Evaluation of Perceived Motion During a Simulated Takeoff Run

Groen, Eric L.; Clari, Mario S. V. Valenti; Hosman, Ruud

doi:10.2514/2.2827

Cited by 39 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although pilots were free to choose their own reference for the magnitude rating, most of them explained afterwards to draw a line between the labels "clear" and "strong", where a rating "strong" was given to indicate that the motion sensation was stronger than expected. The result that the sway stimulus with a gain of 0.7 was judged unacceptably strong, confirms previous findings that with the simulation of linear accelerations inertial motion cues are structurally overestimated in a simulator environment 10,17,18 . This phenomenon is not found for angular motion 11,19 .…”

Section: A Simulation Of Decrab Maneuversupporting

confidence: 88%

Simulated Decrab Maneuver: Evaluation with a Pilot Perception Model

Groen

Smaïli

Hosman³

2005

AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference and Exhibit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this simulator study eleven pilots rated their motion perception during a series of decrab maneuvers of a twin-engine passenger aircraft. Platform yaw, sway, and roll motion were varied independently to examine their relative contribution to the pilots' judgements. In one set of conditions, the washout algorithms were bypassed so as to reproduce unfiltered aircraft motion. This was compared with washout-filtered motion in another set of conditions. Moreover, the effect of visual cues was studied by testing the unfiltered motion cues once under simulated VMC, and once under IMC. The results show that the simulation of heading alignment was positively affected by platform sway and roll, and also by the visual stimulus. Platform yaw was poorly recognized, and remained under the perceptual threshold in the presence of platform sway. Interestingly, unfiltered sway motion was perceived as too strong, even though the simulator workspace required downscaling to 70% of the actual aircraft motion. Finally, the subjective data was used to validate our human motion perception model. Due to the fact that the model does not yet account for the observed interaction between sway motion and the perceptual threshold for yaw, the model output did not quantitatively correlate with the magnitude ratings. However, a multiple regression analysis showed that, qualitatively, the model did predict the way pilots interpreted the platform motion. We conclude that better understanding of perceptual thresholds in a flight simulator setting is necessary to enable quantitative analysis of the effectiveness of ground-based motion cues.

show abstract

Section: A Simulation Of Decrab Maneuversupporting

confidence: 88%

Simulated Decrab Maneuver: Evaluation with a Pilot Perception Model

Groen

Smaïli

Hosman³

2005

AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference and Exhibit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1,5,6 Groen et al 3 when simulating a take off run found a preferred motion gain of 0.2 for the surge motion of the simulator. The amplitude of the reference signal was 3.5 m/s 2 , which is higher than what was used in this experiment.…”

Section: Iva Motion Gain Dependence On Stimulus Amplitudementioning

confidence: 98%

“…Examples of these large amplitude platforms are the Desdemona Research simulator at TNO Human Factors in the Netherlands and the KUKA simulator at Max Planck Institute in Germany. However, several studies [1][2][3][4] showed that subjects perceive one-to-one motion in a simulator differently than in real life. Subjects in these studies reported motion to be too strong.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Tuning of the Lateral Specific Force Gain Based on Human Motion Perception in the Desdemona Simulator

Grácio

Paassen

Wentink

2010

AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Generally, motion simulators present motion and visual cues different from each other due to the physical limitations of the motion platform. Nonetheless, high fidelity motion platforms are capable of simulating some maneuvers one-to-one, i.e., motion cues equal to visual cues. However, one-to-one simulation is normally not preferred by subjects and the simulator motion is reported as too strong. In this study we investigated whether this overestimation depends on the frequency and amplitude of inertial motion. The stimuli in this study consisted of translations in the lateral direction. The Desdemona research simulator was used to generate the motion profiles. Six sinusoidal profiles with different combinations of amplitude and frequency were used as reference stimuli. For every experimental condition, the visual and inertial information had equal frequency but different amplitude. Subjects had to change the inertial motion amplitude until they obtained the best relation between the two sources of motion information. Our results showed that stimuli with high amplitude were associated with smaller motion gains than stimuli with lower amplitude. The same occurred for stimuli with higher frequency when compared to stimuli with lower frequency. The findings in this study suggest that a dynamic scaling algorithm for inertial motion could improve the perceived realism of motion simulation.

show abstract

“…[1][2][3][4] A specific set of studies has concentrated on the concept of coherence zone. 5-7 A coherence zone represents a range of inertial motion levels, either amplitude or phase levels, which although not being a match with the visual motion, are still perceived by humans as one realistic, coherent movement.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Performing a Boundary-Avoidance Tracking Task on the Perception of Coherence Between Visual and Inertial Cues

Pais

Paassen

Wentink

2011

AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During flight simulation, the inertial and visual stimuli provided to the pilot differ considerably. For successful design of motion cueing algorithms it is necessary to gather knowledge on how pilots perceive the difference between visual and inertial cues. Some of the work done on this topic has concentrated on the concept of coherence zone. A coherence zone represents a range of inertial motion amplitudes, which although not being a match with the visual motion, are still perceived by humans as one realistic, coherent movement. To extend the knowledge on coherence zones an experiment was performed that tested the yaw motion coherence zone limits at two frequencies during passive and active situations. Subjects were required to perform a boundary-avoidance task as a mean to decrease the attention given to the perception task. This decrease in attention was thought to cause a widening of the perceived coherence zones. The boundary-avoidance tracking task had two levels of difficulty. The measured coherence zones did not change significantly with the addition of the control task. These results imply that unlike motion perception thresholds, coherence zones are little influenced by decreased levels of attention. This being true, for a range of tasks, such as supervisory tasks or procedural training in a flight simulator, pilot acceptance of the inertial cues might be measured in a passive manner and directly applied to the active scenario.

show abstract

Evaluation of Perceived Motion During a Simulated Takeoff Run

Cited by 39 publications

References 15 publications

Simulated Decrab Maneuver: Evaluation with a Pilot Perception Model

Simulated Decrab Maneuver: Evaluation with a Pilot Perception Model

Tuning of the Lateral Specific Force Gain Based on Human Motion Perception in the Desdemona Simulator

Effect of Performing a Boundary-Avoidance Tracking Task on the Perception of Coherence Between Visual and Inertial Cues

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About