MAP-01-011 HFI Technical Guide - Human Factors Integration ...

THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF HER BRITANNIC MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENTMARITIME ACQUISITION PUBLICATION No 01-010MAP-01-011HFI Technical Guide(formerly STGP 11)ISSUE: 4November 2006Copyright: This work is Crown copyright and the intellectual property rights of this publicationbelong exclusively to the Ministry of Defence. However, material or information contained in thispublication can be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form provided itis used in for the purposes of furthering Human Factors Integration.© Crown Copyright 2006Sponsored by: Sea Systems GroupTES-SSG-ShipDesDefence Procurement Agency,Mod Abbey Wood, Bristol, BS34 8JHtes-ssg-cshf@dpa.mod.ukTelephone 0117 913 5066Nov 2006 Page i Issue 4

MARITIME ACQUISITION PUBLICATION NO 01-011HUMAN FACTORS INTEGRATION (HFI) TECHNICAL GUIDE(STGP 11)CONTENTS1 The HFI Technical Guide .............................................................................................1-12 Introduction to HFI Technical Areas.............................................................................2-13 HFI Design Process .....................................................................................................3-14 Manpower, Complementing and Accommodation .......................................................4-15 Team Organisation ......................................................................................................5-16 Crew Characteristics....................................................................................................6-17 Training ........................................................................................................................7-18 General Arrangement ..................................................................................................8-19 Operational Spaces .....................................................................................................9-110 Accommodation Spaces ............................................................................................10-111 Miscellaneous Spaces ...............................................................................................11-112 Personnel Movement and Material Handling .............................................................12-113 Habitability and Internal Environment ........................................................................13-114 Equipment Layout ......................................................................................................14-115 Operability and User-Equipment Interaction ..............................................................15-116 Maintenance and Support..........................................................................................16-117 Safety.........................................................................................................................17-1AnnexA1 References...........................................................................................................Annex 1A2 Standards and Guidelines....................................................................................Annex 2A3 HF Techniques, Methods and Tools ....................................................................Annex 3Nov 2006 Page i Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)Human Factors Integration (HFI) has been shown to be a key factor in thecontinued drive to improve military capability, overall cost effectiveness andsafety. The guidance contained in the HFI Management Guide (MAP 01-010)and the HFI Technical Guide (MAP 01-011) has been distilled from theexperience gained over at least a decade of ship and equipment developmentand construction. Consequently they represent the best currently availablepractice in HFI. IPTs and supporting contractors will find these publications ofconsiderable value in ensuring the appropriate application of HFI to their Projectand in providing the necessary assurance that their efforts are being effectivelyapplied. With allowance for variations in terminology and applicability and theoverall policy lead given by the TES Human Factors Group, these guides havealso been found useful in the Land and Air domains.Any enquiries regarding this publication in relation to an invitation to tender or acontract in which it is incorporated are to be addressed to the responsibletechnical or supervising authority named in the invitation to tender or contract. Inother cases, the publication sponsor is to be contacted where there are concernsregarding the application of this publication, particularly issues associated withspecific ship types.Compliance with this Maritime Acquisition Publication shall not in itself relieve anyperson from any legal obligations imposed upon them.This publication has been devised solely for the use of the Ministry of Defence(MOD) and its contractors in the execution of contracts for the MOD. To theextent permitted by law, the MOD hereby excludes all liability whatsoever andhowsoever arising (including, but without limitation, liability resulting fromnegligence) for any loss or damage however caused when the standard is usedfor any other purpose.Comments on the content and scope are to be forwarded to the sponsor.Nov 2006 Page ii Issue 4

Abbreviations2SL 2nd Sea LordAAW Anti-Air WarfareACTA Applied Cognitive Task AnalysisADQUAL Additional Qualification [training]ALARP As Low As is Reasonably PracticableAMS Acquisition Management SystemAoF Allocation of FunctionsARM Availability, Reliability & MaintainabilityASEG Acquisition Safety & Environment GroupASEMS Acquisition Safety and Environmental Management SystemASG Air Systems GroupASW Anti-Submarine WarfareATC Air Traffic ControlBITE Built-in Test EquipmentBMR Basic Manning RequirementBOI Balance of InvestmentBOS Behavioural Observation ScalesBRBook of ReferenceBSI British Standards InstituteC4ICommand, Control, Communications, Computers and IntelligenceCAD Computer Aided DesignCADMID Concept, Assessment, Demonstration, Manufacture, In-Service,DisposalCap CapabilityCARS Crew Awareness Rating ScaleCBRNDC Chemical Biological Radiation and Nuclear Damage ControlCBS Chemical Biological SciencesCCTV Closed Circuit TelevisionCDA Co-ordination Demands AnalysisCDM Critical Decision MethodCEChief ExecutiveCFCompetence FrameworkCIT Critical Incident TechniqueCMS Combat Management SystemCNNTSP Chairman Naval Nuclear Technical Safety PanelCOCOM Contextual Control ModelCOEIA Combined Operational Effectiveness and Investment AnalysisCOMAH Control of Major Accident HazardsCONOPS Concept of OperationsCOSHH Control of Substances Hazardous to HealthCOTS Commercial Off-the-ShelfCPA Critical Path AnalysisCREAM Cognitive Reliability Analysis ModelCREW II Complementing Regimes Evaluated for Warships, Version 2C-SAS Cranfield Situation Awareness ScaleCSHF Combat Systems Human FactorsCTA Cognitive Task AnalysisCTLA Cognitive Task Load AnalysisNov 2006 Page iii Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)CUD Comms Usage DiagramsDEC Directorate of Equipment CapabilityDERA Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (not extant)DGNTE Director General Naval Training and EducationDLO Defence Logistics OrganisationDLOD Defence Lines of DevelopmentDME Director Marine EngineeringDNM Directorate of Naval Manning (No longer extant)DNO Directorate of Naval OperationsDNP Director Nuclear PropulsionDNSC Directorate of Naval Service Conditions (No longer extant)DPA Defence Procurement AgencyDRAWS Defence Research Agency Workload ScalesDRX Decision Requirements ExerciseDSAT Defence Systems Approach to TrainingDstl Defence Sciences and Technology LaboratoryDTC Defence Technology CentreEEM External Error ModeEENA Escape and Evacuation Naval AuthorityEER Escape, Evacuation and RecoveryEHFA Early Human Factors AnalysisEMCON Emission ControlEPC Error Producing ConditionEPSS Electronic Performance Support SystemsEUEuropean UnionFCR Fire Control Radar displayFLEET-NPS Commander In Chief Fleet, Naval Personnel Strategy DivisionFLEET-NLM Commander In Chief Fleet, Naval Life Management DivisionFMECA Failure Modes and Effects and Criticality AnalysisFNOC Future Navy Operational ConceptFOSF Flag Officer Surface Flotilla (not extant)FOSM Flag Officer Submarines (not extant)FOTR Flag Officer Training & RecruitmentFTA Fault Tree AnalysisGOMS Goals, Operators, Methods and Selection RulesGTA Groupware Task AnalysisGTAD Generic Target Audience DescriptionHASAW Health and Safety at Work ActHAZAN Hazard AnalysisHAZOP Hazards and Operability (Analysis)HCI Human-Computer Interface (also Human-Computer Interaction)HEART Human Error Assessment and Reduction TechniqueHEI Human Error IdentificationHEIST Human Error Identification in Systems ToolHERA Human Error in ATCHERA Human Error Recovery Assessment frameworkHET Human Error TemplateHFHuman FactorsHFE Human Factors EngineeringHFG Human Factors GroupHFI Human Factors IntegrationNov 2006 Page iv Issue 4

HFSGHFWGHMIHMNIIHQHRAHSEHSFHTAHTA-THVACIABIECIEMIETPILSILSMILSMCILSPIMOINMIPTISAISDISOITJSPKLMLEDLODLSALSARMAPMARPOLMARSMCHMESHMHSAWMIIMLS CGMLSMMIMODMotMOTSMOUTMWLN/ANATONBCHuman Factors Steering GroupHuman Factors Working GroupHuman-Machine Interface (also Human-Machine Interaction)HM Nuclear Installations InspectorateHeadquartersHuman Reliability AnalysisHealth & Safety ExecutiveHorizontal Situation Format displayHierarchical Task AnalysisHTA TeamHeating, Ventilation and Air-ConditioningInvestment Appraisal BoardInternational Electrotechnical CommissionInternal Error ModesInteractive Electronic Technical PublicationIntegrated Logistics SupportIntegrated Logistics Support ManagerILS Management CommitteeIntegrated Logistics Support PlanInternational Maritime OrganisationInstitute of Naval MedicineIntegrated Project TeamIndividual Self-AssessmentIn Service DateInternational Standards OrganisationInformation TechnologyJoint Service PublicationKeystroke Level ModelLight-Emitting DiodeLine of Development (see DLOD)Logistic Support AnalysisLogistics Support Analysis RecordMaritime Acquisition PublicationInternational Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollutionfrom ShipsMission Awareness Rating ScaleModified Cooper HarperMarine Environment Survivability and Habitability IPTManagement of Health and Safety at WorkMotion-Induced InterruptionMarine Electrical Systems Controls Group (was WSA-MLS5)Marine Electrical SystemsMan-Machine InterfaceMinistry of DefenceMotivatedMilitary Off-the-ShelfMilitary Operations in Urbanised TerrainMental WorkloadNot ApplicableNorth Atlantic Treaty OrganisationNuclear Biological and Chemical (no longer extant)Nov 2006 Page v Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)NBCD Nuclear Biological and Chemical Defence (no longer extant)NMMIS Naval Manpower Management Information SystemNRTA Naval Recruiting and Training AgencyNSRP Nuclear Steam Raising PlantOCOperational CapabilityOJT On the Job TrainingOPS Operational Performance StatementOTA Operational (/ Business) Task AnalysisP&ID Process and Instrumentation DiagramPEM Psychological Error MechanismPFG Pricing Forecasting GroupPFIPrivate Finance InitiativePIAR Personnel, Influences, Assumptions and RequirementsPIAR-IMT PIAR Information Management ToolPMS Platform Management SystemsPOSMS Project Orientated Safety Management System (part of ASEMS)PPO Principal Personnel OfficerPSA Probabilistic Safety AssessmentPSF Performance Shaping FactorPSTAD Project Specific Target Audience DescriptionPULHHEEMS Physique, Upper limbs, Lower limbs (or 'Locomotion'), Hearing(left), Hearing (right), Eyesight (left), Eyesight (right), Mentalfunction, Stability (emotional)PUWER Provision and Use of Work Equipment RegulationsQBQuarter BillQUIS Questionnaire for User Interface SatisfactionRADHAZ Radiation Hazard (Electromagnetic)RAF Royal Air ForceRAS (L) RAS LiquidsRAS (S) RAS SolidsRAS Replenishment at SeaRBB Research Building BlockRFA Royal Fleet AuxiliaryRIDDOR Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous OccurrencesRegulationsRN ICG RN Intelligent Customer Group (was RNSETT)RNRoyal NavyRNGTAD Royal Navy Generic Target Audience DescriptionRNSETT RN School of Education & Training Technology (not extant nowRN ICG)RqM Requirements ManagerSASituation AwarenessSABARS Situation Awareness Behavioural Rating ScaleSAG Supportability Assurance Group (within TLPM)SAGAT Situation Awareness Global Assessment TechniqueSA-MA Supportability Assurance Group – Maritime Assurance (was WLS)SAPS Situation Awareness ProbesSARS Situation Awareness Rating ScalesSART Situation Awareness Rating TechniqueSA-SWORD Situation Awareness Subjective Workload DominanceSCC Ship Control CentreNov 2006 Page vi Issue 4

SGSteering GroupSHERPA Systematic Human Error Reduction and Prediction ApproachSIStatutory InstrumentSME Subject Matter ExpertSMP Safety Management ProcedureSMS Safety Management SystemSNA Social Network AnalysisSoC Scheme of ComplementSOP Standard Operating ProcedureSPAM Situation-Present Assessment MethodSPEAR System for Predictive Error Analysis and ReductionSR(S) Staff Requirement for Sea Systems (replaced by SRD & URD)SRD System Requirement DocumentSRK Skill, Rule and KnowledgeSSA Ship Support Agency (subsumed into DLO)SSD State Space DiagramSSG Sea Systems Group (was STG)SSG-CSHF Sea Systems Group - Combat Systems Human Factors (wasSTGCSHF)SSG-CSNav Sea Systems Group - Navigation (was STGNAV)SSG-Ship Sea Systems Group - Surface Ship Division (was STGSS)SSG-ShipDes Sea Systems Group - Surface Ship Division - Ship Design (wasSTGSS3)SSG-ShipSea Sea Systems Group - Surface Ship Division - Seamanship Desk(was STGSEA)SSG-SM Sea Systems Group - Submarine Technology (was STGSM)SSMO Ship Safety Management Office (now TES-SSG-SSMO)SSMS Ship Safety Management SystemST(S) Staff Target for Sea Systems (replaced by URD & SRD)STG Sea Technology Group (now SSG)STGCSHF Sea Technology Group Combat Systems Human Factors (nowTES-SSG-CSHF)STGNAV Sea Technology Group Navigation (now TES-SSG-CSNav)STGP 10 Sea Technology Group Publication 10 (now MAP-01-010)STGP 11 Sea Technology Group Publication 11 (now MAP-01-011)STGSEA Sea Technology Group Seamanship (now TES-SSG-ShipSea)STGSM Sea Technology Group Submarines (now TES-SSG-SM)STGSS Sea Technology Group Surface Ships (now TES-SSG-Ship)STGSS3 Sea Technology Group Surface Ships 3 (now TES-SSG-ShipDes)Suff SufficientSUMI Software Usability Measurement InventorySUS System Usability ScaleSWAT Subjective Workload Assessment TechniqueSWL Safe Working LoadSWORD Subjective Workload DominanceT45 Type 45 Anti Air-Warfare DestroyerTATask AnalysisTAD Target Audience DescriptionTAFEI Task Analysis for Error IdentificationTCCA Team Communication and Co-Ordination AnalysisTCSD Task-Centred System DesignNov 2006 Page vii Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)TCTATEMTESTGATHEATHERPTLCTLMTLMTLMPTLPMTLXTNA SGTNATOTOATPSTRACErTTATTRAMTWGUKUPCURDVDUVMFVPAWLCWLSWSAWTTWW2Team Cognitive Task AnalysisTargeted Equipment Module [training]Technical Enabling Services (see individual Support Groups, egASEG, HFG, ASG, SSG)Training Gap AnalysisTechnique for Human Error AssessmentTechnique For Human Error Rate PredictionThrough Life CostsThree-Level ModelThrough Life ManagementThrough Life Management PlanThrough Life Project Management (part of TES)Task Load IndexTNA Steering GroupTraining Needs AnalysisTraining ObjectiveTraining Options AnalysisTraining Performance StatementTechnique for Retrospective and Predictive Analysis of CognitiveErrorTabular Task AnalysisTask and Training Requirements MethodologyTraining Working GroupUnited KingdomUnit Production CostUser Requirement DocumentVisual Display UnitVersatile Maritime ForceVerbal Protocol AnalysisWhole-Life CostWarship Logistic Support (now TES-SA-MA)Warship Support Agency (subsumed into DLO)Warfare Team TrainingWorld War TwoNov 2006 Page viii Issue 4MAP-01-011 TOC_35.doc

CHAPTER 1 – THE HFI TECHNICAL GUIDECONTENTS1.1 Objectives of the HFI Technical Guide.........................................................................1-31.2 HFI Technical Areas for Naval Platforms and Equipment...................................1-41.3 Structure and Use of the HFI Technical Guide ...................................................1-71.3.1 Document Structure..............................................................................1-71.3.2 HFI Technical Area Navigational Guidance (Chapter 2).......................1-81.3.3 Introduction to HFI Technical Areas......................................................1-81.3.3.1 HFI Technical Issues..........................................................1-81.3.3.2 HFI Processes....................................................................1-91.3.3.3 HFI Activities ......................................................................1-9Nov 2006 Page 1-1 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)Nov 2006 Page 1-2 Issue 4

Chapter 1 – The HFI Technical Guide1.1 Objectives of the HFI Technical GuideThis document has the following objectives:• To describe the Human Factors Integration (HFI) design process as part ofthe systems engineering approach for naval equipment procurement.• To identify HFI technical issues for platforms, Combat Systems and marineengineering equipment.• To provide supporting information about the HFI process, activities,outputs, standards and stakeholders of relevance to platforms andequipment.• To describe the HFI activities that are typically conducted at each Phase ofprocurement.The guidance contained in MAP-01-010 ‘HFI Management Guide (STGP 10)’[Ref 1] and MAP-01-011 ‘HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)’ (ie this document) hasbeen derived from project experience using an approach in which a MoDIntegrated Project Team (IPT) places contracts with a Prime Contractor and thenacts as the focus of Customer activities. Developments in MoD contract strategynow means that the classic IPT may in some cases be replaced by an 'Alliance'formed from MoD and Prime Contractor staff, both working under a commonmanagement structure. Future developments in contracting may see militarycapability increasingly provided under Private Finance Initiative (PFI)arrangements. The specific guidance on HFI responsibilities and activitiescontained within MAP-01-010 and MAP-01-011 may need to be modified to suitthese novel contractual arrangements and the altered context of its application.The guidance in MAP-01-010 and MAP-01-011 is directed primarily at the HFIManager and HFI Focus within an IPT. Project experience gained over severalyears of application of the guides shows that the documents are also used byPrime Contractor staff and in some cases, sub-contractor staff.MAP-01-010 and MAP-01-011 described HFI processes that are principallydirected at the acquisition of new capabilities using bespoke solutions.Increasingly, commercial and technical trends mean that UK Defence Capabilityutilises a higher proportion of Military Off-the-Shelf (MOTS) and Commercial Offthe-Shelf(COTS) solutions. In other cases, new capability may be achievedthrough an upgrade of a legacy system. The overall HFI process described canbe readily adapted to these acquisition situations. In such cases, increasedemphasis on identifying system and equipment constraints may be required.Also, the process of HFI trade-offs may need to respect the commercial benefitsof MOTS and COTS equipment solutions.In order to provide flexibility of approach for IPTs, there is no, single, mandatoryHFI process specified within Defence Procurement Agency (DPA) AcquisitionManagement System (AMS) guidance [Ref 2]. However, formal Human Factors(HF) input may be required for mandatory MoD processes, such as Safety Casedevelopment. The HFI guidance promulgated within MAP-01-010 and MAP-01-011 should be regarded as model processes and activities, representing currentbest practice. The need to undertake specific HFI activities (e.g. task analysis)and the extent to which such activities are required, should be decided on aproject-by-project basis, with appropriate input from HFI specialists andNov 2006 Page 1-3 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)stakeholders. There is no suggestion that all the activities detailed within theGuides are necessary or justified. However, in order to provide accountability,the model process identified in the Guides should be used as a reference norm,with any departures from that norm being documented and justified in appropriateproject documentation. The HFI Focus should therefore use the model processas a checklist, and fully justify any project-specific 'opt-outs'.Experience from a range of MoD acquisition projects, and also from many otherlarge-scale industrial procurement programmes, shows very clearly that thetiming of HFI activities and resulting outputs is a critical factor in successfulHuman Factors Integration. A classic problem is the HFI input is "Too Little, TooLate". The active involvement of HFI staff (HFI Focus and HFI professionals) inthe early Phases of a project is an essential requirement whilst key projectdecisions are being made. If Human Factors input is delayed until the latterPhases of equipment design and selection, there may be relatively little value tobe added. The Early Human Factors Analysis (EHFA) technique addresses thisissue in part.Similarly, it is often thought by non-HF specialists that HFI activities are nevercomplete. Whilst some HF activities are relatively self-contained and producediscrete outputs at defined Phases in a project, it must be emphasised that manyHFI activities require an iterative approach, in which system and equipmentproposals, designs and their realisations are systematically and repeatedlyexamined to assess their effects on the human component of the system. Theneed for HFI continues on beyond the hand-over of capability to the user, in thatthere is justification for HF involvement in the analysis of in-service data and userfeedback on the adequacy of the delivered solutions.It is not only important to decide upon an appropriate set of HFI activities for aparticular project situation, it is essential that these are satisfactorilycommunicated to all relevant parties.HFI activates will not happen as a matter of course. The various organisationsinvolved in a typical capability acquisition chain may or may not have in-houseHFI capability, HFI processes or adopt HFI practices. Where MoD requires acontractor to undertake particular HFI activities, apply particular HFI processes orproduce particular HFI outputs, this must be clearly stated in contractdocumentation and appropriate resources allowed for their procurement andassociated management.To avoid nugatory effort and expenditure, appropriate efforts should be made toidentify, take into account and possibly re-use HF deliverables that have beenproduced for MoD under other contracts.Generally, in specifying HF requirements in contracts, emphasis should beplaced on the form of deliverable required, rather than on how the deliverableshould be achieved. A possible exception to this is where consistency ofapproach across a number of supply contracts is required.1.2 HFI Technical Areas for Naval Platforms and EquipmentThe procurement of Sea Systems ranges from the acquisition of new platformsand/or equipments to the provision of specific items of equipment for existingvessels. The procurement process itself may occur over a number of stages andNov 2006 Page 1-4 Issue 4

Chapter 1 – The HFI Technical Guideinvolves requirements specification, design assessment, acceptance into servicecontinuing in-service support and disposal of the system at the end of its lifecycle. It is important that HFI technical issues are addressed in an appropriatemanner at each Phase of procurement for each type of platform or equipment. Inorder to identify both the design priorities, and the organisations that should beinvolved in the process, HFI Technical Areas have been developed. Table 1-1summarises the HFI Technical Areas, and shows the HFI Domains from whichthey stem.The HFI Domains are used MoD-wide to structure HFI work and have beendescribed in MAP-01-010 [Ref 1]. The HFI Technical Areas are a suggestedstructure to cover both Platform and related Equipment projects. Definitions forthe HFI Technical Areas are given in Chapter 2 of this document.In previous issues of this Guide, HFI technical issues were embedded withinchapters dedicated either to the platform or to the equipment. Whilst this mayreflect the traditional approach to the procurement of Sea Systems, the potentialexisted for duplication of information, particularly where there was no realdifference between the technical issues for either platform or equipment. Thecurrent issue of this Guide takes this overlap into account by combining platformand equipment information where it is sensible to do so. Each chapter discussesa HFI Technical Area with respect to both platform and equipments, combininginformation where it has generic application and making the distinction betweenplatform and equipment where there are differences.When there are differences between HFI Technical Areas for platform orequipment, the following differentiation applies:• Platform HFI Technical Areas address issues affecting the crew includingcomplementing, training, deck and compartment layout, vesselmaintenance and ship husbandry, overall environment and habitability,traffic flow and material handling and crew health and safety.• Equipment HFI Technical Areas deal with issues arising for CombatSystem and marine engineering equipment. Equipment areas focus onteam organisation, personnel skill and physical capabilities and limitations,training, operability and man-machine interface/human-computer interfacedesign, workstation design and workspace layout, the local environmentand health and safety aspects for the specific equipment.In addition, Chapter 2 includes Navigation Checklists for HFI Activities andOutputs, which provide cross-references to aid navigation between MAP-01-010and MAP-01-011.Nov 2006 Page 1-5 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI DomainsManpowerHFI Technical AreasManpower, Complementing &AccommodationChapter 4Team OrganisationChapter 5PersonnelCrew CharacteristicsChapter 6TrainingTrainingChapter 7Human FactorsEngineeringGeneral ArrangementChapter 8Operational SpacesChapter 9Accommodation SpacesChapter 10Miscellaneous SpacesChapter 11Personnel Movement & Material HandlingChapter 12Habitability and Internal EnvironmentChapter 13Equipment LayoutChapter 14Operability & User-Equipment InteractionChapter 15Maintenance and SupportChapter 16System SafetyHealth HazardAssessmentSafetyChapter 17SafetyChapter 17Table 1-1: HFI Domains and Naval HFI Technical AreasNov 2006 Page 1-6 Issue 4

Chapter 1 – The HFI Technical Guide1.3 Structure and Use of the HFI Technical Guide1.3.1 Document StructureThis HFI Technical Guide (ie this Guide - MAP-01-011) is intended for use ateach Phase of procurement. Table 1-2 summarises the main content of thisGuide and its use by the IPT Leader and the HFI Focus. The table gives anoverview of the content of this Guide. Chapter 2 introduces the HFI TechnicalAreas and includes Navigational Guidance that locates the HFI Technical Area ofinterest. Chapter 3 gives an overview of the HFI Design Process, which can beused to guide the application of methods and tools. The individual HFI TechnicalAreas are then described, in detail, in Chapters 4 through 17.Chapter 1Chapter 2Chapter 3Chapters4 through17Annex 1Annex 2ContentIntroduction to the HFITechnical GuideIntroduction to the HFITechnical Areas (includingNavigational Guidance)Overview of the HFI DesignProcessHFI Technical Areas (Platformand Equipment)ReferencesHFI Standards and GuidelinesPurposeTo introduce the use of MAP-01-011.To provide a means ofidentifying relevant sectionswithin MAP-01-011 for aspecific HFI Technical Areawithin a particular procurementPhase.To understand how HFI formspart of the systems engineeringof naval platforms andequipment.To identify platform andequipment HFI technical issuesand appropriate activities,outputs, standards andstakeholders in eachprocurement Phase.To obtain a full listing of HFIand related standards andguidelines for naval equipmentprocurement.Annex 3 HF Methods and Tools To obtain a description of eachof the HF methods referred to inthe Guide.Table 1-2: Chapter ContentsNov 2006 Page 1-7 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)1.3.2 HFI Technical Area Navigational Guidance (Chapter 2)Chapter 2 contains navigational guidance to identify the relevant HFI TechnicalArea within MAP-01-011. The location of the area of interest is identified bymeans of procurement Phase and chapter number (see Figure 1-1 below).1Locate relevantsection for CADMIDCycleProcurementPhaseHFI TechnicalAreaHFI ActivityHFI OutputMAP-01-011Ref2Locate HFI area ofinterest3Look up number ofrelevant section inMAP-01-011Figure 1-1: Technical Area Navigation Guidance TableChapter 2 also provides an overview of the HFI Technical Areas and summarisesthe HFI issues addressed in later chapters.1.3.3 Introduction to HFI Technical AreasEach HFI Technical Area chapter is split into three sections. The first sectionprovides information about HFI technical issues. The second sectionsummarises the overall process for managing HFI aspects in that technical area,identifies the HFI standards that apply and lists the stakeholders involved. Thefinal section of each chapter describes the HFI activities, methods, stakeholdersand outputs in the process.1.3.3.1 HFI Technical IssuesThe guidance that is provided on HFI technical issues is designed to raiseawareness about the effect of procurement decisions on the human componentof Sea Systems. This guidance is drawn from experience in previousprocurements and includes design issues raised by users of current operationalsystems. The impact of future manning policy and technology is also discussed.This information should be used to help decide the major issues, risks,constraints and trade-offs affecting the HFI strategy for the procurement.Nov 2006 Page 1-8 Issue 4

Chapter 1 – The HFI Technical Guide1.3.3.2 HFI ProcessesThe content of each of the HFI Technical Areas in this Guide is organised arounda process. Each process describes how the HFI technical issues for an importantfacet of a platform, combat system or marine engineering equipment areidentified, turned into requirements, specified as part of the design, subjected todemonstrations and assessments during product development and used to formthe basis of acceptance tests.The HFI process described in each HFI Technical Area should be used to identifythe following:1.3.3.3 HFI Activities• The HFI activities that are typically performed at each procurement Phase.• The sequence of HFI activities performed to identify requirements, developthe procurement specification, design the product and conductassessments.• The stakeholders that are involved in each activity at each procurementPhase.• The standards that can be applied (see Annex 2).• The management responsibilities of the HFI Focus in the IPT.The section on HFI activities provides further detail about the application of HFIduring procurement. Each activity is allocated to the procurement Phase when itis typically performed (this may be modified in accordance with the procurementstrategy). Each activity is further categorised as to its main use as follows:• Establishing needs;• Generating requirements;• Product development; or for• Assessment.The following information is provided for each HFI activity:1. Purpose – An overview of why the activity is required and its value inprocurement.2. Inputs – The information that is needed in order to perform the activity.3. HF Methods – The methods that are used to perform the activity(see Annex 3).4. Steps – The procedure followed when conducting the activity.5. Output – A description of what is produced by the activity.Nov 2006 Page 1-9 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)The guidance provided about HFI activities can be used for the following:• Initial planning of the work programme.• Development of Agreed Characteristics.• Generation of the statement of work and standards sections of theInvitation to Tender (ITT).• Evaluation of the Suppliers’ HFI Plans during tender assessment.• Monitoring the conduct of work by the Supplier.• Quality assessment of HFI work products and deliverables.• Product assessment.• Acceptance methodology and criteria.Nov 2006 Page 1-10 Issue 4MAP-01-011 CH 01_09.doc

CHAPTER 2 – INTRODUCTION TO HFI TECHNICAL AREASCONTENTS2.1 Use of HFI Technical Areas .........................................................................................2-32.2 Definition of HFI Technical Areas .......................................................................2-52.2.1 Manpower, Complementing and Accommodation (Chapter 4) .............2-52.2.2 Team Organisation (Chapter 5) ............................................................2-62.2.3 Crew Characteristics (Chapter 6)..........................................................2-62.2.4 Training (Chapter 7)..............................................................................2-72.2.5 General Arrangement (Chapter 8) ........................................................2-72.2.6 Operational Spaces (Chapter 9) ...........................................................2-82.2.7 Accommodation Spaces (Chapter 10) ..................................................2-82.2.8 Miscellaneous Spaces (Chapter 11) .....................................................2-82.2.9 Personnel Movement and Material Handling (Chapter 12)...................2-82.2.10 Habitability and Internal Environment (Chapter 13) ..............................2-82.2.11 Equipment Layout (Chapter 14)............................................................2-92.2.12 Operability and User-Equipment Interaction (Chapter 15)....................2-92.2.13 Maintenance and Support (Chapter 16)..............................................2-102.2.14 Safety (Chapter 17).............................................................................2-112.3 HFI Technical Area - Navigation Guidance Tables...........................................2-122.3.1 Concept - Navigation Guidance Table ................................................2-122.3.2 Assessment - Navigation Guidance Table..........................................2-182.3.3 Demonstration - Navigation Guidance Table ......................................2-312.3.4 Manufacture - Navigation Guidance Table .........................................2-392.3.5 In-Service - Navigation Guidance Table .............................................2-412.3.6 Disposal - Navigation Guidance Table................................................2-43Nov 2006 Page 2-1 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)Nov 2006 Page 2-2 Issue 4

Chapter 2 – Introduction To HFI Technical Areas2.1 Use of HFI Technical AreasThe Human Factors Integration (HFI) Technical Areas are for use by anyIntegrated Project Team (IPT) that is concerned with the development ormodification of platforms or combat and marine engineering equipment. The HFIFocus is provided with guidance about HFI activities, outputs, standards andmethods for use when establishing requirements, evaluating Suppliers’proposals, monitoring HFI work programmes and assessing HFI aspects ofsystems. The main stakeholders involved in each aspect of procurement arelisted.Each HFI Technical Area provides a summary of major HFI issues relevant to thestudy, development, construction and in-service support of a platform. Table 2-1summarises the HFI technical issues addressed in each HFI Technical Area.Chapters 4 through 17 each describe the process used to deal with HFI technicalissues from the Concept Phase to the Disposal Phase.The HFI Technical Area chapters discuss HFI issues common to both platformand equipment. Where there are specific platform and equipment HFI issues,these are discussed separately within the relevant chapter. Specific equipmentissues are discussed in terms of their impact on the Combat System or MarineEngineering and these specific issues, where relevant, are introduced below.HFI DomainsManpowerPersonnelTrainingHFI TechnicalAreasManpower,Complementing&AccommodationChapter 4TeamOrganisationChapter 5CrewCharacteristicsChapter 6TrainingChapter 7HFI Technical IssuesManning & Complementing.Basic Manning Requirement(BMR) & Quarter Bill (QB).Inputs to BMR and QB.Accommodation Size & Margins.Jobs and Roles.Command Team Structure.Ship Control Centre/DamageControl.Skills and Knowledge.Body Size and Strength.Performance Capabilities &Limits.Whole Ship Training Needs.Training Facilities and Equipment.Individual and Team TrainingNeeds.Federated & Synthetic Training.Ashore & On-Board Training.Nov 2006 Page 2-3 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI DomainsHumanFactorsEngineeringHFI TechnicalAreasGeneralArrangementChapter 8OperationalSpacesChapter 9AccommodationSpacesChapter 10MiscellaneousSpacesChapter 11PersonnelMovement &MaterialHandlingChapter 12Habitability &InternalEnvironmentChapter 13EquipmentLayoutChapter 14HFI Technical IssuesInternal Platform Layout.System Routing.Internal Communications.Bridge.Operation, Control & WeaponCompartments.Ship Control Centre, ManoeuvringRoom.Electrical & Machinery Spaces.Aviation Arrangements.Offices.Upper Deck.Bunk & Personal Stowage.Heads, Bathrooms, Laundry.Galley, Scullery, Messes &Canteen.Storerooms, Workshops.Medical Facilities.Classrooms & BriefingCompartments.Passageways.Removal Routes.Traffic Flow.Storing & RAS.Embarkation & Disembarkation.Ship Motion.Noise, Vibration, Lighting, Glare.Heating, Ventilation & AirConditioning.Atmospheric Monitoring & Control.Radiation.Waste Disposal.Effect of Ambient Conditions onPerformance.Individual Comfort.Individual and Team WorkspaceEnvelopes.Workstation Visual, Reach andMovement Envelopes.Nov 2006 Page 2-4 Issue 4

Chapter 2 – Introduction To HFI Technical AreasSystemSafetyHFI DomainsHealthHazardAssessmentHFI TechnicalAreasOperability &User-EquipmentInteractionChapter 15Maintenance andSupportChapter 16SafetyChapter 17SafetyChapter 17HFI Technical IssuesOperational Effectiveness.Level of Automation.Decision Support Systems.Individual & Team Workload.Computer Supported CooperativeWorking.Operability of Human-Computerand other User Interfaces.Equipment Interoperability.Command information, datafusion & decision aids.Machinery control & surveillancedisplays.Selection of Input & ControlDevices.User Support Facilities.Whole Platform MaintenancePolicy.Ship Husbandry.Maintenance Roles.Fault-Finding and DiagnosisStrategy.Maintenance Tools and Aids.Local & Remote Repair Strategy.Vulnerability & Survivability.Fire-Fighting & Damage Control.Hazard Zones.Escape Arrangements.Alarms & Warnings.CBRN.Human Error and Reliability.Equipment Safety.Safety Procedures.Health Hazards.Rest and Shift Cycles.Repetitive Strain.Table 2-1: HFI Technical Issues addressed in each HFI Technical Area2.2 Definition of HFI Technical Areas2.2.1 Manpower, Complementing and Accommodation (Chapter 4)Complementing is the unification of all manning issues to define a complementthat can work and fight the vessel. Manning requires the matching of personnelwith operational jobs and all other duties. This involves consideration of operatorand maintainer roles and the work organisation. Complement size affects thequantity of accommodation and margins.Nov 2006 Page 2-5 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)2.2.2 Team Organisation (Chapter 5)The team organisation is defined by the combination of roles and jobs performedby crew members and the relationship between different roles or jobs.• Combat SystemThe performance of the Command and Operations teams in the WarfareDepartment underpins mission effectiveness. The structure of the team needs tobe such that processes of information-gathering, decision-making and tacticalresponse are optimised under each variation in the mission and the Rules ofEngagement. The Command structure may extend outside the vessel,alternatively, devolved Command and HQ responsibilities may need to beintegrated into the team organisation. The roles undertaken by these personnel,and the way in which these can be organised, is highly dependent upon thetechnology used in sensors, weapons and command information processing.Future Combat Systems are likely to employ highly configurable combinations ofhuman and automatic functions with dynamic allocations of responsibilitiesbetween human and machine and between team members. Requirements tosupport effective user roles and team organisations must be clearly understood ifthis is to be achieved.• Marine EngineeringThe role of the Marine Engineering department and, in particular, that of the ShipControl Centre/Control Room provides a focus for addressing team organisation.Every member of the crew of a modern vessel is a potential user of some form ofmarine engineering equipment. Team structures and roles are heavily influencedby the technology used in marine engineering equipment including the following:• propulsion and ship control;• platform services (electricity, air quality, fresh water etc.);• logistics support (cranes, storage equipment etc.);• support for habitability (catering, laundry etc.);• damage control and fire-fighting;• ship husbandry;• escape and safety;• berthing and anchorage.User role and team issues need to be addressed in response to innovations likeIntegrated Full Electric Propulsion, integrated display consoles for machinerycontrol and surveillance, fully automated machinery spaces, and remotemonitoring systems and automatic fire-fighting.2.2.3 Crew Characteristics (Chapter 6)Crew characteristics are the collected profiles of skills and knowledge, sensorycapabilities, body size and strength and other characteristics of the crew relevantto the design of the platform.Nov 2006 Page 2-6 Issue 4

Chapter 2 – Introduction To HFI Technical AreasThese user characteristics are described in the Target Audience Description(TAD). Within the context of procuring Royal Naval systems there are twoprimary forms of TAD, these being the Royal Navy Generic Target AudienceDescription (RNGTAD) and the Project Specific Target Audience Description(PSTAD). The RNGTAD is freely available to IPTs who should use this as thebasis for developing their PSTAD. Further details relating to the RNGTAD andPSTAD are provided in Crew Characteristics (see Chapter 6).• Combat SystemModern Combat Systems place a premium on cognitive skills and capabilitiesdue to the increasing use of automation and computer-based devices. However,the physical demands of watchkeeping and the fatigue associated with extendedperiods of operation must be considered during the design of equipment.• Marine EngineeringIn the future it will be vital that the right mix of skills is available to ensure that theShip Control Centre/Control Room is operated effectively. Basic machinerysurveillance and control skills are likely to evolve into those skills and knowledgenecessary for computer-based operation, using displays and both generalpurpose (e.g. mouse or rollerball) and special purpose (e.g. propulsion control)input devices. However, the range of tasks associated with the use of marineengineering equipment across the vessel may still require specific physicalcapabilities (e.g. strength) that must be taken into account and fully described.2.2.4 Training (Chapter 7)This is the application of RN training policy at the level of both the platform andequipment including vessel activities and evolutions, crew, team and individualtraining. The provision of training equipment, facilities and support afloat andashore also require consideration.Training needs are defined at the level of the individual operator/maintainer andat the levels of the sub-team and the team in accordance with DSAT QS ‘TheDefence Systems Approach to Training Quality Standard’ [Ref 3]. Synthetictraining is required due to the expense of live exercises and the limitations in thefidelity of associated tactical engagements. A range of synthetic training devicesand capabilities are required for user and team training, maintenance of combatreadiness and specific mission rehearsal. These synthetic devices include standalonepart-task or operator role trainers, tactical team trainers and fully federatedsimulation within and between equipments.2.2.5 General Arrangement (Chapter 8)The General Arrangement HFI Technical Area is concerned with the internaldimensions and layout of compartments, spaces and passageways and thelayout of upper decks. General Arrangement combines information from severalHFI Technical Areas especially Operational Spaces, Accommodation Spaces,Miscellaneous Spaces and Personnel Movement and Material Handling. GeneralArrangement also concerns the provision of internal communications, positioningof bulkheads, doors and hatches, deckhead height and internal systems routing.Layout of compartments can be affected by decisions concerning team designand communication systems. The General Arrangement can have an importanteffect on safety in terms of the ease of Escape and Evacuation.Nov 2006 Page 2-7 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)2.2.6 Operational Spaces (Chapter 9)Operational spaces are those directly concerned with fighting, controlling,manoeuvring and administering the vessel. Included here is the layout of theUpper Decks and superstructure where working space supports variousevolutions, e.g. berthing, anchoring, launching and raising ship’s boats,Replenishment at Sea (RAS) and weapons handling and need to allow foremergency evolutions such as Evacuation. This HFI Technical Area addressesthe detailed layout and provision of services to ensure that user and maintainertask demands are met. Close co-ordination is required with the relevant SystemProject Manager to ensure that workstations can be properly integrated.2.2.7 Accommodation Spaces (Chapter 10)Accommodation spaces support the living, recreational and domestic activities ofthe crew. They encompass sleeping, washing, feeding, resting, laundering andshopping facilities.2.2.8 Miscellaneous Spaces (Chapter 11)Miscellaneous spaces contribute indirectly to the operational and habitabilityaspects of the vessel. These include storerooms, workshops, passageways andother compartments for specialised use.2.2.9 Personnel Movement and Material Handling (Chapter 12)Personnel movement and material handling issues are concerned with designingfor ease of equipment removals, human traffic flow, storing, RAS, ammunitionhandling, Escape and Evacuation routes, embarkation and disembarkation. Inparticular, the design of minimum route lengths to reduce workload requiresconsideration.2.2.10 Habitability and Internal Environment (Chapter 13)Habitability and Internal Environment design is concerned with personnel workand off-duty environments in biological and sociological terms. Biological aspectsdetermine minimum standards of comfort relating to ship’s motion, noise andvibration, lighting and atmospheric contaminants, control of environment, wastedisposal, accommodation, outfit and furnishings etc. Sociological aspects requirethat RN service conditions match the expectations of personnel regardingaccommodation design and facilities.Environmental conditions need to be maintained within acceptable limitsotherwise task performance may be degraded and personnel may be subject tohealth hazards.In terms of the equipment, two issues are of relevance: the operators’ comfortzone and the environmental conditions for the equipment in-situ. The comfortzone summarises the required thresholds of each environmental factor if usersare to remain effective and not be exposed to undue health and safety risks. Thelikely effect of each environmental factor on task performance must be taken intoaccount when selecting or designing equipment, e.g. the effect of lighting ondisplay legibility, the effect of motion on the accuracy or speed of using an inputdevice. Lighting is of specific concern as conditions may range from daylight,under which the effects of glare must be accommodated, to a range of lightingNov 2006 Page 2-8 Issue 4

Chapter 2 – Introduction To HFI Technical Areasconditions within closed compartments. Level of noise may affect the perceptionof auditory alerts, warnings and voice communications. Noise levels inmachinery rooms may be such as to require additional protection orcommunications facilities for users. Vibration levels or ship motion may requirethe use of particular types of controls.2.2.11 Equipment Layout (Chapter 14)Equipment layout refers to the size and arrangement of equipments withincompartments or on decks. The two aspects of most importance are theworkspace layout and the workstation layout.The workspace layout includes the complete working environment within whichoperators and equipment must be able to work effectively and safely. The aim isalways to optimise the use of space to ensure that users and maintainers can dotheir jobs without being hampered or interrupted by traffic from passing personnelor exposed to hazards or risks to safety. Adequate clearance must be providedfor normal and maintenance access and for the movement of personnel andmaterial. A hierarchy of displays from those available to the whole team to thoseat individual stations may need to be integrated into the overall workspace.Visibility of, and access to, other team members forms an important requirement.Command and platform management supervisors need such visibility to ensurethat individuals are working together; to monitor effects of workload or fatigue;and to support less skilled crew members. Sub-teams need to be sited togetherto foster co-operative working.At the level of the individual operator, the layout of each operator workstationmust be optimised to match the visual arc, reach envelope and movementenvelope of each of the personnel that may man the equipment. When wearingprotective clothing, an operator must be able to see all displays and easilymanipulate all controls without having to shift position. Adequate space and worksurfaces must be provided for documentation, job aids etc. though physical spacemay be traded off by the provision of on-line access to such materials. Thedesign of workstations may become radically different in the future as morefunctions are automated and integrated into a common layout.2.2.12 Operability and User-Equipment Interaction (Chapter 15)The design of the user-equipment interface may be in the form of a humancomputerinterface (HCI) or some other type of man-machine interface (MMI).The operability of equipment refers to how effectively and efficiently it can beused to achieve mission goals. The operability of equipment is highly dependenton the provision of appropriate functionality to support the operational demandsplaced on users. The design of operable equipment requires that close attentionbe paid to the critical tasks to be performed, as well as to potential fault andemergency conditions.Effective design of displays, controls and dialogue requires that many factors arebalanced including consistent use of labels and symbols, appropriate use ofcolour, meaningful layout of information as well as user preferences for thedisplay and control of information. In particular, the adoption of a Human FactorsStyle Guide enforces consistency and helps operators to learn and transfer skills.The design of operable user-equipment interfaces must also be complementedby the development of the whole task support package including operator andmaintainer procedures, on-line help and documentation.Nov 2006 Page 2-9 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Combat SystemThe mission performance of a vessel is greatly influenced by the operability of thevarious equipments in the Combat System. Command decision-making, speedand accuracy of response to threats and the morale of personnel are improved ifequipment is effective, efficient to use and trustworthy. Combat Systems includea variety of such user and maintainer interfaces ranging from human-computerinterfaces to more specialised types. Improvements in communications andsensor technology have increased the amount and types of data available to theCommand Team. A major issue is the use of data fusion and filtering techniquesto enable significant tactical information to be isolated and evaluated. Weaponssystems have become increasingly automated, placing the onus on the designerto provide Command Teams with weapons set-up, threat classification andoverride facilities. Sharing of information and co-operative interaction betweenoperators and teams mediated by the Combat System introduces the need todesign appropriate Group Ware. These types of facilities add a new dimension touser-equipment interaction, i.e. the user may see other users and their activitiesrepresented as objects within information displays.• Marine EngineeringVirtually all forms of marine engineering equipment will present some form ofinterface to users. A major challenge in this area is the design of the userequipmentinterface to integrated machinery control and surveillance systems.For example, in future platform management systems a range of propulsion andsupporting services will be controlled through a suite of visual display units in theShip Control Centre/Control Room replacing panels of dials, indicators andcontrol knobs. It is important to bear in mind that hardware intensive systems,e.g. cranes, mechanical handling equipment, fire-fighting equipment also have auser-equipment interface that must be designed for operability.2.2.13 Maintenance and Support (Chapter 16)Maintenance is required to ensure that equipments and systems remainoperational and safe. At the level of the platform this includes Ship Husbandryactivities ranging from bilge clearance to Upper Deck cleanliness. Close coordinationis required with the relevant System Project Manager to ensure thatplatform maintenance evolves in accordance with the integrated logistics supportconcept.At the equipment level, maintenance requirements are a function of equipmentreliability, the support policy and the expertise of available manpower. Each itemof equipment will have an associated maintainability requirement described in theIntegrated Logistics Support (ILS) concept for the type of equipment or for thevessel. Several HFI technical issues are related to the maintenance ofequipment. The first issue is the identification of the user tasks and duties, andassociated skills and knowledge, needed for maintenance. The impact onmaintenance tasks of the technology used in the equipment must be understood.For example, on-line diagnostics may be built into the equipment; the complexityof such diagnostics and their ease of use and interpretation will be affected bythe operability of the system and will in turn affect operator skill levels.• Combat SystemMaintenance issues have radically changed in recent years with the prevalentuse of information technology in Combat Systems. System management,Nov 2006 Page 2-10 Issue 4

Chapter 2 – Introduction To HFI Technical Areasparticularly of software, has been added to the more traditional hardwaremaintenance roles needed to support the integrity of the Combat System.Remote diagnosis and repair from elsewhere in the vessel or from outside thevessel is becoming a distinct possibility; while maintenance job aids, including theuse of synthetic devices, e.g. head-up displays of maintenance procedures andequipment diagrams, are evolving rapidly for use in service.• Marine EngineeringMarine engineering equipment may need to be maintained on deck or withincompartments in potentially dangerous or hazardous environments. Hazardsneed to be minimised, adequate clearance and lighting must be available withinmaintenance spaces, labelling of hazards should appear outside and insideequipment and appropriate handling and lifting equipment must be provided.2.2.14 Safety (Chapter 17)In terms of the platform, ship safety aspects include: human reliability;vulnerability and survivability of personnel in response to shock and other effects;design to support fire-fighting and damage control activities; design of hazardzones; provision of local and global Escape and Evacuation arrangements;uniformity and effectiveness of alarms and warnings; chemical, biological,radiation and nuclear defence (CBRND).Two main classes of safety risk arise with equipment. The first consists of directthreats to the safety of the operator or maintainer when using or maintainingequipment. Exposure to electrical shock, moving equipment, collision withequipment casings and fittings, effects of fire or weapons damage are instanceswhich may need to be anticipated when designing equipment and workspaces.The second class arises from inadvertent operation or erroneous use of theequipment. Human error and reliability analysis techniques are used to explorethe likelihood of safety risks to others including maintenance and other personnelperforming duties on or near weapons and sensors mounted on upper decks.These contribute to the Safety Case for the equipment under JSP 430 ‘MOD ShipSafety Management’ [Ref 5]. Alarms, warnings, display formats, control lockoutand manual override facilities can then be designed to reduce such risks.Health hazards can appear in the workplace and in recreational areas. Hazardsinherent in the design of the vessel are identified and minimised in all areasincluding hygiene of facilities, design of surfaces, materials used in finishes andfurnishing, leakage or venting of fuel and other substances, air quality andventilation with smoke from fires, waste disposal facilities, ladder and hatchwaydesign and positioning.Health hazards arise during the normal operation of equipment, particularly underprolonged watch patterns, which may extend over the whole mission of thevessel. The need to stay closed up in the same position while performingrepetitive movements may result in strain injury. Proximity to operatingequipment may expose personnel to radiation, noise, shock and other risks. Theair quality within vessels may decrease over time and cause breathing difficulties.Operations under conditions of physical and psychological stress when combinedwith cumulative fatigue may adversely affect the health of the crew. Shift cyclesand rest periods need to be considered when designing the equipment to ensurethat performance and health can be maintained.Nov 2006 Page 2-11 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)2.3 HFI Technical Area - Navigation Guidance Tables2.3.1 Concept - Navigation Guidance TableHFI TechnicalAreaManpower,Complementing &AccommodationHFI ActivityDevelop ManningConceptProduce DraftManning OptionsProduce OutlineBMRCONCEPTHFI Output• A clear description of the policyand other constraints on manningand accommodation.• Initial assessment of high-levelmanning options and implicationsfor the use of automation, and fortraining and support policy.• A statement of the future targetmanning level and associatedassumptions for the equipment.• The draft manning estimates foreach option comprise the following:ooooDraft numbers of officers byrank and branch.Draft numbers of SeniorRatings by rate and branch.Draft numbers of JuniorRatings by rate and branch.Draft watchkeeping, primaryand secondary taskdescriptions and skillrequirements.• The manning estimates contributeto the Outline BMR.• The information in the draftmanning options is used todevelop the RNGTAD into aPSTAD (see Chapter 6).The Outline BMR consists of thefollowing:• Outline numbers of officers by rankand branch.• Outline numbers of senior ratingsby rate and branch.• Outline numbers of junior ratingsby rate and branch.• Outline task descriptions for eachperson.• The manning estimates contributeto the Outline BMR. The OutlineBMR and supporting datacontributes to the complementrequirements section of the UserRequirement Document (URD) aswell as the HFI aspects of theSystem Requirement Document(SRD).MAP-01-011Ref4.3.1.14.3.1.24.3.1.3Nov 2006 Page 2-12 Issue 4

Chapter 2 – Introduction To HFI Technical AreasHFI TechnicalAreaTeamOrganisationCrewCharacteristicsTrainingHFI ActivityProduce OutlineAccommodationStatementValidateComplement SizeOutline FutureOrganisationGenerate ProjectSpecific TargetAudienceDescription(PSTAD)Outline FutureTraining PolicyCONCEPTHFI Output• The Outline BMR is supported byworking papers to document theanalysis processes by whichmanning options are derived (e.g.Task Analysis, modelling runs,etc.).• The information in the outlinemanning is used to help define thePSTAD and the information in theoutline BMR is to be maintained inthe PSTAD for the platform.• The Accommodation Statementdetailing accommodation size andadditional margins for each OutlineBMR.• Estimates of complement sizetaking account of latest informationabout the platform and equipmentspecification and design.• Implications of estimates forachieving manning requirementsand constraints.• Identification of options forreducing size of complement.• A high-level representation of thefuture organisation of the teamsmanning each equipment option.• The information about the futureorganisation is used to develop theProject Specific Description(PSTAD) (see Chapter 6) for thepersonnel associated with theequipment.The PSTAD typically comprises thefollowing:• Rank, rate and Branch.• Body size and strength(anthropometric) characteristics.• Physical skills.• Knowledge and mental skills.• Educational Background.• Experience.• Summary of training objectives(OPS and TPS) and careerprogression.• The output consists of a briefreview of existing training facilitiesand resources together with anoutline of the future training contextand factors to be considered inidentifying training options.MAP-01-011Ref4.3.1.44.3.1.55.3.1.16.3.1.17.3.1.1Nov 2006 Page 2-13 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI TechnicalAreaGeneralArrangementPersonnelMovement &Material HandlingHabitability &InternalEnvironmentHFI ActivityTraining NeedsAnalysis (TNA)Scoping StudyDevelop High-Level GeneralArrangementOptionsDetermine DeckHeight CriteriaTraffic FlowConceptSpecify Hull FormMotionSpecifyEnvironmentalPolicyCONCEPTHFI OutputOutline approach to TNA for theprocurement including:• Participants in TNA process –including DEC, Fleet NPS,Customer 2, FOTR, trainingschools, HQ units and MLS IPT.• Overview of stages of TNA agreedwith RN ICG.• Project plan and resourcesrequired for conduct of TNA.• TNA SG membership andresponsibilities.• Identification of how therequirement is likely to affect futureskill requirements.• High-level options for GeneralArrangement of platform.• Deck height criteria for input to theplatform specification.• High-level traffic route options foreach General Arrangement optionand assessment of viability,efficiency and safety issues ofeach route (eg for Escape andEvacuation).The output of this activity includes:• Human performancecharacteristics for the motion of theproposed platform.• The definitions of acceptable levelsof performance and safety.• A priority list of tasks, ordered bysensitivity to motion for acceptableperformance.• Tabulated motion criteria (e.g.acceptable acceleration levels) forselected locations in the platformshull.This report is a record of the HFImotion constraints for inclusion in thehull form selection trade-off studies andwill contribute to defining compartmentlocations on the platform.The contents of the EnvironmentalPolicy includes:• The management procedures forestablishing and auditing theplatform and equipmentenvironmental requirements.• The predicted levels for eachenvironmental factor frommodelling.MAP-01-011Ref7.3.1.28.3.1.18.3.1.212.3.1.113.3.1.113.3.1.2Nov 2006 Page 2-14 Issue 4

Chapter 2 – Introduction To HFI Technical AreasHFI TechnicalAreaOperability andUser-EquipmentInteractionMaintenance andSupportHFI ActivityOutline Use ofAutomationOutline UserTasksOutline User-EquipmentInterface FacilitiesIdentifyMaintenancePolicyOutline PlatformMaintenanceConceptOutlineMaintenanceManningOutline EquipmentMaintenanceRequirementsOutline EquipmentMaintenanceTasksOutline Repairand SupplyFacilitiesCONCEPTHFI Output• The ergonomic standards andspecification of the acceptablelevels to be applied.• Areas of application in the GeneralArrangement.• A high-level description of futureequipment options describing useof automation, user roles andhuman and technological risks.• Outline user and maintainer taskdescriptions for each anticipateduser role including the goal, highlevelprocedure and output of eachsignificant task.• High-level description of userequipmentinterface facilities andoptions.• Implications of maintenance policyfor HFI aspects including manning,maintainer roles and use oftechnology.• Outline platform maintenancepolicy and requirements.• Assessment of HFI issues,constraints and risks.The draft manning estimates comprisethe following:• Draft numbers of officers by rankand branch.• Draft numbers of Senior Ratings byrate and branch.• Draft numbers of Junior Ratings byrate and branch.• Draft task descriptions and skillrequirements.The manning estimates contribute tothe Outline Basic ManningRequirement (BMR). The informationis used to develop the Project SpecificTarget Audience Description (PSTAD)(see Chapter 6) for the personnelallocated maintenance duties.• An outline of the futuremaintenance concept for theequipment and its HFI implicationsfor task design, training, humanequipmentinterface design,maintainer job aids and health andsafety policy.• Task descriptions for eachanticipated maintainer in eachequipment option.• Outline descriptions ofmaintenance facilities, repairfacilities and job aids and supplyequipment.MAP-01-011Ref15.3.1.115.3.1.215.3.1.316.3.1.116.3.1.216.3.1.316.3.1.416.3.1.516.3.1.6Nov 2006 Page 2-15 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI TechnicalAreaSafetyHFI ActivitySpecifyMaintenance HFIParametersSpecify ShipHusbandry PolicyOutline Health andSafety PolicyCONCEPTHFI Output• Maintenance task list.• Specification of commonality policyfor maintenance.• Maintenance environmentalrequirements.• Maintenance requirements.• Specification of maintenanceworkspace envelopes.• Maintenance health and safetyaspects.Note … These outputs will need to beco-ordinated with the products of theLSA from the ILS Plan.• A prioritised list of main workloaddrivers and platform featuresconcerned.• Preferred design characteristics,materials, and associatedmaintenance techniques and toolsassociated with recommendations.• Design criteria to be adopted foreach husbandry area, includingquantified workload targets.• The types of materials to be usedin each husbandry area.• The husbandry tools to be used ineach husbandry area.• The high-level husbandry taskdescriptions for each husbandryarea.A statement of:• The approach to ensuring thatsafety risks to personnel from theoperation and maintenance of theEquipment are as low as isreasonably practicable.• The approach to ensuring thathealth hazards to personnel fromthe operation and maintenance ofthe equipment are as low as isreasonably practicable.The safety policy produced by thisactivity contributes to the SafetyManagement Plan.MAP-01-011Ref16.3.1.716.3.1.817.3.1.1Nov 2006 Page 2-16 Issue 4

Chapter 2 – Introduction To HFI Technical AreasHFI TechnicalAreaHFI ActivityIdentify HFI Healthand Safety IssuesCONCEPTHFI Output• The health and safety issuesassociated with platform options ormodifications and associated risklevels and whole-life costs.Produce Health & • The applicable statutorySafety HFI Policy 1 requirements and how and wherethey are to be applied.Outline SafetyRisksOutline SafetyFacilitiesOutline HealthHazardsAssess HealthHazards andSafety Risks• List of areas of design that havehistorically caused injury tocrewmembers because of eitherhuman error or bad design.• List of areas of design that affecton-board hygiene.• The procedures for hazardidentification and inclusion ofhuman reliability analysis indesigning for safety.• The design requirements for onboardenvironmental Health &Safety monitoring and Control.• The HFI design features andguidelines applicable in eachPlatform HFI Technical Area tomaximise on-board Health & Safety.• Safety risks relating to HFI aspectsand measures for the mitigation ofsuch risks. The informationgenerated by this activitycontributes to the Ship SafetyManagement Plan (see JSP 430[Ref 5]).• Safety facilities are identified foreach equipment option and areincluded in the Safety Case for theEquipment (see JSP 430 [Ref 5]).• Outline list of health hazards.• Conditions under which theseemerge and the personnel most atrisk.• Health and safety riskassessments and risk mitigationmeasures.MAP-01-011Ref17.3.1.217.3.1.317.3.1.417.3.1.517.3.1.617.3.1.71This is local HFI policy based upon Health & Safety legislation and MOD policy but also on relevant accidentdata, epidemiology, etc.Nov 2006 Page 2-17 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)2.3.2 Assessment - Navigation Guidance TableHFI TechnicalAreaManpower,Complementing &AccommodationTeamOrganisationHFI ActivityProduce Draft BMRProduce DraftAccommodationStatementASSESSMENTHFI OutputThe Draft BMR consists of thefollowing:• Draft numbers of officers by rankand branch.• Draft numbers of Senior Ratingsby rate and branch.• Draft numbers of Junior Ratingsby rate and branch.• Draft watchkeeping, primary andsecondary task descriptions andskill requirements.The Draft BMR and supporting datacontributes to the complementrequirements sections of the URDand SRD.The information in the Draft BMR is tobe maintained in the PSTAD for theplatform.Bunk requirements for thecomplement and for the following:• Growth allowance (BoardMargin).• Embarked staff allowances (StaffMargin).• On-board allowance for femaleNaval personnel (FlexibilityMargin).• Training allowance (TrainingMargin).• Advancement allowance(Advancement Margin).The Draft Accommodation Statementis included with the Draft BMR in theSRD.Outline User Roles • The outline user and maintainerroles, existing (or proposed) jobtitles and tasks allocated to eachrole including watchkeeping andother variations.IdentifyOrganisationalOptionsEach team organisational optioncomprises the following information:• Organisational chart showingteam and sub-team groups andresponsibilities.• Role name and specialisation.• Tasks, duties and responsibilitiesof each role.• Types of inter-communicationand flow rates between eachrole.MAP-01-011Ref4.3.2.14.3.2.25.3.2.15.3.2.2Nov 2006 Page 2-18 Issue 4

Chapter 2 – Introduction To HFI Technical AreasHFI TechnicalAreaCrewCharacteristicsHFI ActivityIdentify RequiredSkills andKnowledgeIdentify CriticalPersonnel FactorsAssessAnthropometricCharacteristicsRefine ProjectSpecific TargetAudienceDescription(PSTAD)ASSESSMENTHFI Output• External communication links andflow rates.• Assessment of strengths andweaknesses of organisationalstructure and component roles.The information about roles in theorganisational options is used to helpoutline the PSTAD (see Chapter 6) forthe personnel associated with theequipment.• The skills and knowledgerequirements for each role maybe presented as a matrixshowing the category, name andlevel of each type of skill andknowledge required to performeach task by each crewmember.New forms or levels of skills andknowledge not currently suppliedby the training system arehighlighted for discussion withFOTR, RN ICG and otheragencies.• Critical personnel factorsassociated with the feasibility ofsupporting future user andmaintainer roles andrecommendations aimed atoptimising these factors.• The anthropometriccharacteristics of futurepersonnel available to performcrew roles, or that will use thevessel.• Correlation of task requirementswith body size or strengthrequirements.The revised PSTAD comprises thefollowing:• Rank, rate and Branch.• Body size and strength(anthropometric) characteristics.• Physical skills.• Knowledge and mental skills.• Educational Background.• Experience.• Personal attributes. (*)• Key tasks allocated to eachrole. (*)• Assumed operational conditionsunder which tasks will beperformed. (*)• Summary of training objectives(OPS and TPS) and careerprogression routes.(*) Items not necessarilypresent in earlier version of PSTAD.MAP-01-011Ref6.3.2.16.3.2.26.3.2.36.3.2.4Nov 2006 Page 2-19 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI TechnicalAreaTrainingNote … Trainingactivities runacrossAssessment /Demonstration /ManufacturePhasesHFI ActivityOperational TaskAnalysis (OTA)ASSESSMENTHFI OutputOperational / Business Task Analysis– Deliverable 1 as required byDTSM 3 ‘Defence Training SupportManual 3: Training Needs Analysis’[Ref 8], including: the preliminaryOperational Performance Statement(OPS) or Competence Framework(CF).The OPS is a summary documentand is used to present the analysis ofDeliverable 1 in a concise format forapproval and discussion purposes bythe TNA Steering Group. The outputwill contain:MAP-01-011Ref7.3.2.1Training GapAnalysis (TGA)Training OptionsAnalysis (TOA)• The range of jobs affected.• Duties and tasks to be trained.• The conditions and standards ofperformance required.• Why the task is performed –consequences of failure to carryout the task• The training priority of each task.• An estimate of the trainingthroughput per year.Training Gap Analysis – Deliverable 2as required by DTSM 3 [Ref 8].The outputs of this deliverable arestatements of training gaps andassociated implications against theoperational/business capability. Itshould consider the option forcontinuing with existing training usingthe existing training resources. Itshould also include TOs and an initialanalysis of the new system /requirement which can be takenforward to inform the Training OptionsAnalysis (TOA).The operational tasks requiringtraining are listed together with anindication of the OJT. These aretaken forward to the next stage.TOA – Deliverable 3 as required byDTSM 3 [Ref 8]. A recommendationas to the most cost-effective trainingsolution.An OPS (see DTSM 3) for the dutiesand tasks affected by therecommended training option with anestimated Training Category reflectingthe shore to sea training split.Supportive notes to amplify OJTrequirement to be included asappropriate to assist TrainingDesigners with OJT specifications.This enables changes to affectedcourse documentation.7.3.2.27.3.2.3Nov 2006 Page 2-20 Issue 4

Chapter 2 – Introduction To HFI Technical AreasHFI TechnicalAreaGeneralArrangementHFI ActivityTraining NeedsAnalysis FinalReportDevelop HFI Policyfor GeneralArrangementIdentify HumanFactorsRequirements forSystems RoutingASSESSMENTHFI OutputDepending upon the cost andcomplexity of the training solution itmay be necessary to obtain a detailedinvestment appraisal based on firmquotations/prices from industry. Thismainly applies to projects wherecommand team trainers/simulatorsare identified as the recommendedsolution following the steps above.The TNA Final Report – Deliverable 4as required by DTSM 3 [Ref 8]. Theoutput is an endorsed trainingsolution, draft OPS/CF,implementation plan and anevaluation strategy.• HFI Policy for GeneralArrangement. This documentshall cover the following:oooDescription of the HFI issuesand constraints that affectGeneral Arrangement.The priority list of HFIGeneral Arrangementdecision criteria, in order ofsignificance, and guidanceon their use in trade-offstudies.The management procedureto be adopted to implementHFI General Arrangementpolicy.• Systems routing – HFrequirements documentThe HFI requirements for systemrouting are expressed as measuresfor controlling hazards, maintainingadequate clearance and ensuringcrew comfort. Reference is made tothe function of each system andproposed locations, includingoperational and maintenance points.MAP-01-011Ref7.3.2.48.3.2.18.3.2.2Nov 2006 Page 2-21 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI TechnicalAreaOperationalSpacesAccommodationSpacesPersonnelMovement &Material HandlingHFI ActivityDefineRequirements forOperational SpacesEstablish HFIAccommodationPolicySpecify Traffic Flow,Storing and RASRequirementsASSESSMENTHFI Output• The major HFI requirements andconstraints.• The manning requirements andestimated task workloads.• A listing of allocation of functions.• The outline data flowrequirements specification.• The outline workstationrequirements specification.• The outline workspacerequirements specification.• The outline Upper Deck HFIrequirements includes:oooooThe definitions of all theUpper Deck evolutions.A task description of eachevolution.The outline drawingsshowing spatial operatingenvelope of each task set.The overlay of theseoperating envelopes androuting paths.Recommendations on whataspects require mock-ups orSynthetic User Modelling.The Accommodation Policy, which isexpressed as:• List of habitability factors in orderof priority.• A matrix of habitability factorsagainst domestic messingcatering and recreationalcharacteristics.• The definition of theaccommodation and habitabilitydesign rules and principles.• The human and material trafficroutes categorised by type ofactivity.• The estimated flow rates andmaterial handling requirementsfor the traffic routes.• The HFI design constraints andstandards to be applied, and therecommended minimum routingvolume and cross-sectional arearequirements, maximum routinglengths, waiting area sizing,possible compartment locationsin the platform, and equipmentlifting tackle requirements fordeck-to-deck equipmentmovement.MAP-01-011Ref9.3.1.110.3.1.112.3.2.1Nov 2006 Page 2-22 Issue 4

Chapter 2 – Introduction To HFI Technical AreasHFI TechnicalAreaHabitability &InternalEnvironmentHFI ActivityAssess Ship Motionand HumanPerformanceEnvelopesIdentify SocialEnvironmentRequirementsOutlineEnvironmentalConditions andControlsASSESSMENTHFI OutputThe Ship Motion and HumanPerformance Envelopes consist of thefollowing:• The hull design motion valuesand characteristics (force andacceleration).• A matrix of task category andacceptable hull motion, basedupon task analysis.• Recommended workspace andcompartment locations in thevessel.• Description of the environmentalfactors and constraints affectingworkspace conditions.• The results of this activity arepassed to the relevant ProjectManager to assist in thespecification of the overallplatform environment.The outline descriptions ofenvironmental conditions and controlsfor each workspace includes:• Acceptable variation in shipmotion.• Acceptable ambient noise levels.• Acceptable vibration and shocklevels.• Acceptable temperature andhumidity levels.• Acceptable levels of ventilationand air-conditioning throughput.• Acceptable levels of fixedambient lighting and requiredvariable lighting controls.• Illumination levels for taskspecificlighting.• Atmospheric monitoring controls.• Safe operating envelopes aroundradiation sources, lasers andweapons.The results of this activity are passedto the relevant Project Manager toassist in the specification of overallplatform environment.MAP-01-011Ref13.3.2.113.3.2.213.3.2.3Nov 2006 Page 2-23 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI TechnicalAreaHFI ActivityDefine WasteDisposalIdentify PhysicalEnvironmentRequirementsASSESSMENTHFI OutputThe specification will include:• Specification of the HFI designprinciples, their order of priorityand area of application in theplatform design process.• Specification of acceptable wastedisposal practises and emissionscorrelated with:ooooCompartmentusage/functionality.Traffic flow routes.Compartmentadjacency/location.Specification of mandatorystandards and designguidelines.• Specification of the acceptancecriteria.The environmental specifications foreach workspace and for work stationscomprises:• Vibration and motion.• Definition of vibration, shock andship motion accelerations/forces.• Shock absorption and spatialtolerances for seating andequipment design.• Noise.• Ambient noise levels for taskachievement.• Equipment noise levels.• Atmospheric monitoring andcontrol.• Specification of pollution levels(e.g. gas fumes, fuel leaks).• Smoke clearance requirements.• Radiation (see Chap 13):ooIonising radiation(specification of levels of xrays and γ rays).RADHAZ (hazard levels ofradar and radio equipmentand communicationsaerials).• Heating and ventilation.• Ambient requirements (e.g.temperature levels and airflowrates).• Workstation specifications.• Unmanned compartmentrequirements.• Maintenance supportrequirements.MAP-01-011Ref13.3.2.413.3.2.5Nov 2006 Page 2-24 Issue 4

Chapter 2 – Introduction To HFI Technical AreasHFI TechnicalAreaHFI ActivityASSESSMENTHFI Output• Humidity requirements.• Lighting.• Day and night ambient lightingrequirements (level and quantity).• Workstation illuminationrequirements.• Maintenance requirements.MAP-01-011RefDefine Vibrationand NoiseDefine AtmosphericControl &MonitoringThe results of this activity are passedto the relevant System ProjectManager to assist in the specificationand assessment of overall platformenvironment.The specification will include:• Specification of the HFI designprinciples, their order of priorityand area of application in theplatform design process.• Specification of ambientthreshold levels of noise andvibration correlated with:ooooCompartmentusage/functionality.Traffic flow routes.Compartmentadjacency/location.Specification of mandatorystandards and designguidelines.• Specification of the acceptancecriteria.The specification will include thefollowing:• Specification of the HFI designprinciples, their order of priorityand area of application in theplatform design process.• Specification of ambientthreshold levels of atmosphericfactors correlated with:ooooCompartmentusage/functionality.Traffic flow routes.Compartmentadjacency/location.Specification of mandatorystandards and designguidelines.• Specification of the acceptancecriteria.13.3.2.613.3.2.7Nov 2006 Page 2-25 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI TechnicalAreaHFI ActivityDefine RadiationLevelsASSESSMENTHFI OutputThe specification will include thefollowing:MAP-01-011Ref13.3.2.8Define Heating,Ventilation and Air-ConditioningDefine Lighting andGlare• Specification of the HFI designprinciples, their order of priorityand area of application in theplatform design process.• Specification of ambientthreshold levels of radiationcorrelated with:ooooCompartmentusage/functionality.Traffic flow routes.Compartmentadjacency/location.Specification of mandatorystandards and designguidelines.• Specification of the acceptancecriteria.The specification will include thefollowing:• Specification of the HFI designprinciples, their order of priorityand area of application in theplatform design process.• Specification of ambientthreshold levels of temperatureand ventilation and control of airconditioningcorrelated with:ooCompartmentusage/functionality.Specification of mandatorystandards and designguidelines.• Specification of the acceptancecriteria.The specification will include thefollowing:• Specification of the HFI designprinciples, their order of priorityand area of application in theplatform design process.• Specification of ambientthreshold levels and control oflighting correlated with:ooooCompartmentusage/functionality.Traffic flow routes.Compartmentadjacency/location.Specification of mandatorystandards and designguidelines.• Specification of the acceptancecriteria.13.3.2.913.3.2.10Nov 2006 Page 2-26 Issue 4

