System Delay in Flight Simulators Impairs Performance and Increases Physiological Workload

  • Nina Flad
  • Frank M. Nieuwenhuizen
  • Heinrich H. Bülthoff
  • Lewis L. Chuang
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8532)


Delays between user input and the system’s reaction in control tasks have been shown to have a detrimental effect on performance. This is often accompanied by increases in self-reported workload. In the current work, we sought to identify physiological measures that correlate with pilot workload in a conceptual aerial vehicle that suffered from varying time delays between control input and vehicle response. For this purpose, we measured the skin conductance and heart rate variability of 8 participants during flight maneuvers in a fixed-base simulator. Participants were instructed to land a vehicle while compensating for roll disturbances under different conditions of system delay. We found that control error and the self-reported workload increased with increasing time delay. Skin conductance and input behavior also reflect corresponding changes. Our results show that physiological measures are sufficiently robust for evaluating the adverse influence of system delays in a conceptual vehicle model.


Heart Rate Variability Vary Time Delay Skin Conductance System Delay Increase Time Delay 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Allison, R., Harris, L., Jenkin, M., Jasiobedzka, U., Zacher, J.: Tolerance of temporal delay in virtual environments. In: Proceedings IEEE Virtual Reality 2001, pp. 247–254 (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Middendorf, M., Lusk, S., Whitley, J.: Power spectral analysis to investigate the effects of simulator time delay on flight control activity. In: AIAA Flight Simulation Technologies Conference, pp. 46–52 (1990)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wildzunas, R.M., Barron, T.L., Wiley, R.W.: Visual display delay effects on pilot performance. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine 67, 214–221 (1996)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jennings, S., Reid, L.D., Craig, G., Kruk, R.V.: Time Delays In Visually Coupled Systems During Flight Test and Simulation. Journal of Aircraft 41, 1327–1335 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Middendorf, M., Fiorita, A., McMillan, G.: The effects of simulator transport delay on performance, workload, and control activity during low-level flight. In: AIAA Flight Simulation Technologies Conference (1991)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Riccio, G., Cress, J., Johnson, W.: The effects of simulator delays on the acquisition of flight control skills: Control of heading and altitude. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, pp. 1186–1290 (1987)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhao, C., Zhao, M., Liu, J., Zheng, C.: Electroencephalogram and electrocardiograph assessment of mental fatigue in a driving simulator. Accident; Analysis and Prevention 45, 83–90 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chattopadhyay, P., Bond, A., Lader, M.: Characteristics of galvanic skin response in anxiety states. Journal of Psychiatric Research 12, 265–270 (1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Perfect, P., Jump, M., White, M.D.: Development of handling qualities requirements for a personal aerial vehicle. In: Proceedings of the 38th European Rotorcraft Forum, Amsterdam, Netherlands (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Perry, A.R.: The Flightgear flight simulator. In: 2004 USENIX Annual Technical Conference, Boston, MA (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hart, S., Staveland, L.: NASA Task Load Index (TLX) v1. 0 users manual (1986)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Montagu, J., Coles, E.: Mechanism and measurement of the galvanic skin response. Psychological Bulletin 65, 261–279 (1966)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tattersall, A., Hockey, G.: Level of operator control and changes in heart rate variability during simulated flight maintenance. The Journal of the Human Factors 37, 682–698 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Camm, A., Malik, M.: Heart Rate Variability: Standards of Measurement. European Heart Journal of the Physiological Interpretation and Clinical Use (1996)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nina Flad
    • 1
  • Frank M. Nieuwenhuizen
    • 1
  • Heinrich H. Bülthoff
    • 1
    • 2
  • Lewis L. Chuang
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Perception, Cognition and ActionMax Planck Institute for Biological CyberneticsTübingenGermany
  2. 2.Department of Cognitive and Brain EngineeringKorea UniversityKorea

Personalised recommendations