The Pub - OT posts and discussions

[Zakalwe]

You're missing the point. The key thing is "How long does it take to acquire and process critical information?"

That's easy. Reading numeric information is always slower. It's demonstrably slower. Has been proven time and time again. If it's slower, that means more time spent eyes-in. More time spent eyes-in means less time spent with your eyes on the road and that means more chance of seeing a threat and taking avoiding action.

Citing a badly designed analogue instrument as some sort of "proof" that analogue information representation is somehow inherently worse is a flawed argument - a bad analogue instrument display can easily be worse than a very good digital display.

What is the time difference that we are talking about here?

There are advantages and disadvantages to dials over and above the time to acquire and process. Dials are great for displaying a range. They are great for displaying an *approximate* value- you can do this purely by the needle angle once familiar with the display. They display information linearly. They are great for displaying the rate of change.

They are poorer for displaying an *accurate* value. For a speedometer you need an accurate value.

 

[Neilio]

One of the most noticeable things about my first drive in a 3 was the complete absence of spurious non-essential trivia that normal cars through at you. My last car had three clocks....an analogue at the base of the console, one on the nav screen and one in the binnacle. It had three speedometers, all within a couple if inches of each other. A huge dial telling me how fast all the little bits of metal in the engine were spinning. All that crap is a throwback to the days when engines blew up every 5 minutes and a drive of more than 200 miles meant resetting the tappets on the side of the road.
It's intrusive and no matter how familiar you are with driving, they do take a tiny bit of attention away from the job at hand. I can ind it mildly hilarious that some car makers charge you extra for an engine RPM meter or see it as some sort of selling point.
What earthly reason would you want to know what temperature the battery is at? You can't do anything about it, you can't affect it and even if you could then you would do a worse job than the computer in the BMS.

Good job Tesla’s never break down! In my opinion gauges look a lot classier than crass digital read outs. Make a cabin look more stylish. As pointed out about they are also quicker for a human to read.

No need to get so excited about the battery temp. I did say it was niche. I like being able to monitor my vehicle and different Aspects that change whilst driving. Also it’ll help you work out how long charging will take at a fast charger and you’ll know if it’s worth it. Combined with a option for you to pre condition the battery manually it would be really handy

 

[nxsynjs]

Since we are talking radical. I think Tesla are missing a trick by not replacing the speed reading with a simple dial labelled "jail time" Keep your speed in the green you are below the posted limit. In the amber you're getting points.. In the red you're off to klink not passing go..

Replace the battery reading with a butt-clench-o-meter and job done,,

 

[Glan gluaisne]

Off the top of my head I seem to recall that reading numerical information took between three and five times longer than getting an estimate from a circular analogue type display. The fastest displays to read looked a bit like pie charts, with colours to indicate critical information. It would be very easy to do something like this on the screen in the Model 3, perhaps make it a user-selectable option, so those that prefer a slower to read numeric display can have one, and those that prefer the "at a glance" display can have that if they wish.

 

[Envchem]

Good job Tesla’s never break down! In my opinion gauges look a lot classier than crass digital read outs. Make a cabin look more stylish. As pointed out about they are also quicker for a human to read.

No need to get so excited about the battery temp. I did say it was niche. I like being able to monitor my vehicle and different Aspects that change whilst driving. Also it’ll help you work out how long charging will take at a fast charger and you’ll know if it’s worth it. Combined with a option for you to pre condition the battery manually it would be really handy

Teslas never break down? Right...Tell this to my 3 which is in the SC for a month now with broken motor.

 

[Peteski]

You're missing the point. The key thing is "How long does it take to acquire and process critical information?"

That's easy. Reading numeric information is always slower. It's demonstrably slower. Has been proven time and time again. If it's slower, that means more time spent eyes-in. More time spent eyes-in means less time spent with your eyes on the road and that means more chance of seeing a threat and taking avoiding action.

Citing a badly designed analogue instrument as some sort of "proof" that analogue information representation is somehow inherently worse is a flawed argument - a bad analogue instrument display can easily be worse than a very good digital display.

Reading a 2 digit number (or 3 at most) is instant, especially when you have a pretty good idea what the value is going to be. Just driving tonight I took more notice than usual and it requires zero effort to read off the speed. Would I prefer a large analogue speed dial instead? No, not in this application. As others have mentioned, it’s actually quite difficult to show the full speed range clearly enough in a modern car without making the dial very large. So most modern cars display speed numerically in the middle anyway.

I’m not questioning your science here, only it’s application in this case. Road speed limit signs show a numerical value. I presume you can take those in instantly right? Or would you prefer road signs with a graphical speed display?

