Advertisement

Ergonomic Design of Target Symbols for Fighter Aircraft Cockpit Displays Based on Usability Evaluation

  • Sung-Ho Kim
  • Woo-Seok Jang
  • Heung-Seob Kim
  • Hyoung-Seog Chung
  • Yong-Duk Kim
  • Woo-Jin Lee
  • Hyeon-Ju SeolEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 850)

Abstract

Ergonomic design of target symbol is required for fighter pilots to recognize and interpret target infromation effectively since the latest cockpit display provides huge amount of information. The purpose of this study is to analyze the structure of target symbol, establish coding design guidelines, and design ergonomic target symbol based on the results of usability evaluation for fighter pilots. A structure of target symbol and coding design guidelines analyzed in terms of information dimension (e.g., target type, identification friend or foe, acquisition status, maneuvering status, Data source) and coding dimension (e.g., shape, color, line, alphanumeric character) through literature review. Design alternatives for a target symbol were devised by extracting optimal combination of the information and coding dimension. A usability evaluation was conducted by 19 fighter pilots in their 20 s and 30 s using a relative preference rankings on design alternatives for a target symbol. As a result of conjoint analysis based on usability evaluation data, optimal combination of attributes in terms of target type was only shape coding, that in terms of identification friend or foe was shape, color, and alphanumeric character coding, that in terms of acquisition status was shape, color, and line coding, that in terms of maneuvering status was line and alphanumeric character coding, that in terms of data source was color and line coding. This study suggested that an improved target symbol based on the usability evaluation and design method of target symbol which can be applied to a variety of symbol designs such as public signs.

Keywords

Symbol design Usability evaluation Conjoint analysis 

References

  1. 1.
    MIL-STD-2525C: Common Warfighting Symbology. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    MIL-STD-1472G: Human Engineering Design Criteria for Military Systems, Equipment and Facilities. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Green, P.E., Srinivasan, V.: Conjoint analysis in marketing: new developments with implications for research and practice. J. Mark. 54(4), 3–19 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Silayoi, P., Speece, M.: The importance of packaging attributes: a conjoint analysis approach. Eur. J. Mark. 41(11/12), 1495–1517 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Yoon, B., Park, Y.: Development of new technology forecasting algorithm: hybrid approach for morphology analysis and conjoint analysis of patent information. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 54(3), 588–599 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sung-Ho Kim
    • 1
  • Woo-Seok Jang
    • 1
  • Heung-Seob Kim
    • 1
  • Hyoung-Seog Chung
    • 2
  • Yong-Duk Kim
    • 3
  • Woo-Jin Lee
    • 3
  • Hyeon-Ju Seol
    • 4
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Systems EngineeringAir Force AcademyCheongjuSouth Korea
  2. 2.Department of Aerospace EngineeringAir Force AcademyCheongjuSouth Korea
  3. 3.Agency for Defense DevelopmentDaejeonSouth Korea
  4. 4.School of Integrated National SecurityChungnam National UniversityDaejeonSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations