Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “HUD”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2015

Toward Head-Worn Displays for Equivalent Visual Operations

The Next Generation Air Transportation System represents an envisioned transformation to the U.S. air transportation system that includes an "equivalent visual operations" (EVO) concept, intended to achieve the safety and operational tempos of Visual Flight Rules (VFR) operations independent of visibility conditions. Today, Federal Aviation Administration regulations provide for the use of an Enhanced Flight Visual System (EFVS) as "operational credit" to conduct approach operations below traditional minima otherwise prohibited. An essential element of an EFVS is the Head-Up Display (HUD). NASA has conducted a substantial amount of research investigating the use of HUDs for operational landing "credit", and current efforts are underway to enable manually flown operations as low as 1000 feet Runway Visual Range (RVR). Title 14 CFR 91.175 describes the use of EFVS and the operational credit that may be obtained with airplane equipage of a HUD combined with Enhanced Vision (EV) while also offering the potential use of an “equivalent” display in lieu of the HUD. A Head-Worn Display (HWD) is postulated to provide the same, or better, safety and operational benefits as current HUD-equipped aircraft but for potentially more aircraft and for lower cost. A high-fidelity simulation was conducted that examined the efficacy of HWDs as "equivalent" displays. Twelve airline flight crews conducted 1000 feet RVR approach and 300 feet RVR departure operations using either a HUD or HWD, both with simulated Forward Looking Infra-Red cameras. The paper shall describe (a) quantitative and qualitative results, (b) a comparative evaluation of these findings with prior NASA HUD studies, and (c) describe current research efforts for EFVS to provide for a comprehensive EVO capability.

Prinzel, Lawrence (Lance) J., III↗
NASA NTRS1978

Head-up display for Space Shuttle Orbiter

The very nature of Orbiter's approach and landing task must lead to a discussion of a Head-up Display (HUD) as an aid to this task. HUD has been proposed for Orbiter several times since 1970. However, all previous proposals to add HUD to the Orbiter avionics were defeated due to lack of sophistication and accuracy in state-of-the-art HUD systems, a simpler anticipated Orbiter landing task, and the anticipated role of autoland in the Orbiter approach and landing. Recent advances in HUD state-of-the-art and a more realistic understanding of Orbiter flight and handling characteristics make HUD a viable addition to the Orbiter avionics.

Ivins, M.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Cognitive issues in head-up displays

The ability of pilots to recognize and act upon unexpected information, presented in either the outside world or in a head-up display (HUD), was evaluated. Eight commercial airline pilots flew 18 approaches with a flightpath-type HUD and 13 approaches with conventional instruments in a fixed-base 727 simulator. The approaches were flown under conditions of low visibility, turbulence, and wind shear. Vertical and lateral flight performance was measured for five cognitive variables: an unexpected obstacle on runway; vertical and lateral boresight-type offset of the HUD; lateral ILS beam bend-type offset; and no anomaly. Mean response time to the runway obstacle was longer with HUD than without it (4.13 vs 1.75 sec.), and two of the pilots did not see the obstacle at all with the HUD. None of the offsets caused any deterioration in lateral flight performance, but all caused some change in vertical tracking; all offsets seemed to magnify the environmental effects. In all conditions, both vertical and lateral tracking was better with the HUD than with the conventional instruments.

Fischer, E.↗
NASA NTRS1984

The utility of Head-Up Displays - Eye-focus vs decision times

Instrument-panel information is presented by a Head-Up Display (HUD) to pilots in such a way that the symbols appear far away (at optical infinity) superimposed upon the landscape. The use of a HUD makes it, therefore, unnecessary for the pilot to take his eyes off the changing scene in order to look down and refocus on the instrument panel. It is pointed out that the HUD has proved superior to the conventional instrument-panel display. An experiment was conducted with the objective to help to determine which of the differences between HUD and conventional instrument-panel display are mainly responsible for the superiority of the HUD. Important features of this experiment are that the format of each virtual-image display, its luminance, and its angle subtended at the eye, remained the same as the optical distance and location were varied. It was found that the HUD symbology at optical infinity does reduce decision times compared to the same format at the location of a conventional instrument panel.

