4.6 Article

Ergonomic Guidelines of Head-Up Display User Interface during Semi-Automated

Journal

ELECTRONICS
Volume 9, Issue 4, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/electronics9040611

Keywords

head-up display; HUD; user interface; ergonomics; information complexity; automated driving; self-driving vehicles; windshield display; infotainment

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Self-driving vehicles are emerging as a result of technological advances, and the range of human behavior is expanding. The collateral information on driving is increasing, and head-up displays (HUDs) can be coupled with augmented reality displays to convey additional information to drivers in innovative ways. Interference between the actual driving environment and the displayed information can cause distractions. Research is required to find out what information should be displayed and how to properly display it considering the number of information, as well as the location and arrangement of the HUD. This study aims to examine the types of HUD information presentation that enhance the driver's intuitive understanding. The first experiment identified which information affects drivers more in self-driving conditions in terms of error rate and importance. As a result, information that the drivers consider to be of greater importance or more relevant to their safety was selected. The level of HUD information complexity was assessed in the second experiment. The independent variables were the number of symbols, location of the HUD, and arrangement of the HUD. The results showed that the number of symbols was most affected and that fewer than six should be displayed. Besides, the arrangement of contents was more intuitive when a vertical alignment was used, and the main content should be placed in the center of the windshield area. Finally, ergonomic design guidelines of the information presentation type are proposed in this study.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available