Ergonomics displays

Consider ergonomics in the design of displays and control panels. 

Inadequate ergonomic design in areas such as control panels and the labeling and placement of valves on the plant can also be regarded as a latent failure because it will increase the probability of active errors. For example, a worker may misread process information from a poorly designed display. Poorly labeled and situated valves can cause the wrong valve to be selected, with possibly disastrous consequences. 

The content and organization of the displayed information are of critical importance in inferring the state of the process and subsequently evaluating the effects of alternative courses of action. The following factors will determine the demands of the control panel on the attentional and memory resources of the workers. For detailed data on the design of the control panel, the reader is referred to standard ergonomics textbooks (e.g., Salvendy, 1987). 

These include identification of process equipment and instruments, interpretation of the meaning of their values and trends, navigation through different VDU pages by means of a selection menu, etc. The common feature of these tasks is handling the display system to search and locate relevant process data. In this respect, "classical" ergonomics checklists (see Chapter 4) are very useful in facilitating performance of such tasks. 

Display testing demonstrates visual information and screen ergonomics. 

All aspects of working with computers are covered in the multi-part standard ISO 9241 [632]. Originally titled Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs) , it has been retitled by ISO to Ergonomics of human-system interaction in 2006. 

American National Standards Institute (ANSI) (1988), American National Standard for Human Factors Engineering of fisual Display Terminal Workstations (ANSI/HFS Standard No. 100-1988), Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Santa Moitica, CA. 

Grandjean, E. (1979), Ergonomical and Medical Aspects of Cathode Ray Tube Displays, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich. 

Helander, M. G. (1982), Ergonomic Design of Office Environments for Visual Display Temuruds, Nationtil Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (DTMD), Cincinnati, OH. 

Improve communication by improving controls (how people communicate to machines) and displays (how machines communicate to people) details are covered in a number of ergonomics texts. But even letters and numbers can be confused—especially the number 0 and the letter O and the number 1 and the letter 1. Use aU letter codes or all numeric codes, not a mixture. If a mixed code is used, omit 0, O, 1 and 1. Also, do not use both a dash and an underline. 

Flags, for network content filtering, 248 Flat panel display ergonomics, 1195 FlexibUity, 147, 262 of distribution, 1471 of manufacturing systems, 499... 

Backs, R. W., Walrath, L. C. (1992). Eye movement and pupillary response indices of mental workload during visual search of symbolic displays. Applied Ergonomics, 23, 243-254. 

Grandjean, E. (1980). Ergonomics of VDUs Review of present knowledge. In E. Grandjean E. Vigliani (Eds.), Ergonomic aspects of visual display terminals (pp. 1-12). London Taylor Francis. 

Lundberg, U., Melin, B., Evans, G. W, Holmberg, L. (1993). Physiological deactivation after two contrasting tasks at a video display terminal Learning vs. repetitive data entry. Ergonomics, 36, 601 -611. 

Taptagapom, S., Saito, S. (1990). How display polarity and lighting conditions affect the pupil size of VDT operators. Ergonomics, 33, 201-208. 

ISO 9241-11. 1998. Ergonomic Requirements for Office Work with Visual Display Terminals (VDTs) Part 11 Guidance on Usability. International Organization for Standardization. Washington D.C. Distributed by the American National Standards Institute. 

University of Virginia s Video Display Ergonomics (http //www.virginia. edu/enhealth/ergonomics/toc.html)... 

Roth, E. and OHara, J. (1999), Exploring the Impact of Advanced Alarms, Displays, and Computerized Procedures on Teams, Proceedings of the Human Factors, and Ergonomics Society, 43rd Aimual Meeting, pp. 158-162. 

Seldom was there a mention of ergonomics-related causal factors in the reports collected for the original study. In this second study, extensive knowledge of ergonomics is displayed. Obviously, the ergonomics awareness and training initiatives undertaken have had an effect. 

Standardisation came about as lessous were learnt (both in certification processes as well as from unfortunate incidents and accidents). The guidance surrounding ergonomics thus became more extensive and prescriptive (e.g. standardisation of warning cues position of key displays within a cone of view, etc.) In his paper on Cockpit Ergononucs, Harris et al. (2(X)2) highlight one of the central principles of HF as follows ... 

These early ergonomic evaluations are meant to ensure that the design team adequately considers basic physical characteristics and control interfaces. Areas to concentrate on include positioning, reach, field of view, knob/button size, tactile perception, labelling, system usability, etc. Aircraft controls supplement aircraft displays in communicating to the pilot (Jarrett, 2005). It provides a two-way interaction between the aircraft and the crew. Controls should be easy to reach and be positioned appropriately... 

As for some important ergonomic aspects, such as the use of differently coloured cards (Wright Lickorish, 1988), or the effects of single or multiple-window displays (Tombaugh et al., 1987), they will not be taken into account in this paper. 

---