Advances Adva nces in Abnormal Situation Management
Andrew Ogden-Swift Honeywell Process Solutions
This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to subject matter covered. The information is provided, however, “as is” and without any warranty of any kind. Use of the information is at the user’s risk and the user is isresponsible responsible for any results obtained by using the information provided in this publication. publication. The publication is sold with the understanding understanding that the author and publisher are not engaged in rendering rendering legal, accounting or other professional services. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional person should be sought. Requests for permission to reproduce or translate this publication or requests for further information should be addressed to the ASM
Topics What is an Abnormal Situation? What is the ASM Consortium?
Overview of UI Best Practices
Evaluation of Qualitative Shapes
ASM Consortium W h a t i s an A b n o r m a l S i t u a t io n ?
• An industrial process is being disturbed and the automated control system can not cope • Consequently, the operations team must intervene to supplement the control system.
Loss of Life Personal Injury
t c a Equipment Damage p m Environmental Release I s s e Public Relation n i s Product Throughput u B
Product Quality Job satisfaction
Unexpected Events Cost 3-8% of Capacity At least >$10B annually lost in production
Equipment Factors Explained
20%
Causes of Process Upsets
40%
Source: ASM Consortium
40%
Causes of Equipment Failure
2%
Human error Equipment failure Other
Operating out of range
2%
Improper design
5% 5% 10%
Improper maintenance
Presented by N Kosaric at 2005 Defect Elimination Conference
No defect found 76%
Operating Out of Lim its Drives Equip m ent Failures - H u m a n s Op e rat e t h e P lan t !
Improper installation Improper material
Topics What is an Abnormal Situation?
What is the ASM Consortium? Overview of UI Best Practices
Evaluation of Qualitative Shapes
Abnormal Situation Management A J o i n t R es e a r c h C o n s o r t i u m
Founded in 1994 Human Centered Solutions Helping People Perform
Creating a new paradigm for the operation of complex industrial plants, with solution concepts that improve Operations’ ability to prevent and respond to abnormal situations. www.asmconsortium.org
UCLA
ASMC Focus Areas Understanding ASM • Focuses on measuring, reporting, analyzing, and communicating the causes and effects associated with abnormal situations
Organizational Aspects • Focuses on management practices that influence the organizational culture, work processes, staff roles and responsibilities, and valued behaviors as they relate to abnormal situations.
Knowledge and Skills • Focuses on development and maintenance of a competent work force through training and the creation of a continuous learning environment so that personnel can effectively respond and cope with abnormal situations.
Communications • Focuses on daily communication and situational dialog among plant personnel and explores opportunities to use information technology that improves site-wide coordination in all situations.
Procedures • Focuses on all aspects of procedure use such as accessibility, accuracy, clarity, and policy compliance so that personnel can accomplish important tasks at an industrial site, particularly start-up and shut-down.
Work Environment • Focuses on work place design factors that impact performance of personnel during abnormal situations.
Monitoring • Focuses on effective design, deployment, and maintenance of hardware and software platforms that support process monitoring, control and support for effective operations .
Topics What is an Abnormal Situation?
What is the ASM Consortium?
Overview of UI Best Practices Evaluation of Qualitative Shapes
Managing Abnormal Situations S u p e r v i s o r y C o n t r o l R e s p o n s i b i l i t i es
Process State
Operator Mental & Phys ical Activities
Orien tin g Inputs from Process (sensors, analyzers, radios, video, instructions, sounds & smells)
(1) Sensing, Perception, and/or Discrimination
Evaluating (2) Analysis, Interpretation, and/or (3) Projection
A c tin g
Physical and/or Verbal Response
Outputs to Process (SP, OP%, Manual adjustments)
Situation S i tu a t io n A Aw wa areness r en e s s (1 -3) - 3) Internal Feedback
Assessing External Feedback
• This model operationalizes the activity types in the operator’s supervisory control responsibilities for managing abnormal situations Adaptation of Supervisory Control Activity models of Jens Rasmussen and David Woods - CMA.
