Analysis Techniques For Man-Machine Systems Design
Analysis Techniques For Man-Machine Systems Design Analysis Techniques For Man-Machine Systems Design
NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/7 - 116-Volume 2Relative contributionNo data available.ApplicationsAs a result of an analysis by causal networks of 100 shipping accidents. Wagenaar & Grocneweg (1987) identifiedseveral major types of human error. With the same approach, Schuffel (1987) showed that 68% of causal factors ofshipping accidents could be reduced by improved bridge design.Quality assurance considerationsThe analysis is dependent on the data collection and their interpretation. In general, a group of experts from thevarious disciplines is necessary to reach reliable interpretations of the data.Relationship to system performance requirementsThe technique indicates dangerous coincidences of critical factors, or operator error types that could prejudice systemperformance.References and Bibliography1. Feggetner, AJ. (1982). A method for investigating human factors aspects of aircraft accidents and incidents.Ergonomic 22, 1065-1075.2. Rasmussen, J. (1982) A taxonomy for describing human malfunction in industrial installations. Joumal ofOccunational Accidents 4, 311-333.3. Schuffel, H. (1987). The automated shin's bridec: human error resistant? Soesterberg, The Netherlands: TNOInstitic for Perception.4. Wagenaar. W.A Groeneweg, J. (1987). Accider-tsat sea. .ultiple causes and impossible consequences.International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 22, 587-598.NATO UNCLASSIFIED1 14 -
NATO UNCLASSIFIED- 117 - AC/243(Panel-8)TR/7Volume 26 INTERFACE AND WORKSPACE DESIGNmissionscenarioanalysisLfunctiona nalysis interface &functionallocation oDworkspacedesign6.1 i Design option decision trees6.2 n Critical design requirements6.3 * Link analysisWhehat techniques the doThe aim of human engineerng is to apply knowledge human ot capabilities and limitatons to the design ofequipment and systems which people use, lto ensure effecsviness. safesy, and comfoat. Thus, the final goal of thehuman engineering analyses reviewed in the previous sections is to identify design requirements, and to facilitatet heapplication of human factors knowledge to the design of systems and enuipmentrnFew publications have providedinformation on the process of translating the specification for operator tasks defined through mission, function, andtask analysis into a specification for the design of human-machine interfaces, workspaces, workplace, and/or theenvirontment, (Engel & Townsend, 1989, provide some guidance). Three techniques have been reported, and arereviewed here. (Note that there are many techniques and tools available for evaluasing.he operator workspace, basedon an&hropornetri models: some of those models have been reviewed by NATO AC/243 Panel-8/RSG.9 (McMillanet al., 1989: 1991)).'Me lackc of design techniques need not impede the application of human engineering in the design process, becausethe role of the human engineering specialist is not necessarily to design. Because the design process is creative, it isill-defined and varies from project to project or design team Lo design team. As Bishop & Guinness ( 1966) suggest, afruitful symbiosis can be established between human factors (or human engineering) specialists and designers. Usingmany of the techniques reviewed in this documnent, human engineering specialists can provide a systematic definitionof a problem as well as ways to quantitatively evaluate competing design solutions, while the designer producescreative solutions to particular problems.NATO UNCLASSIFIED
- Page 180 and 181: N ATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8')T
- Page 182 and 183: NATO UNCLASShi Ih I t LUAC/243(Pane
- Page 184 and 185: NATO UNCLASSIFIED,AC/243(Panel 8 TR
- Page 186 and 187: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 188 and 189: NATO UNCLASSIFTEDAC/243(Panel 8')TR
- Page 190 and 191: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8')TR
- Page 192 and 193: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 194 and 195: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 196 and 197: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8')TR
- Page 198 and 199: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8ITR/
- Page 200 and 201: NATO UNCLASSIFIUEUAC/243(Panel 8)TR
- Page 202 and 203: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 204 and 205: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 206 and 207: t NATO UNCLASSIFlEDAC/243(Panel 8)T