Weintraub, D. J.↗
NASA NTRS2001

Rollout and Turnoff (ROTO) Guidance and Information Displays: Effect on Runway Occupancy Time in Simulated Low-Visibility Landings

This report examines a rollout and turnoff (ROTO) system for reducing the runway occupancy time for transport aircraft in low-visibility weather. Simulator runs were made to evaluate the system that includes a head-up display (HUD) to show the pilot a graphical overlay of the runway along with guidance and steering information to a chosen exit. Fourteen pilots (airline, corporate jet, and research pilots) collectively flew a total of 560 rollout and turnoff runs using all eight runways at Hartsfield Atlanta International Airport. The runs consisted of 280 runs for each of two runway visual ranges (RVRs) (300 and 1200 ft). For each visual range, half the runs were conducted with the HUD information and half without. For the runs conducted with the HUD information, the runway occupancy times were lower and more consistent. The effect was more pronounced as visibility decreased. For the 1200-ft visibility, the runway occupancy times were 13% lower with HUD information (46.1 versus 52.8 sec). Similarly, for the 300-ft visibility, the times were 28% lower (45.4 versus 63.0 sec). Also, for the runs with HUD information, 78% (RVR 1200) and 75% (RVR 300) had runway occupancy times less than 50 sec, versus 41 and 20%, respectively, without HUD information.

Hueschen, Richard M.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Head-Worn Display Concepts for Surface Operations for Commerical Aircraft

Experiments and flight tests have shown that a Head-Up Display (HUD) and a head-down electronic moving map (EMM) can be enhanced with Synthetic Vision for airport surface operations. While great success in ground operations was demonstrated with a HUD, the research noted that two major HUD limitations during ground operations were its monochrome form and limited, fixed field-of-regard. A potential solution to these limitations found with HUDs may be emerging with Head Worn Displays (HWDs). HWDs are small display devices that may be worn without significant encumbrance to the user. By coupling the HWD with a head tracker, unlimited field-of-regard may be realized. The results of three ground simulation experiments conducted at NASA Langley Research Center are summarized. The experiments evaluated the efficacy of head-worn display applications of Synthetic Vision and Enhanced Vision technology to improve transport aircraft surface operations. The results of the experiments showed that the fully integrated HWD provided greater pilot performance with respect to staying on the path compared to using paper charts alone. Further, when comparing the HWD with the HUD concept, there were no differences in path performance. In addition, the HWD and HUD concepts were rated via paired-comparisons the same in terms of situation awareness and workload.

Arthur, Jarvis J., III↗
NASA NTRS2014

Performance Comparison Between a Head-Worn Display System and a Head-Up Display for Low Visibility Commercial Operations

Research, development, test, and evaluation of flight deck interface technologies is being conducted by NASA to proactively identify, develop, and mature tools, methods, and technologies for improving overall aircraft safety of new and legacy vehicles operating in Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen). Under the Vehicle Systems Safety Technologies (VSST) project in the Aviation Safety Program, one specific area of research is the use of small Head-Worn Displays (HWDs) as an equivalent display to a Head-Up Display (HUD). Title 14 of the US Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 91.175 describes a possible operational credit which can be obtained with airplane equipage of a HUD or an "equivalent" display combined with Enhanced Vision (EV). If successful, a HWD may provide the same safety and operational benefits as current HUD-equipped aircraft but for significantly more aircraft in which HUD installation is neither practical nor possible. A simulation experiment was conducted to evaluate if the HWD, coupled with a head-tracker, can provide an equivalent display to a HUD. Comparative testing was performed in the Research Flight Deck (RFD) Cockpit Motion Facility (CMF) full mission, motion-based simulator at NASA Langley. Twelve airline crews conducted approach and landing, taxi, and departure operations during low visibility operations (1000' Runway Visual Range (RVR), 300' RVR) at Memphis International Airport (Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) identifier: KMEM). The results showed that there were no statistical differences in the crews performance in terms of touchdown and takeoff. Further, there were no statistical differences between the HUD and HWD in pilots' responses to questionnaires.

Arthur, Jarvis J., III↗
NASA NTRS1978

A head-up display for mid-air drone recovery

During mid-air retrieval of parachute packages, the absence of a natural horizon creates serious difficulties for the pilot of the recovery helicopter. A head-up display (HUD) was tested in an attempt to solve this problem. Both a roll-stabilized HUD and a no-roll (pitch only) HUD were tested. The results show that fewer missed passes occurred with the roll-stabilized HUD when the horizon was obscured. The pilots also reported that the workload was greatly reduced. Roll-stabilization was required to prevent vertigo when flying in the absence of a natural horizon. Any HUD intended for mid-air retrieval should display pitch, roll, sideslip, airspeed, and vertical velocity.

