Most studies of the human supervisor in the power industry have focused on how the reactor operator monitors the energy source and the containment of radiation and controls thermodynamic cycles, while serving base electricity loads. In contrast, the human supervisor of hydroelectric generation in a dynamic, deregulated, market environment, where control activity is motivated increasingly by market forces, has a surprisingly different role. Our goal in this paper is to note the particularly challenging features of the hydro power plant controller's world, particularly when dealing with a multi-site, multi-storage facility, with complex hydraulic arrangements, large generating units, and a focus on serving peak rather than base loads. We present results of cognitive work analyses that are informing investigations into more effective interface design for hydro scheme control and note challenges in formulating a framework for design.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AchonuJ.JamiesonG. (2003). Work domain analysis of a financial system: An abstraction hierarchy for portfolio management. Proceedings of the 22nd European Annual Conference on Human Decision Making and Control (EAM2003). Linkoping, Sweden, June 2–4. pp. 102–109.
2.
BennettK. B.NagyA. L.FlachJ. (1997). Visual displays. In SalvendyG. (Ed.), Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics (2nd edition). New York: Wiley.
3.
CroneD.SandersonP.NaikarN. (2003). Using cognitive work analysis to develop a capability for the evaluation of future systems. Paper submitted for publication in Proceedings of the 47th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Denver CO, 13–17 October.
4.
HoffmanR. R.CrandallB., (1998). Use of the Critical Decision Method to elicit expert knowledge: A case study in the methodology of Cognitive Task Analysis. Human Factors, 40(2), 254–276.
5.
HollnagelE. (2002). Time and time again. Theoretical issues in Ergonomics Science, 3(2), 143–158.
6.
Human Systems Engineering Group of the IEE (1999). People in Control: An International Conference on Human Interfaces in Control Rooms, Cockpits, and Command Centres.University of Bath, UK. 21–23 June.
7.
Human Systems Engineering Group of the IEE (2001). People in Control: The Second International Conference on Human Interfaces in Control Rooms, Cockpits, and Command Centres.UMIST, Manchester, UK. 19–21 June.
8.
JamiesonG. (2002). Empirical evaluation of an industrial application of ecological interface design.Proceedings of the 4th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Meeting. Baltimore, MD.
9.
MillerA.SandersonP. (2003). An Alternative ADS for the Analysis, Design and Evaluation of Information Representations in the ICU. Proceedings of the 22nd European Annual Conference on Human Decision Making and Control (EAM2003). Linkoping, Sweden, pp. 95–101.
10.
MorayN. (1986). Monitoring behavior and supervisory control. In BoffK. R.KaufmannL.ThomasY J. P. (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance. (Chapter 45). New York: Wiley.
11.
MorayN. (1997). Human factors in process control. In SalvendyG. (Ed.), Handbook of human factors and ergonomics. (2nd edition) NY: Wiley.
12.
NEMMCO (1997). Australia's National Electricity Market: An introduction.Sydney, NSW: NEMMCO Ltd.
13.
NoyesJ.BransbyM. (2001). People in Control: Human factors in control room design.Stevenage, UK: The Institution of Electrical Engineers.
14.
RasmussenJ.PejtersenA. M.GoodsteinL. P. (1994). Cognitive systems engineering.New York: Wiley.
15.
ReisingD. C.SandersonP. (2002). Ecological Interface Design for Pasteurizer II: A Process Description of Semantic Mapping. Human Factors, 44(3).
16.
RothE.O'HareJ. (2002). Integrating digital and conventional human system interfaces: Lessons learned from a control room modernisation program.Washington, DC: NRC (NUREG/CR-6749).
17.
SandersonP. M. (2003). Cognitive Work Analysis. In CarrollJ. (Ed.), HCl Models, Theories, and Frameworks: Toward an Interdisciplinary Science.New York: Morgan-Kaufmann. (To appear April).
18.
SandersonP.NaikarN. (2000). Temporal coordination control task analysis for analysing human system integration. Proceedings of the Joint Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society and the International Ergonomics Association (IEA2000/HFES2000).Santa Monica, CA: HFES. Vol 1, Pp 206–209.
SheridanT. B. (1997). Supervisory control. In SalvendyG. (Ed.), Handbook of human factors and ergonomics (2nd edition). New York: Wiley.
21.
VicenteK. J. (1999). Cognitive work analysis: Toward safe, productive, and healthy computer-based work.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
22.
VicenteK. J. (2002). Ecological interface design: Progress and challenges. Human Factors, 44, 62–78.
23.
VicenteK. J.RasmussenJ. (1990). The ecology of human-machine systems II: Mediating “direct perception” in complex work domains. Ecological Psychology, 2(3), 207–249.
24.
WickensC. D.CarswellC. M. (1995). The proximity compatibility principle: Its Psychological Foundation and Relevance to Display Design. Human Factors, 37, 473–495.
25.
WongB.-L. W., (2000). The Integrated Decision Model in Emergency Dispatch Management and its Implications for Design. Australian Journal of Information Systems, 7 (2), 95–101.
26.
WongB.-L. W., (2002). Data analysis for the Critical Decision Method. In DiaperD.StantonN. (Eds.), Task analysis for human-computer interaction.Mahwah, NJ: LEA.
27.
WongW.BlandfordA. (2002) Analysing Ambulance Dispatcher Decision Making: Trialing Emergent Themes Analysis. Proceedings of the combined annual meeting of the Ergonomics Scoeity of Australia and the Computer Human Interaction Special Interest Group (HF2002). Melbourne, Australia, 24–28 November.
28.
YamaguchiY.TanabeF. (2000). Creation of interface system for nuclear reactor operation: practical implication of implementing EID concept on large complex system. Proceedings of the Joint Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society and the International Ergonomics Association (IEA2000/HFES2000), Vol. 1, pp. 571574. Santa Monica, CA: HFES.
