簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表
研究生： 蔡安期
An-Chi Tsai
論文名稱： 教室的投影視覺品質評量
Evaluation of the visual display quality in classrooms
指導教授： 蔡欣君
Shin-Jyun Tsaih
口試委員: 江維華
Wei-Hwa Chiang
施宣光
Shen-Guan Shih
陳嘉萍
Chia-Ping Chen
學位類別： 碩士
Master
系所名稱： 設計學院 - 建築系
Department of Architecture
論文出版年： 2017
畢業學年度： 106
語文別： 英文
論文頁數： 74
中文關鍵詞： 建築 、視覺 、投影 、教室
外文關鍵詞： architecture, visual, projection, classroom
相關次數： 點閱：242  下載：16 
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報
  •  上一筆

    • N/A

    The rapid development of digital media has made the digital projector become the most common teaching equipment in Taiwan. However, the building code in Taiwan does not have any specific guidelines for classroom design related to the digital projector. It becomes very important because there is no difference between the classroom that designs with traditional teaching media and the one with digital teaching media. The objective of this research is to determine the best classroom configuration related to digital projection quality that can be used as a reference for creating the new Taiwan building code for classroom design.
    Three classrooms with different designs and layouts in the National Taiwan University of Science and Technology were studied. The classrooms were also built at different times. A visual display-quality evaluation with questionnaire was performed with 77 students. The results were then used to determine the viewing accuracy and ease of viewing to create an optimal learning environment. Architecture features of the classroom such as illuminance level, viewing distance, and viewing angle affect the viewing accuracy and ease of viewing.
    For illuminance level, lower-illuminance classrooms help display better quality of black- level background images and higher-illuminance level classrooms help display better quality of white-level background images. For viewing distance, as the student approaches the display screen, the display quality of black and white level improves. For viewing angle, narrower viewing angles provide better display quality with the white-level setting. Additionally, the font size cannot be too small for ease of viewing. The lower-illuminance classrooms help display better quality of the black-background text. Shorter viewing distances help students understand the displayed Chinese character or English text. Lastly, viewing angle affects Chinese character that is 18 strokes and above, but does not affect English text.

    ABSTRACT .....................................................................................................................................2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .............................................................................................................3 TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................................4 LIST OF FIGURES .........................................................................................................................6 LIST OF TABLES...........................................................................................................................9 INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................11 LITERATURE REVIEW ..............................................................................................................13 2.1 Classroom design standard ...............................................................................................13 2.2 Digital projector................................................................................................................15 2.3 Brightness and contrast and visual perception..................................................................17 2.4 Ease of viewing.................................................................................................................23 METHODS ....................................................................................................................................25 3.1 Classrooms........................................................................................................................25 3.1.1 Classroom T4-403 ..................................................................................................26 3.1.2 Classroom IB-504...................................................................................................27 3.1.3 Classroom TR-409..................................................................................................29 3.2 Participants .......................................................................................................................30 3.3 Media and digital visual display equipment .....................................................................31 3.4 Artificial lighting and illumination level ..........................................................................31 3.5 Questionnaire....................................................................................................................32 3.5.1 Viewing accuracy ...................................................................................................33 3.5.2 Ease of viewing ......................................................................................................34 3.6 Illuminance, distance and angle........................................................................................36 3.7 Throw ratio .......................................................................................................................39 DATA ANALYSES.......................................................................................................................40 4.1 Visual accuracy test with black and white background setting ........................................40 4.2 Ease of viewing.................................................................................................................43 4.2.1 English alphabets questions....................................................................................44 4.2.2 Symbols questions ..................................................................................................45 4.2.3 Chinese character questions ...................................................................................45 4.2.4 Website sentence questions ....................................................................................47 4.2.5 Effects of the architectural features........................................................................48 4.3 Summary...........................................................................................................................55 CONCLUSION AND FUTURE STUDY .....................................................................................56 4 5.1 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................56 5.2 Future study ......................................................................................................................56 COMPLETE QUESTIONNAIRE .................................................................................................58 EVALUATION SET UP ...............................................................................................................60 Contrast ...................................................................................................................................60 Resolution ...............................................................................................................................67 REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................................72 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .........................................................................................................74

