SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Human interface design”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2008

Functional Mobility Testing: A Novel Method to Establish Human System Interface Design Requirements

Across all fields of human-system interface design it is vital to posses a sound methodology dictating the constraints on the system based on the capabilities of the human user. These limitations may be based on strength, mobility, dexterity, cognitive ability, etc. and combinations thereof. Data collected in an isolated environment to determine, for example, maximal strength or maximal range of motion would indeed be adequate for establishing not-to-exceed type design limitations, however these restraints on the system may be excessive over what is basally needed. Resources may potentially be saved by having a technique to determine the minimum measurements a system must accommodate. This paper specifically deals with the creation of a novel methodology for establishing mobility requirements for a new generation of space suit design concepts. Historically, the Space Shuttle and the International Space Station vehicle and space hardware design requirements documents such as the Man-Systems Integration Standards and International Space Station Flight Crew Integration Standard explicitly stated that the designers should strive to provide the maximum joint range of motion capabilities exhibited by a minimally clothed human subject. In the course of developing the Human-Systems Integration Requirements (HSIR) for the new space exploration initiative (Constellation), an effort was made to redefine the mobility requirements in the interest of safety and cost. Systems designed for manned space exploration can receive compounded gains from simplified designs that are both initially less expensive to produce and lighter, thereby, cheaper to launch.

England, Scott A.↗

NASA NTRS1991

The use of analytical models in human-computer interface design

Some of the many analytical models in human-computer interface design that are currently being developed are described. The usefulness of analytical models for human-computer interface design is evaluated. Can the use of analytical models be recommended to interface designers? The answer, based on the empirical research summarized here, is: not at this time. There are too many unanswered questions concerning the validity of models and their ability to meet the practical needs of design organizations.

Gugerty, Leo↗

NASA NTRS2003

Discrete Abstractions of Hybrid Systems: Verification of Safety and Application to User-Interface Design

Human interaction with a complex control system involves the user, the automation’s discrete mode logic, and the underlying continuous dynamics of the physical system. The user-interface of such systems always displays a reduced set of information about the entire system. Designing interfaces such that all the pertinent information is available and assuring that this information is correct is important for any user-interface, but especially so for safety-critical systems such as automotive systems and autopilots. Here we describe a methodology for the analysis of hybrid control systems that incorporate user interaction, with the goal of assuring that the information provided to the user is correct. That is, the user-interface must contain all information necessary to safely complete a desired procedure or task. We begin with a hybrid system model which incorporates discrete mode logic as well as nonlinear continuous dynamics. Using a hybrid computational tool for reachability, we find the largest region of the state-space in which we can guarantee the state of the system can always remain – this is the safe region of operation. By implementing a controller for safety which arises from this computation, we mathematically guarantee that this safe region is invariant, meaning that the system will always remain within the safe region if the determined controller is used on the boundary of the safe region. Verification within a hybrid framework allows us to account for the continuous dynamics underlying the discrete representations displayed to the user. Using the computed invariant regions as discrete states, we can abstract a discrete event system from this hybrid system with safety restrictions. This abstraction can be used to determine what information must be provided on the display. Furthermore, in cases in which an interface already exists, the abstraction provides the necessary input into existing interface verification methods. We provide two examples: a car traveling through a yellow light at an intersection and an aircraft autopilot in an automatic landing/go-around maneuver. The examples demonstrate the applicability of this methodology to hybrid systems that have operational constraints we can pose in terms of safety. This methodology differs from existing work in hybrid system verification in that we directly account for the user’s interactions with the system.

Meeko Oishi↗

NASA NTRS1993

The use of analytical models in human-computer interface design

Recently, a large number of human-computer interface (HCI) researchers have investigated building analytical models of the user, which are often implemented as computer models. These models simulate the cognitive processes and task knowledge of the user in ways that allow a researcher or designer to estimate various aspects of an interface's usability, such as when user errors are likely to occur. This information can lead to design improvements. Analytical models can supplement design guidelines by providing designers rigorous ways of analyzing the information-processing requirements of specific tasks (i.e., task analysis). These models offer the potential of improving early designs and replacing some of the early phases of usability testing, thus reducing the cost of interface design. This paper describes some of the many analytical models that are currently being developed and evaluates the usefulness of analytical models for human-computer interface design. This paper will focus on computational, analytical models, such as the GOMS model, rather than less formal, verbal models, because the more exact predictions and task descriptions of computational models may be useful to designers. The paper also discusses some of the practical requirements for using analytical models in complex design organizations such as NASA.

