本研究目的在了解人類使用搖桿進行補償追蹤行為的適應現象。人的追蹤能力會因為控制系統動態特性的不同而有所改變，而當控制系統的動態特性瞬間改變時，人通常需要一段時間去適應學習，才能回復原有的正常操控行為。本研究針對人使用搖桿進行補償追蹤實驗，探討當控制系統的動態特性瞬間改變時，受試者為了適應新的動態特性所產生的現象進行研究。本研究隨機選取六位成大學生為受試者進行實驗；實驗進行中，在未告知受試者的情況下，控制系統的動態特性會在實驗開始一段時間後瞬間改變。由實驗結果可得知受試者在適應控制系統新的動態特性時明顯出現一段適應時期，此外，適應時間的長短也會隨著系統的階數以及目標訊號頻寬增加而增長，同時適應時間的長短會隨著一階控制系統的遲滯與發散而有所差異。最後，本研究根據實驗結果嘗試以一個簡單數學模型描述受試者在一階控制系統中之適應時間。期望藉由此研究的結果，作為未來後續研究的基礎。

The goal of this research is to study the adaptive phenomenon of human compensatory tracking behavior when using sidestick. In general, the tracking performance of human changes while the characteristics of the controlled element is different. It takes time for human to accommodate the sudden changes of the controlled element. In the tests, the subject was asked to track the target signals. After certain times, the order of the controlled element was changed without notifying the subjects. There was obviously an adaptation period in which the subject adapted himself to the unknown new controlled element. In general, it was found that the adaptation time varies as the machine orders used in this research changes. Also, it was found that this adaptiation period seems to be a function of bandwidth of the target signals. Further, it increases as the target signal bandwidth increased and the rates were found significantly different by F test for different machine orders. Moreover, based on the research results a simple mathematical model for the adaptation time of first order machines was proposed as the basis for further studies.

[1]中華民國飛行安全基金會(2000).1990’S航空飛安回顧.飛行安全季刊,第20期,15-20.
[2]Aviation Safety and Pilot Control-Understanding and Preventing Unfavorable Pilot-Vehicle Interactions(1997). National Research Council. National Academy Press. Washington. D.C.
[3]Koivo, A.T., Repperger, D.W., Koivo, A.J.(1999). Detection of Aircraft-Pilot-Coupling Caused Oscillation. Computational Intelligence in Robotics and Automation. 1999. CIRA '99. Proceedings. 1999 IEEE International Symposium on, 220-225.
[4]Tustin, A.(1947). The Nature of the Operator’s Response in Manual Control and Its Implications for Controller Design. J. IEEE. Vol. 94. Part IIA, No. 2.
[5]Goodyear Aircraft Corporation Rept(1952). GER-4750, Human Dynamic Study.
[6]Elkind, J. I.(1956). Characteristics of Simple Manual Control Systems. TR-111. MIT. Lincoln Laboratory.
[7]McRuer, D.T. and Krendel, E. S.(1957). Dynamic Response of Human Operators. WADC-TR-56-524.
[8]McRuer, D., Graham, D., Krendel, E., and Reisener, E.Jr.(1965). Human Pilot Dynamics in Compensatory Systems. AFFDL-TR-65-15. Air Force Flight Dynamics Laboratory.
[9]McRuer, D., Krendel, E.(1974). Mathematical Models of Human Pilot Behavior. (AGARDograph NO. 188). NATO Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development.
[10]McRuer, D.(1980). Human Dynamics in Man-Machine Systems. Automatica. Elsevier, vol. 16, 237-253.
[11]景鴻鑫,盧郁文(2002).人的基本追蹤行為之異向性.民航季刊,第四卷,第一期, 75-88.
[12]景鴻鑫,鄭振輝,盧郁文(2002).人的補償追蹤行為之異向性.民航季刊,第四卷,第二期, 117-133.
[13]景鴻鑫,梁永欣,鄭振輝(2002).人的補償追蹤能力之極限探討.民航季刊,第四卷,第四期, 125-137.
[14]Michael A.D.(1995). Dramatic Incidents Highlight Mode Problems in Cockpits. Aviation Week & Space Technology, 57-62.
[15]David Hughes, Michael A.D.(1995). Accidents Direct Focus on Cockpit Automation. Aviation Week & Space Technology, 52-54.
[16]David Hughes(1995). Incidents Reveal Mode Confusion. Aviation Week & Space Technology, 56.
[17]Slack, M.(1945). The Probability Distribution of Sinusoidal Oscillations Combined in Random Noise. Jour. IEE (London), Vol. 93, Pt. III.
[18]Jeng, Y.N.(2000). The Moving Least Squares and Least p-Power Methods for Random Data. The 7-th National Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, 9-14.