Display Hierarchy and ASM H o w t h e HM I S u p p o r t s A S M
• Effective supervisory control involves processing information at multiple levels of detail “Big Picture”
Process Overview Status Display Changes
LEVEL 1
– From the “big picture” (Orient or Assess) to the “details” (Evaluate, Act or Assess) and back and forth
LEVEL 2
Conversion Display
Blending Display
Investigating and Troubleshooting LEVEL 3
– The display hierarchy allows an operator to move between the “big picture” to the “details” as the task or situation requires
Extraction Display
Furnaces
Coker
Fractionator
LEVEL 4 Furnace Display Environmental Adjustments of Individual Exhaust Results Burners and Control Moves
“Details”
The Disp lay Hierarch y is a Critical Solution for ASM
Overview Displays Design Rationale
•
Old pneumatic boards supported at a glance awareness: – Hearing a gauge moving – Pulling out a component to remind you it was in manual – Having trend information from strip charts – Seeing alarm status on a fixed alarm panel
•
Modern DCS show process values across several screens and many hidden displays – Difficult to know where the process has gone, how it got there, or what should be done to recover – Effective arrangement and visualization of process values is required – Operators must actively navigate to find critical information
• Incident investigations often identify a root cause that operators lost track of the “big picture” of plant status
T h e D CS M u s t In c l u d e a Me c h an i s m t o S u p p o r t A w a re n es s
Overview Displays C o m m o n F ai l u r e Mo d e s
• There may be numerous reasons why ju s t h av in g an overview display is not effective: – Incorrect information displayed – Poorly displaying the correct information – Inadequate navigation hierarchy – Operations has the choice to display the overview or not
• Important to use a formal design approach to design displays
Effective Overview Displays U s e r C en t e r e d D e s i g n L i f e c y c l e
How to determine information to show?
What operators need to share
What operators need to know
Information requirements
Collaboration requirements
Action requirements
What operators need to do
Qualitative Display Shapes Design Motivation
• Previous ASM attempts to visualize process information
•
Labor intensive
•
Not reusable, repeatable
•
Complex, highly custom
•
Unit-specific
Qualitative Display Shapes Shape Desig n
• Strategy: Identify process functions for equipment types and the critical variables for those process functions – Determine the interaction requirements required – Create qualitative display shapes that can be reused
• Eight qualitative display shapes have been developed to support operator monitoring of overview displays
Topics What is an Abnormal Situation?
What is the ASM Consortium?
Overview of UI Best Practices
Evaluation of Qualitative Shapes
Shape Evaluation Study In t r o d u c t i o n a n d P u r p o s e
• An evaluation study was completed to assess the benefits of using the new qualitative shapes – Purpose: Evaluate the effectiveness of an overview display designed using qualitative shapes that support operator situation awareness during process monitoring activities
Shape Evaluation Study D e t ec t i n g P r o c e s s D e v i a t io n s
• Detecting deviations to variables can be supported in different ways in the Level 1 overview displays: Schematic/Numeric Overview Display Operators must assess process variation relative to their memory of operating ranges and alarm limits
Operators must judge whether an abnormal condition is occurring (cognitively demanding, error prone)
45.01 43.34 45.80 48.75 46.99 45.98 47.12 44.44 42.76 45.32
Normal variation
Functional/Qualitative Overview Display
50 40
55.05 52.31 50.01 48.75 46.99 45.98 47.12 44.44 42.76 45.32
Abnormal process deviation
50 40
Operators can perceive normal and abnormal variation relative to visual elements (operating range and/or alarm limits) in the shape
Operator attention is drawn to abnormal process deviations and alarms using visual cues
Shape Evaluation Study D u a l Ta s k E v a l u a t io n A p p r o a c h
• Dual-Task Evaluation Approach – Rationale: Operators rarely monitor without simultaneously doing other critical tasks (e.g., completing standard operating procedures, managing field activity, etc.) Schematic/Numeric OR Functional/Qualitative Overview Displays (Repeated Measure) 2nd Task: Monitor Level 1 Overview
Primary Task: Matching Task
Shape Evaluation Study Conclusions
• Using the Functional/Qualitative Overview Display improved operator situation awareness
Situation Awareness Performance Difference (%) Percentage of changes detected (Level 1 SA)
+16.9%
Percentage Accuracy to Probes (Level 2 SA)
+6.4%
• Choice of Functional versus Schematic display layout driven by amount of data needed to support interaction requirements relative to display space available – Results of this study suggest that schematic information (vessels, flow lines) may not be value added in a Level 1 Overview display for supporting operator situation awareness
Conclusion • Abnormal Situations remain a significant cost to process industries • ASM Consortium has contributed to significant understanding and technical solutions • Significant research continues in diverse areas including operator competence, user interface, alarms, procedures, risk management
Loss of Life Personal Injury
t c a Equipment Damage p m Environmental Release I s s e Public Relation n i s Product Throughput u B
Product Quality Job satisfaction
