[abstract] EVALUATION OF HEAD MOUNTED AND HEAD DOWN INFORMATION DISPLAYS DURING SIMULATED MINE-COUNTERMEASURES DIVES TO 42 MSW

Rubicon Research Repository/Manakin Repository

[abstract] EVALUATION OF HEAD MOUNTED AND HEAD DOWN INFORMATION DISPLAYS DURING SIMULATED MINE-COUNTERMEASURES DIVES TO 42 MSW

Show full item record


Title: [abstract] EVALUATION OF HEAD MOUNTED AND HEAD DOWN INFORMATION DISPLAYS DURING SIMULATED MINE-COUNTERMEASURES DIVES TO 42 MSW
Author: Zander, JK; Morrison, JB; Eaton, DJ
Abstract: BACKGROUND: The advent of portable computers and small screen displays offers new methods of communication and display of information between the diver and dive supervisor. There is no information on the ability of divers to use a multi-function head down display (HDD) and head mounted display (HMD) for routine underwater tasks, or whether a HDD, or a monocular or binocular (HMD) is preferred. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three modes of information display were tested by nine mine counter-measures (MCM) divers at the surface and during simulated dives in a hyperbaric chamber. Each diver completed three dives to 42 metres in 6 C water: one dive using a HDD, one using a monocular HMD, and one using a binocular HMD. Divers used the displays to obtain and respond to information including depth and system alarms, and to perform simulated navigation, object location and target identification tasks. Task performance was measured as response or completion times, and accuracy. Subjective data was collected on the usability of the displays in conjunction with other MCM tasks and equipment. RESULTS: Task performance was generally slower and less accurate (p less than 0.05) during the simulated dives than at the surface. Although there were no significant differences between displays in most tasks, response times were shorter (p less than 0.05) for the HDD when reporting depths and when performing the object location task at 42 msw. In subjective reports, 8 divers ranked the HDD first or second overall, 7 ranked the binocular HMD second or third, and 5 divers ranked the monocular HMD last. CONCLUSIONS: MCM divers are capable of using both HDD and HMD effectively to perform an array of tasks during simulated dives to 42 msw. Divers showed a slight preference for the HDD. Each of the three displays presented MCM divers with unique performance and usability problems when completing typical MCM tasks.
Description: Undersea and Hyperbaric Medical Society, Inc. (http://www.uhms.org )
URI: http://archive.rubicon-foundation.org/1790
Date: 2005

Files in this item

Files Size Format View
abstract.txt 259bytes Text file View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • UHMS Meeting Abstracts
    This is a collection of the published abstracts from the Undersea and Hyperbaric Medical Society (UHMS) annual meetings.

Show full item record

Browse

My Account