Chapter 2 – Introduction To HFI Technical AreasHFI TechnicalAreaEquipment LayoutOperability andUser-EquipmentInteractionHFI ActivityDevelop PreliminaryWorkspaceConfigurationsOutline EquipmentFitSpecify Allocation ofFunctionsIdentify Critical UserPerformanceASSESSMENTHFI Output• Outline compartment workspacelayouts, which consist ofdrawings for each equipment andcompartment option.• Equipment fit for each equipmentoption defining dimensions,housing and maintenance accessrequirements.• Equipment options comprising:• A description of the functions ineach option.• The assignment of functions tohuman and equipment.• Information flows within eachoption.Predicted performance and risksassociated with each option.• The results may be presented asa matrix identifying the humanperformance required for eachtask performed by each user rolein equipment options.• Human performance limitationsand risks to achieving targetequipment performance areidentified with supportingevidence.• Human performance parametersto be supported by equipmentfacilities and the user-equipmentinterface are identified.Define User Tasks • Task descriptions for eachanticipated user role in eachequipment option.Specify LogicalUser-EquipmentInterfaceLogical user-equipment interfacedescriptions for each optioncomprising of:MAP-01-011Ref14.3.1.114.3.1.215.3.2.115.3.2.215.3.2.315.3.2.4Select HumanFactors Style GuideSpecify OperabilityCriteriaIdentify User-Equipment InterfacePrototyping• The dialogues defining datadisplayed.• Data inputs.• Control inputs.• User support data outputs andcontrols.• Requirements for simultaneousdisplays and access to controls.• Human Factors Style Guiderequirements for use in designingand assessing the userequipmentinterface.• Operability criteria for eachdialogue in each equipmentoption.• User-equipment interfaceprototyping plan.15.3.2.515.3.2.615.3.2.7Nov 2006 Page 2-27 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI TechnicalAreaMaintenance andSupportHFI ActivityIdentifyMaintenanceOptionsASSESSMENTHFI Output• Maintenance options togetherwith an assessment of theirrelative worth in terms of HFIaspects.MAP-01-011Ref16.3.2.1Define MaintenanceHFI AspectsEstablishMaintenanceManpowerRequirementDefine ShipHusbandry HFIAspectsSpecifyMaintenanceFacilitiesSpecifyMaintenance TasksSpecifyMaintenanceDocumentationSpecifyMaintenanceProcedures• Built-in Test Equipment (BITE)characteristics.• Test point and subsystemidentification characteristics.• Colour coding for ‘safe to touch’characteristics.• Maintenance documentationcharacteristics.• Parts identification and storesorganisation characteristics.• Maintenance lighting levels.• Workspace layout and access.• Platform maintenance and shiphusbandry manning estimates forinput to Basic ManningRequirement (BMR).• Implications for operatormaintainerconcept.For each Ship Husbandry task:• Ship Husbandry procedures andsupporting job aids.• HFI characteristics of tools andequipment.• Workspace layout, accessrequirements and hazard control.• Full specification of theequipment interfaces, job aidsand hardware associated withmaintenance tasks and withsupply and transportation.• Task descriptions for eachanticipated maintainer role for theequipment.• Maintenance documentationincluding on-line help andreference materials.• Maintenance procedurescovering all on-line and off-linetasks performed by eachmaintainer role.16.3.2.216.3.2.316.3.2.416.3.2.516.3.2.616.3.2.716.3.2.8Nov 2006 Page 2-28 Issue 4

Chapter 2 – Introduction To HFI Technical AreasHFI TechnicalAreaSafetyHFI ActivitySpecify: PersonnelHealth & Safety,Vulnerability &Survivability, Fire-Fighting & DamageControl, HazardZones, EscapeArrangements,Platform Alarms &Warnings, CBRNSpecify EquipmentSafety RisksSpecify SafetyFacilitiesSpecify EquipmentAlarms andWarningsASSESSMENTHFI OutputThe specification of health and safetyfeatures includes the following:• Health design specificationssummary, with references out toeach Platform HFI TechnicalArea.• Shock: Specify shock-dampingrequirements for mannedpositions.• Fire fighting and DamageControl: Specify minimum accessdimensions to fire hazard areas.Identify zones for remotemonitoring and drenching.Identify location of Fire fightingand Damage Control equipmentstorage points.• Hazard Zoning and CitadelBoundaries: Workspace layoutsand good practice in activities formaintaining boundaries.• Escape Arrangements: Specifythe proposed arrangements interms of inter-compartmentdependency, compartmentlayout, the support equipmentquantities and stowage volumes,waiting space and routedimensions.• Platform Alarms and Warnings:Specify the categories of platformalarms and warnings requiredand their visual and acousticcoding. Specify the uniformconfiguration and identificationcoding of these categories, asapplicable locally incompartments, in other spacesand on or near equipments andmaterials.• Health and safety assessmentand acceptance criteria.• Safety risks relating to HFIaspects and measures for themitigation of such risks. Theinformation generated by thisactivity contributes to the SafetyCase (see JSP 430 [Ref 5]).• Safety facilities are specified forthe equipment and are includedin the Safety Case (see JSP 430[Ref 5]).• Specification of safety-relatedalarms and warnings, this isincluded in the Safety Case (seeJSP 430 [Ref 5]).MAP-01-011Ref17.3.2.117.3.2.217.3.2.317.3.2.4Nov 2006 Page 2-29 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI TechnicalAreaHFI ActivitySpecify SafetyProceduresSpecify HealthHazardsSpecify HealthHazard ControlsASSESSMENTHFI Output• Safety procedures are integratedinto operational and maintenanceprocedures and relateddocumentation and on-linereference materials. Safetyprocedures contribute to the ShipSafety Management System (seeJSP 430 [Ref 5]).• Specification of health hazards.• Conditions under which theseemerge and the personnel mostat risk.• Specification of health hazardcontrol measures.• Conditions under which these areused and the personnel to whomthese should be applied.MAP-01-011Ref17.3.2.517.3.2.617.3.2.7Nov 2006 Page 2-30 Issue 4

Chapter 2 – Introduction To HFI Technical Areas2.3.3 Demonstration - Navigation Guidance TableHFI TechnicalAreaManpower,Complementing &AccommodationHFI ActivityProduce DraftManningRequirementsDEMONSTRATIONHFI Output• Draft Manning RequirementReport.MAP-01-011Ref4.3.3.1Produce DraftQuarter Bill (QB)FinaliseAccommodationStatement• The QB, which provides the basisfor the Scheme of Complement(SoC).• Several may exist for a vesseldepending on its status.• The SoC is the authority forappointing and drafting personnelto a vessel and to pre-joiningtraining courses.• The SoC will also detail how thevessel is progressively mannedup to acceptance into service.The output is the same as forProduce Draft AccommodationStatement in Assessment.Bunk requirements for thecomplement and for the following:4.3.3.24.3.3.3TeamOrganisationCrewCharacteristicsSpecify FutureOrganisation• Growth allowance (BoardMargin).• Embarked staff allowances (StaffMargin).• On-board allowance for femaleNaval personnel (FlexibilityMargin).• Training allowance (TrainingMargin).• Advancement allowance(Advancement Margin).The Accommodation Statement isincluded with the BMR in the SRD.• The information about team rolesin the final organisation is used todefine the PSTAD (see Chap 6)for the personnel associated withthe platform systems andequipment.Assess User Roles • User role performanceassessments.Validate ProjectSpecific TargetAudienceCharacteristics• Recommendations for job andtask re-design.• Re-definition of personnelrequirements.• Training recommendations.• Assessment of the validity andthe usefulness of the informationpresented in the current PSTAD.• Recommendations forimprovements whereinadequacies are identified.5.3.3.15.3.3.26.3.3.1Nov 2006 Page 2-31 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI TechnicalAreaTrainingGeneralArrangementHFI ActivityDEMONSTRATIONHFI OutputFinalise the PSTAD • The outputs are an updatedversion of those used in DraftPSTAD produced duringAssessment.Training activitiesrun acrossAssessment /Demonstration /ManufacturePhasesDevelop HFI DesignRules for GeneralArrangementSee Assessment. 7.3.2• HFI design rules for use indeveloping and evaluating thelayout and related acceptancecriteria.MAP-01-011Ref6.3.3.28.3.3.1Develop HFIPrototyping andDemonstrationRequirementsDevelop DesignRules for InternalCommunicationsHuman factors prototyping anddemonstration requirementsdocument specifying the following:• Identification of critical tasks andassociated design issues for theGeneral Arrangement in priorityorder of significance.• HFI assessment criteria includingthose that will contribute to formalacceptance.• The prototyping anddemonstration requirementsschedule for Design andManufacture stages.Specification of design rules forinternal communications. Thisdocument will include:• The number of broadcast netsrequired and any necessarycommunication pointidentification coding.• The key information flow,communication point locationsand ‘point-to-point’ connectionrequirements for all operationaland non-operationalcompartments and spaces, andfor damage control.• Guidelines for locating andpositioning communicationpoints.• Alarm and main broadcastmicrophone/transmit and speakerpositions including the requiredrange of output power levels.• The locations of telephones.• HFI assessment and acceptancecriteria.8.3.3.28.3.3.3Nov 2006 Page 2-32 Issue 4

Chapter 2 – Introduction To HFI Technical AreasHFI TechnicalAreaOperationalSpacesAccommodationSpacesHFI ActivityEvaluate Free DeckHeight, Doors andHatchwaysAssess ShipSystemsAssess InternalCommunicationsProduce DesignSpecifications forOperational SpacesSpecifyAccommodationDEMONSTRATIONHFI Output• HF assessment reportaddressing free deck height,doors and hatchways againstanthropometric criteria and crewactivities in each space.• Human factors assessment ofsystem routing with respect toadequate clearance, ease ofmaintenance and safety.• HF evaluation of the adequacy ofinternal communications.• The major HFI requirements andconstraints.• The manning requirements,tasks, jobs and workloadassessments for eachworkspace.• A listing of allocation of functions.• The data flow requirementsspecification.• The workstation requirementsspecification.• The workspace requirementsspecification.• HFI assessment and acceptancecriteria for each workspace.The Accommodation Definition, whichwill include:MAP-01-011Ref8.3.3.48.3.3.58.3.3.69.3.2.110.3.2.1• List of habitability factors relatedto design criteria.• Definition of the accommodationand habitability HFI designprinciples, rules and acceptancecriteria.• Deviations from relevant DefenceStandards.• Outline General Arrangementdrawings for accommodation,heads and bathrooms, messingarrangements and galleys.• Environmental factorsrequirements specifications.MiscellaneousSpacesSpecifyMiscellaneousSpacesThe specification of miscellaneousspaces, which includes:• HFI requirements for each type ofspace.• Traffic flow and environmentalrequirements for each space.• Identification and description ofany critical tasks and jobs to beundertaken in the space.• Workspace layout specification.11.3.1.1Nov 2006 Page 2-33 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI TechnicalAreaPersonnelMovement &Material HandlingHabitability &InternalEnvironmentHFI ActivityDefine All RoutesAssess RemovalRoutesAssess TrafficFlowsAssess Storing andRASAssessEmbarkation andDisembarkationAssess Ship SpaceFactorsDEMONSTRATIONHFI Output• Design Standards invoked (e.g.Def Stans).• Specification of acceptancelevels and criteria.For each of the categories of routespecify the following:• The recommended routesthrough the platform.• Primary and Secondary EscapeRoutes.• The minimum passagewayheights and widths and accesscross-sectional areas.• The locations of material liftingand handling gear together withminimum Safe Working Load(SWL).• The maximum route length.• The minimum dimensions ofwaiting areas for troopembarkation and disembarkation,catering areas and muster points.• HFI assessment and acceptancecriteria.Note … The spatial and handlingrequirements can generally bespecified on a minimum, or maximum,value basis for each routing category.These should be mandatory. Thepreferred routes for each evolutioncan only be recommended, notmandated, unless some overridingdesign reasons are apparent.• HFI assessments of removalagainst assessment andacceptance criteria.• Empirical estimates of actualtraffic flow and identification ofbottlenecks, hazards etc.• Escape Analysis andidentification of congestion orqueues.• HFI assessments of storing andRAS against assessment andacceptance criteria.• Empirical estimates ofembarkation and disembarkationrate and identification ofbottlenecks and hazards.• Assessments of the effects ofShip spatial layout on crewperceptions of habitability.MAP-01-011Ref12.3.3.112.3.3.212.3.3.312.3.3.412.3.3.513.3.3.1Nov 2006 Page 2-34 Issue 4

Chapter 2 – Introduction To HFI Technical AreasHFI TechnicalAreaHFI ActivityAssess SocialFactorsAssessOrganisationalFactorsAssess OperationalFactorsAssess MentalFactorsAssess PersonnelFactorsAssess PhysicalFactorsDEMONSTRATIONHFI Output• Assessments of the effects ofhabitability factors on socialfactors.• Assessments of the effects ofhabitability factors onorganisational factors.• Assessments of the effects ofoperational factors on crewperceptions of habitability.• Assessments of the effects ofhabitability factors on crewperformance and stress.• Assessments of the interaction ofpersonnel characteristics withhabitability factors.The assessments of physical factorsto determine likely effect onhabitability and to check the following:MAP-01-011Ref13.3.3.213.3.3.313.3.3.413.3.3.513.3.3.613.3.3.7Assess WorkspaceEnvironmentAssess WorkstationEnvironmentAssess Off-DutyEnvironment• Noise and vibration assessmentsdefining conformance withspecifications and standards.• Assessments of heating,ventilation and air-conditioningagainst specifications andstandards.• Assessments of ambient andspecific lighting and levels ofglare against specifications andstandards.• Assessments of atmosphericmonitoring and control systemsfor operability against standards.• Assessments of radiation levels,risks and protective measures.• Assessment of the adequacy,operability, safety and hygiene ofwaste disposal facilities.• Assessments of the actual rangeof ambient environmental factors,the effectiveness ofenvironmental controls and theeffect on personnel in eachworkspace.• Assessments of the actual rangeof ambient and task-specificenvironmental factors, theeffectiveness of environmentalcontrols and the effect onpersonnel at each workstation.• Assessments of the actual rangeof ambient environmental factors,the effectiveness ofenvironmental controls and theeffect on personnel in each area.13.3.3.813.3.3.913.3.3.10Nov 2006 Page 2-35 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI TechnicalAreaEquipment LayoutOperability andUser-EquipmentInteractionHFI ActivitySpecifyCompartmentWorkspace LayoutSpecify WorkstationLayoutPrototypeWorkstation LayoutDEMONSTRATIONHFI Output• Compartment workspacedrawings reflecting the spatialaspects of the layout andjuxtaposition of userworkstations, equipments,bulkheads, hatches, windowsand trunking including:ooooOperational compartmentlayout.Equipment spaces includingmaintenance access.Escape routes, doors andhatchways.Internal communications andhuman-human informationflow.• Workstation visibility arcs andauditory requirements.• Console and panel layouts andgroupings.• Seating design, movement andpositioning.• Work surfaces and storagespecifications.• Maintenance accessspecifications• Workstation material and finishspecifications.• Evaluations of each workstationlayout and recommendations forre-design.Specify User Tasks • Task descriptions for eachanticipated user role in theequipment.Apply HumanFactors Style GuideSpecify User-Equipment Interface• Completed checklist of StyleGuide recommendations againstactual design conformance ornon-conformance for eachdialogue.• Full specification of the userequipmentinterface including:oooooooDisplay devices.Input controls.Window types and controls.Display designs.Menu structures andcontrols.Error messages.Error recovery controls.MAP-01-011Ref14.3.2.114.3.2.214.3.2.315.3.3.115.3.3.215.3.3.3Nov 2006 Page 2-36 Issue 4

Chapter 2 – Introduction To HFI Technical AreasHFI TechnicalAreaMaintenance andSupportHFI ActivityConduct User-Equipment InterfacePrototypingSpecify UserSupport FacilitiesSpecify OperatingProceduresAssessMaintenanceAccessDEMONSTRATIONHFI Output• Results of user prototypingindicating achievement or nonachievementof operability criteriaby each dialogue and feedbackabout the operability of thedisplays and controls forming theuser-equipment interface.• User support facilities including:ooooOn-line help.Reference materials.User documentation.Job aids.• Operating procedures coveringall on-line and off-line tasksperformed by each user role.• HFI assessments are integratedwith the maintenance trialsdocumentation described in theILS Plan (ILSP).MAP-01-011Ref15.3.3.415.3.3.515.3.3.616.3.3.1SafetyAssess ShipHusbandryWorkloadAssessMaintenanceCommonalityAssess Operabilityof MaintenanceFacilitiesAssessMaintenanceDocumentationAssessMaintenanceProceduresAssess SafetyFacilitiesAssess SafetyProcedures• HFI assessments are integratedwith the maintenance trialsdocumentation described in theILSP.• HFI assessments are integratedwith the maintenance trialsdocumentation described in theILSP.• Assessments of the consistency,effectiveness and efficiency ofthe maintenance and supportfacilities.• Assessments of the maintenancedocumentation.• Assessments of the maintenanceprocedures.• Assessments of the effectivenessof safety facilities.• Assessments of the safetyprocedures.16.3.3.216.3.3.316.3.3.416.3.3.516.3.3.617.3.3.117.3.3.2Assess Alarms andWarningsAssess HealthHazards andControlsAssess EscapeFacilitiesAssess Fire-Fighting andDamage Control• Assessment of the effectivenessand consistency of interpretationof alarms and warnings.• Assessments of the likelihood ofhealth hazards and theeffectiveness of controlmeasures.• Assessment of likelyeffectiveness, efficiency and risksof using escape facilities.• Assessment of the effectiveness,efficiency and risks arising duringfire fighting and damage controlactivities.17.3.3.317.3.3.417.3.3.517.3.3.6Nov 2006 Page 2-37 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI TechnicalAreaHFI ActivityAssess CBRNDFacilitiesDEMONSTRATIONHFI Output• Assessment of effectiveness,efficiency and risks of activitiesassociated with CBRNconditions.MAP-01-011Ref17.3.3.7Nov 2006 Page 2-38 Issue 4

Chapter 2 – Introduction To HFI Technical Areas2.3.4 Manufacture - Navigation Guidance TableHFI TechnicalAreaManpower,Complementing &AccommodationHFI ActivityFinalise ManningRequirementsMANUFACTUREHFI Output• See HF methods and Tools.• The manning estimatescontribute to the Final QB.MAP-01-011Ref4.3.4.1Finalise QB • Final QB. 4.3.4.2TeamOrganisationFinalise User Roles • Definition of user roles/teamorganisation.Support Trials andIntegration• Revised definition of userroles/team organisation.5.3.4.15.3.4.2TrainingOperationalSpacesTraining activitiesrun acrossAssessment /Demonstration /ManufacturePhasesProcure TrainingSolutionConduct TrainingDesignPlan Training Roll-OutSee Assessment. 7.3.2• A procured training solution. 7.3.3.1• Training Documentation andother supporting documentation.• A full training plan is developedspecifying when, where and towhom each training course isdelivered.Evaluate Training • Assessments of the validity ofeach training course.EvaluateOperational SpacesDesigns• Workspace assessments definingconformance with specificationsand standards.7.3.3.27.3.3.37.3.3.49.3.3.1AccommodationSpacesMiscellaneousSpacesEvaluateAccommodationProvisionEvaluateMiscellaneousSpaces• Workspace assessmentsevaluating level of conformancewith specifications andstandards, including theAccommodation Definition.• Workspace assessmentsdocumenting level ofconformance with specificationsand standards.10.3.3.111.3.2.1PersonnelMovement &Material HandlingSupport ContractorManufacturer• EER simulation results.• Support to acceptance/operabilitytrials results12.3.4.1Habitability &InternalEnvironmentDerive AssessmentCriteria• Confirmation of the acceptabilityof all habitability andenvironmental control systems.13.3.4.1Nov 2006 Page 2-39 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI TechnicalAreaEquipment LayoutHFI ActivityMonitor Feedbackfrom AcceptanceTrialsAssess WorkstationLayoutMANUFACTUREHFI Output• Confirmation of the acceptabilityof all habitability andenvironmental control systems.• Assessment of workstationlayout.MAP-01-011Ref13.3.4.214.3.3.1Operability andUser-EquipmentInteractionMaintenance andSupportSafetyAssess User-Equipment InterfaceConsistencyAssess User-Equipment InterfaceEfficiency andEffectivenessAssess UserSupport FacilitiesAssess OperatingProceduresCo-ordinate HFIAspects ofMaintenance WithTraining, Support,etc.MonitorMaintenanceOperability DuringAcceptance TrialsTransfer HFIInformation to DLO• Assessments of the consistencyof the user-equipment interface.• Assessments of the effectivenessof the user-equipment interface.• Assessments of the efficiency ofthe user-equipment interface.• Assessments of the operatingprocedures.• Confirmation that all HFImaintenance and support issuesin HFI Log are closed off.• Check-list for future audit oftraining and support facilities andsystems.• Confirmation that maintenanceand support facilities andassociated documentation areacceptable.• Log of all outstanding operabilityissues and schedule for theirresolution.• Collated HFI data for use in Inserviceand disposal phases.Devise SystemSafety HFIAcceptanceCriteria 2 • Confirmation of the acceptabilityof all safety managementfacilities and systems.Provide HF Input toAcceptance Trials• Confirmation of the acceptabilityof all safety managementfacilities and systems.15.3.4.115.3.4.215.3.4.315.3.4.416.3.4.116.3.4.216.3.4.317.3.4.117.3.4.2Periodic HFI Audits • HFI Audit reports. 17.3.4.3Provide Support to • Input to project quality systemOther Projectrecords.Safety-RelatedActivities 3 • Specific HFI data.17.3.4.42Described under Manufacture Phase Activities but should start earlier. See also POSMS [Ref 37] SMP10.3Similar activity also applicable at other CADMID phases.Nov 2006 Page 2-40 Issue 4

Chapter 2 – Introduction To HFI Technical Areas2.3.5 In-Service - Navigation Guidance TableHFI TechnicalAreaManpower,Complementing &AccommodationHFI ActivitySupportModificationIN-SERVICEHFI OutputMAP-01-011Ref• Revised QB. 4.3.5.1TeamOrganisationGeneralArrangementOperationalSpacesSupportModificationsProvide ProactiveSupportInput to In-ServiceHFI AuditSupportModification• Revised user roles/teamorganisation specification (asinputs to activities by thoseresponsible for trainingspecification, recruitment andILS).• Revised definition of userroles/team organisation.• Lessons learned (as input toappropriate organisations/databases to ensure these areutilised in the future).• HFI audit/log document (a livingdocument throughout In-Servicephase).• Information to stakeholders thatare in a position to benefit (e.g. infuture projects) from lessonslearned. May be via a nonprojectspecific organisation suchas SSG.• Workspace designs andassessments definingconformance with specificationsand standards.5.3.5.15.3.5.28.3.5.19.3.4.1AccommodationSpacesMiscellaneousSpacesPersonnelMovement &Material HandlingSupportModificationSupportModificationSupportModifications• Workspace assessmentsevaluating level of conformancewith specifications andstandards, including theAccommodation Definition.• Should in-service modificationsnecessitate changes to themiscellaneous spaces design,then the procedure for In-ServiceHFI activities (see Chap 8)should be followed.• Revised removal routes, trafficflow designs, storing and RASspecifications andembarkation/disembarkationarrangements as appropriate.10.3.4.111.3.312.3.5.1Provide ProactiveSupport• Revised personnel movementand material handling design.• Lessons learned (as input toappropriate organisations /databases to ensure these areutilised in the future)12.3.5.2Nov 2006 Page 2-41 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI TechnicalAreaHabitability &InternalEnvironmentEquipment LayoutOperability andUser-EquipmentInteractionHFI ActivityMonitor In-ServiceUser FeedbackIdentifyOpportunities forEnvironmentalImprovementsSupportModificationsProvide ProactiveSupportContinueManufacture PhaseAssessmentsIN-SERVICEHFI Output• Quantitative and qualitativeassessments of habitability andenvironment in a range of serviceconditions.• Proposal for In-Service and midtermrefurbishmentimprovements to habitability andinternal environmental controlsystems.• Revised specifications anddesign for equipment layout.• Revised specifications anddesign.• Recommendations and lessonslearned for future projects.MAP-01-011Ref13.3.5.113.3.5.214.3.4.114.3.4.2• New requirements. 15.3.5.1Maintenance andSupportSafetySupportModificationsMonitor Efficiencyand Effectiveness ofMaintenanceInitiate in-ServiceHFI Audits asRequired.Review OperationalReports forEvidence of HFIIssuesTransfer HFIaspects of SafetyCase to DLOCollect In-ServiceSafety DataReview OperationalSafety DataFeed Safety ReviewResults toCustomer 2• Revised interface specifications. 15.3.5.2• Confirmation that maintenancefacilities and procedures areadequate.• Results of HFI maintenance &Support audits.• Confirmation that operational andmaintenance & supportprocesses adequately identifyand resolve HFI issues.16.3.5.116.3.5.216.3.5.3• Transfer record. 17.3.5.1• Safety system performance data. 17.3.5.2• Quantitative and qualitativeassessments of the operation ofsafety systems in a range ofservice conditions.• Improvements to safety systemperformance and safety wholelifemanagement systems.17.3.5.317.3.5.4Nov 2006 Page 2-42 Issue 4

Chapter 2 – Introduction To HFI Technical Areas2.3.6 Disposal - Navigation Guidance TableHFI TechnicalAreaPersonnelMovement &Material HandlingHFIActivityProvideDisposalPlan SupportDISPOSALHFI Output• Removal routes specification fordisposal.MAP-01-011Ref12.3.6.1Operability andUser-EquipmentInteractionSupportFutureProjects• HFI audit trail log of lessons learnedregarding interface design, for futureprojects’ use.15.3.6.1SafetyEstablishLegislativeandRegulatoryClimateCollate HFIInformationFrom EarlyProjectPhasesIdentifySafety-CriticalTasks andAt-RiskGroupsIdentify &AnalyseHazardsDeviseHazardControls• Collate set of HF requirements for HFdisposal activities and tasks.• Key HF information to provide input toDisposal Safety Case.• Safety-critical task list.• At-risk group list.17.3.6.117.3.6.217.3.6.3• HF input to Disposal Safety Case. 17.3.6.4• HF input to Disposal Safety Case. 17.3.6.5Nov 2006 Page 2-43 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)Nov 2006 Page 2-44 Issue 4MAP-01-011 CH 02_30.doc

CHAPTER 3 – HFI DESIGN PROCESSCONTENTS3.1 Overview of HFI Design Process .................................................................................3-33.1.1 Early Mission and Function Analysis ....................................................3-53.1.2 Effective Allocation of Functions...........................................................3-63.1.3 The Role of the Target Audience Description.......................................3-63.1.4 User-Centred Design ............................................................................3-73.2 HFI Design for Platforms and Equipments .........................................................3-93.3 Quality Assurance of HFI Design........................................................................3-9Nov 2006 Page 3-1 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)Nov 2006 Page 3-2 Issue 4

Chapter 3 – HFI Design Process3.1 Overview of HFI Design ProcessHuman Factors is a scientific and engineering discipline. It provides concepts,knowledge, methods and data for use in the design, realisation, evaluation andsupport of naval systems, platforms and equipment. Human Factors Integration(HFI) draws on this discipline to provide a structured, effective and auditableprocess. The technical guidance presented in Chapters 4 through 17 and theassociated annexes is based on the HFI design process.HFI is an evolving discipline. New information, techniques and tools are beingdeveloped both for the MoD, industry and commerce in general. As such, HFIspecialist advice may be necessary when deciding on the best way of applyingthe design process to a specific procurement. HFI standards (Annex 2) provideadvice about proven methods and data for use in systems engineering. Theactivities and methods that are applied in the HFI design process during platformand equipment development are presented in Figure 3-1 in schematic form.Details of HF methods and tools are summarised in Annex 3.The components of the design process are HFI activities. These have beenarranged into a ‘Core Design Process’ representing typical dependenciesbetween methods irrespective of the procurement Phase – in practice it is highlyiterative. The activities presented in the upper-left and upper-right shaded boxesare applied continuously during product development. The activities presentedalongside the core process are generally used for product evaluation or toproduce supporting data. The actual activities that are carried out and thesequence in which they are performed will vary depending upon whether theproduct is a complete platform, a piece of equipment or a system.The core design process shown in Figure 3-1 is a collation of the activities thatcould be applied in naval equipment programmes. The actual HFI designprocess and methods used in any specific platform or equipment design willdepend on the scope of the programme and the Phase of procurement includingin-service updates.The following sections characterise some of the most important aspects of theHFI design process for Sea Systems.In reality, it is often impractical (and possibly undesirable) to re-design equipmentto suit particular sub-sets of user needs. This is increasingly true for MOTS andCOTS solutions, where the benefits of using a proven, standard solution withknown training implication, may outweigh any benefits from a closer matching ofsolution to technical requirements. In such cases, the need to fully explore andanalyse the implications of equipment choices on the human component of asystem becomes paramount.The goal of the HFI process must be to successfully integrate the human andtechnical components of a system, within any constraints set by the overalloperating context. Similarly, any assumption that HFI is more closely associatedwith a particular project area, such as logistics, must be dispelled.Whilst a responsibility for the management of HFI within an IPT is sometimesaligned with the management of ILS, this is a matter of organisationalconvenience, not one of technical principle. In order to bring the necessarybenefits to a project, HFI resources must fully interact with all technical andsupport areas of the project.Nov 2006 Page 3-3 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)CORE HFI DESIGN PROCESSOperationalScenarioDescriptionMission Analysis & SystemRequirementsHuman FactorsTrade-OffAnalysisTarget AudienceDescriptionFunction AnalysisHealth & SafetyAnalysisTraining NeedsAnalysisAllocation of FunctionsEnvironmentalDesignUserPerformanceCriteriaIdentifyMission-CriticalTasksHuman FactorsStyle GuideTask DescriptionTask AnalysisUser-EquipmentInterface DesignOperabilityCriteriaWorkloadAnalysisTask SynthesisUser-EquipmentInterfacePrototypingOperabilityEvaluationHuman ReliabilityAnalysisSkills AnalysisWorkstationDesignSynthetic UserModellingTask & RolePerformanceModellingRole DefinitionWorkspaceDesignLink AnalysisTask & RolePrototypingJob DesignCore ProcessActivityAppliedcontinuously inproductdevelopmentComplementValidationTeam DesignKEYProductevaluation andcore processsupport activityFigure 3-1: HFI Design ProcessNov 2006 Page 3-4 Issue 4

Chapter 3 – HFI Design Process3.1.1 Early Mission and Function AnalysisThe Concept of Operations (CONOPS) for the platform and/or equipment isdeveloped from early studies into Mission Analysis and System Requirements.The Function Analysis and the Project Specific Target Audience Description(PSTAD) provide information to allow functions to be allocated betweenpersonnel and equipment. However, these documents may not be available untila later stage in the design process. The URD should therefore form the basis forsuch work until such time that the Concept of Operations and the TargetAudience Description (TAD) are derived. Formal structured methods areavailable to support detailed Allocation of Functions in critical areas (see Annex3). The remainder of the core process consists of an iterative process ofaddressing and understanding human task, skill, role, job and team implicationsof the evolving design so as to optimise the total system in terms of operability,habitability and health and safety.More of the defence budget is spent on personnel than on equipment. Forexample, the Whole-Life Cost (WLC) of each complemented billet in a frigate hasbeen estimated at £1M, excluding ashore support costs. Each crew memberaccounts for approximately 5 tonnes of displacement adding £70k per person tothe Unit Production Cost (UPC) of a platform. HFI provides an importantcontribution to gaining a full understanding of the manning implications of newSea Systems. This is essential in order to obtain the correct Balance ofInvestment (BOI). In order to achieve this, the human implications and whole-lifecosts must be explored from the earliest stage for new platforms, equipment ormajor modifications to equipment. Cost avoidance examples have beenestablished by the US Army MANPRINT programme, such as $3.29B on theComanche helicopter programme 1 .A Manpower Cost Model is available, which incorporates factors for rank,specialism and training 2 . This model should be used to assess futurecomplement cost implications. It extends the capitation rates to include morespecific details of the content and cost of training. Recruitment and basic trainingare also accounted for in the model.Early Human Factors Analysis (EHFA) provides a means of carrying out HumanFactors trade-off analysis and is used to explore system options proposed inresponse to mission and operational requirements.Examples of the sort of trade-offs that can be made in naval equipmentprocurement include the following:• Complement size versus the use of automation - for example modernRoyal Fleet Auxiliary (RFA) vessels have unmanned machinery spacesand can operate the Bridge with 2 personnel.• Skill levels versus use of automation – it currently takes from eight to tenyears to develop a fully skilled Warfare Officer and from three to six years afully skilled Artificer.1 See H R Booher ‘MANPRINT Cost Benefits on US Army Systems’ [Ref 13].2 See ‘Reduced Manning – The Way Ahead‘ [Ref 14].Nov 2006 Page 3-5 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Operability versus training – the user interface of many of the computersystems used on-board could now be built with a common style andfeatures to eliminate the cost and time of re-learning basic operating skills.• Platform motion versus human performance – motion-induced interruptions(MIIs) to task performance become extremely hazardous at frequencies offive or more per minute, the MIIs must therefore be balanced against otherconstraints on the stability of the platform to optimise the effects of motionon the working and living environment.• Habitability versus retention – the retention of skilled personnel is vital andthis is affected by the quality of the vessels accommodation and thedemands of the watch-keeping policy.It is vital that human tasks, workload, complement size, operability, habitability,training and health and safety are continually assessed as an integral part of theearly analysis of the function, capability, and performance of Sea Systems.Operational scenario description is an important technique for supporting this andlater design assessment.3.1.2 Effective Allocation of FunctionsThroughout the early stages of design, decisions are made about the allocationof functions between personnel and equipment. These decisions willsubsequently affect the performance of every evolution on board the vessel.Even relatively simple choices between commercial-off-the-shelf equipment orabout the finish and build standard of platform surfaces and compartments candrastically affect subsequent crew workload. Computer-based systemsincreasingly form the core of the most important on-board equipments. It isestimated that up to 50% of the software of modern computer-based systems isassociated with the development of the Human-Computer Interface (HCI). Up to80% of reported real and apparent software problems, however, are associatedwith poor operability. It costs fifteen times more to fix software problems aftercoding has commenced than to do so during the specification of functions.Identifying operability problems at an early stage therefore reduces bothdevelopment and whole-life costs.Effective allocation of functions between human and automation can only occur ifuser performance criteria and operability criteria are clearly identified and used.This is an iterative process requiring close co-ordination of HFI with warship orequipment engineering. The identification of mission-critical tasks is a vitalactivity that can short-circuit the need for a comprehensive task analysis at theearly stage of design. If mission-critical task performance of personnel is likely tobe compromised then the allocation of functions needs to be re-visited.Prototypes of the Man-Machine Interface (MMI), the use of mathematical modelsof task performance and simulation-based design enable human performance tobe explored before development commences. These activities can be focusedon the areas of greatest risk to performance or to health and safety.3.1.3 The Role of the Target Audience DescriptionThe PSTAD plays a key role in the core process and at all stages of thedevelopment and support of Sea Systems. The PSTAD provides a regularlyupdated record of the capabilities and limitations of the people who will eventuallyman the system. Information is collected about physical size, strength, andNov 2006 Page 3-6 Issue 4

Chapter 3 – HFI Design Processaptitudes and trained skills. For example, it is vital that doors and hatches onmixed gender vessels can be operated by all RN personnel. This means thatstrength and body dimensions need to be considered; for example, if an objecthas to be lifted, a reduction of 40% in load is required for the ‘average’ femalefrom that for the ‘average’ male.3.1.4 User-Centred DesignThe sailor must be placed at the centre of the systems engineering processduring the detailed design, development and subsequent support stages. HFIprovides a variety of methods that actively support a user-centred designapproach.In parallel with the logical and physical specification and design of the platform orthe equipment, the tasks, roles and jobs assigned to humans must also be clearlyunderstood. In future systems user and maintainer roles are likely to be changedfrom those found in current systems. HFI activities provide a systematicapproach to developing and specifying the possible roles that users may perform,based on the analysis of tasks and skills. These roles can be explored usingprototypes of the evolving system to ensure that user workload is controlled andthe man-machine interface supports role performance. Optimised manning policyis pushing down the size of the teams in future vessels. Inevitably this will impacton job descriptions and team organisation. These effects need to be understoodparticularly as new technology enables far greater flexibility in allocating roles onboard,and now, even remotely from the vessel. Job design and team designmethods assist this understanding and ensure that new jobs and teamorganisations are both viable and effective.Health and safety must be continually assessed throughout the systemsengineering process. In an estimated 72-95% of accidents on board or involvingvessels, human error has been identified as a causal factor; that is, the causecan be ascribed, in part, to the actions or decisions of personnel responsible foroperating or maintaining a vessel 3 . Decisions about the design of a vessel andits equipment that fail to take HFI into account can increase the probability ofhuman error. HFI provides the means to estimate the likelihood of such errorthrough the use of human reliability analysis. Simulation-based design, makinguse of synthetic user modelling, is a powerful method for exploring safety risksbefore build has commenced. This approach can also be used to configure andassess virtual workstations and workspaces to optimise the location of displays,controls, traffic routes and other aspects of platform layout and equipment fit.3 See Prof. N Fukichi ‘User Requirements and Operational Feedback Safety NavigationReducing Number of Operators’ [Ref 15].Nov 2006 Page 3-7 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)Disciplines:Operational AnalysisWarship DesignSystems EngineeringIntegrated Logistics SupportSafety AnalysisSystems Approach to TrainingHFI Technical AreasChapter 4 - Manpower, Complementing &AccommodationChapter 5 - Team OrganisationChapter 6 - Crew CharacteristicsChapter 7 - TrainingChapter 8 - General ArrangementChapter 9 - Operational SpacesChapter 10 - Accommodation SpacesChapter 11 - Miscellaneous SpacesChapter 12 - Personnel Movement &Materials HandlingDetailed HFIActivities for eachHFI Technical AreaChapter 13 - Habitability & InternalEnvironmentChapter 14 - Equipment LayoutChapter 15 - Operability & User-EquipmentInteractionChapter 16 - Maintenance & SupportChapter 17 - SafetyAnnexesAnnex 1 - ReferencesAnnex 2 - Standards & GuidelinesAnnex 3 - HFI Methods & ToolsFigure 3-2: The Relationship between HFI Design andHFI Technical Areas and ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 3-8 Issue 4

Chapter 3 – HFI Design Process3.2 HFI Design for Platforms and EquipmentsThe HFI activities described in the HFI Technical Areas (Chapters 4 through 17)apply to both platforms and equipments. HFI Technical Areas are based on thegeneral application of HFI design to technical issues for Sea Systems. Figure 3-2illustrates the relationship between the HFI design process and the specific HFIactivities for the platform or equipment. The HFI design process will itself interactwith the processes of other disciplines (see MAP-01-010, Chapter 4).The HFI design process is an integral part of the overall development of products.It is conducted in conjunction with the other disciplines that are used for SeaSystems. The platform and equipment HFI Technical Areas represent specificdesign areas. The application of HFI design to these areas leads to the activitiesdescribed in Chapters 4 through 17 of this guide.3.3 Quality Assurance of HFI DesignThe HFI Technical Area Chapters are presented in a standardised formcomprising three main sections, denoted as Sections 1, 2 and 3 within eachchapter:1. Section 1 – HFI Technical Issues.2. Section 2 – HFI Process.3. Section 3 – HFI Activities.Within the first section (HFI Technical Issues), the HFI Technical Area isintroduced and key HFI issues are identified and discussed.In the second section (HFI Process), HFI Activities are presented in tabular form.Each chapter contains a figure that indicates the relationship between individualHFI Activities, and the way in which they relate to the six CADMID phases.Standards that are relevant to the HFI Technical Area are then listed in tabularform. Finally, HFI Responsibilities are summarised in list form.The third section (HFI Activities) comprises a series of activity definition tables,listed against the appropriate CADMID phase; again presented in a standardisedform. Each table lists the following:• The purpose of the HFI Activity.• Typical input information required to carry out the activity.• A list of the appropriate HF methods that may be used (see Annex 3).• The individual steps that need to be carried out and, where appropriate,reference to other activities and stakeholders that are involved.• The outputs expected from the activity.Nov 2006 Page 3-9 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)A major responsibility facing the HFI Focus is to ensure that an appropriate HFIdesign process is proposed and applied by Suppliers. A number of sources areprovided within this guide for this purpose. These comprise the following:1. HFI Process – The overall process as set out in this guide, it addressesthe needs of a complete warship or support vessel project. For morelimited application (e.g. to refits or specific equipment upgrades) theprocess can be adapted to the level of detail required by the project needs.2. HFI Activities – These describe the purpose, inputs, methods, steps andthe output of each activity in each HFI Technical Area.3. HF Methods – HF Methods are used to achieve the purposes of the HFIactivities. Outline descriptions of methods are given in Annex 3.4. HF Tools – Tools support the application of HF Methods and are used toachieve particular outputs or results. Examples of tools are given in Annex3.5. HFI Standards – A full directory of HFI-related standards applicable toeach HFI Technical Area is given in Annex 2.Nov 2006 Page 3-10 Issue 4MAP-01-011 CH 03_09.doc

CHAPTER 4 – MANPOWER, COMPLEMENTING ANDACCOMMODATIONCONTENTS4.1 HFI Technical Issues....................................................................................................4-34.1.1 Overview...............................................................................................4-34.1.2 Stakeholders.........................................................................................4-34.1.3 Complementing Analysis ......................................................................4-44.1.4 Complement Optimisation & Validation ................................................4-64.1.5 Accommodation ....................................................................................4-74.2 HFI Process ......................................................................................................4-104.2.1 HFI Focus Responsibilities .................................................................4-124.2.2 Relevant Standards ............................................................................4-124.3 HFI Activities.....................................................................................................4-144.3.1 Concept Phase Activities ....................................................................4-144.3.1.1 Develop Manning Concept ...............................................4-144.3.1.2 Produce Draft Manning Options .......................................4-164.3.1.3 Produce Outline Basic Manning Requirement .................4-184.3.1.4 Produce Outline Accommodation Statement ...................4-204.3.1.5 Validate Complement Size ...............................................4-214.3.2 Assessment Phase Activities..............................................................4-224.3.2.1 Produce Draft Basic Manning Requirement .....................4-224.3.2.2 Produce Draft Accommodation Statement .......................4-234.3.3 Demonstration Phase Activities ..........................................................4-244.3.3.1 Produce Draft Manning Requirement...............................4-244.3.3.2 Produce Draft Quarter Bill ................................................4-244.3.3.3 Finalise Accommodation Statement.................................4-254.3.4 Manufacture Phase Activities..............................................................4-264.3.4.1 Finalise Manning Requirement.........................................4-264.3.4.2 Finalise Quarter Bill ..........................................................4-264.3.5 In-Service Phase Activities .................................................................4-274.3.5.1 Support Modification.........................................................4-274.3.6 Disposal Phase Activities....................................................................4-27Nov 2006 Page 4-1 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)Nov 2006 Page 4-2 Issue 4

Chapter 4 – Manpower, Complementing and Accommodation4.1 HFI Technical Issues4.1.1 OverviewComplementing is the process of developing and assuring a viable, sustainableand effective manpower organisation that is optimised to support and meet theneeds of both a specific capability and the whole Navy as expressed throughindividuals, teams and communities, as well as systems, platforms and theService. 1A sufficient amount of accommodation at an acceptable level of habitability is tobe provided for the Complement and in order to meet other operational andorganisational demands throughout the life of the platform.HFI Technical IssuesFundamentally, manpower is the response to a requirement to perform (a rangeof) tasks that taken together comprise the Concept of Operations specified for asystem.Manning refers to the manpower requirements for compartments or to operateequipment; complementing refers to the total requirement at the level of thewhole ship.The basic working document employed by FLEET NPS when designing aScheme of Complement (SoC) for a new platform, is the Quarter Bill (QB).Supporting information is contained in the Basic Manning Requirement (BMR),which is effectively a draft QB. In early stages of platform design, when anumber of platform and fit options exist, a corresponding number of versions ofthe BMR can exist. These versions represent the basis on which manpowercosts are calculated for inclusion in the whole-life costs (WLC) estimates and bywhich the platform options are compared.The Human Factors Integration (HFI) Focus is responsible for providingestimates of the manpower required to operate and maintain the equipment tothe IPT leader as part of the above process.4.1.2 StakeholdersA list of potential stakeholders for this area is given below. This list is notexhaustive and should be seen to be a guide only. HFI Foci should refine this listbased upon the structure of their project, the attendees at the relevant HFSG orHFWG and in light of guidance and requests from industry, DEC and Customer 2representatives.• FLEET NPS BS• FLEET-NLM• DEC• FOTR• INM• IPT HFI Foci• MLS IPT CG• SSG-ShipDes1 See ‘Complementing Method and Tool Support Strategy Study - Final Report’ [Ref 16].Nov 2006 Page 4-3 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)4.1.3 Complementing AnalysisHFI Technical IssuesComplementing for future platforms must balance the following competingpressures: 2• The requirement to provide manpower that can deliver the platform’sspecified levels of operational capability and the flexibility to supportoperations other than war.• The need for sustainable (platform-derived) Branch structures.• Opportunities for smaller complement sizes and deskilling through the useof automation.• Ensuring that support requirements in the Naval Bases are compatible withplatform manning strategies.The cost of manpower across the Naval Service is a key factor in constrainingunit complements to the minimum necessary to meet operational requirements.Within the Principal Personnel Officer’s (PPO) organisation the ComplementingSection of FLEET NPS is the authority on complementing matters. FLEET NPSproduces and maintains the two principal documentary outputs of thecomplementing process which remain with a Ship for its entire life:• The Quarter Bill (QB), which is the guide to the stationing of the Ship’sCompany and shows how the numbers allowed in the Scheme ofComplement (SoC) have been assessed. As a minimum the QB showsState 2 and State 1 manning for each department.• The SoC, which is the detailed means by which the manning indicated inthe QB, is fulfilled. The SoC is held electronically within NMMIS, isavailable in hard copy and is the sole authority for drafting of people tounits and any associated courses. Collectively all SoCs dictate thenumbers, trades and skills required in the Naval Service.Early estimates for the size and composition (Basic Manning Requirement(BMR)) of the Ship’s Company are compiled using a number of approaches toensure a balanced allocation of manpower to meet the human effort required tooperate the Ship. The central framework is described by the series of PrimeStates and manning policies for the departments and sub-departments outlined inAnnex D to BR 4017 ‘Naval Manning Manual’ [Ref 18]. The Prime Statesunderpin the QB and are the starting point from which all other organisationalaspects should flow. Ensuring a balanced and realistic allocation of effort tomeet all requirements will demand a number of iterations of the estimate followedby adjustments to manning, organisation and ultimately even a ‘new’ type ofperson for the Project Specific Target Audience Description (PSTAD).Once the BMR, equipment characteristics, operating, maintenance and supportrequirements have reached a sufficient level of maturity work can begin onassembling a Draft QB. In reality the BMR and the Draft QB ‘grow’ in parallel andthere is no standard stage at which one takes over from the other. A definitive2 See ‘Complementing for Future Platforms’ [Ref 17].Nov 2006 Page 4-4 Issue 4

Chapter 4 – Manpower, Complementing and AccommodationSoC will exist once the QB is finalised and then the emphasis shifts to thedetailed through-life work involved with ensuring that the SoC will cause the rightpeople to join the ship at the right time having had the right training.The QB is associated with the Operational Performance Statements (OPS) (seeChap 7 - Training) for each post required on a vessel. The SoC provides moredetailed job descriptions including the ADQUALS required for each post. All suchinformation relating to the competency requirements of personnel are reflected inthe PSTAD (see Annex 3) for the vessel or equipment. The PSTAD is developedas part of the procurement process (see Chap 6 - Crew Characteristics).Manning studies are performed during the procurement to develop the BMR.Manning study meetings are held, at which DEC, CINCFLEET, the PPO, DefenceProcurement Agency (DPA) and the Ship Support Agency (SSA) arerepresented. Early Complementing information is required for the followingreasons:HFI Technical Issues• To inform long-term manpower planning.• To aid early design and costing activities.Careful account must be taken of the lead-time for the development of sufficientmanpower to enable the SoCs for the future Fleet to be filled. For example, ittakes eight to ten years to develop a Principal Warfare Officer and from three tosix years to develop an Artificer. Fleet NPS contributes information about RNmanning policy and constraints while DPA will conduct the detailed manningstudies and provide data for discussion. Accurate complementing informationrequires comprehensive task analysis based on the following:• Concept of Operations.• Equipment fit.• Operating policy.• Maintenance and Support requirements (Integrated Logistics Support (ILS)and Availability, Reliability & Maintainability (ARM)).• Non-equipment related tasks.• ‘Effective work effort’ of individuals and teams.• In practice very early estimates are based on:ooooExisting best practice and organisation.Recognition of ‘lessons learnt’.Best estimates of future equipment manpower requirements.Arbitrary manpower ‘caps’.Aspects of manning requirements are determined by existing policy, for exampleBR 2170 ‘Ship CBRNDC Manual‘ [Ref 19] dictates the manning policy fordamage control readiness and survivability. The overall aim is to ensure that theworkload on a vessel is achievable at the lowest possible manpower cost. DPA,Support Groups (Pricing Forecasting Group (PFG)) can provide assistance in theNov 2006 Page 4-5 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI Technical Issuesestimation of manpower costs. Such costs can be used in conjunction withestimated Unit Production Costs (UPC) and Whole-Life Costs (WLC) todetermine the most cost-effective mix of vessel, equipment and manpower.The DEC is likely to set manpower targets for the Combat System team and thatof other major equipments and the size of this team will require detailed scrutinythroughout the early stages of the procurement. MLS IPT and the IPT are likelyto be involved in the manning working groups, which monitors the evolvingorganisation and size of these teams.4.1.4 Complement Optimisation & ValidationComplement optimisation is an on-going process requiring continual assessmentof the types of activity that the crew has to perform. In broad terms theseactivities can be categorised as follows:1. Type 1 – Scheduled, continuous or regular tasks.2. Type 2 – Intermittent, irregular but expected tasks.3. Type 3 – Unscheduled, emergency tasks.Automation and multi-skilling are possible strategies for reducing Type 1 tasks.Type 2 and 3 tasks include fault diagnosis and repair, Replenishment at Sea(RAS), boarding, guarding, Ship husbandry, fire-fighting and damage control.These may require variable numbers of personnel depending on the nature of theactivity and the level of risk to the vessel that is involved. Increasing automationof Type 1 tasks (like Command, weapons control, machinery control, routinemaintenance, food preparation and cleaning) may decrease the availability ofpersonnel at the more junior level for Type 2 and 3 tasks. Various methods canbe used to reduce the incidence of, and the manpower needed for, Type 2 and 3tasks. These methods range from the basic design of compartments and internallayout to the provision of automatic surveillance and damage control equipment.Complementing is therefore a complex process, partly because of the amount ofdata. A number of computer models have been developed by the UK and othernavies to aid the project with generation of early complement estimates, and thenwith validation of the BMR and QB. SSG sponsor a Complement ValidationModel, Complementing Regimes Evaluated for Warships, Version 2 (CREW II),which provides vessel statistics based on the following:• Mission demands.• Manpower levels and skills.• Equipment manning levels and maintenance demands.Manning estimation requires the matching of personnel to the workload imposedby operational jobs and other duties. The jobs, tasks and associated workload aswell as underlying skills and training requirements are defined by HFI activities.These activities are undertaken in conjunction with the specification of equipmentcharacteristics and the definition of operational mission requirements.Nov 2006 Page 4-6 Issue 4

Chapter 4 – Manpower, Complementing and AccommodationThe following feedback from operational Combat System teams 3 is relevant tothe manning of equipment:• The allocation of manpower needs consideration to match therequirements of the state of readiness and the scenario. This will includethe performance of mission critical tasks. The risk associated withmanpower reduction requires assessment. An inappropriate reduction inthe numbers or the quality of the personnel might reduce the effectivenessof the Combat System.• One consequence of a misjudged reduction in manpower would be poormaintenance and husbandry. If there are insufficient personnel ofappropriate ranks to carry out such tasks then habitability and maintenancesupport will suffer.HFI Technical Issues• Full account needs to be taken of the numbers of personnel for tasks suchas fire fighting. In the event of a shortfall people must be taken from otheroperational duties.• If the manpower levels are too low then demands on personnel increasewhen on busy patrols. Watchkeeping routines may be disrupted and thiscan have adverse consequences on operational capability.• Increases in the data rate from improved sensors have increased theworkload on users in order to cope with the same number of contacts. Thenumber of personnel cannot be decreased unless the back-end processingof such data is improved.The allocation of manpower needed for operating marine engineering equipmentthroughout the vessel must match the state of readiness and the scenario.The International Maritime Organisation (IMO) MARPOL 73/78 4 regulations forwaste processing increases the number of man-hours required for this activityand may increase the workload during RAS.4.1.5 AccommodationAccommodation margins make provision for accommodation and services inaddition to those required for the Ship’s basic complement. Factors that affectaccommodation include the following:• Basic Complement.• Training Policy.• Conditions of Service.• Alterations in the number of personnel to be accommodated.3 See ‘Current Human Factors Design Issues Within Submarine Combat Systems’ [Ref20].4 MARPOL 73/78 - the International Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollutionfrom Ships, 1973 as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto.Nov 2006 Page 4-7 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI Technical IssuesThe Accommodation Margin is a defined number of bunks added to the basiccomplement requirement to allow a vessel to carry extra personnel for thefollowing purposes (further defined in BR 4017 [Ref 18]). Historically these fallinto the following sub-margins, see Table 4-1.Board MarginFuture growth of the complement.This is related to the future growth allowance of theShip (i.e. weight, space, stability) in response toequipment enhancements or changes in manningpolicy.Training MarginAdvancement MarginStaff MarginFlexibility MarginTo allow for personnel such as officers, senior andjunior ratings whose development requires a periodof training at sea.To allow for senior rate advancement during theirdraft on board (Petty Officers and Chief Petty Officersonly).For embarked Staff or Flag Officers and/or othervisiting staffs.In vessels with a mixed complement.Table 4-1: Accommodation Margins added to the Basic ComplementThese margins are initially calculated by FLEET NPS using guidance laid down inBR 4017. Initial calculations should therefore be performed on the BMR(s) andincluded as part of an Accommodation Statement (bound with the BMR). TheAccommodation Statement comprises the basic complement with margins added.It is important that the HFI Focus is aware of the following points concerningcomplementing and accommodation margins:• The extra bunks provided for the accommodation margins will not all be inuse permanently and so will not contribute to the WLC of personnel.• Ship services (e.g. galley and dining hall capacities, fresh water, wastetreatment) should be sized in accordance with the AccommodationStatement, not the BMR / QB. Increases to the Accommodation Statementshould result in increases to the capacity of services as well as bunks.• Accommodation margins must endure into service. They must not be usedup during design due to changes in mission or equipment fit, for example.Any such changes should result in re-sizing the ship if necessary tomaintain the margins.Nov 2006 Page 4-8 Issue 4

Chapter 4 – Manpower, Complementing and AccommodationHFI Technical IssuesFigure 4-1: Female personnel are employed atsea in surface shipsIt is current Naval policy for female personnel to be employed at sea in surfaceships. Measures clearly need to be taken to separate male and femaleaccommodation for reasons of privacy. Rules laid down by the Navy Board 5dictate that females shall have:• Separate accommodation, heads and bathrooms.• Short access routes from bunk spaces to heads and bathrooms, avoidingmain passageways.The requirement to accommodate females will increase the accommodationmargins because of the need to cope with variability in the numbers of males andfemales. This gives rise to the Flexibility Margin, which allows a short noticerelief of either gender to be drafted to the Ship.5 See ‘Navy Board Rules’ [Ref 21].Nov 2006 Page 4-9 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)4.2 HFI ProcessThe process of developing the complement and accommodation margins issummarised in Figure 4-2.HFI ProcessDevelop ManningConceptProduce DraftManning OptionsProduce DraftManningRequirementsProduce OutlineBMRProduce DraftBMRProduce Draft QBFinalize ManningRequirementsProduce OutlineAccommodationStatementProduce DraftAccommodationStatementFinalizeAccommodationStatementFinalize QBMANUFACTURE DEMONSTRATIONASSESSMENT CONCEPTSupportModificationIN SERVICENot IdentifiedDISPOSALFigure 4-2: The HFI Process for Manpower, Complementing andAccommodationNote Figure 4-2 does not include the ‘Validate Complement Size’ activitythat runs from Concept phase through Manufacture phase.Nov 2006 Page 4-10 Issue 4

Chapter 4 – Manpower, Complementing and AccommodationThe BMR is developed using information about RN manning policy (Branchstructure, future manpower availability), retention and service condition factors,operational scenarios describing the role and therefore tasks expected ofmanpower, and the estimated numbers of personnel to operate and maintain theplatform and its equipment. The BMR forms the basis for the QB, which will alsoinclude the numbers of additional officers, and rates that may be accommodated.The Accommodation Statement specifies the total accommodation required forthe complement and additional personnel including austere accommodation, e.g.for embarked Special Forces. A co-ordinated approach must be adopted toresolving trade-offs between compartment position, equipment fit, personnelroutes and environment to optimise crew tasks across the range of operationalscenarios.The process of estimating and refining the complement estimate and establishingaccommodation requirements involves liaison between the HFI Focus andvarious stakeholders in conducting the HFI activities. The HFI activities arepresented in Table 4-2.C A D M I D HFI ActivityDevelop Manning ConceptProduce Draft Manning OptionsHFI ProcessProduce Outline BMRProduce Outline Accommodation Statement Validate Complement SizeProduce Draft BMRProduce Draft B Accommodation StatementProduce Draft Manning RequirementsProduce Draft QB Finalise Accommodation StatementFinalise Manning RequirementsFinalise QBSupport ModificationTable 4-2: HFI Activities for Manpower, Complementing andAccommodation DesignThe shaded boxes represent the procurement Phases at which the activities arelikely to be conducted. These activities also apply In-Service.Nov 2006 Page 4-11 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)4.2.1 HFI Focus ResponsibilitiesThe sequence of HFI activities described in the remainder of this chapter areillustrated in Figure 4-2. The HFI Focus is responsible for the following:• Liaison with DEC/HFI Focus/IPT Requirements Manager (RqM) toestablish the overall manning and accommodation requirements.• Liaison with the IPT leader to establish complement limits and to providemanning estimates associated with the needs of equipment (Chap 6).• Liaison with FLEET NPS the authority responsible for the QB, to establishRN manpower policy, manning limits and effects on accommodation andplatform services, and Branch structure. This will require that the HFIFocus produce a tangible overview of likely Sea Systems in order to informfuture manning policy.• Development of an Operational Scenario Description (Annex 3) suitable foruse in assessing manning options.HFI Process• Estimation and modelling of the numbers and type of officers and ratingsrequired using RN experience and estimates of workload to operate,maintain and sustain the platform and all its equipment.• Liaison with FLEET NPS to ensure that the PSTAD is appropriate given theRN Manpower Policy and complies with the assumptions made in thecomplementing process.• Maintenance of the PSTAD (see Chap 6) to reflect the BMR and the QB.• Co-ordination of all aspects of the platform design (Chaps 8, 10 and 13)with the accommodation statement.• Collation of manning estimates from, and dissemination of manning limitsto, the platform supplier and to equipment projects (Chaps 4 and 6).• Establishing the UPC and the WLC associated with manning options andperformance of trade-offs to establish options with the most favourableUPC and WLC.4.2.2 Relevant StandardsThe standards used are listed below; they are detailed in Annex 2 with otherrelated standards.Nov 2006 Page 4-12 Issue 4

Chapter 4 – Manpower, Complementing and AccommodationStandardTitleBR 4017Def Stan 00-25 Part 16Naval Manning ManualHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 16: Introduction and Manpower Domain –Technical Guidance and DataTable 4-3: Relevant StandardsANEP 21StandardBR 2170 Vol 1TitleProcedure for Ship Manning for NATO SurfaceShipsShips CBRNDC ManualVolume 1BR 2170 Vol 2BR 2170 Vol 3Ships CBRNDC ManualVolume 2: CBRN DefenceShips CBRNDC ManualVolume 3: CBRNDC Stores Catalogue for HMSurface Ships and RFAsHFI ProcessBR 2170 Vol 4BR 2170 Vol 5Ships CBRNDC ManualVolume 4: SubmarinesShips CBRNDC ManualVolume 5: Advancement and TrainingRequirementsTable 4-4: Other Related StandardsNov 2006 Page 4-13 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)4.3 HFI Activities4.3.1 Concept Phase Activities4.3.1.1 Develop Manning ConceptPurposeTo outline manning constraints and target levels, policy andrequirements that will apply to the platform, and to take accountof constraints and future implications of RN Manpower Policy.Inputs • FLEET NPS manning policy and projections• Constraints from selection, training and retention policy• Accommodation policy from FLEET-NLM• DEC mission profiles and operational concept• ILS concept and support policy from TES-SA-MA• Principal Personnel Officer’s (PPO) manpower policy• Manning targets for equipmentMethods • Mission Analysis• System Requirements• Functions Analysis• Operational Scenario Description• Human Factors Trade-Off AnalysisHFI ActivitiesSteps • Determine manning policies, constraints and requirementswith FLEET NPS.• Identify constraints resulting from manpower selection(FLEET-NPS), training (FOTR) and retention (FLEET-NLM)policy.• Confirm mission profile with DEC using ‘Mission Analysis’and System Requirements ‘Functions Analysis’ and‘Operational Scenario Description’.• Identify very high-level support constraints and requirementswith TES-SA-MA.• Discuss very high-level manning configurations andaccommodation constraints with SSG-ShipDes.• Confirm accommodation constraints with FLEET-NLM.• Establish implications for automation, training, support andWLC for the high-level manning options using ‘HumanFactors Trade-Off Analysis’.Nov 2006 Page 4-14 Issue 4

Chapter 4 – Manpower, Complementing and AccommodationThe review of manpower needs must take account of thefollowing:• The role and likely mission scenarios to be supported by thetarget platforms for the equipment.• Assumptions about the outline manning levels that arerequired for operation and maintenance of each componentequipment.• Assumptions about the functions to be performed using theequipment.• Future availability of manpower and future RN Branchstructure.• Manning levels and organisations for current equipment.Output • A clear description of the policy and other constraints onmanning and accommodation• Initial assessment of high-level manning options andimplications for the use of automation, and for training andsupport policy.• A statement of the future target manning level andassociated assumptions for the equipment.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 4-15 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)4.3.1.2 Produce Draft Manning OptionsPurposeTo provide more detailed estimates of the number and type ofmanpower required for each equipment option.Inputs • Outline manning studiesMethods • Operational Scenario Description• Allocation of Function (Partitioning)• Task Analysis• Task Synthesis• Role Definition• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description• Job Design• Team Design• Task & Role Performance Modelling• Human Factors Trade-Off AnalysisHFI ActivitiesSteps • A draft manning estimate is developed for each option forinput into the draft BMR options:o Identify tasks allocated to human roles (Chaps 15 & 16).o Identify roles identified in organisational options(Chap 5).o Identify skill and other requirements to associate roleswith rank, rate and specialisation.o Identify workload for each role across mission scenariotimelines in order to identify numbers of personnelrequired to enable all watchkeeping and otherrequirements to be fulfilled (Chap 5).o Identify maintenance manpower required based onresults of ILS studies (Chap 16).o Identify other manpower that may use the equipment orassociated systems on the target platforms.o Develop WLC estimates for each manning option andconduct trade-off studies to identify the most costeffectiveoption taking account of operationaleffectiveness, personnel selection and training needs,career and organisational development, support costsand safety.Nov 2006 Page 4-16 Issue 4

Chapter 4 – Manpower, Complementing and AccommodationOutput • The draft manning estimates for each option comprise thefollowing:o Draft numbers of officers by rank and branch.o Draft numbers of Senior Ratings by rate and branch.o Draft numbers of Junior Ratings by rate and branch.o Draft watchkeeping, primary and secondary taskdescriptions and skill requirements.• The manning estimates contribute to the Outline BMR.• The information in the draft manning options is used todevelop the PSTAD for the personnel (see Chap 6).HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 4-17 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)4.3.1.3 Produce Outline Basic Manning RequirementPurposeTo provide a formal record of the proposed platform manningrequirement to a level of detail required to support the URD /SRD. This is used as the basis for deriving the outlineAccommodation Statement and for costing the manpowerelement of the vessel’s WLC.To provide an early estimate of the manpower numbers requiredto operate and maintain the equipment, for input into the outlineBMR for the platform.Inputs • High-level manning options and policy constraints from theManning Concept (Chap 4).• SoCs for similar types of existing vessel.• Output from the initial support manning estimates (seeEstablish Maintenance Manpower Requirement (Chap 16)).• Outputs from the Produce Outline Manning (Chap 6) activityconducted on equipments for the platform.• High-level allocation of functions in equipment options(Chap 15).• Outline team organisation (Chap 5).Methods • Operational Scenario Description• Allocation of Function (Partitioning)• Task Analysis• Task Synthesis• Role Definition• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description• Job Design• Team Design• Complement Validation• Human Factors Trade-Off AnalysisHFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 4-18 Issue 4

Chapter 4 – Manpower, Complementing and AccommodationSteps • Produce an Outline BMR for each platform option.• Record assumptions regarding the impact of RN manpowerpolicy and other constraints.• Base the Outline BMR on RN experience with, and TaskAnalysis of, existing or similar platforms and equipment ifequipment fit and maintenance policy is only available at ahigh level. Take account of future operational scenarios andthe effect of automation.• Conduct trade-offs to investigate the WLC of differentmanning profiles in relation to the use of automation. UseOperational Scenario Description, Allocation of Function,Task Synthesis, Role Definition, Job Design and TeamDesign methods to generate the complement options.• Use Complement Validation methods (see the ANEP 21standard in Annex 2 [Ref 22]), e.g. CREW II to estimatenumbers of officers and ratings for each operationalscenario.• Maintain traceability between manning estimates and theinformation and assumptions on which these are based.• Update the PSTAD of personnel for the vessel.Output • The Outline BMR consists of the following:o Outline numbers of officers by rank and brancho Outline numbers of senior ratings by rate and brancho Outline numbers of junior ratings by rate and brancho Outline task descriptions for each personThe manning estimates contribute to the Outline BMR. TheOutline BMR and supporting data contributes to the complementrequirements section of the URD as well as the HFI aspects ofthe SRD.The Outline BMR is supported by working papers to documentthe analysis processes by which manning options are derived(e.g. Task Analysis, CREW II modelling runs, etc.).The information in the outline manning is used to help define thePSTAD, and the information in the outline BMR is to bemaintained in the PSTAD for the platform.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 4-19 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)4.3.1.4 Produce Outline Accommodation StatementPurposeTo provide the basis for initial calculations of the proposedShip’s accommodation volumes and associated facilities (freshwater, system capacities, etc.).Inputs The output of Produce Outline BMR (4.3.1.3).MethodsNot identified.Steps • An Accommodation Statement is required to support eachOutline BMR.The definition of accommodation and margins is a FLEET NPSresponsibility, performed in accordance with BR 4017 [Ref 18].Board Margin is defined by DEC.OutputThe Accommodation Statement detailing accommodation sizeand additional margins for each Outline BMR.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 4-20 Issue 4

Chapter 4 – Manpower, Complementing and Accommodation4.3.1.5 Validate Complement SizePurposeTo assess the current complement estimates against therequirements and constraints and existing information aboutcrew workload.Inputs • Complement estimates from the outline BMR.Note this assessment is applied periodically until the Final QB isestablished.Methods • Task & Role Performance Modelling• Task & Role Prototyping• Workload Analysis• Complement Validation• Human Factors Trade-Off AnalysisSteps • Review the manning requirements and policy.• Collate data from platform and equipment manningestimates.• Use results of Task & Role Performance Modelling andPrototyping and Workload Analysis to assess the numbers ofpersonnel required for each platform and equipmentfunction.• Use Complement Validation techniques, e.g. CREW II to reestimatenumbers of officers and ratings.• Establish implications for automation, training, support andWLC of the manning estimates using Human Factors Trade-Off Analysis.Output • Estimates of complement size taking account of latestinformation about the platform and equipment specificationand design.• Implications of estimates for achieving manningrequirements and constraints.• Identification of options for reducing size of complement.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 4-21 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)4.3.2 Assessment Phase Activities4.3.2.1 Produce Draft Basic Manning RequirementPurposeInputsMethodsTo provide a formal record of the vessel’s manning requirement.It is used as the basis for deriving the Draft AccommodationStatement and for refined costing of the manpower element ofthe Ship’s WLC.A Draft BMR is developed for each selected Outline BMR optionand follows the same general procedure.Uses the same HF methods as Produce Outline Basic ManningRequirement (4.3.1.3), with the following additional steps.Steps • Review refined user requirements to identify changesthrough the early stages of procurement.• Review details of equipment fits to identify changes inmaintenance loading assumptions.• Take note of manning requirements and task descriptionsfrom task and workload analyses for operational spaces(e.g., Bridge, Ops Room, Ship Control Centre (SCC) andManoeuvring Room, Aviation spaces, Upper Deck), RAS andstoring, and Ship Husbandry.• Input the manning requirements and task descriptionsemerging from the component system areas such asCombat System and marine engineering equipments. Liaiseclosely with related equipment and support projects to collatemanning estimates.• Ensure that the draft BMR is disseminated to equipment andsupport projects to impose an overall constraint on theirmanning levels.• Agree manning levels (including male/female numbers) andfull complement with FLEET NPS.HFI ActivitiesOutput • The Draft BMR consists of the following:o Draft numbers of officers by rank and branch.o Draft numbers of Senior Ratings by rate and branch.o Draft numbers of Junior Ratings by rate and branch.o Draft watchkeeping, primary and secondary taskdescriptions and skill requirements.The Draft BMR and supporting data contributes to thecomplement requirements section of the URD / SRD.The information in the Draft BMR is to be maintained in thePSTAD for the platform.Nov 2006 Page 4-22 Issue 4