Augustine, W. L.↗
NASA NTRS1982

An Operational evaluation of head up displays for civil transport operations. NASA/FAA phase 3 report

The advantages and disadvantages of head-up displays (HUDs) in commercial jet transport approach and landing operations was evaluated. Ten airline captains currently qualified in the B-727 aircraft flew a series of instrument landing system (ILS) and nonprecision approaches in a motion base simulator using both a flight director HUD concept and a flightpath HUD concept as well as conventional head-down instruments under a variety of environmental and operational conditions to assess: (1) the potential benefits of these HUDs in airline operations; (2) problems which might be associated with their use; and (3) flight crew training requirements and flight crew operating procedures suitable for use with the HUDs. Results are presented in terms of objective simulator based performance measures, subject pilot opinion and rating data, and observer data.

Lauber, J. K.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Evaluation of Hands-Free Devices for Space Habitat Maintenance Procedures

Currently, International Space Station (ISS) crews use a laptop computer to display procedures for performing onboard maintenance tasks. This approach has been determined to be suboptimal. A heuristic evaluation and two studies have been completed to test commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) "near-eye" heads up displays (HUDs) for support of these types of maintenance tasks. In both studies, subjects worked through electronic procedures to perform simple maintenance tasks. As a result of the Phase I study, three HUDs were down-selected to one. In the Phase II study, the HUD was compared against two other electronic display devices - a laptop computer and an e-book reader. Results suggested that adjustability and stability of the HUD display were the most significant acceptability factors to consider for near-eye displays. The Phase II study uncovered a number of advantages and disadvantages of the HUD relative to the laptop and e-book reader for interacting with electronic procedures.

Hoffman, R. B.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Evaluation of Head-Worn Display Concepts for Commercial Aircraft Taxi Operations

Previous research has demonstrated that a Head-Up Display (HUD) can be used to enable more capacity and safer aircraft surface operations. This previous research also noted that the HUD exhibited two major limitations which hindered the full potential of the display concept: 1) the monochrome HUD format; and, 2) a limited, fixed field of regard. Full-color Head Worn Displays (HWDs) with very small sizes and weights are emerging to the extent that this technology may be practical for commercial and business aircraft operations. By coupling the HWD with a head tracker, full-color, out-the-window display concepts with an unlimited field-of-regard may be realized to improve efficiency and safety in surface operations. A ground simulation experiment was conducted at NASA Langley to evaluate the efficacy of head-worn display applications which may directly address the limitations of the HUD while retaining all of its advantages in surface operations. The simulation experiment used airline crews to evaluate various displays (HUD, HWD) and display concepts in an operationally realistic environment by using a Chicago, O Hare airport database. The results pertaining to the implications of HWDs for commercial business and transport aviation applications are presented herein. Overall HWD system latency was measured and found to be acceptable, but not necessarily optimal. A few occurrences of simulator sickness were noted while wearing the HWD, but overall there appears to be commercial pilot acceptability and usability to the concept. Many issues were identified which need to be addressed in future research including continued reduction in user encumbrance due to the HWD, and improvement in image alignment, accuracy, and boresighting.

Bailey, Randall E.↗
NASA NTRS1972

Night visual approaches: Pilot performance with and without a head-up display

Simulated night visual approaches were flown into two airports with and without a head up display (HUD) in a transport aircraft. The HUD featured pitch stabilized vertical scales which displayed the glide slope angle to the runway aim point and a horizontal bar which aided the pilot in his control of the aircraft flight path angle. One airport was located on flat terrain with numerous foreground lights, the second airport had no foreground lights and the terrain sloped up behind the airport. With the HUD glide slope tracking precision was equally good for either runway. With no HUD glide slope tracking was about three times worse with the flat airport and about eight times worse with the airport with no foreground lights and up-sloping terrain beyond the runway.

Palmer, E. A.↗
NASA NTRS1973

Initial flight and simulator evaluation of a head up display for standard and noise abatement visual approaches

A preliminary assessment was made of the adequacy of a simple head up display (HUD) for providing vertical guidance for flying noise abatement and standard visual approaches in a jet transport. The HUD featured gyro-stabilized approach angle scales which display the angle of declination to any point on the ground and a horizontal flight path bar which aids the pilot in his control of the aircraft flight path angle. Thirty-three standard and noise abatement approaches were flown in a Boeing 747 aircraft equipped with a head up display. The HUD was also simulated in a research simulator. The simulator was used to familiarize the pilots with the display and to determine the most suitable way to use the HUD for making high capture noise abatement approaches. Preliminary flight and simulator data are presented and problem areas that require further investigation are identified.