    1. Bai, Y. W., Liu, Y. C., & Tsai, C. H. (2011). Using image processing methods to reduce dazzle in the eyes from a digital projector. IEEE Instrumentation and measurement technology conference; Hangzhou: China 2011; pp. 1781-6.
    2. Wu, H. C. (2012). Visual fatigue and performances for the 40-min mixed visual work with a projected screen. The Ergonomics Open Journal, 5, 10-18.
    3. Ramsey, C. G., & Sleeper, H. R. (2000). Architectural graphic standards. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
    4. Construction and Planning Agency Ministry of the Interior. (2016). Building Technical Specification. Taipei: Archbook.
    5. Department of Education, State of Hawaii. (2006). Educational Specifications (EDSPECS) For High Schools.
    6. Projector Central. Classroom Buyer’s Guide – Throw Distance & Zoom. Retrieved September 24, 2016 from http://www.projectorcentral.com/classroom_projector_buyers_guide_throw_distance_zoo m.htm
    7. Winterbottom, M., & Wilkins, A. (2009). Lighting and discomfort in the classroom. Journal of Environmental Psychology 29 (2009) 63-75
    8. Van der Zanden, (2014). Readability in Classroom. Delft University of Technology. ICT, Educational Technology.
    9. Chi, C. F., Cai, D., & You, M. (2003). Applying image descriptors to the assessment of legibility in Chinese characters. Ergonomics 2003; 46: 825-835
    10. Neufert, E. & Neufert, P. (2012). Architects’ Data: Fourth Edition. Hoboken: Wiley- Blackwell
    11.California Department of Education, Sacramento, 1997. Educational Specifications. Linking Design of School Facilities to Educational Program.
    12. International Code Council. (2014). 2015 IBC: International Building Code. Illinois: ICC
    13. American National Standard Institute (ANSI). (1988) American national standard practice for human factors engineering of visual display terminal workstation. ANSI / HFS Standard no, 100-1988. Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
    14. Wikipedia. LCD Projector. Retrieved September 24, 2016 from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LCD_projector
    15. Adatech Systems. Throw Ratios and Viewing Distance. Retrieved September 24, 2016 from http://www.theprojectorpros.com/learn-s-learn-p-theater_throw_ratios.htm
    16. Smith, S.W. (2003). Digital signal processing: A practical guide for engineers and scientists: Newness.
    17. Yonemura G.T., (1987)“Criteria for Recommending Lighting Levels,” U.S. National Bureau of Standard, NBSIR 81-2231, March 1987, P. 23
    18. Egan, M.D., & Olgyay, V. (2002). Architectural lighting second edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
    19. Chan, A. H. S. & Lee, P. S. K. (2005) Effect of display factors on Chinese reading times, comprehension scores and preferences. Journal of Behavior and Information Technology 2005; 24: 81-89.
    20. Basak, S. K. (2006). Ophthalmology (Oral & Practical) 3rd Edition. Medical Book Company.
    21. Robert E. Fischer, Biljana Tadic-Galeb, Paul R. Yoder “Optical System Design” New York: McGraw-Hill.
    22. Wikipedia. Em (typography). Retrieved January 2, 2017 from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Em_(typography)
    23. W3Schools. CSS Fonts. Retrieved January 2, 2017 from http://www.w3schools.com/css/css_font.asp
    24. Cai, D., Chi, C. F. & You, M. (2001). The legibility threshold of Chinese characters in three-type styles. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomic 2001; 27: 9-17.
    25. Cai, D., Chi, C. F. & You, M. (2003). Applying image descriptors to the assessment of legibility in Chinese characters. Ergonomics 2003: 46: 825-41.

    QR CODE