Comparison between conventional and digital nuclear power plant main control rooms: A task complexity perspective, part I: Overall results and analysis

International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics

Volumn 51, Issue , 2016, Pages 2-9

  Liu, Peng ^a   Li, Zhizhong ^a  

^a TSINGHUA UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Automation; Digitalization; Main control room; Nuclear power plant; Task complexity

Indexed keywords

AUTOMATION; CONTROL ROOMS (POWER PLANTS); NUCLEAR ENERGY; NUCLEAR INDUSTRY; NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS;

COMPLEX INDUSTRIAL SYSTEMS; DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES; DIGITALIZATION; EMPIRICAL KNOWLEDGE; MAIN CONTROL ROOM; POTENTIAL NEGATIVE EFFECTS; TASK COMPLEXITY; TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT;

POWER CONTROL;

ADULT; ARTICLE; AUTOMATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONSTRUCT VALIDITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CRITERION RELATED VALIDITY; DIGITALIZATION; HUMAN; INTERNAL CONSISTENCY; LICENSED OPERATOR; MALE; MISCELLANEOUS NAMED GROUPS; NUCLEAR POWER PLANT; NUCLEAR POWER PLANT CONVENTIONAL MAIN CONTROL ROOM; NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DIGITAL MAIN CONTROL ROOM; PERCEPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; RELIABILITY; TASK COMPLEXITY PERSPECTIVE; TASK PERFORMANCE; TREND STUDY; VALIDATION PROCESS; WORK ENVIRONMENT;

