Towards Finding the Optimum Position in the Visual Field for a Head Worn Display Used for Task Guidance with Non-registered Graphics

Abstract

Where should a HWD be placed in a user's visual field? We present two studies that compare comfort, preference, task efficiency and accuracy for various HWD positions. The first study offsets a 9.2° horizontal field-of-view (FOV) display temporally (toward the ear) from 0° to 30° in 10° steps. 30° proves too uncomfortable while 10° is the most preferred position for a simple button-pushing game, corroborating results from previous single-task reading experiments. The second experiment uses a Magic Leap One to compare 10° x 10° FOV interfaces centered at line-of-sight, temporally offset 15° (center-right), inferiorly offset 15° (bottom-center), and offset in both directions (bottom-right) for an order picking task. The bottom-right position proved worst in terms of accuracy and several subjective metrics when compared to the line-of-sight position.

Application of Anti-wear Technology for Water-cooled Wall of CFB Boilers

“…The concentration of gas and solid phases in circulating fluidized bed boilers is high and unevenly distributed, and the concentration in the dilute phase area is much higher than the concentration of gas and solid phases in pulverized coal boilers, so the wear of the entire flue air system process in CFB boilers is more serious. And if a failure leakage accident occurs, it will increase the workload of temporary maintenance and overhaul of fluidized bed boilers, resulting in serious economic losses [1][2].…”