1. 3D-in-2D Planar View Display
A Brief Involvement in the User research and proposal generation
3D-in-2D Planar View Display
Interaction Design Centre, Middlesex University, London, UK

2. The Spectrum of Combined 3D/2D Displays
2D plan view displays
3D virtual world, perspective displays
Side-by-side displays
Correlated -
Non-correlated
Overlaid displays
Un-correlated
Integrated displays
3D (spatial) visualisations in context of 2D displays
4D (space + time) integration

3. The idea proposed: A visualisation system for air traffic control
Provide support for spatial awareness of dynamic 3D tactical air traffic control situations
Localised 3D perspective view of the airspace displayed in a 3D "bubble”, displayed on demand
The 3D visualisation in a 2D plan view radar display, eliminates the need to shift focus
Integrated within the context and the same visual field of view of a 2D planar ATC radar display.
The integration of 3D visualisation in a 2D plan view radar display is anticipated to eliminate the need to shift focus
Incorporate temporal design in the localised 3D representation
To support spatial-temporal reasoning

4. Background (i): Requirements based on Operational Work Analysis
2 Field Studies in Air Traffic Control Centres:
Ethnographic observations of controllers at work
Focus Groups with controllers
Critical Decision Making Interviews
In depth interviews
Outcomes:
Spatial Temporal Framework (Rozzi et. al. 2006; Wong et. al. 2006), to think about classes of Visual Requirements
4D Visual Requirements to support controller’s Spatial temporal reasoning. Main requirement was to provide:
2D to maintain control over the all traffics active in the sector
3D + Time picture to access detailed information on demand, in the specific portion of the sector
Carried out prototyping workshop to design and redesign visual concepts

5. Background (ii): Why the 3D-in-2D display is innovative?
Previous research directed at:
Comparing 2D vs 3D
Evaluating visuo-spatial tasks and visual search tasks
See Smallman, et al (2001), Xu and Rantanen (2003), Van Orden and Broyles (2000)
Assessing strength of 3D over 2D for assessing tactical situations
3D was found to have advantages over 2D
(i) Navigation, (ii) spatial awareness, (iii) integration and focussed attention tasks (see Naikar, 1998, for rigorous review)
Minimises interpretive effort for understanding tactical situations (Haskell and Wickens, 1993; van Orden and Broyles, 2000; Dennehy et al, 1994)

6. 2D however does not suffer from these problems
Drawbacks of 3D
Poor distance estimation in 3D (see Tavanti, 2004, for a review)
Distance between objects along line of sight hard to estimate
Realism in scene can clutter the display
Poor 3D interaction / navigation techniques
Selection in 3D is difficult
2D however does not suffer from these problems
But due to lack of 3rd dimension, requires greater mental effort to construct a mental representation
Therefore: integrate 3D into 2D, to take advantage of the synergies that arise

7. Focus and Context Visualization Techniques_Filtering
Bifocal lens applied to London Underground Map
(Leung and Apperley, 1994)

8. Focus and Context Visualization Techniques_ Distortion
(La Mar 2001)

9. Focus and Context Visualization Techniques_ Semantic Depth of Field (SDOF)
(Tory & Moller, 2004)

10. Proof of concept: MU’s Picture in Picture

11. Proof of concept: SA’s Distortion Lens

12. Proof of concept: DV’s Lente

13. Conclusion
While there are 3D visualisations and attempts to extend 3D into 4D by including temporal representations, none have attempted to integrate and blend 3/4D visualisation within a 2D radar display.
Evaluate current F+C implementations
Review and construct new F+C display for Air Traffic Control