An experimental investigation of human mismatches in machining

Abstract

Mismatches refer to incompatibilities, inappropriateness, unsuitabilities or inconsistencies in machine operators' actions which, if not addressed, would lead to errors. A fuller understanding of the rate at which mismatches occur and their causes would allow human aspects to be given proper consideration alongside hardware and technological issues in the design of new working environments, machines and tasks. This research highlights these human aspects of machining by examining mismatches in relation to various human characteristics.

The human task-mismatch matching method was developed and applied in manual turning operations using experimental and questionnaire techniques on groups of 16 skilled and 12 unskilled operators. The skilled subjects were drawn from local industry and university technical staff. Unskilled subjects were engineering students, all of whom had some familiarity with machining through periods of industrial placement. Statistically significant relationships were established between mismatches and many of the human characteristics studied (skill, age, work experience, self-confidence and trust) when considering all the subjects as a single group, but for skilled operators alone, the only significant relationship was between self-confidence and trust.

As a general conclusion, it can be confirmed that studying operators in their own workplace provides invaluable information for the design and operation of future workplaces, but that the relationships between performance and human characteristics remain difficult to establish formally.

Keywords

human factors mismatches machining

References

Sanders

M. S.

McCormick

E. J.

Human Factors in Engineering and Design, International Editions, Industrial Engineering Series, 6th edition, 1987 (McGraw-Hill, New York).

Urdang

The Oxford Thesaurus, 1991 (Oxford University Press).

Reason

Cognitive aids in process environments: Prostheses or tools?

Int. J. of Man-Machine Studies, 1987, 27, 463–470.

Lee

J. D.

Moray

Trust, self-confidence and operators' adaptation to automation. Int. J. of Human-

Computer Studies, 1994, 1, 153–184.

Muir

B. M.

Trust in automation: Part I. Theoretical issues in the study and human intervention in automated systems. Ergonomics, 1994, 37(11), 1905–1922.

Muir

B. M.

Moray

Trust in automation. Part II. Experimental studies of trust and human intervention in a process control simulation. Ergonomics, 1996, 39(3), 429–460.

Rani

Abdul M. R.

Human mismatches in machining. PhD thesis, Loughborough University, 1997.

Williams

J. C.

Human factors analysis of automation requirementsâa methodology for allocating functions. In 10th Advances in Reliability Technology Symposium (Ed. Libberton

G.P.

), 1988 (Elsevier Applied Science, London).

Holding

D. H.

Skill research. In Human Skills (Ed. Holding

D. H.

), 1981 (John Wiley, Chichester).

10.

Welford

A. T.

Ageing and Human Skill, 1958 (The Nuffield Foundation, Oxford University Press).

11.

Ekkers

C. L.

Pasmooij

C. K.

Brouwers

A. A. F.

Janusch

A. J.

Human control tasks: A comparative study in different man-machine systems. In Proceedings of the IFAC Workshop, Enschede, Netherlands, 1979 (Pergamon Press, Oxford).

12.

Silver

Mitchell

T. R.

Bist

M. E.

Responses to successful and unsuccessful performances: The moderating effect of self-efficacy on the relationship between performance and attributions. Organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Process, 1995, 62(3), 286–299.

13.

Luhman

Trust and Power, 1980 (John Wiley, New York).