 

[Peteski]

Off the top of my head I seem to recall that reading numerical information took between three and five times longer than getting an estimate from a circular analogue type display. The fastest displays to read looked a bit like pie charts, with colours to indicate critical information. It would be very easy to do something like this on the screen in the Model 3, perhaps make it a user-selectable option, so those that prefer a slower to read numeric display can have one, and those that prefer the "at a glance" display can have that if they wish.

Again context is everything in a test like that. I bet they weren’t looking at a simple 2 digit speed. Might be a different story if you were reading off a dynamic 6 digit number and you needed to be within a certain band.

 

[Glan gluaisne]

Again context is everything in a test like that. I bet they weren’t looking at a simple 2 digit speed. Might be a different story if you were reading off a dynamic 6 digit number.

It was a three digit number - we do not have any current aircraft that can fly at 6 digit speeds!

 

[Glan gluaisne]

Reading a 2 digit number (or 3 at most) is instant, especially when you have a pretty good idea what the value is going to be. Just driving tonight I took more notice than usual and it requires zero effort to read off the speed. Would I prefer a large analogue speed dial instead? No, not in this application. As others have mentioned, it’s actually quite difficult to show the full speed range clearly enough in a modern car without making the dial very large. So most modern cars display speed numerically in the middle anyway.

I’m not questioning your science here, only it’s application in this case. Road speed limit signs show a numerical value. I presume you can take those in instantly right? Or would you prefer road signs with a graphical speed display?

Road signs aren't normally viewed to the left and down from your normal eye line looking out through the screen, at a very short relative distance and so do not involve any eye focus accommodation time, as the eyes will already be in focus for the eye's relaxed muscle state, distance vision.

The issue with any action that means physically pointing your centre of vision at a point inside the car, at a focus distance that require a fair bit of accommodation, is that it takes a finite amount of time for your eyes to adjust focus, acquire the image, send that image to a part of the visual cortex that deals with interpretation, then pass that interpretation to the part of the brain that deals with number recognition, before it can be understood.

The process for acquiring information from an analogue display, without reading any associated numbers, is demonstrably faster, perhaps in part because you don't need a very clear image to acquire the information needed, so the accommodation time is slightly shorter, perhaps in part because there is no need to do any numeric processing. Our brains seem to be wired to interpret relative position natively, perhaps as an adaptation from reading shadows, position of the sun or moon, or whatever, long before we invented machines and learned to read their outputs.

 

[Peteski]

It was a three digit number - we do not have any current aircraft that can fly at 6 digit speeds!

Sure, I was just using an example to illustrate my point. Sometimes it makes perfect sense to use an analogue display eg. for a tachometer, where a numerical display would not be effective at all. But for road speed a numerical display can be very effective and often better than an analogue dial in my opinion. Have you noticed how common numerical speed displays have become in recent years? Most cars have them now and the analogue version is there more for decoration, like the one in that e-tron. The problem with an analogue speed display in a modern car is that it has to display a relatively wide speed range, so you inevitably lose resolution at the lower end of the scale where it actually matters most. I got a ticket last year for running 35 in a 30 limit. Probably would have avoided that in my Tesla.

edit: I notice the Porsche Taycan dash has a prominent numerical speed display. Nobody will look at anything else to check their speed.

 

[Peteski]

Road signs aren't normally viewed to the left and down from your normal eye line looking out through the screen, at a very short relative distance and so do not involve any eye focus accommodation time, as the eyes will already be in focus for the eye's relaxed muscle state, distance vision.

The issue with any action that means physically pointing your centre of vision at a point inside the car, at a focus distance that require a fair bit of accommodation, is that it takes a finite amount of time for your eyes to adjust focus, acquire the image, send that image to a part of the visual cortex that deals with interpretation, then pass that interpretation to the part of the brain that deals with number recognition, before it can be understood.

The process for acquiring information from an analogue display, without reading any associated numbers, is demonstrably faster, perhaps in part because you don't need a very clear image to acquire the information needed, so the accommodation time is slightly shorter, perhaps in part because there is no need to do any numeric processing. Our brains seem to be wired to interpret relative position natively, perhaps as an adaptation from reading shadows, position of the sun or moon, or whatever, long before we invented machines and learned to read their outputs.

I find It takes more time to focus on a modern dial speedometer than it does to just read the numerical display. I’ve had a few cars recently with both analogue and numerical speed displays and it’s always the numerical one I glance at. Either way you are reading off a numerical number anyway. It’s very different with a Rev counter where you are watching the needle race toward the red line and not actually reading any number at all. That might work with a speedometer too IF there was only a single speed limit to worry about.