Chapter 4 – Manpower, Complementing and Accommodation4.3.2.2 Produce Draft Accommodation StatementPurposeInputsMethodsTo provide the basis for revised calculations of the vessel’saccommodation volumes and associated facilities (fresh water,system capacities etc.).The output of Produce Draft BMR.Not identified.Steps • An Accommodation Statement is required to support eachDraft BMR.The definition and scoping of accommodation and margins is aFLEET NPS responsibility. Liaise with FLEET NPS to ensurethat adequate provision of services is included to support theaccommodation.A design margin may be included for pre-service contingencyuse by the HFI Focus as agreed with FLEET NPS.Output • Bunk requirements for the complement and for the following:o Growth allowance (Board Margin)o Embarked staff allowances (Staff Margin)o On-board allowance for female Naval personnel(Flexibility Margin)o Training allowance (Training Margin)o Advancement allowance (Advancement Margin)The Draft Accommodation Statement is included with the DraftBMR in the SRD.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 4-23 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)4.3.3 Demonstration Phase Activities4.3.3.1 Produce Draft Manning RequirementPurposeInputsTo produce a refined manning estimate for the teamorganisation based on the selected equipment option.Product of the draft manning option studies (this chapter).Equipment allocation of functions and task synthesis (Chap 15).Team organisation and user roles (Chap 5).Methods See Produce Draft Manning Options (4.3.1.2).StepsOutputThe HF Methods, the Steps, and the Output are the same as forProduce Draft Manning Options (4.3.1.2).The manning estimates contribute to the Draft QB.The information in the draft-manning estimate is used to developthe PSTAD for the personnel (see Chap 6).Draft Manning Requirement Report.4.3.3.2 Produce Draft Quarter BillPurposeTo translate the BMR into a QB, thereby providing a moredefinitive manning requirement for FLEET-NPS to undertaketheir planning activities for future manpower and training.Inputs • The Draft BMR is the primary inputMethodsThe same HF methods are used as for Produce Draft BMR inAssessment (4.3.2.1).Steps • The number of uniformed personnel required is finalised.• The minimum rank or rate and Branch, arm or specialisationis identified.• Job titles and task descriptions are upgraded.• Additional job information like ADQUALs is added.• Billets are categorised for peacetime, war or crisis.HFI ActivitiesOutput • The QB, which provides the basis for the SoC.• Several may exist for a vessel depending on its status.• The SoC is the authority for appointing and draftingpersonnel to a vessel and to pre-joining training courses.• The SoC will also detail how the vessel is progressivelymanned up to acceptance into service.Nov 2006 Page 4-24 Issue 4

Chapter 4 – Manpower, Complementing and Accommodation4.3.3.3 Finalise Accommodation StatementPurposeInputsMethodsStepsOutputTo provide a definitive statement of the accommodation requiredon board, on which all accommodation spaces and services willbe based.The output of Produce Draft QB.Not Identified.Further revisions of the Accommodation Statement may takeplace during the Demonstration Phase. It should be noted,however, that the platform volume is highly dependent on theAccommodation Statement. Early agreement of theAccommodation Statement is therefore required.The steps are the same as for Produce Draft AccommodationStatement in Assessment (Sect 4.3.2.2).The output is the same as for Produce Draft AccommodationStatement in Assessment (Sect 4.3.2.2).Bunk requirements for the complement and for the following:• Growth allowance (Board Margin).• Embarked staff allowances (Staff Margin).• On-board allowance for female Naval personnel (FlexibilityMargin).• Training allowance (Training Margin).• Advancement allowance (Advancement Margin).The Accommodation Statement is included with the BMR in theSRD.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 4-25 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)4.3.4 Manufacture Phase Activities4.3.4.1 Finalise Manning RequirementPurposeTo finalise the number and type of personnel required to operateand support the equipment.Inputs Product of the draft manning studies (see 4.3.3.2),Equipment allocation of functions and task synthesis (Chap 15),Team organisation and user roles (Chap 5).MethodsStepsOutputThe HF Methods, Steps and the Output are the same as forProduce Draft Manning Options (4.3.1.2).See HF methods and Tools.See HF methods and Tools.The manning estimates contribute to the Final QB.4.3.4.2 Finalise Quarter BillPurposeInputsMethodsTo produce the definitive manning requirement for FLEET NPSas the basis for the SoC.Modifications to the QB at this stage will not affect the overallnumbers and thus should not affect the Accommodation Statement,unless a design margin has been included at an earlierstage.Not identified.HFI ActivitiesSteps • Allowable modifications at this stage will generally beconfined to adjustments of individual stations against watchstate. However, if necessary, re-apportionment between thebranches (whilst maintaining numbers of Officers, SeniorRates and Junior Rates) may also be allowed withoutaffecting the design of the Ship or eroding the operationalaccommodation margins. Such changes will generally arisefrom outside the project, and will be co-ordinated by FLEET-NPS.• It is incumbent to FLEET NPS to inform the HFI Focus of anyproposed changes to the QB and/or the AccommodationStatement. Such changes remain subject to the project’sagreement up to acceptance of the Ship.• The HFI Focus is to inform the Supplier of any changes tothe QB &/or Accommodation Statement, since such changescould affect the detailed design and assessment activities.OutputFinal QBNov 2006 Page 4-26 Issue 4

Chapter 4 – Manpower, Complementing and Accommodation4.3.5 In-Service Phase Activities4.3.5.1 Support ModificationPurposeInputsMethodsStepsOutputTo provide suitable manpower, complementing andaccommodation provision when changes are required due toequipment modification. Operational and use changes are likelyto be the main reason for modification.Quarter BillNot identified.Follow process outlined in Assessment through ManufacturePhases, but tailored strictly to the scope of the change.Revised QB4.3.6 Disposal Phase ActivitiesNo specific activities are identified although there will clearly be a requirement toaddress human resources issues during disposal of a platform or equipment, thatmay call upon some aspects of the manpower, complementing andaccommodation HFI activities.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 4-27 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 4-28 Issue 4MAP-01-011 CH 04_23.doc

CHAPTER 5 – TEAM ORGANISATIONCONTENTS5.1 HFI Technical Issues....................................................................................................5-35.1.1 Organisational Context .........................................................................5-35.1.2 Stakeholders.........................................................................................5-35.1.3 Combat System ....................................................................................5-35.1.3.1 Combat System Watchkeeping Routines...........................5-45.1.3.2 Combat System User Roles ...............................................5-55.1.3.3 Combat System Team Integration......................................5-75.1.4 Marine Engineering Issues ...................................................................5-95.1.4.1 Marine Engineering Watchkeeping Routines .....................5-95.1.4.2 Marine Engineering User Roles .......................................5-105.1.4.3 Marine Engineering Team Integration ..............................5-105.1.5 Other Teams.......................................................................................5-115.2 Overview of Process.........................................................................................5-125.2.1 HFI Focus Responsibilities .................................................................5-135.2.2 Relevant Standards ............................................................................5-145.3 HFI Activities.....................................................................................................5-155.3.1 Concept Phase Activities ....................................................................5-155.3.1.1 Outline Future Organisation .............................................5-155.3.2 Assessment Phase Activities..............................................................5-165.3.2.1 Outline User Roles ...........................................................5-165.3.2.2 Identify Organisational Options ........................................5-175.3.3 Demonstration Phase Activities ..........................................................5-195.3.3.1 Specify Future Organisation.............................................5-195.3.3.2 Assess User Roles ...........................................................5-205.3.4 Manufacture Phase Activities..............................................................5-215.3.4.1 Finalise User Roles ..........................................................5-215.3.4.2 Support Trials and Integration ..........................................5-215.3.5 In-Service Phase Activities .................................................................5-225.3.5.1 Support Modifications.......................................................5-225.3.5.2 Provide Proactive Support................................................5-235.3.6 Disposal Phase Activities....................................................................5-23Nov 2006 Page 5-1 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)Nov 2006 Page 5-2 Issue 4

Chapter 5 – Team Organisation5.1 HFI Technical Issues5.1.1 Organisational ContextThe RN and other user organisations of vessels and equipment are changing inresponse to technological and to social and demographic pressures. For the RNthese changes reflect the overall size of the organisation that is appropriate giventhe numbers and types of vessels. Other initiatives, such as the combination ofBranches, have reflected changing demands on Naval personnel with theintroduction of new technologies. Future organisational structures must identifyand implement measures to defuse the problems being compounded by the twindemands for increased performance and reductions in manpower. Futureorganisational structures must also be feasible given future manpower policy,demographic and educational trends and the planned Branch structure of the RN.HFI Technical IssuesThis chapter describes the HFI activities that need to be carried out whenaddressing team organisation technical issues for Combat System and MarineEngineering equipment.5.1.2 StakeholdersA list of potential stakeholders for this area is given below. This list is notexhaustive and should be seen to be a guide only. HFI Foci should refine this listbased upon the structure of their project, the attendees at the relevant HFSG orHFWG and in light of guidance and requests from industry, DEC and Customer 2representatives.• DEC• FLEET NPS• IPT HFI Foci• MLS IPT CG• SSG-ShipDes5.1.3 Combat SystemFigure 5-1: An example combat systemNov 2006 Page 5-3 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI Technical IssuesThe Combat System is the set of human and machine resources that comprisethe fighting capabilities of the vessel. Subsystems will include weapons, sensors,intelligence and information sources and the Combat Management System(CMS).The CMS comprises the Command System (current/immediate tacticalmanagement and response) and the Command Support System (medium- tolong-term planning and resource allocation). The CMS provides the followinghigh-level functions:• Access to and display of total information required by the Command.• Assistance to the Command in planning, threat evaluation and decisiontaking.• Control over weapon deployment.• Control over vessel movements.• Control over external communications.• Control over vessel emissions.• Control over damage and weapons repair.The CMS provides these functions through interfaces to the following:• Active and passive sensors.• Weapons systems.• Communications system.• Ship control system.• CBRND organisation.The organisation that directly supports the planning for and the achievement ofoperational mission goals is the Warfare Department. For a surface vessel thiswill comprise the Command and role-specific sub-teams, for example, the AirDepartment, Above Water Warfare Team, Underwater Warfare Team,Communications Team, Electronic Warfare Team, Weapons Engineering Teamand other supporting teams. The structure of teams will vary depending on thenature of the platform (surface or submarine) its class, its role and the specificequipment fit.5.1.3.1 Combat System Watchkeeping Routines• The HFI Focus needs to ensure that account is taken of the watchkeepingroutines under which the teams manning the Combat System will performtheir duties.Further guidance should be sought from the IPT Requirements Manager andother user representatives.Nov 2006 Page 5-4 Issue 4

Chapter 5 – Team Organisation5.1.3.2 Combat System User RolesA user role consists of a set of responsibilities and tasks undertaken by anindividual in relation to a specific system. The general responsibilities and tasksassigned to a user role may vary depending on the mission of the vessel and itsprime state (action, defence etc.) at a particular time during a mission. Thespecific responsibilities and tasks executed by a user role will depend on theactual conditions and events as they occur during an operational scenario. Userrole definition is an important activity during the development or modification of aCombat System. The user roles that are defined must be compatible with thenature of the jobs that exist in the user organisation – a job is the grouping ofduties and responsibilities (mainly derived from the full range of roles that may beperformed) into recognisable posts in the Branch structure of the RN. If userroles are defined which do not match the capabilities of the available personnelthen two things must be done:HFI Technical Issues• The HFI Focus must liaise with the Principal Personnel Officer (PPO) toensure that future user roles will be supportable in the user organisation.• The nature of the mismatch must be investigated to determine what actioncan be taken by the project, e.g. investigate possible trade-offs betweenthe user role definitions and training, or consider the use of moreautomation.5.1.3.2.1 Relevant Characteristics of the Combat System UsersThe Command Team on a surface vessel will include:• The Captain.• Warfare Officers.• Officer of the Watch.• Ratings (including picture supervisors, compilers, signallers andoperator/maintainers).• Weapons Engineering Officer.The following characteristics of the roles performed by these personnel arerelevant to the design of the Combat System, the titles of some posts aredifferent on submarines but similar principles will apply:• The Captain may station himself in the Operations compartment to fight thevessel. He may choose to direct warfare or other functions or delegatethese and only intervene if required to veto decisions. When absent,responsibility is delegated to a Principal Warfare Officer.• Warfare officers will take responsibility for the conduct of operations in aparticular environment (air, surface and sub-surface).• Command functions may be delegated to a lower level to increase speedof response, e.g., to the Missile Director or the Electronic Warfare Director.• The Officer of the Watch is stationed on the Bridge and is responsible forsafe manoeuvring of the vessel, sometimes under direct control from theNov 2006 Page 5-5 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)Command, and for providing information about the visual situation toCommand.HFI Technical Issues• The Weapons Engineering Officer is stationed in the Operationscompartment in the Action state and is responsible for ensuring that theCombat System is available and for co-ordination with the CBRNDorganisation concerning damage control.• The various officers and ratings responsible for weapon direction andcontrol; the compilation of information from sensors and tacticalcommunications are concentrated in the Operations Room.5.1.3.2.2 Future Influences on User RolesTwo general pressures influence the definition of future user roles in CombatSystems. The first pressure is to optimise manning levels by increasing the useof automation. The second pressure is to take advantage of new technology toincrease the operational effectiveness and flexibility of the platforms that areavailable. In combination, these pressures can force a fundamental re-appraisalof the user roles traditionally associated with the operation of Combat Systems.For example, in the past the role of picture compiler has been one of limitedresponsibility with tasks being paced by the contacts received through one typeof sensor or equipment. Decisions regarding contact classification, associationwith other contacts, threat and response are performed at higher levels in theCommand. This Command role may eventually disappear or be radicallychanged in the future. Contact location and type may be determined andreported automatically – eliminating this user role. Inputs from different sensorsand equipments may be combined automatically or be presented in new ways –changing the responsibilities and tasks of future user roles. New user roles maybecome possible where, for example, responsibilities and tasks are concernedexclusively with higher levels of information like sectors (areas or sets ofbearings) or defined classes of tracks. The responsibility resting on the HFIFocus is to ensure that future user roles are viable given the availability andcapabilities of technology and manpower.In the future the numbers of contacts that may be sensed by (or communicatedto) a Combat System will increase together with the complexity and variety oftactical responses that are possible. To meet such requirements the user roles inthe Combat System will need to be designed to be flexible and adaptable.Flexibility is required to enable user roles to be altered quickly and reliablydepending on mission and scenario events and Command priorities. Familiarlines of demarcation within the Command Team may be broken down asresources are allocated to meet the workload as it arises. At different timeswithin a mission or a scenario automatic facilities may be left in sole control ofparticular functions to release human effort; or automatic facilities may be used inconjunction with human effort; or activities may revert to predominantly manualoperation.Adaptability is required to cope with variations in operational context, intechnological effectiveness and in the skill levels of available personnel. Usersmust be able to quickly change their mode of operation and re-enter a processingsequence by overriding or working with automatic facilities. Supervisors must beable to re-allocate work from users (or automatic facilities) when tacticalconditions or workload or complexity dictates.Nov 2006 Page 5-6 Issue 4

Chapter 5 – Team Organisation5.1.3.3 Combat System Team IntegrationHFI Technical IssuesFigure 5-2: The Combat System team is concentrated in the OperationsRoom.In a surface ship, the Combat System team is concentrated in the OperationsRoom. This co-location helps team integration at the cost of reducing thesurvivability of the Command function if the compartment is damaged orcompromised.The HFI Focus needs to be aware of the following issues, which either reflectcurrent practice or may influence future possibilities for the way that teams areintegrated.• The Command is likely to interact very closely with the Weapon Directorand may assume responsibility for part of this role in the Action state.• On current Combat Systems the Weapon Director interacts closely with,and monitors the actions and displays of the Weapons Operator.• In the future, the Weapon Operator function may become fully automatedor be sited remotely from the Weapon Director to improve vesselsurvivability.• The Tactical Picture Compilation Team interacts closely with theCommand. Improvements in the extraction and validation of track datamay enable the picture compilation to become more highly automated,reducing or largely eliminating the need for direct interaction and colocation.Nov 2006 Page 5-7 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• In vessels with an ASW attack capability the Active Sonar Operator isclosely directed by Command and the ASW Director.HFI Technical Issues• In vessels with passive sonars the Sonar Team may be sited outside theOperations Compartment, with the Passive Sonar Director acting as thelink between Command and operators.• In the future, the combination of the automation of sensor compilation andweapons firing, the provision of integrated communications withinworkstations, the use of remote maintenance centres and the use of‘intelligent’ software applications may reduce the Command Team to acore consisting of the Captain (tactical decision maker) supported by a fewtactical advisers and information managers responsible for specific warfareenvironments.5.1.3.3.1 Supporting Effective Combat Team PerformanceEffective team organisations exhibit the following characteristics and these needto be taken into account during the design process:• Use of a variety of skills: multi-skilling includes the operator/maintainerconcept; the need for greater flexibility in future Combat System teams islikely to increase multi-skilling.• Identifiable and consistent work tasks: however, operational demands inCombat Systems vary from conditions of high workload, high externalpacing to very low-workload, high-vigilance situations.• Regular and trustworthy feedback about team performance: the Commandand supervisors need to know how effectively the Combat System team isoperating, if they cannot be directly seen it is important that othermechanisms (besides co-location) are put in place to support this, e.g.computer-supported co-operative working Group Ware.• Feedback about contribution to team effectiveness: Combat System teammembers need to know how well they are performing.• Sufficient task-relevant expertise: see Chap 7 on Training.• Adequate resources for workload: Chap 6 discusses manning estimationfor equipments and Chap 15 deals with user workload and operability.• Appropriate and flexible task performance strategies: the allocation offunctions between human and machine and the operability of the CombatSystem (see Chap 15) must be compatible with supporting thisrequirement.• Control over work scheduling: ultimately, this is driven by the tacticalsituation and the state and tasking of the vessel. Increased automation willreduce the amount of manual processing required and enable greatercontrol over the timing of tasks.In the future, communications between Combat System team members, evenwhere they share the same compartment, will increasingly be mediated bytechnology, particularly as virtual teams are established to meet the needs ofdifferent operations. A virtual team is one within which all communications areNov 2006 Page 5-8 Issue 4

Chapter 5 – Team Organisationmediated by technology while the team may be separated spatially, temporallyand organisationally. The focus of virtual teams is on the shared electronicworkspace for which new tools are needed to support computer-supported cooperativeworking. The HFI Focus must therefore help define the group workingrequirements to be supported by technology if performance is to be effective andefficient.5.1.4 Marine Engineering IssuesThe Combat System technical issues discussed above can be read across toother equipments – particularly those incorporating significant computer-basedautomation. Some specific issues are discussed for the major classes of marineengineering equipment.HFI Technical Issues5.1.4.1 Marine Engineering Watchkeeping RoutinesFigure 5-3: WatchkeepingUnlike the Combat System team, personnel working on platform managementgenerally follow four-hour watches to an agreed pattern. The Marine EngineeringDepartment also provides a full contribution to Chemical Biological Radiation andNuclear Defence (CBRND) and other tasks using the stood-down personnelwhen a vessel is in certain CBRNDC states. Flight deck parties arecomplemented for two watches. Permanent watchkeepers are required inharbour to maintain vessel power and essential services.Nov 2006 Page 5-9 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)5.1.4.2 Marine Engineering User RolesHFI Technical IssuesThe following types of issues arise with regard to user roles for marineengineering equipment:• Users may work at an equipment but may also be responsible forinspecting more distant items of equipment.• Platform management roles: the definition of supervisor and operator tasksand duties for watchkeeping varies under different states and conditions.• CBRND and damage control and surveillance: the distribution of tasks andduties varies between centralised and dispersed management and actionteams.• Platform security and safety monitoring: the effect of introducing remotemonitoring like CCTV on tasks and duties, e.g. during flight recovery,maintenance operations etc. needs to be investigated.• Outfitting within compartments and on decks: the demands of the specificfit of equipment selected or developed, and the organisation of duties mayaffect many facets of the general duties undertaken by personnel, e.g.catering, handling of materials in stores and workshops, RAS, cleaning etc.• Equipment reliability and maintenance organisation: maintenance tasksand duties may be radically changed and/or performed remotely (Chap 16).• The effect of future maritime regulations: the demands of MoD, nationaland international regulations, e.g. those of future International MaritimeOrganisation (IMO) MARPOL 1 regulations on platform waste processing.The personnel working with marine engineering equipment will vary from fullyqualified specialists to ordinary members of the crew who are assigned theseduties. A core team of specialists may supervise less-experienced ratings.However, under certain conditions only fully qualified personnel may be used,e.g. when strict obedience of engine orders is required on entering or leaving aport. The equipment must therefore be designed and sited to enable supervisionand promote rapid learning and the use of relatively simple, procedural methodsof working.5.1.4.3 Marine Engineering Team IntegrationThe Marine Engineering Department on board a vessel is chiefly responsible foroperating and maintaining main propulsion, auxiliary and external machineryinstallations. The organisation of this department is likely to be closely related tothe technology used in these systems. Unmanned machinery spaces are likelyto become the norm in the future with the bulk of monitoring and controlconducted remotely from the Ship Control Centre/Control Room.The implication of such changes is that the future organisation required tosupport marine engineering is likely to be very different to that found in current1 MARPOL 73/78 - the International Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollutionfrom Ships, 1973 as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto.Nov 2006 Page 5-10 Issue 4

Chapter 5 – Team Organisationvessels. The Ship Control Centre/Control Room may become the onlycompartment to be permanently manned. The following issues will thereforeneed to be addressed when considering the future team organisation:• The ratio of highly skilled, specialised supervising engineers to less-skilledoperators under different states, e.g. start-up of propulsion system, shipcontrol when entering or leaving harbour.• The allocation of duties between supervisors and between operators interms of responsibility for controlling and monitoring different platformservices.HFI Technical Issues• The need to revert to manual operation of equipment in the event of controlor system failure or damage.• Opportunities for dispersal of platform management control andsurveillance to other points within the platform.• The extent to which unmanned operation of machinery spaces can beachieved, i.e. the need to maintain direct surveillance of equipment undernormal and abnormal conditions.In general, future marine engineering equipment will enable reductions inmanning levels, which will have an impact on the team organisation. Examplesof areas where technology will have this effect include the following:• Integrated Full Electric Propulsion.• Environmental monitoring systems.• Self-activating fire control systems.• Built in test, self-diagnosis of faults, automatic redundancy and remotemaintenance.The logical direction in the future is to maximise the use of these technologies tothe extent that platform management functions may be fully automated. In thefuture the Bridge may directly control propulsion, plant may only have to beserviced on return to port whilst damage control may be dispersed across theplatform or controlled from the Operations compartment.5.1.5 Other TeamsWhilst previous sections have referred specifically to the Combat Systems Teamand the Marine Engineering Team, the HFI issues related to the needs of otherteams such as the Weapons Engineering, Air Department, and SupplyDepartment need to be given equal consideration.Nov 2006 Page 5-11 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)5.2 Overview of ProcessThe sequence of HFI activities described in the remainder of this chapter isillustrated in Figure 5-4.HFI ProcessOutline Future Organisation andFunctions Including Equipmentand Automation AspectsIdentify UserOrganisationalOptionsSpecify FutureOrganisationOutline UserRolesAssess UserRolesFinalise UserRolesSupport Trials andIntegrationMANUFACTURE DEMONSTRATION ASSESSMENTCONCEPTSupportModificationsProvide ProactiveSupportIN SERVICENot IdentifiedDISPOSALFigure 5-4: The HFI Process for Combat System Team OrganisationNov 2006 Page 5-12 Issue 4

Chapter 5 – Team OrganisationThe process of developing the team organisation requires the early outline of thefuture organisation of teams to be defined. Organisational options are studiedand used to identify user roles. The future organisation is specified and final userroles are defined. The emerging user roles may be assessed using modellingand prototyping.The process of defining user roles and the team organisation involves liaisonbetween the HFI Focus and various stakeholders in conducting the HFI activities.The HFI activities are presented in Table 5-1. The ticks represent theprocurement Phases at which the activities are likely to be conducted.C A D M I D HFI ActivityOutline Future Organisation Outline User RolesIdentify Organisational Options Specify Future Organisation Assess User RolesHFI ProcessFinalise User RolesSupport Trials and ManagementSupport ModificationsProvide Proactive SupportTable 5-1: HFI Activities in Team Organisation5.2.1 HFI Focus Responsibilities• Liaison with FLEET-NPS, the authority responsible for the Quarter Bill(QB), to establish RN manpower policy, manning limits and future Branchstructure and relevance for user roles.• Resolution of trade-offs relating to user and maintainer characteristics tooptimise the whole-life costs (WLC) and performance of the CombatSystem or marine engineering equipment.• Development of an Operational Scenario Description (Annex 3) suitable foruse in assessing user roles and organisational options for the CombatSystem.• Establishing the WLC and unit production costs (UPC) associated withuser roles and team organisation options and performance of trade-offs toestablish options with the most favourable WLC and UPC.Nov 2006 Page 5-13 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)5.2.2 Relevant StandardsThe applicable standards are listed in Table 5-2 below. Further details areincluded in Annex 2, together with other related standards.StandardTitleBR 4017Def Stan 00-25 Part 16Naval Manning ManualHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 16: Introduction and Manpower Domain –Technical Guidance and DataTable 5-2: Standards Applicable to Team OrganisationHFI ProcessANEP 21StandardBR 2170 Vol 1TitleProcedure for Ship Manning for NATO SurfaceShipsShips CBRNDC ManualVolume 1BR 2170 Vol 2BR 2170 Vol 3BR 2170 Vol 4BR 2170 Vol 5Ships CBRNDC ManualVolume 2: CBRN DefenceShips CBRNDC ManualVolume 3: CBRN Stores Catalogue for HM SurfaceShips and RFAsShips CBRNDC ManualVolume 4: SubmarinesShips CBRNDC ManualVolume 5: Advancement and TrainingRequirementsTable 5-3: Other Related StandardsNov 2006 Page 5-14 Issue 4

Chapter 5 – Team Organisation5.3 HFI Activities5.3.1 Concept Phase Activities5.3.1.1 Outline Future OrganisationPurposeTo provide an early view of the organisation of teams thatoperate, maintain and are supported by the Equipment.Inputs • Schemes of Complement for existing vessels usingcomparable equipments (Chap 6).• High-level allocation of functions in equipment options(Chap 15).Methods • Human Factors Trade-Off Analysis• Team DesignSteps • An outline future organisation is required to support eachequipment option and to form an input to each outlinemanningestimate (Chap 4).• User and maintainer roles are identified from a high-levelallocation of functions between equipment and personnel(Chap 15).• Team roles and structures are outlined using Team Designbased on equipment functions and human-human interfacerequirements.• Human Factors Trade-offs are performed between teamoptions and implications for WLC in terms of training andUPC in terms of workspace and equipment requirements.Outputs • A high-level representation of the future organisation of theteams manning each equipment option.• The information about the future organisation is used todevelop the Project Specific Target Audience Description(PSTAD) (see Chap 6) for the personnel associated with theequipment.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 5-15 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)5.3.2 Assessment Phase Activities5.3.2.1 Outline User RolesPurposeTo define the outline user and maintainer roles that will beundertaken by personnel manning the Equipment.Inputs • The product of Outline Future Organisation (5.3.1.1).• Task synthesis for equipment (Chap 15).MethodsStepsRole DefinitionUser roles are outlined for each equipment option using RoleDefinition in conjunction with the manning studies (Chap 4).• Identify tasks allocated to human roles.• Identify roles identified in organisational options.• Identify existing user roles for equipment on each targetplatform and identify variations possible in the future giventhe concept of operation, the ILS concept and RNManpower Policy.• Specify the Rank, Rate and Branch of each user role.OutputsThe outline user and maintainer roles, existing (or proposed) jobtitles and tasks allocated to each role including watchkeepingand other variations.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 5-16 Issue 4

Chapter 5 – Team Organisation5.3.2.2 Identify Organisational OptionsPurposeTo identify preliminary team organisations for each equipmentoption.Inputs • The user roles (5.3.2.1)• Allocation of functions• Task synthesis for each equipment option (Chap 15).Methods • Job Design• Team Design• Link AnalysisStepsTeam organisational options are developed for each selectedequipment:• Identify user and support roles from allocation of functionand task analysis and synthesis.• Group tasks and responsibilities into team roles (JobDesign).• Identify links between team roles in terms of shared workresponsibilities, command responsibilities and intercommunicationrequirements using Link Analysis.• Develop team and sub-team groupings based on rank andfunctional responsibilities (Team Design).• Identify team structure for each variant of mission andwatchkeeping state.• Develop organisational options for each equipment.• Assess organisational options to determine strengths andweaknesses in terms of throughput of informationprocessingand decision-making, maintenance of commandand control, flexibility, adaptability, compatibility with externalorganisations, internal organisational development andchange, compatibility with RN Manpower policy and careerdevelopment and likely job satisfaction of component roles.• Feasibility of dispersed locations for roles in eachorganisation and Group Ware requirements (computersupportedco-operative working facilities).HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 5-17 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)OutputsEach team organisational option comprises the followinginformation:• Organisational chart showing team and sub-team groupsand responsibilities.• Role name and specialisation.• Tasks, duties and responsibilities of each role.• Types of inter-communication and flow rates between eachrole.• External communication links and flow rates.• Assessment of strengths and weaknesses of organisationalstructure and component roles.The information about roles in the organisational options is usedto develop the PSTAD (see Chap 6) for the personnelassociated with the equipment.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 5-18 Issue 4

Chapter 5 – Team Organisation5.3.3 Demonstration Phase Activities5.3.3.1 Specify Future OrganisationPurposeTo specify the team organisation structure, the roles and theinter-relationship between each role.Inputs • The products of early user role (5.3.2.1) and organisationstudies.• Design documentation for the equipment.MethodsStepsOutputsThe HFI Methods, the Steps and the Output are the same as forIdentify Organisational Options in Assessment (5.3.2.2).The HFI Methods, the Steps and the Output are the same as forIdentify Organisational Options in Assessment (5.3.2.2).The information about team roles in the final organisation isused to define the PSTAD (see Chap 6) for the personnelassociated with the Equipment.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 5-19 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)5.3.3.2 Assess User RolesPurposeTo assess the viability and acceptability of user roles for theequipment.Inputs • Product of user role studies (5.3.2.1).• Design documentation.• Working prototypes of the equipment.Methods • Operational Scenario Description• Task & Role Performance Modelling• Task & Role PrototypingSteps • Models are developed to represent the tasks performed byeach user role. Performance parameters are calculated foreach user role making use of timelines and events based onOperational Scenarios (Task & Role PerformanceModelling).• Human-equipment prototypes or early versions of theequipment are used to assess user role performance. Thepersonnel acting as user roles must be representative ofthose that will use the future equipment (Task & RolePrototyping).• User role performance is evaluated against operationalscenarios to assess each critical task and to validateestimates obtained from workload modelling (Task & RolePrototyping).• The following aspects of user roles are checked:o Personnel requirements in the PSTAD are accurate.o Command authority and decision-making is preserved.o Information flow through the equipment is optimised.o Task pacing, variety, autonomy and level of socialcontact are optimised.o Watch compositions are suitable to meet operationaldemands.o Flexibility and adaptability is supported.o Responsibilities are unambiguously allocated.HFI ActivitiesOutputs • User role performance assessments• Recommendations for job and task re-design• Re-definition of personnel requirements• Training recommendationsNov 2006 Page 5-20 Issue 4

Chapter 5 – Team Organisation5.3.4 Manufacture Phase Activities5.3.4.1 Finalise User RolesPurposeInputsMethodsTo finalise user roles of personnel required to operate andsupport the equipment.Results of user role assessment, equipment designdocumentation and specification of organisation.The HFI Methods, the Steps and the Output are the same as forOutline User Roles (5.3.2.1) in Assessment.Steps • The HFI Methods, the Steps and the Output are the same asfor Outline User Roles (5.3.2.1) in Assessment.• Final changes to the Watch and Station Bill may be made inconjunction with FLEET-NPS and DEC/IPT.OutputsDefinition of user roles/team organisation.5.3.4.2 Support Trials and IntegrationPurpose • To improve the team organisation design and maximiseoperational effectiveness.• To support integration of team organisation design withtraining requirements, recruitment, ILS.InputsDefinition of user roles/team organisation as per Finalise UserRoles (5.3.4.1).Methods • Job design• Task design• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description (PSTAD)StepsOutputsIterative process involving rolling review of the user roles/teamorganisation design with respect to the overall system designand changes occurring during the Manufacture phase. Alsoarising from any change in requirement identified as a result ofthe ongoing programme of acceptance and trials activities.Revised definition of user roles/team organisation.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 5-21 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)5.3.5 In-Service Phase Activities5.3.5.1 Support ModificationsPurposeTo provide effective reassessment and specification of teamorganisations, resulting from modification to the overallrequirement during the operational life.Inputs • Definition of user roles/team organisation• Revised requirement (e.g. system design, functional)Methods • HF requirements definition• Job design• Task design• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description (PSTAD)Steps • Develop team organisation HF requirements resulting fromthe revised overall requirement that is driving themodification.• Modify the user roles/team organisation specification inaccordance with the requirements identified above.OutputsRevised user roles/team organisation specification (as inputs toactivities by those responsible for training specification,recruitment and ILS).HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 5-22 Issue 4

Chapter 5 – Team Organisation5.3.5.2 Provide Proactive SupportPurposeTo proactively intervene as appropriate to ensure that WLCs areminimised and performance maximised.Inputs • Definition of user roles/team organisationMethods • Job design• Operational data: user feedback, incident reports• Task design• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description (PSTAD)Steps • Refine user roles/team organisation definition in accordancewith inputs, above.• Instigate fuller design process under Support Modifications(5.3.5.1) if appropriate (will effectively follow a microcosm ofCADMID itself).• Feed back lessons learned to the appropriate body for use infuture projects.Outputs • Revised definition of user roles/team organisation.• Lessons learned (as input to appropriate organisations/databases to ensure these are utilised in the future).5.3.6 Disposal Phase ActivitiesN/A for this technical area, but see Chapters 4 and 6 covering manpower,complementing and accommodation, and crew characteristics respectively.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 5-23 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 5-24 Issue 4MAP-01-011 CH 05_14.doc

CHAPTER 6 – CREW CHARACTERISTICSCONTENTS6.1 HFI Technical Issues....................................................................................................6-36.1.1 Introduction ...........................................................................................6-36.1.2 Stakeholders.........................................................................................6-36.1.3 Target Audience Characteristics...........................................................6-36.1.3.1 Skills and Knowledge .........................................................6-46.1.3.2 Physical Characteristics .....................................................6-56.1.3.3 Personnel Factors ..............................................................6-66.1.4 The Royal Navy Generic Target Audience Description (RNGTAD)......6-76.1.4.1 RNGTAD Definition and Purpose.......................................6-76.1.4.2 RNGTAD Structure.............................................................6-76.1.5 Generation of a Project Specific Target Audience Description (PSTAD)6-116.2 HFI Process ......................................................................................................6-136.2.1 HFI Focus Responsibilities .................................................................6-146.2.2 Relevant Standards ............................................................................6-156.3 HFI Activities.....................................................................................................6-166.3.1 Concept Phase Activities ....................................................................6-166.3.1.1 Generate Project Specific Target Audience Description ..6-166.3.2 Assessment Phase Activities..............................................................6-186.3.2.1 Identify Required Skills and Knowledge ...........................6-186.3.2.2 Identify Critical Personnel Factors....................................6-196.3.2.3 Assess Impact of Anthropometric Characteristics............6-206.3.2.4 Refine Project Specific Target Audience Description.......6-216.3.3 Demonstration Phase Activities ..........................................................6-226.3.3.1 Validate Project Specific Target Audience Characteristics6-226.3.3.2 Finalise Project Specific Target Audience Description.....6-236.3.4 Manufacture Phase Activities..............................................................6-236.3.5 In-Service Phase Activities .................................................................6-236.3.6 Disposal Phase Activities....................................................................6-23May 2006 Page 6-1 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)May 2006 Page 6-2 Issue 4

Chapter 6 – Crew Characteristics6.1 HFI Technical Issues6.1.1 IntroductionThe HFI Focus is responsible to the IPT Leader for ensuring that the platform isoperable, habitable and safe for the crew and other users, including maintainers.In addition to meeting operational requirements, for a fully effective system, theplatform and its equipments must be compatible with the skills, knowledge, basiccapabilities, physical capacities and limitations of personnel. This requires adetailed analysis and specification of the characteristics of the personnel who willform the crew.HFI Technical IssuesIn practice, this is achieved through the development and use of a TargetAudience Description (TAD). The TAD for all RN vessels will have manysimilarities, especially at the early stages of a project. To avoid unnecessaryduplication of effort and cost associated with repeated development of TADs,SSG has commissioned the production of a generic reference document. This iscalled the Royal Navy Generic Target Audience Description (RNGTAD) and isintended for use by those involved with the design and procurement of Navalcapability, including IPTs, Naval staff, prime contractors, etc.The RNGTAD provides a collection of data describing the RN structure andcharacteristics of the RN population, from which a detailed description of thecharacteristics of the user of the system under design or consideration may bedrawn. The RNGTAD should be used as a common starting point for all NavalIPT procurement programs to support the efficient development of ProjectSpecific TADs (PSTADs). IPTs have traditionally had to procure a TAD that iscreated from scratch during the Concept Phase of a procurement programme, anoften lengthy and costly process. Use of the RNGTAD as a starting point willsimplify and facilitate this process and should be cited within requirementsstatements and contractual documentation as appropriate.6.1.2 StakeholdersA list of potential stakeholders for this area is given below. This list is notexhaustive and should be seen to be a guide only. HFI Foci should refine this listbased upon the structure of their project, the attendees at the relevant HFSG orHFWG and in light of guidance and requests from industry, DEC and Customer 2representatives.• DEC• FLEET-NPS• IPT HFI Foci• TES-SA-MA• TES-SSG-CSHF• TES-SSG-ShipDes6.1.3 Target Audience CharacteristicsTarget Audience Descriptions of the RN population should address certain corecharacteristics to provide the maximum support to the procurement process;these are discussed in the following sections. It should also be noted that manyof these characteristics for the RN are already defined within the RNGTAD, seeSect 6.1.4.2 for a list of the data categories contained within the RNGTAD.May 2006 Page 6-3 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)6.1.3.1 Skills and KnowledgeHFI Technical IssuesThe skills and knowledge required to perform vessel evolutions and to operateand make use of the equipment must be identified during the procurementprocess. Firstly, skills and knowledge requirements need to be identified in orderto make valid decisions about manning and training. However, the platform andequipment design must match the skills and knowledge of available manpower.The following feedback from operational personnel is relevant:• Some skills may be lost as new equipment is introduced. The rate dependson those leaving the RN.• The introduction of the operator-maintainer concept requires carefulconsideration in the demands that it makes upon the personnel within theCombat System.• As Combat Systems get more complex the time required to achieve therequired level of performance increases. It may also require that thetechnical skills of the personnel operating these needs to be higher than inthe past.Figure 6-1: Deep knowledge of systems and equipment willcontinue to remain important even with highlyautomated equipmentWhilst training can increase the skills and knowledge of personnel, this hasimplications for whole-life costs. Conversely, there are practical limits to the levelof reliable human performance that can be achieved, even with selection andtraining. Thus the process of specifying skill and knowledge requirements willinteract with decisions on automation and decision support facilities. Inparticular, user support systems including on-line help and documentation mustbe designed to support skills and knowledge development and maintenance.May 2006 Page 6-4 Issue 4

Chapter 6 – Crew CharacteristicsIt may be possible to reduce the skills and knowledge requirements for basicoperation of the platform and its equipment where standard items, simplifiedpractices and equipment sharing a common user-equipment interface areintroduced. Although routine watch-keeping duties may be de-skilled to someextent, specific and deep knowledge of vessel evolutions, systems andequipments are likely to continue to play an important role even with highlyautomated and reliable equipment. Depth of knowledge about how systemsoperate is vital whenever equipment failure or damage occurs. Each vessel willalso have unique aspects that must be learnt from training or experience.Experience with other highly automated machinery control and surveillancesystems, e.g. nuclear power plant, and in particular under conditions whereunusual or unexpected conditions occur, has shown the value of ensuring thatsupervisors have in-depth knowledge about the systems and about how thesesystems respond to faults or apparent faults. Applications knowledge is likely toincrease in importance for all levels of user. Applications knowledge includesunderstanding the use of the resources available within the equipment as well asunderstanding the real-world tactical objects and goals to be managed.HFI Technical IssuesThe skills and knowledge for basic operation of Combat Systems are becomingmore standardised as the style used to design the user-equipment interfaceapproximates that employed in general purpose computers. Low-level computingskills like the use of pointing devices and display windows manipulation are nowcommon requirements. System management is a new skill area characteristic ofCombat Systems, particularly where several systems are linked together or sharecommon networks and communications bandwidths.Platform management equipment for machinery surveillance and control, and fordamage control, is similarly affected by the increasing use of standardisedcomputer-based user-equipment interfaces.6.1.3.2 Physical CharacteristicsThe platform spaces, traffic areas and the equipment to be operated must bedesigned to match the physical characteristics of personnel. Appropriate sets ofanthropometric data about the physical size and strength of personnel must beused in order to ensure that users can move and work safely and effectivelywithout having to adopt unsafe or uncomfortable body and limb positions. Therequirements of UK Health and Safety legislation must also be met.Such data relating to the general UK population is available in commerciallyavailable publications. However, data relating to more specific populations fromsurveys of RN personnel also exist and are currently presented within theRNGTAD. The anthropometric data used must take account of the agreed rangeof variation of both male and female populations. In platform management, thiswill affect the design of controls, the reach envelope to use controls and thestrength required to operate certain classes of device, e.g. valves. It is usual tospecify the required range in terms of upper and lower ‘percentiles’ to be cateredfor.Similarly, the reach and visual envelopes of all personnel must beaccommodated in the design of operator positions, compartment layout andaccess ways. Basic human limitations in vision and hearing also need to beaccommodated in the design. In the design of individual items of equipment,human strength and endurance capabilities must be considered.May 2006 Page 6-5 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI Technical IssuesFigure 6-2: Personnel must not be required to adopt unsafe oruncomfortable body and limb positions to operate equipmentEquipment may be operated from consoles by seated or standing operators,reversionary controls or individual controls and indicators may be situated incramped machinery spaces. Cranes and other rigs may be located on decks. Ineach case body size may become a limiting factor unless requirements foraccess, equipment use and egress are properly investigated. Some items ofequipment may need to be carried or otherwise manipulated, e.g. fire-fightingappliances. In these cases strength and other physical capabilities of personnelwill need to be investigated to ensure that these do not limit the flexible use of theavailable manpower.6.1.3.3 Personnel FactorsPersonnel factors cover a range of issues related to crew characteristics. Theimportance of retaining skilled personnel means that the HFI process mustconsider the design of satisfying jobs and acceptable conditions of work.Conditions of service and habitability (Chap 13) may influence attitudes towardson-board activities, particularly when contrasted with lifestyles available in otherjobs, e.g. privacy, standard of accommodation spaces and access to recreationaland personal communications systems. Boring, repetitive, or highly de-skilledwork may reduce motivation and act to limit the supply of skilled personnel. Also,jobs may become de-skilled through greater use of automation and this maycreate a risk of diluting the applications knowledge that is vital to the successfulmanagement of equipment. Career progression may need to be supported byproviding jobs with more responsibility and the opportunity to develop higherlevels of technical skill and greater autonomy.May 2006 Page 6-6 Issue 4

Chapter 6 – Crew Characteristics6.1.4 The Royal Navy Generic Target Audience Description (RNGTAD)The RNGTAD is a comprehensive repository of Naval Personnel data, this isorganised and presented within a DOORS database environment to facilitateintegration and use within IPTs e.g. the development of traceable requirements.The purpose and intended use of the RNGTAD is discussed in sections 6.1.4.1and 6.1.4.2.6.1.4.1 RNGTAD Definition and PurposeThe RNGTAD has been created to:HFI Technical Issues• Provide a set of data that describes the physical and psychologicalcapabilities/limitations of the RN population.• Provide descriptions of the organisation and structure in which RNpersonnel operate.To place the above described data in context and account for developing trendsthe RNGTAD also provides information on:• RN policies, visions and programmes of work designed to achievesufficient, motivated and capable staff to meet the RN requirement.The totality of information within the RNGTAD is also intended to facilitate costanalyses (e.g. whole life costs) on which project decisions may be based.The RNGTAD is currently (2006) owned and managed by SSG and is availablethrough SSG-CSHF. A User Guide is contained within the RNGTAD DOORSdatabase and supporting reports are available from SSG-CSHF.6.1.4.2 RNGTAD StructureThere are six main subdivisions within the RNGTAD, these are:1. Section 1: User Guidance – This section informs the user what GuidanceMaterial is available and provides a link to access the Guidance.2. Section 2: Secular, Social and Demographic Factors – Describes thegeneral population as a whole, from which RN personnel are generallyrecruited. This section provides information social factors and marketforces that may influence the recruiting pool and hence the compositionand attitudes/expectations of future RN personnel.3. Section 3: Royal Navy Structure and Organisation – Describes the RNorganisational structure and personnel policies.4. Section 4: Royal Navy Personnel – Describes the RN populationcharacteristics. This is in terms of numbers, composition, physical, mentaland sensory characteristics and capabilities.5. Section 5: Supporting Information – Provides information to aidinterpretation and understanding of the RNGTAD, e.g. functionalinterpretation of PULHHEEMS classifications. This section also containsreferences and acronyms.May 2006 Page 6-7 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)6. Section 6: Database Change Record – Provides information of thechange history of the RNGTAD.HFI Technical IssuesSections 2 – 4 contain the majority of the personnel data and a more detailedbreakdown of these specific RNGTAD sections can be found at Table 6-1.• Social TrendsSection 2: Secular, Social and Demographic Factors• Demographic Trends• Employment Attitudes and Expectations• Social, Leisure and Attitudes• Mobility/Location• Education, Training, Qualifications• Technology Trends• Marriage, Cohabitation, Family• HealthSection 3: Royal Navy Structures and Organisation• Personnel Policy Factors and Trends• Naval Organisational Structure• Career Structures• Job Descriptions – Scope of Training and EmploymentSection 4: Royal Navy Personnel• Population description, demographics and trends• Physical Characteristics / Capabilities• Mental, Social and Emotional Characteristics• Sensory Characteristics• Training CharacteristicsMay 2006 Page 6-8 Issue 4

Chapter 6 – Crew Characteristics• Group/Team Factors and Command Structures• Human Needs and Limitations• Summary of Entry RequirementsTable 6-1: Data Descriptions for Sections 2 - 4 of the RNGTADThe RNGTAD is a sizable document equating to in excess of 300 pages ofpersonnel data. Accordingly, there are a number of pre-applied dataclassifications, such as those presented within Table 6-2, to assist with datahandling and manipulation, (e.g. filtering, sorting and exporting).HFI Technical IssuesTAD DataClassificationsDescription of ClassificationProjectRelevantThis attribute has been included for use by IPTs. Thefollowing classifications are available:• Yes• No• Not SpecifiedThis attribute allows projects to classify sections of theRNGTAD as being project relevant. This attribute featureswithin the PSTAD preset views such that if data is classifiedas 'Yes' or 'Not' Specified' then the data and all it'sascendants will be displayed during the sort. It should benoted that the default entry is 'Not Specified'.PopulationThis classifies the data according to the population to whichit is applicable:• RN Specific• MoD Tri Service• General Population• Unknown (Not defined at source)Whenever RN specific data is not available then either MoDtri service or general population data is presented.May 2006 Page 6-9 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)TAD DataClassificationsDescription of ClassificationHFI Technical IssuesData CategoryClassifies data according to the type of data that ispresented:• Information• Human Requirement• Capability/Limitation• Target Audience AspirationDLODsHFI DomainHFI TechnicalAreaObject/data are classified according to the Defence Lines ofDevelopment, definitions of these can be found in theinformation section of the RNGTAD.• Concepts & Doctrine• Personnel• Equipment and Technology• Structures and Estates• Sustainability• TrainingClassifies the object/data according to the HFI domains:• Manpower• Personnel• Training• HFE• System Safety• Health Hazard AssessmentObjects/data are classified according to the HFI technicalareas:• Manpower, Complementing and Accommodation• Team Characteristics• Crew Characteristics• Training• General Arrangement• Operational Spaces• Accommodation Spaces• Miscellaneous Spaces• Personnel Movement and Materials Handling• Habitability and Internal Environment• Equipment Layout• Operability and User-Equipment Interaction• Maintenance and Support• SafetyMay 2006 Page 6-10 Issue 4

Chapter 6 – Crew CharacteristicsTAD DataClassificationsDescription of ClassificationPIAR Label 1PIAR Label 2Objects/data are classified according to the first level ofPIAR data classification:• Motivated• Capable• SufficientObjects/data are classified according to the second level of2SL PIAR data classification:• Cap - Human Factors• Cap - Training and Education Policy• Cap - Competence• Mot - Personal Policy• Suff - Market Factors• Suff - Manning FactorsNote:Cap = CapabilitySuff = SufficientMot = MotivatedHFI Technical IssuesTable 6-2: Key Data Classifications within the RNGTAD6.1.5 Generation of a Project Specific Target Audience Description(PSTAD)The RNGTAD takes the form of a DOORS database and is currently (2006)managed by and available through SSG-CSHF, see previously (Sect 6.1.4.1).For use on a given project, a clone of the master RNGTAD should be obtainedfrom SSG, this clone should then be analysed and converted into a ProjectSpecific Target Audience Description (PSTAD).To create the PSTAD the RNGTAD should be reviewed to identify datacategories that need to be retained; this will largely depend upon on the nature,complexity and specialisation of the RN procurement project to which the TAD isto be applied. HF specialists may be required to support this identification andappraisal of relevant data. In addition, this analysis may result in the exclusion ofcertain data categories where these are not appropriate to the project, oralternatively, the identification of data voids, i.e. the need for further datacategories and/or data refinement.Once completed this becomes the Project Specific Target Audience Description(PSTAD). The PSTAD should continue to be refined, validated and used throughthe remaining Phases of the procurement cycle as defined within the HFIActivities Tables (in Sect 6.3).May 2006 Page 6-11 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI Technical IssuesIt should be noted that the list of possible categories is not exhaustive, and asTADs become a more integral part of the RN system design process, further datacategories may be identified that are relevant to the design process.Depending upon the scope and scale of a project, an IPT should nominate aperson within the team to be the PSTAD Administrator. This individual should beresponsible for the management (e.g. editing, updating etc.) of the PSTAD.May 2006 Page 6-12 Issue 4

Chapter 6 – Crew Characteristics6.2 HFI ProcessThis section explains the process of defining the crew characteristics for thepersonnel responsible for operating and maintaining the platform. The processinvolves liaison between the HFI Focus and various stakeholders in conductingthe HFI activities. The validity of the characteristics collated in the PSTAD mustbe confirmed before they are used in product design. The HFI Activities arediscussed in Table 6-3 and the HFI activities are illustrated in Figure 6-3.RNGTADAnalysisGenerate a Project Specific TargetAudience Description (PSTAD)CONCEPTIdentifyRequired Skillsand KnowledgeIdentify CriticalPersonnelFactorsRefine Project SpecificTarget Audience DescriptionAssess Impact ofAnthropometricCharacteristicsASSESSMENTHFI ProcessValidate and FinaliseProject Specific TargetAudience DescriptionDEMONSTRATIONMaintain PSTAD to allow identification ofdiscrepancies in user characteristics, e.g. newusers, and allow remedial action, e.g. training tobe improvedMANUFACTUREMaintain PSTAD to ensure that it continues toaccurately represent user characteristics (andnew users) for any future modifications orupgradesIN-SERVICEFeedback of Lessons Learnt for Future TADDevelopmentDISPOSALFigure 6-3:The HFI Process for Crew CharacteristicsMay 2006 Page 6-13 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)C A D M I D HFI ActivityGenerate PSTAD from RNGTADIdentify Required Skills & KnowledgeIdentify Critical Personnel FactorsAssess Impact of Anthropometric CharacteristicsRefine PSTADHFI ProcessValidate Project Specific Target AudienceCharacteristicsFinalise the PSTAD Maintain PSTADFeedback of Lessons Learnt for Future RNGTADDevelopmentTable 6-3: HFI Activities for Crew Characteristics6.2.1 HFI Focus ResponsibilitiesThe HFI Focus is responsible for the following:• Liaison with TES-SSG-CSHF to obtain RNGTAD and provide input to thePSTAD as appropriate.• Liaison with TES-SSG-ShipDes, DEC, MLS CG and FLEET-NPS to agreethe user roles and user characteristics of personnel expected to man theplatform.• Liaison with the HFI Focus of each related equipment project to ensure thatthe PSTAD is appropriate within the context of the Whole Ship.• Liaison with FLEET-NPS to ensure that the PSTAD is appropriate, giventhe RN Manpower Policy, and complies with the assumptions made in thecomplementing process (Chap 4).• Liaison with FLEET-NLM to identify aspects impacting on retention or jobsatisfaction.• Liaison with FOTR to identify the training implications of new skills andknowledge requirements and new job descriptions (Chap 7).May 2006 Page 6-14 Issue 4

Chapter 6 – Crew Characteristics• Liaison with TES-SA-MA to ensure that maintainer skills and knowledgeand other characteristics are compatible with the Integrated LogisticsSupport (ILS) concept for the platform (Chap 16).• Resolution of trade-offs relating to user and maintainer characteristics tooptimise the whole-life costs, performance and health and safety of theplatform and its equipment (Chap 17).6.2.2 Relevant StandardsThe applicable standards are listed in Table 6-4 below. Further details areincluded in Annex 2, together with other related standards.StandardTitleDef Stan 00-25 Part 16Def Stan 00-25 Part 17Human Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 16: Introduction and Manpower Domain –Technical Guidance and DataHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 17: Personnel Domain – Technical Guidanceand DataHFI ProcessTable 6-4: Relevant StandardsMay 2006 Page 6-15 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)6.3 HFI Activities6.3.1 Concept Phase Activities6.3.1.1 Generate Project Specific Target Audience DescriptionPurposeTo generate a PSTAD from the RNGTAD. The RNGTAD shouldbe reviewed to identify data categories that need to be retained,expanded, deleted and added. This will largely depend upon onthe nature and complexity of the RN procurement project to whichthe TAD is to be applied and specific HF activities defined withinthe HFIP. HF specialists may be required in the selection ofexiting data categories and requirement for additional datacategories.Inputs • Royal Navy Generic Target Audience Description.• Review of key personnel characteristics with FLEET-NPS andDEC.• Review of key personnel characteristics with HFI Specialists.• Data from existing Schemes of Complement (SoC).• Data from previous surveys of personnel from INM andFLEET-NLM.• Outline Manning for equipment.• Job Specifications.• Operational Performance Statements.• Training performance Statements.MethodsData is typically obtained through:• [Review of Royal Navy Generic] Target Audience Description(RNGTAD)• [Structured] Interviews• Specific HF research studies• Document reviewsStepsThe PSTAD is developed as follows:HFI Activities• Obtain RNGTAD from SSG-CSHF.• Review the RNGTAD to identify project relevant subsets ofdata, data voids and additional data requirements.• Identify the user and maintainer roles associated with theplatform from current manning practice, from the emergingconcept of operation for the platform and the use ofequipment, and from the ILS Use Study (Chap 16).• Collect existing information about training objectives(Operational Performance Statements (OPS) and TrainingPerformance Statements (TPS)) and career progressionMay 2006 Page 6-16 Issue 4

Chapter 6 – Crew Characteristicsroutes for personnel.• Identify knowledge, educational background and mental skillslikely to be required for the platform and for new equipment,particularly where these vary from those currently available.• Identify physical skills and body size and strengthcharacteristics required to operate and maintain the newequipment, particularly new requirements; correlate these withthose likely to be available amongst the available manpower.OutputsThe PSTAD typically comprises the following:• Rank, rate and Branch• Body size and strength (anthropometric) characteristics• Physical skills• Knowledge and mental skills• Educational Background• Experience• Summary of training objectives (OPS and TPS) and careerprogressionHFI ActivitiesMay 2006 Page 6-17 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)6.3.2 Assessment Phase Activities6.3.2.1 Identify Required Skills and KnowledgePurposeTo identify the skill and knowledge requirements of personnel asthe basis for further role definition and early training needsanalysis.Inputs • The PSTAD for the platform and for component equipments.• The results of training needs analyses.• Complementing studies.• Existing Operational and Training Performance Statements.• Task synthesis and role definitions related to equipmentspecifications (Chap 15).MethodsStepsSkills AnalysisSkills and knowledge requirements are identified as follows:• Identify the tasks allocated to each crewmember.• Perform skills analysis in conjunction with HFI Specialists toidentify the categories and levels of each mental and physicalskill required to perform the role (Chap 7).• Identify the categories and level of knowledge required toperform the role.OutputsThe skills and knowledge requirements for each role may bepresented as a matrix showing the category, name and level ofeach type of skill and knowledge required to perform each task byeach crewmember. New forms or levels of skills and knowledgenot currently supplied by the training system are highlighted fordiscussion with FOTR, RN ICG and other agencies.HFI ActivitiesMay 2006 Page 6-18 Issue 4

Chapter 6 – Crew Characteristics6.3.2.2 Identify Critical Personnel FactorsPurposeTo identify the impact of personnel requirements on futurepersonnel selection, retention and job satisfaction.Inputs • The PSTAD for the platform and component equipments.• The results of FLEET-NLM attitude surveys or informationabout retention.• The result of specific HF research.MethodsStepsNot IdentifiedThis HFI activity is conducted in order to ensure that the impact offuture user and maintainer roles is fully discussed with thePrincipal Personnel Officer (PPO) so that the effect on personnelselection, career progression and manpower retention isunderstood.• Identify user and maintainer roles requiring skills, knowledge,responsibilities or other attributes that vary significantly fromthose of current jobs.• Liaise with FLEET-NPS to discuss the feasibility of supportingfuture user roles.• Identify morale and job satisfaction issues associated with theperformance of duties by personnel working on currentplatforms.• Identify the likely impact of proposed changes to user andmaintainer roles in positive and negative terms.• In conjunction with FLEET-NPS and FLEET-NLM identify andimplement methods of eliminating, or reducing the effect of,negative factors, e.g. re-organise tasks to provide greaterautonomy, more variety, increased responsibility etc.Outputs • Critical personnel factors associated with the feasibility ofsupporting future user and maintainer roles andrecommendations aimed at optimising these factors.HFI ActivitiesMay 2006 Page 6-19 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)6.3.2.3 Assess Impact of Anthropometric CharacteristicsPurposeTo identify the range of body size and strength amongst personnelavailable to operate and maintain the future platform.Inputs • The PSTAD for the platform and component equipments(Chap 5).• Results of national and INM surveys of physicalcharacteristics.• Equipment and workspace specifications (Chap 14 andChap 15).MethodsStepsNot IdentifiedThe anthropometric characteristics of personnel likely to beallocated to the crew or the vessel are determined as follows:• Identify current surveys of anthropometric characteristics ofRN and other personnel and extract parameters and ranges ofattributes relevant to the performance of operating andmaintenance tasks.• Liaise with INM to determine any variation likely in the future.• Correlate the anthropometric characteristics with thoserequired for the operation and maintenance of the platform.• Use the anthropometric characteristics during platform layoutand traffic flow design, user-equipment interface design(Chap 15), equipment workspace design (Chap 14), design formaintainability (Chap 16) and health and safety assessments(Chap 17).Outputs • The anthropometric characteristics of future personnelavailable to perform crew roles, or that will use the vessel.• Correlation of task requirements with body size or strengthrequirements.HFI ActivitiesMay 2006 Page 6-20 Issue 4

Chapter 6 – Crew Characteristics6.3.2.4 Refine Project Specific Target Audience DescriptionPurposeTo collate the results of studies into personnel requirements in thePSTAD.Inputs • Outline Skills & Knowledge statements• Critical Personnel Factor statements• Outline Anthropometric Characteristics• Platform PSTAD• Collated TADs from component equipment projectsMethodsStepsSee previous sections.The PSTAD is amended as follows:• Identify the crew platform roles and the user and maintainerroles for the component equipments from current manningpractice, the ILS concept and from the emerging concept ofoperation.• Collect existing information about training objectives (OPS andTPS) and career progression for each role.• Identify knowledge, educational background and mental skillslikely to be required for the platform and for new equipment.• Identify physical skills and body size and strengthcharacteristics required to operate and maintain the newplatform and its equipment.• Identify tasks to be performed by each role and the conditionsunder which such tasks will be performed.• Identify other personnel characteristics of each role includinglevel of responsibility, factors affecting job satisfaction etc.OutputsThe revised PSTAD comprises the following:• Rank, rate and Branch• Body size and strength (anthropometric) characteristics• Physical skills• Knowledge and mental skills• Educational Background.• Experience• Personal attributes (*)• Key tasks allocated to each role (*)• Assumed operational conditions under which tasks will beperformed (*)• Summary of training objectives (OPS and TPS) and careerprogression routes(*) Items not necessarily present in earlier version of PSTAD.HFI ActivitiesMay 2006 Page 6-21 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)6.3.3 Demonstration Phase Activities6.3.3.1 Validate Project Specific Target Audience CharacteristicsPurposeTo confirm the accuracy and the use of the information in thePSTAD.Inputs • The current PSTAD• Design specifications• Evaluations of prototypes• Evaluation of models• Evaluation of mock-upsMethodsNot IdentifiedSteps • The skills and knowledge descriptions are checked against theoutputs of training needs analyses.• Personnel factors are checked against factors known toinfluence job satisfaction and retention.• Anthropometric characteristics are checked against currentsurvey results.• Design specifications, drawings, prototypes and models etc.are sampled to determine whether or not personnelcharacteristics have been applied as design rules orparameters, and to determine areas where inadequate adviceis available.Outputs • Assessment of the validity and the usefulness of theinformation presented in the current PSTAD.• Recommendations for improvements where inadequacies areidentified.HFI ActivitiesMay 2006 Page 6-22 Issue 4

Chapter 6 – Crew Characteristics6.3.3.2 Finalise Project Specific Target Audience DescriptionPurposeTo update the PSTAD for use during the detailed design of theequipment.Inputs • PSTAD• Equipment design information• Team organisation and user role specifications (Chap 5)• Result of training needs analyses (Chap 7)MethodsStepsOutputsNot IdentifiedThe steps are those used in PSTAD produced duringAssessment.The outputs are an updated version of those used in the PSTADproduced during Assessment.6.3.4 Manufacture Phase ActivitiesMaintain the PSTAD to allow identification of discrepancies in usercharacteristics, e.g., new users and the required remedial action (such astraining). Inputs, Methods, Steps and Outputs should be a further iteration ofthose outlined in Sect 6.3.3.2 above.6.3.5 In-Service Phase ActivitiesMaintain the PSTAD to ensure that it continues to accurately represent usercharacteristics (and the characteristics of new users once the system is inservice. Inputs, Methods, Steps and Outputs should be a further iteration ofthose outlined in Sect 6.3.3.2 above.6.3.6 Disposal Phase ActivitiesConsider use of previous PSTADs to support subsequent RN projects. The HFIfocus should ensure appropriate feedback, on PSTAD development, is providedto the RNGTAD maintainer, currently SSG to support further development of themaster RNGTAD. For example, new data generated within the PSTAD, thatcould benefit other Naval Procurement programmes, should be fed back to theSSG-CSHF for integration into the master RNGTAD.HFI ActivitiesMay 2006 Page 6-23 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)HFI ActivitiesMay 2006 Page 6-24 Issue 4MAP-01-011 CH 06_18.doc

CHAPTER 7 – TRAININGCONTENTS7.1 HFI Technical Issues....................................................................................................7-37.1.1 Introduction ...........................................................................................7-37.1.2 Stakeholders.........................................................................................7-57.1.3 Individual and Team Training................................................................7-57.1.4 Combat System / Warfare Team Training ............................................7-67.1.5 Engineering Training.............................................................................7-87.1.6 Use of Synthetic Training Equipment....................................................7-97.1.7 Fidelity of Synthetic Training Equipment.............................................7-107.2 HFI Process ......................................................................................................7-117.2.1 HFI Focus Responsibilities .................................................................7-127.2.2 Relevant Standards ............................................................................7-137.3 HFI Activities.....................................................................................................7-147.3.1 Concept Phase Activities ....................................................................7-147.3.1.1 Outline Future Training Policy ..........................................7-147.3.1.2 Training Needs Analysis Scoping Study ..........................7-157.3.2 Assessment / Demonstration / Manufacture Phase Activities.............7-167.3.2.1 Operational Task Analysis (OTA).....................................7-167.3.2.2 Training Gap Analysis (TGA) ...........................................7-187.3.2.3 Training Options Analysis (TOA)......................................7-197.3.2.4 Training Needs Analysis Final Report ..............................7-217.3.3 Manufacture Phase Activities..............................................................7-227.3.3.1 Procure Training Solution.................................................7-227.3.3.2 Conduct Training Design..................................................7-227.3.3.3 Plan Training Roll-Out ......................................................7-237.3.3.4 Evaluate Training .............................................................7-247.3.4 In-Service Phase Activities .................................................................7-247.3.5 Disposal Phase Activities....................................................................7-24Nov 2006 Page 7-1 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)Nov 2006 Page 7-2 Issue 4

Chapter 7 – Training7.1 HFI Technical IssuesHFI Technical IssuesFigure 7-1: Training is vital to the development and maintenanceof individual skills, team and crew operational readiness7.1.1 IntroductionThe Tri-Service approach to training is defined in DSAT QS ‘The DefenceSystems Approach to Training Quality Standard’ [Ref 3] which replaces BR 8420‘The Royal Naval Systems Approach to Training Quality Standard (RNSAT QS)’[Ref 4].FOTR, in his role as DGNTE, is responsible for RN training policy and the RNtraining system. RNSETT (now RN ICG) produced a series of guides to supportthe design and delivery of training. These guides are now superseded by thefollowing tri-service Defence Training Support Manuals (DTSM), which providespecialist advice:• DTSM 1 ‘The Analysis, Design and Development of Training’ [Ref 6]• DTSM 2 ‘The Glossary of Defence Training Terminology’ [Ref 7]• DTSM 3 ‘Training Needs Analysis (TNA)’ [Ref 8] 1 .• DTSM 4 ‘The Evaluation of Training’ [Ref 9]1 See also JSP 502 ‘The Tri-Service Guide to Training Needs Analysis (TNA) forAcquisition Projects’ [Ref 12].Nov 2006 Page 7-3 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• DTSM 5 ‘Technology Based Training Delivery Solutions’ [Ref 10]HFI Technical Issues• DTSM 6 ‘The Audit and Inspection of Individual Training’ [Ref 11]These guidance documents provide for a systematic and consistent approach tothe development of training, focusing on the achievement of defined performancelevels. All training-related activities are documented and analysed to ensureefficient, effective training and that they meet developing operational needs.Whilst the basic approach to naval training has remained stable since itsintroduction some 20 years ago, the environment in which training is achievedand the means by which it is delivered have changed and will continue to do so.In managing the analysis of the training requirement for a new capability, a TNASteering Group (TNA SG) is constituted. Further details pertaining to the rolesand responsibilities of the TNA SG can be found in DTSM 3 ‘TNA’ [Ref 8]. TheSG will normally be chaired by the project sponsor, usually the RequirementsManager (as DEC’s representative); to ensure that training requirements arecaptured as part of the requirements capture process.The IPT Leader is responsible for ensuring that the cost implications and theready for training date are co-ordinated in the procurement and properlyrepresented in the TLMP. The relevant System Project Manager is alsoresponsible for ensuring that the TNA produces a specification that can be usedfor the purposes of tender action, if required. Following on from the TNA aTraining Working Group (TWG) should be established (usually under the ILSManagement Committee (ILSMC)) allowing the relevant System Project Managerto co-ordinate acceptance with the Integrated Logistics Support Manager (ILSM)and the Lead School to ensure that RN training design and delivery areresourced. The Operational Command represents the final user and isresponsible for assessing the operational objectives, implications of additionalon-the job training (OJT) on operational capability and the provision of subjectmatter expert advice to the TNA.It is Naval policy that training is carried out where and when it is most costeffectiveto do so. A rigorous approach is required to determine whetherappropriate training functionality should be embedded in relevant futureequipments to support federated training (short/medium term) and aconfederated capability (long term). The training needs and the necessaryfacilities are identified and funded as part of the platform procurement. In caseswhere equipments are procured as commercial-off-the-shelf products it isimportant that a training package is also procured which is either compatible with,or can be adapted to meet, the user service training needs. Even where atraining package is procured with equipment, it is important to consider how it willbe delivered to personnel when the equipment is in-service. Training equipmentdelivery, together with its associated environmental infrastructure, needs toprecede unit equipment In Service Date (ISD).FOTR and/or the Lead School will also be represented on a TNA SG to providetraining subject matter expert advice. FLEET-NPS should be represented inorder to ensure that the job, ADQUAL and TEM are taken into account. RN ICGis responsible for the quality assurance of all TNAs done by or on behalf of theNaval Service as well as being the first point of contact for acquisition/TNArelated advice. The HFI Focus may represent the procurement project in allaspects of the TNA or at the very least will co-ordinate the TNA activity with otherHFI activities.Nov 2006 Page 7-4 Issue 4

Chapter 7 – TrainingIt is the responsibility of the platform project staff to co-ordinate the definition ofthe platform training requirements for a new vessel to ensure that:• A comprehensive Ship Class policy is adopted.• All necessary platform training needs are identified and co-ordinated withtraining needs of other equipments.• Training facilities on-board and ashore are identified.• A technical approach to supporting training media is identified and coordinatedwith platform services, e.g. use of the Combat System highway.HFI Technical Issues7.1.2 Stakeholders• There is commonality of approach (e.g. user-equipment interface designfor training facilities) across all equipments.• Provision is made for training resources in manning estimates, spaceallowance and maintenance policy.• The cost-effectiveness of major training options is assessed and enteredinto the whole-life costs (WLC) for the platform.• The training solution is compatible with existing or planned trainingsystems for existing or future platforms.A list of potential stakeholders for this area is given below. This list is notexhaustive and should be seen to be a guide only. HFI Foci should refine this listbased upon the structure of their project, the attendees at the relevant HFSG orHFWG and in light of guidance and requests from industry, DEC and Customer 2representatives.• DEC• FOTR• IPT HFI Foci• MLS CG• RN ICG• TES-SA-MA• MTS IPT7.1.3 Individual and Team TrainingThe purpose of training in the Royal Navy is to contribute to the cost-effectivedelivery of the required level of Operational Capability (OC) by preparingpersonnel to be at pre-defined and agreed levels of skill and knowledge. Trainingalso builds cohesion and teamwork and ranges from individual proficiencytraining to the conduct of large Task Force exercises that test command andcontrol and the application of doctrine. Training enables personnel and units tocontinue to operate in the confusion and stress of combat beyond a predefined(raw) capability.Training must be provided for individual users and maintainers, for sub-teams,full and command teams in order to support the delivery of OC. Team trainingplays a critical role in enabling the service to meet its objectives of increasedoperational effectiveness with fewer personnel. In particular, the need to changeNov 2006 Page 7-5 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)traditional user roles and to encourage more flexible use of resources inplatforms increases the requirement for team training afloat.HFI Technical IssuesEmbedded training, leading to federated and confederated training will be anessential requirement if effective team training is to be achieved in supporting theFuture Navy Operational Concept (FNOC). The decision to include embeddedtraining facilities in equipments is as much a design issue as a training issue. Itis easier to include an embedded or appended training functionality within aninitial equipment design than it is to add it later. Team training needs are moredifficult to specify than the individual skills and knowledge required for basicequipment operation or maintenance.The complexity of the applications available in future platforms may dictate thateach trainee develops skills and knowledge in a part-task manner. Changes inthe types of user role associated with the use of equipment may require afundamental re-evaluation of the way in which skills and knowledge aredeveloped. Skills decay is a major problem with highly automated systems thatrequire infrequent intervention. Embedded training facilities and user supportfacilities can be used to maintain the currency of skills required to cope with faultand damage states.7.1.4 Combat System / Warfare Team TrainingFigure 7-2: Training must be provided for users at sub-team andfull team levelsWarfare Team Training (WTT) is a key component of OC and the need to ‘Fightand Win’ dictates that core warfare training must remain predicated on multithreat,multi-platform, high-intensity operations but broadened to reflect the moreversatile roles required of Naval platforms. Training is vital to the developmentand maintenance of individual skills and Warfare team operational readiness.Nov 2006 Page 7-6 Issue 4

