skip to main page content USDA Forest Service logoPrivacy | Legal
Forest Service Technology & Development logo
Technology &
Development Center

Table of Contents

Back | Next | Cover Page

Evaluation of Two Fully Rugged Laptop Computers for the Forest Service

Test Results

Environmental and feature comparison tests for fully rugged mobile computing on the CF-30 and XR-1 laptops were conducted at MTDC. Environmental tests were performed with guidance from MIL-STD-810F.

They included:

Photo of an open laptop that has just gone through a rain/moisture test and is covered with water.
Figure 2—The laptops were tested for rain/moisture resistance. The laptops
were sprayed for 10 minutes on each axis with a simulated rain of 4 in/h at
40 mi/h. Both laptops passed all rain/moisture tests.

Photo of one of the corners of a laptop that recieved a crack after the drop test.
Figure 3—The laptops were drop tested to test shock resistance. The laptops
were dropped onto plywood from 3 feet on all six axes. The XR-1 laptop
developed a crack in the case around the screen after one of the drops.

Comparison tests of different features included:

Two photos of the laptops. On the left the laptop screens are compared to each other and cut in half vertically. On the right,  the two laptop screens are compared to each other and cut in half horizontally.
Figure 4—The laptops were compared side-by-side to determine
how well the screen could be seen in direct sunlight. While
the screen of the CF-30 laptop was brighter, the new DynaVue
screen of the XR-1 laptop had better contrast and less glare,
making it easier to view.

Photos of the two laptops with their screens being compared in the dark. On the left is the CF-30 with a brighter screen and on the right is the XR-1 with a less bright screen.
Figure 5—The laptops' screens were also compared in a dark setting.
It is important to law enforcement officers that the screen is
not too bright in the dark so their position is not compromised.
The XR-1 screen (the right screen in each pair of photos) was
much darker (but readable) at its lowest setting.

Graph of the Mobile Mark Battery Performance Tests. The graph shows results for the CF-30 (500 nits), CF-30 (1,000 nits) and the XR-1 (DynaVue). All three were tested in the Productivity Suite, DVD Suite, and Reader Suite.
Figure 6—MobileMark 2007 battery performance software was used
to measure battery life. The CF-30 battery lasted nearly
twice as long as the XR-1 battery.

Graph showing the results of the PC Benchmarking Test Results. The tests were done on the CF-20 and XR-1 under the 3DMark06, PCMark05, and Passmark Performance 6.1.
Figure 7—Three different performance benchmarking software
suites were used to test the laptops' processor and components.
The XR-1 performed better in all benchmarking tests.

Graph showing the results of the CF-30 and XR-1 on the GPS Testing-Forested Canopy. The graph shows the accuracy (meters from survey point) tested at various instances.
Figure 8—Results from the forested canopy GPS accuracy tests
at the Lubrecht Experimental Forest GPS test course. Accuracy
results are based on National Standard for Spatial Data
Accuracy formulas. Lower values mean better accuracy.

back to main page content

Top

Back | Next

Cover Page

Shield logo for USDA Forest Service Print this pub
mailbox icon E-mail: wo_mtdc_webmaster@fs.fed.us

Forest Service Technology & Development logo

Technology &
Development Center
USDA Forest Service, Technology and Development
Last Modified: 10/15/2016 23:43:27

UsableNet Approved (v. 1.4.1)


Visitor hit counter hit counter hit counter hit counter hit counter hit counter since November 26, 2007