Gugerty, Leo↗

DOE OSTI2020

Human-System Interface Design Review Guidelines

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff reviews the human factors engineering (HFE) aspects of nuclear power plants in accordance with the Standard Review Plan (NUREG-0800, Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants: LWR Edition). The Human Factors Engineering Program Review Model (NUREG-0711, Revision 3, issued November 2012) contains detailed design review procedures. As part of the review process, the interfaces between plant personnel and the plant's systems and components are evaluated for conformance with HFE guidelines. This document, Human-System Interface Design Review Guidelines (NUREG-0700, Revision 3), provides the guidelines necessary to perform this evaluation. The review guidelines address the physical and functional characteristics of human-system interfaces (HSIs). Because these guidelines only address the HFE aspects of design and not other related considerations, such as instrumentation and control and structural design, they are referred to as HFE guidelines. In addition to the review of actual HSIs, the NRC staff can use the NUREG-0700 guidelines to evaluate a design-specific HFE guidelines document or style guide. The HFE guidelines are organized into four basic parts, which are divided into sections. Part I contains guidelines for the basic HSI elements: information displays, user-interface interaction and management, and analog displays and controls. These elements are used as building blocks to develop HSI systems to serve specific functions. Part II contains the guidelines for reviewing the following HSI systems: alarm system, safety parameter display system, group-view display system, soft control system, computer-based procedure system, automation system, and communication system. Part III provides guidelines for the review of workstations and workplaces. Part IV provides guidelines for the review of HSI support (i.e., maintainability of digital systems and degraded HSI and instrumentation and control conditions).

42 ENGINEERING↗

NASA NTRS1993

Designers' models of the human-computer interface

Understanding design models of the human-computer interface (HCI) may produce two types of benefits. First, interface development often requires input from two different types of experts: human factors specialists and software developers. Given the differences in their backgrounds and roles, human factors specialists and software developers may have different cognitive models of the HCI. Yet, they have to communicate about the interface as part of the design process. If they have different models, their interactions are likely to involve a certain amount of miscommunication. Second, the design process in general is likely to be guided by designers' cognitive models of the HCI, as well as by their knowledge of the user, tasks, and system. Designers do not start with a blank slate; rather they begin with a general model of the object they are designing. The author's approach to a design model of the HCI was to have three groups make judgments of categorical similarity about the components of an interface: human factors specialists with HCI design experience, software developers with HCI design experience, and a baseline group of computer users with no experience in HCI design. The components of the user interface included both display components such as windows, text, and graphics, and user interaction concepts, such as command language, editing, and help. The judgments of the three groups were analyzed using hierarchical cluster analysis and Pathfinder. These methods indicated, respectively, how the groups categorized the concepts, and network representations of the concepts for each group. The Pathfinder analysis provides greater information about local, pairwise relations among concepts, whereas the cluster analysis shows global, categorical relations to a greater extent.

Gillan, Douglas J.↗

DOE OSTI2023

Visual Style Elements in Human–System Interface Design for Nuclear Power Operations: Does Style Affect Performance and Preference?