Chapter 7 – TrainingTraining must be provided for individual users and maintainers and at sub-team,full team and command team levels.The requirement to train selected personnel in the integrated employment ofsensors and weapons will remain for the foreseeable future. However, theincreasing complexity of the modern digitised battle space, ‘swing’ and thegrowth of information transfer will demand a shift of emphasis from internal OpsRoom management to information and mission management. Versatile MaritimeForce (VMF) requires broader warfare skills, including activity co-ordinationacross a more diverse range of participants and non-procedural responses tounconventional threats.HFI Technical IssuesFurther automated picture-compilation enhancements signal a trend towardsreduced operator input to lower level processes, and increasing commonality infuture Command Systems and greater use of COTS technology will lead to moreintuitive execution. Through Federation/Confederation, T45 platforms andbeyond will offer progressively higher quality training facilities afloat, increasingthe scope for greatly improved OJT and Warfare Team Training (WTT), withcompensating efficiencies in shore training. These capabilities are nowtechnically mature and the opportunity can be seized.The following issues concerning training for Warfare teams need to beaddressed:• The characteristics of operator and maintainer training ashore and at seaneed to match the requirements and opportunities of jobs at sea.• The effectiveness of the transfer of operator-maintainer and other skillsfrom shore training to training at sea needs careful evaluation.• Training needs to stretch the capabilities of operators beyond that which isusually achievable during peacetime conditions.• Where training functions are embedded in the Combat System there is arisk of confusing real and synthetic contacts, which needs to be addressed.• The Warfare team cannot be wholly trained at sea as operators need to befamiliar with equipment before they can be involved effectively in teamtraining.• Some tasks may only be learned adequately at sea, e.g. submarine specialoperations and deep-sea rescue.• Changes in the types of user roles in future Combat Systems will alsorequire a fundamental re-evaluation of the way in which skills andknowledge are developed. Skills decay is a major problem given thecomplexity of new Combat Systems. This is only partially offset bystandardisation of the user-equipment interface and the use of automation.Embedded training facilities and user support facilities can be used tomaintain the currency of skills, although the chosen solution must allow theuser to distinguish between real-world and synthetic situations.Nov 2006 Page 7-7 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)7.1.5 Engineering TrainingHFI Technical IssuesFigure 7-3: Example Marine Engineering EquipmentTraining must be provided for individual users and maintainers and for teamsusing equipment for platform management, CBRNDC and various evolutionsincluding RAS, waste disposal, catering, ship husbandry, support to ship safety,docking, boarding and evacuation etc. The following training issues need to beconsidered for engineering equipment:• Training in platform management and related areas may have to beconducted ashore due to the complexity of the machinery surveillance andcontrol equipment and the underlying systems.• The effectiveness of the transfer of skills trained ashore to the operationalplatform management system needs careful evaluation.• The fidelity of training equipment and tasks must be appropriate to ensurethat critical aspects like fault diagnosis and repair of a vessel’s propulsionand other systems can be effected.• Whilst being practiced at sea, some roles and functions must be trainedashore due to lack of space or time or due to the nature of the training e.g.CBRNDC, damage control, fire-fighting etc.• Some platform management systems are used continually when at seaand alongside, this makes on-board training in their use and supportdifficult or hazardous to achieve.Nov 2006 Page 7-8 Issue 4

Chapter 7 – Training• The use of electronic support measures (EPSS / IETPs) is as much adesign issue as it is a training issue. Decisions to use such systems needto be made early with the consequences fully evaluated.7.1.6 Use of Synthetic Training EquipmentTraining needs must be established for any training equipment exceeding adefined value (this is reviewed periodically). RN ICG and DTSM 1 ‘The Analysis,Design and Development of Training’ [Ref 6] 2 provide advice about themanagement process used to ensure that training equipments are cost-effective.HFI Technical IssuesFigure 7-4: Example Synthetic Training EquipmentTraining equipment can be as complex as the real equipment and requires anequal degree of rigour in procurement and systems engineering processes.Where standard computing devices and standardised interfaces are used,training functionality can be embedded within real equipment. Consoles on aCombat System or on the platform management system may be designed toallow them to be re-configured for use as instructor workstations. Traineeconsoles for Combat Systems or the platform management systems can beconfigured in various ways to facilitate individual, sub-team and command teamtraining.The communications networks available on-board future platforms, and betweenplatforms and shore-based establishments, will enable continuation training to beprogressed outside operational compartments and monitored by training staffashore. Training ashore is likely to remain a requirement, particularly for parttaskindividual training and maintainer training. Stand-alone trainers for basic2 See also DTSM 3 ‘Training Needs Analysis (TNA)’ [Ref 8], and DTSM 5 ‘TechnologyBased Training Delivery Solutions’ [Ref 10].Nov 2006 Page 7-9 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI Technical Issuesskills development, and for more advanced user or maintainer role training, arerequired to support initial training and specialist conversion training at shoreestablishments.7.1.7 Fidelity of Synthetic Training EquipmentThe platform management system will always be operational whilst at sea andthis may place greater emphasis on the availability of shore-based simulators forsystems management and for fault simulation and repair training. The sole useof real equipment as the basis for training is now a very expensive, inefficient andprobably ineffective way of developing and maintaining individual and teamperformance at the required level of operational readiness. Even within theclassroom environment, use of the real equipment may prove prohibitivelyexpensive particularly when additional scenario generation and instructionalcontrol facilities are required. Synthetic training provides a method of deliveringtraining ashore and on-board (often within the harbour) at individual and teamlevels. For example, synthetic training now provides the opportunity to link realequipment with other platforms, other synthetic devices and scenario generationfacilities creating a virtual warfare environment for training at team, crew, taskforce and even theatre level.Three types of training fidelity need to be considered as follows.1. Physical Fidelity – The degree to which the training replication of theoperational equipment requires exact physical representation in spatialarrangements, the appearance and direct tactile feel of controls.2. Functional Fidelity – The degree to which the training replication of theuser interface with the operational equipment will need to represent andemphasise the informational aspects of the task including scenarios,tactical objects and their behaviour, format, content and response.3. Environmental Fidelity – The degree to which the host environment forthe equipment needs to be replicated in terms of sound, motion andambience (heat, humidity, lighting etc.).In addition to the degree of replication of the real equipment, synthetic trainingdevices require instructional facilities. These include instructor facilities formonitoring and controlling training scenarios and the provision of additional cuesor feedback not available in the real equipment or environment to promotegreater understanding or to support learning of very complex material or skills.Nov 2006 Page 7-10 Issue 4

Chapter 7 – Training7.2 HFI ProcessThe process of defining the training involves liaison between the HFI Focus andvarious stakeholders in conducting the HFI activities.Training Needs Analysis (TNA) is an iterative process supporting a risk reductionstrategy. Its use within acquisition is dependent on the acquisition strategyadopted, the maturity of platform/equipment (and hence system information) andthe time available in which to procure a solution. It is possible that all theactivities can be achieved prior to the Main Gate submission but it is likely thatthe process will need re-iterating during the demonstration phase. It is unlikelythat the training requirement will be identified during the concept phase but anassessment of the implications for training, should a particular capability beacquired, should be assessed.For a platform, multiple studies will be undertaken and the management of thisprocess could fall to the HFI focus. Figure 7-5 tries to show the processdiagrammatically within the CADMID cycle.C A D M I DScoping ReportOutline FutureTraining PolicyOperational TaskAnalysisTraining GapAnalysisFinal ReportProcure TrainingSolutionConduct TrainingDesignConduct TrainingEvaluateTrainingHFI ProcessTraining OptionsAnalysisPlan, implement and deliver first ofclass / conversion trainingFigure 7-5: CADMID CycleNote … The training rollout plan is contingent on the development of thetraining solution and training design work.The process of defining the training involves liaison between the HFI Focus andvarious stakeholders in conducting the HFI activities. The HFI activities arepresented in Table 7-1. The ticks represent the procurement Phases at whichthe activities are likely to be conducted.Nov 2006 Page 7-11 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)C A D M I D HFI ActivityOutline Future Training Policy Scoping Report Operational Task Analysis (OTA) Training Gap Analysis (TGA) Training Options Analysis (TOA) Training Needs Analysis Final ReportProcure Training Solution Conduct Training DesignPlan Training Roll-OutHFI Process Evaluate TrainingTable 7-1: HFI Activities for Training7.2.1 HFI Focus ResponsibilitiesThe HFI Focus is responsible for the following:• Liaison with DEC to establish the overall training requirements.• Liaison with FOTR, the authority responsible for RN training, to establishRN training strategy and future provision for training resources within RNtraining establishments.• Development of an Operational Scenario Description (Annex 3) suitable foruse in the platform TNA, which will consider crew, team and individual roletraining.• Development of the platform TNA and equipment TNA in accordance withspecialist guidance from RN ICG.• Provision of training support facilities within the platform design, e.g.classrooms, communications, sufficient bandwidth for training information.• Collation of TNAs from, and dissemination of training policy to, the platformsupplier and to equipment supply projects.• Establishing the whole-life costs (WLC) associated with training optionsand performance of trade-offs to establish options with the most favourableWLC.• Liaison with FLEET-NPS to validate training throughput of manpower.Nov 2006 Page 7-12 Issue 4

Chapter 7 – Training• Liaison with TES-SA-MA to ensure that maintenance training needs areidentified and the training support system is compatible with the IntegratedLogistics Support (ILS) concept for the equipment (Chap 16).• Development of the TNA and supporting material for submission to theInvestment Appraisal Board (IAB).• Resolution of trade-offs and selection of the most cost-effective trainingoption to minimise the WLC of training support for the platform.• Development of training equipment as part of the overall procurement.• Planning the training roll-out in conjunction with FOTR and the end user.7.2.2 Relevant StandardsThe applicable standards are listed in Table 7-2 below. Further details areincluded in Annex 2, together with other related standards.StandardDef Stan 00-25Part 18TitleHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 18: Training Domain – Technical Guidance and DataHFI ProcessDef Stan 07-238DSAT QSDTSM 1DTSM 3DTSM 4JSP 502Guide to Design of Training and Recreational TelevisionSystems – Category 2The Defence Systems Approach to Training Quality StandardDefence Training Support Manual (DTSM) 1: The Analysis,Design and Development of TrainingDefence Training Support Manual (DTSM) 3: Training NeedsAnalysis (TNA)Defence Training Support Manual (DTSM) 4: The Evaluationof TrainingThe Tri-Service Guide to Training Needs Analysis (TNA)Table 7-2: Relevant StandardsNov 2006 Page 7-13 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)7.3 HFI Activities7.3.1 Concept Phase Activities7.3.1.1 Outline Future Training PolicyPurposeInputsMethodsTo identify overall targets, constraints, existing facilities andfuture RN training policy for the type of platform andassociated types of equipment.Information about current training facilities and training policyfrom FOTR.Human Factors Trade-Off AnalysisSteps • Confirm the existing training facilities and organisationpolicy with FOTR.• Identify training resource constraints ashore and afloat.• Produce high-level estimates of training throughput.• Assess future availability of training time for crews, teamsand personnel.• Assess future synthetic policy and technologicalpossibilities.• Use Human Factors Trade-Off Analysis to assess thebalance of investment in different high-level trainingstrategies.OutputsThe output consists of a brief review of existing trainingfacilities and resources together with an outline of the futuretraining context and factors to be considered in identifyingtraining options.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 7-14 Issue 4

Chapter 7 – Training7.3.1.2 Training Needs Analysis Scoping StudyPurposeTo identify the approach, participants and resources neededfor TNA.Inputs • The output from the Outline Future Training Policy,including OJT constraints.• Health & Safety requirements.• Minimum ADQUALS.• Constraints on the use of embedded training or otherequipment.• Acquisition Policy.• Manning constraints, PSTAD.MethodsTraining Needs Analysis.Steps • Outline how the requirement is likely to affect future skillrequirements.• Highlight constraints due to policy, limitations on TNA andtraining equipment resources, timing of the TNA, accessto subject matter experts and the likely role of industry andother service providers.• Identify existing work or material from TNA, HFI or ILSsources.• Adapt TNA methodology from that in DTSM 3 3 [Ref 8] andagree approach with RN ICG.• Develop project plan and resource TNA SG and TNAteam.OutputsOutline approach to TNA for the acquisition including:• Participants in TNA process – including DEC, FLEET-NPS, Customer 2, FOTR, training schools, HQ units.• Overview of stages of TNA agreed with RN ICG.• Project plan, strategy and resources required for conductof TNA.• TNA SG membership and responsibilities.• Identification of how the requirement is likely to affectfuture skill requirements.HFI Activities3 DTSM 3 [Ref 8] replaced JSP 502 ‘Tri-Service Guide to TNA for Acquisition Projects’[Ref 12] which superseded BR 8420 TG1 ‘Training Guide 1: The Royal Navy Instructionsfor the Conduct of Training Needs Analysis (TNA)’ [Ref 23].Nov 2006 Page 7-15 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)7.3.2 Assessment / Demonstration / Manufacture Phase Activities7.3.2.1 Operational Task Analysis (OTA)PurposeTo establish and prioritise the operational performance,conditions and standards required of individuals, sub-teamsand/or full team tasks for the new or changed operationalrequirement. If the new requirement is an equipment orsystem then the interface with the affected platforms must beanalysed to ensure that all operator and maintainerrequirements are captured.Inputs • Output from the outline and draft Basic ManningRequirement (BMR) defining the complement• Output from Outline Future Training Policy.• Approach to the TNA for the platform and equipment.Methods • Training Needs Analysis• Task Analysis• Task Synthesis• Role AnalysisHFI ActivitiesSteps • User interfaces for the platform and equipment aredefined and the physical, functional and environmentalparameters are identified. This may require the collationof various pieces of information from equipment projects(Chap 14, Chap 15, Chap 16).• Operational and maintenance jobs affected by theintroduction of the platform and associated equipment areidentified.• Task Analysis and Task Synthesis are used to detail theindividual, sub-team, team and Command Team dutiesand the tasks performed to operate or maintain theequipment (Chap 15 & Chap 16).• Platform operational objectives need to be developed foreach job based on all evolutions to be performed on theplatform including maintenance, ship husbandry, damagecontrol and fire-fighting, administration, logisticsmanagement, security and aircraft handling. Similarly, anoperational task list needs to be developed for each jobbased on all tasks performed using the equipment. Theconditions and performance standard of each task isidentified and each is rated in terms of difficulty,importance and frequency to establish its training priority.Nov 2006 Page 7-16 Issue 4

Chapter 7 – TrainingHigh-level estimates of training throughput for eachequipment option are developed:• Obtain target numbers to be trained for the platform frommanning estimates (Chap 4 & Chap 6).• Estimate the number of each type of user and maintainerto be trained on entry of the system into service(conversion training) taking account of the effect of thelikely time for full deployment of the platform across thefleet.• Estimate the number and type of user and maintainer tobe trained over the life of the platform and associatedequipment (Initial training and continuation training) takingaccount of the turnover of personnel and the trainingmargin calculated for each platform.• Estimate the length of each type of training for each typeof user role and maintainer (this may vary with trainingoption and in the early stages rely on current training).• Estimate the instructor resources required to providetraining for each type of user role and maintainer, takingaccount of the turnover of instructional personnel.• Estimate the class size per instructor and the ratio ofinstructors to trainees for training afloat.• Estimate annual throughput of trainees and instructors pertype of training.• Use throughput estimates to determine WLC for eachtraining option.OutputsOperational / Business Task Analysis – Deliverable 1 asrequired by DTSM 3 ‘Defence Training Support Manual 3:Training Needs Analysis’ [Ref 8], including: the preliminaryOperational Performance Statement (OPS) or CompetenceFramework (CF).The OPS is a summary document and is used to present theanalysis of Deliverable 1 in a concise format for approval anddiscussion purposes by the TNA Steering Group. The outputwill contain:• The range of jobs affected.• Duties and tasks to be trained.• The conditions and standards of performance required.• Why the task is performed – consequences of failure tocarry out the task• The training priority of each task.• An estimate of the training throughput per year.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 7-17 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)7.3.2.2 Training Gap Analysis (TGA)PurposeTo identify the additional training requirement of the affectedjob holders by determining the gap between the requirementsof the new requirement and the current training standard foreach job.Inputs • Output from the operational task analysis.• Existing OPS, TPS.• ADQUALS for jobholders.Methods • Training Needs Analysis• Task Analysis• Task Synthesis• Skills AnalysisSteps • Describe the gap between the performance conditionsand standards of the new requirement and the existingTPS and ADQUALS of each job. This gap represents theOJT requirement for the ‘Do Nothing’ Option.• Establish the additional knowledge, skills and attitudes foreach task using Task Analysis, Task Synthesis and SkillsAnalysis and an assessment of the fidelity requirementsfor the training solution• Assess the risks to operational capability of accepting theOJT approach implied in the ‘Do Nothing’ Option.• Summarise the tasks in the OPS that require training i.e.the ‘Do Nothing’ Option is unacceptable – these form thebasis of high-level training objectives for further analysis.Whilst the TNA is designed to look at the gap that cannot bedelivered by existing training it should also consider theresource implications on existing courses/training and theability of those courses/training in respect of a change inthroughput.HFI ActivitiesOutputs Training Gap Analysis – Deliverable 2 as required by DTSM 3[Ref 8].The outputs of this deliverable are statements of training gapsand associated implications against the operational/businesscapability. It should consider the option for continuing withexisting training using the existing training resources. Itshould also include TOs and an initial analysis of the newsystem / requirement which can be taken forward to informthe Training Options Analysis (TOA).The operational tasks requiring training are listed togetherwith an indication of the OJT. These are taken forward to thenext stage.Nov 2006 Page 7-18 Issue 4

Chapter 7 – Training7.3.2.3 Training Options Analysis (TOA)PurposeThe product from this deliverable is a recommendation as to acost effective training solution for meeting the identifiedOperational Tasks that require training. To recommend themost cost-effective training solution for meeting the identifiedoperational tasks that required training.Inputs • The results of the operational task analysis.• Training gap analysis.• Equipment specifications and details of the user interfaces(Chap 15).Methods • Training Needs Analysis• Cost benefit analysis• Investment appraisal• Training effectiveness analysis• Risk AnalysisSteps • A description of selected methods and/or media that willpartially or fully meet the training requirement describedby the Training Gap Analysis. The methods and mediaoptions selected will depend upon the type of project,training policy, training throughput and best practice.• An estimation of the relative training effectiveness of eachmedia option required to bridge the training gap, basedupon an analysis of the gap between each option and theoperational need. This is to include a fidelity analysis.• The training penalties of each option stated in terms of thedegradation of the performance, conditions, standardsspecified by the Training Objectives (TOs) and/or fidelity.• The OJT implications for each of the training options. Thisis important because it will leave the sponsor in no doubtabout the commitment to OJT and the possibility of areduction in operational capability if the OJT is notproperly resourced.• An estimate of the risks and/or opportunities associatedwith each training option.• A cost benefit analysis using a broad order of costs, in linewith treasury guidelines.An analysis to determine a balance between the training andcost effectiveness of the selected methods and or media.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 7-19 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)OutputsTOA – Deliverable 3 as required by DTSM 3 [Ref 8]. Arecommendation as to the most cost-effective trainingsolution.An OPS (see DTSM 3) for the duties and tasks affected bythe recommended training option with an estimated TrainingCategory reflecting the shore to sea training split. Supportivenotes to amplify OJT requirement to be included asappropriate to assist Training Designers with OJTspecifications. This enables changes to affected coursedocumentation.Depending upon the cost and complexity of the trainingsolution it may be necessary to obtain a detailed investmentappraisal based on firm quotations/prices from industry. Thismainly applies to projects where command teamtrainers/simulators are identified as the recommendedsolution following the steps above.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 7-20 Issue 4

Chapter 7 – Training7.3.2.4 Training Needs Analysis Final ReportPurposeTo describe the training requirement, the recommendedtraining strategy and the resources required to design andsupport the training.Inputs • The TNA scoping study.• OTA / Operational Performance Statement.• Training gap analysis.• Selected training solution.MethodsNot Identified.Steps • The TNA methodology is described.• The operational performance statement and associatedoperational objectives.• The training requirement and its justification based on thetraining gap analysis.• The recommended training solution including the trainingoptions identified, estimates of the relative trainingeffectiveness and cost of each option, and rationale forthe selection of the solution.• Implementation plan for training equipment and trainingdesign.• Evaluation strategy for use during the procurement, atacceptance and at the post-project evaluation.Outputs The TNA Final Report – Deliverable 4 as required by DTSM 3[Ref 8]. The output is an endorsed training solution, draftOPS/CF, implementation plan and an evaluation strategy.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 7-21 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)7.3.3 Manufacture Phase ActivitiesSee also Sect 7.3.2 Assessment / Demonstration / Manufacture Phase Activities.7.3.3.1 Procure Training SolutionPurposeInputsMethodsTo procure the training solution as identified from the TNAThe OPS, TPS and training objectives from the TNA.The outline training solution description and fidelity analysisresults from the TNA.Dependant on the nature of the training solution.Steps • Agree a procurement strategy.• Specify the outputs required of the training solution – theTPS and fidelity requirements.OutputsA procured training solution.7.3.3.2 Conduct Training DesignPurposeInputsTo design the training around the procured training solution.TNA Reports.Methods Training should meet the requirements of DSAT QS [Ref 3].Steps • See DTSM 1 [Ref 6]OutputsTraining Documentation and other supporting documentation.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 7-22 Issue 4

Chapter 7 – Training7.3.3.3 Plan Training Roll-OutPurposeInputsMethodsTo plan the delivery of conversion training during equipmentinstallation and to plan the hand-over of training to FOTR.The training roll-out plan needs to be integrated with thedevelopment and acceptance plans.The availability of trainees for each vessel or site isestablished.The locations of training and the style of training, i.e. train thetrainer or train all trainees are decided.Not Identified.Steps • The training rollout plan is contingent on the developmentof the training solution and training design work which is inturn contingent on the development of the real equipmentand the platform.• Training syllabi for each course are used to determine thelength of time required to deliver training.• The installation schedule is used to identify the timing oftraining delivery to each shore unit and platform.• The availability of personnel for training is agreed withFLEET-NPS.OutputsA full training plan is developed specifying when, where andto whom each training course is delivered.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 7-23 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)7.3.3.4 Evaluate TrainingPurposeTo assess how effectively training develops the required levelof skills and knowledge.Inputs • Training objectives• Training media• Courseware• The syllabusMethods • Conduct internal validation• Conduct external validationFurther details can be found in DTSM 4 [Ref 9].Steps • Advice is required from RN ICG and FOTR regarding themethod and metrics used to assess effectiveness.• Generally, any measure of effectiveness must estimatethe degree to which the skills and knowledge developedwithin each course transfers to the use of the realequipment.• Skill and knowledge decay may also be assessed toconfirm the provision of continuation and on-the-jobtraining. In practice, subject matter experts (e.g.instructors) may actually provide this information for theconversion training.OutputsAssessments of the validity of each training course.7.3.4 In-Service Phase ActivitiesOnce training is established the Services’ systematic approach will continue tovalidate the training.7.3.5 Disposal Phase ActivitiesNot identified.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 7-24 Issue 4MAP-01-011 CH 07_26.doc

CHAPTER 8 – GENERAL ARRANGEMENTCONTENTS8.1 HFI Technical Issues....................................................................................................8-38.1.1 Scope....................................................................................................8-38.1.2 Stakeholders.........................................................................................8-38.1.3 Human Factors Considerations ............................................................8-48.1.4 Access and Egress Arrangements........................................................8-48.1.5 Common Equipment Requirements......................................................8-48.1.6 Routing of Systems...............................................................................8-58.2 HFI Process ........................................................................................................8-68.2.1 HFI Focus Responsibilities ...................................................................8-78.2.2 Relevant Standards ..............................................................................8-88.3 HFI Activities.....................................................................................................8-108.3.1 Concept Phase Activities ....................................................................8-108.3.1.1 Develop High-Level General Arrangement Options .........8-108.3.1.2 Determine Deck Height Criteria........................................8-118.3.2 Assessment Phase Activities..............................................................8-128.3.2.1 Develop HFI Policy for General Arrangement ..................8-128.3.2.2 Identify Human Factors Requirements for SystemsRouting .............................................................................8-148.3.3 Demonstration Phase Activities ..........................................................8-158.3.3.1 Develop HFI Design Rules for General Arrangement ......8-158.3.3.2 Develop HFI Prototyping and DemonstrationRequirements ...................................................................8-168.3.3.3 Develop Design Rules for Internal Communications........8-178.3.3.4 Evaluate Free Deck Height, Doors and Hatchways .........8-198.3.3.5 Assess Ship Systems.......................................................8-198.3.3.6 Assess Internal Communications .....................................8-208.3.4 Manufacture Phase Activities..............................................................8-208.3.5 In-Service Phase Activities .................................................................8-218.3.5.1 Input to In-Service HFI Audit ............................................8-218.3.6 Disposal Phase Activities....................................................................8-21Nov 2006 Page 8-1 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)Nov 2006 Page 8-2 Issue 4

Chapter 8 – General Arrangement8.1 HFI Technical Issues8.1.1 ScopeThe overall vessel configuration design will result in the General Arrangement,the provision of internal communications, positioning of bulkheads, doors andhatches as well as deckhead height. It also includes the implications ofmachinery configuration including uptake and intake arrangements and systemsrouting. This chapter should be read in conjunction with Chapters 9 through 11,which deal with the design and layout of spaces and compartments.HFI Technical IssuesThe role of this Technical Area is to co-ordinate the workspace requirementsthroughout the platform so that minimum compromise is made on userrequirements in the following:• Access sizes and deck height clearances.• Locating compartments – separation and adjacency (see Chap 9 throughChap 11).• Routing traffic flows (see Chap 12).• Firefighting and Damage Control (see Chap 17).• Local and global Escape and Evacuation (see Chap 17).• Environment (see Chap 13).• Separation of duplicate systems.• Systems routing.8.1.2 StakeholdersA list of potential stakeholders for this area is given below. This list is notexhaustive and should be seen to be a guide only. HFI Foci should refine this listbased upon the structure of their project, the attendees at the relevant HFSG orHFWG and in light of guidance and requests from industry, DEC and Customer 2representatives.• TES-ASG• DEC• EENA• INM• IPT HFI Foci• SSG-Ship /SSG-SMNov 2006 Page 8-3 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)8.1.3 Human Factors ConsiderationsHFI Technical IssuesThe General Arrangement of compartments and spaces on the platform musttake account of the effect of the following factors on crew effectiveness, safetyand comfort:• Environmental thresholds including noise, temperature and vibration.• Ship motion envelopes.• Traffic flow rates and passageway sizing and routings.• Hazard, Firefighting and Damage Control requirements.• Escape routing and casualty handling.• Social and recreational criteria.8.1.4 Access and Egress ArrangementsBulkheads, doors and hatchways and deckhead clearances must be designed inaccordance with traceable and agreed specifications for the following,recognising the strength and height limitations of the personnel forming the crew(see Chap 6):• Traffic flow, embarkation and disembarkation.• Storing and removal requirements.• Escape routing.8.1.5 Common Equipment RequirementsWherever possible the positioning/location and operation of common items ofequipment should be mandated. The following are examples:• Light switch operations and location in compartments.• Emergency breaker positioning.• Compartment tallies and legend styles and location.• Alarms and warnings.• Internal telephone and communications positioning and style.• Commonality of location and usage of escape routes from compartments.• Provision of Escape equipment such as Emergency Escape BreathingDevices.Nov 2006 Page 8-4 Issue 4

Chapter 8 – General Arrangement8.1.6 Routing of SystemsHFI Technical IssuesFigure 8-1: Routing of systems can impact onthe habitability of the workspaceSystems routing can impact upon the habitability of the workspace as well asmesses and recreational spaces. Vibrating pipes, noisy systems, and heat andvapour emissions can affect the user’s performance. Trunking pipes mayobscure passageways and poorly jointed pipes can release contaminants into thecompartment. Systems routed through compartments occupy valuable spaceand interfere with the layout of the compartment.The location of the intakes and uptakes will affect the whole topside design aswell as impacting on the internal layout of operational and accommodationspaces. The layout topside also needs to balance requirements for the flightdeck and the arcs of fire and position of weapons and sensors.Nov 2006 Page 8-5 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)8.2 HFI ProcessThe sequence of HFI activities described in the remainder of this chapter isillustrated in Figure 8-2.HFI ProcessDevelop HFI DesignRules for GeneralArrangementDevelop GeneralArrangementOptionsDevelop HFIPolicy for GeneralArrangementDevelop HFI Prototypingand DemonstrationRequirementsDevelop Design Rulesfor InternalCommunicationsEvaluate Free DeckHeight, Doors andHatchwaysNot IdentifiedDetermine Criteriafor Deck HeightIdentify HFRequirements forSystems RoutingAssess Ship SystemsAssess InternalCommunicationsMANUFACTURE DEMONSTRATIONASSESSMENT CONCEPTInput into HFIAuditIN SERVICENot IdentifiedDISPOSALFigure 8-2: The HFI Process for General ArrangementNov 2006 Page 8-6 Issue 4

Chapter 8 – General ArrangementThe process of addressing HFI issues for the General Arrangement of theplatform is summarised in Figure 8-2. Deck height criteria may be set at an earlystage to take account of anthropometric data. The HFI Policy, specifications andassessments for General Arrangement define a co-ordinated approach toresolving trade-offs between compartment position, equipment fit, personnelroutes and environment to optimise crew tasks across the range of operationalscenarios.The process of identifying and resolving Human Factors Integration (HFI) issuesaffecting the General Arrangement involves liaison between the HFI Focus andvarious stakeholders in conducting the HFI activities. The HFI activities arepresented in Table 8-1. The ticks represent the procurement Phases at whichthe activities are likely to be conducted. These activities also apply in service.C A D M I D HFI Activity Develop General Arrangement options Determine criteria for deck height Develop HFI policy for General ArrangementHFI Process Identify HF requirements for systems routing Develop HFI design rules for General Arrangement Develop HFI prototyping and demonstrationrequirements Develop design rules for internal communications Evaluate free deck height, doors and hatchways Assess ship systems Assess internal communicationsInput into HFI auditTable 8-1: HFI Activities for General Arrangement HFI8.2.1 HFI Focus ResponsibilitiesThe HFI Focus is responsible for the following:• Liaison with DEC and SSG-Ship / SSG-SM about the overall GeneralArrangement.• The co-ordination of HFI issues affecting the General Arrangement throughan appropriate management or steering group.Nov 2006 Page 8-7 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Development of an Operational Scenario (see Annex 3) suitable for use inevaluating HFI aspects of the General Arrangement.• The use of HFI criteria and specifications to help define and assess designoptions for the General Arrangement.• The development and application of assessment and acceptance methodsto test the HFI adequacy of the General Arrangement.• Liaison with specialist stakeholders concerned with specific aspects of theGeneral Arrangement.• Liaison with equipment System Project Managers to ensure that theGeneral Arrangement is compatible with the need to operate and maintainspecific equipment.8.2.2 Relevant StandardsHFI ProcessThe applicable standards are listed in Table 8-2 below. Further details areincluded in Annex 2, together with other related standards.StandardTitleDef Stan 00-25Part 15Def Stan 00-25Part 17Def Stan 00-25Part 19Def Stan 02-149Def Stan 02-542Def Stan 02-587Part 1Def Stan 02-587Part 2Def Stan 02-551Def Stan 02-557Part 1Human Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 15: Principles and ProcessHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 17: Personnel Domain – Technical Guidance and DataHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 19: Human Engineering Domain – Technical Guidanceand DataEscape and Access Policy in Surface ShipsGuide to Design and User Requirements of InternalCommunications Systems. Part 1: Surface ShipsRequirements for Lighting Systems.Part 1: Surface ShipsRequirements for Lighting Systems.Part 2: SubmarinesGuide to Internal Communication Equipment – MainBroadcast and Associated ItemsGuide to Internal Communication Equipment – Loudspeakerand Associated Items.Part 1: Selection and Siting of LoudspeakersNov 2006 Page 8-8 Issue 4

Chapter 8 – General ArrangementStandardDef Stan 02-557Part 2Def Stan 07-204Part 1Def Stan 07-204Part 3Def Stan 07-232Def Stan 07-239TitleGuide to Internal Communication Equipment – Loudspeakerand Associated Items.Part 2: Range of Loudspeakers and Associated ItemsThe Requirements for Fire Protection and Damage Controlfor Surface Ships.Part 1: Policy for Surface ShipsThe Requirements for Fire Protection and Damage Controlfor Surface Ships.Part 3: Surface Ship and Submarine EquipmentGuide to Design Use Requirements of InternalCommunications Systems SubmarinesGuide to System Design of Voice Internal CommunicationsEquipment for SubmarinesDef Stan 08-157Guide to the Design of Flight Deck CommunicationsSystemsTable 8-2: Relevant StandardsHFI ProcessStandardANEP 26Def Stan 02-139Def Stan 08-155Def Stan 08-158TitleErgonomic Data for Shipboard Space Design in NATOSurface ShipsCode of Practice for Ship HusbandryGuide to the System Design and Description of RationalisedInternal Communications Equipment Mk1 and Mk2VariationsGuide to Internal Communication Equipment – Flight DeckCommunicationsTable 8-3: Other Related StandardsNov 2006 Page 8-9 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)8.3 HFI Activities8.3.1 Concept Phase Activities8.3.1.1 Develop High-Level General Arrangement OptionsPurposeTo enable different layouts for the General Arrangement to bedeveloped, thus permitting their subsequent evaluation andselection.Inputs • Vessel concept studies• Preliminary general dimensions of hull designMethods • Operational Scenario Description• Target Audience Description• Link AnalysisSteps • Collate information about general platform functions andexisting requirements affecting layout.• Identify new requirements or novel concepts affectinginternal layout.• Develop outline drawings of internal layout.• Identify criteria for assessing layouts including adjacencyrequirements, compartment and deck suitability forevolutions, minimisation of traffic route length, habitability,health and safety, survivability, damage control, and aircraftand equipment handling and movement.• Conduct high-level assessments of compartment locationsand general dimensions, upper deck layout and traffic routesagainst criteria.OutputHigh-level options for General Arrangement of platform.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 8-10 Issue 4

Chapter 8 – General Arrangement8.3.1.2 Determine Deck Height CriteriaPurposeTo define the human criteria for establishing free deck heightand hence full deck height, thus supporting the development ofthe General Arrangement.Inputs • Anthropometric data for personnel from INM and othersources.• High-level layout options from High Level GeneralArrangement Options (Sect 8.3.1.1).Methods • Target Audience DescriptionSteps • Use anthropometric (body size) data for RN and otherpersonnel (from Target Audience Description) and establishdesign criteria for deck height.• Deck heights need not be uniform throughout the vessel.Different criteria may be used in different decks. Precedentdesigns will offer a scope of variation from which policy canbe derived on minimum clearances against criteria (e.g. 99thpercentile etc.).• Estimate and add allowances for deck thickness, deckheadpipe/cable runs and false decks.OutputsDeck height criteria for input to the platform specification.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 8-11 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)8.3.2 Assessment Phase Activities8.3.2.1 Develop HFI Policy for General ArrangementPurposeTo collate all HFI issues that influence the General Arrangementand to facilitate their combined use in the setting ofrequirements.Inputs • Output of the General Arrangement options activity(Sect 8.3.1.1)• Output of the deck height recommendations activity(Sect 8.3.1.2)• Layouts of operational (Chap 9), accommodation (Chap 10)and miscellaneous (Chap 11) spaces• Traffic flow policy and known parameters (Chap 12)• Environmental and ship motion characteristics (Chap 13)• Outline equipment workspace layouts (Chap 14)Methods • Operational Scenario Description• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description (PSTAD)• Task Analysis• Synthetic User Modelling• Workspace DesignHFI ActivitiesSteps • Collate platform Task Descriptions for operational andworking spaces, bridge, ship control centre, manoeuvringroom, aviation and upper deck.• Identify high-level storing and traffic flow requirements.• Liaise with System Project Managers to collate TaskDescriptions of Operations and Control compartments,weapon spaces, electrical and machinery spaces.• Establish equipment and stores functional groupings, weightand volume distribution constraints, and constraints due toequipment operation and location.• Establish constraints due to ship motion and environmentalfactors.• Generate a list of the HFI factors affecting GeneralArrangement drawing on PSTAD, Operational ScenarioDescriptions, Task Descriptions and outline WorkspaceDesigns. Take account of priority based on their effect oncrew effectiveness, safety and comfort. This priority list isused to identify and evaluate the options for co-location ofpersonnel and equipments, and the co-location ofcompartments and spaces, taking account of constraintsimposed by ship motion, environmental factors, traffic routingand operational evolutions.Nov 2006 Page 8-12 Issue 4

Chapter 8 – General Arrangement• Identify or establish working group to address GeneralArrangement HFI issues.• Establish detailed working arrangements for implementationof HFI General Arrangement policy and determine need forSynthetic User Modelling.• Contribute to trade-off studies on compartment location.Outputs • HFI Policy for General Arrangement. This document shallcover the following:o Description of the HFI issues and constraints that affectGeneral Arrangement.o The priority list of HFI General Arrangement decisioncriteria, in order of significance, and guidance on theiruse in trade-off studies.o The management procedure to be adopted to implementHFI General Arrangement policy.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 8-13 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)8.3.2.2 Identify Human Factors Requirements for SystemsRoutingPurposeTo establish the principles that need to be adhered to whendesigning routes for systems, to enable safe and efficientoperation and maintenance of those systems and to avoidunnecessary encroachment into manned areas.Inputs • The HFI General Arrangement Policy (Sect 8.3.2.1)• Recommendations for deck height (Sect 8.3.1.2)• Outline layouts of General ArrangementMethods • Task Synthesis• Link Analysis• Workspace Design• Health and Safety AnalysisHFI ActivitiesSteps • Use Task Synthesis to identify operational and maintenancetasks associated with all systems.• Identify key operating and maintenance points for allsystems to be routed. Correlate with the outline GeneralArrangement.• Identify and collate hazards associated with all systems(Chap 17).• Identify accommodation requirements (Chap 4 & Chap 10).• Identify possible options proposed for system routing.• Use Link Analysis, Workspace Design and Health & SafetyAnalysis to establish the design principles and workingpractices affecting the HFI requirements for system routingto enable the following:o Maintenance access.o Damage control access for emergency supplies andfeedouts.o Minimal encroachment into accommodation and messingspaces.o Minimal encroachment into working space and accessroutes.o Minimal exposure of the crew to hazards.o Minimal encroachment on free deck height.Outputs • Systems routing – HF requirements documentThe HFI requirements for system routing are expressed asmeasures for controlling hazards, maintaining adequateclearance and ensuring crew comfort. Reference is made to thefunction of each system and proposed locations, includingoperational and maintenance points.Nov 2006 Page 8-14 Issue 4

Chapter 8 – General Arrangement8.3.3 Demonstration Phase Activities8.3.3.1 Develop HFI Design Rules for General ArrangementPurposeTo collate all HFI design specifications which influence theGeneral Arrangement, and to review the design of the GeneralArrangement in the light of these specifications. Also todocument succinctly the HFI design rules for GeneralArrangement development and to define acceptance criteria.Inputs • The HFI General Arrangement Policy (Sect 8.3.2.1)• Outline layouts of General ArrangementMethods • Task Synthesis• Link Analysis• Escape Analysis• Workspace Design• Health and Safety Analysis• Synthetic User ModellingSteps • Collate the workstation layouts from Workspace Design ofthe functional areas, Bridge, Ship Control Centre, manoeuvringroom, aviation, offices and Upper Deck (Chap 9).• Collate the Ship project accommodation and miscellaneousspaces adjacency and layout requirements using TaskSynthesis and Link Analysis (Chap 10 and Chap 11).• Liaise with System Project Managers to collate theworkstation layout requirements for the functional areas inOperations and Control compartments, weapon spaces,electrical and machinery spaces (Chap 14).• Collate the outputs of the traffic flow analyses making use ofLink Analysis or Escape Analysis (Chap 12).• Collate environmental specifications (Chap 13).• Review the implications of HFI policy on Systems Routingand Deck Height.• Review HFI General Arrangement requirements usingdecision criteria generated in earlier Phases. Contribute toGeneral Arrangement design drawings.• Use the workspace layout requirements and other factorsaffecting layout to identify requirements and constraints thatwill apply to the General Arrangement using Link Analysisand Synthetic User Modelling.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 8-15 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Develop HFI design rules in accordance with the GeneralArrangement HFI policy.• Define HFI design evaluation and acceptance criteria makinguse of parameters from the Health & Safety Analysis(Chap 17).OutputsHFI design rules for use in developing and evaluating the layoutand related acceptance criteria.8.3.3.2 Develop HFI Prototyping and DemonstrationRequirementsPurposeTo specify the critical aspects of the platform for whichprototyping or demonstrations are required to refine or prove thedesign prior to commitment in the build programme. Aspectsthat need to be considered are those which involve risk due touncertainty or where a number of options might exist whichcannot be rationalised from drawings or modelling.Inputs The HFI General Arrangement Policy (Sect 8.3.2.1).Methods • Task Analysis• Task SynthesisSteps • Collate all platform Task Analysis and Task Synthesisinformation.• Identify the critical tasks and design features that impingedirectly on the effective and safe conduct of these tasks.• Identify aspects of the General Arrangement that requireprototyping and demonstration to resolve HFI issues.• Specify the prototypes and demonstrations that willcontribute to design assessment and platform acceptance.HFI ActivitiesOutputs • Human factors prototyping and demonstration requirementsdocument specifying the following:o Identification of critical tasks and associated designissues for the General Arrangement in priority order ofsignificance.o HFI assessment criteria including those that willcontribute to formal acceptance.o The prototyping and demonstration requirementsschedule for Design and Manufacture stages.Nov 2006 Page 8-16 Issue 4

Chapter 8 – General Arrangement8.3.3.3 Develop Design Rules for Internal CommunicationsPurposeTo establish all foreseeable interpersonal communicationsrequirements for operation, maintenance and damage controlconditions.Inputs • The HFI General Arrangement Policy (Sect 8.3.2.1)• Outline layouts of General ArrangementMethods • Operational Scenario Descriptions• Task Analysis• Task Synthesis• Link Analysis• Human Factors Style GuideSteps • Identify the intra- and inter-compartment information flow,channel and sound requirements for each operational areaincluding the Bridge, Aviation, Operational and Controlcompartments, Ship Control Centre or manoeuvring room.• Correlate the information flow requirements with userpositions, user task-related and workstation layouts. Identifythe key ‘point-to-point’ communications links and ‘receiveonly’ positions.• Review precedent alarm and main broadcast requirements inconjunction with current project requirements. Identifymicrophone and speaker locations and power output rangerequirements.• Review the damage control and emergency communicationsinformation flow requirements. Identify the critical ‘point topoint’ communications links.• For non-operational areas and compartments, identify thecommunications information flow requirements.• Identify the numbers of broadcast and communications netsneeded, and their co-positioning requirements. List the key‘point-to-point’ connections for each net.• Specify location requirements and positioning guidelines forcommunication points at workstations to ensure taskcompatibility, and in compartments and spaces to ensureuniformity of bulkhead positioning.• Specify the location requirements for telephones.• Define design evaluation and acceptance criteria.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 8-17 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)Outputs • Specification of design rules for internal communications.This document will include the following:o The number of broadcast nets required and anynecessary communication point identification coding.o The key information flow, communication point locationsand ‘point-to-point’ connection requirements for alloperational and non-operational compartments andspaces, and for damage control.o Guidelines for locating and positioning communicationpoints.o Alarm and main broadcast microphone/transmit andspeaker positions including the required range of outputpower levels.o The locations of telephones.o HFI assessment and acceptance criteria.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 8-18 Issue 4

Chapter 8 – General Arrangement8.3.3.4 Evaluate Free Deck Height, Doors and HatchwaysPurposeInputsMethodsTo evaluate the human factors of free deck height, doors andhatchways.Drawings and mock-ups of the platform layoutNot Identified.Steps • Inspect the platform, in conjunction with assessments of allroutes.• Establish any deficiencies in deck height, door and hatchwaydesign.Outputs • HF assessment report addressing free deck height, doorsand hatchways against anthropometric criteria and crewactivities in each space.8.3.3.5 Assess Ship SystemsPurposeInputsMethodsStepsOutputsTo evaluate the human factors of ship systems and their effecton the user environment.Drawings and mock-ups of the platform layout including the shipsystems.Not Identified.Inspect the system routing arrangements to identify anyunacceptable encroachments on accommodation andworkspace. Also, assess the operability and maintainability ofthe systems themselves.Human factors assessment of system routing with respect toadequate clearance, ease of maintenance and safety.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 8-19 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)8.3.3.6 Assess Internal CommunicationsPurposeTo ensure that internal communications are designed inaccordance with good human factors practice, and thus promotetheir effectiveness.Inputs • User-equipment interface design layouts• Working communications equipment• Communications systems specificationMethodsNot Identified.Steps • Operate or simulate the operations of the systems underrepresentative scenarios, and assess the adequacy of thecommunications links available.• Consider specifically communications between users inseparate compartments.OutputsHF evaluation of the adequacy of internal communications.8.3.4 Manufacture Phase ActivitiesNone identified for this procurement phase, save for any inspection activities thatmay be required to investigate the impact of deficiencies identified atmanufacture as a result of design or build.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 8-20 Issue 4

Chapter 8 – General Arrangement8.3.5 In-Service Phase Activities8.3.5.1 Input to In-Service HFI AuditPurposeTo identify, highlight and feed back into both the current andfuture designs, human factors related improvements, and topromote the auditability of these incremental improvements.Inputs • Defect reports.• Accident and incident reports.• Requests and requisitions for modifications that impact uponthe GA.Methods • [In-Service HFI] Audit.Steps • Collect input data.• Incorporate into HFI audit or HFI log.• Raise actions as appropriate to:o Resolve the immediate problem.o Ensure that lessons learned from this problem can becarried forward into future projects, via reporting detailsto the appropriate organisation.Outputs • HFI audit/log document (a living document throughout In-Service phase).• Information to stakeholders that are in a position to benefit(e.g. in future projects) from lessons learned. May be via anon-project specific organisation such as SSG.8.3.6 Disposal Phase ActivitiesNone identified.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 8-21 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 8-22 Issue 4MAP-01-011 CH 08_18.doc

CHAPTER 9 – OPERATIONAL SPACESCONTENTS9.1 HFI Technical Issues....................................................................................................9-39.1.1 Scope....................................................................................................9-39.1.2 Stakeholders.........................................................................................9-49.1.3 HF Issues..............................................................................................9-49.1.4 Wider Issues .........................................................................................9-59.2 HFI Process ........................................................................................................9-69.2.1 HFI Focus Responsibilities ...................................................................9-79.2.2 Relevant Standards ..............................................................................9-89.3 HFI Activities.....................................................................................................9-109.3.1 Assessment Phase Activities..............................................................9-109.3.1.1 Define Requirements for Operational Spaces..................9-109.3.2 Demonstration Phase Activities ..........................................................9-139.3.2.1 Produce Design Specifications for Operational Spaces...9-139.3.3 Manufacture Phase Activities..............................................................9-159.3.3.1 Evaluate Operational Spaces Designs.............................9-159.3.4 In-Service Phase Activities .................................................................9-169.3.4.1 Support Modification.........................................................9-169.3.5 Disposal Phase Activities....................................................................9-16Nov 2006 Page 9-1 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)Nov 2006 Page 9-2 Issue 4

Chapter 9 – Operational Spaces9.1 HFI Technical IssuesHFI Technical IssuesFigure 9-1: A typical bridge9.1.1 ScopeOperational spaces are those directly concerned with fighting, controlling,manoeuvring and administering the vessel, and include the following:• Bridge and Secondary Steering Position.• Operations and Control Compartment.• Weapon Compartments.• Ship Control Centre/Manoeuvring Room.• Electrical Spaces.• Offices including Communications.• Aviation Arrangements.• Machinery Spaces.• Damage Control HQ.• Upper Decks.A workspace may be a compartment, an area within a compartment or the wholeplatform, depending on the nature of the work. Each workspace may comprise anumber of workstations, some of which may be composite workstations (e.g.comprising a weapons console and internal communications unit).Nov 2006 Page 9-3 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)9.1.2 StakeholdersHFI Technical IssuesA list of potential stakeholders for this area is given below. This list is notexhaustive and should be seen to be a guide only. HFI Foci should refine this listbased upon the structure of their project, the attendees at the relevant HFSG orHFWG and in light of guidance and requests from industry, DEC and Customer 2representatives.• TES-ASG• DEC• IPT HFI Foci• MLS CG• TES-SSG-CSHF• TES-SSG-CSNav• TES-SSG-ShipDes9.1.3 HF IssuesThe Human Factors (HF) issues raised in this context are concerned with thelayout and operability of the compartments. The issues are therefore concernedwith the matching of the layout of the spaces and provision of services with thecompartment user requirements. Design of the layout of operational spacesevolves around the design and location of workstations, space for access whenthe compartment is manned, access for maintenance, document storage andbulkhead storage needs. Workstation design is the responsibility of the SystemProject Managers and is the main subject of the ‘Equipment Layout’ technicalarea described in Chapter 14. For the HFI Focus, the major design activity foroperational spaces is concerned with defining the workspace. This chaptershould be read in conjunction with Chapter 8 (General Arrangement) andChapters 10 and 11, which deal with other spaces on the Ship.Figure 9-2: An aircraft hangarNov 2006 Page 9-4 Issue 4

Chapter 9 – Operational SpacesThe manning and job descriptions of operator, sub-team and team organisationsfor each compartment are broadly defined for the platform by the HFI Focusthrough the complementing studies (Chap 4). These aspects are also analysedin detail and synthesised for individual equipments (Chap 5 and Chap 6). Theoutputs from the two approaches must be integrated in deciding the layout of theoperational compartments. This requires clear definition of the interface betweenthe HFI Plans of the platform and of the equipment Integrated Project Teams.Information needs to flow between users in the various Operational spaces.These flows should be specified in the compartment user requirements. Theseshould be co-ordinated by the HFI Focus to ensure that all inter-operationalspace data and information flows are accounted for during the platform systemsintegration and installation process.HFI Technical Issues9.1.4 Wider IssuesOther functional aspects of compartments need to be addressed. These aspectswill include Ship Husbandry activities, watchkeeping requirements, maintenanceand repair. All these aspects contribute to the manning levels already discussed.Assumptions made about these aspects when defining jobs and tasks should notbe compromised by changes in design as the result of trade-off studies.Office space requirements are defined by the jobs carried out in them. Thenumber of offices and their space allocation will relate to the Naval managementpolicy. The provision of computerised facilities requires particular attention inadministrative workstation design.Similar issues apply to the Upper Decks and superstructure. Here, deck area isrequired for working space in scenarios, such as berthing, anchoring, launchingand recovering ship’s boats, RAS Solids (S) and Liquids (L), Jackstay transferand weapon handling. Addressing these issues again requires task and trafficanalysis to determine the primary and secondary functions of equipment,manning levels, the requirement for grab rails, anti-slip deck coverings andsupporting tools and equipment. Simulation-based design is a powerful methodfor visualising and evaluating Upper deck (and other) layouts. It is particularlyuseful for upper deck specification as moving machinery, aircraft and humanscan be modelled to assess the need to preserve safety and design efficientprocedures.Nov 2006 Page 9-5 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)9.2 HFI ProcessThe sequence of HFI activities described in the remainder of this chapter isillustrated in Figure 9-3.HFI ProcessGA ConceptDefinitionOutlineRequirementsDefinition andSpecificationApproveMANUFACTURE DEMONSTRATION ASSESSMENT CONCEPTSupportModificationIN SERVICENot IdentifiedDISPOSALFigure 9-3: The HFI Process for Operational SpacesNov 2006 Page 9-6 Issue 4

Chapter 9 – Operational SpacesThe process of addressing HFI issues for the Operational Spaces of the platformis summarized in Figure 9-3. Different workspaces will clearly require differentHFI activities to support their design. All workspaces are developed to takeaccount of the way in which they are used, the proposed equipment fit, theGeneral Arrangement of compartments on the platform, personnel movementand internal environment. Workspaces are assessed to ensure that they meetfunctional, safety and comfort requirements.The process of defining the layout, supporting inter-compartment informationconnectivity and collating manning of operational spaces involves liaisonbetween the HFI Focus and various stakeholders in conducting the HFI activities.The HFI activities are presented in Table 9-1. The ticks represent theprocurement Phases at which the activities are likely to be conducted.C* A D M I D HFI activityDefine Requirements for Operational SpacesProduce Design Specifications for OperationalSpacesEvaluate Operational Spaces DesignSupport ModificationHFI ProcessTable 9-1: HFI Activities for Operational Spaces* The General Arrangement Concept activity is described in Chapter 8.9.2.1 HFI Focus ResponsibilitiesThe HFI Focus is responsible for the following:• Co-ordination of the implementation of equipment workspace userrequirements throughout the platform.• Collation of equipment manning requirements to check that these areacceptable and are properly included in the Basic Manning Requirement(BMR) (Chap 4).• Ensuring that the platform’s equipment HFI environmental,communications, layout and General Arrangement requirements are coordinatedand understood.• Liaison with SSG-ShipSea with respect to seamanship matters, includingreplenishment, survival equipment and upper deck arrangement.• Liaison with Fleet Navigation Officer and SSG-CSNav with respect tobridge, bridge wing and other navigation-related compartment layouts.Nov 2006 Page 9-7 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Liaison with MLS CG with respect to the layout of ship control centre,damage control machinery spaces and other related machinerycompartments.• Liaison with the appropriate System Project Managers to ensure that theuser requirements for the Combat System are met in the layout ofOperations, Control and Weapons compartments.• Liaison with TES-ASG to ensure that Aviation arrangements are adequate.• Liaison with the appropriate stakeholders to ensure that Electrical, Machineand Office workspaces are adequate.• Overall design co-ordination to ensure system integration andrationalisation of any design conflicts.9.2.2 Relevant StandardsHFI ProcessThe applicable standards are listed in Table 9-2 below. Further details areincluded in Annex 2, together with other related standards.StandardTitleDef Stan 00-25 Part 15Def Stan 00-25 Part 17Def Stan 00-25 Part 19Def Stan 02-105 Part 1Def Stan 02-105 Part 2Def Stan 02-105 Part 3Human Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 15: Principles and ProcessHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 17: Personnel Domain – Technical Guidanceand DataHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 19: Human Engineering Domain – TechnicalGuidance and DataRequirements for the Fitting Out of Offices (ExcludingOperational/Communications Offices) in HM SurfaceShips and Submarines.Part 1: General RequirementsRequirements for the Fitting Out of Offices (ExcludingOperational/Communications Offices) in HM SurfaceShips and Submarines.Part 2: Specific Requirements-Surface ShipsRequirements for the Fitting Out of Offices (ExcludingOperational/Communications Offices) in HM SurfaceShips and Submarines.Part 3: Specific Requirements-SubmarinesTable 9-2: Relevant StandardsNov 2006 Page 9-8 Issue 4

Chapter 9 – Operational SpacesANEP 26StandardTitleErgonomic Data for Shipboard Space Design in NATOSurface ShipsBS EN ISO 8468:1995 Ships Bridge Layout and Associated Equipment –Requirements and GuidelinesBS EN ISO 11064-3Def Stan 07-265Ergonomic design of control centres.Part 3: Control room layoutRequirements and Arrangements of Communicationsand Electronic Warfare Offices in HM Ships and RFAsTable 9-3: Other Related StandardsHFI ProcessNov 2006 Page 9-9 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)9.3 HFI Activities9.3.1 Assessment Phase Activities9.3.1.1 Define Requirements for Operational SpacesPurposeTo outline the requirements to be met in the layout, manning andenvironment of the Bridge, Ship Control Centre, ManoeuvringRoom, Aviation, Operations, Control and WeaponsCompartments, Electrical, Machine and Office Workspaces, andthe Upper Decks.Inputs • The General Arrangement Concept (Chap 8)• Project Specific Target Audience Description (Chap 6)• Results of complementing studies (Chap 4)• Traffic flow parameters (Chap 12)• Task descriptions for evolutions performed in the operationalspaces• Equipment descriptions and foot-prints (Chap 14)Methods • Task Analysis• Task Synthesis• Role Definition• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description• Link Analysis• Escape Analysis• Workspace Design• Synthetic User Modelling• Health & Safety AnalysisHFI ActivitiesSteps • These outline specifications are a collation of TaskDescription and Task Synthesis data gathered from thecomponent system projects (Chap 15). There should be noneed for the platform project to do any detailed HFI analysisin these areas. This will be carried out by the equipment HFIFocus.• Identify proposed equipment fit and workstation layoutrequirements (Chap 14) using Link Analysis and WorkspaceDesign.• Collate information about manned positions, tasks performedand environmental requirements (Chap 13) includingadjacency, access requirements for maintenance in allspaces (Chap 16), as well as weapon handling requirementsusing Role Definition, Project Specific Target AudienceDescription (PSTAD), Link Analysis and Synthetic UserModelling.Nov 2006 Page 9-10 Issue 4

Chapter 9 – Operational Spaces• Check manning levels against BMR for consistency withcomplement constraints and non-encroachment on margins(Chap 4).• Identify the HFI adjacency requirements of compartmentswith other functionally related spaces using Link Analysis.• Correlate the spatial and location requirements in accordancewith the HFI policy in establishing General Arrangement totake account of the results of Health & Safety Analysis(Chap 17).• Establish inter-compartment and traffic flow requirements(Chap 12).• The collated workspace data is reviewed for traceability fromthe platform requirements.The Upper Deck HFI requirements are outlined in the followingway:• Identify the Upper Deck evolutions to be undertaken.• Conduct high-level Task Synthesis reflecting the evolutionrequirements. Utilise and correlate these with the results ofrelevant Task Synthesis undertaken for aviationarrangements.• Review and collate the traffic flow and access requirements(Chap 12) related to the various evolutions using LinkAnalysis and Escape Analysis.• Use ship motion analysis (Chap 13) to establish spatialoperating envelopes for each evolution task set. Overlaythese with traffic flow routing paths to avoid mutualencroachment on space.• Generate outline functional layout diagrams. Identify anyoutline requirements for mock-ups or Synthetic UserModelling to clarify critical spatial arrangements. Takeaccount of Health & Safety Analysis (Chap 17) of the upperdecks.The procedure for producing the outline workspace requirementis as follows:• Liaise with System Project Managers to identify thefunctionality, manning and maintenance task requirements forthe electrical and machinery spaces referring to RoleDefinition and the TAD (Chap 4, Chap 5, Chap 6, Chap 15,Chap 16).• Identify any local control or workstation design requirements(Chap 14) in the electrical and machinery spaces that are theremit of the HFI Focus; refer to the TAD.• Liaise with relevant stakeholders to identify the functionality,manning and tasking requirements of offices. Conduct highlevelTask Synthesis as necessary.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 9-11 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• From the office high-level Task Synthesis identify therequirements for embedded (in other compartments) facilities,storage (filing, etc.) facilities, desktops, computers etc.• Specify outline equipment and workstation layouts for theelectrical, machinery and office spaces using WorkspaceDesign and Synthetic User Modelling if required.• Specify outline environmental factors requirements (Chap 13)for the electrical machinery and office spaces.• Identify the adjacency requirements of the electrical,machinery and office spaces with other functionally relatedspaces using Link Analysis. Correlate with the otherspace/compartment location requirements in accordance withHFI General Arrangement policy.Output • The major HFI requirements and constraints.• The manning requirements and estimated task workloads.• A listing of allocation of functions.• The outline data flow requirements specification.• The outline workstation requirements specification.• The outline workspace requirements specification.• The outline Upper Deck HFI requirements includes thefollowing:• The definitions of all the Upper Deck evolutions.• A task description of each evolution.• The outline drawings showing spatial operating envelope ofeach task set.• The overlay of these operating envelopes and routing paths.• Recommendations on what aspects require mock-ups orSynthetic User Modelling.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 9-12 Issue 4

Chapter 9 – Operational Spaces9.3.2 Demonstration Phase Activities9.3.2.1 Produce Design Specifications for Operational SpacesPurposeInputsTo produce workspace design specifications and defineacceptance criteria for the Bridge, Ship Control Centre,Manoeuvring Room, Aviation Arrangements, Operations, Controland Weapons Compartments and Upper Decks.To produce workspace design specifications and defineacceptance criteria for Electrical Spaces, Machinery Spaces andOffices.All outputs of Sect 9.3.1.1 (except Recommendations onAspects Requiring Mock-Ups or Synthetic User Modelling)Methods • Task Analysis• Role Definition• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description• Link Analysis• Workspace Design• Synthetic User Modelling• Health & Safety AnalysisSteps • Liaise with System Project Managers to collate detailedfunctional requirements of compartments and spaces fromTask Description, Task Synthesis and Role Definition(Chap 5, Chap 15 and Chap 16).• Identify proposed equipment fit and workstation layoutrequirements (Chap 14) using Workspace Design referring toPSTAD as required.• Collate information about manned positions, deck evolutions,tasks performed and environmental requirements (Chap 13)including adjacency, access requirements for maintenance(Chap 16) in all spaces, as well as weapon handlingrequirements.• Check manning levels against BMR for consistency withcomplement constraints and non-encroachment on margins(Chap 4).• Identify the HFI adjacency requirements of compartmentsand deck spaces with other functionally related spaces usingLink Analysis.• Correlate the spatial and location requirements inaccordance with the HFI policy in establishing GeneralArrangement.• Establish topside, inter-compartment and traffic flowrequirements (Chap 12).• The collated workspace data is reviewed for traceability fromthe platform requirements.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 9-13 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Define HFI assessment and acceptance criteria.• Liaise with System Project Managers to identify thefunctionality, manning and maintenance task requirementsfor the electrical and machinery spaces (Chap 5, Chap 15and Chap 16).• Identify any local control or workstation design requirements(Chap 14) in the electrical and machinery spaces that are theremit of the HFI Focus; refer to the TAD.• Liaise with relevant stakeholders to identify the functionality,manning and tasking requirements of offices. Conduct highlevelTask Synthesis and Role Definition as necessary(Chap 5, Chap 15 and Chap 16).• From the office Task Synthesis, identify the requirements forembedded (in other compartments) facilities, storage (filing,etc.) facilities, desktops, computers etc.• Specify equipment and workstation layouts (Chap 14) for theelectrical, machinery and office spaces using WorkspaceDesign and User Synthetic Modelling.• Specify environmental factors requirements (Chap 13) forthe electrical machinery and office spaces.• Identify the adjacency requirements of the electrical,machinery and office spaces with other functionally relatedspaces using Link Analysis. Correlate with the otherspace/compartment location requirements in accordancewith HFI General Arrangement policy.Output • The major HFI requirements and constraints.• The manning requirements, tasks, jobs and workloadassessments for each workspace.• A listing of allocation of functions.• The data flow requirements specification.• The workstation requirements specification.• The workspace requirements specification.• HFI assessment and acceptance criteria for eachworkspace.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 9-14 Issue 4

Chapter 9 – Operational Spaces9.3.3 Manufacture Phase Activities9.3.3.1 Evaluate Operational Spaces DesignsPurposeInputsTo ensure that all operational spaces are safe, compatible withthe tasks to be performed within and have an acceptable internalenvironment.Drawing specifications, mock-ups or simulation-based designand real compartment layoutsMethods • Operational Scenario Description• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description• Link AnalysisSteps • Liaise with the System Project Managers to define the HFIassessment and acceptance schedule and responsibilities.• Inspect the dimensions and layout of the workspace againstthe design specification.• Measure the levels of each environmental factor and checkthat they are in accordance with the specification (Chap 13).• Trial the workspace and workstation in conjunction with therelevant equipment project (Chap 13 and Chap 14), testingfeatures such as:o Ease of communications (if team environment);o Ease of access to equipment;o Adequacy of illumination levels;o Adequacy of ventilation;o Fulfilment of compartment adjacency requirements.OutputWorkspace assessments defining conformance withspecifications and standards.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 9-15 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)9.3.4 In-Service Phase Activities9.3.4.1 Support ModificationPurposeInputsMethodsStepsOutputTo provide effective reassessment and specification ofoperational spaces in the event of modification.Drawing specifications, mock-ups or simulation-based designand real compartment layoutsAs per Demonstration Phase, tailored to the scope ofmodification.As per previous Phases, according to the extent of the change.Workspace designs and assessments defining conformancewith specifications and standards.9.3.5 Disposal Phase ActivitiesNone identified.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 9-16 Issue 4MAP-01-011 CH 09_16.doc

CHAPTER 10 – ACCOMMODATION SPACESCONTENTS10.1 HFI Technical Issues..................................................................................................10-310.1.1 Scope 10-310.1.2 Stakeholders.......................................................................................10-410.1.3 General Standards for Accommodation..............................................10-410.2 HFI Process ......................................................................................................10-710.2.1 HFI Focus Responsibilities .................................................................10-810.2.2 Relevant Standards ............................................................................10-810.3 HFI Activities...................................................................................................10-1110.3.1 Assessment Phase Activities............................................................10-1110.3.1.1 Establish HFI Accommodation Policy.............................10-1110.3.2 Demonstration Phase Activities ........................................................10-1210.3.2.1 Specify Accommodation.................................................10-1210.3.3 Manufacture Phase Activities............................................................10-1310.3.3.1 Evaluate Accommodation Provision...............................10-1310.3.4 In-Service Phase Activities ...............................................................10-1310.3.4.1 Support Modification.......................................................10-1310.3.5 Disposal Phase Activities..................................................................10-14Nov 2006 Page 10-1 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)Nov 2006 Page 10-2 Issue 4

Chapter 10 – Accommodation Spaces10.1 HFI Technical IssuesHFI Technical IssuesFigure 10-1: Typical mess accommodation10.1.1 ScopeThis chapter should be read in conjunction with Chapter 8 (GeneralArrangement) and Chapter 11 (Miscellaneous Spaces). Accommodation spacesare those concerned with the living, recreational and domestic activities of thecrew (Chapter 4 addresses accommodation sizing for the complement). As suchthey encompass sleeping, washing, feeding, resting, laundering and canteenfacilities. They should all be contained within the citadel and include thefollowing:• Accommodation Modules.• Bunk Spaces.• Personal Stowage.• Heads and Bathrooms.• Laundry and Drying Facilities.• Galley and Scullery.• Messes.• Canteen Facilities.• Entertainment and Leisure Facilities.Nov 2006 Page 10-3 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)10.1.2 StakeholdersHFI Technical IssuesA list of potential stakeholders for this area is given below. This list is notexhaustive and should be seen to be a guide only. HFI Foci should refine this listbased upon the structure of their project, the attendees at the relevant HFSG orHFWG and in light of guidance and requests from industry, DEC and Customer 2representatives.• DEC• Fleet-NLM• INM• IPT HFI Foci• SSG-ShipDes10.1.3 General Standards for AccommodationThe habitability standard for accommodation spaces should be set at theminimum level from which enhancements can be made to meet known personalexpectations and future trends in what constitutes an acceptable standard (seeChap 14 for information about habitability). Trade-off studies can be applied todefine options for the accommodation spaces. Just as the operational spacefacilities must match the on-duty requirements of the users, so mustaccommodation facilities match their basic ‘off-duty’ requirements. For example,the application of ergonomics standards to seating arrangements, etc. should beconsistent with changes in demographic characteristics (see Chap 6). Motioneffects should be minimised in galleys, where food odours may increase risk ofseasickness, and gross motor tasks are common (Figure 10-2). Noise andvibration should be minimised in sleeping quarters, to ensure effective rest.Figure 10-2: Canteen facilitiesNov 2006 Page 10-4 Issue 4

Chapter 10 – Accommodation SpacesSufficient space for rest and recreation must be provided. Changes in serviceconditions are likely to take place in new platforms with a target of doublebunking as the minimum level for junior rates. Accommodation Modules andBunk spaces should be furnished to well-specified ergonomic standards of decor,finish and functionality. Care should be taken in the ergonomic design ofpersonal areas to maximise privacy and stowage facilities.There should be no intruding equipment, pipework or obstructions inAccommodation Modules and avoided in legacy accommodation spaces, headsand bathrooms if possible, but certainly at height of users’ heads and shoulderswhen seated or standing. The design of washing and toilet facilities shouldminimise discomfort and maximise hygiene, meeting the differing requirements ofmales and females. The occurrence of inadequate deck height in compartmentsshould be minimised. Use of up-to-date anthropometric (body size) data isrequired in deciding deck height and other human-related design parameters(Chap 6).HFI Technical IssuesFigure 10-3: Typical living quartersHuman traffic congestion occurs at certain focal points such as galleys, messesand canteens. The design of the passageways and waiting areas should formpart of the traffic flow analyses (see Chap 12). The accommodation of femaleNaval personnel at sea will require separate bunk spaces, showers and WCs,Nov 2006 Page 10-5 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI Technical Issueswith short access routes between, avoiding main passageways. Heads andbathrooms should be located on the same deck as adjacent accommodationmodules and mess decks.Location of provision storerooms should ideally be close to the galley with goodaccess. The dining halls (messes) should be separated from the accommodationspaces for reasons of both hygiene and habitability. The arrangement and fittingof the messes should recognise the social and service expectations associatedwith rank and rate.Nov 2006 Page 10-6 Issue 4

Chapter 10 – Accommodation Spaces10.2 HFI ProcessThe sequence of HFI activities described in the remainder of this chapter isillustrated in Figure 10-4.GeneralArrangementConceptDevelopmentEstablishAccommodationPolicyDefineAccommodationAssessAccommodationAssess / ApproveAccommodationMANUFACTURE DEMONSTRATION ASSESSMENT CONCEPTHFI ProcessSupportModificationIN SERVICENot IdentifiedDISPOSALFigure 10-4: The HFI Process for Accommodation SpacesThe process of addressing HFI issues for the Accommodation Spaces of theplatform is summarised in Figure 10-4. The HFI accommodation policy is definedNov 2006 Page 10-7 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)to take into account habitability requirements, internal environment, hygiene andother health and safety requirements and future RN policy for service conditions.The accommodation is designed to meet the needs of the Quarter Bill and toaccord with the General Arrangement of the platform.The process of identifying and resolving HF issues affecting the AccommodationSpaces involves liaison between the HFI Focus and various stakeholders inconducting the HFI activities. The HFI activities are presented in Table 10-1.The ticks represent the procurement Phases at which the activities are likely tobe conducted.C* A D M I D HFI activityEstablish HFI Accommodation PolicySpecify AccommodationEvaluate Accommodation ProvisionHFI Process Support ModificationTable 10-1: HFI Activities for Operational Spaces* The General Arrangement Concept activity is described in Chapter 8.10.2.1 HFI Focus ResponsibilitiesThe HFI Focus is responsible for the following:• Liaison with DEC, SSG-ShipDes, Fleet-NLM and MLS CG aboutrequirements for accommodation spaces.• Identify the key requirements to be met in the accommodation and itsfacilities to meet basic crew needs and service conditions.• Ensure that accommodation will meet the needs of the Quarter Bill andprovide sufficient austere accommodation for additional personnel(Chap 4).• Selection of standards applicable to the design of facilities andmaintenance of hygiene.• The development and application of assessment and acceptance methodsto test the adequacy of the accommodation spaces.10.2.2 Relevant StandardsThe standards used are listed in Table 10-2 below. Further details are includedin Annex 2, together with other related standards.Nov 2006 Page 10-8 Issue 4

