Analysis Techniques For Man-Machine Systems Design

Analysis Techniques For Man-Machine Systems Design Analysis Techniques For Man-Machine Systems Design

ai.eecs.umich.edu
from ai.eecs.umich.edu More from this publisher
11.07.2015 Views

NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/ 24 3 (Pane l 8 ' TR/ 7Volume 2an application to the design of a prototype radar using the standard sequence for operating the equipment (a widelycited example by Cornell (1968) was actually an hypothetical application). Link analysis was used to evaluatecompeting human-machine interface designs during the sele.ion of a maritime patrol aircrafL Recently the techniquewas used for the development of interface designs for a forwari air defence system. Link analysis has also been usedwidely in crew compartment design, for example for patrol aircraft, for army command posts, and for the developmcntof improved designs of destroyer bridges.Quality assurance considerationsThe analysis is dependent on the frequencies and weightings used to weight the different links. The weightings aresubjective.Relationship to system performancerequirementsOperator performance is implicit in the use of the "cost" function to determine the arrangement of systemcomponents, resulting in reduced operator times, and errors. The cost function chosen will determine the exactrelationship to system performance.Referencesand Bibliography1. Cornel, C.E. (1968). Minimizing human errors. SpaceIAeronatlics. March, p. 79 .2. Evans, S., Walker, C., & Beevis, D. (1984). A human enrinecrinl evaluation of DDH28O bridge designpr9oal. DCIEM No. 84-R-43. Toronto: Defence and Civil Institute of Environmental Medicine.3. Freund, L.E. & Sadosky, TL. (1967). Linear programming applied to optimization of instrument panel andworkplace layout. Human Factors 2(4), 295-300.4. Hendy, K. (1989). A model for human-machine-human interactions in workspace layout problems. HumanEactors31. ( 5 ). 593-610.5. Laughery, K-R. Snr., & Laughery, K.R. Jr. (1987). Analytic techniques for function analysis. In: G. Salvendy(Ed.), Handbook of human factors. New York: John Wiley & Sons.6 Shackel, B. (1961). Ergonomics in equipment design. Instrument Practice. June.. pp. 705-712.7. Siegel. A.I., Wolf, JJ., & Pilitis, J. (1982). A new method for the scientific layout of workspaces. AUplicdErgonomics 13 (2), 87-90.8. US Department of Defense (1987). Human eneineering Drocdures tuide. Washington D.C.: DoD-HDBK-763.9. Wierwille, W.W. (1981). Statistical techniques for instrument panel arrangement. In: J. Moraal & K.F. Kraiss(Eds.), Manned system desiin. New York: Plenum Press.NATO UNCLASSIFIED1do

NATO UNCLASSIFIED- 1 -- AC/243(Panel-8)TR/7Volume 2VOLUME 2 PART 2DECOMPOSITION AND REPRESENTATIONOF SYSTEMSNATOUNCLASSIFIED1 -

NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/ 24 3 (Pane l 8 ' TR/ 7Volume 2an application to the design of a prototype radar using the standard sequence for operating the equipment (a widelycited example by Cornell (1968) was actually an hypothetical application). Link analysis was used to evaluatecompeting human-machine interface designs during the sele.ion of a maritime patrol aircrafL Recently the techniquewas used for the development of interface designs for a forwari air defence system. Link analysis has also been usedwidely in crew compartment design, for example for patrol aircraft, for army command posts, and for the developmcntof improved designs of destroyer bridges.Quality assurance considerationsThe analysis is dependent on the frequencies and weightings used to weight the different links. The weightings aresubjective.Relationship to system performancerequirementsOperator performance is implicit in the use of the "cost" function to determine the arrangement of systemcomponents, resulting in reduced operator times, and errors. The cost function chosen will determine the exactrelationship to system performance.Referencesand Bibliography1. Cornel, C.E. (1968). Minimizing human errors. SpaceIAeronatlics. March, p. 79 .2. Evans, S., Walker, C., & Beevis, D. (1984). A human enrinecrinl evaluation of DDH28O bridge designpr9oal. DCIEM No. 84-R-43. Toronto: Defence and Civil Institute of Environmental Medicine.3. Freund, L.E. & Sadosky, TL. (1967). Linear programming applied to optimization of instrument panel andworkplace layout. Human Factors 2(4), 295-300.4. Hendy, K. (1989). A model for human-machine-human interactions in workspace layout problems. HumanEactors31. ( 5 ). 593-610.5. Laughery, K-R. Snr., & Laughery, K.R. Jr. (1987). Analytic techniques for function analysis. In: G. Salvendy(Ed.), Handbook of human factors. New York: John Wiley & Sons.6 Shackel, B. (1961). Ergonomics in equipment design. Instrument Practice. June.. pp. 705-712.7. Siegel. A.I., Wolf, JJ., & Pilitis, J. (1982). A new method for the scientific layout of workspaces. AUplicdErgonomics 13 (2), 87-90.8. US Department of Defense (1987). Human eneineering Drocdures tuide. Washington D.C.: DoD-HDBK-763.9. Wierwille, W.W. (1981). Statistical techniques for instrument panel arrangement. In: J. Moraal & K.F. Kraiss(Eds.), <strong>Man</strong>ned system desiin. New York: Plenum Press.NATO UNCLASSIFIED1do

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!