AFRL Develops a Unified Taxonomy for Assessing Visionic Devices

  • Published
  • By Plans and Programs Directorate
  • AFRL/XP
A cooperative effort between scientists at AFRL's Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, facilities and the US Army's Aeromedical Research Laboratory, Fort Rucker, Alabama, produced more than 40 test methodologies for conducting laboratory evaluations of visionic devices. The key to properly applying these methodologies lies in the associated, newly developed taxonomic approach. This collaborative endeavor was part of a larger effort conducted under the auspices of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's Research and Technology Organization panel on Human Factors and Medicine. The working group documented the guidelines for selecting and implementing various methodologies for measuring the performance of prototype and production visionic devices. For its purposes, the group replaced the commonly used term "helmet-mounted display" with the more generic term "visionic device."
Using various kinds of electronic sensors, visionic devices provide warfighters a visual (i.e., pictorial) image of their surroundings; symbolic information may or may not augment these images. The team developed a new taxonomy that not only enables classification of a given visionic device based on optical design and display type, but also provides recommendations regarding specific test parameters that should be measured to ensure the final product delivers expected operational performance.
The new classification scheme is based on both a visionic device's optical design and its display type. The first step in classifying a device requires identifying it (under test) as either non-see-through or see-through. Non-see-through optical designs allow users to view only sensor-provided imagery; they do not provide users a direct, unaided view of the external scene. Conversely, devices built according to the see-through premise permit users to view sensor-provided imagery overlaid upon the external scene.
The second step in the taxonomic approach requires identification of the display type. The choice is between image intensification systems, wherein the sensor and display are integrated into a single component, and stand-alone displays (e.g., cathode-ray tubes and liquid crystal displays).
The third step involves revisiting the optical design to determine if the device uses a monocular or biocular/binocular presentation mode. Biocular/binocular systems require additional testing for alignment disparities between imagery presented to the two eyes. Once these three taxonomic determinations have effectively classified the visionic device under test, researchers can consult tables containing recommended test parameters and corresponding methodologies.