Chapter 10 – Accommodation SpacesStandardDef Stan 00-25 Part 15Def Stan 00-25 Part 17Def Stan 00-25 Part 19Def Stan 02-107Def Stan 02-120Def Stan 02-121 Part 1Def Stan 02-121 Part 2Def Stan 02-121 Part 3Def Stan 02-121 Part 4Def Stan 02-123 Part 1Def Stan 02-123 Part 2Def Stan 02-125Def Stan 02-728TitleHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 15: Principles and ProcessHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 17: Personnel Domain – Technical Guidanceand DataHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 19: Human Engineering Domain – TechnicalGuidance and DataRequirements for Accommodation in HM SurfaceWarships and SubmarinesRequirements for WCs, Urinals, Bathrooms andWashing Facilities in HM Surface Warships andSubmarinesRequirements for Galley & Associated Spaces.Part 1: Common RequirementsRequirements for Galley & Associated Spaces.Part 2: Specific Requirement - Surface ShipsRequirements for Galleys and Associated Spaces.Part 3: Specific Requirements for ConventionalSubmarinesRequirements for Galley & Associated Spaces.Part 4: Specific Requirements - Nuclear SubmarinesRequirements for Laundries and AssociatedCompartments.Part 1: Laundries and Associated CompartmentsRequirements for Laundries and AssociatedCompartments.Part 2: Laundry Machinery, Equipment and FittingsRequirements for NAAFI Compartments in SurfaceShips and SubmarinesRequirements for Domestic Hot and Cold Fresh WaterSystemsTable 10-2: Relevant StandardsHFI ProcessNov 2006 Page 10-9 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)StandardANEP 24ANEP 26Def Stan 07-205 Part 1Def Stan 07-205 Part 2Def Stan 07-205 Part 4TitleGuidelines for Shipboard Habitability Requirements forCombat and Surface ShipsErgonomic Data for Shipboard Space Design in NATOSurface ShipsRequirements for Galleys and Associated Spaces.Part 1: Common RequirementsRequirements for Galleys and Associated Spaces.Part 2: Specific Requirements for Surface ShipsRequirements for Galleys and Associated Spaces.Part 4: Specific Requirements for Nuclear SubmarinesTable 10-3: Other Related StandardsHFI ProcessNov 2006 Page 10-10 Issue 4

Chapter 10 – Accommodation Spaces10.3 HFI Activities10.3.1 Assessment Phase Activities10.3.1.1 Establish HFI Accommodation PolicyPurposeTo establish the requirements to be met when specifyingaccommodation facilities and when formulating and assessingtheir layout.Inputs • The General Arrangement Concept (Chap 8)• Project Specific Target Audience Description (PSTAD)(Chap 6)• The Accommodation Statement from the Basic ManningRequirement (BMR) (Chap 4)• Traffic flow parameters (Chap 12)• Task descriptions for scenarios performed in theaccommodation spaces• Equipment descriptions and footprints (Chap 14)Methods • Task Analysis• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description• Health & Safety AnalysisSteps • Identify optional forms of sleeping, messing, domestic andrecreational arrangements in conjunction with stakeholdersto identify the major HFI characteristics of thesearrangements (using Task Description and the PSTAD).• Establish a priority list of habitability factors (see Chap 13) inorder of effect upon domestic rest and recreation (hygiene,compartment layout, colour schemes, etc.).• Establish a matrix of design factors for bunk spaces,messing arrangements, catering complexes, laundryarrangements, bathrooms and WCs. Compare withappropriate Def Stan.• Specify a set of accommodation and habitability design rulesand principles for each of the design factors taking intoaccount results of Health & Safety Analysis (Chap 17).OutputsThe Accommodation Policy, which is expressed as:• List of habitability factors in order of priority.• A matrix of habitability factors against domestic messingcatering and recreational characteristics.• The definition of the accommodation and habitability designrules and principles.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 10-11 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)10.3.2 Demonstration Phase Activities10.3.2.1 Specify AccommodationPurposeInputsTo specify in detail the accommodation facilities needed to meetthe policy.The HFI Accommodation Policy (Sect 10.3.1.1) and theAccommodation Statement (Chap 4).Methods • Task Analysis• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description• Link Analysis• Workspace Design• Health & Safety AnalysisStepsAccommodation is specified in accord with the policy as follows:• From the accommodation statement associated with theBMR/Quarter Bill (QB) (Chap 4) and Task Descriptions,generate an outline accommodation General Arrangementspecifying cabin and berthing allocations and locations, withheads and bathrooms space, services and stowagerequirements (PSTAD, Link Analysis, Workspace Design).• Review the recreation, dining hall and canteen space andlayout requirements, together with options for novel messingarrangements (Link Analysis).• Review galley adjacency, space and layout requirements inconjunction with relevant Def Stans and results of the Health& Safety Analysis.• Define design evaluation and acceptance criteria.OutputsThe Accommodation Definition, which will include the following:HFI Activities• List of habitability factors related to design criteria.• Definition of the accommodation and habitability HFI designprinciples, rules and acceptance criteria.• Deviations from relevant Def Stans.• Outline General Arrangement drawings for accommodation,heads and bathrooms, messing arrangements and galleys.• Environmental factors requirements specifications.Nov 2006 Page 10-12 Issue 4

Chapter 10 – Accommodation Spaces10.3.3 Manufacture Phase Activities10.3.3.1 Evaluate Accommodation ProvisionPurposeInputsTo assess accommodation compartments to ensure that theyare habitable, safe, hygienic and conducive to crew morale.Drawing specifications, mock-ups and real compartment layouts.Methods • Task Analysis• Task SynthesisStepsThe accommodation spaces are assessed as follows:• Inspect the dimensions and layout of the bunk, recreationand messing.• Inspect the dimension and layout of the galley, bathrooms,WCs and domestic facilities (e.g. laundry).• Inspect the spaces for conformance to the hygienerequirements.• Trial the galley and catering facilities, at both workspace andworkstation levels of detail.OutputsWorkspace assessments evaluating level of conformance withspecifications and standards, including the AccommodationDefinition.10.3.4 In-Service Phase Activities10.3.4.1 Support ModificationPurposeInputsMethodsStepsOutputsTo provide accommodation that is compatible with needs whena significant modification is made (typically to a platform).As per Assessment and Demonstration Phase activities.As per Assessment and Demonstration Phase activities.As per Assessment and Demonstration Phase activities, buttailored strictly to the scope of the change.Workspace assessments evaluating level of conformance withspecifications and standards, including the AccommodationDefinition.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 10-13 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)10.3.5 Disposal Phase ActivitiesNone identified.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 10-14 Issue 4MAP-01-011 CH 10_14.doc

CHAPTER 11 – MISCELLANEOUS SPACESCONTENTS11.1 HFI Technical Issues..................................................................................................11-311.1.1 Scope 11-311.1.2 Stakeholders.......................................................................................11-411.1.3 General Requirements for Miscellaneous Spaces..............................11-411.2 HFI Process ......................................................................................................11-611.2.1 HFI Focus Responsibilities .................................................................11-711.2.2 Relevant Standards ............................................................................11-711.3 HFI Activities...................................................................................................11-1011.3.1 Demonstration Phase Activities ........................................................11-1011.3.1.1 Specify Miscellaneous Spaces.......................................11-1011.3.2 Manufacture Phase Activities............................................................11-1211.3.2.1 Evaluate Miscellaneous Spaces.....................................11-1211.3.3 In-Service Phase Activities ...............................................................11-1211.3.4 Disposal Phase Activities..................................................................11-12Nov 2006 Page 11-1 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)Nov 2006 Page 11-2 Issue 4

Chapter 11 – Miscellaneous Spaces11.1 HFI Technical IssuesHFI Technical IssuesFigure 11-1: Storerooms should be configured to minimise theworkload of provisioning11.1.1 ScopeThis chapter should be read in conjunction with Chapter 8 (GeneralArrangement) and Chapters 9 and 10, which deal with other spaces.Miscellaneous spaces comprise those spaces that contribute indirectly to theoperational and recreational aspects of the vessel. These include the following:• Storerooms.• Workshops.• Passageways.• Access ways, airlocks, stairways, lifts and hatches.• Medical Facilities.• Classrooms/Briefing Rooms.Nov 2006 Page 11-3 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)11.1.2 StakeholdersHFI Technical IssuesA list of potential stakeholders for this area is given below. This list is notexhaustive and should be seen to be a guide only. HFI Foci should refine this listbased upon the structure of their project, the attendees at the relevant HFSG orHFWG and in light of guidance and requests from industry, DEC and Customer 2representatives.• DEC• IPT HFI Foci• MLS CG• TES-SA-MA• TES-SSG-ShipDes11.1.3 General Requirements for Miscellaneous SpacesThe jobs and tasks of personnel when operating in these spaces must be definedso that the layout and any necessary supporting tools and facilities can beadequately specified.The location of storerooms should be in accordance with the results ofReplenishment at Sea (RAS) and storing route task analyses. The design of thelayout and shelving inside should be traceable back to the user requirements(e.g. frequency of use) and the characteristics of the provisions or store itemsinvolved. Likewise the location of general and engineering Naval Stores shouldtake account of traffic flow studies (Chap 12) to minimise congestion imposed bypersonnel attending the stores.The location of workshops should be close to the area they support. The designof the layout and the equipment included should be traceable back to the resultsof Integrated Logistics Support (ILS) Logistic Support Analysis (LSA) (Chap 16),defining the most likely repair tasks.In the case of passageways, a policy of minimum intrusion into task areas (i.e.maintenance or operational) should be defined to minimise traffic flowcongestion. Similarly, deckhead or overhead stowage in main passageways(e.g. CBRNDC timbers) must meet health and safety requirements and recognisedifferences in male and female height and strength.Nov 2006 Page 11-4 Issue 4

Chapter 11 – Miscellaneous SpacesHFI Technical IssuesFigure 11-2: Medical facilitiesThe medical facilities should be designed as a self-contained unit to enhanceworkflow. They should be located on the damage control deck in a quiet area,and have their own air and ventilation system. The capacity of the ward shouldbe compatible with the size of the complement.Nov 2006 Page 11-5 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)11.2 HFI ProcessThe sequence of HFI activities described in the remainder of this chapter isillustrated in Figure 11-3.HFI ProcessGeneral Arrangement Concept DefintionSpecification and DesignAssessment and ApprovalNot IdentifiedMANUFACTURE DEMONSTRATION ASSESSMENT CONCEPTSupport ModificationIN SERVICENot IdentifiedDISPOSALFigure 11-3: The HFI Process for Miscellaneous SpacesNov 2006 Page 11-6 Issue 4

Chapter 11 – Miscellaneous SpacesThe process of addressing HF issues for the Miscellaneous Spaces of theplatform is summarised in Figure 11-3. A range of factors is taken into account indefining requirements for, and specifying the layout of, miscellaneous spaces.These factors include crew tasks, traffic flow, environment, ship motion, safetyconsiderations, equipment fit and anthropometric data (body size) for personnel.The process of identifying and resolving HFI issues affecting MiscellaneousSpaces involves liaison between the HFI Focus and various stakeholders inconducting the HFI activities. The HFI activities are presented in Table 11-1.The ticks represent the procurement Phases at which the activities are likely tobe conducted.C* A D M I D HFI activity General Arrangement Concept* Define Storerooms, Workshops, Passageways,Medical Facilities, Classrooms & BriefingCompartmentsAssess Miscellaneous SpacesSupport ModificationHFI ProcessTable 11-1: HFI Activities for Miscellaneous Spaces* The General Arrangement Concept activity is described in Chapter 8.11.2.1 HFI Focus ResponsibilitiesThe HFI Focus is responsible for the following:• Liaison with stakeholders about requirements for miscellaneous spaces.• Identify location and patterns of usage of all miscellaneous spaces.• Ensure that fitting and layout of miscellaneous spaces is appropriate tolikely usage and meets health and safety requirements (Chap 17).• Selection of standards applicable to the design of facilities and themaintenance of appropriate environmental conditions (Chap 13).• The development and application of assessment and acceptance methodsto test the HFI adequacy of the miscellaneous spaces.11.2.2 Relevant StandardsThe standards used are listed in Table 11-2 below. Further details are includedin Annex 2, together with other related standards.Nov 2006 Page 11-7 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI ProcessStandardBR 8541Def Stan 00-25 Part 15Def Stan 00-25 Part 17Def Stan 00-25 Part 19Def Stan 02-101 Part 1Def Stan 02-101 Part 2Def Stan 02-106 Part 1Def Stan 02-106 Part 2Def Stan 02-106 Part 3Def Stan 02-106 Part 4Def Stan 02-115Def Stan 02-117TitleSafety Requirements for Armament Stores for NavalUseHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 15: Principles and ProcessHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 17: Personnel Domain – Technical Guidanceand DataHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 19: Human Engineering Domain – TechnicalGuidance and DataRequirements for Design and Fitting Out ofWorkshops, Maintenance Spaces and EngineeringStores for HM Surface Ships.Part 1: Common RequirementsRequirements for Design and Fitting Out ofWorkshops, Maintenance Spaces and EngineeringStores for HM Surface ShipsPart 2: Specific RequirementsRequirements for Medical and Dental Organisation inHM Surface Ships and Submarines.Part 1: Common Requirements – Medical and DentalFacilitiesRequirements for Medical and Dental Organisation inHM Surface Ships and Submarines.Part 2: Specific Requirements – Medical and DentalFacilities in HM Surface ShipsRequirements for Medical and Dental Organisation inHM Surface Ships and Submarines.Part 3: Specific Requirements – Medical Organisationfor Action in HM Surface ShipsRequirements for Medical and Dental Organisation inHM Surface Ships and SubmarinesPart 4: Medical and Dental Facilities in SubmarinesDetails and List of Weatherdeck and SideArrangements for Surface ShipsRequirements for Anchoring, Berthing, Towing,Securing to a Buoy and MooringNov 2006 Page 11-8 Issue 4

Chapter 11 – Miscellaneous SpacesStandardDef Stan 02-126 Part 1Def Stan 02-126 Part 2Def Stan 02-126 Part 3Def Stan 02-716Def Stan 02-795TitleRequirements for Stores Compartments in HMSurface Ships and Submarines.Part 1: Common RequirementsRequirements for Stores Compartments in HMSurface Ships and Submarines.Part 2: Specific Requirements – Surface ShipsRequirements for Stores Compartments in HMSurface Ships and Submarines.Part 3: Specific Requirements – SubmarinesRequirements for Winterisation on Surface ShipsRequirements for Health Physics Laboratories inNuclear SubmarinesTable 11-2: Relevant StandardsANEP 26StandardTitleErgonomic Data for Shipboard Space Design in NATOSurface ShipsHFI ProcessDef Stan 08-101 Part 1Def Stan 08-101 Part 2Requirements for the Construction and SystemArrangements in Magazines and Weapon StorageCompartments.Part 1: HM Surface ShipsRequirements for the Construction and SystemArrangements in Magazines and Weapon StorageCompartments.Part 2: HM SubmarinesTable 11-3: Other Related StandardsNov 2006 Page 11-9 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)11.3 HFI Activities11.3.1 Demonstration Phase Activities11.3.1.1 Specify Miscellaneous SpacesPurposeTo specify in detail the facilities needed for Storerooms,Workshops, Passageways, Medical Facilities, Classrooms andBriefing Compartments.Inputs • The upper deck requirements (Chap 9)• Project Specific Target Audience Description (PSTAD)(Chap 6)• Traffic flow parameters (Chap 12)• Task descriptions for evolutions• Equipment descriptions and footprints (Chap 14).Methods • Task Synthesis• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description• Link Analysis• Workspace Design• Synthetic User Modelling• Health & Safety AnalysisHFI ActivitiesSteps • The design procedures for the medical facilities follow moreclosely the details of those for the continuously mannedcompartments. The design of passageways is covered inthe traffic flow diagrams (Chap 12). The relevant aspects ofdimensions, system routing, etc. should be collated here forwriting the passageway design specifications.• Liaise with stakeholders and System Project Managers toensure that miscellaneous spaces take into account RNpolicy and the needs of equipments and users (PSTAD).• Review the HFI requirements captured for the spaces.Conduct Task Synthesis for tasks carried out within thesespaces; apply Synthetic User Modelling if required.• Analyse extant space layout designs to identify good andbad features.• Identify the characteristics of the equipment fits or stores tobe handled. Identify the critical activities and actionsfunctionally associated with the spaces using Link Analysis.• Design the layout of each space (Workspace Design) anddefine the environmental factors (Chap 13) specification,taking into account Health & Safety Analysis (Chap 17).• Define design evaluation and acceptance criteria.Nov 2006 Page 11-10 Issue 4

Chapter 11 – Miscellaneous SpacesOutput • The specification of miscellaneous spaces, which include thefollowing:o HFI requirements for each type of space.o Traffic flow and environmental requirements for eachspace.o Identification and description of any critical tasks andjobs to be undertaken in the space.o Workspace layout specification.o Design Standards invoked (e.g. Def Stans).o Specification of acceptance levels and criteria.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 11-11 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)11.3.2 Manufacture Phase Activities11.3.2.1 Evaluate Miscellaneous SpacesPurposeTo ensure that all miscellaneous spaces are safe, compatiblewith the tasks to be performed within and have an acceptableinternal environment.Inputs • Drawing specifications• Mock-ups• Compartment layoutsMethodsStepsNot Identified.Each workspace is assessed as follows:• Liaise with the System Project Managers to define the HFIassessment and acceptance schedule and responsibilities.• Inspect the dimensions and layout of the workspace againstthe design specification.• Measure the levels of each environmental factor and checkthat they are in accordance with the specification (Chap 13).• Trial the workspace and workstation in conjunction with therelevant equipment project (Chap 13 and Chap 14), testingfeatures such as:o Ease of communications (if team environment).o Ease of access to equipment.o Adequacy of illumination levels.o Adequacy of ventilation.o Fulfilment of compartment adjacency requirements.OutputWorkspace assessments documenting level of conformancewith specifications and standards.11.3.3 In-Service Phase ActivitiesShould in-service modifications necessitate changes to the miscellaneous spacesdesign, then the procedure for In-Service HFI activities (see Chap 8) should befollowed.HFI Activities11.3.4 Disposal Phase ActivitiesNone identified.Nov 2006 Page 11-12 Issue 4MAP-01-011 CH 11_18.doc

CHAPTER 12 – PERSONNEL MOVEMENT AND MATERIALHANDLINGCONTENTS12.1 HFI Technical Issues..................................................................................................12-312.1.1 Introduction .........................................................................................12-312.1.2 Stakeholders.......................................................................................12-312.1.3 Removal Routes .................................................................................12-412.1.4 Traffic Flow .........................................................................................12-412.1.5 Storing and Replenishment at Sea (RAS) ..........................................12-412.1.6 Embarkation and Disembarkation.......................................................12-612.1.6.1 Submarines ......................................................................12-612.1.6.2 Assault Ships....................................................................12-612.2 HFI Process ......................................................................................................12-812.2.1 HFI Focus Responsibilities .................................................................12-912.2.2 Relevant Standards ..........................................................................12-1012.3 HFI Activities...................................................................................................12-1212.3.1 Concept Phase Activities ..................................................................12-1212.3.1.1 Traffic Flow Concept ......................................................12-1212.3.2 Assessment Phase Activities............................................................12-1312.3.2.1 Specify Traffic Flow, Storing and RAS Requirements....12-1312.3.3 Demonstration Phase Activities ........................................................12-1512.3.3.1 Define All Routes............................................................12-1512.3.3.2 Assess Removal Routes ................................................12-1612.3.3.3 Assess Traffic Flows ......................................................12-1612.3.3.4 Assess Storing and RAS ................................................12-1712.3.3.5 Assess Embarkation and Disembarkation......................12-1812.3.4 Manufacture Phase Activities............................................................12-1912.3.4.1 Support Contractor Manufacturer...................................12-1912.3.5 In-Service Phase Activities ...............................................................12-2012.3.5.1 Support Modifications.....................................................12-2012.3.5.2 Provide Proactive Support..............................................12-2012.3.6 Disposal Phase Activities..................................................................12-2112.3.6.1 Provide Disposal Plan Support.......................................12-21Nov 2006 Page 12-1 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)Nov 2006 Page 12-2 Issue 4

Chapter 12 – Personnel Movement and Material Handling12.1 HFI Technical IssuesHFI Technical IssuesFigure 12-1: Replenishment at sea12.1.1 IntroductionPersonnel movement and material handling issues are those related to humantraffic flow (including escape and evacuation), storing (including ammunitioning),all forms of Replenishment at Sea (RAS), the embarkation and disembarkation ofpersonnel and the design of equipment maintenance envelopes and equipmentremoval routes. A general Human Factors Integration (HFI) requirement is tominimise route lengths (and hence workload). This will be generally compatiblewith the Naval Architect’s consideration of minimising the displacement of thevessel. A conflict of interest may occur, however, if compartments, as opposedto passageways, are required for through access. This chapter should be read inconjunction with Chapters 8 through 11, which deal with the layout of the platformand its compartments and spaces.12.1.2 StakeholdersA list of potential stakeholders for this area is given below. This list is notexhaustive and should be seen to be a guide only. HFI Foci should refine this listbased upon the structure of their project, the attendees at the relevant HFSG orHFWG and in light of guidance and requests from industry, DEC and Customer 2representatives.• INM• IPT HFI Foci• TES-SA-MA• TES-SSG-ShipDes• TES-SSG-ShipSeaNov 2006 Page 12-3 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)12.1.3 Removal RoutesHFI Technical IssuesRemoval routes have particular spatial dimension requirements that are definedby the volume, weight and handling requirements of equipments. Thesedimensions should include those of the human bearer as well as the equipmentitself. The PSTAD should include information about the strength of personnel(load carrying capability), and the distance or time over which loads can becarried.Trade-offs in handling route dimensions, directions and locations can beconducted in conjunction with the Naval Architects, together with equipmentAvailability, Reliability & Maintainability (ARM) specialists (Chap 12), by defininga priority list of critical equipments and frequency of access or removal.12.1.4 Traffic FlowThe movement of personnel around the platform should be free from hindrance.Analysis to determine the requirements of human traffic flow should be basedupon the jobs and tasks of personnel. This will enable identification of suitableroutes between equipments, compartments and spaces. The loading on any oneroute (numbers per unit time, the sources and destinations), and the type oftraffic (casual, maintenance, fire fighting, etc.), will contribute to the definition ofseveral platform features. These features include the width of passageways, thejuxtaposition of compartments, the number and design of hatchways and doorsacross the routes and the deckhead clearances. Definitive design statementscan then be made about the cross-sectional dimensions, lengths and routingrequirements for traffic flows. A particularly important application of traffic flowanalysis is that of evacuation (Chap 17) and assault route planning andevaluation.12.1.5 Storing and Replenishment at Sea (RAS)Figure 12-2: RAS activities have specific requirements for deck spaceRAS activities have specific requirements for deck space and storing routeswhich may influence ship layout considerations, particularly since stores, such asprovisions, require a direct access route. Different evolutions apply to handlingliquids and solids (RAS (L) and RAS (S)).Nov 2006 Page 12-4 Issue 4

Chapter 12 – Personnel Movement and Material HandlingHandling of stores, which may require lifts or hoists, can influence the shipmanning levels. Stores can be transferred quickly from vessel to vessel. If thecurrent policy to reduce manning continues, overloading of those personnelallocated to stores handling may result. In the absence of suitable facilities, theavailability of manpower rapidly becomes the limiting factor in the speed, eventhe possibility, of achieving RAS. The specification of such facilities may be animportant consideration in achieving reduced manpower targets. There areopportunities to implement established industrial techniques, such as bar codingfor stores accounting, as well as use of palletted stores, which could reduce themanpower requirements on board larger ships.Motion-induced effects, especially Motion-Induced Interruptions (MII), are alsolikely to be important in RAS activities, as personnel may be required to carry outthe operation in difficult motion environments (Chap 13).HFI Technical IssuesSafety concerns, when transporting and moving stores on a ship, especiallythose containing explosives, are of paramount importance. Specific HF issuesinclude the difficulty of lifting and handling heavy loads, the use of hoists, accessroutes to magazines and storerooms and the carrying of hazardous stores(Chap 17).Attention should be paid to ensuring that the layout of a storeroom is compatiblewith the type of store handled to ease the replenishment and retrieval activities.Analysis of the RAS and storing tasks will have a major input upon the UpperDeck and Through Deck design. As a manning requirement, the details of theworkload involved will need to form an input to the platform complementingstudies.Figure 12-3: Material handlingNov 2006 Page 12-5 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)12.1.6 Embarkation and DisembarkationHFI Technical IssuesFor most platforms, embarkation and disembarkation issues are covered by thediscussion above concerning removal routes, traffic flow, storing and RAS.However, in submarines and Assault Ships specific issues are raised. Escapearrangements are discussed in Chapter 17.12.1.6.1 SubmarinesSubmarine embarkation and disembarkation routes are necessarily spaceconstrained. The torpedo and weapon routes offer good storing routes, whichsuggest that stores should be situated close by, particularly stores that need tobe accessed frequently.Figure 12-4: Submarine embarkation and disembarkationroutes are necessarily space constrainedBecause of the space constraints, the embarkation and disembarkation ofweapons is a very time-consuming process with severe personnel safetyconnotations in the mechanics of the evolution. For future submarine designs,analysis of Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for improvement of taskperformance and safety could have a major impact upon the design and layout ofthe fore-ends.12.1.6.2 Assault ShipsAssault Ships are required to embark and disembark large numbers of troops,equipment and stores rapidly. This requires detailed analysis of the traffic flowsto and from the flight deck, disembarkation point and davits/cranes, in relation tothe ship’s storage and accommodation spaces. The parameters that becomesignificant are knowledge of the SOPs, sizing and location of waiting spaces,Nov 2006 Page 12-6 Issue 4

Chapter 12 – Personnel Movement and Material Handlingsimultaneous demands on routes, flow time criticality, access hatchway andpassageway design.HFI Technical IssuesFigure 12-5: Assault Ship DisembarkationNov 2006 Page 12-7 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)12.2 HFI ProcessThe sequence of HFI activities described in the remainder of this chapter isillustrated in Figure 12-6.HFI ProcessAssess RemovalRoutesAssess TrafficFlowsTraffic FlowConceptSpecify Traffic flow,Storing & RASRequirementsDefine All RoutesSupportContractorManufacturerAssess Storingand RASAssessEmbarkation andDisembarkationMANUFACTURE DEMONSTRATION ASSESSMENT CONCEPTProvide ProactiveSupportSupportModificationsIN SERVICEProvide DisposalPlan SupportDISPOSALFigure 12-6: The HFI Process for Personnel Movement and MaterialHandlingNov 2006 Page 12-8 Issue 4

Chapter 12 – Personnel Movement and Material HandlingThe process of addressing HF issues for Personnel Movement and MaterialHandling is summarised in Figure 12-6. The equipment fit, crew activities andhealth and safety policy are used to help define HF characteristics of traffic flows,storing and RAS movements. These criteria are used together with moredetailed design information to specify all routes for each purpose, includingembarkation and disembarkation.The process of identifying and resolving HF issues affecting PersonnelMovement and Material Handling involves liaison between the HFI Focus andvarious stakeholders in conducting the HFI activities. The HFI activities arepresented in Table 12-1. The ticks represent the procurement Phases at whichthe activities are likely to be conducted.C A D M I D HFI ActivityTraffic Flow Concept Specify Traffic Flow, Storing and RAS Requirements Define all Routes Assess Removal RoutesHFI Process Assess Traffic Flows Assess Storing and RAS Assess Embarkation and DisembarkationSupport Contractor ManufacturerSupport ModificationsProvide Proactive SupportProvide Disposal Plan SupportTable 12-1: HFI Activities for Personnel Movement and Material Handling12.2.1 HFI Focus ResponsibilitiesThe HFI Focus is responsible for the following:• Liaise with stakeholders about the likely routing requirements through theplatform to agree best practice, parameters and standard operatingprocedures.• Liaise with System Project Managers to establish equipment removal andother requirements (Chap 16).Nov 2006 Page 12-9 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Ensure that removal routes are designed to minimise human handlingeffort and maximise health and safety.• Ensure that traffic flow routes are designed to minimise hindrance andmaximise safety, for human passage.• Ensure that storing routes and storeroom layouts are designed to minimisehandling effort and are compatible with the shelf life of items and theirfrequency of use.• Perform trade-offs with the design of the General Arrangement to optimiserouting in conjunction with other aspects (Chap 8).• Develop and apply assessment and acceptance methods to test the HFIadequacy of the routes and their usage.12.2.2 Relevant StandardsThe standards used are listed in Table 12-2 below. Further details are includedin Annex 2, together with other related standards.HFI ProcessStandardDef Stan 00-25 Part 15TitleHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 15: Principles and ProcessDef Stan 00-25 Part 17Def Stan 00-25 Part 19Def Stan 02-149Def Stan 08-103 Part 2Human Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 17: Personnel Domain – Technical Guidanceand DataHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 19: Human Engineering Domain – TechnicalGuidance and DataAccess Policy in Surface ShipsRequirements for Maintenance Envelopes andRemoval Routes.Part 2: Requirements for SubmarinesTable 12-2: Relevant StandardsANEP 26StandardDef Stan 07-279TitleErgonomic Data for Shipboard Space Design in NATOSurface ShipsRequirements for Replenishment at Sea – SurfaceShipsNov 2006 Page 12-10 Issue 4

Chapter 12 – Personnel Movement and Material HandlingSI 1992/2793 The Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992(as amended)SI 1998/2306The Provision and Use of Work EquipmentRegulations 1998 (PUWER)Table 12-3: Other Related StandardsHFI ProcessNov 2006 Page 12-11 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)12.3 HFI Activities12.3.1 Concept Phase Activities12.3.1.1 Traffic Flow ConceptPurposeTo provide a high-level analysis of traffic flow and routing tocontribute to emerging concepts about platform functions andthe General Arrangement.Inputs The General Arrangement Concept (Chap 8).MethodsNot Identified.Steps • Identify main evolutions associated with the movement ofpersonnel or materials for each major platform function.• Identify major traffic flows in each option for the GeneralArrangement.• Assess likely parameters of traffic flow for each routeincluding numbers, type of movement (watchkeepingchange, evacuation, embarkation etc.), rate of movement,type of material handling.• Perform trade-offs between traffic routes and GeneralArrangement.OutputsHigh-level traffic route options for each General Arrangementoption and assessment of viability, efficiency and safety issuesof each route (eg for Escape and Evacuation).HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 12-12 Issue 4

Chapter 12 – Personnel Movement and Material Handling12.3.2 Assessment Phase Activities12.3.2.1 Specify Traffic Flow, Storing and RAS RequirementsPurposeTo establish the requirements for personnel movement andmaterial handling on the platform, with a view to influencing thedevelopment of the General Arrangement.Inputs • Product of Traffic Flow Concept (Sect 12.3.1.1)• Equipment fit and maintenance and replenishmentoperations (Chap 16)• Environmental specifications (Chap 13)Methods • Operational Scenario Description• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description• Link AnalysisStepsThe requirement for traffic flow, storing and RAS is defined asfollows:• Use Operational Scenarios to help analyse system andequipment fits, stores fits and accommodation fits to identifytypes of materials to be handled and the environmentalconditions involved.• Use Link Analysis to analyse relevant existing platformdesigns to assist in identifying potential human trafficsources and destinations.• Estimate personnel flow rates and material handling volumerequirements from historic data. Define applicable HFIrelatedstandards including body size, movement andstrength constraints from the PSTAD.• Categorise the flows and material handling volume intogroups such as domestic, maintenance and repair, storing,troop embarkation and disembarkation, fire fighting anddamage control, CBRN etc.• Define high-level routing design requirements of flow rateand material handling sizing, and route length for removalroutes, RAS and storing routes, ammunition routes, troopand equipment embarkation and disembarkation routes, etc.• Identify effect on General Arrangement, design constraintsand degree of compromise in HFI design of routing sizing,handling and location.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 12-13 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)Outputs • The human and material traffic routes categorised by type ofactivity.• The estimated flow rates and material handlingrequirements for the traffic routes.• The HFI design constraints and standards to be applied, andthe recommended minimum routing volume and crosssectionalarea requirements, maximum routing lengths,waiting area sizing, possible compartment locations in theplatform, and equipment lifting tackle requirements for deckto-deckequipment movement.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 12-14 Issue 4

Chapter 12 – Personnel Movement and Material Handling12.3.3 Demonstration Phase Activities12.3.3.1 Define All RoutesPurposeTo specify in detail the constraints and facilities needed to meetthe HFI principles established for traffic flow, storing and RAS.Additionally, the constraints and facilities for removals,embarkation and disembarkation are specified.Inputs Output from traffic flow specification (Sect 12.3.2.1)Methods • Task Analysis• Task Synthesis• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description• Link Analysis• Synthetic User Modelling• Health & Safety AnalysisSteps • Conduct detailed Task Analyses and Task Synthesis, andLink Analysis for each of the categories of route establishedto determine activities and associated spatial envelopes.• Identify and specify the locations for material handling gear,the sizing of passageways, hatchways and doorways foreach of the categories of route taking account of the PSTADand making use of Synthetic User Modelling when required.• Identify and specify the access dimensions to critical firehazard compartments and spaces, taking account of theTarget Audience Description and making use of SyntheticUser Modelling when required.• Review outline General Arrangement, and check forconsistency with personnel and material handling routes.Use Health & Safety Analysis to identify associated risks.• Generate HFI design specifications for all routes.• Define HFI assessment and acceptance criteria for routes.OutputsFor each of the categories of route specify the following:• The recommended routes through the platform.• Primary and Secondary Escape Routes.• The minimum passageway heights and widths and accesscross-sectional areas.• The locations of material lifting and handling gear togetherwith minimum Safe Working Load (SWL).• The maximum route length.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 12-15 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• The minimum dimensions of waiting areas for troopembarkation and disembarkation, catering areas and musterpoints.• HFI assessment and acceptance criteria.(The spatial and handling requirements can generally bespecified on a minimum, or maximum, value basis for eachrouting category. These should be mandatory. The preferredroutes for each evolution can only be recommended, notmandated, unless some overriding design reasons areapparent).12.3.3.2 Assess Removal RoutesPurposeInputsMethodsTo assess the HFI characteristics of removal routes.Drawings and mock-ups of removal routes, simulations ofmission-critical or hazardous segments of routes.Not identified.Steps • Equipment removal routes may be evaluated as part ofmaintenance field trials (see the Integrated Logistics SupportPlan (ILSP) (Chap 16)).• Note that removal problems may become apparent duringinitial installation of equipment (in Manufacture).OutputsHFI assessments of removal against assessment andacceptance criteria.12.3.3.3 Assess Traffic FlowsPurposeTo assess critical parameters of actual traffic flow.HFI ActivitiesInputsMethodsDrawings and mock-ups of traffic routes, simulations of missioncritical or hazardous segments of routes.Not identified but includes:• Escape AnalysisNov 2006 Page 12-16 Issue 4

Chapter 12 – Personnel Movement and Material HandlingSteps • Opportunities for full traffic flow trials during build (inManufacture Phase) are likely to be rare, although criticalareas may be selectively assessed. Mock-ups duringDemonstration Phase could be used for this purpose, ifavailable and if adequately robust.• Some types of Ship will not warrant traffic flow assessment.For others (e.g. Assault Ships), it may be essential to ensurethat the arrangements in critical areas are adequate inavoiding bottlenecks.• Traffic flow assessment in mock-ups or on the actualplatform should involve adequate numbers of personnelwearing protective clothing and carrying full equipment.Outputs • Empirical estimates of actual traffic flow and identification ofbottlenecks, hazards etc.• Escape Analysis and identification of congestion or queues.12.3.3.4 Assess Storing and RASPurposeInputsMethodsTo assess HFI Characteristics of storing and RAS.Drawings and mock-ups of storing and RAS Solids (S) andLiquids (L) routes, simulations of mission critical operations orhazardous segments of routes.Not Identified.Steps • The movement of materials on and off the ship duringoutfitting will give early indication of potential problems.Formal assessment may, however, prove difficult until latestages, and might best be left until formal trials and tests oflifting appliances.Outputs• Opportunity will exist to fully assess the Upper Deckreplenishment fittings during formal inspections. However, itwill not be possible to exercise RAS in full until the ship isunderway at sea.• Working mock-ups or simulations should be considered toassess and develop facilities or arrangements with a highdegree of novelty.HFI assessments of storing and RAS against assessment andacceptance criteria.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 12-17 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)12.3.3.5 Assess Embarkation and DisembarkationPurposeInputsMethodsTo assess critical parameters of embarkation anddisembarkation.Drawings and mock-ups of embarkation and disembarkationroutes, simulations of mission critical or hazardous segments ofroutes.Not Identified.Steps • Opportunities for full trials during build (in ManufacturePhase) are likely to be rare, although critical areas may beselectively assessed. Mock-ups or simulations duringDemonstration Phase could be used for this purpose ifavailable and if adequately robust.• Embarkation and disembarkation assessment in mock-upsor on the actual platform should involve adequate numbersof personnel wearing protective clothing and carrying fullequipment as well as a representative payload.OutputsEmpirical estimates of embarkation and disembarkation rate andidentification of bottlenecks and hazards.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 12-18 Issue 4

Chapter 12 – Personnel Movement and Material Handling12.3.4 Manufacture Phase Activities12.3.4.1 Support Contractor ManufacturerPurposeTo resolve HFI issues as they arise, and as additionalrequirements are identified.Inputs Outputs from all activities in Demonstration Phase (Sect 12.3.3).Methods • [Project Specific] Target Audience Description• Task analysis• Team Design• Role DefinitionSteps • Resolve issues as they arise based on newly identifiedrequirements.• Conduct Escape, Evacuation and Recovery (EER)simulation of final design if appropriate.• Feed results into acceptance/operability trials results.Outputs • EER simulation results• Support to acceptance/operability trials resultsHFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 12-19 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)12.3.5 In-Service Phase Activities12.3.5.1 Support ModificationsPurposeTo provide effective reassessment and personnel movementand material handling specifications, resulting from modificationto the overall requirement during operational life.Inputs • Outputs from all Manufacture Phase activities• Revised requirement (e.g. system design, functional)MethodsAs per Demonstration Phase activitiesSteps • Develop personnel movement and material handling HFrequirements resulting from the revised overall requirementthat is driving the modification.• Modify specifications and design of the DemonstrationPhase outputs in accordance with the requirementsidentified above.OutputsRevised removal routes, traffic flow designs, storing and RASspecifications and embarkation/disembarkation arrangementsas appropriate.12.3.5.2 Provide Proactive SupportPurposeTo proactively intervene as appropriate to ensure that WLCs areminimised and performance maximised.Inputs • Outputs from all Demonstration Phase activities• Operational data: user feedback, incident reportsMethods • HF Requirements DefinitionHFI ActivitiesSteps • Refine personnel movement and material handling design inaccordance with inputs, above.• Instigate fuller design process under Sect 12.3.5.1 (SupportModifications) if appropriate (will effectively follow amicrocosm of CADMID itself).• Feed back lessons learned to the appropriate body for use infuture projects.Outputs • Revised personnel movement and material handling design.• Lessons learned (as input to appropriate organisations/databases to ensure these are utilised in the future)Nov 2006 Page 12-20 Issue 4

Chapter 12 – Personnel Movement and Material Handling12.3.6 Disposal Phase Activities12.3.6.1 Provide Disposal Plan SupportPurposeAssist in the development of the disposal plan by specifyingoptimal sequence and routing for disposal of equipment.Inputs • Traffic and removal routesMethods • Task analysis• Human Error HAZOPSteps • Define scope of disposal requirement.• Identify hazards (via HAZOP).• Conduct task analysis of the disposal activity using Inputsand identified hazards to maximise safety and efficiency.Outputs • Removal routes specification for disposalHFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 12-21 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 12-22 Issue 4MAP-01-011 CH 12_17.doc

CHAPTER 13 – HABITABILITY AND INTERNAL ENVIRONMENTCONTENTS13.1 HFI Technical Issues..................................................................................................13-313.1.1 Living and Working Conditions ...........................................................13-313.1.2 Stakeholders.......................................................................................13-413.1.3 Effects of Ambient and Task-Specific Factors on Performance..........13-413.1.4 Habitability and Internal Environment Factors ....................................13-413.1.5 Ship Motion and Seakeeping..............................................................13-613.1.6 Vibration and Noise.............................................................................13-713.1.7 Atmosphere Control and Monitoring ...................................................13-813.1.8 Radiation .........................................................................................13-813.1.9 Heating, Ventilation and Air-Conditioning ...........................................13-813.1.10 Lighting and Glare...............................................................................13-913.1.11 Waste Disposal.................................................................................13-1013.1.12 HFI Design Co-ordination and Optimisation .....................................13-1013.2 HFI Process ....................................................................................................13-1213.2.1 HFI Focus Responsibilities ...............................................................13-1413.2.2 Relevant Standards ..........................................................................13-1513.3 HFI Activities...................................................................................................13-1713.3.1 Concept Phase Activities ..................................................................13-1713.3.1.1 Specify Hull Form Motion ...............................................13-1713.3.1.2 Specify Environmental Policy .........................................13-1813.3.2 Assessment Phase Activities............................................................13-1913.3.2.1 Assess Ship Motion and Human Performance Envelopes13-1913.3.2.2 Identify Social Environment Requirements ....................13-2013.3.2.3 Outline Environmental Conditions and Controls.............13-2113.3.2.4 Define Waste Disposal ...................................................13-2213.3.2.5 Identify Physical Environment Requirements.................13-2313.3.2.6 Define Vibration and Noise.............................................13-2413.3.2.7 Define Atmospheric Control & Monitoring ......................13-2513.3.2.8 Define Radiation Levels .................................................13-2613.3.2.9 Define Heating, Ventilation and Air-Conditioning ...........13-2713.3.2.10 Define Lighting and Glare...............................................13-2813.3.3 Demonstration Phase Activities ........................................................13-2913.3.3.1 Assess Ship Space Factors ...........................................13-2913.3.3.2 Assess Social Factors ....................................................13-3013.3.3.3 Assess Organisational Factors.......................................13-3113.3.3.4 Assess Operational Factors ...........................................13-3213.3.3.5 Assess Mental Factors ...................................................13-3213.3.3.6 Assess Personnel Factors..............................................13-3313.3.3.7 Assess Physical Factors ................................................13-3413.3.3.8 Assess Workspace Environment....................................13-36Nov 2006 Page 13-1 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)13.3.3.9 Assess Workstation Environment...................................13-3713.3.3.10 Assess Off-Duty Environment ........................................13-3813.3.4 Manufacture Phase Activities............................................................13-3913.3.4.1 Derive Assessment Criteria............................................13-3913.3.4.2 Monitor Feedback from Acceptance Trials.....................13-4013.3.5 In-Service Phase Activities ...............................................................13-4113.3.5.1 Monitor In-Service User Feedback.................................13-4113.3.5.2 Identify Opportunities for Environmental Improvements 13-4213.3.6 Disposal Phase Activities..................................................................13-42Nov 2006 Page 13-2 Issue 4

Chapter 13 – Habitability and Internal Environment13.1 HFI Technical Issues13.1.1 Living and Working ConditionsA platform must provide acceptable living and working conditions. The topic canbe considered under two main headings, Habitability Design and EnvironmentDesign.HFI Technical IssuesFigure 13-1: Typical Wardroom accommodation• Habitability DesignHabitability Design is concerned with personnel’s work and off-dutyenvironments. Habitability consists of those environmental, social andorganisational factors to be found aboard a Ship which contribute to the quality oflife of its personnel in order to maintain their mental and physical well-being at alevel sufficient to allow them to achieve sustained effectiveness in theperformance of their tasks, both operational and non-operational, and to supportoptimum personnel retention. Within Habitability Design, there are biological andsociological factors. The biological factors generate the need to define minimumstandards of comfort, associated with maintaining acceptable levels ofoperational performance by the crew. The sociological aspect generates arequirement for the accommodation design to consider the influence of evolvingsocial expectations upon the RN service conditions. The factors contributing tohabitability should meet the needs of a Ship’s company embarked continuouslyfor 24 hours per day, during patrols lasting several weeks, and deploymentslasting several months. However, the cost of doing so should be commensuratewith necessary constraints on space or weight.• Environment Design.Environmental factors are characteristics of the workspace that may affect taskperformance or personnel safety. If these characteristics fall outside certainNov 2006 Page 13-3 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI Technical Issueslimits, task performance may be degraded or health and safety risks increasedunacceptably. Environmental Design focuses on the interaction betweenphysical environmental factors and human performance with regard to the designof equipment. The aim of Environmental Design is to identify the zone ofacceptability and relevant health and safety standards for each environmentalfactor. The acceptability zone is described by the ‘envelope’ defined by theminimum and maximum acceptable limits of ship motion, noise, vibration, climate,lighting and atmospheric contaminants, etc.13.1.2 StakeholdersA list of potential stakeholders for this area is given below. This list is notexhaustive and should be seen to be a guide only. HFI Foci should refine this listbased upon the structure of their project, the attendees at the relevant HFSG orHFWG and in light of guidance and requests from industry, DEC and Customer 2representatives.• DEC• INM• IPT HFI Foci• SSG-ShipDes13.1.3 Effects of Ambient and Task-Specific Factors on PerformanceTwo general types of environmental effect may influence the operationaleffectiveness of personnel. The general ambient conditions are determined bymotion, temperature, noise, illumination and so on which generally will affectoperator comfort, level of attention and fatigue. The performance of a specifictask or the operation of particular equipment is affected by an interaction with theenvironment, e.g. the effect of lighting on display legibility, the effect of motion onthe accuracy or speed of using an input device.Ship motion and vibration may affect the ease of using control devices oroperator speed and accuracy when entering data. The climate at a workstationor within a workspace will help to determine human comfort and may increaselevels of stress and affect physical and mental performance. Level of noise mayaffect the perception of auditory alerts and warnings and voice communications.The selection and design of displays and control devices must take into accountthe effects on performance of the full range of environmental factors. Illuminationis a specific concern as it may range from daylight conditions under which theeffects of glare must be accommodated to a range of lighting conditions withinclosed compartments.The project therefore needs to take into account the total effect of all theenvironmental conditions and their interaction with human activities. Specificguidance is available from standards about the detailed effect of such factors.This chapter summarises the environmental conditions that need to beconsidered during design. INM can provide specific advice if required.13.1.4 Habitability and Internal Environment FactorsThe main factors that affect habitability are as shown in Table 13-1 and aredrawn from INM TR 96004 ‘Habitability of Warships‘ [Ref 24].Nov 2006 Page 13-4 Issue 4

Chapter 13 – Habitability and Internal EnvironmentDimensionHabitability FactorShip Space • Space provision-Location, adjacencies, size, shape,access, colour schemes.• Surface coverings-decks, bulkheads, deckheads, (ie floor,walls, ceilings) etc.• Furnishings• Sleeping accommodation• Personal space-dimensions, access, privacy• Domestic areas-Galleys, heads, showers, laundry etc.,communal areas• Passageways• Messing• Recreational/Leisure/ Personal activities• Social• Educational studyHFI Technical IssuesSocialFacilities provided:• Messing• Recreational (entertainment, leisure and study)• Educational study• Personal activities• SmokingOrganisational • Manning policy• Length of deployment/patrol• Branches/ Specialist teams/Messes• Watches/Sleep/ FatigueOperationalfactorsMentalPersonnelfactors• Class of Vessel-Minor war vessel, Surface Ship,Submarine• Action state-Peace/War.• Time-time into watch, patrol or deploymentStress-Performance• Gender-male/female.• Rank or rate-Junior rates/Senior rates/WarrantOfficers/Officers• Operational branch• Nationality/Cultural group/Religion• Attitudes-Current in service/Recent recruits/Recentleavers• Future recruits-Socio-economic group, expectations,aspirationsNov 2006 Page 13-5 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)DimensionHabitability FactorHFI Technical IssuesPhysical • Motion• Vibration• Noise• Atmosphere-Temperature, humidity, ventilation, pollutants• Lighting-visibility, readability, glare, adaptation, skin tone.• ClothingTable 13-1: Habitability Factors and Constituent Dimensions13.1.5 Ship Motion and SeakeepingPoor seakeeping performance in severe weather conditions can degrade thefighting capability of naval vessels, mainly due to the adverse effect the motion ofthe Ship has on crew performance. Therefore the adverse effects of ship motionon human performance need to be quantified, if possible, and minimised. Themain symptoms of human performance degradation are an increase in the timetaken to perform tasks, a reduction in output accuracy, and for physicallydemanding tasks a reduction in task safety.There are three categories to consider when evaluating the effects of motion onShip’s personnel:1. Motion Sickness – Motion sickness is generally associated with lowfrequency linear accelerations in the vertical axis, to which rolling andpitching contribute. Adaptation often occurs over 3-4 days unless motioncharacteristics change. Task performance may be degraded even whensymptoms of sickness are not visible and, in the worst case (when vomitingoccurs) task performance is reduced to zero. Excessive motion sicknessproblems will severely decrease the comfort of the crew, vessel habitability,and effectiveness of the Ship.2. Motion-Induced Interruptions (MII) – Ship’s motions can directly affectthe postural stability of personnel. Events known as motion-inducedinterruptions (MII) are particularly disruptive to short-term tasks that requirebalance and co-ordination. A model is available to assess the effects ofMII on the performance of non-seated tasks (refer to Institute of NavalMedicine (INM)).3. Motion-Induced Fatigue – Motion-induced fatigue is responsible for thefact that performing a physical task at sea is more fatiguing than carryingout the same task ashore. On smaller naval vessels, motion-inducedfatigue is probably due to the additional energy required to maintainpostural control. Fatigue and its effects are likely to accumulate duringextended periods at sea and factors such as work/rest schedules andsleep quality and quantity will be important.All of these effects can lead to degradation in performance of both physical andcognitive shipboard tasks. The categories of tasks whose performance are mostsensitive to ship motion need to be identified and the combined effects of themotion-induced symptoms assessed. The task descriptions for the platform willNov 2006 Page 13-6 Issue 4

Chapter 13 – Habitability and Internal Environmentassist this process. Association of these tasks with acceptable motion envelopeswill identify constraints upon manned compartment positioning on the platform,e.g. locate workstations nearer the centre of gravity of the platform. For thosetasks that are particularly sensitive to motion, the possibility of automation shouldbe considered. Workstation design and fittings can also influence motion effectson performance, e.g. orientate workstations so that the operator is either facingforward or aft, head rests may help reduce motion sickness when unnecessaryhead movements can be controlled.Equal attention should be paid to motion effects in both operational andaccommodation spaces. Therefore, motion effects in accommodation spacesshould be evaluated and appropriate measures introduced to maintain comfortlevels whilst crew members are off duty. In addition to the use of predictive toolsto assess Ship-motion effects, simulation-based design software can help thedesigner to visualise the effect of motion on human movement, task performanceand safety.HFI Technical Issues13.1.6 Vibration and NoiseVibration and ship motion will inevitably affect the performance and comfort ofpersonnel at some time. Vibration may affect the whole body or specific bodyparts. For example, whole body vibration may occur in certain platform spacesdepending upon the machinery state and other conditions. Alternatively, controlsor handles on equipment may vibrate, thus affecting operators or maintainerswhenever they manipulate the equipment. These factors may interact with theuse of displays and input devices to affect the speed and accuracy of users.Input devices and display characteristics must therefore be selected toaccommodate these problems.It is important to reduce the effects of vibration as much as possible. Exposure tovibration of different types can degrade health and well-being, help to inducemotion sickness, reduce comfort and decrease task performance speed oraccuracy. Severe effects on human performance can occur if vibration and noiselevels are allowed to exceed acceptable limits. High levels of vibration and noise,if endured over long periods, can be harmful to health, debilitating theperformance of tasks involving judgement and decision-making. Short- and longtermeffects on operator fatigue and health must also be taken into account whenevaluating the tasks to be performed and the length of watches.The likely resonance frequency of vibration, and approximate length of time thatpersonnel will be exposed to vibration needs to be ascertained. Thisunderstanding can be used to ensure that task performance is optimised. It alsoreduces the likelihood of health and safety risks. Vibration effects need to bemodelled and assessed where task performance is critical or health and safetyrisks arise.Vibration effects can be reduced by providing appropriate damping of seatcushions or through the design and finishings of hand controls etc. In associationwith motion, vibration can decrease the habitability of accommodation areas;where appropriate fittings and finishings should be used to control its effect.Noise (defined as unwanted sound) interferes directly with voice communicationsand detection of information-bearing sounds emitted by equipment. Noise canreduce operator comfort, interfere with tasks and lead to long-term or acutehealth problems. Hearing loss or impairment will result from prolonged exposureto high levels of noise. High levels of noise (above 80 dB) may be inevitable inNov 2006 Page 13-7 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI Technical Issuessome machinery spaces or when using particular items of equipment. In thesecases individual protective equipment is required and must be provided.Accommodation spaces also need to be free of noise, particularly sleepingquarters.Generally noise levels must be minimised in workspaces and at particularworkstations. Equipment and air-conditioning plant will contribute to ambientnoise levels and their effect needs to be minimised. Maximum acceptablevibration and noise levels in various type of space need to be established. Thelevels set will be influenced by occupancy, operational tasks, risks ofperformance decrements, sleep disturbance or other factors affecting health andsafety, communication or operational effectiveness. The use of sound-proofing,active noise suppression and remote location of plant all need to be consideredin the design of workspaces.13.1.7 Atmosphere Control and MonitoringThe HFI issue here is the establishment of acceptable exposure limits ofatmospheric pollution in all spaces. The identification of options in terms ofdispersion of polluted air and alternative air supplies should also be considered inconjunction with the Firefighting and Damage Control studies.13.1.8 RadiationBoth RADHAZ and ionising radiation aspects are comprehensively covered inMOD documentation such as Section 11 of Def Stan 21-8 ‘Safety Requirementsfor the Design of Electrotechnical and Naval Weapon Equipment’ [Ref 25], andJSP 392 ‘Instructions for Radiological Protection’ [Ref 26].13.1.9 Heating, Ventilation and Air-ConditioningThe main climatic factors are temperature, temperature variation, fresh air flow,air velocity and humidity. Compartmental environmental control and monitoringsystems need to maintain the temperature, humidity and air flow within specificlimits to maintain operator comfort and the habitability within the vessel.Adverse environmental conditions will reduce performance, increase fatigue andpose health hazards. Temperature, its variation, fresh air flow, air velocity andhumidity combine to affect task performance and comfort. The acceptable limitsof each of these variables can be used to identify the ‘comfort zone’ within whichpeople do not feel too damp, too hot, too dry or too cold. Comfort levels will alsobe affected by the need to wear individual protective clothing and equipment.Environmental monitoring and regulation must therefore be sensitive to bothambient and local requirements to maximise comfort levels. Environmentalcontrols may need to be available for the workspace and at workstations.Acceptable levels of heating, ventilation and air-conditioning should be set on atask-related basis for manned compartments. The application of these levels willinfluence the routing and power requirements of these services. It may alsoinfluence the need to design for manned compartment ventilation and airconditioningsupplies separately from those for unmanned and/or potentiallyhazardous compartments.Nov 2006 Page 13-8 Issue 4

Chapter 13 – Habitability and Internal Environment13.1.10 Lighting and GlareManned workspaces require good lighting conditions at all times. Lighting in theworking and non-working environment must meet at least four generalrequirements:• Sufficient light must be provided to enable personnel to see the objects ordisplays used for work or recreational purposes.• Sufficient light must enable people to see hazards or potential hazards.• Visual comfort must be maintained by controlling the characteristics of thelight emitted or reflected.HFI Technical Issues• Light must be of the required intensity and frequency to prevent anyadverse impact on night vision when required.Lighting in operational spaces must be optimised to ensure that mission criticaltasks can be conducted. However, this can conflict with the need to enablepersonnel to maintain dark adaptation whenever they return below for briefperiods. White light is generally preferred but this may need to be variable inbrightness and direction. Lighting may also vary in colour in certain spaces (forexample red lighting may be used) and the effect of this on the legibility ofdisplays and other material, e.g. warning signs, needs to be considered.Workspaces within which equipment is fitted include areas on the upper deck andthe bridge where the effects of natural lighting have to be taken into account, e.g.the effects of sunlight levels and glare on the use of visual displays. The effect ofambient lighting conditions and the special needs at each workstation musttherefore be accommodated in the design of workspaces and workstations.Operational and special task-oriented lighting will be specified by the equipmentdesigners using ergonomic standards and specific design criteria. These willgenerally be equipment and compartment specific, covering both operational andmaintenance aspects. Ambient and recreational lighting requirements are wellcovered in ergonomic standards in terms of intensity, separation of light sourcesand their positioning for compartments and passageways. The ambient lightingspecifications of compartments must match and integrate with the equipmentspecific requirements. Therefore, liaison with the equipment projects is essentialto ensure that their requirements are understood and designed for. Lighting inareas with visual display units is particularly critical in order to avoid reflectiveglare and other effects.In platform design, safety issues must be considered. Safety lightingrequirements include issues such as Upper Deck lighting, illuminating hatches,ladders, low headroom accesses and vessel rails. Lighting on decks and on thebridge may need to be minimised to counter the threat of electro-optical detectionand this will have safety implications for personnel working or moving in theseareas. Emergency lighting should mimic the ambient and safety lightingrequirements, particularly in the areas of escape routes and most frequentlyutilised routes. Potential safety risks are associated with the use of ladders andhatchways, while hazards associated with objects like pipes and equipmentsabound. The positioning of ambient lighting sources should take account of theresults from the traffic flow, main route, escape route and storing route analysesundertaken during the platform design, to reduce the probability of injury.Nov 2006 Page 13-9 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)13.1.11 Waste DisposalHFI Technical IssuesThe disposal of waste overboard must be in accordance with InternationalMaritime Organisation (IMO) advice. MARPOL 1 requirements associated withenvironmental protection have increased crew workload in handling waste andthis has associated health and safety implications. Waste disposal on board isunpleasant, provides potential hygiene hazards for personnel and constitutes atoxic and fire risk to the vessel.13.1.12 HFI Design Co-ordination and OptimisationThe Human Factors Integration (HFI) Focus is responsible for ensuring that thevarious aspects of Habitability and Environmental Design are co-ordinated acrossthe project during platform development or subsequent update.Each of the dimensions affecting habitability can be associated with specificmeasures depending on the characteristics of the platform or the nature of theproposed work or recreational activity.In the case of some factors, such as vibration and acceleration, the general HFIaim will be to minimise the influence of the factors. There is no problem if thefactor is zero or can be reduced to zero, but there will be an upper limit ofacceptability and at a higher level, a limit of tolerability.In the case of other factors, such as noise and temperature, the HFI aim will be toensure the parameter lies within a range of values. For such parameters, therewill be upper and lower limits of tolerability and within these, upper and lowerlimits of acceptability. Between the tolerable and acceptable ranges, there maybe effects that cause decrements in human performance and must therefore betaken into account. There may also be a preferred zone within which a majorityof users prefer to work or rest. The actual limits for these ranges may be taskand activity dependent, e.g. active workers will prefer a lower ambienttemperature to sedentary workers. In the case of noise, whilst a very low level ofnoise may not cause harm, it may reduce performance by allowing crew tobecome less vigilant or aware.Certain parameters, such as ambient temperature and relative humidity interactwith each other and must therefore be considered together. Figure 13-2illustrates how these parameters combine in a non-linear way to produce a zoneof tolerability within which a zone of preferred ambient conditions lies.There are other parameters, such as privacy and personal space, that can onlybe measured using subjective ratings. In these cases, relevant parameters areavailable from related standards or Service conditions based on results ofattitude surveys or demographic trends.1 MARPOL 73/78 - the International Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollutionfrom Ships, 1973 as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto.Nov 2006 Page 13-10 Issue 4

Chapter 13 – Habitability and Internal Environment100%RelativeHumidityOptimumComfort ZoneTolerable Zone -Work ImpairedTolerable Zone -Work Not ImpairedHFI Technical Issues0%0 °C Temperature60 °CFigure 13-2: Thermal Comfort and Performance ZonesFor an operational Ship the project must respect all health and safety parameterlimits absolutely, take into account all relevant human performance influencingfactors and seek to achieve most dimensions with the ‘acceptable zone’ most ofthe time if the Ship is to have a habitable environment. In a balanced design,parameters that are rated subjectively (see above) will be optimised within theprevailing constraints of practicality, cost and overall product reliability.Nov 2006 Page 13-11 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)13.2 HFI ProcessThe sequence of HFI activities described in the remainder of this chapter isillustrated in Figure 13-3.HFI ProcessSpecify HullForm MotionAssess ShipMotion & HumanPerformanceEnvelopesDefineWaste DisposalRequirementsAssess Off-dutyEnvironmentOutline TargetAudienceDescriptionIdentify SocialEnvironmentRequirementsSpecifyWorkspaceEnvironmentDefineNoise & VibrationRequirementsAssessWorkspaceEnvironmentAssessWorkstationEnvironmentDefineLightingRequirementsSpecifyEnvironmentalPolicyIdentify PhysicalEnvironmentRequirementsDefineHeating,Ventilation & AirConditioningRequirementsDefineAtmosphericControl &MonitoringRequirementsDefineRadiation ControlRequirementsAssess Ship Space FactorsAssess Social FactorsAssess OrganisationalFactorsAssess Operational FactorsAssess Mental FactorsAssess Personnel FactorsDEMONSTRATION ASSESSMENT CONCEPTAssess Physical FactorsDeriveAssessmentCriteriaMonitorAssessmentTrialsMANUFACTUREMonitorIn-Service UserFeedbackIdentifyimprovementopportunitiesIN-SERVICENot identifiedDISPOSALFigure 13-3: HFI Process for Habitability and Internal EnvironmentNov 2006 Page 13-12 Issue 4

Chapter 13 – Habitability and Internal EnvironmentThe process of addressing HF issues for Personnel Movement and MaterialHandling is summarised in Figure 13-3.The process of defining the environmental conditions involves liaison betweenthe HFI Focus and various stakeholders in conducting the HFI activities. The HFIactivities are presented in Table 13-2. The ticks represent the procurementPhases at which the activities are likely to be conducted.C A D M I D HFI ActivitySpecify Hull Form MotionSpecify Environmental PolicyAssess Ship Motion and Human Performance EnvelopesIdentify Social Environmental RequirementsSpecify Workspace EnvironmentDefine Waste DisposalIdentify Physical Environmental RequirementsDefine Vibration and NoiseDefine Atmospheric Control and MonitoringDefine Radiation LevelsDefine Heating, Ventilation and Air-ConditioningDefine Lighting and GlareHFI ProcessAssess Ship Space FactorsAssess Social FactorsAssess Organisational FactorsAssess Operational FactorsAssess Mental FactorsAssess Personnel FactorsAssess Physical FactorsAssess Workspace EnvironmentAssess Workstation EnvironmentAssess Off-Duty EnvironmentDerive Assessment CriteriaMonitor feedback from acceptance trialsMonitor In-Service user feedbackIdentify opportunities for environmental improvementsTable 13-2: HFI Activities for Habitability and Environment DesignNov 2006 Page 13-13 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)13.2.1 HFI Focus ResponsibilitiesThe HFI Focus is responsible for the following:• Habitability Design• Liaison with stakeholders about ship motion studies and the internalenvironment.• Liaison with System Project Managers about equipment fit andenvironmental requirements on the platform.• Definition of habitability factors (décor, domestic facilities, etc.) and theirrelevance to the platform design.• Definition of the acceptable ambient levels of environmental factorsthroughout the platform.• Specification of levels of environmental factors in each workspace anddissemination to Project Managers.HFI Process• Identification of health hazard and safety implications of ship motion andthe internal environment, including radiation hazards.• Selection of standards and environmental limits for platform acceptance.• Environment Design• Liaison with DEC, DME and SSG-Ship / SSG-SM to identify environmentalrequirements.• Liaison with the IPT Leader or System Project Managers to ensure that theenvironmental requirements and conditions for personnel and equipmentare taken into account for the Whole Ship.• Liaison with INM to obtain specialist advice on the required levels ofenvironmental conditions and to conduct specific modelling of theenvironment in workspaces.• Liaison with TES-SA-MA to assess the effect of maintenance operations onthe environment and to identify required environmental conditions forequipment.• Identification of the effect of environmental conditions on user andmaintainer performance, comfort, fatigue and health and safety.• Identification of required environmental thresholds and controls forworkstations and workspaces.• Resolution of trade-offs relating to environmental conditions and thelocation of personnel and equipment.Nov 2006 Page 13-14 Issue 4

Chapter 13 – Habitability and Internal Environment13.2.2 Relevant StandardsThe standards used are listed in Table 13-3 below. Further details are includedin Annex 2, together with other related standards.StandardBR 1326Def Stan 00-25 Part 15Def Stan 00-25 Part 17Def Stan 00-25 Part 19Def Stan 00-25 Part 20Def Stan 02-102 Part 1Def Stan 02-587 Part 1Def Stan 02-587 Part 2Def Stan 02-720Def Stan 02-721 Part 1Def Stan 02-721 Part 2Def Stan 02-726Def Stan 07-254 Part 2Def Stan 08-159 Part 2Def Stan 09-56TitleAir Purification in SubmarinesHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 15: Principles and ProcessHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 17: Personnel Domain – Technical Guidanceand DataHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 19: Human Engineering Domain – TechnicalGuidance and DataHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 20: Health Hazard Assessment Domain –Technical Guidance and DataRequirements for Air-Conditioning and Ventilation.Part 1: HM Surface Ships and Royal Fleet AuxiliariesRequirements for Lighting Systems.Part 1: Surface ShipsRequirements for Lighting Systems.Part 2: SubmarinesWaste Disposal PolicyGarbage Disposal in Surface Ships.Part 1: General RequirementsGarbage Disposal in Surface Ships.Part 2: Requirements for EquipmentRequirements for Cleanliness of Ships During BuildDesign Guide on the Reduction of Acoustic Noise inSurface Ships.Part 2: Reduction of Internal Airborne NoiseRequirements for Air-Conditioning and Ventilation.Part 2: HM SubmarinesSubmarine Noise Reduction (CONFIDENTIAL)HFI ProcessNov 2006 Page 13-15 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)StandardDef Stan 21-8, Sect 11JSP 392TitleSafety Requirements for the Design ofElectrotechnical and Naval Weapon EquipmentInstructions for Radiological ProtectionTable 13-3: Relevant StandardsANEP 24ANEP 25StandardTitleGuidelines for Shipboard Habitability Requirements forCombat and Surface ShipsGuidelines for Environmental Factors in NATOSurface ShipsHFI ProcessASHRAE 55Thermal Environmental Conditions for HumanOccupancyBS EN ISO 9241 Part 6 Ergonomic Requirements for Office Work with VisualDisplay Terminals: Environmental RequirementsBS ISO 9921-1Ergonomic assessment of speech communicationPart 1: Speech interference levels and communicationdistances for persons with normal hearing in directcommunication distances for persons with normalhearing capacity in direct communication (SIL method)BS EN ISO 11399Def Stan 07-238STANAG 4154STANAG 4293Ergonomics of the thermal environment – Principlesand application of relevant international standardsGuide to Design of Training and RecreationalTelevision SystemsCommon Procedures for Sea keeping in the ShipDesign ProcessGuidelines for the Acoustical Environment in NATOSurface ShipsTable 13-4: Other Related StandardsNov 2006 Page 13-16 Issue 4

Chapter 13 – Habitability and Internal Environment13.3 HFI Activities13.3.1 Concept Phase Activities13.3.1.1 Specify Hull Form MotionPurposeInputsMethodsStepsTo document the proposed platform’s motion characteristics andto assess these for human acceptability, with particular regard tothe proposed tasks to be undertaken on board, and with theparticular aim of rejecting non-viable concepts.Hull design options and models of motion characteristics.Not Identified.Modelling should be undertaken wherever a risk is identified thatShip motions could adversely affect the operational performanceand safety of personnel. Some traditional hull forms, andincreasing speed demands on novel forms, may induce motionsin this category.• Develop hull form(s) and model to derive motioncharacteristics.• Define acceptable levels of performance and safety.• Establish how human performance and safety is affected byShip motion. If necessary, liaise with INM concerningspecialist modelling and empirical studies. Generateperformance vs. motion envelopes/curves.• Correlate the performance data with high-level taskdescriptions.• For each hull form option, specify the motion constraints foracceptable task performance.OutputsThe output of this activity includes:• Human performance characteristics for the motion of theproposed platform.• The definitions of acceptable levels of performance andsafety.• A priority list of tasks, ordered by sensitivity to motion foracceptable performance.• Tabulated motion criteria (e.g. acceptable accelerationlevels) for selected locations in the platforms hull.This report is a record of the HFI motion constraints for inclusionin the hull form selection trade-off studies, and will contribute todefining compartment locations on the platform.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-17 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)13.3.1.2 Specify Environmental PolicyPurposeInputsTo outline environmental requirements for the platform and toestablish the policy for managing the relationship between theplatform project and equipment projects to ensure that theenvironmental requirement is achieved.Equipment list and environmental requirements and effects.Methods • Environmental DesignSteps • Identify options for equipment fits.• Identify and collate equipment characteristics that influencethe levels of the internal environmental factors.• Identify the need for predictive modelling of eachenvironmental factor. Generic mathematical models oralgorithms will be needed to establish the predicted levels ofthe environmental factors (heat, noise, vibration, ship motion,atmospheric pollution and radiation). Obtain specialistadvice from INM and other stakeholders.• Identify applicable ergonomic standards and acceptablelevels for each factor. Establish a set of HFI designprinciples for specifying compartment location, compartmentlayout, air circulation requirements, noise absorption tiling,wild heat tolerance levels, light reflection levels and lightsource positioning.• Identify the requirements to be imposed upon GeneralArrangement (Chap 8) and compartment design byapplication of the HFI design principles.• Establish liaison with System Project Managers or otherstakeholders for monitoring and controlling theimplementation of the HFI design principles.• Specify the threshold levels for each environmental factor.OutputsThe contents of the Environmental Policy includes the following:HFI Activities• The management procedures for establishing and auditingthe platform and equipment environmental requirements.• The predicted levels for each environmental factor frommodelling.• The ergonomic standards and specification of the acceptablelevels to be applied.• Areas of application in the General Arrangement.Nov 2006 Page 13-18 Issue 4

