Home Ecological interface design and evaluation for feedwater dearating system in NPPs
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Ecological interface design and evaluation for feedwater dearating system in NPPs

  • Zhihui Xu , Gang Wu , Junzhou He , Huaqing Peng , Min Yang and Shengyuan Yan EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: October 4, 2023
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

A good human-computer interface can improve the efficiency of operators in the main control room of a nuclear power plant (NPP) and reduce operational errors. It has been shown that ecological interface design (EID) can effectively reduce the cognitive load of users, improve the level of situation awareness, and help users to make decisions quickly and effectively. In this paper, we analyzed the feedwater deaeration system (ADG) of nuclear power plants, constructed the work domain analysis according to the abstraction hierarchy theory. The factors that affect the balance of the system are clarified, and the ecological interface is designed based on it, so that it can present the system status and present the future development trend more intuitively, and support the operator to predict the system situation. In this study, 10 volunteers with relevant knowledge background were selected for operational experiments, with subjective evaluation based on SART scale and grey theory, which verified that EID interface has significant advantages over the original interface in supporting both operator response time and accuracy.


Corresponding author: Shengyuan Yan, Harbin Engineering University, 150001 Harbin, Heilongjiang, China, E-mail:

  1. Conflict of interest statement: There is no any conflict of interest. All the organizations provided official permission for publication of the article.

  2. Author contributions: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.

  3. Research funding: This work was partially supported by the State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Power Safety Monitoring Technology and Equipment and Harbin Engineering University under project No. K-A2020.410.

References

Anokhin, A., Ivkin, A., and Dorokhovich, S. (2018). Application of ecological interface design in nuclear power plant (NPP) operator support system. Nucl. Eng. Technol. 50: 619–626, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2018.03.005.Search in Google Scholar

Bacon, L.P. and Strybel, T.Z. (2013). Assessment of the validity and intrusiveness of online-probe questions for situation awareness in a simulated air-traffic-management task with student air-traffic controllers. Saf. Sci. 56: 89–95, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2012.06.019.Search in Google Scholar

Burns, C.M. and Hajdukiewicz, J.R. (2017). Ecological interface design. CRC Press, New York.10.1201/9781315272665Search in Google Scholar

Burns, C.M., Skraaning, G., Jamieson, G.A., Lau, N., Kwok, J., Welch, R., and Andresen, G. (2008). Evaluation of ecological interface design for nuclear process control: situation awareness effects. Hum. Factors 50: 663–679, https://doi.org/10.1518/001872008x312305.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Carrasco, C., Jamieson, G.A., and St-Cyr, O. (2014). Revisiting three ecological interface design experiments to investigate performance and control stability effects under normal conditions. In: IEEE Int. Conf. Syst. Man. Cyber. (SMC)., pp. 323–328.10.1109/SMC.2014.6973928Search in Google Scholar

Endsley, M.R. (1995). Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Hum. Factors 37: 32–64, https://doi.org/10.1518/001872095779049543.Search in Google Scholar

Endsley, M.R. (1998). Situation global assessment technique (SAGAT). In: Aeros. Electron. Conf., Vol. 3, pp. 789–795.Search in Google Scholar

Endsley, M.R. (2019). The divergence of objective and subjective situation awareness: a meta-analysis. J. Cognit. Eng. Decis. Making 14: 34–53, https://doi.org/10.1177/1555343419874248.Search in Google Scholar

Endsley, M.R., Selcon, S.J., Hardiman, T.D., and Croft, D.G. (1998). A comparative analysis of SAGAT and SART for evaluations of situation awareness. In: Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Ann. Meet. Proc., pp. 82–86.10.1177/154193129804200119Search in Google Scholar

Fay, D., Stanton, N.A., and Roberts, A. (2016). Designing new interfaces for submarines: from cognitive work analysis to ecological interface design. In: Adv. Hum. Asp. Trans., Vol. 484, pp. 413–425.10.1007/978-3-319-41682-3_35Search in Google Scholar

Gorman, J.C., Cooke, N.J., and Winner, J.L. (2017). Measuring team situation awareness in decentralized command and control environments. Ergonomics 49: 1312–1325, https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315087924-11.Search in Google Scholar

Hauland, G. (2008). Measuring individual and team situation awareness during planning tasks in training of en route air traffic control. Int. J. Aviat. Psychol. 18: 290–304, https://doi.org/10.1080/10508410802168333.Search in Google Scholar

