated in the two-phase test procedure. For the screening procedure of visual symbols (11 candidate displays for speed information and 10 for distance warning) an established standard procedure for evaluating candidate symbols developed by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) was used. The auditory warning sounds were tested according to a procedure where the participants were asked to rate each sound (totally 12 candidate sounds) according to 13 statements. Moreover, in the Swedish experiments, two alternatives of haptic feed-back via the accelerator pedal were tested in a mock-up driving seat. And as a final task, the participants were asked to build their own warning package using alternatives of the different warning modes (visual/auditory/haptic).
Based on the results from the tests of the various candidates the best alternative of visual display and haptic display is recommended to build the SASPENCE speed information/warning function. In the same way, for the distance warning function, the best alternative of visual display, an auditory speech message telling “Distance” and either Force feed-back or pulsating accelerator pedal is recommended. Various combinations of these “building blocks” are possible, of which the ones judged to form the most promising “package” should be tested in driving simulator studies.
These pre-screening tests were performed in two European countries (namely, Sweden and Spain) in order to cover a wider group of drivers as well as to investigate potential nationality or cultural differences in HMI preferences.
In each country, two groups of about 30 test persons participated in the two-phase test procedure. For the screening procedure of visual symbols (11 candidate displays for speed information and 10 for distance warning) an established standard procedure for evaluating candidate symbols developed by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) was used. The auditory warning sounds were tested according to a procedure where the participants were asked to rate each sound (totally 12 candidate sounds) according to 13 statements. Moreover, in the Swedish experiments, two alternatives of haptic feed-back via the accelerator pedal were tested in a mock-up driving seat. And as a final task, the participants were asked to build their own warning package using alternatives of the different warning modes (visual/auditory/haptic).
Based on the results from the tests of the various candidates the best alternative of visual display and haptic display is recommended to build the SASPENCE speed information/warning function. In the same way, for the distance warning function, the best alternative of visual display, an auditory speech message telling “Distance” and either Force feed-back or pulsating accelerator pedal is recommended. Various combinations of these “building blocks” are possible, of which the ones judged to form the most promising “package” should be tested in driving simulator studies.
Avdelning/ar
Publiceringsår
2006
Språk
Engelska
Publikation/Tidskrift/Serie
Report C20.52. PReVENT Consortium
Dokumenttyp
Rapport
Förlag
[Publisher information missing]
Ämne
- Infrastructure Engineering
Status
Published