Chapter 13 – Habitability and Internal Environment13.3.2 Assessment Phase Activities13.3.2.1 Assess Ship Motion and Human Performance EnvelopesPurposeTo refine the understanding of the ship motion characteristicsand to assess these for human acceptability, and to influence theGeneral Arrangement by establishing the location within the hullof workspaces at which critical, motion-sensitive tasks are totake place.Inputs • The specification of hull form motion.• Outline drawings of General Arrangement.Methods • Mission Critical Task Identification• Task Analysis• Environmental Design• Health and Safety AnalysisStepsShip Motion and Human Performance Envelopes are developedin the following way:• Identify task descriptions for the platform. Group these byworkspace for operational, accommodation andmiscellaneous spaces (Chap 8 through Chap 11). Identifytasks critical to successful mission outcomes and tasksassociated with health and safety risks (Chap 17).• Assess the motion effects on these tasks in each workspace.Establish acceptable levels using appropriate models andHFI methods.• Specify the ship motion and human performance envelopesfor the various tasks in each workspace. Relate these to therefined motion envelopes of locations within the hull.Contribute to General Arrangement design and trade-offs.OutputsThe Ship Motion and Human Performance Envelopes consist ofthe following:• The hull design motion values and characteristics (force andacceleration).• A matrix of task category and acceptable hull motion, basedupon task analysis.• Recommended workspace and compartment locations in thevessel.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-19 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)13.3.2.2 Identify Social Environment RequirementsPurposeTo identify environmental conditions, constraints and standardsrelevant to ship spaces.Inputs • Environmental standardsMethods • Human Factors Trade-Off AnalysisSteps • The environmental factors that apply to equipmentworkspaces are identified.• Lighting, heating and ventilation, noise and vibration and theeffect of ship motion are considered.• Ergonomic and other standards are identified.• Human Factors Trade-offs are performed against differentenvironmental factors to determine the effect on tasks,habitability, equipment operability and health and safety.OutputsDescription of the environmental factors and constraints affectingworkspace conditions.The results of this activity are passed to the relevant ProjectManager to assist in the specification of the overall platformenvironment.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-20 Issue 4

Chapter 13 – Habitability and Internal Environment13.3.2.3 Outline Environmental Conditions and ControlsPurposeInputsTo identify environmental thresholds, operating limits andenvironmental controls in workspaces.User roles and tasks performedMethods • Environmental DesignSteps • Identify user tasks performed in each workspace and otherrelevant factors, e.g. shift length, clothing worn etc.• Identify each environmental factor (lighting, noise, vibration,ship motion, temperature, humidity, ventilation, radiationlevels) and categorise whether these are task-specific and/orambient.• With INM model the effect of each environmental factor onthe comfort, performance, fatigue and health of personnel inthe workspace taking account of time on watch and variationin climate and sea state.• Identify appropriate ergonomic and other standards for theenvironment.• Liaison with Dstl Human Sciences Team for the review ofknowledge from the Research Building Block (RBB) tosupport this activity.• Identify required threshold levels for each environmentalfactor in the equipment workspaces taking account ofequipment needs and the effects of operating equipment.• Identify other methods of reducing performance and healthrisks, e.g. relocate compartment, alter workspace layout,install environmental controls etc.OutputsThe outline descriptions of environmental conditions and controlsfor each workspace includes the following:• Acceptable variation in ship motion.• Acceptable ambient noise levels.• Acceptable vibration and shock levels.• Acceptable temperature and humidity levels.• Acceptable levels of ventilation & air-conditioning throughput.• Acceptable levels of fixed ambient lighting and requiredvariable lighting controls.• Illumination levels for task-specific lighting.• Atmospheric monitoring controls.• Safe operating envelopes around radiation sources, lasersand weapons.The results of this activity are passed to the relevant ProjectManager to assist in the specification of overall platformenvironment.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-21 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)13.3.2.4 Define Waste DisposalPurposeTo define the waste disposal specifications and acceptancecriteria.Inputs • The environmental policy for the platform.• Equipment fit and characteristics in each compartment.MethodsNot Identified.Steps • Liaise with stakeholders to revise HFI design principlesapplicable to waste disposal.• Liaise with System Project Managers to define environmentalrequirements for, and effect of, the equipment fit.• Establish acceptable waste disposal practices and emissionscommensurate with compartment usage, traffic flow safety(Chap 12 and Chap 17) and compartment adjacency(Chap 8).• Specify mandatory standards and minimum design levels.• Define HFI assessment and acceptance criteria.OutputsThe specification will include:• Specification of the HFI design principles, their order ofpriority and area of application in the platform designprocess.• Specification of acceptable waste disposal practices andemissions correlated with:o Compartment usage/functionality.o Traffic flow routes.o Compartment adjacency/location.o Specification of mandatory standards and designguidelines.o Specification of the acceptance criteria.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-22 Issue 4

Chapter 13 – Habitability and Internal Environment13.3.2.5 Identify Physical Environment RequirementsPurposeTo specify environmental conditions and controls in eachworkspace and at each workstation.Inputs • Outline environmental conditions and controls.Methods • Environmental DesignStepsOutputsThe procedure applied for outlining environmental conditions andcontrols is applied to the workspaces and workstation layouts forthe equipment.The environmental specifications for each workspace and forwork stations comprises the following:• Vibration and motion• Definition of vibration, shock and ship motion accelerations/forces• Shock absorption and spatial tolerances for seating andequipment design• Noise• Ambient noise levels for task achievement• Equipment noise levels• Atmospheric monitoring and control• Specification of pollution levels (e.g. gas fumes, fuel leaks)• Smoke clearance requirements• Radiation (see Chap 13):o Ionising radiation (specification of levels of x rays and γ(gamma) rays)o RADHAZ (hazard levels of radar and radio equipmentand communications aerials)• Heating and ventilation• Ambient requirements (eg temperature levels & airflow rates)• Workstation specifications• Unmanned compartment requirements• Maintenance support requirements• Humidity requirements• Lighting• Day & night ambient lighting requirements (level & quantity)• Workstation illumination requirements• Maintenance requirementsThe results of this activity are passed to the relevant SystemProject Manager to assist in the specification and assessment ofoverall platform environment.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-23 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)13.3.2.6 Define Vibration and NoisePurposeTo define the noise and vibration specifications and acceptancecriteria.Inputs • The environmental policy for the platform.• Equipment fit and characteristics in each compartment.MethodsNot Identified.Steps • Liaise with stakeholders to revise HFI design principlesapplicable to noise and vibration.• Liaise with System Project Managers to define environmentalrequirements for, and effect of, the equipment fit.• Establish acceptable ambient levels of noise and vibrationcommensurate with compartment usage, traffic flow safety(Chap 12 and Chap 17) and compartment adjacency (Chap 8).• Specify mandatory standards and minimum design levels.• Define HFI assessment and acceptance criteria.OutputsThe specification will include:• Specification of the HFI design principles, their order of priorityand area of application in the platform design process.• Specification of ambient threshold levels of noise and vibrationcorrelated with:o Compartment usage/functionality.o Traffic flow routes.o Compartment adjacency/location.o Specification of mandatory standards and designguidelines.o Specification of the acceptance criteria.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-24 Issue 4

Chapter 13 – Habitability and Internal Environment13.3.2.7 Define Atmospheric Control & MonitoringPurposeTo define the atmospheric control and monitoring specificationsand acceptance criteria.Inputs • The environmental policy for the platform.• Equipment fit and characteristics in each compartment.MethodsNot Identified.Steps • Liaise with stakeholders to revise HFI design principlesapplicable to atmospheric control and monitoring.• Liaise with System Project Managers to define environmentalrequirements for, and effect of, the equipment fit.• Establish acceptable ambient levels of atmospheric controlcommensurate with compartment usage, traffic flow safety(Chap 12 and Chap 17) and compartment adjacency(Chap 8).• Specify mandatory standards and minimum design levels.• Define HFI assessment and acceptance criteria.OutputsThe specification will include the following:• Specification of the HFI design principles, their order ofpriority and area of application in the platform designprocess.• Specification of ambient threshold levels of atmosphericfactors correlated with:o Compartment usage/functionality.o Traffic flow routes.o Compartment adjacency/location.o Specification of mandatory standards and designguidelines.o Specification of the acceptance criteria.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-25 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)13.3.2.8 Define Radiation LevelsPurposeTo define the radiation protection specifications and acceptancecriteria.Inputs • The environmental policy for the platform.• Equipment fit and characteristics in each compartment.MethodsNot Identified.Steps • Liaise with stakeholders to revise HFI design principlesapplicable to radiation protection and control.• Liaise with System Project Managers to define environmentalrequirements for, and effect of, the equipment fit.• Establish acceptable ambient levels of radiationcommensurate with compartment usage, traffic flow safety(Chap 12 and Chap 17) and compartment adjacency(Chap 8).• Specify mandatory standards and minimum design levels.• Define HFI assessment and acceptance criteria.OutputsThe specification will include the following:• Specification of the HFI design principles, their order ofpriority and area of application in the platform designprocess.• Specification of ambient threshold levels of radiationcorrelated with:o Compartment usage/functionality.o Traffic flow routes.o Compartment adjacency/location.o Specification of mandatory standards and designguidelines.o Specification of the acceptance criteria.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-26 Issue 4

Chapter 13 – Habitability and Internal Environment13.3.2.9 Define Heating, Ventilation and Air-ConditioningPurposeTo define the heating, ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC)specifications and acceptance criteria.Inputs • The environmental policy for the platform.• Equipment fit and characteristics in each compartment.MethodsNot Identified.Steps • Liaise with stakeholders to revise HFI design principlesapplicable to heating, ventilation and air-conditioning.• Liaise with System Project Managers to define environmentalrequirements for, and effect of, the equipment fit.• Establish acceptable ambient levels of temperature andairflow commensurate with compartment usage.• Specify mandatory standards and minimum design levels.• Define HFI assessment and acceptance criteria.OutputsThe specification will include the following:• Specification of the HFI design principles, their order ofpriority and area of application in the platform designprocess.• Specification of ambient threshold levels of temperature andventilation and control of air-conditioning correlated with:o Compartment usage/functionality.o Specification of mandatory standards and designguidelines.o Specification of the acceptance criteria.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-27 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)13.3.2.10 Define Lighting and GlarePurposeTo define the lighting specifications and acceptance criteria.Inputs • The environmental policy for the platform.• Equipment fit and characteristics in each compartment.MethodsNot Identified.Steps • Liaise with stakeholders to revise HFI design principlesapplicable to lighting.• Liaise with System Project Managers to define environmentalrequirements for, and effect of, the equipment fit.• Establish acceptable ambient levels of lighting and glarecommensurate with compartment usage, traffic flow safety(Chap 12 and Chap 17) and compartment adjacency(Chap 8). Identify safety lighting location (Chap 17) andintensity level specifications.• Specify mandatory standards and minimum design levels.• Define HFI assessment and acceptance criteria.OutputsThe specification will include the following:• Specification of the HFI design principles, their order ofpriority and area of application in the platform designprocess.• Specification of ambient threshold levels and control oflighting correlated with:o Compartment usage/functionality.o Traffic flow routes.o Compartment adjacency/location.o Specification of mandatory standards and designguidelines.o Specification of the acceptance criteria.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-28 Issue 4

Chapter 13 – Habitability and Internal Environment13.3.3 Demonstration Phase Activities13.3.3.1 Assess Ship Space FactorsPurposeTo assess the habitability of the ship spaces.Inputs • Specifications of the internal environment.• General Arrangement and compartment and space layoutsand fittings.• Task descriptions including social activities.MethodsNot Identified.Steps • Fleet-NLM, SSG-Ship / SSG-SM and INM should beapproached for advice on the assessment of habitabilityaspects of Ship spaces.• Identify aspects of the spatial layouts likely to have asignificant impact on habitability, e.g. amount of personalspace for working and recreation, shape and configuration ofcompartments and passageways, adjacency of differenttypes of compartments and spaces, layout of domesticfacilities.• Correlate spatial factors with the expected types of humanactivity, e.g. number of crew eating at the same time, routinetraffic patterns during operational and domestic activities.• Assess the likely impact of the spatial layout on crewmembers for each significant activity taking into accountsubject matter opinion and the results of attitude surveys orexpectations of future recruits.OutputsAssessments of the effects of Ship spatial layout on crewperceptions of habitability.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-29 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)13.3.3.2 Assess Social FactorsPurposeTo assess the habitability of the recreational and social aspectsof the platform.Inputs • Specifications of the internal environment.• General Arrangement and compartment and space layouts.• Task descriptions including social activities.• Complement size and composition.MethodsNot Identified.Steps • Fleet-NLM and INM should be approached for advice on theassessment of social aspects.• Identify significant aspects of social life that may affect crewmotivation or attitude using subject matter expert opinion andthe results of attitude surveys.• Correlate social factors with the design of the platform, e.g.facilities and space available for recreational activities, levelof privacy.• Assess the likely impact of the design on social aspects oflife on board.OutputsAssessments of the effects of habitability factors on socialfactors.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-30 Issue 4

Chapter 13 – Habitability and Internal Environment13.3.3.3 Assess Organisational FactorsPurposeTo assess the habitability, given the organisation of the crewand working practices.Inputs • Specifications of the internal environment.• General Arrangement and compartment and space layouts.• Task descriptions including social activities.• Complement size and composition.• Team organisation and working practices.MethodsNot Identified.Steps • Fleet-NLM should be approached for advice on theassessment of organisational aspects.• Identify significant aspects of the crew organisation,including the pattern of watches that may affect crewmotivation or attitude using subject matter expert opinion andthe results of attitude surveys.• Correlate organisational factors with the design of theplatform, e.g. layout of team working spaces, disruption ofsleep by changes in watches.• Assess the likely impact of the design on organisationalaspects of life on board.OutputsAssessments of the effects of habitability factors onorganisational factors.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-31 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)13.3.3.4 Assess Operational FactorsPurposeTo assess the effect of operational variables on habitability.Inputs • Mission profiles and operational scenarios.• Standard operating procedures for similar classes of vessel.MethodsStepsOutputsNot Identified.Subject matter expert opinion is required to identify howoperational requirements are likely to interact with the overallvessel characteristics and to affect crew perceptions ofhabitability, e.g. impact of conducting different operations duringeach mission profile.Assessments of the effects of operational factors on crewperceptions of habitability.13.3.3.5 Assess Mental FactorsPurposeTo assess the effect of habitability factors on crew stress andperformance.Inputs • Specifications of the internal environment.• Task descriptions.• Output of any modelling activities or simulation-baseddesign.MethodsNot Identified.HFI ActivitiesSteps • INM should be approached for advice on the measurementof stress or performance as a function of habitability factors.Outputs• Identify mission-critical tasks, ongoing domestic activitiesand/or events with a significant health or safety risk.• Identify habitability factors that may lead to reducedperformance, increase health and safety risks or decreaselong-term crew comfort.• Identify and apply measurements to determine effects onstress or performance.Assessments of the effects of habitability factors on crewperformance and stress.Nov 2006 Page 13-32 Issue 4

Chapter 13 – Habitability and Internal Environment13.3.3.6 Assess Personnel FactorsPurposeTo assess habitability given the characteristics of the targetaudience.Inputs • Specifications of the internal environment.• General Arrangement and compartment and space layoutsand fittings.• Complement structure.• Task descriptions including social activities.• Project Specific Target Audience Description.• Results of attitude surveys of serving personnel, leavers andamongst the population from which future recruits are drawn.MethodsNot Identified.Steps • Fleet-NLM or INM should be approached for advice on theinteraction of different types of target audiencecharacteristics with other habitability factors.• The range in the anthropometric characteristics of the targetaudience is determined and correlated with the physicaldimensions of Ship layout and fittings to identify anymismatch.• The activity cycles of each rank and rate, categorised byBranch, are identified and correlated with the working anddomestic facilities provided, spatial layout and environmentalfactors to identify potential sources of dissatisfaction.• Career and skill development requirements of differentmembers of the crew are correlated with the provision ofeducational and study facilities and space to identify problemareas.• Specific requirements of different genders or religions ofcrew member are correlated with the facilities and spaceactually provided to identify any mismatch.OutputsAssessments of the interaction of personnel characteristics withhabitability factors.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-33 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)13.3.3.7 Assess Physical FactorsPurposeTo assess the habitability of the internal environment and tocheck that standards and specifications have been observed.Inputs • Noise and vibration thresholds.• Heating, ventilation and air-conditioning thresholds andrequirements.• Lighting thresholds and requirements.• Atmospheric monitoring and control requirements.• RADHAZ thresholds.• Waste disposal requirements.MethodsStepsNot Identified.A range of specialised measurement techniques is available forassessing the psychological and physiological effects of thephysical factors in the Ship’s environment. INM should beapproached, if necessary, to advise on the types ofmeasurements that can be applied.HFI Activities• Noise & Vibration - Measure level of noise and vibration atcrew positions and in compartments. Noise and vibrationlevels from each source should be measured locally and atother locations on the platform. Setting to work engines,motors, pumps, etc. will give a good opportunity for noisemeasurement and may offer a rare chance to measure thecontribution of individual noise sources. During sea trialsetc., with many major noise sources running simultaneously,the overall effect can be measured, together with vibrationlevels, although the major contributor will not necessarily beidentifiable.• Atmospheric Control & Monitoring - There will notgenerally be an opportunity for full functional checks ofatmospheric control and monitoring systems. The operabilityassessment should form part of the setting to workprocedure.• Radiation – The MoD Director Nuclear Propulsion (DNP)and the responsible Nuclear Steam Raising Plant (NSRP)contractor will check ionising radiation levels and protectivemeasures in accordance with the Submarine SafetySpecifications. The HFI Focus should be aware of anydeficiencies. In the case of non-ionising radiation (i.e. Radarand Radio), RADHAZ boundaries should be defined andcompared with intensity specifications.• Heating, Ventilation and Air-Conditioning (HVAC) - Theopportunity for full functional checks of heating, ventilationand air-conditioning will always be limited by ambientconditions. The full range of possible climate, from arctic toNov 2006 Page 13-34 Issue 4

Chapter 13 – Habitability and Internal Environmenttropical, may only be experienced after some time in service.During manufacture or refit, flow rates can be checkedagainst specification. Manned positions should be checkedfor hot and cold spots.• Lighting - This may include assessments of direct sunlight.This procedure may be performed when setting the lightingor the equipment to work, as required. However, it should benoted that the eventual light levels would only be achievedfollowing ‘final clean and paint’. Allowances will need to bemade prior to this activity for each compartment.o Assess operability of equipment given the range of lightlevels and screen glare conditions likely to apply.o Adjust position or style of luminaires to ensure adequateand non-intrusive light levels.o Assess adequacy of lighting positions in critical safetyareas such as Upper Deck, ladders, and hatches.• Waste Disposal - Waste disposal facilities are checked foroperability. This should include an assessment of theadequacy of volume of space available for storage of wasteprior to treatment, and hygiene arrangements.OutputsThe assessments of physical factors to determine likely effect onhabitability and to check the following:• Noise and vibration assessments defining conformance withspecifications and standards.• Assessments of heating, ventilation and air-conditioningagainst specifications and standards.• Assessments of ambient and specific lighting and levels ofglare against specifications and standards.• Assessments of atmospheric monitoring and control systemsfor operability against standards.• Assessments of radiation levels, risks and protectivemeasures.• Assessment of the adequacy, operability, safety and hygieneof waste disposal facilities.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-35 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)13.3.3.8 Assess Workspace EnvironmentPurposeTo assess the effect of environmental conditions in theworkspaces.Inputs • Environmental specifications.• Actual environment.MethodsStepsNot Identified.The following assessments are conducted within the equipmentworkspaces:• Variability and range of each ambient environmental factor(lighting, noise, vibration, shock, ship motion forces/accelerations, temperature and humidity, air quality and flow,radiation level) at different prime states and at differentequipment operating levels.• Effectiveness of environmental monitoring, self-regulationand control of ambient conditions.• Effect of ambient conditions on the performance, comfort,fatigue and health of personnel conducting operational andmaintenance tasks in the workspace.OutputsAssessments of the actual range of ambient environmentalfactors, the effectiveness of environmental controls and theeffect on personnel in each workspace.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-36 Issue 4

Chapter 13 – Habitability and Internal Environment13.3.3.9 Assess Workstation EnvironmentPurposeTo assess the effect of environmental conditions at workstations.Inputs • Environmental specifications.• Actual environmentMethodsStepsNot Identified.The following assessments are conducted at each of theworkstations:• Variability and range of each ambient environmental factor(lighting, noise, vibration, shock, ship motion forces/accelerations, temperature and humidity, air quality and flow,radiation level) at each workstation.• Effectiveness of environmental monitoring, self-regulationand control of ambient conditions at each workstation.• Effect of ambient and task-specific environmental factors onoperator task performance at each workstation.• Effectiveness of local workstation environmental controls,e.g. lighting.• Effect of ambient and task-specific conditions on theperformance, comfort, fatigue and health of personnelconducting operational tasks at each workstation.OutputsAssessments of the actual range of ambient and task-specificenvironmental factors, the effectiveness of environmentalcontrols and the effect on personnel at each workstation.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-37 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)13.3.3.10 Assess Off-Duty EnvironmentPurposeTo assess the effect of environmental conditions in Off-DutyAreas.Inputs • Environmental specifications• Actual environmentMethodsStepsNot Identified.The following assessments are conducted at each of the Off-Duty Areas:• Variability and range of each ambient environmental factor(lighting, noise, vibration, shock, ship motion forces/accelerations, temperature and humidity, air quality and flow,radiation level) in each area.• Effectiveness of environmental monitoring, self-regulationand control of ambient conditions in each area.• Effectiveness of local environmental controls, e.g. lighting.• Effect of ambient conditions on the comfort, fatigue andhealth of personnel using the area.OutputsAssessments of the actual range of ambient environmentalfactors, the effectiveness of environmental controls and theeffect on personnel in each area.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-38 Issue 4

Chapter 13 – Habitability and Internal Environment13.3.4 Manufacture Phase Activities13.3.4.1 Derive Assessment CriteriaPurposeTo establish criteria by which the effectiveness of internalhabitability control systems operate and to evaluate theacceptability of the resulting environment to users under a set ofcontrolled operational conditions.Inputs • Habitability and environmental control system performancespecifications.• Habitability and environment User requirementsspecifications.• Human Factors standards and guides.• Critical Task Descriptions.Methods • [Standard] Environmental Measurements; of (inter alia):o Temperature (Work space).o Humidity (Work space and other space).o Air flow (Work space and other space).o Noise (Work space and other space).o Vibration (Work space and other space).o Lighting/Glare (Work space and other space) - Normaland Night-Vision adapted conditions.o Radiation levels - At all relevant frequencies.Steps • Extract key system performance criteria from habitability andenvironmental control system specifications.• Identify critical tasks from established task descriptions.• Identify critical task performance requirements and keyenvironmental influences.• Determine limiting parameters for each key influence.• Schedule habitability and environment system acceptancetrial requirements and acceptance criteria.• Monitor and analyse acceptance trial results.• Predict likely critical performance decrements.OutputsConfirmation of the acceptability of all habitability andenvironmental control systems.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-39 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)13.3.4.2 Monitor Feedback from Acceptance TrialsPurposeInputsTo obtain and evaluate feedback on the performance ofhabitability and environmental control systems from initial usersduring acceptance trials.Data obtained from initial system users.Methods • [User] Questionnaires.• [Structured] Interviews.Steps • Obtain data from a range of initial system users duringacceptance trials.• Evaluate data to determine subjective user opinion.• Extrapolate early data to encompass normal and worst-caseoperating conditions.• Identify possible critical performance decrements.• Identify possible issues influencing on recruitment and staffretention.OutputsConfirmation of the acceptability of all habitability andenvironmental control systems.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-40 Issue 4

Chapter 13 – Habitability and Internal Environment13.3.5 In-Service Phase Activities13.3.5.1 Monitor In-Service User FeedbackPurposeTo obtain and evaluate feedback on the performance ofhabitability and environmental control systems from long-termusers in-service.Inputs • Operational reports.• Data from user surveys.Methods • [User] Questionnaires.• [Structured] Interviews.Steps • Analyse operational reports, focussing on HF-related issuesand influences.• Propose to Customer 2 appropriate user-opinion surveys.• Analyse data from user surveys.• Identify trends in user performance decrement data.• Identify possible critical performance decrements.• Identify possible issues influencing on recruitment and staffretention.OutputsQuantitative and qualitative assessments of habitability andenvironment in a range of service conditions.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-41 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)13.3.5.2 Identify Opportunities for Environmental ImprovementsPurposeInputsTo identify, evaluate and propose possible improvements tohabitability and environmental control systems, based onactuarial and user-opinion data.Results of:• Acceptance Trials.• Early User feedback.• In-Service operational feedback.MethodsNot Identified.Steps • Based on analysis of quantitative data and qualitativefeedback from users, identify systems and work space areaswhere improvements to habitability and environmentalcontrol systems may produce improved user performance,reduced sick time and accidents, etc.• Evaluate cost-effectiveness of proposed improvements.OutputsProposal for In-Service and mid-term refurbishmentimprovements to habitability and internal environmental controlsystems.13.3.6 Disposal Phase ActivitiesNone identified.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 13-42 Issue 4MAP-01-011 CH 13_18.doc

CHAPTER 14 – EQUIPMENT LAYOUTCONTENTS14.1 HFI Technical Issues..................................................................................................14-314.1.1 Scope and Definitions.........................................................................14-314.1.2 Stakeholders.......................................................................................14-314.1.3 Overall Requirements .........................................................................14-414.1.4 Multiple Workstation Layout Requirements ........................................14-414.1.5 Workstation Configuration...................................................................14-614.2 HFI Process ......................................................................................................14-814.2.1 HFI Focus Responsibilities .................................................................14-914.2.2 Relevant Standards ..........................................................................14-1014.3 HFI Activities...................................................................................................14-1414.3.1 Assessment Phase Activities............................................................14-1414.3.1.1 Develop Preliminary Workspace Configurations ............14-1414.3.1.2 Outline Equipment Fit.....................................................14-1514.3.2 Demonstration Phase Activities ........................................................14-1614.3.2.1 Specify Compartment Workspace Layout ......................14-1614.3.2.2 Specify Workstation Layout............................................14-1714.3.2.3 Prototype Workstation Layout ........................................14-1814.3.3 Manufacture Phase Activities............................................................14-1914.3.3.1 Assess Workstation Layout ............................................14-1914.3.4 In-Service Phase Activities ...............................................................14-2014.3.4.1 Support Modifications.....................................................14-2014.3.4.2 Provide Proactive Support..............................................14-2014.3.5 Disposal Phase Activities..................................................................14-20Nov 2006 Page 14-1 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)Nov 2006 Page 14-2 Issue 4

Chapter 14 – Equipment Layout14.1 HFI Technical Issues14.1.1 Scope and Definitions‘Equipment layout’ refers to the size and arrangement of equipment withincompartments and on decks. The aim of the equipment layout process is toensure that personnel are afforded with sufficient space and appropriateequipment positioning in working and living arrangements. The workspace refersto the space within which people work and move in order to perform work (Figure14-1). Workspace design is the arrangement of equipment and user positions ortraffic routes in platform spaces. The workstation is the place and/or userequipmentinterface(s) at which people work. Workstation design is the specificarrangement of equipment and furniture at the user-equipment interface.HFI Technical IssuesFigure 14-1: The workspace for personnel must besufficient for safe, effective work14.1.2 StakeholdersA list of potential stakeholders for this area is given below. This list is notexhaustive and should be seen to be a guide only. HFI Foci should refine this listbased upon the structure of their project, the attendees at the relevant HFSG orHFWG and in light of guidance and requests from industry, DEC and Customer 2representatives.• DEC• IPT HFI Foci• IPT ILS Manager• MLS CG• TES-SA-MA• TES-SSG-CSHF• TES-SSG-ShipDesNov 2006 Page 14-3 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)14.1.3 Overall RequirementsHFI Technical IssuesA variety of factors play a part in determining the design of the overall workspaceand the configuration of workstations including the following:• The overall space available in compartments and on decks.• Whether hatch size permits prior assembly of equipment.• Anthropometric (body size) characteristics of the target audience.• Required separation from other users.• Visibility of other displays or users from a workstation.• Required working area at each workstation.• Minimal usable size of the display area.• Access for maintenance purposes.• Movement of users through and within compartments including emergencyaccess and egress.• Needs of left and right-handed personnel.• Modular design of equipment.The configuration of displays, controls and working surfaces that make up eachworkstation can have a major impact on the performance and health of users.Workstation and seating arrangements need to be compatible with the visual,auditory, body size, strength, and differences in handedness of the availablepersonnel of both genders. Seating needs to be adjustable in height, lumbarsupport and (if necessary) orientation. Layout of equipment and required visibilityshould not require awkward head and neck movements. The length of time thatusers will need to spend on watch should be considered when designing theworkstation and choosing materials. Low cost mock-ups, synthetic usermodelling and anthropometric modelling within computer-aided design are allavailable to help in optimising workspace and workstation design.14.1.4 Multiple Workstation Layout RequirementsCombat Systems consist of a variety of equipments that may be co-located incompartments providing minimal space for users. The overall layout ofequipment needs to balance the requirement between the provision of effectiveworking conditions for users and maintainers and access to equipment within theavailable space.Nov 2006 Page 14-4 Issue 4

Chapter 14 – Equipment LayoutHFI Technical IssuesFigure 14-2: Multiple user workstations within the combat systemIn the past the overall configuration of Operations compartments has not alwaysoptimised performance of the tasks required of personnel. Equipments orbulkheads have blocked access or visibility, equipments and subordinate userpositions have not been arranged around supervising Command positions andmovement has been difficult. The provision of standard consoles providingaccess to a range of functions will help to reduce the range of user-equipmentinterfaces with which each user will need to interact. The opportunity exists forthe layout of future Combat System workspaces to be designed around therequirements of the Command team.Platform management and other systems are increasingly co-located in onecompartment. In this case multiple workstations are provided for supervisors andfor operators engaged in machinery control and surveillance, security or safetymanagement and damage control. The following types of issues need to beconsidered when designing the configuration of the Ship Control Centre/ControlRoom:• The supervisor should have a clear line of sight to all other operator displayconsoles, e.g. place the supervisor’s console behind operator consoles in acentral position and on a raised dais.• All personnel should be seated facing in the direction of forward platformmotion.• Place most important and frequently used displays and controls in thecentre of the consoles to support reduced watchkeeping team sizes.• Provide facilities for supervisors or other operators to conductwatchkeeping duties whilst standing or moving around, e.g.communications, large screen repeater displays, raised working surfaces.Nov 2006 Page 14-5 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)14.1.5 Workstation ConfigurationHFI Technical IssuesThe tasks to be conducted at workstations and anthropometric data regarding thebody size of personnel are used to decide on the optimum configuration for eachworkstation design. The configuration should be decided for each item ofCombat System or marine engineering equipment. For commercial-off-the-shelfitems, the demands facing personnel, and operating conditions including lengthof watchkeeping shifts and the working environment, need to be taken intoaccount when selecting the equipment. The three basic configurations can beconsidered to be:• Seated workstation, e.g. crane operator, platform management systemoperator.• Sit/stand workstation, e.g. panel control layout for auxiliary power operatorsor maintainers.• Standing workstation, e.g. catering equipment operators.Figure 14-3: An example seated workstationFigure 14-4 illustrates key human dimensions that need to be taken into accountwhen designing workstation layout in the chosen configuration. Generalguidance is that every workstation should be operable by personnel falling in therange of body sizes from the 5 th percentile female to the 95 th percentile male (asdefined by anthropometric data for the relevant population). Safety criticalconsiderations (e.g., the requirement for emergency egress) may requireincreased anthropometric boundary limits. However, it is up to the project todecide, in conjunction with the relevant naval Authorities, the specific percentilesthat should be applied. Due consideration needs to be given to any requirementsfor operators wearing individual protective clothing. Seating should be adjustablefor different sizes of operator and provide adequate lumbar support whilst alsoproviding protection against shock. The selection of seating should take intoNov 2006 Page 14-6 Issue 4

Chapter 14 – Equipment Layoutaccount the need for over-the-shoulder viewing of displays and the need toorientate the seat to view more than one display, e.g. a swivelling seat. Seatcoverings should allow for the dissipation of excess body heat and moisture.HFI Technical IssuesFigure 14-4: Human body size dimensions relevant toworkstation designNov 2006 Page 14-7 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)14.2 HFI ProcessThe sequence of HFI activities described in the remainder of this chapter issummarised in Figure 14-5.HFI ProcessDevelopPreliminaryWorkspaceConfigurationsSpecifyCompartmentWorkspace LayoutNot IdentifiedPrototypeWorkstationLayoutAssessWorkstationLayoutOutline EquipmentFitSpecifyWorkstationLayoutMANUFACTURE DEMONSTRATION ASSESSMENT CONCEPTSupportModificationsProvide ProactiveSupportIN SERVICENot IdentifiedDISPOSALFigure 14-5: The HFI Process for Equipment LayoutNov 2006 Page 14-8 Issue 4

Chapter 14 – Equipment LayoutThe process of defining the equipment layout is summarized in Figure 14-5.Overall compartment layout and equipment fit is outlined before the compartmentworkspaces and workstation layout is specified in detail, if necessary theworkstation may be prototyped to ensure that it conforms to requirements.The process of defining the equipment layout involves liaison between the HFIFocus and various stakeholders in conducting the HFI activities. The HFIactivities are presented in Table 14-1. The ticks represent the procurementPhases at which the activities are likely to be conducted.C A D M I D HFI ActivityDevelop Preliminary Workspace ConfigurationsOutline Equipment Fit Specify Compartment Workspace Layout Specify Workstation Layout Prototype Workstation Layout Assess Workstation LayoutHFI ProcessSupport ModificationsProvide Proactive SupportTable 14-1: HFI Activities in Equipment Layout14.2.1 HFI Focus ResponsibilitiesThe HFI Focus is responsible for the following:• Liaison with SSG-Ship / SSG-SM, MLS CG and DEC to agree overallworkspace layout.• Liaison with the IPT Leader or relevant System Project Manager tointegrate the workspace layouts into the General Arrangement (Chap 8)and design of Operational Spaces (Chap 9).• Liaison with TES-SSG-CSHF or MLS CG to assess suitability ofworkstation layout and arrange prototyping with user representatives.• Liaison with TES-SA-MA to ensure that maintenance access requirementsare met (Chap 16).• Identification of usability criteria for an effective and efficient userequipmentinterface (Chap 15).Nov 2006 Page 14-9 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Ensure that the equipment layout matches the anthropometric (body size)characteristics of available manpower as described in the PSTAD (seeChap 6).• Resolution of trade-offs relating to the positioning of equipment and use ofavailable space.• Assessment of equipment layouts to ensure that team and individualworking arrangements are optimised.14.2.2 Relevant StandardsThe standards used are listed in Table 14-2 below. Further details are includedin Annex 2, together with other related standards.StandardTitleHFI ProcessDef Stan 00-25 Part 15Def Stan 00-25 Part 17Human Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 15: Principles and ProcessHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 17: Personnel Domain – Technical Guidanceand DataDef Stan 00-25 Part 19Def Stan 02-101 Part 1Def Stan 02-101 Part 2Def Stan 02-105 Part 1Def Stan 02-105 Part 2Human Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 19: Human Engineering Domain – TechnicalGuidance and DataRequirements for Design and Fitting Out ofWorkshops, Maintenance Spaces and EngineeringStores for HM Surface Ships.Part 1: Common RequirementsRequirements for Design and Fitting Out ofWorkshops, Maintenance Spaces and EngineeringStores for HM Surface ShipsPart 2: Specific RequirementsRequirements for the Fitting Out of Offices (ExcludingOperational/Communications Offices) in HM SurfaceShips and Submarines.Part 1: General RequirementsRequirements for the Fitting Out of Offices (ExcludingOperational/Communications Offices) in HM SurfaceShips and Submarines.Part 2: Specific Requirements-Surface ShipsNov 2006 Page 14-10 Issue 4

Chapter 14 – Equipment LayoutStandardDef Stan 02-105 Part 3Def Stan 02-106 Part 1Def Stan 02-106 Part 2TitleRequirements for the Fitting Out of Offices (ExcludingOperational/Communications Offices) in HM SurfaceShips and Submarines.Part 3: Specific Requirements-SubmarinesRequirements for Medical and Dental Organisation inHM Surface Ships and Submarines.Part 1: Common Requirements – Medical and DentalFacilitiesRequirements for Medical and Dental Organisation inHM Surface Ships and Submarines.Part 2: Specific Requirements – Medical and DentalFacilities in HM Surface ShipsDef Stan 02-106 Part 3Def Stan 02-106 Part 4Requirements for Medical and Dental Organisation inHM Surface Ships and Submarines.Part 3: Specific Requirements – Medical Organisationfor Action in HM Surface ShipsRequirements for Medical and Dental Organisation inHM Surface Ships and SubmarinesPart 4: Medical and Dental Facilities in SubmarinesHFI ProcessDef Stan 02-113Def Stan 02-120Def Stan 02-121 Part 1Def Stan 02-121 Part 2Def Stan 02-121 Part 3Def Stan 02-121 Part 4Def Stan 02-123 Part 1Def Stan 02-123 Part 2Requirements for Mechanical Handling.Requirements for WCs, Urinals, Bathrooms andWashing Facilities in HM Surface Warships andSubmarinesRequirements for Galley & Associated Spaces.Part 1: Common RequirementsRequirements for Galley & Associated Spaces.Part 2: Specific Requirement - Surface ShipsRequirements for Galleys and Associated Spaces.Part 3: Specific Requirements for ConventionalSubmarinesRequirements for Galley & Associated Spaces.Part 4: Specific Requirements - Nuclear SubmarinesRequirements for Laundries and AssociatedCompartments.Part 1: Laundries and Associated CompartmentsRequirements for Laundries and AssociatedCompartments.Part 2: Laundry Machinery, Equipment and FittingsNov 2006 Page 14-11 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)StandardDef Stan 02-162 Part 1Def Stan 02-599Def Stan 02-603Def Stan 02-721 Part 1Def Stan 02-721 Part 2TitleRequirements for the Manufacture, Test andInstallation of Guard Stanchions, Rails, andAssociated Safety Fittings.Part 1: Weather DecksPolicy Requirements and Design Guidance for Alarmand Warning SystemsGuide to the Policy, Design and Installation of FireDetection Systems In ShipsGarbage Disposal in Surface Ships.Part 1: General RequirementsGarbage Disposal in Surface Ships.Part 2: Requirements for EquipmentHFI ProcessDef Stan 02-728Requirements for Domestic Hot and Cold Fresh WaterSystemsTable 14-2: Relevant StandardsBS 3044StandardTitleGuide to Ergonomic principles in the design andselection of Office FurnitureBS EN ISO 8468:1995 Ships Bridge Layout and Associated Equipment –Requirements and GuidelinesBS EN ISO 9241 Part 5 Ergonomic Requirements for Office Work with VisualDisplay Terminals:Workstation Layout and Postural RequirementsBS EN ISO 11064-3Def Stan 02-707 Part 1Def Stan 02-707 Part 2Def Stan 07-205 Part 1Def Stan 07-205 Part 2Ergonomic design of control centresPart 3: Control room layoutSymbols and Abbreviations:Part 1: Guide to the General Use of SymbolsSymbols and Abbreviations:Part 2: Guide to Abbreviations and System CodeLettersRequirements for Galleys and Associated Spaces:Part 1: Common RequirementsRequirements for Galleys and Associated Spaces:Part 2: Specific Requirements for Surface ShipsNov 2006 Page 14-12 Issue 4

Chapter 14 – Equipment LayoutDef Stan 07-205 Part 4Def Stan 07-248 Part 1Def Stan 07-248 Part 2Requirements for Galleys and Associated Spaces:Part 4: Specific Requirements for Nuclear SubmarinesRequirements for the Guarding of SecureCompartments and Protectively Marked Material andEquipments.Part 1: Surface ShipsRequirements for the Guarding of SecureCompartments and Protectively Marked Material andEquipments.Part 2: SubmarinesTable 14-3: Other Related StandardsHFI ProcessNov 2006 Page 14-13 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)14.3 HFI Activities14.3.1 Assessment Phase Activities14.3.1.1 Develop Preliminary Workspace ConfigurationsPurposeTo define overall space requirements for the equipment andpersonnel.Inputs • General Arrangement and overall dimensions of operationalcompartments (Chap 8 and Chap 9)• User roles and team organisation (Chap 5)Methods • Workspace Design.• Link Analysis.• Synthetic User Modelling.• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description.Steps • Identify the equipment fit and footprint in each equipmentoption.• Identify the manning required for each equipment option(Chap 4).• Liaise with the System Project Managers and SSG-Ship /SSG-SM to define compartment options in the GeneralArrangement (Chap 8).• Identify requirements and constraints defining location andinter-relationships of operator positions and equipment fitusing Link Analysis and Synthetic User Modelling if required.• Identify anthropometric (body size) and other ergonomicstandards (e.g. Def Stan 00-25) for use in workspace layoutfrom the PSTAD (see Chap 6).• Identify movement envelopes for ingress, egress, user taskperformance and maintenance access (Chap 6 andChap 16).• In conjunction with SSG-CSHF or MLS CG define overallworkspace configuration options taking account of user rolesand team organisation using Workspace Design.HFI ActivitiesOutput • Outline compartment workspace layouts, which consist ofdrawings for each equipment and compartment option.Nov 2006 Page 14-14 Issue 4

Chapter 14 – Equipment Layout14.3.1.2 Outline Equipment FitPurposeTo identify the equipment fit for each equipment option.Inputs • General Arrangement and overall dimensions of operationalcompartments (Chap 8 and Chap 9)• User roles and team organisation (Chap 5)Methods • Workstation Design.• Synthetic User Modelling.• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description.Steps • Collate the equipment list for each option, including existingequipment and equipment from other related projects.• Identify the dimensions of each item of equipment and itshousing requirements.• Identify maintenance access requirements for each item ofequipment (Chap 16).• Produce outline drawing of workstation layout usingWorkstation Design taking account of human dimensions inthe PSTAD (see Chap 6) and making use of Synthetic UserModelling for critical or potentially dangerous areas.OutputEquipment fit for each equipment option defining dimensions,housing and maintenance access requirements.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 14-15 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)14.3.2 Demonstration Phase Activities14.3.2.1 Specify Compartment Workspace LayoutPurposeTo provide the compartment workspace layout for theequipment.Inputs • General Arrangement and overall dimensions of operationalcompartments (Chap 8 and Chap 9)• User roles and team organisation (Chap 5)• Workstation layouts (Sect 14.3.2.2).Methods • Workspace Design.• Link Analysis.• Synthetic User Modelling.• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description.Steps • Identify the equipment fit and footprint.• Identify the manning required for the equipment (Chap 4).• Liaise with the System Project Managers and SSG-Ship /SSG-SM to define compartment workspace constraints andto ensure compatibility with the General Arrangement(Chap 8).• Apply requirements and constraints defining location andinter-relationships of operator positions and equipment fitusing Link Analysis and Synthetic User Modelling.• Apply anthropometric (body size) and other ergonomicstandards for use in workspace layout from the PSTAD (seeChap 6).• Identify movement envelopes for ingress, egress, user taskperformance and maintenance access making use ofSynthetic User Modelling for critical tasks or where safety isof concern (Chap 6, Chap 16 and Chap 17).• Identify user viewing arcs, e.g. to shared large displays,aural requirements, reach and manipulation envelopes andhuman-human interaction and co-location requirements.• In conjunction with SSG-CSHF or MLS CG use WorkspaceDesign to define workspace configuration taking account ofuser roles and team organisation.HFI ActivitiesOutput • Compartment workspace drawings reflecting the spatialaspects of the layout and juxtaposition of user workstations,equipments, bulkheads, hatches, windows and trunkingincluding:o Operational compartment layout.o Equipment spaces including maintenance access.Nov 2006 Page 14-16 Issue 4

Chapter 14 – Equipment Layouto Escape routes, doors and hatchways.o Internal communications and human-human informationflow.14.3.2.2 Specify Workstation LayoutPurposeTo specify the detailed arrangement of each workstation.Inputs • General Arrangement and overall dimensions of operationalcompartments (Chap 8 and Chap 9)• User roles and team organisation (Chap 5)• Workspace layout (Sect 14.3.2.1)• User-equipment interface design documentation (Chap 15).Methods • Workstation Design.• Synthetic User Modelling.• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description.Steps • Define the equipment comprising the workstation.• Identify user position and seating arrangements.• Identify working space and storage requirements.• Identify display and input device characteristics (Chap 15).• Apply anthropometric (body size) and other ergonomicstandards for use in workstation design referring to thePSTAD (Chap 6).• Identify movement envelopes for user task performance andmaintenance access making use of Synthetic User Modellingif required.• Identify user viewing arcs, auditory requirements and reachand manipulation envelopes for each item of equipment.• In conjunction with SSG-CSHF or MLS CG use WorkstationDesign to finalise workstation design.Output • Workstation visibility arcs and auditory requirements.• Console and panel layouts and groupings.• Seating design, movement and positioning.• Work surfaces and storage specifications.• Maintenance access specifications• Workstation material and finish specifications.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 14-17 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)14.3.2.3 Prototype Workstation LayoutPurposeTo provide assessments of workstation layouts for use inoptimising the design.Inputs • Workspace and workstation layout.Methods • Operability Scenario Definition.• Operability Evaluation.• User-Equipment Interface Prototyping.Steps • Develop and apply task scripts based on OperabilityScenarios during workstation evaluation, these scripts aredesigned to exercise each aspect of the workstation designmaking use of Operability Evaluation checklists etc. andUser-Equipment Interface Prototyping (Chap 15).• Record performance of user representatives following taskscripts using observer checklists, self-report by users and/orvideo-taping of user movements.• Evaluate information displays to ensure that the mostimportant and most frequently used information is centred inthe user’s field of view.• Assess legibility of each display item and input device legendunder the full range of lighting conditions.• Assess audibility of voice and equipment sounds under thefull range of likely noise levels.• Evaluate user position and comfort to ensure that physicaland physiological stress is minimised.• Evaluate reach and manipulation of each input device andcontrol.• Assess visibility of, and interaction with, other workstationpositions or shared displays.Output • Evaluations of each workstation layout andrecommendations for re-design.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 14-18 Issue 4

Chapter 14 – Equipment Layout14.3.3 Manufacture Phase Activities14.3.3.1 Assess Workstation LayoutPurposeTo assess the final workstation design against requirements.Inputs • Workspace layout (Sect 14.3.2.1)• Workstation layout (Sect 14.3.2.2)Methods • Operability Scenario Definition.• Operability Evaluation.• User-Equipment Interface Prototyping.Steps • Develop and apply task scripts based on OperabilityScenarios making use of Operability Evaluation checklistsetc. and User-Equipment Interface Prototyping (Chap 15).• Record performance of user representatives following taskscripts using observer checklists, self-report by users and/orvideo-taping of user movements.• Evaluate information displays to ensure that the mostimportant and most frequently used information is centred inthe user’s field of view.• Assess legibility of each display item and input device legendunder the full range of lighting conditions.• Assess audibility of voice and equipment sounds under thefull range of likely noise levels.• Evaluate user position and comfort to ensure that physicaland physiological stress is minimised.• Evaluate reach and manipulation of each input device andcontrol.• Assess visibility of, and interaction with, other workstationpositions or shared displays.• Assess all dimensions of the workstation design againstspecified requirements and ergonomic standards.Output • Assessment of workstation layout.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 14-19 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)14.3.4 In-Service Phase Activities14.3.4.1 Support ModificationsPurposeInputsMethodsStepsOutputsTo provide effective reassessment and specification ofequipment layout, resulting from modification to the requirementduring the operational life.As per previous phasesAs per previous phases.As per previous phases, but tailored to the scope of thechanges.Revised specifications and design for equipment layout.14.3.4.2 Provide Proactive SupportPurposeInputsMethodsTo proactively intervene as appropriate to ensure that WLCs areminimised and performance maximised.Operational data: user feedback, incident reportsAs per previous phases.Steps • As per previous phases• Instigate fuller modification activity under Sect 14.3.4.1 ifnecessary.Outputs • Revised specifications and design.• Recommendations and lessons learned for future projects.HFI Activities14.3.5 Disposal Phase ActivitiesNone identified.Nov 2006 Page 14-20 Issue 4MAP-01-011 CH 14_16.doc

CHAPTER 15 – OPERABILITY AND USER-EQUIPMENTINTERACTIONCONTENTS15.1 HFI Technical Issues..................................................................................................15-315.1.1 Operability and User-Equipment Interface..........................................15-315.1.2 Stakeholders.......................................................................................15-415.1.3 Operability of Combat Systems ..........................................................15-415.1.4 Operability of Marine Engineering Equipment ....................................15-515.1.5 Operability and User Performance......................................................15-515.1.6 Selection of Displays and Control Devices .........................................15-615.1.6.1 Introduction.......................................................................15-615.1.6.2 General Window Management.........................................15-715.1.6.3 Consistency......................................................................15-715.1.6.4 Display Types...................................................................15-815.1.6.5 Style Guide.......................................................................15-915.1.6.6 Interface Prototyping ........................................................15-915.2 HFI Process ....................................................................................................15-1015.2.1 HFI Focus Responsibilities ...............................................................15-1215.2.2 Relevant Standards ..........................................................................15-1315.3 HFI Activities...................................................................................................15-1815.3.1 Concept Phase Activities ..................................................................15-1815.3.1.1 Outline Use of Automation .............................................15-1815.3.1.2 Outline User Tasks.........................................................15-1915.3.1.3 Outline User-Equipment Interface Facilities ...................15-2015.3.2 Assessment Phase Activities............................................................15-2115.3.2.1 Specify Allocation of Functions ......................................15-2115.3.2.2 Identify Critical User Performance..................................15-2215.3.2.3 Define User Tasks..........................................................15-2315.3.2.4 Specify Logical User-Equipment Interface .....................15-2415.3.2.5 Select Human Factors Style Guide ................................15-2515.3.2.6 Specify Operability Criteria.............................................15-2615.3.2.7 Identify User-Equipment Interface Prototyping...............15-2715.3.3 Demonstration Phase Activities ........................................................15-2815.3.3.1 Specify User Tasks ........................................................15-2815.3.3.2 Apply Human Factors Style Guide .................................15-2915.3.3.3 Specify User-Equipment Interface..................................15-3015.3.3.4 Conduct User-Equipment Interface Prototyping.............15-3115.3.3.5 Specify User Support Facilities ......................................15-3215.3.3.6 Specify Operating Procedures .......................................15-3315.3.4 Manufacture Phase Activities............................................................15-3415.3.4.1 Assess User-Equipment Interface Consistency .............15-34Nov 2006 Page 15-1 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)15.3.4.2 Assess User-Equipment Interface Efficiency andEffectiveness ..................................................................15-3515.3.4.3 Assess User Support Facilities.......................................15-3615.3.4.4 Assess Operating Procedures........................................15-3615.3.5 In Service Phase Activities................................................................15-3715.3.5.1 Continue Manufacture Phase Assessments ..................15-3715.3.5.2 Support Modifications.....................................................15-3715.3.6 Disposal Phase Activities..................................................................15-3815.3.6.1 Support Future Projects .................................................15-38Nov 2006 Page 15-2 Issue 4

Chapter 15 – Operability And User-Equipment Interaction15.1 HFI Technical Issues15.1.1 Operability and User-Equipment Interface[Note: The user-equipment interface is the general name for human-machineinterface (HMI) and human-computer interface (HCI). The acronyms are alsoused to denote human-machine/computer interaction depending on context.]Operability is the general term for describing the effectiveness, efficiency,acceptability and support for learning of the user-equipment interface (Figure15-1). Failure to design a usable interface can waste the operational potential ofnew systems and increase manpower costs. In the worst case lack of operabilitycan result in operational mistakes and risks that may prove vital when conductingmission critical tasks. At the very least poor operability will increase the humaneffort needed to operate the system, decrease operator morale, increase thecosts of training and decrease the flexible use of the resources available toCommand.HFI Technical IssuesFigure 15-1: An example user-equipment interfaceThe guidance contained in this chapter is applicable in full to the development ofCombat Systems, integrated platform management systems (PMS), Chemical,Biological, Radiation & Nuclear (CBRN) and damage control systems andgenerally to machinery control and surveillance systems. However, many of thesteps recommended are also highly relevant to individual items of hardwareintensive warfare and marine engineering equipment – including those procuredas commercial-off-the-shelf items.Nov 2006 Page 15-3 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)15.1.2 StakeholdersHFI Technical IssuesA list of potential stakeholders for this area is given below. This list is notexhaustive and should be seen to be a guide only. HFI Foci should refine this listbased upon the structure of their project, the attendees at the relevant HFSG orHFWG and in light of guidance and requests from industry, DEC and Customer 2representatives.• DEC• IPT HFI Foci• IPT RequirementManager (RqM)• MLS CG• TES-SSG-CSHF• TES-SSG-CSNav• TES-SSG-ShipDes15.1.3 Operability of Combat SystemsIn order to develop a highly operable Combat System user-equipment interface itis necessary to base the design on the needs of users when performing missioncritical tasks. To achieve this the following information must be derived:• Identify each member of the Combat Team and define his station (whichmay change from watch to watch e.g. Officer of the Watch), his post withinthe complement (e.g. Navigating Officer), his rank or rate and the specificrole held in mission scenarios (e.g. Weapons Director).• Define the operational scenarios that will most stretch the capability of manand machine.• Determine the way in which someone performing a specific role can bestperform his tasks whilst making use of the user-equipment interface.The following design issues apply to the development of the user-equipmentinterface:• Users should be presented with a common working environment defined ina Human Factors Style Guide (see Annex 3). For a Combat System thiswill require the use of consistent display features and symbology andstandard control devices and actions. This will help to ensure a highdegree of interoperability across the Combat System.• An alarms and warnings policy must be defined within the context of thewhole vessel (Chap 17).• Operation of systems must be resistant to malevolent operation. This isparticularly true of Combat Systems because of the sensitivity ofinformation and the restrictions necessarily placed on access to weaponfiringor emission controls.• Modern sensors are increasing the flow of contact information into theCombat System. In order to cope with this increase the Combat Systemmust take over a significant part of the user’s workload through the use ofautomated detection and tracking of contacts.Nov 2006 Page 15-4 Issue 4

Chapter 15 – Operability And User-Equipment Interaction• There is a need to consider how the user-equipment interface will supportthe user during recovery from system failures.15.1.4 Operability of Marine Engineering EquipmentMarine engineering equipment must be highly operable. The user-equipmentinterface to the platform management system, in common with the CombatSystem, needs to be developed to be compatible with the mission and taskcontext and the needs of users. The task context here will concern vessel controland the generation and distribution of power. Emphasis will be placed on thesafe execution of tasks rather than speed and accuracy of performance. Thefollowing design issues are relevant to the operability of platform managementsystems:HFI Technical Issues• The Human Factors Style Guide (Annex 3) for platform managementshould include marine engineering conventions and symbology whilstfollowing basic display and control rules consistent with those used in theCombat System to improve interoperability.• A platform management alarms and warnings policy should be appliedwithin the context of the whole vessel (Chap 17). A large number ofvariables can go out of range in the platform management system and thealarms and warnings need to be considered.• Operation of systems needs to take into account reversionary modes. Theoperator should always be informed in which mode he is operating.• There is a need to consider how the user-equipment interface will supportthe user during recovery from the failure of a major vessel service.• The predicted enhanced capabilities of platform management systems maylead to reduced manning. There will therefore be a need to ensure that:o Alarm avalanches can be handled within a smaller team.o The operating team can deal with simultaneous failures in severalvessel services.o Improved automation does not lead to user de-skilling.o Situational awareness is maintained so that the user can intervenefollowing a failure.15.1.5 Operability and User PerformanceIdentification of mission critical tasks is key to the design of highly operable userequipmentinterfaces. Operational Scenario Descriptions (Annex 3) are used toidentify the key operator activities that will have the greatest effect on overallsystem performance. The user-equipment interface is specifically designed orselected to ensure that these key operator activities can be performed effectivelyand efficiently in order to meet the performance requirements for each of theoperational scenarios for the system.The important types of human performance in Combat Systems dependfundamentally on the ability of users to process information and decide the bestway to act given an interpretation of the situation. Users of future CombatNov 2006 Page 15-5 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI Technical IssuesSystems will increasingly monitor and manage the flow of information rather thattaking an active role in generating the basic data needed to make tacticaldecisions. Human decision-making will remain critical where technology islimited or situations are complex. Modern weapon systems may require nohuman intervention, beyond the need to over-ride pre-set firing parameters, oncethreats are identified and rules and zones of engagement are defined. The levelof user performance required should set the requirements for an operable userequipmentinterface. User performance can be expressed as statements of thespeed and accuracy needed to perform mission critical tasks. For example:• Time to acknowledge the detection of a contact on the sonar, radar, EW orother sensors.• Time to process a contact from detection until it is associated with a track.• Accuracy of classifying a contact as a threat or non-threat.• Throughput time to prepare and disseminate a plan e.g. EMCON, pointAAW defence, ASW.In platform management the user-equipment system must operate effectivelywhen a user is conducting standard operating procedures, emergency operatingprocedures and maintenance operations. Examples of relevant userperformance include the following:• Time to bring plant on-line e.g. main propulsion, secondary propulsion, airpurification etc.• Time to re-configure systems following equipment failure or damage: e.g.re-distribution of electrical, hydraulic, fuel, water or other services.• Accuracy of diagnosing equipment or damage states: e.g. fire detection inunmanned machinery spaces, loss of main or auxiliary systems, electricalfailure etc.• Throughput time to perform repetitive or specific actions: e.g. time to re-fuelaircraft, unit time per Replenishment at Sea (RAS) operation, time to hosedown a deck, time before fire-fighting capability is available in eachplatform space.This approach enables operability to be defined and linked to mission criticaltasks. User performance statements can be used to set operability criteria and todefine user-equipment prototyping requirements.15.1.6 Selection of Displays and Control Devices15.1.6.1 IntroductionDisplay and control device technology is advancing rapidly and it is important thatenough flexibility is built into the acquisition process to take advantage ofincreases in capability. Notwithstanding improvements in technology it isimportant that the basic requirements for physical display and control devices arecompatible with user capabilities and the tasks to be performed. For displaydevices screen size, colour capability and resolution must be appropriate.Control devices must be usable in the range of conditions experienced on-boardvessels and be appropriate for the speed, accuracy and other characteristics ofNov 2006 Page 15-6 Issue 4

Chapter 15 – Operability And User-Equipment Interactionthe tasks to be performed. In particular input devices must not be allowed toplace limits on the maximum data input rate that experienced operators canachieve.Hardware intensive items of marine engineering equipment will also have userequipmentinterfaces as illustrated by the following examples:• Machines with integral controls and displays e.g. crane.• Panel displays showing equipment status e.g. LED displays onatmospheric monitoring equipment.HFI Technical Issues• Simple controls e.g. hatch levers and wheels, fire-hose coupling joints andon-off controls.These forms of user interface must also be operable. Displays must be legible,consistent and unambiguous. Controls must be compatible with the tasks to beperformed and with the capabilities (including body size and physical strength) ofpersonnel.15.1.6.2 General Window ManagementIn Combat Systems fixed displays providing access to only one type ofinformation are giving way to multi-purpose consoles within which ‘windows’provide access to a wide range of display formats. Such flexibility leads to thepenalty of requiring users to spend time housekeeping and could lead toimportant information being missed. Combat Systems therefore need to strike acareful balance between the flexible use of windows and the need to preservedisplays in consistent locations on the screen without occlusion of important data.The design process therefore needs to identify how windows can be organisedand provide default arrangements appropriate to the tasks facing users.These lessons also apply to marine engineering equipment. Traditionallyplatform management has been performed using hardware panels of controlsand indicators. These fixed displays providing access to information for onesystem are also likely to be replaced with a ‘windows’ approach providing accessto platform management, CBRNDC, general surveillance and other applications.Standardisation is required for the following aspects of display format and control:15.1.6.3 Consistency• Default arrangements of windows for different user roles.• Range and design of symbols, icons and colour codes.• Common tools for use within the displays.• Common formats for data of similar type e.g. lists or tables.A central requirement for operability and interoperability is consistency. Threetypes of consistency apply:• Internal consistency - the same display and control types are used forsimilar functions within an equipment e.g. the operation of valves using theNov 2006 Page 15-7 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)machinery control and surveillance system should be consistent acrossdifferent platform systems.HFI Technical Issues15.1.6.4 Display Types• External consistency - the same control action on different equipmentsshould be achieved in the same way e.g. acknowledging an alarm on theCombat System or the platform management system.• Cultural consistency – use of display formats or control types should meetaccepted conventions e.g. move control forwards to increase revolutions,use of colour coding for threats, etc.The display types commonly used within Combat Systems include the following:• Labelled Plan Displays;• Totes;• Elevation Displays;• Time-Based Displays.Each of these display types has specific requirements that depend on the tasksthat they support. These requirements include the following:• Overlay of sensor imagery and synthetic information;• The use of geographical and oceanographic data;• Panning, scrolling and zoom facilities;• Direct selection or manipulation of displayed objects, e.g. tracks;• Labelling and the use of colour and other codes;• Indication of the same object on different displays, e.g. the track vector ona Labelled Plan Display may need to be easily associated with the trackdetails on Tote and time-based displays;• Filtering of data to reduce clutter or highlight significant categories of dataor bearings.Animated graphical displays are particularly relevant for use within platformmanagement and damage control management systems. Examples of theseforms of display are listed below:• Bar graphs, pie charts and trend curves for representing parameters ofmachinery operation, diagnostics, trend and condition, e.g. turbinetemperatures;• Representational displays for complex systems or to show platformspaces, e.g. plan view of compartment spaces with colour coding to showenvironmental and damage states; schematic of propulsion systemshowing each component from which normal and fault parameters can beselected for display;Nov 2006 Page 15-8 Issue 4

Chapter 15 – Operability And User-Equipment Interaction• Topological displays of systems, e.g. electrical distribution system acrossplatform, fuel system;15.1.6.5 Style Guide• Mimics to show status of specific equipment components, e.g. valves canbe represented as icons that change shape and/or colour depending onstate, flow direction and rate; tanks can be represented as icons that showquantity of contents;• Analogue and digital meters and gauges can also be simulated on softwaredisplays.HFI Technical IssuesA Human-Factors Style Guide (Annex 3) is required in order to document thegeneral principles for operability (consistency, compatibility between controlactions and effects, co-location of controls and displays etc.). The style guidealso describes the conventions used for each display and control element(shape, colour, digital read-out, scale etc.).• The Use of Style GuidesA range of Style Guides may be appropriate to a particular project, with each onefocused on major system needs. For example, a platform-wide style guide maybe required to cover communications, power distribution, fire-fighting and otherdistributed system interfaces. Specific guides may be required in areas such asCombat systems, Bridge Systems, Platform Management Systems, etc. Withinsuch a hierarchy, appropriate standardisation should be incorporated.15.1.6.6 Interface PrototypingUser-equipment interface prototyping with representative subject matter experts,e.g. instructors, must be performed to test the operability and the validity of thevarious displays and controls provided.Nov 2006 Page 15-9 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)15.2 HFI ProcessThe sequence of HFI activities described in the remainder of this chapter isillustrated in Figure 15-2.HFI ProcessOutline use ofAutomationSpecify Allocationof FunctionsIdentify CriticalUser PerformanceSpecify OperatingProceduresAssess OperatingProceduresSpecify UserSupport FacilitiesAssess UserSupport FacilitiesOutline UserTasksDefine User TasksSpecify UserTasksSpecify User-EquipmentInterfaceAssess UserEquipmentInterfaceConsistencyOutline User-EquipmentInterface FacilitiesSpecify LogicalUser-EquipmentInterfaceSpecify OperabilityCriteriaIdentify User-EquipmentPrototypingConduct User-EquipmentInterfacePrototypingAssess User-EquipmentInterfaceEfficiencySelect HumanFactors StyleGuideApply HumanFactors StyleGuideAssess UserEquipmentInterfaceEffectivenessMANUFACTURE DEMONSTRATIONASSESSMENTCONCEPTAssess OperatingProceduresAssess UserSupport FacilitiesAssess UserEquipmentInterfaceConsistencySupportModificationsAssess User-EquipmentInterfaceEfficiencyAssess UserEquipmentInterfaceEffectivenessIN SERVICESupport FutureProjectsDISPOSALFigure 15-2: The HFI Process for Operability & User-Equipment InteractionNov 2006 Page 15-10 Issue 4

Chapter 15 – Operability And User-Equipment InteractionAs part of the process of defining the user-equipment interfaces for equipment,decisions regarding the use of automation and the allocation of functionsdetermine the user tasks to be supported by the user-equipment interfaces. Thedesign of the user-equipment interface proceeds from an early outline of the maindisplays and dialogues, through a logical description of all the user-equipmenttransactions to be included.A Human Factors Style Guide is selected for use in standardising the design ofdisplays, controls and the dialogue. Operability criteria represent the userperformance requirements to be supported by the user interface. Userequipmentinterface prototyping is used to ensure that the final design meets allessential operability criteria. The user-equipment interface design is developedwith user support facilities and user procedures. During the Manufacture and InservicePhases assessments are conducted on each aspect of the userequipmentinterface and supporting materials to ensure they meet the userrequirements.The process of defining operability and user-equipment interaction involvesliaison between the HFI Focus and various stakeholders in conducting the HFIactivities. The HFI activities are presented in Table 15-1. The ticks represent theprocurement Phases at which the activities are likely to be conducted.HFI ProcessC A D M I D HFI ActivityOutline Use of AutomationOutline User TasksOutline User-Equipment Interface Facilities Specify Allocation of Functions Identify Critical User Performance Define User Tasks Specify Logical User-Equipment Interface Select Human Factors Style Guide Specify Operability Criteria Identify User-Equipment Interface Prototyping Specify User Tasks Apply Human Factors Style Guide Specify User-Equipment Interface Conduct User-Equipment Interface Prototyping Specify User Support Facilities Specify Operating ProceduresNov 2006 Page 15-11 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)C A D M I D HFI Activity Assess User-Equipment Interface Consistency Assess User-Equipment Interface Efficiency andEffectiveness Assess User Support Facilities Assess Operating ProceduresContinue with Manufacture Phase AssessmentsSupport ModificationsSupport Future ProjectsTable 15-1: HFI Activities in Operability and User-Equipment InteractionHFI Process15.2.1 HFI Focus ResponsibilitiesThe HFI Focus is responsible for the following:• Liaison with DEC, SSG-CSHF, MLS CG, and the IPT RqM to agree thelevel of automation.• Liaison with DEC, SSG-CSHF, MLS CG, and the IPT RqM to identifyappropriate Human Factors Style Guides (Annex 3) for use instandardising the user-equipment interfaces.• Liaison with the DEC, SSG-CSHF, MLS CG, and the IPT RqM to manageuser-equipment interface standardisation across the Whole Ship.• Liaison with DEC, SSG-CSHF, MLS CG, and the IPT RqM to assesssuitability of user-equipment interfaces and arrange prototyping with userrepresentatives.• Liaison with DEC, SSG-CSHF, MLS CG, and the IPT RqM to ensure thatthe maintainer tasks are supported by a suitable user-equipment interface(Chap 16).• Identification of operability criteria for an effective and efficient userequipmentinterface.• Ensure that the user-equipment interface matches the characteristics ofavailable manpower as described in the Project Specific Target AudienceDescription (PSTAD) (Chap 6).• Resolution of trade-offs relating to the use of automation and the design ofthe user-equipment interface to optimise the performance of the system.• Assessment of user-equipment interfaces against operability criteria andthe Human Factors Style Guide.Nov 2006 Page 15-12 Issue 4

Chapter 15 – Operability And User-Equipment Interaction15.2.2 Relevant StandardsThe applicable standards are listed in Table 15-2 below. Further details on thesestandards are included in Annex 2, together with other related standards.StandardDef Stan 00-25 Part 15Def Stan 00-25 Part 17Def Stan 00-25 Part 18Def Stan 00-25 Part 19Def Stan 00-25 Part 20Def Stan 00-25 Part 21Def Stan 02-113Def Stan 02-122Def Stan 02-123 Part 1Def Stan 02-123 Part 2Def Stan 02-307Def Stan 02-520Def Stan 02-542 Part 1Def Stan 02-551TitleHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 15: Principles and ProcessHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 17: Personnel Domain – Technical Guidanceand DataHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 18: Training Domain – Technical Guidance andDataHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 19: Human Engineering Domain – TechnicalGuidance and DataHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 20: Health Hazard Assessment Domain –Technical Guidance and DataHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 21: System Safety Domain - Technical Guidanceand DataRequirements for Manual HandlingRequirements for Catering EquipmentRequirements for Laundries and AssociatedCompartments.Part 1: Laundries and Associated CompartmentsRequirements for Laundries and AssociatedCompartments.Part 2: Laundry Machinery, Equipment and FittingsWorkshop EquipmentGuide to Design Procedures for Versatile ConsoleSystemGuide to Design and User Requirements of InternalCommunications Systems. Part 1: Surface ShipsGuide to Internal Communication Equipment – MainBroadcast and Associated ItemsHFI ProcessNov 2006 Page 15-13 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)StandardTitleDef Stan 02-556 Guide to Internal Communication Equipment -Headsets and Associated Items including Microphoneand Receiver InsetsDef Stan 02-557 Part 1 Guide to Internal Communication Equipment –Loudspeaker and Associated Items.Part 1: Selection and Siting of LoudspeakersDef Stan 02-557 Part 2 Guide to Internal Communication Equipment –Loudspeaker and Associated Items.Part 2: Range of Loudspeakers and Associated ItemsDef Stan 02-558 Guide to Internal Communications Equipment –Handsets and Associated ItemsDef Stan 02-559 Guide to Internal Communications Equipment –Microphones and Associated ItemsHFI ProcessDef Stan 02-562Def Stan 02-575Guide to Internal Communication Equipment, Non-VCS Units (RICE 1, CCH and SINBAD)Guide to Design of Closed Circuit Television andSurveillance SystemsDef Stan 02-599Def Stan 02-603Def Stan 02-626Def Stan 02-635Def Stan 02-707 Part 1Def Stan 02-707 Part 2Def Stan 02-721 Part 1Def Stan 02-721 Part 2Def Stan 02-728Policy Requirements and Design Guidance for Alarmand Warning SystemsGuide to the Policy, Design and Installation of FireDetection Systems in ShipsControl and Surveillance Equipment for Plant andSystem InstallationsRequirements for Electric Motors and Control GearAssociated with Domestic Workshops and SimilarMachinerySymbols and Abbreviations.Part 1: Guide to the General Use of SymbolsSymbols and Abbreviations.Part 2: Guide to Abbreviations and System CodeLettersGarbage Disposal in Surface Ships.Part 1: General RequirementsGarbage Disposal in Surface Ships.Part 2: Requirements for EquipmentRequirements for Domestic Hot and Cold Fresh WaterSystemsNov 2006 Page 15-14 Issue 4