As the world increasingly adopts renewable and sustainable energy systems, transitionary solutions include nuclear power, which currently provides 20% of the United States’ electricity and is the largest single source of carbon-free electricity generation. Advanced reactors are a critical component of a carbon-free mixed energy portfolio that require careful design of first-of-a-kind control rooms. The application of Human Factors Engineering (HFE) is essential for scientific and iterative testing of novel human–system interface (HSI) concepts to ensure effective, efficient, and safe plant operations. Microworlds are simulators that use simplified physics models and control systems to distill nuclear power operations into essential functions. HFE scientists used the Rancor Microworld Simulator to obtain preference and performance metrics for novel and traditional static HSI design styles. Participants comprised advanced reactor company employees and nuclear industry consultants. A mixture of quantitative and qualitative data was captured. There was a preference for the basic graphical style that included high contrast and traditional color scheme elements. No single HSI design outperformed the others, and the participants did not perform better using their preferred HSI style. We report this experiment is the first in a series of HFE testing for HSIs in advanced reactor control room development. Clear user preferences emerged for elements within static displays. The cutting-edge neumorphic style was the least preferred. Future directions include tests of dynamic displays. HFE is used in evaluating and designing HSI devices that will improve the efficiency and safety of advanced nuclear power operations.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

NASA NTRS2001

Human Centered Autonomous and Assistant Systems Testbed for Exploration Operations

The Engineering and Mission Operations Directorates at NASA Johnson Space Center are combining laboratories and expertise to establish the Human Centered Autonomous and Assistant Systems Testbed for Exploration Operations. This is a testbed for human centered design, development and evaluation of intelligent autonomous and assistant systems that will be needed for human exploration and development of space. This project will improve human-centered analysis, design and evaluation methods for developing intelligent software. This software will support human-machine cognitive and collaborative activities in future interplanetary work environments where distributed computer and human agents cooperate. We are developing and evaluating prototype intelligent systems for distributed multi-agent mixed-initiative operations. The primary target domain is control of life support systems in a planetary base. Technical approaches will be evaluated for use during extended manned tests in the target domain, the Bioregenerative Advanced Life Support Systems Test Complex (BIO-Plex). A spinoff target domain is the International Space Station (ISS) Mission Control Center (MCC). Prodl}cts of this project include human-centered intelligent software technology, innovative human interface designs, and human-centered software development processes, methods and products. The testbed uses adjustable autonomy software and life support systems simulation models from the Adjustable Autonomy Testbed, to represent operations on the remote planet. Ground operations prototypes and concepts will be evaluated in the Exploration Planning and Operations Center (ExPOC) and Jupiter Facility.

Malin, Jane T.↗

NASA NTRS2017

Digital Human Modeling

The development of models to represent human characteristics and behaviors in human factors is broad and general. The term "model" can refer to any metaphor to represent any aspect of the human; it is generally used in research to mean a mathematical tool for the simulation (often in software, which makes the simulation digital) of some aspect of human performance and for the prediction of future outcomes. This section is restricted to the application of human models in physical design, e.g., in human factors engineering. This design effort is typically human interface design, and the digital models used are anthropometric. That is, they are visual models that are the physical shape of humans and that have the capabilities and constraints of humans of a selected population. They are distinct from the avatars used in the entertainment industry (movies, video games, and the like) in precisely that regard: as models, they are created through the application of data on humans, and they are used to predict human response; body stresses workspaces. DHM enable iterative evaluation of a large number of concepts and support rapid analysis, as compared with use of physical mockups. They can be used to evaluate feasibility of escape of a suited astronaut from a damaged vehicle, before launch or after an abort (England, et al., 2012). Throughout most of human spaceflight, little attention has been paid to worksite design for ground workers. As a result of repeated damage to the Space Shuttle which adversely affected flight safety, DHM analyses of ground assembly and maintenance have been developed over the last five years for the design of new flight systems (Stambolian, 2012, Dischinger and Dunn Jackson, 2014). The intent of these analyses is to assure the design supports the work of the ground crew personnel and thereby protect the launch vehicle. They help the analyst address basic human factors engineering questions: can a worker reach the task site from the work platform provided; can she or he see the task site; can she or he control tools, which, if dropped, might damage the system? Figure 7.3.1 provides an example of such analysis for a future NASA launch vehicle. [figure 7.3.1 here] In-space systems for operation by astronauts have long been targets for DHM analysis, given the focus on mission success and concerns for astronaut safety. Figure 7.3.2 illustrates the analysis of the design to support astronaut tasks for an International Space Station glovebox. [Figure 7.3.2 here] Use by