Bourquin, K.↗
NASA NTRS1979

The role of cognitive switching in head-up displays

The pilot's ability to accurately extract information from either one or both of two superimposed sources of information was determined. Static, aerial, color 35 mm slides of external runway environments and slides of corresponding static head-up display (HUD) symbology were used as the sources. A three channel tachistoscope was utilized to show either the HUD alone, the scene alone, or the two slides superimposed. Cognitive performance of the pilots was assessed by determining the percentage of correct answers given to two HUD related questions, two scene related questions, or one HUD and one scene related question.

Fischer, E.↗
NASA NTRS1981

Magnitude of visual accommodation to a head-up display

The virtual image symbology of head-up displays (HUDs) is presented at optical infinity to the pilot. This design feature is intended to help pilots maintain visual focus distance at optical infinity. However, the accommodation response could be nearer than optical infinity, due to an individual's dark focus response. Accommodation responses were measured of two age groups of airline pilots to: (1) static symbology on a HUD; (2) a landing site background at optical infinity; (3) the combination of the HUD symbology and the landing site background; and (4) complete darkness. Results indicate that magnitude of accommodation to HUD symbology, with and without the background, is not significantly different from an infinity focus response for either age group. The dark focus response is significantly closer than optical infinity for the younger pilots, but not the older pilots, a finding consistent with previous research.

Leitner, E. F.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Head-up displays: Effect of information location on the processing of superimposed symbology

Head-up display (HUD) symbology superimposes vehicle status information onto the external terrain, providing simultaneous visual access to both sources of information. Relative to a baseline condition in which the superimposed altitude indicator was omitted, altitude maintenance was improved by the presence of the altitude indicator, and this improvement was the same magnitude regardless of the position of the altitude indicator on the screen. However, a concurrent decifit in heading maintenance was observed only when the altitude indicator was proximal to the path information. These results did not support a model of the concurrent processing deficit based on an inability to attend to multiple locations in parallel. They are consistent with previous claims that the deficit is the product of attentional limits on subjects' ability to process two separate objects (HUD symbology and terrain information) concurrently. The absence of a performance tradeoff when the HUD and the path information were less proximal is attributed to a breaking of attentional tunneling on the HUD, possibly due to eye movements.

Sanford, Beverly D.↗
NASA NTRS1996

Building the Traffic, Navigation, and Situation Awareness System (T-NASA) for Surface Operations

We report the results of a part-task simulation evaluating the separate and combined effects of an electronic moving map display and newly developed HUD symbology on ground taxi performance, under moderate- and low-visibility conditions. Twenty-four commercial airline pilots carried out a series of 28 gate-to-runway taxi trials at Chicago O'Hare. Half of the trials were conducted under moderate visibility (RVR 1400 ft), and half under low visibility (RVR 700 ft). In the baseline condition, where navigation support was limited to surface features and a Jeppesen paper map, navigation errors were committed on almost half of the trials. These errors were virtually abolished when the electronic moving map or the HUD symbology was available; in addition, compare, the baseline condition, both forms of navigation aid yielded an increase in forward taxi speed. The speed increase was greater for HUD than the electronic moving map, and greater under low visibility than under moderate visibility. These results suggest that combination of electronic moving map and HUD symbology has the potential to greatly increase the efficiency of ground operations, particularly under low-visibility conditions.

McCann, Robert S.↗
NASA NTRS1995

Attentional Capture by Superimposed Symbology: Boundary Conditions

We report new results from an ongoing set of experiments in which subjects view a computer-generated display consisting of a set of stationary symbols (e.g., a "HUD") superimposed on a dynamic view of a runway as it appears to the pilot during final approach. Previous work (McCann, Foyle, & Johnston, 1993) has shown that when subjects process a cueing stimulus and then identify a geometric target, performance is slower when the cue appears on the HUD and the target appears on the runway surface, compared to a control condition where the cue and target are both on the runway surface. This "shift cost" was taken as evidence that the HUD captures attention, which then has to be shifted to the "out-the-world" scene before the target can be identified. New experiments show that the shift cost is eliminated when the cue occupies a known, fixed location on the HUD. Implications for the conditions that produce attentional tunneling are discussed.

McCann, Robert S.↗