Chapter 15 – Operability And User-Equipment InteractionStandardDef Stan 07-204 Part 1Def Stan 07-204 Part 3Def Stan 07-232Def Stan 07-233Def Stan 08-107TitleThe Requirements for Fire Protection and DamageControl for Surface Ships:Part 1: Policy for Surface ShipsThe Requirements for Fire Protection and DamageControl for Surface Ships.Part 3: Surface Ship and Submarine EquipmentGuide to Design Use Requirements of InternalCommunications Systems SubmarinesGuide to System Design and Description ofRationalised Internal Communications Equipment MkIIGeneral Requirements for the Design ofElectrotechnical and Naval Weapon EquipmentDef Stan 08-111Def Stan 08-155Requirements for Damage Surveillance and ControlManagement Systems in HM Surface Ships,Submarines and Royal Fleet AuxiliariesGuide to the System Design and Description ofRationalised Internal Communications Equipment Mk1and Mk2 VariationsHFI ProcessDef Stan 08-157Def Stan 08-158Def Stan 22-7SSP 27 Part 1SSP 59Guide to the Design of Flight Deck CommunicationsSystemsGuide to Internal Communication Equipment - FlightDeck CommunicationsSpecifications for Extending Ladders and FoldingPlatform Step-Ladders - Aluminium AlloyGuidance on Machinery Control and SurveillanceSystem Specification, Response and Assessment.Part 1: IntroductionCombat System Design Strategy – Project ManagersGuideTable 15-2: Standards Applicable to Operability and User-EquipmentInteractionStandardAIAA G-035ANEP 22TitleGuide to Human Performance MeasurementsHuman Factors Consideration for the Determination ofAutomation PolicyNov 2006 Page 15-15 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)ANEP 27APP6(A)Human Factors Guidelines for the Design of MMIs inOperational RoomsMilitary Symbols for Land Based SystemsBS EN ISO 8468:1995 Ships Bridge Layout and Associated Equipment –Requirements and GuidelinesBS EN 29241-2:1993,ISO 9241-2:1992BS EN 29241-3:1993,ISO 9241-3:1992Ergonomic Requirements for Office Work with VisualDisplay Terminals:Guidance on task requirementsErgonomic Requirements for Office Work with VisualDisplay Terminals:Visual display requirementsBS EN ISO 9241 Part 4 Ergonomic Requirements for Office Work with VisualDisplay Terminals:Keyboard requirementsHFI ProcessBS EN ISO 9241 Part 7 Ergonomic Requirements for Office Work with VisualDisplay Terminals:Display Requirements with ReflectionsBS EN ISO 9241 Part 8 Ergonomic Requirements for Office Work with VisualDisplay Terminals:Requirements for Displayed ColoursBS EN ISO 9241 Part 9 Ergonomic Requirements for Office Work with VisualDisplay Terminals:Requirements for Non-Keyboard Input DevicesBS EN ISO 9241 Part10BS EN ISO 9241 Part11BS EN ISO 9241 Part12BS EN ISO 9241 Part13BS EN ISO 9241 Part14Ergonomic Requirements for Office Work with VisualDisplay Terminals:Dialogue principlesErgonomic Requirements for Office Work with VisualDisplay Terminals:Guidance on usabilityErgonomic Requirements for Office Work with VisualDisplay Terminals:Presentation of informationErgonomic Requirements for Office Work with VisualDisplay Terminals:User guidanceErgonomic Requirements for Office Work with VisualDisplay Terminals:Menu dialoguesNov 2006 Page 15-16 Issue 4

Chapter 15 – Operability And User-Equipment InteractionBS EN ISO 9241 Part15BS EN ISO 9241 Part16BS EN ISO 9241 Part17BS EN ISO 10075-1:2000(ISO 10075:1991).Def Stan 02-106 Part 1Def Stan 02-106 Part 2Def Stan 02-576Def Stan 07-239Def Stan 08-147 Part 2ISO 9355 Part 1: 1999ISO 9355 Part 2SI 1992/2792Ergonomic Requirements for Office Work with VisualDisplay Terminals:Command dialoguesErgonomic Requirements for Office Work with VisualDisplay Terminals:Direct manipulation dialoguesErgonomic Requirements for Office Work with VisualDisplay Terminals:Form filling dialoguesErgonomic principles related to mental workloadPart 1: General terms and definitionsRequirements for Medical and Dental Organisation inHM Surface Ships and Submarines:Part 1: Common Requirements – Medical and DentalFacilitiesRequirements for Medical and Dental Organisation inHM Surface Ships and Submarines:Part 2: Specific Requirements – Medical and DentalFacilities in HM Surface ShipsGuide to Closed Circuit Television SurveillanceEquipmentGuide to System Design of Voice InternalCommunications Equipment for SubmarinesThe Requirements for Fire Protection and DamageControl for Surface Ships:Part 2: SubmarinesErgonomics requirements for the design of displaysand control actuatorsPart 1: Human Interactions with displays and controlactuatorsErgonomics requirements for the design of displaysand control actuatorsPart 2: DisplaysThe Health and Safety (Display Screen Equipment)Regulations 1992 (DSE Regs) (as amended)HFI ProcessSI 1994/3260 The Electrical Equipment (Safety) Regulations 1994Table 15-3: Other Related StandardsNov 2006 Page 15-17 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)15.3 HFI Activities15.3.1 Concept Phase Activities15.3.1.1 Outline Use of AutomationPurposeInputsTo provide a baseline concept for the overall design of theequipment with a high-level view of the level of automation anduse of technology.Requirements for equipment.Methods • Operational Scenario Description.• Human Factors Trade-Off Analysis.Steps • Identify the operational performance requirements to beachieved in the system for projected Operational Scenarios.• Identify the manpower targets to be achieved in the systemrequiring automation of equipment functions (Chap 4).• Identify technologies to be applied in the equipment toachieve operational performance requirements withinmanpower constraints.• Collate information about lessons learned from the designand use of existing equipments in the RN and elsewhere.• Identify areas of the equipment to be automated anddetermine technological and human factors risks.• Perform initial high-level trade-offs in accordance with theEarly Human Factors Analysis (EHFA) User Guide (see alsoMAP-01-010 [Ref 1] Chap 3).OutputsA high-level description of future equipment options describinguse of automation, user roles and human and technologicalrisks.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 15-18 Issue 4

Chapter 15 – Operability And User-Equipment Interaction15.3.1.2 Outline User TasksPurposeTo provide an initial description of the user tasks likely to besignificant in the equipment.Inputs • Product from outline use of automation (Sect 15.3.1.1).• Project Specific Target Audience Description (PSTAD)(Chap 6)Methods • Mission Analysis.• System Requirements.• Operational Scenario Description.• Allocation of Functions (Partitioning).• Task Synthesis.• Task Analysis.Steps • Identify the user and maintainer roles for the equipment fromcurrent manning practice (Chap 5), the Integrated LogisticsSupport (ILS) concept (Chap 16) and from the emergingconcept of operation for the new equipment (MissionAnalysis and System Requirements, Allocation of Function).• Identify user tasks that will be critical to the achievement ofoperational performance given the projected use ofautomation (Task Synthesis).• Develop initial task descriptions taking account of futureOperational Scenarios.OutputsOutline user and maintainer task descriptions for eachanticipated user role including the goal, high-level procedure andoutput of each significant task.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 15-19 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)15.3.1.3 Outline User-Equipment Interface FacilitiesPurposeTo identify significant or innovative user-equipment interfacerequirements.Inputs • Product from Outline User Tasks (Sect 15.3.1.2).• Information about technological options.Methods • Allocation of Function (Partitioning).• User-Equipment Interface Design.Steps • Identify high-level information flows between user roles andequipment functions based on the outlined use of automationand user tasks (Allocation of Function).• Refer to MOD Research Programmes to obtain informationabout the characteristics of future user-equipment interfaces.• Identify projected technologies underlying the developmentof user-equipment interfaces in the future equipment (e.g.use of intelligent software agents).• Identify significant or innovative display and control optionsfor application in the equipment (e.g. head-up displays, voicerecognition techniques etc).• Identify facilities to supplement and enhance userperformance and learning.• Identify the main categories of user-equipment facility foreach area of the equipment.OutputsHigh-level description of user-equipment interface facilities andoptions.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 15-20 Issue 4

Chapter 15 – Operability And User-Equipment Interaction15.3.2 Assessment Phase Activities15.3.2.1 Specify Allocation of FunctionsPurposeTo provide a systematic description of the functions providedwithin the equipment and to ensure their effective allocation asfully automatic, semi-automatic or manual.Inputs • Product from outline use of automation (Sect 15.3.1.1).• Target Audience Description (TAD) (Chap 6).Methods • Mission Analysis.• System Requirements.• Operational Scenario Description.• Function Analysis.• Allocation of Function (Partitioning).Steps • Develop or adapt criteria for allocating functions toequipment and human.• Agree overall roles of automatic facilities and personnel inconcept of operation with DEC, TES-SSG-CSHF, MLS CGand TES-SA-MA using Mission Analysis and System Reqs.• Identify systems engineering options for the overallequipment and isolate discrete functions (Function Analysis).• Select an appropriate method and notation for use inconducting the allocation of functions.• Apply allocation of function criteria to identify technologicaland human strengths and limitations.• Develop an allocation of functions for each equipment optionassigning functions as fully automatic, semi-automatic ormanual.• Develop logic and sequencing of functions within human andequipment components of equipment.• Describe information flow between human and equipment toidentify high-level user-equipment interfaces.• Conduct high-level modelling of information flow andbottlenecks through each equipment option, making use ofOperational Scenarios.• Conduct trade-offs to reduce operational, technological andhuman risks and to optimise overall equipment performance.Outputs • Equipment options comprising:o A description of the functions in each option;o The assignment of functions to human and equipment;o Information flows within each option;o Predicted performance and risks associated with eachoption.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 15-21 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)15.3.2.2 Identify Critical User PerformancePurposeTo identify user and maintainer performance capabilities andlimitations that are critical to the overall effectiveness of theequipment.Inputs • Product from Allocation of Functions (Sect 15.3.2.1).Methods • Mission Analysis.• System Requirements.• Operational Scenario Description.• Task Synthesis.• Task & Role Performance Modelling.• Task & Role Prototyping.Steps • Critical human performance capabilities and limitations areidentified in conjunction with HFI specialists; these aremodelled for each equipment option.• Use Mission Requirements and System Requirements toidentify and quantify mission critical equipment performanceobjectives and parameters, e.g. maximum number ofcontacts that may be tracked, maximum number of threatsthat may be engaged, maximum response time from threatdetection to response, time to respond to platformmanagement alarms etc. in each Operational Scenario.• Identify mission critical tasks performed by user roles(Chap 5) that are affected by each performance objective orparameter (Task Synthesis).• Model the effect of human performance capacity (perception,decision-making, response) on overall equipmentperformance under representative operational scenarios(Task & Role Performance Modelling).• Collect human performance data from existing systems.• Develop estimates of human performance from use of initialprototypes and demonstrators (Task & Role Prototyping).• Identify user roles and tasks that limit achievement ofequipment performance objectives.HFI ActivitiesOutputs • The results may be presented as a matrix identifying thehuman performance required for each task performed byeach user role in equipment options.• Human performance limitations and risks to achieving targetequipment performance are identified with supportingevidence.• Human performance parameters to be supported byequipment facilities and the user-equipment interface areidentified.Nov 2006 Page 15-22 Issue 4

Chapter 15 – Operability And User-Equipment Interaction15.3.2.3 Define User TasksPurposeInputsTo provide more detailed descriptions of the tasks to beperformed by users in each equipment option.Products from:• Critical user performance (Sect 15.3.2.2),• Outline tasks (Sect 15.3.1.2) and• Allocation of functions (Sect 15.3.2.1).Methods • Operational Scenario Description.• Task Analysis.• Task Synthesis.Steps • Identify the user roles for the equipment defined in theallocation of functions.• Identify user tasks in each option and decompose these intodetailed sub-tasks (Task Analysis & Task Synthesis).• Conduct analysis of the difficulty, frequency and importanceof tasks using Operational Scenarios.• Ensure that user characteristics required for taskperformance are reflected in the PSTAD (see Chap 6) andidentify any mismatch requiring further study of manningoptions or re-allocation of functions.• Identify human performance risks and limitations associatedwith tasks and re-allocate functions to optimise human taskdesign.• Develop detailed descriptions of task goals, inputs,processing, decision-making, outputs and problems for usein detailed design and other HFI processes.OutputsTask descriptions for each anticipated user role in eachequipment option.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 15-23 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)15.3.2.4 Specify Logical User-Equipment InterfacePurposeInputsTo describe the logical flow of information between users andequipment to be supported at the user-equipment interface.Products from:• Allocation of Functions (Sect 15.3.2.1) and• Define User Tasks (Sect 15.3.2.3).Methods • User-Equipment Interface Design.• Operational Scenario Description.StepsThis HFI activity draws on the high-level descriptions ofinformation flow between human and equipment generated inthe allocation of functions. This activity generates more detaileddefinitions of the data and controls required in the userequipmentinterface for each equipment option. The descriptiondoes not, at this stage, describe the physical format of displaysand controls nor the form of the dialogue. Use is made,however, of the task descriptions to indicate additional data andcontrols to support human performance and reduce errors.• Identify each information flow and group these into dialoguesusing task descriptions to determine each discrete dialogue(goal, task input and task output).• Describe the data presented to the user in detail includingalerts, alarms, warning and error conditions within eachdialogue.• Describe the data input by the user and identify requiredcontrol inputs e.g. ‘commit’, ‘save’, ‘undo’ etc.• Identify data output, and data input and controls required foradditional facilities to support human performance andlearning, e.g. on-line help, use of software intelligent agentsetc.• Conduct modelling of the logical user-equipment interface,using Operability Scenarios, to ensure that all data andcontrol requirements are met, the dialogues are complete,and all requirements for simultaneous display of data andaccess to controls are identified.HFI ActivitiesOutputsLogical user-equipment interface descriptions for each option,comprising:• The dialogues defining data displayed,• Data inputs,• Control inputs,• User support data outputs and controls and• Requirements for simultaneous displays and access tocontrols.Nov 2006 Page 15-24 Issue 4

Chapter 15 – Operability And User-Equipment Interaction15.3.2.5 Select Human Factors Style GuidePurposeTo identify the requirement for Human Factors Style Guides tohelp standardise the design of the user-equipment interface.Note that the production of a new style guide may sometimes bea time-consuming and expensive task; furthermore with COTSequipment it may not actually be necessary to provide such aguide.Inputs • Product from outline user-equipment interface facilities(Sect 15.3.1.3).• Existing Human Factors Style Guides.Methods • Human Factors Style Guide.Steps • Human Factors Style Guides provide detailed guidanceabout the required format of elements of the user interfaceincluding:o windows design.o use of colour.o menu design.o use of input controls etc.• The use of commercial-off-the-shelf products may also placeconstraints on the selection of the user-equipment interfacestyle.• If necessary the project may require a specific style guide tobe developed.OutputsHuman Factors Style Guide requirements for use in designingand assessing the user-equipment interfaceHFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 15-25 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)15.3.2.6 Specify Operability CriteriaPurposeInputsTo specify parameters of user performance that must beachievable using the user-equipment interface.Products from:• Critical User Performance Criteria (Sect 15.3.2.2) and• Logical User-Equipment Interface (Sect 15.3.2.4).Methods • Operability Criteria Definition.StepsWhereas the goal of developing a consistent user interface isdealt with through the use of a Style Guide, this HFI activityidentifies the user performance objectives that must besupported by the design.• Identify each dialogue defined in the logical user-equipmentinterface.• Identify critical user performance to be achieved through theuse of each dialogue.• Develop quantitative, achievable and testable metrics todefine the operability parameters for each dialogue e.g. ‘theuser must be able to acknowledge and respond to a threatwithin X seconds’ (where X is defined as the maximum timeallowed for a response if the required level of overallequipment efficiency and effectiveness is to be achieved).• Identify general Operability Criteria for the user-equipmentinterface, e.g. ‘a user must be able to select contextdependenthelp for any object within Y seconds’.Outputs • Operability criteria for each dialogue in each equipmentoption.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 15-26 Issue 4

Chapter 15 – Operability And User-Equipment Interaction15.3.2.7 Identify User-Equipment Interface PrototypingPurposeTo develop the user-equipment interface prototyping strategy toensure that all operability criteria are met during the designprocess.Inputs • Product from Operability Criteria (Sect 15.3.2.6).Methods • Operational Scenario Descriptions.• User-Equipment Interface Prototyping.Steps • Identify the operability criteria and specify assessments to beperformed during the design.• Select Operational Scenarios to be applied duringprototyping.• Discuss content, form and user representatives required forprototyping with SSG-CSHF or MLS CG and/or the ILSManager (ILSM).• Identify media for use in prototyping.• Plan prototyping as part of design process.OutputsUser-equipment interface prototyping plan.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 15-27 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)15.3.3 Demonstration Phase Activities15.3.3.1 Specify User TasksPurposeTo specify task descriptions for the equipment.Inputs • Product from Define User Tasks (Sect 15.3.2.3).Methods • Operational Scenario Description.• Task Analysis.• Task Synthesis.Steps • Identify the user roles for the equipment defined in theallocation of functions.• Identify user tasks and decompose these into detailed subtaskstaking account of the emerging design (Task Analysis& Task Synthesis).• Conduct analysis of the difficulty, frequency and importanceof tasks using Operational Scenarios.• Ensure that user characteristics required for taskperformance are reflected in the PSTAD (see Chap 6) andidentify any mismatch requiring further study of manningoptions or re-allocation of functions.• Identify human performance risks and limitations associatedwith tasks and re-allocate functions or redesign the userequipmentinterface to optimise human task design.• Develop detailed descriptions of task goals, inputs,processing, decision-making, outputs and problems for usein detailed design and other HFI processes.OutputsTask descriptions for each anticipated user role in theequipment.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 15-28 Issue 4

Chapter 15 – Operability And User-Equipment Interaction15.3.3.2 Apply Human Factors Style GuidePurposeTo use the Human Factors Style Guide to achieve the design ofa consistent user-equipment interface.Inputs • Project Style Guide (Sect 15.3.2.5).Methods • Human Factors Style Guide.StepsOutputsThe application of the Style Guide can be achieved in a numberof ways. The main aim is to ensure that it is used in a fullyintegrated way during the user-equipment interface designprocess. The recommendations in the Style Guide are appliedas a checklist to check conformance of the design and to obtainexplanations of the nature and effect of non-conformance.Completed checklist of Style Guide recommendations againstactual design conformance or non-conformance for eachdialogue.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 15-29 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)15.3.3.3 Specify User-Equipment InterfacePurposeTo specify the physical design of the user interface andhardware required for display and control.Inputs • Product from Task Specification (Sect 15.3.3.1) and• Application of Style Guide (Sect 15.3.3.2).• User Role and Team Specifications (Chap 5).• PSTAD (Chap 6).• This activity may be conducted in an iterative manner withUser-Equipment Interface Prototyping (sect 15.3.3.4).Methods • User-Equipment Interface Design.Steps • The specification and development of the physical displays,dialogue design, user navigation, command options, menustructure and input controls.• The procedure is dependent upon the systems engineeringmethod and tools used in the project.• The process used must provide sufficient visibility to enablecontinuous assessments of the acceptability of the design toSSG-CSHF, MLS CG and other MoD representatives.• The user-equipment interface must be designed to meetagreed Style Guide requirements and specified operabilitycriteria.• The user-equipment interface must be compatible with theuser tasks to be conducted and the skills and knowledge ofusers.OutputsFull specification of the user-equipment interface including:• Display devices.• Input controls.• Window types and controls.• Display designs.• Menu structures and controls.• Error messages.• Error recovery controls.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 15-30 Issue 4

Chapter 15 – Operability And User-Equipment Interaction15.3.3.4 Conduct User-Equipment Interface PrototypingPurposeTo provide assessments of the developing user-equipmentinterface design against operability criteria to inform the designprocess.Inputs • Operability Criteria (Sect 15.3.2.6),• User-Equipment Design Documentation (Sect 15.3.3.3),• Prototyping Plan (Sect 15.3.2.7).Methods • User-Equipment Interface Design.• Operability Evaluation.• User-Equipment Interface Prototyping.Steps • The user-equipment interface dialogues identified in theprototyping plan are assessed against operability criteria.• The results of the assessments are used to provide feedbackto the design process.• Prototyping must assess each dialogue against all specifiedoperability criteria.• Each display and control object in the user interface shouldalso be assessed during prototyping to provide on-goingadvice to the design process.• Low-cost prototypes, simulations and the equipment may beused for this purpose.• A variety of methods are available for assessing operabilityincluding subject matter expert ratings, video recording andembedded recording of user performance.OutputsResults of user prototyping indicating achievement or nonachievementof operability criteria by each dialogue andfeedback about the operability of the displays and controlsforming the user-equipment interface.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 15-31 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)15.3.3.5 Specify User Support FacilitiesPurposeTo specify the design of the user support package including onlinehelp and reference materials, user documentation and otherjob aids.Inputs • Product from Task Specifications (Sect 15.3.3.1) and• User Role and Team Descriptions (Chap 5).• User-Equipment Interface Design Documentation(Sect 15.3.3.3).• PSTAD (Chap 6).Methods • User-Equipment Interface Design.Steps • The procedure is the same as that for specifying the userequipmentinterface (Sect 15.3.3.3).• General operability criteria for user support facilities areassessed through prototyping (Sect 15.3.3.4).• The development of support facilities must be consistent andintegrated with the development of training products(Chap 7).Outputs • User support facilities including:o On-line help,o Reference materials,o User documentation ando Job aids.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 15-32 Issue 4

Chapter 15 – Operability And User-Equipment Interaction15.3.3.6 Specify Operating ProceduresPurposeTo provide operating procedures for each user role.Inputs • User-Equipment Interface Design (Sect 15.3.3.3)• Task Descriptions (Sect 15.3.3.1)• User Role and Team Description (Chap 5).MethodsStepsOutputsNot Identified.The operating procedures cover the use of the equipment.These are based on the user task descriptions for on-line andoff-line activities. The user support facilities (Sect 15.3.3.5) andthe training products (Chap 7) must reflect the final form of theoperating procedures. Health and safety requirements mustalso be reflected in the operating procedures (Chap 17).Operating procedures form the basis for the equipment’sStandard Operating Procedures (SOPs).Operating procedures covering all on-line and off-line tasksperformed by each user role.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 15-33 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)15.3.4 Manufacture Phase Activities15.3.4.1 Assess User-Equipment Interface ConsistencyPurposeTo assess the consistency of the user-equipment interface.Inputs • User-Equipment Interface Design (Sect 15.3.3.3) and• The HFI Style Guide (Sect 15.3.3.2).MethodsNot Identified.Steps • The consistency of the user-equipment interface is assessedagainst the requirements of the HFI Style Guide.• Consistency is also assessed across all equipments formingpart of the system to ensure that there is no negative transferbetween the interpretation and use of different facilities.Negative transfer occurs where a display indication or theuse of a control within an entity directly conflicts or interfereswith the subsequent interpretation or operation of anotherentity elsewhere within the equipment.• Consistency may be assessed using checklists andstructured appraisals of each part of the equipment.OutputsAssessments of the consistency of the user-equipment interface.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 15-34 Issue 4

Chapter 15 – Operability And User-Equipment Interaction15.3.4.2 Assess User-Equipment Interface Efficiency andEffectivenessPurposeTo assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the userequipmentinterface in supporting achievement of operationalperformance objectives.Inputs • Critical User Performance Statements (Sect 15.3.2.2) and• User-Equipment Interface Design (Sect 15.3.3.3).Methods • Operational Scenario Descriptions.• Task and Role Performance Modelling.• Task and Role Prototyping.• User-equipment interface prototyping.• Operability Evaluation.Steps • Operational performance objectives associated with eachuser role are linked to the operability criteria (Sect 15.3.2.6)developed for the design process.• Structured evaluations are performed with the equipment,using Operational Scenarios, to assess overall performance,e.g. time to respond to a threat, time to classify a contact etc.OutputsAssessments of the effectiveness of the user-equipmentinterface.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 15-35 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)15.3.4.3 Assess User Support FacilitiesPurposeTo assess the efficiency of the user-equipment interface insupporting achievement of operational performance objectives.Inputs • Critical user performance statements (Sect 15.3.2.2) and• User-equipment interface design (Sect 15.3.3.3).Methods • Operational Scenario Descriptions.• Task and Role Performance Modelling.• Task and Role Prototyping.• User-Equipment Interface prototyping.• Operability Evaluation.StepsOutputsOperational performance objectives associated with each userrole are linked to the operability criteria (Sect 15.3.2.6)developed for the design process. Structured evaluations areperformed with the equipment, using Operational Scenarios, toassess the efficiency of using the user-equipment interface, e.g.throughput time for each discrete task, elimination of repetitiveactions, minimisation of the number of dialogue actions etc.Assessments of the efficiency of the user-equipment interface.15.3.4.4 Assess Operating ProceduresPurposeTo assess the operating procedures for the equipment.Inputs • Task Specifications (Sect 15.3.3.1)• User-Equipment Interface Design (Sect 15.3.3.3)• Operating procedures (Sect 15.3.3.6)MethodsNot identified.HFI ActivitiesSteps • The operating procedures (Sect 15.3.3.6) are assessed toensure that they cover all aspects of the operation of theequipment. Each procedure is checked to ensure that it isperformed as effectively and as efficiently as is possible.• Compatibility of the set of operating procedures assigned toeach user role is assessed to ensure that these areconsistent with the tasks and responsibilities assigned to thatrole (Chap 5).OutputsAssessments of the operating procedures.Nov 2006 Page 15-36 Issue 4

Chapter 15 – Operability And User-Equipment Interaction15.3.5 In Service Phase Activities15.3.5.1 Continue Manufacture Phase AssessmentsIn-Service phase support is based upon continuing the activities underManufacture Phase (Sect 15.3.4), with an emphasis on outputting requirementsas a result of these activities, which can then be used to instigate the followingactivity (Sect 15.3.5.2).15.3.5.2 Support ModificationsPurposeTo provide effective reassessment and specification ofoperability and user-equipment interfaces, resulting frommodification to the overall requirement during the operationallife.Inputs • Operability and User Interface Specifications and Designs• Revised requirement (e.g. system design, functional)MethodsAs per Demonstration Phase.Steps • Develop interface HF requirements resulting from the revisedoverall requirement that is driving the modification• Modify interface specification and design in accordance withthe requirements identified above (Sect 15.3.5.1).OutputsRevised interface specifications.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 15-37 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)15.3.6 Disposal Phase Activities15.3.6.1 Support Future ProjectsPurposeTo ensure that lessons learned from current projects arecaptured and utilised to reduce future project and whole lifecosts, and maximise safety.Inputs • Outputs from all In-Service Phase activities• Outputs from the HFI log.MethodsNot identified.Steps • Update HFI log – check for consistency, repetition andomission.• Categorise data to support future utility.OutputsHFI audit trail log of lessons learned regarding interface design,for future projects’ use.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 15-38 Issue 4MAP-01-011 CH 15_23.doc

CHAPTER 16 – MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORTCONTENTS16.1 HFI Technical Issues..................................................................................................16-316.1.1 Introduction and Overview ..................................................................16-316.1.2 Stakeholders.......................................................................................16-616.1.3 Maintainer Roles.................................................................................16-616.1.4 Fault-Finding and Diagnostic Strategy................................................16-616.1.5 Maintenance Tools and Job Aids........................................................16-716.1.6 Maintenance Design ...........................................................................16-716.2 HFI Process ......................................................................................................16-916.2.1 HFI Focus Responsibilities ...............................................................16-1216.2.2 Relevant Standards ..........................................................................16-1216.3 HFI Activities...................................................................................................16-1416.3.1 Concept Phase Activities ..................................................................16-1416.3.1.1 Identify Maintenance Policy............................................16-1416.3.1.2 Outline Platform Maintenance Concept..........................16-1516.3.1.3 Outline Maintenance Manning........................................16-1616.3.1.4 Outline Equipment Maintenance Requirements.............16-1716.3.1.5 Outline Equipment Maintenance Tasks..........................16-1816.3.1.6 Outline Repair and Supply Facilities ..............................16-1916.3.1.7 Specify Maintenance HFI Parameters............................16-2016.3.1.8 Specify Ship Husbandry Policy ......................................16-2216.3.2 Assessment Phase Activities............................................................16-2316.3.2.1 Identify Maintenance Options.........................................16-2316.3.2.2 Define Maintenance HFI Aspects...................................16-2416.3.2.3 Establish Maintenance Manpower Requirement............16-2516.3.2.4 Define Ship Husbandry HFI Aspects..............................16-2616.3.2.5 Specify Maintenance Facilities .......................................16-2716.3.2.6 Specify Maintenance Tasks ...........................................16-2816.3.2.7 Specify Maintenance Documentation.............................16-2916.3.2.8 Specify Maintenance Procedures...................................16-2916.3.3 Demonstration Phase Activities ........................................................16-3016.3.3.1 Assess Maintenance Access..........................................16-3016.3.3.2 Assess Ship Husbandry Workload .................................16-3016.3.3.3 Assess Maintenance Commonality ................................16-3116.3.3.4 Assess Operability of Maintenance Facilities .................16-3216.3.3.5 Assess Maintenance Documentation .............................16-3316.3.3.6 Assess Maintenance Procedures...................................16-3316.3.4 Manufacture Phase Activities............................................................16-3416.3.4.1 Co-ordinate HFI Aspects of Maintenance with Training,Support, etc. ...................................................................16-3416.3.4.2 Monitor Maintenance Operability During Acceptance Trials16-35Nov 2006 Page 16-1 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)16.3.4.3 Transfer HFI Information to DLO....................................16-3616.3.5 In-Service Phase Activities ...............................................................16-3716.3.5.1 Monitor Efficiency and Effectiveness of Maintenance ....16-3716.3.5.2 Initiate In-Service HFI Audits as Required .....................16-3816.3.5.3 Review Operational Reports for Evidence of HFI Issues16-3816.3.6 Disposal Phase Activities..................................................................16-39Nov 2006 Page 16-2 Issue 4

Chapter 16 – Maintenance and Support16.1 HFI Technical Issues16.1.1 Introduction and OverviewThis chapter addresses HFI aspects of platform maintenance (ship husbandry)and equipment maintenance and support.HFI Technical IssuesFigure 16-1: A typical shiphusbandry taskAt the platform level, maintenance is mainly concerned with ship husbandry,ranging from upper deck maintenance to bilge cleaning. Examples ofmaintenance issues include:• Unsatisfactory Upper Deck design and layout leading to water retention,right angle edgings instead of rounded, use of ferrous fastenings andcombinations of dissimilar metals leading to corrosion, etc.• Heads and bathroom pipe work drainage, deck materials and lack ofadequate ventilation creating a corrosive environment.• Poor resistance of external equipment, structure and coatings toenvironmental corrosion.• The ease (or difficulty) with which protective coatings can be applied toship and equipment surfaces.Nov 2006 Page 16-3 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI Technical Issues• Machinery space layout feature (pipe work, lack of equipment save-alls,poor access to bilges for coating repair) that increase maintenancerequirements or make maintenance more difficult.• Passageway and accommodation space deck linings that require frequentupkeep.• Dirt traps created by exposed pipe and cable runs and equipment seats inpassageways due to poor installation detailing (e.g. inadequate cleaningenvelope).• Dust traps in ventilation system and poor air filtration.• Omission of save-alls on equipment to prevent working fluidscontaminating the bilges.Many of these issues may be prevented by the application of Def Stan 08-123‘Requirements for the Design and Testing of Equipment to Meet EnvironmentalConditions’ [Ref 27].Platform maintenance requirements can strongly influence the required level ofmanning and problems created by difficult maintenance tasks or highmaintenance workload may exacerbate health hazards and degrade ship safety.The way in which maintenance tasks are designed and arranged, and theresulting workload, can contribute significantly to the complementing requirement(Chap 4). Maintenance and ship husbandry requirements must therefore becarefully controlled.Figure 16-2: A platform maintenance taskNov 2006 Page 16-4 Issue 4

Chapter 16 – Maintenance and SupportEarly consideration of external and internal hull design and material specification,together with surface coating policies, should be instituted in a policy documentwith the aim of minimising the ship husbandry workload. The contents of such apolicy will have a direct influence upon the achievement of reduced manpowertargets.As the design of the platform progresses, task analysis and task synthesismethods are used to define the extent of the husbandry workload. The results ofthis process in turn helps to refine the complement estimates. Havingestablished the task and workload requirements, an aim should be to defineperformance parameters against which ship husbandry tasks can be assessed.This will enable better specification of ship husbandry design requirements to bemade.HFI Technical IssuesFigure 16-3: Planned maintenance taskThe quantification of maintenance workload uses information provided byPlanned Maintenance Schedules and Availability, Reliability and Maintainability(ARM) characteristics of equipment, both of which are subject to policy decisionswithin the platform project. Access to equipment for maintenance is also aconcern, as are certain maintenance commonality requirements across allequipments and systems in order to minimise training and enable operatormaintainerroles.Integrated Logistics Support (ILS) and Human Factors Integration (HFI) arecomplementary processes and the advice contained in this chapter needs to beread in conjunction with the ILS policy for the equipment and platform.Nov 2006 Page 16-5 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)16.1.2 StakeholdersHFI Technical IssuesA list of potential stakeholders for this area is given below. This list is notexhaustive and should be seen to be a guide only. HFI Foci should refine this listbased upon the structure of their project, the attendees at the relevant HFSG orHFWG and in light of guidance and requests from industry, DEC and Customer 2representatives.• DEC• IPT HFI Foci• IPT ILS Manager(ILSM)• MLS CG• SSG-ShipDes16.1.3 Maintainer RolesIncreases in the use of automation and the reliability of equipment have changedthe maintenance roles associated with equipment. In addition to these factors,the RN has developed personnel who are dual qualified in maintenance andoperations. However a careful balance must be attained when considering thefollowing types of issues:• Whether personnel should be primarily operators who have maintenanceskills, or skilled maintainers who are dual qualified in operational duties.• The balance of demands placed on operators between maintenance andother duties.• Availability of highly skilled maintainers on-board or remotely viacommunications links.• Reliance on the use of automatic diagnostic and repair facilities.System management, particularly of software, has been added to the moretraditional hardware maintenance roles needed to support the integrity ofequipment. Decisions need to be made about the allocation of systemmanagement tasks to dedicated maintainers and to other personnel. Theincreasing dependency upon computer-based systems has introduced a newhuman role of ‘platform system manager’.16.1.4 Fault-Finding and Diagnostic StrategyThe design of equipment for maintenance needs to balance accessrequirements, skill levels of personnel, diagnostic and repair policy with the needto continue operations. Modern technology can allow some equipment to berapidly re-configured to work around equipment faults that in the past would haverequired interruption of operations.The design of the user-equipment interface needs to support rapid decisionmakingabout the impact of faults on the equipment resources available. In thefuture complex faults may be solved remotely via communication with shoreestablishments although bandwidth limitations and EMCON policy may conflictwith this approach.Nov 2006 Page 16-6 Issue 4

Chapter 16 – Maintenance and SupportHFI Technical IssuesFigure 16-4: Access to equipment for maintenance can be a concern16.1.5 Maintenance Tools and Job AidsMaintenance-support technology is advancing rapidly with the emergence ofelectronic documentation, computer-assisted diagnosis and repair software, theuse of synthetic displays for maintenance tasks and personal head-up displays toprovide immediate access to each of these support facilities at maintenancepoints. The design of this technology needs to take into account the skills,knowledge and other characteristics of available manpower e.g. reading level.Basic anthropometric (body size and strength) and visual and auditorycapabilities and limitations also need to be considered in the design of tools andjob aids.16.1.6 Maintenance DesignConsideration of the HFI aspects of maintenance design should be carried out inconjunction with the ILS Manager (ILSM). The following design issues havebeen raised from interviews with serving personnel (see ‘HF Design IssuesWithin Submarine CS’ [Ref 20]):• There are problems with the allocation of jobs to personnel. Should therebe operator-maintainers or maintainer-operators for the equipment?• Equipment reliability needs to be considered when in a state of highreadiness. Failures requiring maintenance often appear after eight hourson some current equipment.• If manpower is reduced to too low a level, the maintainers may makedemands on operators when they are required for other duties.• Operator and maintainer tasks are carried out in series not in parallel. Sothere is little problem for such tasks as repair and replace.Nov 2006 Page 16-7 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Setting equipment to work may remain as a responsibility for specialists.HFI Technical Issues• It is necessary to have effective documentation if maintenance operationsare to be conducted by users.• Maintenance requirements are expected to decrease with improvedworkstations and increased automation.• Platform management tasks have more maintenance aspects. The needto interact directly with machinery means that maintainability must beimproved, e.g. allowing space for access and the provision of lighting.Nov 2006 Page 16-8 Issue 4

Chapter 16 – Maintenance and Support16.2 HFI ProcessThe sequence of HFI activities described in the remainder of this chapter issummarised in Figure 16-5.Identify MaintenancePolicySpecifyMaintenance HFIParametersDefine MaintenanceHFI AspectsAssess MaintenanceAccessOutline PlatformMaintenanceConceptEstablishMaintenanceManpowerRequirementAssess MaintenanceCommonalitySpecify ShipHusbandry PolicyDefine ShipHusbandry HFIAspectsAssess ShipHusbandry WorkloadOutline MaintenanceManningIdentify MaintenanceOptionsSpecify MaintenanceFacilitiesAssess Operability ofMaintenanceFacilitiesOutline EquipmentMaintenance TasksSpecify MaintenanceDocumentationAssess MaintenanceDocumentationOutline EquipmentMaintenanceRequirementsSpecify MaintenanceTasksOutline Repair &Supply FacilitiesSpecify MaintenanceProceduresAssess MaintenanceProceduresDEMONSTRATION ASSESSMENTCONCEPTHFI ProcessFigure 16-5: The HFI Process for Maintenance and SupportNov 2006 Page 16-9 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)Co-ordinate HFI aspectswith training, support, etc.Monitor maintenanceoperability duringacceptance trials &assess evidence.Transfer HFI informationused in procurement toDLO for use in supportphase.MANUFACTUREMonitor efficiency &effectiveness ofmaintenance.Review operationalreports for evidence ofHFI issues.Initiate in-service HFIaudits as required.IN-SERVICEHFI ProcessNot identifiedDISPOSALFigure 16-5 Continued: The HFI Process for Maintenance and SupportThe process of defining HFI aspects of maintenance and support involves liaisonbetween the HFI Focus and various stakeholders in conducting the HFI activities.The HFI activities are presented in Table 16-1. The ticks represent theprocurement Phases at which the activities are likely to be conducted.C A D M I D HFI ActivitiesIdentify Maintenance PolicyOutline Platform Maintenance ConceptOutline Maintenance ManningOutline Equipment Maintenance RequirementsOutline Equipment Maintenance TasksOutline Repair and Supply FacilitiesNov 2006 Page 16-10 Issue 4

Chapter 16 – Maintenance and SupportC A D M I D HFI Activities Specify Maintenance HFI ParametersSpecify Ship Husbandry PolicyIdentify Maintenance OptionsDefine Maintenance HFI AspectsDefine Ship Husbandry HFI AspectsEstablish Maintenance Manpower RequirementSpecify Maintenance TasksSpecify Maintenance FacilitiesSpecify Maintenance DocumentationSpecify Maintenance Procedures Assess Maintenance Access Needs Assess Ship Husbandry WorkloadHFI Process Assess Maintenance Commonality Assess Operability of Maintenance Facilities Assess Maintenance Documentation Assess Maintenance ProceduresCo-ordinate HFI aspects of maintenance with training,support, etc.Monitor maintenance operability during acceptancetrials. Assess evidence from trials.Transfer (to DLO) HFI information used inprocurement for use in support phase.Monitor efficiency and effectiveness of maintenance.Initiate in-service HFI audits as requiredReview operational reports for evidence of HFI issues.Table 16-1: HFI Activities in Equipment Maintenance and SupportNov 2006 Page 16-11 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)16.2.1 HFI Focus ResponsibilitiesThe HFI Focus is responsible for the following:• Co-ordination of HFI maintenance and ship husbandry activities with theIntegrated Logistics Support (ILS) programme and the Logistics SupportAnalysis (LSA).• Liaison with System Project Managers to ensure that maintenancemanning estimates, equipment fit and workspace aspects of equipmentproject HFI and ILS programmes (Chap 14) are co-ordinated with those ofthe platform.• Liaison with stakeholders, especially the Integrated Logistics SupportManager (ILSM), to ensure that maintenance and ship husbandry policyreflects best practice in the RN.• Identification and development of Human Factors Style Guides (Annex 3)to promote maintenance commonality across the platform (Chap 15).HFI Process• Identification and control of ship husbandry workload drivers in the platformdesign.• Co-ordination of maintenance workspace requirements within the GeneralArrangement (Chap 8).• The development and application of assessment and acceptance methodsto test HFI aspects of maintenance in conjunction with the ILS Plan (ILSP).• Liaison with DEC, MLS CG and IPT System Support Managers to agreethe maintenance duties for personnel manning the equipment.• Liaison with FLEET-NPS to ensure that the maintenance manningassumptions are appropriate given the RN Manpower Policy and complywith the assumptions made in the complementing process (Chap 4).• Liaison with FOTR to identify the training implications of new maintenanceskills and knowledge requirements and new job descriptions (Chap 7).• Liaison with ILSM to co-ordinate the HFI aspects of maintenance and toensure that results are compatible with the ILS concept for the equipment.16.2.2 Relevant StandardsThe applicable standards are listed in Table 16-2 below. Further details on thesestandards are included in Annex 2, together with other related standards.StandardDef Stan 00-25 Part 15Def Stan 00-25 Part 19TitleHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 15: Principles and ProcessHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 19: Human Engineering Domain – TechnicalGuidance and DataNov 2006 Page 16-12 Issue 4

Chapter 16 – Maintenance and SupportStandardDef Stan 00-60 Part 0Def Stan 00-60 Part 1Def Stan 00-60 Part 3Def Stan 00-60 Part 10Def Stan 00-60 Part 20Def Stan 00-60 Part 21TitleIntegrated Logistics Support.Part 0: Application of integrated logistics support (ILS)Integrated Logistics Support.Part 1: Logistic Support Analysis (LSA) and LogisticSupport Analysis Records (LSAR)Integrated Logistics Support.Part 3: Guidance for Application of Software SupportIntegrated Logistics Support.Part 10: Electronic DocumentationIntegrated Logistics Support.Part 20: Application of Supply Support ProceduresIntegrated Logistics Support.Part 21: Procedures for internal provisioningDef Stan 00-60 Part 22Def Stan 02-139Integrated Logistics Support.Part 22: Procedures for codificationCode of Practice for Ship Husbandry.HFI ProcessDef Stan 07-252Def Stan 08-103 Part 2Def Stan 08-123Def Stan 21-17Requirements for the Preparation and Painting ofSubmarines.Requirements for Maintenance Envelopes andRemoval Routes.Part 2: Requirements for SubmarinesRequirements for the Design and Testing ofEquipment to Meet Environmental Conditions.Requirements for Maintainability Demonstrations ofNaval Systems.Table 16-2: Relevant StandardsStandardBR 2203BR 3939Def Stan 02-341 Part 1Ship Husbandry Manual.TitleHull Preservation Processes.Requirements for Cleaning of Items, Components &Equipment for Fluid Systems – CleaningTable 16-3: Other Related StandardsNov 2006 Page 16-13 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)16.3 HFI Activities16.3.1 Concept Phase Activities16.3.1.1 Identify Maintenance PolicyPurposeInputsMethodsStepsTo confirm current maintenance policy.Maintenance Policy from ILS Use Study and maintenanceconcept from the ILSM.Not Identified.In conjunction with the ILS Use Study define the followingaspects of maintenance policy:• Fault diagnosis and repair philosophy.• Availability and supply doctrine.• Anticipated service life.• RN Manpower policy regarding maintainers.• RN Training policy and facilities for maintainer training(Chap 7).OutputsImplications of maintenance policy for HFI aspects includingmanning, maintainer roles and use of technology.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 16-14 Issue 4

Chapter 16 – Maintenance and Support16.3.1.2 Outline Platform Maintenance ConceptPurpose • To specify the maintenance concept for the platform.• To determine high-level HFI implications.• To perform appropriate trade-offs.Inputs • Early ILS studies including the Use Study.• ILS strategy/vision for the support of the vessel (see Def Stan00-60 ‘Integrated Logistics Support‘ [Ref 28]).Methods • Human Factors Trade-off Analysis.StepsIn conjunction with ILSM:• Confirm current maintenance policy.• Outline high-level platform maintenance requirements.• Assess implications of policy requirements for maintenancemanning, roles and jobs (Chap 4).• Assess implications for the high-level organisation ofoperator-maintainer training on-board and ashore (Chap 7).• Assess implications for use of automation and userequipmentinterfaces.• Assess implications for the layout of the vessel and itsworkspaces (Chap 8 through Chap 11).• Assess implications for health hazards and safety (Chap 17).• Perform Human Factors Trade-offs to assess the optimalbalance of investment between completing options anddifferent HFI aspects.Outputs • Outline platform maintenance policy and requirements• Assessment of HFI issues, constraints and risks.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 16-15 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)16.3.1.3 Outline Maintenance ManningPurposeTo identify maintainer manning for input to the complementstudies.Inputs • Maintenance roles in the team organisation (Chap 5).• Maintenance tasks from the LSA studies or from tasksynthesis.• Maintenance policy constraints (Sect 16.3.1.2).Methods • Operational Scenario Description.• Allocation of Functions (Partitioning).• Task Analysis.• Task Synthesis.• Role Definition.• Skills Analysis.• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description.• Job Design.• Team Design.• Task & Role Performance Modelling.Steps • Develop maintenance manpower estimates for input into thecomplementing process.• Identify maintenance tasks allocated to human roles.• Identify maintainer roles identified in organisational options(Chap 5).• Identify skill and other requirements to associate roles withrank, rate and specialisation.• Identify maintenance workload for each role in order toidentify numbers of personnel required.OutputsThe draft manning estimates comprise the following:HFI Activities• Draft numbers of officers by rank and branch.• Draft numbers of Senior Ratings by rate and branch.• Draft numbers of Junior Ratings by rate and branch.• Draft task descriptions and skill requirements.The manning estimates contribute to the Outline Basic ManningRequirement (BMR) (see Chap 4). The information is used todevelop the Project Specific Target Audience Description(PSTAD) (see Chap 6) for the personnel allocated maintenanceduties.Nov 2006 Page 16-16 Issue 4

Chapter 16 – Maintenance and Support16.3.1.4 Outline Equipment Maintenance RequirementsPurposeTo identify high-level maintenance requirements for theequipment.Inputs • Use Study, and• Outline specifications for equipment.Methods • Human Factors Trade-Off Analysis.Steps • The likely technologies and their on-board and ashoremaintenance needs are outlined.• New concepts for maintenance are explored e.g. use ofhead-up displays accessing maintainer job aids, remotemaintenance of on-board facilities.• Anticipated hazardous maintenance operations andconditions are identified• Perform trade-offs between different HFI-related aspects ofmaintenance concept.OutputsAn outline of the future maintenance concept for the equipmentand its HFI implications for task design, training, humanequipmentinterface design, maintainer job aids and health andsafety policy.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 16-17 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)16.3.1.5 Outline Equipment Maintenance TasksPurposeTo provide outline descriptions of the tasks to be performed bymaintainers in each equipment option.Inputs • Product of Outline Equipment Maintenance Requirements(Sect 16.3.1.4).• Details of the equipment design.Methods • Mission Analysis.• System Requirements.• Operational Scenario Description.• Allocation of Functions (Partitioning).• Task Synthesis.• Task Decomposition.Steps • Identify the maintainer roles for the equipment defined in theallocation of functions.• Identify maintainer tasks in each option and decompose theseinto detailed sub-tasks.• Conduct analysis of the difficulty, frequency and importanceof tasks using estimates of availability, reliability andmaintainability of equipment.• Ensure that maintainer characteristics required for taskperformance are reflected in the PSTAD (see Chap 6) andidentify any mismatch requiring further study of manningoptions or re-allocation of functions.• Identify human performance risks and limitations associatedwith tasks and re-allocate functions to optimise human taskdesign.• Develop detailed descriptions of task goals, inputs,processing, decision-making, outputs and problems for use indetailed design and other HFI processes.OutputsTask descriptions for each anticipated maintainer in eachequipment option.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 16-18 Issue 4

Chapter 16 – Maintenance and Support16.3.1.6 Outline Repair and Supply FacilitiesPurposeTo identify outline descriptions of the maintenance facilities, repairfacilities and other support aids.Inputs • ILS studies of maintenance repair lines and logistics supply.• Outline Equipment Maintenance Requirements (Sect 16.3.1.4).MethodsNot Identified.Steps • Collate system and sub-system maintenance needs.• Identify automated maintenance technology and job aids.• Assign repair and supply functions to equipment and humans.• Develop outline descriptions of equipment for maintenancerepair and supply.OutputsOutline descriptions of maintenance facilities, repair facilities andjob aids and supply equipment.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 16-19 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)16.3.1.7 Specify Maintenance HFI ParametersPurposeTo establish the HFI policy for maintainability of the platform,including the identification of any aspects that need to becommon to all component systems.Inputs • ILS LSA outputs.• Platform Maintenance Concept (Sect 16.3.1.2).Methods • Task Analysis• Human Factors Style Guide• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description• Workspace Design• Health & Safety AnalysisStepsIn conjunction with ILSM:HFI Activities• Collate LSA maintenance task list (results of Task Analyses).• Using PSTAD, establish that maintenance task characteristicsare tolerant to human performance degradationbrought about by physical and psychological stress.• Initiate procedures that ensure the platform-wide applicationof the principle of similarity, including the provision of aHuman Factors Style Guide for maintenance user interfaces.These procedures may cover:o Common Built-in Test Equipment (BITE) philosophy.o Common test point and subsystem identificationmethods.o Common colour coding of user or maintainer ‘safe totouch’ items in equipments.o Skill compatible maintenance documentation styles.o Uniform styling in parts identification and storesorganisation (within the constraints of NATO stocknumbering, etc.).o Uniform specification for maintenance lighting levels.• Liaise with System Project Managers to establish theprocedures for specifying and auditing the inclusion ofequipment maintenance envelopes in compartment layoutdesign (Workspace design).• Define the outline maintenance envelope specifications forthe known equipment fits and ensure these specificationsare used in General Arrangement.• Establish procedures for the identification and minimisationof maintenance related hazards based on the Health andSafety Analysis (Chap 17).Nov 2006 Page 16-20 Issue 4

Chapter 16 – Maintenance and SupportOutputs • Maintenance task list.• Specification of commonality policy for maintenance.• Maintenance environmental requirements.• Maintenance requirements.• Specification of maintenance workspace envelopes.• Maintenance health and safety aspects.Note. These outputs will need to be co-ordinated with theproducts of the LSA from the ILS Plan:HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 16-21 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)16.3.1.8 Specify Ship Husbandry PolicyPurposeTo establish the Ship Husbandry aspects which need to beaddressed to minimise workload and ensure personnel safety.Inputs • Ship husbandry policy and survey results.• Platform Maintenance Concept (Sect 16.3.1.2)Methods • Task Synthesis• Task Analysis• Task Decomposition• Workload Analysis• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description (PSTAD)• Health & Safety AnalysisStepsIn conjunction with the ILSM:• Identify any up-to-date surveys of typical detail designproblems and work-studies of Ship Husbandry (e.g. TaskDescription, Task Analysis, Task Synthesis, RNGTAD,PSTADs).• Analyse the data to identify workload drivers in terms ofmaterials, design characteristics, techniques and tools, andaverage time spent off task (Workload Analysis)• Categorise and prioritise the Ship Husbandry tasks in termsof workload, health hazards and safety (Health & SafetyAnalysis).• Identify design improvements to reduce workload andimprove safety in each husbandry area.HFI ActivitiesOutputs • A prioritised list of main workload drivers and platformfeatures concerned.• Preferred design characteristics, materials, and associatedmaintenance techniques and tools associated withrecommendations.• Design criteria to be adopted for each husbandry area,including quantified workload targets.• The types of materials to be used in each husbandry area.• The husbandry tools to be used in each husbandry area.• The high-level husbandry task descriptions for eachhusbandry area.Nov 2006 Page 16-22 Issue 4

Chapter 16 – Maintenance and Support16.3.2 Assessment Phase Activities16.3.2.1 Identify Maintenance OptionsPurposeTo identify maintenance options, including organisation of linesof maintenance, for the equipment.Inputs • Maintenance options from the Logistics Support Analysis(LSA) studies.• Maintenance manning (Sect 16.3.1.3).• Equipment maintenance tasks (Sect 16.3.1.5).• Outline maintenance facilities (Sect 16.3.1.6).Methods • Human Factors Trade-Off Analysis.StepsThis is primarily an ILS activity (see Def Stan 00-60 [Ref 28]) towhich HFI aspects are added in order to help decide the relativeWLC, strengths and weaknesses of each maintenance option.HFI aspects that are considered when assessing maintenanceoptions include the following:• Manpower availability and TLC associated with personnelselection and training pipeline.• Skills and knowledge, anthropometric characteristics, criticalperformance and workload associated with maintainer tasks(Chap 6).• Training implications of maintenance tasks (Chap 7).• Implications for use of automation and human-equipmentinterface design (Chap 15).• Impact of maintenance access, equipment assembly anddisassembly, and supply movement on space and layout(Chap 14).• Impact on environmental conditions (Chap 13).• Impact on health and safety (Chap 17).OutputsMaintenance options together with an assessment of theirrelative worth in terms of HFI aspects.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 16-23 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)16.3.2.2 Define Maintenance HFI AspectsPurposeTo define HFI requirements of platform maintenance.Inputs • ILS LSA outputs.• HFI Maintenance Parameters.Methods • Task Analysis• Human Factors Style Guide• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description• Workspace Design• Environmental Design• Health & Safety AnalysisStepsIn conjunction with the ILSM:• Define critical maintenance tasks requiring particular specialistor operator-maintainer skills, posing safety or hazard risksor forming a critical path in sustaining platform or equipmentperformance (Task Analysis, Health & Safety Analysis).• Identify procedures and job aids (including documentation)to support performance of critical tasks.• Identify hazard and safety protection for personnelconducting maintenance.• Define workspace layout for maintenance activities takingaccount of other on-going tasks in the same compartmentsor spaces (Workspace Design).• Identify environmental requirements for maintenanceincluding lighting levels (Environmental Design).• Define access requirements for maintenance taking accountof anthropometric data (body size), strength and othercharacteristics of the PSTAD.• Identify requirements for Human Factors Style Guide tosupport commonality of maintenance user-equipmentinterfaces and procedures.• Liaise with System Project Managers to ensure that a WholeShip approach to maintainability is followed.HFI ActivitiesOutputs • Built-in Test Equipment (BITE) characteristics.• Test point and subsystem identification characteristics.• Colour coding for ‘safe to touch’ characteristics.• Maintenance documentation characteristics.• Parts identification and stores organisation characteristics.• Maintenance lighting levels.• Workspace layout and access.Nov 2006 Page 16-24 Issue 4

Chapter 16 – Maintenance and Support16.3.2.3 Establish Maintenance Manpower RequirementPurposeTo collate all maintenance manning requirements for the wholeplatform, including that required for equipments, and to providean evaluation of these requirements in the light of manningpolicy and constraints.Inputs • Complement estimates (Chap 4).• Equipment Manning Requirements (Chap 4).• Manpower policy and operator-maintainer concept forplatform.• HFI Maintenance parameters.MethodsStepsNot identified.In conjunction with ILSM:• Collate LSA maintenance task information for manningpurposes (include Ship Husbandry manning estimates).• Liaise with System Project Managers to combine manningestimates (Chap 16).• Feed results into complementing process (Chap 4).• Asses implications of complement estimates formaintenance manning and operator-maintainer concept.Outputs • Platform maintenance and ship husbandry manningestimates for input to Basic Manning Requirement (BMR).• Implications for operator-maintainer concept.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 16-25 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)16.3.2.4 Define Ship Husbandry HFI AspectsPurposeTo specify in detail the facilities required to meet the HFI ShipHusbandry policy.Inputs • HFI Policy for ship husbandry.Methods • Task Analysis• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description• Workspace Design• Environmental Design• Health & Safety AnalysisStepsIn conjunction with the ILSM:• Specify critical husbandry tasks requiring specialist skills,posing safety or hazard risks and forming a critical path insustaining platform performance (Task Analysis, Health &Safety Analysis).• Specify procedures, tools and job aids (includingdocumentation) to support performance of critical tasks.• Specify hazard and safety protection for personnel conductingship husbandry (Chap 17).• Specify workspace layout for husbandry activities takingaccount of other on-going tasks in the same compartments orspaces (Workspace Design), (Chap 14).• Specify environmental conditions and requirements forhusbandry tasks (Environmental Design) (Chap 13).• Define access requirements for husbandry taking account ofanthropometric data (body size), strength and othercharacteristics of the PSTAD (Chap 6).• Identify requirement for a Human Factors Style Guide tosupport commonality of maintenance user-equipmentinterfaces and procedures (Chap 15).• Liaise with stakeholders to ensure that a Whole Shipapproach to husbandry is followed and to take advantage ofmodern techniques, tools and materials.• Define HFI assessment and acceptance criteria for ShipHusbandry tasks and job aids.HFI ActivitiesOutputsFor each Ship Husbandry task:• Ship Husbandry procedures and supporting job aids.• HFI characteristics of tools and equipment.• Workspace layout, access requirements and hazard control.Nov 2006 Page 16-26 Issue 4

Chapter 16 – Maintenance and Support16.3.2.5 Specify Maintenance FacilitiesPurposeTo specify the physical design of the user interface andhardware required for maintenance functions, repair job aids andequipment used in supply and transportation.Inputs • Maintenance tasks.• Human Factors Style Guide (Chap 15).• User role and team specifications (Chap 5).This activity may be conducted in an iterative manner with userequipmentinterface prototyping (Chap 15).Methods • User-Equipment Interface Design.• Human Factors Style Guide.StepsThe specification and development of the physical displays,dialogue design, user navigation, command options, menustructure and input controls. The procedure is dependent uponthe systems engineering method and tools used in the project.The process used must provide sufficient visibility to enablecontinuous assessments of the acceptability of the design to theILSM and other MoD representatives. The user-equipmentinterface must be compatible with the maintainer tasks to beconducted and the skills and knowledge of users. HFI aspectsof the design must be compatible with the following:• ILS strategy.• Repair and supply strategy, including diagnostics.• Support equipment strategy.• Transportation strategy.OutputsFull specification of the equipment interfaces, job aids andhardware associated with maintenance tasks and with supplyand transportation.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 16-27 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)16.3.2.6 Specify Maintenance TasksPurposeTo specify maintainer task descriptions for the Equipment.Inputs • Maintainer task definitions.• User-equipment interface design documentation.Methods • Operational Scenario Description.• Task Analysis.• Task Synthesis.StepsMaintainer tasks are specified as follows:• Identify the maintainer roles for the equipment defined in theILS concept and the allocation of functions.• Identify maintainer tasks and decompose these into detailedsub-tasks taking account of the emerging design.• Conduct analysis of the difficulty, frequency and importance oftasks using estimated equipment availability, reliability andmaintainability.• Ensure that maintainer characteristics required for taskperformance are reflected in the PSTAD (Chap 6) and identifyany mismatch requiring further study of manning options or reallocationof functions.• Identify human performance risks and limitations associatedwith tasks and re-allocate functions or redesign the userequipmentinterface to optimise human task design.• Develop detailed descriptions of task goals, inputs, processing,decision-making, outputs and problems for use in detaileddesign and other HFI processes.OutputsTask descriptions for each anticipated maintainer role for theequipment.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 16-28 Issue 4

Chapter 16 – Maintenance and Support16.3.2.7 Specify Maintenance DocumentationPurposeTo specify the HFI elements of the design of the maintenancedocumentation including on-line help and reference materials.Inputs • Task specifications.• Equipment descriptions.MethodsStepsOutputsNot identified.The development of maintenance documentation must beconsistent and integrated with the development of the usersupport package (Chap 15).Maintenance documentation including on-line help and referencematerials.16.3.2.8 Specify Maintenance ProceduresPurposeInputsMethodsTo provide procedures for each maintainer role.Maintenance task specifications.Not identified.Steps • The maintenance procedures are based on the maintainertask specifications that will cover on-line and off-line activities.• The maintenance documentation and the training products(Chap 7) must reflect the final form of maintenanceprocedures.• Health and safety requirements must also be reflected in themaintenance procedures (Chap 17).• Maintenance procedures form the basis for a vessel’sStandard Operating Procedures (SOPs).OutputsMaintenance procedures covering all on-line and off-line tasksperformed by each maintainer role.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 16-29 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)16.3.3 Demonstration Phase Activities16.3.3.1 Assess Maintenance AccessPurposeTo ensure that maintenance access meets HFI requirements.Inputs • Workspace general arrangements and detail drawings.• Workstation general arrangement and detailed drawings.• Mock-ups.• Maintainability demonstrations.• Results of Field trials in the ILSP with real equipment.MethodsStepsNot identified.The following checks are required in conjunction withmaintenance trials detailed in the ILSP:• The schedule of inspections and trials constructed inaccordance with the available support documentation andtest forms for all on-board outfits and equipment.• Assess maintenance workspace for conduct of each activity.• Assess withdrawal space for components of equipment.• Assess cable, service and other connection points for accessby maintainers.OutputsHFI assessments are integrated with the maintenance trialsdocumentation described in the ILSP.16.3.3.2 Assess Ship Husbandry WorkloadPurposeTo ensure that Ship Husbandry activities are minimised andgood practice is followed.HFI ActivitiesInputs • Outputs of task and workload analyses of ship husbandry.Methods• Existing information about ship husbandry procedures andworkload.Not identified.Nov 2006 Page 16-30 Issue 4

Chapter 16 – Maintenance and SupportSteps • Baseline Ship Husbandry workload and good practicechecked against that used in existing platforms.• Assess compartments and spaces for cleanability.• Estimate Ship Husbandry workload for the whole ship brokendown by compartments and spaces.• Record problems (e.g. dirt traps) for further action.OutputsHFI assessments are integrated with the maintenance trialsdocumentation described in the ILSP.16.3.3.3 Assess Maintenance CommonalityPurposeTo assess the use of common procedures and consistentmaintenance user-equipment interfaces.Inputs • User-equipment design documentation.• Prototypes.• Products.• Maintenance operating procedures.MethodsStepsNot identified.Assess the following to check that common designs andprocedures have been applied:• BITE philosophy.• Test points.• Parts and stores identification.• Fault indications.• Equipment and workspace labelling.• Colour coding.• User-equipment interfaces to maintenance functions.OutputsHFI assessments are integrated with the maintenance trialsdocumentation described in the ILSP.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 16-31 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)16.3.3.4 Assess Operability of Maintenance FacilitiesPurposeTo assess the consistency, effectiveness and efficiency ofmaintenance facilities.Inputs • Maintenance tasks.• Equipment designs.Methods • Operational Scenario Descriptions.• Task and Role Performance Modelling.• Task and Role Prototyping.• User-equipment interface prototyping.• Operability Evaluation.StepsConsistency is assessed across all equipments forming themaintenance and support package for the Equipment.Maintainer interfaces are checked to ensure that operatingmethods and their interpretation transfers between differentfacilities.Maintenance performance objectives associated with eachmaintainer role are assessed. Structured evaluations areperformed with the equipment and support facilities, usingmaintenance scenarios based on ARM estimates, to assessoverall performance, e.g. time to diagnose a fault, time to repaira fault etc.Structured evaluations are also performed with the equipment toassess the efficiency of using the maintenance and supportfacilities, e.g. time to perform routine maintenance tasks,elimination of repetitive actions, minimisation of the number ofmaintenance actions etc.OutputsAssessments of the consistency, effectiveness and efficiency ofthe maintenance and support facilities.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 16-32 Issue 4

Chapter 16 – Maintenance and Support16.3.3.5 Assess Maintenance DocumentationPurposeTo assess the maintenance documentation.Inputs • Maintenance tasks.• Maintenance documentation.MethodsStepsNot Identified.In conjunction with the ILSM the maintenance documentation isassessed in two ways:• The validity of the documentation is checked to ensure that thehelp, guidance and other information is compatible with theactual equipment design and maintenance tasks andprocedures.• The effectiveness of the documentation is checked to ensurethat it actually supports maintainer performance of specifictasks.OutputsAssessments of the maintenance documentation.16.3.3.6 Assess Maintenance ProceduresPurposeTo assess the maintenance procedures for the Equipment.Inputs • Maintenance task specifications.• Maintenance procedures.MethodsNot Identified.Steps • The procedures are assessed to ensure that they cover allaspects of the maintenance of the Equipment.Outputs• Each procedure is checked to ensure that it is performed aseffectively and as efficiently as is possible.• Compatibility of the set of maintenance procedures assignedto each maintainer role is assessed to ensure that these areconsistent with the tasks and responsibilities assigned to thatrole.Assessments of the maintenance procedures.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 16-33 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)16.3.4 Manufacture Phase Activities16.3.4.1 Co-ordinate HFI Aspects of Maintenance with Training,Support, etc.PurposeTo ensure HFI issues identified and solutions developed in earlierphases are reflected in:• Training delivery programmes.• Facilities and ship and equipment support programmes andfacilities.Inputs • HFI log (see MAP-01-010 [Ref 1]).• Description of maintenance and support facilities.• List of maintenance and support tasks.• Risk assessments.MethodsNot Identified.Steps • Identify key maintenance tasks and activities, together withassociated task performance criteria.• Confirm scope and content of training programmesencompass key tasks.• Confirm maintenance and support arrangements reflectintended maintenance and support policy and manpowerprovisions.OutputsConfirmation that all HFI maintenance and support issues in HFIlog are closed off.Check-list for future audit of training and support facilities andsystems.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 16-34 Issue 4

Chapter 16 – Maintenance and Support16.3.4.2 Monitor Maintenance Operability During AcceptanceTrialsPurposeTo provide assurance that maintenance and support facilities andassociated documentation meet user needs and operationalconstraints.Inputs • Results of acceptance trials.• User-feedback survey reports.• Hand-over defects lists.Methods • [Structured] Interviews.• Questionnaires.• [Task] Observational Analysis.• Task & Role Prototyping.• [Computer-based] Task & Role Performance Modelling.• Workload Measurement.• Task Performance Measurement.Steps • Identify key maintenance tasks and activities, together withassociated task performance criteria.• Identify maintenance and support tasks that require syntheticmodelling rather than in-situ trials.• Confirm scope and content of all acceptance trials address HFIissues and provide for appropriate task observation, datacollection and data analysis.• Collate relevant acceptance trials results and analysescollected data.OutputsConfirmation that maintenance and support facilities andassociated documentation are acceptable.Log of all outstanding operability issues and schedule for theirresolution.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 16-35 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)16.3.4.3 Transfer HFI Information to DLOPurposeInputsMethodsTo ensure support phase activities are based on accurate datathat reflect concept, assessment and design phase assumptionsand decisions.HFI logs, data and reports from concept, assessment and designphases.Not Identified.Steps • Ensure all HFI data is comprehensive and complete.• Collate and identify all HFI information in an agreed structuredmanner.• Assemble summary and detailed records.• Transfer information to nominated recipient.OutputsCollated HFI data for use in In-service and disposal phases.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 16-36 Issue 4

Chapter 16 – Maintenance and Support16.3.5 In-Service Phase Activities16.3.5.1 Monitor Efficiency and Effectiveness of MaintenancePurposeTo confirm the adequacy of the maintenance and supportfacilities provided.Inputs • Maintenance task performance criteria.• ARM criteria.• Operational feedback reports.• In-service audits (Chap 8 and Sect 16.3.5.2).• Incident reports.• Accident reports.Methods • [Structured] Interviews.• Questionnaires.Steps • Analyse operational feedback reports to identifymaintenance-related issues.• Analyse in-service audits to identify maintenance-relatedissues.• Analyse accident and incident reports to identifymaintenance-related issues.• Analyse data from users.OutputsConfirmation that maintenance facilities and procedures areadequate.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 16-37 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)16.3.5.2 Initiate In-Service HFI Audits as RequiredPurposeInputsTo collect operational data to support analysis of the adequacyof maintenance and support facilities.Not Identified.Methods • [In-service HFI] Audit.Steps • Negotiate access to operational data with Customer 2.• Produce audit plan including audit criteria.• Agree audit schedule with Customer 2.• Collect data.OutputsResults of HFI maintenance & Support audits.16.3.5.3 Review Operational Reports for Evidence of HFI IssuesPurposeTo establish the degree to which In-service HFI issues areidentified, monitored and reported through operational andmaintenance & support processes.Inputs • Operational feedback reports.• In-service audits (Chap 8 and Sect 16.3.5.2).• Incident reports.• Accident reports.• Structured interviews.• Questionnaires.MethodsNot Identified.HFI ActivitiesSteps • Analyse operational feedback reports to identifymaintenance-related HFI issues.Outputs• Analyse in-service audits to identify maintenance-related HFIissues.• Analyse accident and incident reports to identifymaintenance-related HFI issues.• Analyse data from users.Confirmation that operational and maintenance & supportprocesses adequately identify and resolve HFI issues.Nov 2006 Page 16-38 Issue 4

Chapter 16 – Maintenance and Support16.3.6 Disposal Phase ActivitiesNone identified.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 16-39 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 16-40 Issue 4MAP-01-011 CH 16_17.doc