 

[Neilio]

Teslas never break down? Right...Tell this to my 3 which is in the SC for a month now with broken motor.

Yeah that was my point

 

[Envchem]

Yeah that was my point

Missed the irony there

 

[Zakalwe]

Off the top of my head I seem to recall that reading numerical information took between three and five times longer than getting an estimate from a circular analogue type display. The fastest displays to read looked a bit like pie charts, with colours to indicate critical information. It would be very easy to do something like this on the screen in the Model 3, perhaps make it a user-selectable option, so those that prefer a slower to read numeric display can have one, and those that prefer the "at a glance" display can have that if they wish.

How long though? If we are talking milliseconds, then it's irrelevant.

 

[pgkevet]

How long though? If we are talking milliseconds, then it's irrelevant.

For the sake of being picky - At motorway speeds about half a foot per millisecond - better stopping half a foot behind a car than half a foot inside it
Personally when it comes to speedometer I quite like the numbers. I do detest tiny icons on touchscreens though - very dangerous. But I do admire Elon for making a lack of facilities a feature and for continuing to con his customers with promises

 

[Glan gluaisne]

How long though? If we are talking milliseconds, then it's irrelevant.

Varies a great deal with age. A fit, young, person can accommodate in around 0.25s, plus the time taken to process and interpret what they've seen, maybe another 0.25 to 0.5s. By early middle age, accommodation time may well be double, by late middle age it may be three or four times longer. The interpretation and processing time stays roughly the same.

For the sake of being picky - At motorway speeds about half a foot per millisecond - better stopping half a foot behind a car than half a foot inside it
Personally when it comes to speedometer I quite like the numbers. I do detest tiny icons on touchscreens though - very dangerous. But I do admire Elon for making a lack of facilities a feature and for continuing to con his customers with promises

About 125 feet in the time taken for a fit, young, person's eye to accommodate, perhaps three or four times that distance for someone in late middle age.

Also worth noting that accommodation time applies both ways, once to re-focus to the screen distance, once more to refocus back out to the road.

 

[Peteski]

Varies a great deal with age. A fit, young, person can accommodate in around 0.25s, plus the time taken to process and interpret what they've seen, maybe another 0.25 to 0.5s. By early middle age, accommodation time may well be double, by late middle age it may be three or four times longer. The interpretation and processing time stays roughly the same.



About 125 feet in the time taken for a fit, young, person's eye to accommodate, perhaps three or four times that distance for someone in late middle age.

Also worth noting that accommodation time applies both ways, once to re-focus to the screen distance, once more to refocus back out to the road.

Driving home last night I did a bit of testing on this and found that my eyes didn’t need to adjust at all between glancing at the speed and back to the road. The font is plenty big enough and far enough away from your face that you don’t need to fully focus on it. If I was glancing at an analogue speedo I’m pretty sure I would need longer to read off and process an accurate speed. It’s not like I’m checking to see if I’m going at 100 mph or 30 mph, I’m checking to see if I’m just under or just over the speed limit. So I want to see a specific value, not a vague range. So I glance over and see 35. There is no mental processing involved. It’s just 35. So I slow down a little and see 30. It’s all I need in a car speedometer.

Anyway a quick look at a variety of the latest EV dash displays shows that pretty much all manufacturers are switching to a prominent numerical speed display. The traditional analogue speed dial is becoming obsolete.

Incidentally I also notice that many first attempts at a digital EV display attempt to replicate an analogue dial graphic. The early Tesla MS UI was like that too. Audi now appear to be following a similar trend, moving slowly but surely away from the traditional double dial layout on their EVs.

 

[Glan gluaisne]

Driving home last night I did a bit of testing on this and found that my eyes didn’t need to adjust at all between glancing at the speed and back to the road. The font is plenty big enough and far enough away from your face that you don’t need to fully focus on it. If I was glancing at an analogue speedo I’m pretty sure I would need longer to read off and process an accurate speed. It’s not like I’m checking to see if I’m going at 100 mph or 30 mph, I’m checking to see if I’m just under or just over the speed limit. So I want to see a specific value, not a vague range. So I glance over and see 35. There is no mental processing involved. It’s just 35. So I slow down a little and see 30. It’s all I need in a car speedometer.

Anyway a quick look at a variety of the latest EV dash displays shows that pretty much all manufacturers are switching to a prominent numerical speed display. The traditional analogue speed dial is becoming obsolete.

Incidentally I also notice that many first attempts at a digital EV display attempt to replicate an analogue dial graphic. The early Tesla MS UI was like that too. Audi now appear to be following a similar trend, moving slowly but surely away from the traditional double dial layout on their EVs.