Dischinger, H. Charles, Jr.↗

DOE OSTI2024

Human Factors Design for Particle Accelerator Control Room Interfaces

Fermilab, the birthplace of many scientific discoveries in physics and particle accelerator sciences, is in the midst of a widescale modernization effort. The Accelerator Control Operations Research Network (ACORN project’s goal is to modernize the accelerator control system by replacing end-of-life power supplies and enhance future operations of the Fermilab accelerator complex with megawatt particle beams. Within ACORN, opportunities for process improvement concerning software development, human-system interface design, and task performance are also being considered. Human factors researchers from Idaho National Laboratory in collaboration with usability experts from Fermilab, are currently investigating human-centered design improvements for the accelerator control system. For example, substantial tribal knowledge and memory recall are required to effectively operate the accelerator system. This contributes to high cognitive workload and potential burnout of accelerator operators. Developing guidance for consistent visual and functional design enables a more intuitive interaction and relieves operators of cognitive burden. Additionally, developing more intuitive and integrated interfaces can also lead to improved accelerator efficacy by empowering operators with greater understanding and control of the systems. The challenge in developing such interfaces is in designing for a wide variety of user goals, system specifications, and level of experience in users. The challenges need to be met while e also considering the maintainability of the control system. The purpose of this paper is to detail the human factors process and design within the ACORN project, describe results gathered thus far, and discuss the larger implications for this work.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗

NASA NTRS2010

The Importance of HRA in Human Space Flight: Understanding the Risks

Human performance is critical to crew safety during space missions. Humans interact with hardware and software during ground processing, normal flight, and in response to events. Human interactions with hardware and software can cause Loss of Crew and/or Vehicle (LOCV) through improper actions, or may prevent LOCV through recovery and control actions. Humans have the ability to deal with complex situations and system interactions beyond the capability of machines. Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) is a method used to qualitatively and quantitatively assess the occurrence of human failures that affect availability and reliability of complex systems. Modeling human actions with their corresponding failure probabilities in a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) provides a more complete picture of system risks and risk contributions. A high-quality HRA can provide valuable information on potential areas for improvement, including training, procedures, human interfaces design, and the need for automation. Modeling human error has always been a challenge in part because performance data is not always readily available. For spaceflight, the challenge is amplified not only because of the small number of participants and limited amount of performance data available, but also due to the lack of definition of the unique factors influencing human performance in space. These factors, called performance shaping factors in HRA terminology, are used in HRA techniques to modify basic human error probabilities in order to capture the context of an analyzed task. Many of the human error modeling techniques were developed within the context of nuclear power plants and therefore the methodologies do not address spaceflight factors such as the effects of microgravity and longer duration missions. This presentation will describe the types of human error risks which have shown up as risk drivers in the Shuttle PRA which may be applicable to commercial space flight. As with other large PRAs of complex machines, human error in the Shuttle PRA proved to be an important contributor (~12 percent) to LOCV. An existing HRA technique was adapted for use in the Shuttle PRA, but additional guidance and improvements are needed to make the HRA task in space-related PRAs easier and more accurate. Therefore, this presentation will also outline plans for expanding current HRA methodology to more explicitly cover spaceflight performance shaping factors.

Hamlin, Teri↗

NASA NTRS2001

On Abstractions and Simplifications in the Design of Human-Automation Interfaces

This report addresses the design of human-automation interaction from a formal perspective that focuses on the information content of the interface, rather than the design of the graphical user interface. It also addresses the, issue of the information provided to the user (e.g., user-manuals, training material, and all other resources). In this report, we propose a formal procedure for generating interfaces and user-manuals. The procedure is guided by two criteria: First, the interface must be correct, i.e., that with the given interface the user will be able to perform the specified tasks correctly. Second, the interface should be as succinct as possible. The report discusses the underlying concepts and the formal methods for this approach. Several examples are used to illustrate the procedure. The algorithm for constructing interfaces can be automated, and a preliminary software system for its implementation has been developed.

