VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

-POSTING RULES
-Advertise in here!
- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

Keep VAF Going
Donate methods

Point your
camera app here
to donate fast.

  #1  
Old 01-13-2015, 09:03 AM
Robert Anglin Robert Anglin is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: houston, texas
Posts: 900
Default Answer to DR's cover story.

Yes we have done this over the years. The Ergonomics of panel instruments and all other switches, valves, knobs, exset.. How the will be used, in what order the will be used, how often they will be used, the safety of using them along with situational awareness at the same time they will be used. Yep, I agree with you whole hartedly. Going that extra step and taking the time to look at this aspect of building has good merit. I have mostly done this over time, by just setting in the aircraft and going over, how and what a person can do and needs to do in flight and on the ground, before you start up, when you start moving, during take-off, abort situations, flight, interring the pattern, working the pattern, transmission to roll out. I have found that if you mock these aspects of your uses, of both the aircraft and its systems. Before you install anything and as you install everything, you will be a lot happier, safer and not have to work as hard to fly. Yep never hurts to set and think it through, plan it out, mock it up and test your findings. I like your idea, D.R., we have just done it the old school way. It would be nice to see what you come up with, out of the computer. Go far it, I like learning from others ideas. AND thanks for the work you do for us all.
Yours as always. R.E.A. III #80888


[ed. Here is the text being talked about from the 1/13/15 edition...dr]


Thoughts Regarding an On-The-Bench Panel U.I. Project

I'm having initial thoughts of what is 'down the road' regarding panel changes on our family RV-6 (first flight 2002 and on its third panel). This round I was thinking first of taking measurements of four spots (picture below) using string, or wire, fishing lure hardware or whatever, and converging those lines to a point at the bridge of my nose.



With these measurements I would then construct a wire jig to quickly and accurately recreate the distance-to-eyes and panel angle in my home office using a folding table, a panel blank, and my adjustable office chair. Four pieces of fishing line tied together to some old glasses frames and some numbered hooks is the investment.

Now the fun begins with paper printouts of avionics on the panel blank. Where to put the AOA, switches, labels, EFIS screens, backup screens, iPad/Phone and more using MY arms and MY eyes with MY bifocals, etc. Get the switches and screens exactly where they work for my arm sweep and sight lines (thinking IFR here). Wedges required to perfectly read an EFIS on the other side of the panel - and how many degrees. Are MY arms long enough to reach this and that without moving my body/head? Or switching hands? Important stuff with the hood on I'm finding out. With today's remote transponders, comms, autopilots and more, you could end up with a very clean setup.

Build the panel in my home office with sufficiently long service loops, and with the proper power supply on the bench spend all the time necessary to configure a majority of the software. Drop it in. If it took a good long while to accomplish, where's the harm? It would be a lot of fun as well as a new skill set...and it wouldn't require a daily 1-hour round trip to the airport.

Anyone do this already? Thoughts?

Nerds of the world unite! dr




Last edited by DeltaRomeo : 01-13-2015 at 05:36 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-13-2015, 11:17 AM
Bill Boyd's Avatar
Bill Boyd Bill Boyd is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Landing field "12VA"
Posts: 1,712
Default I've been doing some of the same

thanks to Glen (HumptyBump)... measuring declination angle of pupil-to-row of switches below the panel to make certain the main panel overhang would not cover the switch labels I'm going to make. It looks like there will be enough panel area above the switches to fit a decent label in most cases.





Years ago I did the same sort of biometrics to locate the ideal left and right segment heights on my Scheiden flip up bifocals, since my eyes aren't set in my head at exactly the same height. One of my numerous idiosyncracies

-Stormy
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-13-2015, 12:03 PM
AX-O's Avatar
AX-O AX-O is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,545
Default

DR, what you are describing is the Designed Sitting Eye Height (potentially some Design Eye Position). It is a big problem when designing cockpits that must fit a small female and a gigantor male, hence the reason for collecting anthropometrics measurements at test pilot school. The good thing for you is that you only have to design your cockpit to fit you, so the solution becomes simple.

My advice is for you to also use ?your flying posture? and not the ?sitting at attention? posture for measurements. Test have shown that after you fly for any period of time, pilots tend to slide down the seat and hunch over, and the cushions warm up and compress. All that adds up to a different eye position in relationship to the original eye position (that of taxi/take off). Good luck.

Check this link out for additional info.
http://aviationknowledge.wikidot.com...-human-factors
__________________
Axel
RV-4 fastback thread and Pics
VAF 2020 paid VAF 704
The information that I post is just that; information and my own personal experiences. You need to weigh out the pros and cons and make up your own mind/decisions. The pictures posted may not show the final stage or configuration. Build at your own risk. Further more, these are my opinions and not those of my employer.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-13-2015, 01:41 PM
enielsen enielsen is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 146
Default sim

If you mocked up a decent cockpit with the sides and realistic seating... you could probably sell the design to the flight simulator crowd.
__________________
RV-x Planning stage
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-13-2015, 01:46 PM
flyboy1963's Avatar
flyboy1963 flyboy1963 is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Lake Country, B.C. Canada
Posts: 2,434
Default consider body movement?