EID: 85027942189     PISSN: 01698141     EISSN: 18728219     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ergon.2014.06.006     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Au W.-T., Rohrmann B., Taylor P., Ho J.M.-C., Yeung S.-W. Developing equivalent Chinese and English scale-point labels for rating scales used in survey research. Asian J. Soc. Psychol. 2011, 14(2):91-111.
2. Bainbridge L. Ironies of automation. Automatica 1983, 19(6):775-779.
3. Braarud P.Ø. Complexity Factors and Prediction of Crew Performance (HWR-521) 1998, OECD Halden Reactor Project, Halden, Norway.
4. Braarud P.Ø. Subjective Task Complexity in the Control Room (HWR-621) 2000, OECD Halden Reactor Project, Halden, Norway.
5. Bye A., Lois E., Dang V.N., Parry G., Forester J., Massaiu S., Boring R., Braarud P.Ø., Broberg H., Julius J., Männistö I., Nelson P. The International HRA Empirical Study - Phase 2 Report - Results from Comparing HRA Methods Predictions to HAMMLAB Simulator Data on SGTR Scenario (HWR-915) 2010, OECD Halden Reactor Project, Halden, Norway.
6. Collier S. Development of a Diagnostic Complexity Questionnaire (HWR-536) 1998, OECD Halden Reactor Project, Halden, Norway.
7. Desaulniers D.R. Stress in the control room: effects and solutions. IEEE Sixth Annual Human Factors Meeting, Orlando, FL 1997.
8. Endsley M.R., Kaber D.B. Level of automation effects on performance, situation awareness and workload in a dynamic control task. Ergonomics 1999, 42(3):462-492.
9. Gertman D., Blackman H., Marble J., Byers J., Smith C. The SPAR-H Human Reliability Analysis Method (NUREG/CR-6883) 2005, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.
10. Gertman D.I., Boring R.L., Hugo J., Phoenix W. Haven't a cue? Mapping the CUE space as an aid to HRA modeling. Proceedings of the 11th International Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management Conference (PSAM11) and the Annual European Safety and Reliability Conference (ESREL 2012), Helsinki, Finland 2012.
11. Herrero S., Saldaña M., Rodriguez J., Ritzel D. Influence of task demands on occupational stress: gender differences. J. Saf. Res. 2012, 43(5-6):365-374.
12. Hickling E.M., Bowie J.E. Applicability of human reliability assessment methods to human-computer interfaces. Cognit. Technol. Work 2013, 15(1):19-27.
13. Hsieh M.-H., Hwang S.-L., Liu K.-H., Liang S.-F.M., Chuang C.-F. A decision support system for identifying abnormal operating procedures in a nuclear power plant. Nucl. Eng. Design 2012, 249:413-418.
14. Hugo J., Gertman D. A qualitative method to estimate HSI display complexity. Nucl. Eng. Technol. 2013, 45(2):141-150.
15. IAEA Managing Modernization of Nuclear Power Plant Instrumentation and Control Systems (IAEA-TECDOC-1389) 2004, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria.
16. Joe J.C., Boring R.L., Persensky J.J. Commercial utility perspectives on nuclear power plant control room modernization. 8th International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Plant Instrumentation, Control, and Human-Machine Interface Technologies (NPIC & HMIT 2012), San Diego, CA 2012.
17. Kirlik A. Modeling strategic behavior in human-automation interaction: why an "aid" can (and should) go unused. Hum. Fact. 1993, 35(2):221-242.
18. Liu P., Li Z.Z. Task complexity: a review and conceptualization framework. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 2012, 42(6):553-568.
19. Liu P., Li Z.Z., Wang Z. Task complexity measure for emergency operating procedures based on resource requirements in human information processing. Proceedings of the 11th International Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management Conference (PSAM11) and the Annual European Safety and Reliability Conference (ESREL 2012), Helsinki, Finland 2012.
20. Minsk B.S., Mitchell M.R., Branch K.M., Gore B.F., Bates E.K., Faris D.K. Technical Basis for Physical Fidelity of NRC Control Room Training Simulators for Advanced Reactors (PNNL-18865) 2009, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA.
21. Mumaw R.J., Roth E.M., Vicente K.J., Burns C.M. There is more to monitoring a nuclear power plant than meets the eye. Hum. Fact. 2000, 42(1):36-55.
22. National Research Council Digital Instrumentation and Control Systems in Nuclear Power Plants: Safety and Reliability Issues 1997, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
23. O'Hara J.M., Brown W.S., Lewis P.M., Persensky J.J. The Effects of Interface Management Tasks on Crew Performance and Safety in Complex, Computer-based Systems: Overview and Main Findings (NUREG/CR-6690, Vol. 1) 2002, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.
24. O'Hara J.M., Hall R.E. Advanced control rooms and crew performance issues: implications for human reliability. IEEE Transact. Nucl. Sci. 1992, 39(4):919-923.
25. O'Hara J.M., Higgins J., Fleger S., Barnes V. Human-system interfaces for automatic systems. 7th International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Plant Instrumentation, Control, and Human-Machine Interface Technologies, Las Vegas, NV 2010.
26. Onnasch L., Wickens C.D., Li H., Manzey D. Human performance consequences of stages and levels of automation: an integrated meta-analysis. Hum. Fact. 2014, 56(3):476-488.
27. Roth E., O'Hara J. Integrating Digital and Conventional Human-system Interfaces: Lessons Learned from a Control Room Modernization Program (NUREG/CR-6749) 2002, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.
28. Salo L., Laarni J., Savioja P. Operator experiences on working in screen-based control rooms. 5th International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Plant Instrumentation, Controls, and Human-Machine Interface Technology, Albuquerque, NM 2006.
29. Salo L., Savioja P. Practices of process control in digital control room: possibilities and threats. Thirteenth European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics: Trust and Control in Complex Socio-technical Systems, Zürich, Switzerland 2006.
30. Sarter N. Investigating mode errors on automated flight decks: illustrating the problem-driven, cumulative, and interdisciplinary nature of Human Factors research. Hum. Fact. 2008, 50(3):506-510.
31. Sarter N.B., Woods D.D. How in the world did we ever get into that mode? Mode error and awareness in supervisory sontrol. Hum. Fact. 1995, 37(1):5-19.
32. Sarter N.B., Woods D.D., Billings C.E. Automation suprises. Handbook of Human Factors & Ergonomics 1997, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ. second ed. G. Salvendy (Ed.).
33. Sasangohar F., Cummings M.L. Human-system Interface Complexity and Opacity Part II: Methods and Tools to Assess HSI Complexity (HAL2010-03) 2010, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
34. Savioja P., Aaltonen I., Karvonen H., Koskinen H., Laarni J., Liinasuo M., Norros L. Systems usability concerns in hybrid control rooms. 8th International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Power Plant Instrumentation, Control, and Human-Machine Interface Technologies, San Diego, CA 2012.
35. Sebok A. Team performance in process control: influences of interface design and staffing levels. Ergonomics 2000, 43(8):1210-1236.
36. Sheridan T.B. Human and Automation: System Design and Research Issues 2002, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ.
37. Skjerve A.B.M., Skraaning G. The quality of human-automation cooperation in human-system interface for nuclear power plants. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 2004, 61(5):649-677.
38. Vicente K.J., Burns C.M. A Field Study of Operator Cognitive Monitoring at Pickering Nuclear Generating Station - B (CEL 95-04) 1995, Cognitive Enginnering Laboratory, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
39. Wiener E.L. Human Factors of Advanced Technology ("Glass Cockpit") Transport Aircraft (NASA Contractor Report No. 177528) 1989, NASA-Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA.
40. Woods D.D. Decomposing automation: apparent simplicity, real complexity. Automation and Human Performance: Theory and Applications 1996, 3-17. Erlbaum, New Jersey. R. Parasuraman, M. Mouloua (Eds.).
41. Woods D.D., Roth E.M., Stubler W.F., Mumaw R.J. Navigating through large display networks in dynamic control applications. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting 1990.
42. World Nuclear Association Nuclear Power in China 2013, [online], (accessed 10.09.13.). http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-A-F/China-Nuclear-Power/.
43. Wright M.C., Kaber D.B. Effects of automation of information-processing functions on teamwork. Hum. Fact. 2005, 47(1):50-66.
44. Zhou Y., Mu H., Jiang J., Zhang L. Investigation of the impact of main control room digitalization on operators cognitive reliability in nuclear power plants. Work 2012, 41(Suppl. 1):714-721.