Heymann, Michael↗

NASA NTRS2002

On Abstractions and Simplifications in the Design of Human-Automation Interfaces

This report addresses the design of human-automation interaction from a formal perspective that focuses on the information content of the interface, rather than the design of the graphical user interface. It also addresses the issue of the information provided to the user (e.g., user-manuals, training material, and all other resources). In this report, we propose a formal procedure for generating interfaces and user-manuals. The procedure is guided by two criteria: First, the interface must be correct, that is, with the given interface the user will be able to perform the specified tasks correctly. Second, the interface should be succinct. The report discusses the underlying concepts and the formal methods for this approach. Two examples are used to illustrate the procedure. The algorithm for constructing interfaces can be automated, and a preliminary software system for its implementation has been developed.

Heymann, Michael↗

NASA NTRS2015

Human-Robot Interaction

Human-robot interaction (HRI) is a discipline investigating the factors affecting the interactions between humans and robots. It is important to evaluate how the design of interfaces affect the human's ability to perform tasks effectively and efficiently when working with a robot. By understanding the effects of interface design on human performance, workload, and situation awareness, interfaces can be developed to appropriately support the human in performing tasks with minimal errors and with appropriate interaction time and effort. Thus, the results of research on human-robot interfaces have direct implications for the design of robotic systems. For efficient and effective remote navigation of a rover, a human operator needs to be aware of the robot's environment. However, during teleoperation, operators may get information about the environment only through a robot's front-mounted camera causing a keyhole effect. The keyhole effect reduces situation awareness which may manifest in navigation issues such as higher number of collisions, missing critical aspects of the environment, or reduced speed. One way to compensate for the keyhole effect and the ambiguities operators experience when they teleoperate a robot is adding multiple cameras and including the robot chassis in the camera view. Augmented reality, such as overlays, can also enhance the way a person sees objects in the environment or in camera views by making them more visible. Scenes can be augmented with integrated telemetry, procedures, or map information. Furthermore, the addition of an exocentric (i.e., third-person) field of view from a camera placed in the robot's environment may provide operators with the additional information needed to gain spatial awareness of the robot. Two research studies investigated possible mitigation approaches to address the keyhole effect: 1) combining the inclusion of the robot chassis in the camera view with augmented reality overlays, and 2) modifying the camera frame of reference. The first study investigated the effects of inclusion and exclusion of the robot chassis along with superimposing a simple arrow overlay onto the video feed of operator task performance during teleoperation of a mobile robot in a driving task. In this study, the front half of the robot chassis was made visible through the use of three cameras, two side-facing and one forward-facing. The purpose of the second study was to compare operator performance when teleoperating a robot from an egocentric-only and combined (egocentric plus exocentric camera) view. Camera view parameters that are found to be beneficial in these laboratory experiments can be implemented on NASA rovers and tested in a real-world driving and navigation scenario on-site at the Johnson Space Center.

Sandor, Aniko↗

NASA NTRS2011

Human-Robot Interaction Directed Research Project

Human-robot interaction (HRI) is about understanding and shaping the interactions between humans and robots (Goodrich & Schultz, 2007). It is important to evaluate how the design of interfaces and command modalities affect the human s ability to perform tasks accurately, efficiently, and effectively (Crandall, Goodrich, Olsen Jr., & Nielsen, 2005) It is also critical to evaluate the effects of human-robot interfaces and command modalities on operator mental workload (Sheridan, 1992) and situation awareness (Endsley, Bolt , & Jones, 2003). By understanding the effects of interface design on human performance, workload, and situation awareness, interfaces can be developed that support the human in performing tasks with minimal errors and with appropriate interaction time and effort. Thus, the results of research on human-robot interfaces have direct implications for design. Because the factors associated with interfaces and command modalities in HRI are too numerous to address in 3 years of research, the proposed research concentrates on three manageable areas applicable to National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) robot systems. These topic areas emerged from the Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 work that included extensive literature reviews and observations of NASA systems. The three topic areas are: 1) video overlays, 2) camera views, and 3) command modalities. Each area is described in detail below, along with relevance to existing NASA human-robot systems. In addition to studies in these three topic areas, a workshop is proposed for FY12. The workshop will bring together experts in human-robot interaction and robotics to discuss the state of the practice as applicable to research in space robotics. Studies proposed in the area of video overlays consider two factors in the implementation of augmented reality (AR) for operator displays during teleoperation. The first of these factors is the type of navigational guidance provided by AR symbology. In the proposed studies, participants performance during teleoperation of a robot arm will be compared when they are provided with command-guidance symbology (that is, directing the operator what commands to make) or situation-guidance symbology (that is, providing natural cues so that the operator can infer what commands to make). The second factor for AR symbology is the effects of overlays that are either superimposed or integrated into the external view of the world. A study is proposed in which the effects of superimposed and integrated overlays on operator task performance during teleoperated driving tasks are compared