...great stuff....don't forget, if you're strapped in with your 5-point, you aren't able to reach.' just one more inch' to reach that switch or pen holder etc.
might also consider wearing helmet, sunglasses, headset etc. to see if any of that changes your head angle, fields of vision, and whatnot.
I know if I have a passenger, their thigh moves mine over, and I no longer have full right stick, partly due to my kneeboard....wow,..... a whole myriad of factors happening in our 'simple' little planes eh?
__________________
Perry Y.
RV-9a - SOLD!....
Lake Country, BC
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-13-2015, 01:56 PM
Bill Boyd's Avatar
Bill Boyd Bill Boyd is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Landing field "12VA"
Posts: 1,712
Default yeah

... I've been known to size up passengers and preemptively remove their joystick - so that between their thighs and mine, I at least would have enough roll control movement to get by. Thick passengers don't get stick time in the 6A - sorry!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-13-2015, 02:03 PM
JonJay's Avatar
JonJay JonJay is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Battleground
Posts: 4,348
Default

....and after you are all done and your mock up is complete, close your eyes and mentally go through all of your procedures. You should be able to put your hand or finger, correctly, on everything, blind.
Many moons ago in my flight training, you didn't fly until you could demonstrate this to the instructor.
These where just basic 150's, so you might have to adjust your expectations a bit, but the concept is still a good one I think.....
If you have an issue low to the ground, you don't want to have your head buried in the cockpit finding that boost pump or flaps......
__________________
Smart People do Stupid things all the time. I know, I've seen me do'em.

RV6 - Builder/Flying
Bucker Jungmann
Fiat G.46 -(restoration in progress, if I have enough life left in me)
RV1 - Proud Pilot.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-14-2015, 09:01 AM
Robert Anglin Robert Anglin is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: houston, texas
Posts: 900
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AX-O View Post
DR, what you are describing is the Designed Sitting Eye Height (potentially some Design Eye Position). It is a big problem when designing cockpits that must fit a small female and a gigantor male, hence the reason for collecting anthropometrics measurements at test pilot school. The good thing for you is that you only have to design your cockpit to fit you, so the solution becomes simple.

My advice is for you to also use “your flying posture” and not the “sitting at attention” posture for measurements. Test have shown that after you fly for any period of time, pilots tend to slide down the seat and hunch over, and the cushions warm up and compress. All that adds up to a different eye position in relationship to the original eye position (that of taxi/take off). Good luck.

Check this link out for additional info.
http://aviationknowledge.wikidot.com...-human-factors
I see that "D.R." has picked up on this point and a very good point too, thanks OX. If I may, you guys may want to take part 23 into mind also.
I was lucky to be part of the extended family of the test pilots, and builders, of some of the last Bellanca factory aircraft made in the Houston area and to have gone throw a part 143 school. Some of this stuff like the switches and there movement is in both 43.13 and part 23. You may wish to look at them too as a lot of what was put into the Rules was do to human mistakes that cost someone in the past. Anthropometry is a good factor to take into account if you or building production aircraft or any human tool interface that will be used by a lot of other people and maybe a good thought here too. I hate to date myself as I still have a Post versa-log slide rule in my desk drawer that I will not throw away, so I am very interested in seeing what D.R. and others may come up with out of their computer graphics skills. Thanks. Yours. R.E.A. III #80888

Last edited by Robert Anglin : 01-14-2015 at 09:08 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-14-2015, 10:57 AM
RV7ator RV7ator is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Boise, ID
Posts: 1,011
Default

Good design practice, but I think its third-tier importance.

Pretty easy to reach everywhere except the farthest corner of an side-by-side RV cockpit. We've all seen panels laid out by stuffing a punt gun with avionics and letting fly at a sheet of aluminum. You're not going to go too far wrong given the small volume of an RV cockpit.

The reach factor is constrained more by the limited viewing angles of various screens. Can't put them too far away or low without affecting legibility. This serendipitously limits head twisting and eyeball rolling. There's adequate acreage immediately before the pilot for switches. Then, there's airframe structure to work around.

Most important is the pilot's skill level operating complex avionics. A single "Ahhhh...." moment poking buttons will result in +300 feet and off heading 10 degrees while neurons are devoted to your index finger and the stick arm goes wanting. This is completely independent of panel layout, and for me makes all the difference between smooth, accurate pilotage and all over they sky. That button six inches one way or another would not make up for incompetence.

John Siebold
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-14-2015, 11:35 PM
xblueh2o xblueh2o is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: SF East Bay
Posts: 868
Default

Regarding the figure from the cockpit design and human factors showing the Boeing "sweep on" concept. This must be a recent design change. In current Boeings nearly all the switches in the overhead are turned on by pushing the switch forward/down. I have not spent any time in a 787 though so perhaps they changed their philosophy.
__________________
Sam
RV-8 with the Showplanes Fastback conversion
Emp completed except for glass work
Wings completed except for bottom skin and glass work
Fuselage underway
N18451 reserved
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:27 PM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.