Comparative assessment of human machine interfaces for ROV guidance with different levels of secondary visual workload

Due to relatively slow dynamics of ROVs, pilot are given extra time to perform other tasks, such as inspections and arm operation. However, during multiple task handling, relevant information is typically dispersed on a number of screens overloading the pilot's visual channel. There is very little research examining the unique human-factors problems associated with unmanned underwater vehicles. Use of audio display has been suggested as a means to reduce visual workload, to enhance situation awareness, and mitigate the visual and cognitive demands of contemporary ROV operations. Our research investigates the effects of secondary visual tasks on operators workload and performance using standard visual navigation interface, augmented reality visual interface and audio interface. All experiments were performed on the state-of-the-art, real-time ROV simulator developed by Mobile & Marine Robotics Research Centre, University of Limerick and augmented reality system developed by Laboratory for Underwater Systems and Technologies, University of Zagreb. As expected, the results show that in no-load conditions visual guidance is better than the guidance-by-sound. By contrast, the effects of secondary visual load affect operators' performance. The use of augmented reality paradigm and especially hearing, in the form of the auditory display, emerges as an important advantage. Improvement depends on a level of experience in using auditory guidance system. Practice has a major effect on performance, raising the conclusion that there is a more room for improvement in using auditory interface.

[1]  Edin Omerdic,et al.  ROV LATIS: next generation smart underwater vehicle , 2012 .

[2]  Carlos Silvestre,et al.  Vehicle and mission control of single and multiple autonomous marine robots , 2006 .

[3]  A. Treisman Features and Objects: The Fourteenth Bartlett Memorial Lecture , 1988, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[4]  N I Durlach,et al.  Supernormal auditory localization. I. General background. , 1993, Presence.

[5]  Zoran Vukic,et al.  Acoustically aided HMI for ROV navigation , 2012 .

[6]  N I Durlach,et al.  Adapting to supernormal auditory localization cues. I. Bias and resolution. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  N.I. Durlach,et al.  Supernormal Auditory LocalizationI. General Background , 1993, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[8]  James R. Marston,et al.  Cognitive load of navigating without vision when guided by virtual sound versus spatial language. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[9]  R L McKinley,et al.  3-dimensional auditory displays: development, applications, and performance. , 1994, Aviation, space, and environmental medicine.

[10]  N I Durlach,et al.  Adapting to supernormal auditory localization cues. II. Constraints on adaptation of mean response. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  Thor I. Fossen,et al.  Guidance and control of ocean vehicles , 1994 .

[12]  T Letowski,et al.  Evaluation of acoustic beacon characteristics for navigation tasks , 2000, Ergonomics.

[13]  Alan F. Smeaton,et al.  Spatially Augmented Audio Delivery: Applications of Spatial Sound Awareness in Sensor-Equipped Indoor Environments , 2009, 2009 Tenth International Conference on Mobile Data Management: Systems, Services and Middleware.

[14]  Durand R. Begault,et al.  3-D Sound for Virtual Reality and Multimedia Cambridge , 1994 .

[15]  Rudolf Susnik,et al.  Spatial sound resolution of an interpolated HRIR library , 2005 .

[16]  B.J. Buckham,et al.  A Kalman filter for the navigation of remotely operated vehicles , 2005, Proceedings of OCEANS 2005 MTS/IEEE.

[17]  Durand R. Begault,et al.  Techniques and Applications for Binaural Sound Manipulation , 1992 .

[18]  Thor I. Fossen,et al.  Marine Control Systems Guidance, Navigation, and Control of Ships, Rigs and Underwater Vehicles , 2002 .

[19]  Paul Newman MOOS - Mission Orientated Operating Suite , 2008 .

[20]  Nada J. Pavlovic,et al.  Human Factors Issues with Operating Unmanned Underwater Vehicles , 2011 .

[21]  Johan Engström,et al.  Effects of visual and cognitive load in real and simulated motorway driving , 2005 .

[22]  Thor I. Fossen,et al.  Guidance Laws for Autonomous Underwater Vehicles , 2009 .

[23]  Zoran Vukic,et al.  Underwater Vehicle Localization with Complementary Filter: Performance Analysis in the Shallow Water Environment , 2012, J. Intell. Robotic Syst..

[24]  Bruce N. Walker,et al.  Navigation Performance With a Virtual Auditory Display: Effects of Beacon Sound, Capture Radius, and Practice , 2006, Hum. Factors.

[25]  B. Shinn-Cunningham Applications of virtual auditory displays , 1998, Proceedings of the 20th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Vol.20 Biomedical Engineering Towards the Year 2000 and Beyond (Cat. No.98CH36286).

[26]  Barbara G. Shinn-Cunningham,et al.  Supernormal Auditory Localization , 1993, Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ..

[27]  Ariel Bleicher The Gulf spill's lessons for robotics , 2010 .

[28]  D. M. Green,et al.  Sound localization by human listeners. , 1991, Annual review of psychology.

[29]  Michael Vorländer,et al.  Virtual Auditory Displays , 2014, Handbook of Virtual Environments, 2nd ed..