Jamieson, G.A. and Vicente, K.J. (2001). Ecological interface design for petrochemical applications: supporting operator adaptation, continuous learning, and distributed, collaborative work. Comput. Chem. Eng. 25: 1055–1074, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0098-1354(01)00678-0.Search in Google Scholar

Lau, N., Jamieson, G.A., Skraaning, G., and Burns, C.M. (2008). Ecological interface design in the nuclear domain: an application to the secondary subsystems of a boiling water reactor plant simulator. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 55: 3579–3596, https://doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2008.2005725.Search in Google Scholar

Masys, A.J. (2005). A systemic perspective of situation awareness: an analysis of the 2002 mid-air collision over Überlingen, Germany. Disaster Prev. Manag. Int. J. 14: 548–557, https://doi.org/10.1108/09653560510618375.Search in Google Scholar

McIlroy, R.C. and Stanton, N.A. (2015). Ecological interface design two decades on: whatever happened to the SRK taxonomy? IEEE Trans. Hum.-Mach. Syst. 45: 145–163, https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2014.2369372.Search in Google Scholar

Morar, N., Baber, C., McCabe, F., Starke, S.D., Skarbovsky, I., Artikis, A., and Correai, I. (2019). Drilling into dashboards: responding to computer recommendation in fraud analysis. IEEE Trans. Hum.-Mach. Syst. 49: 633–641, https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2019.2925619.Search in Google Scholar

Naderpour, M., Lu, J., and Zhang, G. (2016). A safety-critical decision support system evaluation using situation awareness and workload measures. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 150: 147–159, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2016.01.024.Search in Google Scholar

O’Hara, J.M., Stubler, W., and Brown, W. (2020). Human-system interface design review guidelines. NUREG0700 revision 3. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington D.C.10.2172/1644018Search in Google Scholar

Pawlak, S. and Vicente, J. (1996). Inducing effective operator control through ecological interface design. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 44: 653–688, https://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.1996.0028.Search in Google Scholar

Puuska, S., Rummukainen, L., Timonen, J., Lääperi, L., Klemetti, M., Oksama, L., and Vankka, J. (2018). Nationwide critical infrastructure monitoring using a common operating picture framework. Int. J. Crit. Infrastruct. Prot. 20: 28–47, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcip.2017.11.005.Search in Google Scholar

Rasmussen, J. (1985). The role of hierarchical knowledge representation in decision making and system management. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 15: 234–243, https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.1985.6313353.Search in Google Scholar

Rasmussen, J., Pejtersen, A.M., and Schmidt, K. (1990). Taxonomy for cognitive work analysis. Risø National Laboratory. Cog. Syst. Group, New York.Search in Google Scholar

Rasmussen, J. and Vicente, K.J. (1989). Coping with human errors through system design: implications for ecological interface design. Int. J. Man.-Mach. Stud. 31: 517–534, https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7373(89)90014-X.Search in Google Scholar

Reising, D. and Sanderson, P.M. (2002). Ecological interface design for pasteurizer II: a process description of semantic mapping. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. 44: 222–247, https://doi.org/10.1518/0018720024497952.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Rose, J., Bearman, C., and Dorrian, J. (2018). The Low-Event Task Subjective Situation Awareness (LETSSA) technique: development and evaluation of a new subjective measure of situation awareness. Appl. Ergon. 68: 273–282, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2017.12.006.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Sharma, A., Nazir, S., and Ernstsen, J. (2019). Situation awareness information requirements for maritime navigation: a goal directed task analysis. Saf. Sci. 120: 745–752, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2019.08.016.Search in Google Scholar

Vicente, K.J. (2002). Ecological interface design: progress and challenges. Hum. Factors 44: 62–78, https://doi.org/10.1518/0018720024494829.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Vicente, K.J. and Rasmussen, J. (1992). Ecological interface design: theoretical foundations. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 22: 589–606, https://doi.org/10.1109/21.156574.Search in Google Scholar

Yang, C.W., Yang, L.C., Cheng, T.C., Jou, Y.T., and Chiou, S.W. (2012). Assessing mental workload and situation awareness in the evaluation of computerized procedures in the main control room. Nucl. Eng. Des. 250: 713–719, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2012.05.038.Search in Google Scholar

Zhai, L.Y., Khoo, L.P., and Zhong, Z.W. (2009). Design concept evaluation in product development using rough sets and grey relation analysis. Expert Syst. Appl. 36: 7072–7079, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.08.068.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2023-02-21
Published Online: 2023-10-04
Published in Print: 2023-10-26

© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 28.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/kern-2023-0009/html
Scroll to top button