1 / 27

Establishing and Maintaining Direction for Street Crossing Using Nonvisual Cues

Establishing and Maintaining Direction for Street Crossing Using Nonvisual Cues. Billie Louise (Beezy) Bentzen Janet M. Barlow David A. Guth Alan C. Scott Christopher M. Cunningham TRANSED 2012 Delhi.

amanda
Download Presentation

Establishing and Maintaining Direction for Street Crossing Using Nonvisual Cues

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Establishing and Maintaining Direction for Street Crossing Using Nonvisual Cues Billie Louise (Beezy) Bentzen Janet M. Barlow David A. Guth Alan C. Scott Christopher M. Cunningham TRANSED 2012 Delhi

  2. This project was supported by Grant #5 R01 EY12894-07 from the National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the National Eye Institute. Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  3. Need for alignment cues (before starting to cross the street) Ramp slopes toward center of the intersection; pedestrian who is blind has to align on sloping surface, but counter to slope Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  4. Need for heading cues(while crossing the street) Crosswalk is skewed. There is no traffic parallel to the crosswalk. Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  5. Research Goals • Determine surfaces or other cues that result in heading in the direction indicated by cue, despite slope • Determine cues that result in maintaining directional heading across a wide street Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  6. Three phases • “Lab” – testing variety of alignment cues on plywood ramps in parking lot • “Simulated crosswalks” – 24 m long, in large parking lot • On the street at actual intersections in three cities Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  7. Cues tested on simulated curbramps • Running Slope of ramp – no surface installed on it—(approached from different angles) • Bar tile – perpendicular to direction of travel • Bar tile – parallel to direction of travel • Truncated domes with bar perpendicular to direction of travel • Returned curb • Tactile arrow on pushbutton Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  8. Detectable warning with bar Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  9. Detectable warning with bar Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  10. Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  11. Cues tested on simulated crosswalks—24m (6 lanes) long Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  12. Bar tile - perpendicular Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  13. Edgestrips Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  14. Guidestrip Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  15. RIAS (Talking Signs) Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  16. Beaconing APS Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  17. Users’ Experience – Beaconing Signal • Users hear locator tone from pushbutton • Users push and hold button for at least 1 sec • Users hear alignment tone--7 repetitions of locator tone as far-side beacon from speaker at end of crosswalk • Users wait for walk signal • Users hear walk signal from near-side pushbutton only, and begin crossing • When walk signal ends, users hear far-side beacon (loud locator tone) during pedestrian clearance interval, while crossing is completed Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  18. Results • At 4m all participants were within the crosswalk for all five conditions • At 24m no participants were within the crosswalk for bar tile or RIAS • At 24 m all participants were within the crosswalk for edgestrips, guidestrip and beaconing audible signal Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  19. Intersection testing—Large, complex signalized intersections in Alpharetta, GA, Towson, MD, and Austin, TX Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  20. Standard audible and vibrotactile signal Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  21. Beaconing audible and vibrotactile signal Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  22. Tactile Guidestrip Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  23. Results of intersection testing Participants were more likely to stay within the crosswalk with either the guidestrip or beaconing than with standard audible signals. Beaconing Guidestrip Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  24. Results of intersection testing When participants veered outside the crosswalk in the standard audible signal condition, they seldom made a correction that brought them back into the crosswalk by the end of the crossing. Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  25. Results of intersection testing When participants veered outside the crosswalk in the beaconing signal condition, they often made a correction that brought them back into the crosswalk before the end of the crossing. Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  26. Results of intersection testing When participants lost contact with the guidestrip, for instance when they had to go around a car that was across the crosswalk, they were sometimes unable to find the guidestrip again and veered far outside the crosswalk. Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

  27. Questions? Contact Beezy Bentzen bbentzen@accessforblind.org Accessible Design for the Blind, 17/9/12, Slide

More Related