Rochlis, Jennifer↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Establishing Trust in NASA’s Artemis Program Computer-Human Interface (CHI) Implementation

The NASA Artemis program will return humans to the moon. This time, with the help of commercial and international partners, the program’s objective is a permanent moon base. The moon base infrastructure, including an orbiting moon station and moon surface assets, will be developed for astronauts to stay for the long haul to learn to live and work on another planet in preparation for an eventual Humans-to-Mars mission. As the roundtrip communication delays increase in deep space exploration, more onboard systems autonomy and functionality will be needed to maintain and control the vehicle or habitat. These mission constraints will change the current Earth-based spacecraft ground control support approach that will demand more safe, efficient, and effective Computer-Human Interface (CHI) control. For Artemis, CHI is defined as the elements that the crew interfaces with-audio, video, lighting, and crew controls. Understanding how CHI will need to evolve to support deep space missions will be critical for the Artemis program-especially crew controls which is the focus of this paper. How does NASA ensure crew controls are reliable to control complex systems and prevent a catastrophic event due to human error-especially when the astronauts could be physiologically and/or psychologically impaired? NASA’s approach to mitigating catastrophic hazards in human spaceflight system development such as crew controls is through a holistic system engineering and Human System Integration methodology that embraces NASA’s Human-Rating Requirements-ensuring human performance characteristics to control/safely recover the crew from hazardous situations within the human interface design are considered. This paper discusses, at a high level, CHI for the Artemis program. Next, a discussion of what it means to human-rate a space system crew controls and how trust in the human-computer interface begins with the NASA human rating requirements. Finally, a discussion on how systems engineering, and the human system integration process ensures that crew control implementation incorporates the NASA human-rating requirements.

Human-Rating↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Establishing Trust in NASA’s Artemis Campaign Computer-Human Interface (CHI) Implementation

The NASA Artemis program will return humans to the Moon. This time, with the help of commercial and international partners, the program's objective is a permanent moon base. The moon base infrastructure, including an orbiting moon station and moon surface assets, will be developed for astronauts to stay for the long haul to learn to live and work on another planet in preparation for an eventual Humans-to-Mars mission. As the roundtrip communication delays increase in deep space exploration, the crew will need more onboard systems autonomy and functionality to maintain and control the vehicle or habitat. These mission constraints will change the current Earth-based spacecraft to ground control support approach that will demand more safe, efficient, and effective Computer-Human Interface (CHI) control. For Artemis, CHI is defined as the elements that the crew interfaces with: audio, video, lighting, and crew controls subsystems. Understanding how CHI will need to evolve to support deep space missions will be critical for the Artemis program--especially crew controls, which is the focus of this paper. How does NASA ensure crew controls are reliable enough to control complex systems and prevent a catastrophic event due to human error--especially when the astronauts could be physiologically and/or psychologically impaired? NASA's approach to mitigating catastrophic hazards in human spaceflight system development such as crew controls, is through a holistic system engineering and Human System Integration methodology that focuses on incorporating NASA's Human-Rating Requirements-that ensures human performance characteristics to control/safely recover the crew from hazardous situations within the human interface design are considered. This paper discusses, at a high level, CHI for the Artemis program. Next, a discussion of what it means to human-rate a space system crew controls and how trust in the human-computer interface begins with the NASA human rating requirements. Finally, a discussion on how systems engineering and the human system integration process ensures that crew control implementation incorporates the NASA human-rating requirements.

artemis↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Establishing Trust in NASA’s Artemis Campaign Computer-Human Interface (CHI) Implementation

artemis↗