- Page 208 and 209: NATO UNoCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR
- Page 210 and 211: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 212 and 213: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 214 and 215: NATO UN CL A S SIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8
- Page 216 and 217: NATO UNCLAS.SIFI.EDAC/243(Panei 8Vo
- Page 218 and 219: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 220 and 221: fl1106AC/243(Panel 8'TR/7- 106Volum
- Page 222 and 223: NATO UNCLASSIFIED -AC/243(Panel 8)T
- Page 224 and 225: .N AI U N C L A Itt110iAC/243(Panel
- Page 226 and 227: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 228 and 229: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 232 and 233: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 234 and 235: ] NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)T
- Page 236 and 237: VNATO UNCLASSIFIED;-AC/243(Panel 8'
- Page 238 and 239: NATO UNCLASSIFIED1111wAC/243(Panel
- Page 240 and 241: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 242 and 243: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/ 24 3 (Pane l 8
- Page 244 and 245: NATo I UNCLASSIFEDAC/243(Panel 8'IT
- Page 246 and 247: NATO ITNCLASSIUI:EDAC/243(panel 81T
- Page 248 and 249: NATO U.NCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR
- Page 250 and 251: NATO INCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel- 8LTR
- Page 252 and 253: NATO I rNC'LASSTFIEDAC/243(Panel 82
- Page 254 and 255: NATONTCLaSSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8\TR/7
- Page 256 and 257: NATO UNCLASSIiE:DAC/243(Panel 8Y1TR
- Page 258 and 259: o ndesel pre-lubrication (D)compres
- Page 260 and 261: NATO I rNCT-AS S ITfEDAC/243(Panel
- Page 262 and 263: NATO ITNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR
- Page 264 and 265: NATO IrNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR
- Page 266 and 267: NATO UINCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR
- Page 268 and 269: NATO) I INCI.ASSllHTlDAC/243(Panel
- Page 270 and 271: o n* (D L4COP1RORDIAm CTiMMINCA1-CO
- Page 272 and 273: (DREFI..11.1 ,CC) WEATHE RDATAft EN
- Page 274 and 275: NATO tTNC>LAM0-~E-DC/4(ae TR7 32Vo
- Page 276 and 277: NATO UNCLASSIF"EDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 278 and 279: NATO U NCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR
NATO UNCLASSIFIED- 117 - AC/243(Panel-8)TR/7Volume 26 INTERFACE AND WORKSPACE DESIGNmissionscenarioanalysisLfunctiona nalysis interface &functionallocation oDworkspacedesign6.1 i <strong>Design</strong> option decision trees6.2 n Critical design requirements6.3 * Link analysisWhehat techniques the doThe aim of human engineerng is to apply knowledge human ot capabilities and limitatons to the design ofequipment and systems which people use, lto ensure effecsviness. safesy, and comfoat. Thus, the final goal of thehuman engineering analyses reviewed in the previous sections is to identify design requirements, and to facilitatet heapplication of human factors knowledge to the design of systems and enuipmentrnFew publications have providedinformation on the process of translating the specification for operator tasks defined through mission, function, andtask analysis into a specification for the design of human-machine interfaces, workspaces, workplace, and/or theenvirontment, (Engel & Townsend, 1989, provide some guidance). Three techniques have been reported, and arereviewed here. (Note that there are many techniques and tools available for evaluasing.he operator workspace, basedon an&hropornetri models: some of those models have been reviewed by NATO AC/243 Panel-8/RSG.9 (McMillanet al., 1989: 1991)).'Me lackc of design techniques need not impede the application of human engineering in the design process, becausethe role of the human engineering specialist is not necessarily to design. Because the design process is creative, it isill-defined and varies from project to project or design team Lo design team. As Bishop & Guinness ( 1966) suggest, afruitful symbiosis can be established between human factors (or human engineering) specialists and designers. Usingmany of the techniques reviewed in this documnent, human engineering specialists can provide a systematic definitionof a problem as well as ways to quantitatively evaluate competing design solutions, while the designer producescreative solutions to particular problems.NATO UNCLASSIFIED