Effect of driving speed on target visibility under mesopic conditions using a driving simulator

Abstract

This article concerns driving after dark. Control of driving speed, being one aspect of the cognitive load of driving, is an important factor which influences visual performance when driving. However, it is not included as a parameter in the widely used models, such as small target visibility and relative visual performance. A driving simulation platform was established to enable investigation of the effect of driving speed on target detection performance. In addition, the effects of target contrast, position and the initial target appearance distance were also evaluated. The results show that increasing driving speed leads to a significant reduction in both the detection rate and the detection distance. The effect of speed was characterised using the Visibility Level model, by calculating two boundary values of Visibility Level for different speeds. The results show that driving speed has an impact on target visibility. A new model is proposed, the Simulator-based Visual Performance model, the metric for which is the product of detection rate and detection distance. It describes the effect on visual performance of driving speed, target contrast, distance and their interactions. The Simulator-based Visual Performance model predicts the experimental results well.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Fisher

. Road lighting as an accident countermeasure. Australian Road Research 1977; 7: 3–16.

Elvik R, Vaa T. Handbook of Road Safety Measures. Oxford, UK: Elsevier, 2004.

Mace DJ, Porter RJ. Fixed roadway lighting: The effect of lighting geometry and photometry on target visibility and driver comfort: 83rd Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C., USA, 11–15 January, 2004.

Boyce

. Human Factors in Lighting, 2nd Edition. London: Taylor and Francis, 2003.

Rea

. An overview of visual performance. Lighting Design and Application 1982; 12: 35–41.

Eloholma

Viikari

Halonen

. Mesopic models – from brightness matching to visual performance in night-time driving: A review. Lighting Research and Technology 2005; 37: 155–175.

Rea

Ouellette

. Relative visual performance: A basis for application. Lighting Research and Technology 1991; 23: 135–144.

Adrian

. Visibility levels under night-time driving conditions. Journal of the Illuminating Engineering Society 1987; 16: 3–12.

Illuminating Engineering Society of North America. ANSI/IESNA RP-8-00 American National Standard Practice for Roadway Lighting, New York: IESNA, 2000.

10.

Brémond

Mayeur

. Some drawbacks of the visibility level as an index of visual performance while driving: Proceedings of 27th Session of the CIE, Sun City, South Africa. 9–16 June 2011, pp. 1140–1143.

11.

Chen

Wang

Liu

Wang

Lou

Zhu

Teunissen

. Target visibility under mesopic vision using a driving simulator. Lighting Research and Technology 2019; 51: 883–899.

12.

Cao DW, Tu Y, Wang ZC, Wang LL, Liu L, Chen ZY, Lou D, Zhu XY, Teunissen, C. Study of target visibility on the road with driving as workload: Proceedings of 29th Session of the CIE 2019. Washington, D.C., USA, 14–22 June, 2019: pp. 868–876.

13.

Unity Technologies. Offline Documentation. Retrieved 30 November 2018, from https://docs.unity3d.com/Manual/OfflineDocumentation.html.

14.

Alferdinck

JWAM

. Target detection and driving behaviour measurements in a driving simulator at mesopic light levels. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics 2006; 26: 264–280.

15.

Mayeur

Brémond

Bastien

JMC

. Effects of the viewing context on target detection. Implications for road lighting design. Applied Ergonomics 2010; 41: 461–468.

16.

Lingard

Rea

. Off-axis detection at mesopic light levels in a driving context. Journal of the Illuminating Engineering Society 2002; 31: 33–39.

17.

Bullough

Rea

. Simulated driving performance and peripheral detection at mesopic and low photopic light levels. Lighting Research and Technology 2000; 32: 194–198.

18.

Weston HC. The Relation between Illumination and Visual Efficiency – The Effect of Brightness Contrast. Industrial Health Research Board Report 87. London: HMSO, 1945.

19.

Gomes

. Curso de Estatística Experimental, 15th Edition. Piracicaba: Esalq, 2009.

20.

Amini

Mirzajani

Jafarzadehpour

Darvishpour

. Evaluation of simple visual reaction time of different colored light stimuli in visually normal students. Clinical Optometry 2019; 11: 167–171.

21.

Cohen

. Eta-squared and partial eta-squared in fixed factor ANOVA designs. Educational and Psychological Measurement 1973; 33: 107–112.

22.

Cohen

. Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1988; 2: 19–74.

23.

Plainis

Murray

. Neurophysiological interpretation of human visual reaction times: Effect of contrast, spatial frequency and luminance. Neuropsychologia 2000; 38: 1555–1564.

24.

Hurden

Smith

Evans

Harlow

Bunting

Barbur

. Visual performance at mesopic light levels: An empirical model. Lighting Research and Technology 1999; 31: 127–131.

25.

Adrian

. Visibility of targets: Model for calculation. Lighting Research and Technology 1989; 21: 181–188.

26.

Commission International de l'Éclairage. CIE 228: 2018 Grey-Scale Calculation for Self-Luminous Devices., Vienna: CIE, 2018.

27.

Aulhorn

. Über die beziehung zwischen lichtsinn und sehschärfe. Graefe's Archiv für Ophthalmologie 1964; 167: 4–74.

28.

Donners MAH, Talen HJ, van den Broek-Cools JHF. Road lighting for aging driving-a user's perspective: Proceedings of CIE 2016: Lighting Quality and Energy Efficiency. Melbourne, Australia. March 3–9: 2016: 345–354.