Operational Workload Analysis

A useful tool, prior to the flight testing phase, is the Operational Workload Analysis (OWA), which recognises that the likelihood of a human error in a task is directly related to the way the task itself is designed and the quality of the following key factors ... 

Human Factors Engineering/Ergonomics approach (control of error by design, audit, and feedback of operational experience) Occupational/process safety Manual/control operations Routine operation Task analysis Job design Workplace design Interface design Physical environment evaluation Workload analysis Infrequent... 

McLeod, R. W., and Sherwood-Jones, B. M. (1993), Simulation to Predict Operator Workload in a Command System, in A Guide to Task Analysis, B. Kirwan, and L. K. Ainsworth, Eds., Taylor... 

McCracken, J. H., and Aldrich, T. B. (1984), Analysis of Selected LHX Mission Fimctions Implications for Operator Workload and System Automation Gottis, Technical Note ASI 479-024-84(B), prepared by Anacapa Sciences, Inc., June. 

In many studies, task demands are only assessed with subjective techniques. This approach is not adequate because there may often be, for various reasons, a considerable difference between the objective workload and the subjective evaluation by the employees. Hence, it is in most cases desirable to obtain objective data on task demands. The operationalization of demand as well as perfonnance measures deserves very careful consideration. It is often necessary to consult experts and to carry out an operational task analysis in order to obtain sufficient insight into the relevant specifications. 

Hamilton, D.B., Bierbaum, C.R., 1990. Task Analysis/Workload (TAWL) a methodology for predicting operator workload. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 34th Annual Meeting. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Santa Monica, CA, pp. 1117-1121. 

Define tasks. The first step involves defining the tasks that are to be subjected to analysis. The type of tasks analyzed depends on the focus of the analysis for example, when assessing the effects on operator workload caused by a novel design or a new process, it is usefnl to analyze a set of tasks that are as representative of the devices operations as possible. 

As explained in the previous section, in order to determine the workload of operators in the advanced MCR, both the communicative behavior between operators and the operational behavior for operation of MMIS-based control equipment should be considered in addition to a measurement of the cognitive workload. In order to resolve this problem, this research is based on the workload measurement method used in various existing fields, and it was realized in the way of integration with the workload analysis method required additionally. 

The results for the workload analysis indicate that the cognitive activities of SS are far more than those of other operators. It was found that as the communicative activities of SS are also the most, SS leads the entire MCR. Not only that, but SS is also found to conduct more operational activities than other operators. This shows that SS increases the frequency of operational activities by executing diagnostic procedures (SPTAP + DP) and Optimum Operation Procedures (ORP), using the CBPs, under the operation environment of an advanced MCR. 

The COCOA developed in this research presents the framework suitable to a workload analysis of the operators in an advanced MCR. This also presents the taxonomy for additional operation activities of operators to use the computerized procedures and soft control added to the advanced MCR, and it enables an integrated measurement of the operator workload in various dimensions of cognition, communication, and operation. Of course, even though it is impossible to get an arithmetic average of the load values measured in each dimension, additional research is needed to present a comprehensive measure in consideration of the weighed values between factors (dimensions). In addition, the measurement method presented in COCOA is regarded as a calculation method to enable a eomparison between operators. 

Workload analysis is an analysis of the demand placed on the operator by the task requirements. 

A slightly more complex HPLC analysis of oral contraceptive tablets for content uniformity has been described [65]. The analysis was automated because it represented a high proportion of the laboratory workload, it was relatively routine, and it would reduce contact with steroids, therefore minimizing health risks. The last point was emphasized by placing the robotic system in a room separate from the main laboratory, with the controller outside the room. This is significantly different from the approach followed by many users of laboratory robotics, who often place the system in a main laboratory area. The robotic system performs the following steps, after the operator places the tablets into tubes in racks located on the robot table ... 

Given the above analysis and also the high cost of purchasing relatively small quantities of 5-aminoimidazole-4-carboxamide (XXIII, AIC), we in Chemical Development were given the backing to explore other possibilities and identify a safer, lower-cost route to Temozolomide that would avoid the hazards and preferably require conventional rather than specialist equipment. Another requirement, made necessary by the heavy workload in our New Jersey Chemical Development operation, was that we find an outside partner to carry out the process exploration work with us. 

Set a tentative date Attempt to set the time most convenient to the plant production people. Stable operation during the test is essential, and the production personnel can anticipate periods of potential instability best. Contact the laboratory supervisor. A performance test usually means increasing the lab workload, and the lab supervisor must schedule additional personnel. Obtain a commitment from the lab supervisor to complete the analysis by a reasonable date. The longer a sample sits on the shelf, the smaller is the reliability of the analysis because of possible leakage or chemical reaction, and the greater is its chance of being lost. 

As mentioned by Swain and Guttmann (1983), human reliability is the probability of the successful conclusion of a procedure or task by the operator or team in any stage of the system operation, considering the minimal necessary time (when the time dimension is relevant). Human reliability analysis (HRA) evaluates human actions in a system, considering the factors which contribute to his performance, and it commonly shows incompatibilities among human limitations and the conditions imposed by work. Some of these factors are related to time restrictions, excessive workloads, inadequate training of operators, inadequate procedures, task complexity, and so on. 

This data is assessed using activity analysis methods. These methods are apphed to different operators belonging to the same class, and consist in analysing the man-machine system in predefined contexts (chosen at the previous stage). The inputs/outputs of each operator are also measured and memorized, and his workload, visual strategies (using occulometric methods [1]), displacements, etc., studied. 

Laboratory samples are often collected during plant tests. These are usually to support the development of inferential properties (as described in Chapter 9). Indeed steady operation, under conditions away from normal operation, can provide valuable data scatter . Occasionally a series of samples are collected to obtain dynamic behaviour, for example if an onstream analyser is temporarily out of service or its installation delayed. The additional laboratory testing generated may be substantial compared to the normal workload. If the laboratory is not expecting this, then analysis may be delayed for several days with the risk that the samples may degrade. 

Table 1 shows the results of biomechanical analysis for the activities of semi-mechanized holes digging operation and cleaning of plantation s weeds. For each of the phases of these activities, table shows which joints present risks of injury caused by the workload or not. The acronym NRI means No Risk of Injury in Joints , which means that over 99.0%o of workers can support the load imposed by the activity without risk to the joints involved and the acronymRI means Risk of Injury , meaning that recommended load limit was exceeded, indicating that less than 99.0%o of workers can support the load imposed by the activity without risk to the joints involved. 

When it comes to the analysis of the performance of operators in safety critical systems, perhaps the most emphasized of PSFs is workload (as seen in e.g. the operator performance model of... 

---