Search Results

The last years have seen an increasing amount of innovations in the functionality of car electronics (e.g. advanced driver assistant systems (ADAS) and in-vehicle infotainment systems (IVIS)). These electrical systems are not reserved for premium cars anymore, but additionally reach mid-size, compact, and subcompact cars. The growing number of functionalities in these cars entails increasing amount of interfaces, which may confuse, overload, or annoy the driver. Accompanying this, there is a trend towards the integration of capacitive touchscreens as user interfaces. These touchscreens were implemented first in consumer electronics and had a substantial impact on the way in which users interact with technology. This in turn has led to an increased user driven demand for the technology to be implemented in other domains, even in safety-critical ones like the automotive area.

Simple, effective, and appropriately placed visual information must be available to the driver as part of a well designed Human Machine Interface (HMI). Visual interfaces for Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS), secondary task control, and safety warnings should attempt to minimize both driver reaction time to warnings and the workload on the driver to comprehend a warning or respond to driving advice or information. A driving simulator study was designed and executed to assess the appropriateness and effectiveness of three display concepts. The study directly compared the driver warning reaction and overall workload for three visual HMIs: the conventional instrument panel and center-stack displays (IP/CS), an idealized heads up display (HUD), and the Communication Steering Wheel (CSW) display. Study participants were required to respond to secondary convenience control tasks (4 tasks); safety warnings (3 scenarios); and also a peripheral detection task (PDT).