No one has eyes that don't need to accommodate when changing from focussing at distance to focussing a couple of feet away. All vertebrates have much the same eye structure and focussing mechanism, and the human eye is not capable of resolving detail at close distances without having to accommodate.

Your eyes will have automatically done this, everyone's eyes do, but it's an autonomous reflex, so usually goes completely unnoticed, in much the same way as we never notice the visual deficit we all have at the "blind spot" where the optic nerve comes up through the retina.

Had someone been pointing a camera at your eyes then the side effects of accommodation would have been visible. In addition to the muscles controlling the shape of the eye's lens quickly moving to alter its focal length (just like focussing a camera), both eyes will have swivelled inwards, to prevent double vision. The irises will also have closed down slightly, to improve the depth of field slightly, as a side effect of changing the lens focal length is that it reduces depth of field (again, just like a camera lens).

There is processing involved, as the part of the brain that interprets numerical data is separate from the part that interprets images. Data has to pass from one area to another to allow understanding of the meaning of the shapes seen. We're good at pattern recognition natively though, it's an ancient response (probably related to predator recognition) so we can process images a great deal faster - no interpretation of meaning is required, much of the time.

 

[Peteski]

No one has eyes that don't need to accommodate when changing from focussing at distance to focussing a couple of feet away. All vertebrates have much the same eye structure and focussing mechanism, and the human eye is not capable of resolving detail at close distances without having to accommodate.

Your eyes will have automatically done this, everyone's eyes do, but it's an autonomous reflex, so usually goes completely unnoticed, in much the same way as we never notice the visual deficit we all have at the "blind spot" where the optic nerve comes up through the retina.

Had someone been pointing a camera at your eyes then the side effects of accommodation would have been visible. In addition to the muscles controlling the shape of the eye's lens quickly moving to alter its focal length (just like focussing a camera), both eyes will have swivelled inwards, to prevent double vision. The irises will also have closed down slightly, to improve the depth of field slightly, as a side effect of changing the lens focal length is that it reduces depth of field (again, just like a camera lens).

There is processing involved, as the part of the brain that interprets numerical data is separate from the part that interprets images. Data has to pass from one area to another to allow understanding of the meaning of the shapes seen. We're good at pattern recognition natively though, it's an ancient response (probably related to predator recognition) so we can process images a great deal faster - no interpretation of meaning is required, much of the time.

As I said I don’t need to focus on the speed display. My brain picks up the number just fine, even if slightly out of focus. Now if I want to check the battery percentage, that takes a little time because the font is much smaller and my eyes need that split second to re-focus. That process fits your description above. Also if I go back to the analogue speedometer, I definitely have to focus on that to read off a precise speed. It’s calibrated in 20 mph increments for a start. So I would simply read the numerical speed display in the middle of it anyway. The dial was completely obsolete. The Tesla is better because the font is bigger and higher up in my eyeline instead of having to look down through the steering wheel. Only a HUD with numerical speed would offer any further advantage and I think that would be minimal for me.

 

[Glan gluaisne]

As I said I don’t need to focus on the speed display. My brain picks up the number just fine, even if slightly out of focus. Now if I want to check the battery percentage, that takes a little time because the font is much smaller and my eyes need that split second to re-focus. That process fits your description above. Also if I go back to the analogue speedometer, I definitely have to focus on that to read off a precise speed. It’s calibrated in 20 mph increments for a start. So I would simply read the numerical speed display in the middle of it anyway. The dial was completely obsolete. The Tesla is better because the font is bigger and higher up in my eyeline instead of having to look down through the steering wheel. Only a HUD with numerical speed would offer any further advantage and I think that would be minimal for me.

As I said, your eyes are very definitely re-focussing - no human being has the ability to even discern a rough outline of something at a couple of feet away whilst their eyes are focussed at infinity (as they will be when looking out the windscreen).

Head up displays are a good illustration of this, and why a great deal of money has been spent in creating optics that focus at infinity, so that the eye can be fooled into thinking that something on the HUD is really a great deal further away, avoiding the need to accommodate in order to read the information. Worth noting that few, if any, car HUDs actually use infinity optics, though, as the technology is still pretty expensive and doesn't lend itself to being projected on to a windscreen.

None of us are usually aware of accommodation happening, although older people often become aware of it as age related accommodation decline starts to set in, usually at around the age of 50. This often starts as a noticeable increase in the length of time it takes for a near object to become clear, a side effect of the focussing movement of the lens becoming more restrictive with age, and ends up needing corrective glasses to focus at shorter distances. A younger person with good eyesight won't notice accommodation time at all, it's just something that automatically happens whenever our eyes move from viewing at distance to viewing close up, and vice versa.