CHAPTER 17 – SAFETYCONTENTS17.1 HFI Technical Issues..................................................................................................17-317.1.1 Stakeholders.......................................................................................17-317.1.2 Types of Health Hazard ......................................................................17-317.1.3 Use of Computer Equipment...............................................................17-517.1.4 Working Environment..........................................................................17-617.1.5 General Vessel Safety ........................................................................17-617.1.6 Vulnerability and Survivability .............................................................17-717.1.7 Fire Fighting and Damage Control......................................................17-817.1.8 Hazard Zoning ....................................................................................17-817.1.9 Escape and Evacuation Arrangements...............................................17-917.1.10 Alarms and Warnings........................................................................17-1017.1.11 Chemical, Biological, Radiation and Nuclear (CBRN) ......................17-1017.1.12 Equipment Safety Risks....................................................................17-1017.1.13 Safety Regime – Safety Case...........................................................17-1117.1.14 Human Reliability and Equipment Design.........................................17-1217.2 HFI Process ....................................................................................................17-1317.2.1 HFI Focus Responsibilities ...............................................................17-1717.2.2 Relevant Standards ..........................................................................17-1817.3 HFI Activities...................................................................................................17-2217.3.1 Concept Phase Activities ..................................................................17-2217.3.1.1 Outline Health and Safety Policy....................................17-2217.3.1.2 Identify HFI Health and Safety Issues ............................17-2317.3.1.3 Produce Health & Safety HFI Policy...............................17-2417.3.1.4 Outline Safety Risks .......................................................17-2517.3.1.5 Outline Safety Facilities..................................................17-2617.3.1.6 Outline Health Hazards ..................................................17-2617.3.1.7 Assess Health Hazards and Safety Risks ......................17-2817.3.2 Assessment Phase Activities............................................................17-3017.3.2.1 Specify: Personnel Health & Safety, Vulnerability &Survivability, Fire-Fighting & Damage Control, HazardZones, Escape Arrangements, Platform Alarms & Warnings,CBRNDC ........................................................................17-3017.3.2.2 Specify Equipment Safety Risks ....................................17-3317.3.2.3 Specify Safety Facilities .................................................17-3417.3.2.4 Specify Equipment Alarms and Warnings ......................17-3517.3.2.5 Specify Safety Procedures .............................................17-3617.3.2.6 Specify Health Hazards..................................................17-3617.3.2.7 Specify Health Hazard Controls .....................................17-3717.3.3 Demonstration Phase Activities ........................................................17-3817.3.3.1 Assess Safety Facilities..................................................17-38Nov 2006 Page 17-1 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)17.3.3.2 Assess Safety Procedures .............................................17-3917.3.3.3 Assess Alarms and Warnings ........................................17-3917.3.3.4 Assess Health Hazards and Controls.............................17-4017.3.3.5 Assess Escape Facilities................................................17-4017.3.3.6 Assess Fire-Fighting and Damage Control ....................17-4117.3.3.7 Assess CBRNDC Facilities ............................................17-4117.3.4 Manufacture Phase Activities............................................................17-4217.3.4.1 Devise System Safety HFI Acceptance Criteria .............17-4217.3.4.2 Provide HF Input to Acceptance Trials...........................17-4317.3.4.3 Periodic HFI Audits.........................................................17-4317.3.4.4 Provide Support to Other Project Safety-RelatedActivities .........................................................................17-4417.3.5 In-Service Phase Activities ...............................................................17-4517.3.5.1 Transfer HFI aspects of Safety Case to DLO.................17-4517.3.5.2 Collect In-Service Safety Data .......................................17-4517.3.5.3 Review Operational Safety Data ....................................17-4617.3.5.4 Feed Safety Review Results to Customer 2...................17-4617.3.6 Disposal Phase Activities..................................................................17-4717.3.6.1 Establish Legislative and Regulatory Climate ................17-4717.3.6.2 Collate HFI Information From Early Project Phases.......17-4817.3.6.3 Identify Safety-Critical Tasks and At-Risk Groups .........17-4817.3.6.4 Identify & Analyse Hazards ............................................17-4917.3.6.5 Devise Hazard Controls .................................................17-49Nov 2006 Page 17-2 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – Safety17.1 HFI Technical IssuesThe MoD’s HFI programme differentiates between system safety and healthhazards as follows:• Health hazards address conditions inherent in the operation or use of aproduct that may cause death, injury, illness, disability or performancedeterioration.• System Safety is the process of reducing the risks of personnel death orinjury, or damage to equipment, that may occur when the system isoperated or functions in a normal or an abnormal manner, to a level that isbroadly acceptable or tolerable or as low as is reasonably practicable(ALARP).HFI Technical IssuesChapter 1 of MAP-01-010 [Ref 1] provides further information about thedistinction between these two aspects of health and safety. The HFI issues inthis HFI Technical Area include the following:• Health Hazards.• General Vessel Safety.• Vulnerability and Survivability.• Fire fighting and Damage Control.• Hazard Zones.17.1.1 Stakeholders• Escape and Evacuation Arrangements.• Alarms and Warnings.• Chemical, Biological, Radiation and Nuclear (CBRN).A list of potential stakeholders for this area is given below. This list is notexhaustive and should be seen to be a guide only. HFI Foci should refine this listbased upon the structure of their project, the attendees at the relevant HFSG orHFWG and in light of guidance and requests from industry, DEC and Customer 2representatives.• DEC• FLEET NPS• EENA• IPT HFI Foci• IPT ILS Manager(ILSM)• IPT SafetyCommittee• MLS CG• SSG-ShipDes• SSG-SSMO17.1.2 Types of Health HazardHealth hazards arise during the normal operation of equipment, particularly underprolonged watches, which may be repeated over the whole mission. The need toNov 2006 Page 17-3 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI Technical Issuesstay closed up in the same position while performing repetitive movements mayresult in strain injury. Proximity to sensor or weapons operation may exposepersonnel to radiation, noise, shock and laser risks. The air quality within vesselsmay decrease over time and cause breathing difficulties. Operations underconditions of physical and psychological stress when combined with cumulativefatigue may adversely affect the health of the crew. Shift cycles and rest periodsneed to be considered when designing the equipment to ensure that performancecan be maintained over worst-case mission scenarios. Health hazard analysis isrequired as part of JSP 430 ‘MOD Ship Safety Management’ [Ref 5].The range of health hazards that should be considered during equipment designis as follows:1. Acoustic – Hearing loss from exposure to continuous or intermittent noise,e.g. in machinery rooms, prolonged wearing of headsets.2. Biological – Infections from microorganisms, their toxins and enzymes,e.g. in galleys.3. Chemical – Inhalation, ingestion or direct contact with toxic substances,e.g. hydraulic fluid.4. Oxygen deficiency – Reduced performance or asphyxiation, e.g. poorlyventilated compartments.5. Radiation – Radiation from ionising and non-ionising sources, e.g.proximity to high-powered radar equipment.6. Shock – Shock arising from equipment operation or ship motion, e.g.electric, extreme movements.7. Temperature extremes and humidity – Extremes leading to reductions inperformance or more serious effects on health, e.g. excessive heatgenerated by proximity to operating equipment.8. Trauma – Physical trauma resulting from direct impact to the body ormusculo-skeletal trauma due to the need to lift excessive weights orcontinuously operate equipment, e.g. repetitive strain injury associated withusing input devices for computer-based or other equipment.9. Vibration – Vibration arising from the contact of mechanically oscillatingsurfaces with the body, e.g. the effect of the platform motion envelope indifferent compartments.10. Visual – Loss or serious impairment of sight due to exposure to high levelsof light energy, e.g. lasers, eyesight problems from prolonged use of visualdisplay units.Health hazards appear in many facets of the workplace, as well as recreationalareas. A major concern is to ensure that the design of workplaces andrecreational areas is aimed at minimising the incidence of events that degradehealth. The remit of the platform project is to identify the hazards inherent ineach area and initiate design policies and audit procedures to maximise crewhealth. Some specific subjects of concern are:Nov 2006 Page 17-4 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – Safety• Hygiene hazards can result from inadequate or poorly located drainagefacilities in galleys, heads and bathrooms.• Inadequate specification of the complement at the design stage of theplatform can lead, later in service, to beyond capacity use of heads,bathrooms and laundry facilities as the complement builds up. Thisconsequently results in an accumulation of fluid spillage and dirt in suchareas.• Use of ceramic tiling on work surfaces and decks in galleys results inabsorption of slop water and bacterial growth. This is exacerbated by thefrequency with which tiles are cracked and not replaced.HFI Technical Issues• Care should be taken in the selection of materials for the finishing andfurnishing of the platform to specify acceptable thresholds on propertiessuch as:oooooFlammability potential.Smoke and toxic gas production in a fire scenario.Heat release rate.Halogen content.Asbestos content.• The possibility of the leakage and venting of fuels from tanks intoaccommodation spaces and workplaces can occur because of the routingof associated pipe work through these spaces.• Air quality and space ventilation can be readily saturated by smoke fromfires.• Waste disposal procedures and equipment design should have thecapacity to cater for defined long periods between discharge withoutgenerating a health hazard.• Ladder design and hatchway positioning with poor illumination are allcontributors to accidents on board.17.1.3 Use of Computer EquipmentAn important class of health hazards has been associated with the use ofcomputer equipment. Recent Health and Safety Executive legislation hasdefined parameters for the design and use of visual display units and computerinput devices. The types of health hazard that this legislation addresses are verylikely to arise with the use of modern computer workstations, particularly due tothe prolonged length of time that operators must remain closed up while workingunder stressful conditions. Eyestrain and upper limb disorders are two of themost common health hazards that can be counteracted by implementing knowndesign standards and requiring relatively simple procedures.Nov 2006 Page 17-5 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)17.1.4 Working EnvironmentHFI Technical IssuesEquipment may need to be operated within relatively poor environments.Combinations of factors like poor air quality, atmospheric pollutants e.g. smoke,chemical emissions from equipment, Chemical Biological Radiation and Nuclear(CBRN) conditions, shock, vibration and ship motion all need to be taken intoconsideration. Close attention therefore needs to be paid to the use and designof protective clothing and equipment, the provision of shock damping inworkspaces, the regulation of air quality and measures for noise reduction withincompartments. Hazard zoning, the provision of effective warning labels and theuse of active alarms and warnings when equipment is about to operate or movealso form important health hazard control measures.17.1.5 General Vessel SafetyThe nature of the Ship’s environment increases the risks of accidents andinjuries. The crew works, lives and moves within confined spaces in a platformthat may be subject to extreme motion. The crew themselves have to performphysical activities including operating equipment, handling materials, movementthrough passageways and hatches, movement up and down ladders and acrossdecks while interacting with potentially hazardous machinery, objects orsubstances.An analysis of 603 accidents affecting vessels over 100 tonnes registered in theUK in 1988 1 found that 37% were due to slips and falls, 16% involved manualhandling and 16% involved machinery and tools.A further analysis of 377 accident reports raised for personnel on board RNvessels between 1986 and 1991 2 showed that nearly a third of the accidentsinvolved falls. The majority of these (16% of the total) were falls betweendifferent levels in the platform usually involving ladders. Falls on the same level(13% of the total) included tripping over objects on the deck and slipping andfalling on greasy decks. Accidents also included burns, moving machinery,lifting, chemicals and hatches - each accounting for between 5-10% of the total.The locations on the platform most consistently associated with accidents were(in order of frequency) ladders (12%), passageways and access points (9%), thehanger and the flight deck (9%), the mess and dining hall (8%), the engine room(5%), the galley (4%) and boat handling (4%). Out of this total, 25% of theaccidents led to the crew members involved taking time off work, either confinedto the sick bay or evacuated to a shore hospital. In 9% of cases the crewmembers were declared unfit for duty at sea hence reducing the availablecomplement. The accidents resulted in various injuries to the hands and feet(42% of the total), the head (19%), the limbs (19%) and the neck and back(12%). Table 17-1 summarises the frequency and medical consequences ofeach cause of accident.1‘Casualties to Vessels and Accidents to Men: Vessels registered in the UK – return for 1988’ [Ref 29].2INM R9208 ‘An Analysis of the Main Causal Factors of Shipboard Accidents in the Royal Navy’ [Ref 30].Nov 2006 Page 17-6 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – SafetyConsequences toPersonnelSlight TreatmentLow(30 cases)BurnsMoving machineryHFI Technical IssuesTime Off Duty toRecoverTrappedWeldingSharp EdgesHatchesLiftingFalls (betweendifferent levels).Falls (on same level).MedicalDowngradingMoving objectsHorseplayExplosionTable 17-1: Frequency and Consequences of Different Causes of Accident17.1.6 Vulnerability and SurvivabilityStructural materials must meet vulnerability and survivability requirements toavoid potentially serious risks to personnel including splintering or emission ofnoxious fumes with fire damage. Some trade-offs may need to be consideredearly on, subject to the priority order of the HFI issues and risks identified in theEarly Human Factors Analysis (EHFA).Shock and relative motion can also cause personal injury. Equipments can bedesigned to withstand far greater shock impulses than humans. A range ofhuman shock resilience envelopes can be derived in relation to the workspaceand tasks to be undertaken. At the equipment level, these are defined for theoperator by the relevant System Project Manager. At the platform level,consideration must be given to the design implications of:• Minimising damage to walking and seated personnel.• Hull whip and distortion in relation to compartment location.• Security of fixtures and fittings on bulkheads and decks, particularly inheavily populated compartments.As a consequence of designing for a low radar cross-section, surface shipsuperstructures may assume unconventional shapes and potentially give rise toawkward compartment shapes. Careful consideration needs to be given tospace utilisation. Angled sides, for example, are an additional consideration inmain access deck design regarding central versus side passageways.Unconventional hull forms potentially affect operational and accommodationspaces. Consideration needs to be given to console shapes and location ofsystem routing (with regard to maintainer access) and human traffic flow(especially if there are areas of limited deck head height).Nov 2006 Page 17-7 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)17.1.7 Fire Fighting and Damage ControlHFI Technical IssuesFigure 17-1: Fire fighting and damage controlFire Certification is a mandatory requirement of the Safety Regime 3 and isadministered by MESH IPT. The HFI issues in fire fighting and damage controlrevolve around the definition of the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) andtasks involved in these areas. However, they must be understood, since theyspecify the fire fighting team organisation, its supporting equipment and itscommunications requirements. These parameters become significant when thelocations of potential fire hazard compartments are firmed up in the design.Location of known types of fire hazard can then be matched with the provision offixed fire detectors, fire fighting and air testing facilities and with likely types of firefighting task. This enables rationalisation of the requirements for access routesand stowage of support equipment. Damage control can be catered for in asimilar way once stability-critical spaces are identified. Where poor accesscannot be overcome, due consideration should be given to remote monitoringand compartment drenching (e.g. Halon) for fires, even in low-risk compartmentsi.e. those that do not contain hazardous materials. Fire fighting and damagecontrol can form an important driver of complement size. Therefore, in achievingreduced manning, the workload requirements must be carefully considered andany adverse impact on fire fighting and damage control identified.17.1.8 Hazard ZoningThe principle of zoning and isolating hazardous equipments from mainstreamactivities is necessarily compromised in several areas because of the exigenciesof service. Operational or maintenance tasks occasionally require that personnel3The Safety Regime consists of: Safety Management System, Safety Management Plan, Safety Requirements,Safety Case and Safety Case Report; see JSP 430 ‘MOD Ship Safety Management’ [Ref 5] Parts 1 and 2 alsoPart 3 Chapter 7 ‘Fire’.Nov 2006 Page 17-8 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – Safetyhave to access hazardous equipments or those placed near potential hazards. Itis therefore essential that the task requirements of equipments be understood atthe platform level so that these compromises can be avoided or at leastcontrolled.17.1.9 Escape and Evacuation ArrangementsThe Escape arrangements are considered in the Certificate of Safety – Escapeand Evacuation, a mandatory requirement of the Safety Regime 4 andadministered by the Escape and Evacuation Naval Authority (EENA) housedwithin SSG-ShipDes. These arrangements concern the design of escape routesfrom compartments and the overall global escape from the ship.HFI Technical IssuesThe layout of equipment in manned compartments must take into account theneed for rapid escape along a safe route and the primary and secondary escaperoutes should ensure that congestion and queues are minimised and that theoverall time to escape is ALARP. The doors and hatches along escape routesneed to ensure that all personnel can operate them, taking into account theopening forces in view of limited upper body strength of some Naval personnel.This requires knowledge of the distribution of personnel on board and thefunction of the equipment and activities undertaken in each compartment, so thatspaces that are frequently manned have good provision for escape.Figure 17-2: Emergency escape routesSubmarine escape arrangements must provide adequate numbers of escapesuits, airline sockets and waiting space. The procedure for escape therefore has4See JSP 430 ‘MOD Ship Safety Management’ [Ref 5] Parts 1 and 2 also Part 3 Chapter 6 ‘Surface ShipEscape and Evacuation’.Nov 2006 Page 17-9 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)HFI Technical Issuesto be understood to define the design of this area. Again, inevitably, acompromise driven by constraints such as space will arise. The HFI analysis ofpersonnel requirements and related risks enables the extent of the compromiseto be understood.17.1.10 Alarms and WarningsThe design requirements for alarms and warnings will be extended to theequipments and is the responsibility of the relevant System Project Managers.However, there is a requirement for establishing uniformity of alarms andwarnings in what they signify and in how they work, e.g. use of colour coding.This is very much a platform issue and, as such, it falls into the remit of theproject’s HFI Focus to formulate the policy.17.1.11 Chemical, Biological, Radiation and Nuclear Defence (CBRND)The formal requirements for CBRN protection are available from Dstl, CBS(Chemical Biological Sciences) and Directorate of Naval Operations (DNO). TheSOPs and citadel policies are well established. The HFI issues in terms ofplatform design are to ensure that:• Minimal Upper Deck activities are required in such environments.• The citadel boundaries do not have to be breached by normal operationaltraffic flow, including feeding and on/off-duty routing.Figure 17-3: Operating underCBRN conditions17.1.12 Equipment Safety RisksTwo main classes of safety risk arise with equipment. The first class is directthreats to the safety of the operator or maintainer when using or maintainingNov 2006 Page 17-10 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – Safetyequipment. Exposure to electrical shock, moving equipment, collision withequipment casings and fittings, effects of fire or weapons damage are instanceswhich may need to be anticipated when designing equipment. The second classarises from inadvertent operation or erroneous use of the equipment that maythen threaten personnel on the vessel or elsewhere. Experience with existingequipments indicates that safety risks often arise because of the interaction ofdifferent factors. Poor access for maintenance purposes can lead to accidentsdue to lack of visibility or awkward manipulation of tools or equipment. Lack ofattention to user seating design or the co-location of users with potentiallydangerous equipment can lead to safety risks in the event of platform collisionsor compartment damage. Lack of training can lead to safety risks for usersoperating or maintaining sensors and weapons systems. Poor display designand workstation layout can lead to safety risks to own ship or other platforms.HFI Technical Issues17.1.13 Safety Regime – Safety CaseThe HFI Focus is responsible for ensuring that HFI contributes to the overarchinghealth and safety requirements described in JSP 430 [Ref 5] and in BR 2000(20)‘Ship Engineering Practice, Safety Considerations and Precautions’ [Ref 31]. ASafety Regime compliant with JSP 430 and the ‘Project Oriented SafetyManagement System’ (POSMS) [Ref 36], or equivalent ‘Safety ManagementSystem’, is required to be in place for a vessel from its inception to its disposal.JSP 430 further requires that a ‘Safety Case’ is in place through life for allplatforms and associated equipments.The Safety Case documents the evidence demonstrating the safety of the vesselor equipment. A ‘Safety Case Report’ is produced in each Phase of theprocurement and life cycle of a vessel. This is a management tool thatdocuments specific safety risks and hazards and details ownership of actions andmitigation required to reduce the risks of these arising. The Safety Case willinclude a description of the vessel and its equipment, a formal safetyassessment, description of the ‘Safety Management System’ (SMS) andemergency and contingency arrangements. HFI is of particular use whengenerating the Formal Safety Assessment and identifying or assessing theEmergency and Contingency Arrangements. This section describes specifictechnical issues and the HFI activities that are applicable when generating theSafety Case.Formal Safety Assessment comprises Hazard Analysis, Risk Assessment andRisk Reduction. HFI contributes to each of these as follows:1. Hazard Analysis – Hazard Analysis (HAZAN) identifies and quantifies thelikelihood and impact of risks to health and safety. HFI contributes a rangeof techniques to this process. Task Analysis, Operability Evaluation,Workload Analysis, Link Analysis, Synthetic User Modelling, Health &Safety Analysis and Human Reliability Analysis can all be used for thispurpose.2. Risk Assessment – Risk Assessment assesses the tolerability ofsustaining health and safety incidents on the basis of their likelihood andseverity. HFI contributes data and standards on human tolerance to arange of potentially hazardous factors and techniques for qualifying andquantifying the likelihood of error.3. Risk Reduction – Risk Reduction concentrates on measures to remove ormitigate risks to health and safety. HFI contributes techniques and data forNov 2006 Page 17-11 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)use when ensuring that equipment is operable, workspace environment issafe and emergency systems operate effectively.HFI Technical IssuesThe HFI contribution to Safety Assessment also overlaps with the process of‘Identifying and Managing HFI Issues and Risk’ described in MAP-01-010 [Ref 1]and with the overall process of Risk Management. Note that Risk Managementis defined by Def-Stan 00-56 ‘Safety Management Requirements for DefenceSystems’ [Ref 37] as ‘the systematic application of management policies,procedures and practices to the tasks of Hazard Identification, Hazard Analysis,Risk Estimation, Risk and ALARP Evaluation, Risk Reduction and RiskAcceptance’.17.1.14 Human Reliability and Equipment DesignHuman error may contribute to safety risks and may arise because of mistakes inthe interpretation of a situation or the status of equipment. Human error may alsoarise when a user or maintainer executes the wrong action, or fails to carry out arequired action, even though the understanding of the situation or equipmentstatus is correct. Human error and reliability analysis techniques are used tosystematically identify and quantify the types of human error.A variety of design methods are available to counteract or reduce the effects ofdifferent types of human error – these include the use of alarms and warnings;consistent display and control design; the effective use of layout and colour whendesigning critical screens; the use of confirmation dialogues for actions withirreversible effects; the design of equipment so that it can be used easily bypersonnel differing in size and strength. User interface prototyping and the useof synthetic user models of the workspace provide powerful methods forestimating the likelihood of errors and the effectiveness of design solutions.To ensure that design solutions are appropriate it is important to identify theprobability and severity of safety risks when human performance, equipmentoperation or malfunction, environmental conditions and operational scenarios arecombined. Event trees and fault trees, in combination with timelines for eachuser role, provide methods for identifying safety risks arising from a combinationof factors.Nov 2006 Page 17-12 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – Safety17.2 HFI ProcessThe sequence of HFI activities described in the remainder of this chapter issummarised in Figure 17-4.Outline Health & Safety PolicyIdentify Health &Safety HFI IssuesOutline Safety RisksOutline SafetyFacilitiesOutline HealthHazardsCONCEPTProduce Health &Safety HFI PolicyAssess HealthHazards & SafetyRisksSpecify PersonnelHealth & SafetySpecify EquipmentSafety RisksSpecify HealthHazardsSpecify Vulnerability& SurvivabilitySpecify HazardZonesSpecify EscapeArrangementsSpecify Fire Fightingand Damage ControlSpecify NBCDSpecify SafetyFacilitiesSpecify SafetyProceduresSpecify Alarms &WarningsSpecify HealthHazard ControlsASSESSMENTHFI ProcessAssess EscapeFacilitiesAssess Fire Fighting& Damage ControlAssess NBCDFacilitiesDevise AcceptanceCriteriaCollect In-ServiceSafety DataCurrent Regulationsand LegislationAssess SafetyFacilitiesHF Input toAcceptance TrialsTransfer Safety Caseto DLOCollate HFIInformationAssess Alarms &WarningsAssess SafetyProceduresPeriodic HFI AuditsReview OperationalSafety DataHazid/HazanIdentify Safety-Critical Tasks & At-Risk GroupsAssess HealthHazardsSupport other SafetyactivitiesFeed forward toCustomer 2Devise HazardControls/AutomationHF Input to SafetyCase to SupportDisposalDISPOSAL IN-SERVICE MANUFACTURE DEMONSTRATIONFigure 17-4: HFI Process for SafetyNov 2006 Page 17-13 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)The process of defining HFI aspects of Health Hazards, Ship Safety and SystemSafety involves liaison between the HFI Focus and various stakeholders inconducting the HFI activities. The HFI activities are presented in Table 17-2.The ticks represent the procurement Phases at which the activities are likely tobe conducted.Table 17-2 is annotated with the relevant POSMS Safety ManagementProcedures (SMP). The POSMS SMPs and the relationships between them areshown in Figure 17-5. POSMS processes are designed to be iterative and onlyapplied to the extent necessary at each stage of the project.C A D M I D HFI Activities POSMS Outline Health and Safety Policy SMP01 Identify Health & Safety HFI Issues SMP04 Outline Safety Risks SMP04HFI Process Outline Safety Facilities SMP04 Outline Health Hazards SMP04Produce Health and Safety HFI Policy 5SMP01,SMP04 Assess Health Hazards and Safety Risks SMP05Specify: Personnel Health & Safety,Vulnerability & Survivability, Fire-Fighting &Damage Control, Hazard Zones, EscapeArrangements, Platform Alarms & Warnings,CBRNSMP08 Specify Equipment Safety Risks SMP05 Specify Safety Facilities SMP08 Specify Equipment Alarms and Warnings SMP08 Specify Safety Procedures SMP08 Specify Health Hazards SMP08 Specify Health Hazard Controls SMP08Assess Safety FacilitiesSMP06,SMP075This is local HFI policy based upon Health & Safety legislation and MOD policy but also on relevant accidentdata, epidemiology, etc.Nov 2006 Page 17-14 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – SafetyC A D M I D HFI Activities POSMSAssess Safety ProceduresSMP06,SMP07Assess Alarms and WarningsSMP06,SMP07Assess Health Hazards and ControlsSMP06,SMP07Assess Escape FacilitiesSMP06,SMP07Assess Fire-Fighting & Damage ControlSMP06,SMP07Assess CBRN FacilitiesSMP06,SMP07 Devise platform and equipment system safetyAcceptance Criteria 6Provide HF input to the design and executionof acceptance trials.Periodic audit manufacture HFI activitiesagainst HFI Plan and HF component of projectspecifications.SMP10SMP08~HFI ProcessProvide support to recruitment, training, ILSand other project support activities. 7 ~Ensure HFI aspects of Safety Case aresatisfactorily transferred to DLO.SMP12 Collect In-Service safety data. SMP13Review operational an maintenance safetydataSMP13 Feed forward result of review to Customer 2. SMP13Establish current legislative climate andidentify relevant regulations.Collate HFI information from earlier projectphases and identify sources of specialistsystem and equipment knowledge and skillsrequired.SMP01SMP016Described under Manufacture Phase Activities but should start earlier. See also POSMS [Ref 37] SMP10.7Similar activity also applied at other CADMID phases.Nov 2006 Page 17-15 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)C A D M I D HFI Activities POSMSIdentify Safety-Critical Tasks and At-RiskGroups.Identify and analyse hazards associated withcurrent state and condition of platform andequipment.Devise hazard controls consistent with ALARPprinciple.SMP04SMP05SMP08Table 17-2: HFI Activities for SafetySMP01Safety InitiationHFI ProcessSMP02Safety CommitteeSMP03Safety PlanningSMP04Preliminary Hazard IDand AnalysisSMP10Safety Contracts &RequirementsSMP05Hazard ID and AnalysisSMP06Risk EstimationSMP07Risk & ALARPEvaluationSMP08Risk ReductionSMP11Hazard LogSMP12Safety Case and CaseReportSMP09Risk AcceptanceSMP13In-service SMSFigure 17-5: The POSMS Safety Management ProceduresNov 2006 Page 17-16 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – Safety17.2.1 HFI Focus ResponsibilitiesThe HFI Focus is responsible for the following:• Produce a comprehensive HFI Health and Safety policy for the platformestablishing the acceptable and mandatory characteristics of materials,waste treatment and disposal, air quality, etc., as well as safety designcriteria.• Liaise with Safety Committee, DEC, MLS CG and SSG-Ship / SSG-SM todefine the health and safety policy for the equipment.• Formulate detailed project management procedures, in conjunction withSystem Project Managers and other stakeholders, through which healthhazards and ship safety issues are identified, recorded and resolved.• Establish the extent of compliance required to civil authority Health andSafety regulations.• Ensure that HFI operational scenarios enable assessment of healthhazards and system safety including assessments of crew vulnerability andsurvivability.• Identify standards for the control of health hazards associated with theequipment.• Ensure that hazardous operations are identified and minimised.HFI Process• Liaise with the IPT Leader or relevant System Project Manager to ensurethat equipment health hazards are identified and managed at the platformlevel.• Define the fire fighting and damage control manning requirements.• Define the requirements for remote safety monitoring and fire drenchingfacilities.• Establish a consistent policy in the specification of Alarms and Warningsusing an appropriate Human Factors Style Guide.• Establish the HFI design rules and maxims that should be incorporated inthe design of escape arrangements.• Liaise with FOTR to identify the training implications of safety procedures.• Liaise with TES-SA-MA to identify safety implications of maintenance andsupport options.• Resolve trade-offs relating to platform and equipment design, equipmentlayout, user characteristics, training, and environmental conditions toensure that health hazards and risks to safety are as low as is reasonablypracticable (ALARP).Nov 2006 Page 17-17 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Safety Case Responsibilities:ooooEnsure that all HFI health and safety issues are fully addressed in theSafety Case in accordance with JSP 430 [Ref 5].Ensure that HFI assessments contribute to the Formal SafetyAssessment as required by JSP 430.Implement HFI aspects of the Safety Management System (SMS) inaccordance with JSP 430.Liaise with the IPT Leader or relevant System Project Manager toensure that the safety risks and safety mitigation is integrated into theSafety Case for the Whole Ship as required by JSP 430.17.2.2 Relevant StandardsHFI ProcessThe applicable standards are listed in Table 17-3 below. Further details on thesestandards are included in Annex 2, together with other related standards.StandardBR 862 Vol 1 and Vol 2TitleHandbook for Naval Magazine and ExplosiveRegulationsVol 1 and Vol 2BR 1326(A)BR 1750ABR 2000(20)BR 8541COSHH(see INDG 136)Def Stan 00-25 Part 15Def Stan 00-25 Part 20Def Stan 00-25 Part 21Def Stan 00-40 Part 1Materials Toxicity Guide Regulations (Submarines)Handbook of Naval Medical StandardsShip Engineering Practice, Safety Considerations andPrecautionsSafety Requirements for Armament Stores for NavalUseControl of Substances Hazardous to HealthRegulationsHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 15: Principles and ProcessHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 20: Health Hazard Assessment Domain –Technical Guidance and DataHuman Factors for Designers of Systems.Part 21: System Safety Domain - Technical Guidanceand DataReliability and Maintainability (R&M)Part 1: Managerial responsibilities and requirementsfor programmes and plansNov 2006 Page 17-18 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – SafetyStandardDef Stan 00-40 Part 4Def Stan 00-40 Part 6Def Stan 00-56 Part 1Def Stan 00-56 Part 2Def Stan 02-148TitleReliability and Maintainability (R&M)Part 4: Guidance for writing NATO R&M requirementsdocuments (ARMP-4)Reliability and Maintainability (R&M)Part 6: In-service R&M (ARMP-6)Safety Management Requirements for DefenceSystemsPart 1: RequirementsSafety Management Requirements for DefenceSystemsPart 2: GuidanceRequirements for Life Saving EquipmentDef Stan 02-599Def Stan 02-603Def Stan 02-707Policy Requirements and Design Guidance for Alarmand Warning SystemsGuide to the Policy, Design and Installation of FireDetection Systems in ShipsSymbols and Abbreviations.(2 parts).HFI ProcessDef Stan 02-784Def Stan 07-204 Part 1Def Stan 07-204 Part 3Def Stan 07-228Def Stan 08-132Def Stan 08-144Def Stan 21-8Requirements for Safety Signs and ColoursThe Requirements for Fire Protection and DamageControl for Surface Ships:Part 1: Policy for Surface ShipsThe Requirements for Fire Protection and DamageControl for Surface Ships.Part 3: Surface Ship and Submarine EquipmentRequirements and Safety Regulations for ElectricalEquipment and Installations Fitted in Magazines,Submarine Weapon Stowage Compartments,Adjacent Compartments and Designated DangerAreasRequirements for Hazard Stateboards in SurfaceShipsMateriel Requirements for the CBRN Defence ofSurface Ships Including RFAsSafety Requirements for the Design ofElectrotechnical and Naval Weapon EquipmentNov 2006 Page 17-19 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)StandardEEC Directive 90/270see SI 1992/2792 andL26/2002HASAWJSP 392JSP 430POSMSTitleThe minimum safety and health requirements for workwith display screen equipmentHealth and Safety at Work ActInstructions for Radiological ProtectionMOD Ship Safety Management.(4 parts).Project Oriented Safety Management SystemTable 17-3: Relevant StandardsHFI ProcessStandardBR 9147BS EN 340BS EN 563TitleMOD(N) Health & Safety ManagementProtective Clothing. General Requirements.Safety of Machinery. Temperatures of TouchableSurfaces. Ergonomics data to establish temperaturelimit values for hot surfaces.BS EN 614-1BS EN 894-1BS EN 894-2Def Stan 08-147 Part 2ISO 11428: 1996ISO 11429: 1996SI 1992/3004Safety of Machinery. Ergonomic Design Principles.Terminology and general principlesSafety of Machinery. Ergonomics Requirements forthe Design of Displays and Control Actuators.Part 1: General principals for human interactions withdisplays and control actuators.Safety of Machinery. Ergonomics Requirements forthe Design of Displays and Control Actuators.Part 2: DisplaysThe Requirements for Fire Protection and DamageControl for Surface Ships:Part 2: SubmarinesErgonomics - Visual danger signals - Generalrequirements, design and testingErgonomics - System of auditory and visual dangerand information signalsThe Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare)Regulations 1992 (as amended)Nov 2006 Page 17-20 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – SafetySI 1995/3163SI 1999/3242SI 2002/2677STANAG 2899The Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and DangerousOccurrences Regulations 1995 (RIDDOR)The Management of Health and Safety at WorkRegulations 1999 (MHSAW)The Control of Substances Hazardous to HealthRegulations 2002 (as amended)Protection of HearingTable 17-4: Other Related StandardsHFI ProcessNov 2006 Page 17-21 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)17.3 HFI Activities17.3.1 Concept Phase Activities17.3.1.1 Outline Health and Safety PolicyPurposeTo identify the approach to ensuring that the:• Health hazards are identified and managed.• Equipment is as safe as is reasonably practicable.Inputs • Information about existing health hazards.• Health and safety standards and legislation.MethodsStepsHuman Factors Trade-Off Analysis.This HFI activity addresses both safety and health hazards.• Identify how JSP 430 [Ref 5] will be implemented for theequipment.• Identify how health hazards will be managed.• Collate information about health hazards, safety risks,controls and measures from existing equipments.• Outline areas of concern for the new equipment.• Identify safety standards and regulations for application tothe equipment.• Identify standards and regulations for avoidance of healthhazards for application to the equipment.• Conduct trade-offs between HFI aspects of the use ofautomation, manpower policy, training policy, environmentalconditions and equipment layout, training policy and theconcept of operation to minimise health hazards andequipment risks in accordance with an Early Human FactorsAnalysis (EHFA).OutputsA statement of:HFI Activities• The approach to ensuring that safety risks to personnel fromthe operation and maintenance of the Equipment are as lowas is reasonably practicable (ALARP).• The approach to ensuring that health hazards to personnelfrom the operation and maintenance of the equipment are aslow as is reasonably practicable (ALARP).The safety policy produced by this activity contributes to the‘Safety Management Plan’.Nov 2006 Page 17-22 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – Safety17.3.1.2 Identify HFI Health and Safety IssuesPurposeTo identify potential health and safety issues associated withproposed platform or platform modification options and todetermine the optimal trade-off between safety and otherfactors.Inputs • Platform options or information about proposedmodifications.• Overview of main functional and physical characteristics ofeach option.MethodsHuman Factors Trade-Off Analysis.Steps • Using the descriptions of functional and physicalcharacteristics of the platform identify a preliminary list ofhazards to personnel.• Identify the seriousness of each hazard and identify highleveldescriptions of possible hazard controls.• Identify the interaction between health and safety and thelevel of investment in other HFI aspects including the use ofautomation, operability, platform layout and habitability,environmental measures, platform motion characteristics andtraining.• Compare platform options using Human Factors Trade-OffAnalysis to determine that those that offer risks to health andsafety are as low as is reasonably practicable and determineassociated whole-life costs.OutputsThe health and safety issues associated with platform options ormodifications and associated risk levels and whole-life costs.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 17-23 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)17.3.1.3 Produce Health & Safety HFI Policy 8PurposeTo establish the extant statutory requirements and problemareas in previous platforms that need to be improved, and tospecify design procedures and on-board monitoring and controlequipment needed to meet the requirements.Inputs • Health and safety legislation, e.g. Health & Safety at Work(HASAW).• Information about accidents and health problems fromsimilar existing vessels.• Information about hazards and controls in the Safety Case.Methods • Health & Safety Analysis.• Human Reliability Analysis.Steps • Review statutory requirements. Establish the Health andSafety implications for platform design options.• Identify known design areas where human errors with safetyconnotations commonly occur.• Establish the procedures for Human Reliability Analysis andtheir applicability in the platform design process.• Establish the relationship of HFI and other Health Hazardand Safety Analysis procedures.• Establish the outline requirements for on-boardenvironmental monitoring and control systems as determinedby Health and Safety requirements.• Establish escape route and facilities requirements.HFI ActivitiesOutputs • The applicable statutory requirements and how and wherethey are to be applied.• List of areas of design that have historically caused injury tocrew members because of either human error or bad design.• List of areas of design that affect on-board hygiene.• The procedures for hazard identification and inclusion ofhuman reliability analysis in designing for safety.• The design requirements for on-board environmental Healthand Safety monitoring and Control.• The HFI design features and guidelines applicable in eachPlatform Technical Area to maximise on-board Health andSafety.8This is local HFI policy based upon Health & Safety legislation and MOD policy but also on relevant accidentdata, epidemiology, etc.Nov 2006 Page 17-24 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – Safety17.3.1.4 Outline Safety RisksPurposeTo outline safety risks associated with equipment options.Inputs • Existing health and safety checklists or data about accidentsand health problems from existing equipments.• Safety Case evidence developed in previous Phase.Methods • Task Analysis.• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description.• Operability Evaluation.• Workload Analysis.• Link Analysis.• Synthetic User Modelling.• Health & Safety Analysis.• Human Reliability Analysis.Steps • Identify risks to personnel associated with equipmentmalfunction.• Identify risks to personnel arising from human error.• Identify risks to personnel arising from damage to theplatform.• Identify risks arising from unclear or conflicting assignmentsof safety responsibilities to users and maintainers (Chap 5).• Identify safety risks arising from a mismatch between usercharacteristics, required tasks and equipment design(Chap 6).• Identify safety risks arising from lack of training (Chap 7).• Identify safety risks associated with deficiencies in thedesign of the human-equipment interface (Chap 15).• Identify safety risks associated with the layout of equipment(Chap 14).• Identify safety risks associated with maintenance andsupport operations (Chap 16).• Identify safety risks associated with environmental conditions(Chap 13).• Identify safety risks arising from the interaction between twoor more of the following factors: team organisation and roles;user characteristics and tasks; operations using the humanequipmentinterface design; equipment layout; maintenancestates and operations; environmental conditions.• Quantify the probability and severity of safety risks.• Identify measures for the mitigation of safety risks.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 17-25 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)OutputsSafety risks relating to HFI aspects and measures for themitigation of such risks. The information generated by thisactivity contributes to the Safety Management Plan (seeJSP 430 [Ref 5]).17.3.1.5 Outline Safety FacilitiesPurposeInputsMethodsStepsOutputsTo identify design features to improve the safety of theequipment.The hazard controls identified as part of the Formal SafetyAssessment.Not Identified.Identify:• Alarms and warnings to alert personnel to possible safetyrisks.• Equipment functions to improve or maintain safety e.g.weapons lock, manual overrides, automatic detection ofsafety risks.• Additional equipment to monitor or provide information forsafety purposes e.g. sensors or video covering potentiallydangerous equipment or hazard zones.• Protective clothing, equipment and materials for use inEquipment workspaces.Safety facilities are identified for each equipment option and areincluded in the Safety Case for the Equipment (see JSP 430[Ref 5]).17.3.1.6 Outline Health HazardsHFI ActivitiesPurposeTo outline health hazards arising from the use or maintenance ofthe equipment.Inputs • Equipment design and operational and maintenance tasks.• Team organisation and locations of personnel.• Whole Ship hazard assessments.• Environmental conditions (Chap 13) and workspace /workstation design.• Project Specific Target Audience Description (PSTAD).Nov 2006 Page 17-26 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – SafetyMethodsHealth & Safety Analysis.Steps • Identify hazardous operations and identify health hazardsassociated with the operation or maintenance of theequipment under different states and taking account of watchlength.• Assess the likely incidence of the following types of healthhazard:o Acoustic – hearing loss from exposure to continuous orintermittent noise, e.g. weapons firing.o Biological – infections from micro-organisms, theirtoxins and enzymes, e.g. under CBRN warfare.o Chemical – inhalation, ingestion or direct contact withtoxic substances, e.g. hydraulic fluid.o Oxygen deficiency – reduced performance orasphyxiation, e.g. poorly ventilated compartments.o Radiation – from ionising and non-ionising sources, e.g.proximity to high-powered radar equipment.o Shock – arising from equipment operation or shipmotion, e.g. weapons impact.o Temperature extremes and humidity – leading toreductions in performance or more serious effects onhealth, e.g. excessive heat generated by proximity tooperating equipment.o Trauma – physical trauma resulting from direct impact tothe body or musculo-skeletal trauma due to the need tolift excessive weights or continuously operate equipment,e.g. repetitive strain injury associated with using inputdevices for computer-based or other equipment.o Vibration – arising from the contact of mechanicallyoscillating surfaces with the body, e.g. the effect of themotion envelope in different compartments.o Visual – loss or serious impairment of sight due toexposure to high levels of light energy, e.g. lasers.Outputs • Outline list of health hazards• Conditions under which these emerge and the personnelmost at risk.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 17-27 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)17.3.1.7 Assess Health Hazards and Safety RisksPurposeTo identify health hazards and safety risks in each PlatformTechnical Area and to identify the HFI characteristics of hazardcontrols.Note. This activity is performed at every procurement Phaseand during In Service. When modifications are planned; itprovides an input to the Safety Case.Inputs • Existing health and safety checklists or data about accidentsand health problems from existing vessels.• Existing Safety Cases.Methods • Task Analysis.• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description.• Operability Evaluation.• Workload Analysis.• Link Analysis.• Synthetic User Modelling.• Health & Safety Analysis.• Human Reliability Analysis.HFI ActivitiesSteps • Using the Safety Management Plan (see JSP 430 [Ref 5])and relevant Def Stans (see Annex 2) as checklists, inspectthe vessel for potential hazards and ensure that allprescribed safety facilities or measures have beenimplemented.• Perform Task Analysis of jobs where personnel are exposedto hazards or could be responsible for exposing others tohazards, identify the conditions of task performance underwhich hazards may arise.• Perform Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) Studies makinguse of Operability Evaluation (Chap 15) to identify hazardsassociated with the user-equipment interface design (Health& Safety Analysis).• Identify jobs in which omissions or mistakes in performancemay occur leading to the incidence of hazards, performWorkload Analysis to help quantify risks.• Identify the spatial arrangement of personnel and equipmentmaking use of Link Analysis and referring to the ProjectSpecific Target Audience Description (PSTAD), includingpossible emission envelopes from equipment or storedmaterials, identify hazard zones (Chap 5 and Chap 8 throughChap 11).Nov 2006 Page 17-28 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – Safety• Associate human tasks and error probabilities with theanalysis of equipment malfunction (e.g. represented byFailure Modes and Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA),Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) etc. techniques) to determine thecontribution of human reliability to the incidence ofhazardous conditions (Human Reliability Analysis).• Determine the probability of a hazard occurring and the riskto personnel it represents.• Identify methods of reducing the incidence or risk of hazardsconsidering improved user-equipment design (Chap 15),improved layout (Chap 14) (e.g. separation of personnelfrom moving machinery using guard rails etc.), increases toenvironmental safety (Chap 13) (e.g. better lighting, motionrestraints and shock protection, anti-slip surfaces etc.), theprovision of warnings, use of safety job-aids and bettertraining (Chap 7).• Integrate the results identifying hazards and controls withinthe Formal Safety Assessment in the Safety Case.OutputsHealth and safety risk assessments and risk mitigationmeasures.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 17-29 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)17.3.2 Assessment Phase Activities17.3.2.1 Specify: Personnel Health & Safety, Vulnerability &Survivability, Fire-Fighting & Damage Control, HazardZones, Escape Arrangements, Platform Alarms &Warnings, CBRNPurposeTo specify in detail the facilities needed to meet the Health andSafety policy for the platform.Inputs • Health and safety standards.• HFI health and safety policy.• Information about hazards and controls in the Safety Case.Methods • Health & Safety Analysis.• Human Factors Style Guide.StepsIn conjunction with the procedures for all Platform TechnicalAreas, define the Health and Safety design specifications foreach Platform Technical Area. These specify the following:HFI Activities• The health and safety standards to be applied.• The principles to ensure that procedures, facilities layout etc.are as uniform as is possible across the platform.• The design of ladders and their illumination requirements tobe consistent with the traffic flow type and loads to becarried.• The safety features and sea state operating requirements ofUpper Deck equipment.• The specification of hygiene requirements and theirconstraints upon the specification of materials, wastedisposal, ventilation design, galley design, bathroom andheads design.• The vessel shock survival requirements and the hullresponse characteristics:o Identify the most likely spatial distributions of shock.o Correlate those with human resilience thresholds.o Identify regions where excessive levels pertain.o Correlate with outline General Arrangement and thencetask categories.o Specify shock-damping requirements.• Fire hazards:o Identify access requirements to fire hazardcompartments and spaces correlating with Directorate ofNaval Operations (DNO) Standard Operating Procedures(SOPs).o Identify zones that could benefit from remote monitoringNov 2006 Page 17-30 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – Safetyand drenching.Outputso Establish ready access location points for firefightingequipment commensurate with the type of fire hazardand non-impedance to traffic flow.• In conjunction with the design requirements of bulkheadlinings, deck coverings and aesthetic features, define therequired material standards for the following factors:o Smoke production.o Toxic gas production.o Flammability.o Heat Release Rate.o Low moisture absorption.o Low moisture retention.o Low fuel absorption.• Review the Fire fighting and Damage Control manningrequirements in conjunction with on-going refinement of theBasic Manning Requirement (BMR).• Ensure that proposed hazard zoning and citadel boundariesdo not compromise frequently used or operationallynecessary traffic routes.• Compartments:o Identify manned compartments and proposed equipmentfits.o Define outline compartment escape routes andconsequential restrictions on compartment layout.• For submarines:o Analyse the escape requirements and identify thenumbers of escape suits and emergency breathingapparatus, and the associated storage volume.o Waiting areas also need to be sized.• Establish the policy and select Human Factors Style Guidesfor uniformity of alarm and warning categorisation, colourand acoustic coding, with particular emphasis upon ShipControl Centre/Manoeuvring Room, Bridge andHeadquarters (HQ) (for Equipment see 17.3.2.4).• Where hull shapes impose awkward space allocation, reviewwith Naval Architects with the aim of maximising spaceutilisation and necessary access, without imposing upontraffic.• Define health hazard and safety design evaluation andacceptance criteria.The specification of health and safety features includes thefollowing:• Health design specifications summary, with references out toeach Platform Technical Area.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 17-31 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Shock: Specify shock-damping requirements for mannedpositions.• Fire fighting and Damage Control: Specify minimum accessdimensions to fire hazard areas. Identify zones for remotemonitoring and drenching. Identify location of Fire fightingand Damage Control equipment storage points.• Hazard Zoning and Citadel Boundaries: Workspace layoutsand good practice in activities for maintaining boundaries.• Escape Arrangements: Specify the proposed arrangementsin terms of inter-compartment dependency, compartmentlayout, the support equipment quantities and stowagevolumes, waiting space and route dimensions.• Platform Alarms and Warnings: Specify the categories ofplatform alarms and warnings required and their visual andacoustic coding. Specify the uniform configuration andidentification coding of these categories, as applicable locallyin compartments, in other spaces and on or near equipmentsand materials (for Equipment see 17.3.2.4).• Health and safety assessment and acceptance criteria.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 17-32 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – Safety17.3.2.2 Specify Equipment Safety RisksPurposeTo specify safety risks associated with the equipment design.Inputs • Equipment design documentation.• Safety Case evidence developed in previous Phase.Methods • Task Analysis.• [Project Specific] Target Audience Description.• Operability Evaluation.• Workload Analysis.• Link Analysis.• Synthetic User Modelling.• Health & Safety Analysis.• Human Reliability Analysis.Steps • Identify risks to personnel associated with equipmentmalfunction.• Identify risks to personnel arising from human error.• Identify risks to personnel arising from damage to theplatform from enemy action or due to other reasons.• Identify risks arising from unclear or conflicting assignmentsof safety responsibilities to users and maintainers (Chap 5).• Identify safety risks arising from a mismatch between usercharacteristics, required tasks and equipment design(Chap 6).• Identify safety risks arising from lack of training (Chap 7).• Identify safety risks associated with deficiencies in thedesign of the human-equipment interface (Chap 15).• Identify safety risks associated with the layout of equipment(Chap 14).• Identify safety risks associated with maintenance andsupport operations (Chap 17).• Identify safety risks associated with environmental conditions(Chap 13).• Identify safety risks arising from the interaction between twoor more of the following factors: team organisation and roles;user characteristics and tasks; operations using the humanequipmentinterface design; equipment layout; maintenancestates and operations; environmental conditions.• Quantify the probability and severity of safety risks.• Identify measures for the mitigation of safety risks.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 17-33 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)OutputsSafety risks relating to HFI aspects and measures for themitigation of such risks. The information generated by thisactivity contributes to the Safety Case (See JSP 430 [Ref 5]).17.3.2.3 Specify Safety FacilitiesPurposeTo specify design features to improve the safety of the equipment.Inputs • The hazard controls identified as part of the Formal SafetyAssessment.• Outline safety facilities.• Safety risks.MethodsStepsNot Identified.The following types of safety facility for the system are specifiedand integrated into the design:• Equipment functions to improve or maintain safety, e.g.weapons lock, manual overrides, automatic detection of safetyrisks.• Additional equipment to monitor or provide information forsafety purposes, e.g. sensors or video covering potentiallydangerous equipment or hazard zones.• Protective clothing, equipment and materials for use inequipment workspaces.OutputsSafety facilities are specified for the equipment and are included inthe Safety Case.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 17-34 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – Safety17.3.2.4 Specify Equipment Alarms and WarningsPurposeTo specify alarms and warnings required to maintain equipmentsafety (for Platform see 17.3.2.1).Inputs • The hazard controls identified as part of the Formal SafetyAssessment.• The alarms and warnings policy.• Outline safety facilities.• Safety risks.Methods • Human Factors Style Guide.• User-Equipment Interface Design.• Workstation Design.• Workspace Design.Steps • Identify safety risks associated with user and maintainer tasks.• Identify types of passive and active alarms and warnings forsafety risks.• Select standards and use a Human Factors Style Guide toensure design of legible and/or audible and consistent alarmsand warnings.• Ensure that alarms and warnings are integrated into theequipment design (Chap 15).• Ensure that alarms and warnings are integrated intomaintenance points and support equipment (Chap 17).• Ensure that alarms and warnings are integrated into theequipment workspace layout (Chap 14).• Co-ordinate design and deployment of alarms and warningswith the System Project Manager to ensure consistency and toavoid mutual interference within the platform.OutputsSpecification of safety-related alarms and warnings, this isincluded in the Safety Case (see JSP 430 [Ref 5]).HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 17-35 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)17.3.2.5 Specify Safety ProceduresPurposeTo identify safety procedures.Inputs • The hazard controls identified as part of the Formal SafetyAssessment.• Outline safety facilities.• Safety risks.• Equipment design documentation.• Operating and maintenance procedures.MethodsNot Identified.Steps • The safety procedures are developed by reviewing all safetyrisks and identifying appropriate safety procedures to formpart of the Ship’s own Safety Management System.• Procedures related to the use of safety facilities and inresponse to alarms and warnings are included.• Safety procedures are developed for each instance ofequipment malfunction and damage state.OutputsSafety procedures are integrated into operational andmaintenance procedures and related documentation and on-linereference materials. Safety procedures contribute to the Ship’sown Safety Management System.17.3.2.6 Specify Health HazardsPurposeTo specify health hazards arising from the use or maintenanceof the equipment.HFI ActivitiesInputs • Outline Health Hazards.• Equipment design and operational and maintenance tasks.• Team organisation and locations of personnel.• Whole Ship hazard assessments.• Environmental conditions and workspace/workstation design.• Project Specific Target Audience Description (PSTAD).Methods Not Identified.StepsThe HFI Method and the Steps are the same as those used inOutline Health Hazards during Assessment.Nov 2006 Page 17-36 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – SafetyOutputs • Specification of health hazards.• Conditions under which these emerge and the personnelmost at risk.17.3.2.7 Specify Health Hazard ControlsPurposeInputsMethodsStepsTo identify measures for eliminating or minimising healthhazards.Health hazards identified for the equipment.Not Identified.Specify control measures for each health hazard, including thefollowing:• Re-allocation of tasks to users.• Measures for controlling individual workload.• Watch and shift length and breaks.• Exercises to avoid repetitive strain injury.• Protective clothing and equipment.• Design of seating and workstations.• Hazard zones.Outputs • Specification of health hazard control measures.• Conditions under which these are used and the personnel towhom these should be applied.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 17-37 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)17.3.3 Demonstration Phase Activities17.3.3.1 Assess Safety FacilitiesPurposeInputsMethodsTo assess the effectiveness of safety facilities.Equipment design and safety facility specifications, mock-ups orprototypes.Not Identified.Steps • The safety risk reduction associated with the provision ofeach facility is identified.• The effectiveness of each facility at reducing the probabilityand the severity of risks to safety is evaluated. Thisevaluation may take several forms:o Subject matter expert assessments can be used toassess likely effectiveness of safety facilities.o The effectiveness of the facility may be modelled usingmathematical simulations.o Synthetic modelling and equipment interface prototypingmay be used to assess safety risks with the operator inthe loop.o Mock-ups of equipment workspaces may be used withsimulation of environmental conditions, e.g. smokepollution.OutputsAssessments of the effectiveness of safety facilities.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 17-38 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – Safety17.3.3.2 Assess Safety ProceduresPurposeTo assess the safety procedures for the equipment.Inputs • Documentation.• Job aids.MethodsNot Identified.Steps • The procedures are assessed to ensure that they cover allsafety risks associated with the use and maintenance of theequipment.• Each procedure is checked to ensure that it is performed aseffectively and as efficiently as is possible.• Compatibility of the safety responsibilities assigned to eachuser and maintainer role is assessed to ensure that theseare consistent with the tasks and responsibilities assigned tothat role.OutputsAssessments of the safety procedures.17.3.3.3 Assess Alarms and WarningsPurposeTo assess effectiveness and uniformity of design of alarms andwarnings.Inputs • Equipment design with alarm and warning specifications• Drawings.• Mock-ups.• Prototypes.• Actual equipment.MethodsNot Identified.Steps • Stimulate or prototype alarms and warnings.Outputs• Check for consistency against design standards anduniformity of audibility/ visibility characteristics.Assessment of the effectiveness and consistency ofinterpretation of alarms and warnings.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 17-39 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)17.3.3.4 Assess Health Hazards and ControlsPurposeTo assess the likelihood of health hazards and the effectivenessof control measures.Inputs • Equipment.• Workstation and workspace design and health hazards andcontrols list.MethodsNot Identified.Steps • Equipment design, workspace and workstation layout andenvironmental design are assessed against the standardsspecified for the equipment.• The health hazard control measures implemented for theequipment are checked by subject matter experts to ensurethat all health hazards have been identified and their effectminimised.OutputsAssessments of the likelihood of health hazards and theeffectiveness of control measures.17.3.3.5 Assess Escape FacilitiesPurposeTo inspect usability of, and identify risks associated with, escapefacilities.Inputs • Drawings.• Mock-ups.• Actual equipment.• Distribution of personnel on board.• Escape Scenarios.MethodsNot Identified but including:• Escape Analysis [as advised by EENA].HFI ActivitiesSteps • Trial use of escape facilities with personnel wearing escapeequipment.Outputs• Working mock-ups or simulations may need to be used forarrangements with a high degree of novelty to give earlyindication of their viability and detailed design requirements.Assessment of likely effectiveness, efficiency and risks of usingescape facilities.Nov 2006 Page 17-40 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – Safety17.3.3.6 Assess Fire-Fighting and Damage ControlPurposeTo inspect fire-fighting and damage control procedures andfacilities in each compartment and workspace.Inputs • Drawings.• Mock-ups.• Actual equipment.MethodsStepsOutputsNot Identified.Check that compartment monitoring and drenching, andpotential hazard type categorisation are in accordance with HFIrequirements.Assessment of the effectiveness, efficiency and risks arisingduring fire fighting and damage control activities.17.3.3.7 Assess CBRNDC FacilitiesPurposeTo determine viability of operations under CBRN conditions andto check effectiveness and risks associated with specific CBRNactivities.Inputs • Drawings.• Mock-ups.• Actual equipment.MethodsNot Identified.Steps • Assemble appropriately clothed personnel or applysimulation techniques.• Undertake simulated operational routines and CBRNactivities, assessing ease of movement, adequacy of routedesigns, e.g. door sizing, doorclip operation, equipmenthandling, voice communications etc.OutputsAssessment of effectiveness, efficiency and risks of activitiesassociated with CBRN conditions.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 17-41 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)17.3.4 Manufacture Phase Activities17.3.4.1 Devise System Safety HFI Acceptance Criteria 9PurposeTo establish criteria by which the effectiveness of passive andengineered safety systems and processes operate and establishcriteria for determining that safety obligations are fully met.Inputs • Safety system performance specifications.• Legislation (UK & EU).• Regulatory Guides (HSE, MOD, etc.).• Human Factors standards and guides.• Critical Task Descriptions.Methods • [Safety] Checklists.Steps • Extract key system performance criteria from platform andequipment specifications.• Identify critical tasks from established task descriptions.• Identify critical task performance requirements and keyenvironmental influences.• Determine limiting parameters for each key influence.• Schedule safety system acceptance trial requirements andacceptance criteria.• Monitor and analyse acceptance trial results.OutputsConfirmation of the acceptability of all safety managementsystems and facilities.HFI Activities9 Described under Manufacture Phase Activities but should start earlier. See also POSMS [Ref 37] SMP10.Nov 2006 Page 17-42 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – Safety17.3.4.2 Provide HF Input to Acceptance TrialsPurposeInputsMethodsTo ensure that Human Factors Safety issues are adequatelyrepresented in user trial specifications.Data obtained from initial system studies in Demonstrationphase.Not Identified.Steps • Identify all safety-related human factors issues.• Determine means of testing and exercising all humanmachineinterface features and facilities in all safetymanagement systems.• Specify minimum requirements for representative userpopulations in trials.• Specify test scenarios and any required simulations.• Ensure presence of competent and independent trialwitnesses/assessors.OutputsConfirmation of the acceptability of all safety managementsystems and facilities.17.3.4.3 Periodic HFI AuditsPurposeTo assess the adequacy of Manufacturer’s HFI processes andthe effectiveness of their application to project materiel.Inputs • Project HFI Plans• Manufacturer’s HFI Plans.• HF components of platform, system and equipmentspecificationsMethods • [Systematic] Audit.Steps • Identify HFI activities in Project and Manufacturer’s plans.• Produce HFI Audit plan.• Agreed access with manufacturers.• Carry out Audits and produce reports.• Feed results of audits to relevant stakeholders.HFI ActivitiesOutputsHFI Audit reports.Nov 2006 Page 17-43 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)17.3.4.4 Provide Support to Other Project Safety-RelatedActivities 10PurposeTo assist platform and equipment IPTs to carry out HFI activitiesappropriate to their systems and domains.To improve consistency of approach to HFI across all projectactivities.Inputs • Project HFI Plans.• Manufacturer’s HFI Plans.MethodsNot Identified.Steps • Maintain ongoing dialogue with project IPTs and otherstakeholders.• Respond to invitations to contribute HFI knowledge and datato project specialist safety activities.• Initiate transfer of HFI data and other inputs to project safetyactivities.Outputs • Input to project quality system records.• Specific HFI data.HFI Activities10 Similar activity also applied at other CADMID phases.Nov 2006 Page 17-44 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – Safety17.3.5 In-Service Phase Activities17.3.5.1 Transfer HFI aspects of Safety Case to DLOPurposeInputsMethodsTo ensure future users of the project equipment and systemsreceive full and adequate information.HFI information and data from earlier project phases.Not Identified.Steps • Collate and register all project HFI information and data.• Transfer project HFI information and data to DLOOutputsTransfer record.17.3.5.2 Collect In-Service Safety DataPurposeTo obtain in-service feedback on the performance of safetymanagement systems and facilities from long-term users.Inputs • Operational reports.• Data from user surveys.Methods • [User] Questionnaires.• [Structured] Interviews.Steps • Propose to Customer 2 appropriate user-opinion surveys.• Carry out appropriate user-opinion surveys.OutputsSafety system performance data.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 17-45 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)17.3.5.3 Review Operational Safety DataPurposeTo evaluate in-service feedback on the performance of safetymanagement systems and facilities from long-term users.Inputs • Operational reports.• Data from user surveys.Methods • Structured analysis.• Trend analysis.• Accident rate data.• Lost-time data• Human Error data.• Near-miss dataSteps • Analyse operational reports, focussing on HF-related safetyissues and influences.• Analyse data from user surveys.• Identify trends in user safety performance decrement data.• Identify possible safety-critical performance decrements.OutputsQuantitative and qualitative assessments of the operation ofsafety systems in a range of service conditions17.3.5.4 Feed Safety Review Results to Customer 2PurposeInputsMethodsTo maintain and improve the operational effectiveness andperformance of safety systems.Result of previous analyses.Not Identified.HFI ActivitiesSteps • Establish dialogue with end-user representatives.Outputs• Establish regular feed-forward mechanisms.• Establish loop-closing feedback from end-userrepresentatives.Improvements to safety system performance and safety wholelifemanagement systems.Nov 2006 Page 17-46 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – Safety17.3.6 Disposal Phase Activities17.3.6.1 Establish Legislative and Regulatory ClimatePurposeTo determine accurately the regulatory and legislative climate inwhich platform and equipment disposal activities will take place.Inputs • Current UK and EU Health, Safety and Environmentallegislation and regulations (COMAH, COSHH, etc).• Local authority legislation (Carriage of dangerous goods,waste disposal, etc.).• Transportation safety regulations (Carriage of dangerousgoods and materials).• Current safety authority guides, e.g. HSE, HMNII, MOD.• Draft legislation and regulations (if disposal activity will spana long time period).MethodsNot Identified.Steps • Identify and collate relevant legislation, regulations andguides.• Identify relevant disposal phase requirements on project.• Identify issues affecting all human activities and tasks.• Identify requirements for Personal Protective Equipment,special tools and facilities, etc.• Review the potential role of automation to reduce risks todisposal operators.OutputsCollate set of HF requirements for HF disposal activities andtasks.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 17-47 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)17.3.6.2 Collate HFI Information From Early Project PhasesPurposeInputsMethodsTo ensure key information that affects the safety of disposalactivities is available and is extracted form project records.Project HFI information and data from all previous projectphases.Not Identified.Steps • Collate HFI information form earlier project phases.• Extract key HF information that will affect the safety ofdisposal activities.OutputsKey HF information to provide input to the Safety Case tosupport disposal.17.3.6.3 Identify Safety-Critical Tasks and At-Risk GroupsPurposeTo identify and analyse all safety-critical tasks associated withDisposal phase activities and identify at-risk groups of disposaloperators.Inputs • Disposal plan.• Platform and equipment specifications.• Deck, compartment and space layout drawings and sections.• Hazardous materials lists.Methods • Task analysis.Steps • Analyse proposed disposal tasks.• Evaluate safety risks to operators.• Identify at-risk groups, exposures and likely dose values.HFI ActivitiesOutputs • Safety-critical task list.• At-risk group list.Nov 2006 Page 17-48 Issue 4

Chapter 17 – Safety17.3.6.4 Identify & Analyse HazardsPurposeTo identify and analyse all hazards associated with Disposalphase activities.Inputs • Platform and equipment specifications.Methods • HAZOP• Operational reports.• In-service Hazard logs and results of analyses.• Specialist user knowledge.• HAZAN• Critical Incident techniques.• Specialist Knowledge ExtractionSteps • Identify safety-critical activities and tasks.• Review the use of automation and mechanisation to reducerisks to disposal operators.• Provide HF input to HAZOP and HAZAN studies of Disposalactivities and tasks.OutputsHF input to Safety Case to support disposal.17.3.6.5 Devise Hazard ControlsPurposeTo devise appropriate hazard control to reduce risks to DisposalOperators ALARP.Inputs • Hazard log.• At-risk group list.• Dose estimates.• Automated task feasibility studies.MethodsNot Identified.Steps • Review hazards.Outputs• Apply ALARP principles to remove risk, reduce risks oridentify required hazard controls.• Provide HF input to Hazard control solutions.HF input to Safety Case to support disposal.HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 17-49 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)HFI ActivitiesNov 2006 Page 17-50 Issue 4MAP-01-011 CH 17_24.doc

ANNEX 1 – REFERENCESCONTENTSA1References......................................................................................................................3A1.1 Method and Tool Citations.....................................................................................6Nov 2006 Page A1-1 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)Nov 2006 Page A1-2 Issue 4

Annex 1 – ReferencesA1ReferencesUnderlined text indicates a short document name or identity used in the body ofthe text.Each reference includes the title together with the identity, issue, date, andauthor / publisher. Voids are indicated by a tilde (~). Additional information (egweb address) may also be provided.[1] Human Factors Integration (HFI)Management Guide (STGP 10)MAP-01-010, Issue 4, May 2006, SeaSystems Group / MOD.(Previously known as STGP 10)[2] Acquisition Management System (AMS)websiteAMS, Build v10.3, May 2006, AMS /MOD.‘http://www.ams.mod.uk/’[3] The Defence Systems Approach toTraining Quality Standard (DSAT QS)DGTE/12/02, ~, Mar 2003, DG T&E /MOD.(Tri-Service replacement for BR 8420(RNSAT QS) [Ref 4].)[4] The Royal Naval Systems Approach toTraining Quality Standard (RNSAT QS)BR 8420, Issue 2, 1999, RNSETT /MOD.(Superseded by (DSAT QS) [Ref 3].)[5] MOD Ship Safety Management JSP 430, Issue 3, 2005, Ship SafetyManagement Office/ DPA.Part 1: Policy, Issue 3 Amnt 1, Mar2005.Part 2: Policy Guidance, Issue 3 Amnt 1,Mar 2006.Part 3: Naval Authority Regulations,Issue 3, Mar 2005.Part 4: Audit Manual, Issue 3, Mar 2005.[6] Defence Training Support Manual(DTSM) 1: The Analysis, Design andDevelopment of Training[7] Defence Training Support Manual(DTSM) 2: The Glossary of DefenceTraining Terminology[8] Defence Training Support Manual(DTSM) 3: Training Needs Analysis(TNA)[9] Defence Training Support Manual(DTSM) 4: The Evaluation of TrainingDTSM 1, Final 1.0, May 2004, DG T&E /MOD.DTSM 2, ~, Apr 2005, DG T&E / MOD.DTSM 3, Final 1.0, Sep 2004, DG T&E /MOD.(replaces JSP 502 [Ref 12]).DTSM 4, Final 1.1, Mar 2005, DG T&E /MOD.Nov 2006 Page A1-3 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)[10] Defence Training Support Manual(DTSM) 5: Technology Based TrainingDelivery Solutions[11] Defence Training Support Manual(DTSM) 6: The Audit and Inspection ofIndividual TrainingDTSM 5, Final 1.0, Sep 2005, DG T&E /MOD.DTSM 6, Draft 2.0, Sep 2005, DG T&E /MOD.[12] The Tri-Service Guide to Training NeedsJSP 502, ~, July 2001, MOD.Analysis (TNA) for Acquisition Projects (Superseded by DTSM 3 [Ref 8].)[13] MANPRINT Cost Benefits on US ArmySystems~, ~, 1997, H R Booher.In MoD/DERA Annual Human FactorsIntegration Seminar, ~, ~, 1997, MoD.[14] Reduced Manning – The Way Ahead ~, ~, 1998, HILS(N).Paper at the Warship Manning Dilemma.[15] User Requirements and OperationalFeedback Safety Navigation ReducingNumber of Operators[16] Complementing Method and ToolSupport Strategy Study - Final Report~, ~, June 1997, Fukichi, Prof. N.In Sixth International Marine DesignConference: Vol.2 - State of the ArtReports, ~, June 1997, (Eds.) Sen &Birmingham / Univ. Newcastle.QAL/P1167/11/05/06/D2, Issue 1, Dec2005, Quintec Associates Ltd on behalfof STG / MOD.[17] Complementing for Future Platforms D/CofN/301/9, ~, Jan 1997, MOD.[18] Naval Manning Manual BR 4017, 1204 edition, Dec 2004, Officeof DNPS / MOD.[19] Ship CBRND Manual BR 2170, ~, ~, FSAG.Volume 1 - Damage Control andFirefighting, Iss 3, Nov 1999.Volume 2 - CBRN Defence, Iss 2, Sep2000.Volume 3 - CBRND Stores Cataloguefor HM Surface Ships and RFAs, Iss 1,2005.Volume 4 - Submarines, Iss 3, 1999.Volume 5 - Advancement and TrainingRequirements, ~, 2002.[20] Current Human Factors (HF) DesignIssues Within Submarine CombatSystems (CS)DRA/CIS(SS5)/1038/2/3/021, ~, 1995,DRA / MOD.[21] Navy Board Rules NAVB/P(90), ~, ~, NAVB / MOD.[22] Procedure for Ship Manning for NATOSurface ShipsANEP 21, Edition 1, Sep 1991, NATOMAS.Nov 2006 Page A1-4 Issue 4

Annex 1 – References[23] Training Guide 1: The Royal NavyInstructions for the Conduct of TrainingNeeds Analysis (TNA)BR 8420 TG1, Issue 2, 2001, RNSETT.(Superseded by JSP 502 [Ref 12] andthen by DTSM 3 [Ref 8].)[24] Habitability of Warships INM Technical Report No. 96004, ~,1996, INM.[25] Safety Requirements for the Design ofElectrotechnical and Naval WeaponEquipmentDef Stan 21-8, Issue 1, 2000, MOD.See Section 11 of reference.[26] Instructions for Radiological Protection JSP 392, Issue 4, 2005, CNNTSP.[27] Requirements for the Design andTesting of Equipment to MeetEnvironmental ConditionsDef Stan 08-123, Issue 1, Apr 2000,MoD.[28] Integrated Logistics Support Def Stan 00-60, ~, ~, MOD.For parts and issue status, see Annex 2.[29] Casualties to Vessels and Accidents toMen: Vessels registered in the UK –return for 1988[30] An Analysis of the Main Causal Factorsof Shipboard Accidents in the RoyalNavy[31] Ship Engineering Practice, SafetyConsiderations and Precautions[32] Human Factors Design & EvaluationMethods Review~, ~, 1990, Department of Transport,Marine Division / HMSO.INM Report No. R9208, ~, 1992, INM.BR 2000(20), ~, 2004, DME.HFIDTC/1.3.3/1-1, Version 1, Feb 2004,Paul Salmon, Prof Neville Stanton, DrChris Baber, Dr Guy Walker & DrDamian Green / HFI DTC.[33] HFI Technical Guide STGP 11, Issue 3, 2002, STG.[34] Systems engineering - System life cycleprocessesBS ISO/IEC 15288:2002, ~, Nov 2002,BSI.[35] Handbook of Human Factors andErgonomics Methods[36] Project Oriented Safety ManagementSystem (POSMS)[37] Safety Management Requirements forDefence SystemsISBN 0415287006, ~, Aug 2004, Eds:Neville Stanton, Alan Hedge, Hal WHendrick, Eduardo Salas & KarelBrookhuis / Taylor and Francis.POSMS, ~, v2.1, ~, Joint DPA-DLO.‘http://www.asems.dii.r.mil.uk/’ also see‘http://www.asesg.dii.r.mil.uk’Consists of a Manual, supported by 13Safety Management Procedures.Def-Stan 00-56, Issue 3, Dec 2004,MOD.Part 1: Requirements, Part 2: Guidance.Nov 2006 Page A1-5 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)A1.1 Method and Tool CitationsThe following table lists citations taken from the HFI DTC Report ‘Human FactorsDesign & Evaluation Methods Review’ [Ref 32] and used in support of Annex 3 –HFI Methods and Tools. Note that the citations are quoted from the report andare not verified; full details were not included in the report for all citations.The references are indexed by a number of the form ‘DTCnnn’. Each referenceincludes a citation of the style typically used in the original report (eg ‘Ainsworth,L. & Marshall, E. (1998).’) as well as the document’s title and details presented inthe same style as for the main references above.DTC001 Advances inReliabilityTechnologySymposium (~)DTC002 AGARD (1989)DTC003 AGARD (1990)DTC004 AGARD (1992)9th Advances in ReliabilityTechnology Symposium,University of BradfordProceedings of AGARDSymposium on SituationalAwareness in AerospaceOperation, Copenhagen,DKSituational Awareness inAerospace Operations,Neuilly Sur Seine, FranceAGARD Avionics PanelSymposium, Madrid~, ~, ~, ~ / ~.~, ~, 1989, ~ / NATO-AGARD.AGARD-CP-478, ~, 1990, ~ /NATO-AGARD.AGARD-CP-521, ~, May 1992, ~ /NATO-AGARD.DTC005 Ainsworth, L. &Marshall, E.(1998).DTC006 Ainsworth, W.(1988)Issues of quality andpracticality in task analysis:preliminary results from twosurveysErgonomics 41(11) pp 1604-1617,~, 1998, L Ainsworth & E Marshall /~.Reprinted in 'Task Analysis' [RefDTC007] pp 79-89Optimization of string International Journal of Manlengthfor spoken digit input Machine Studies 28 pp 573-581, ~,with error Correction 1988, W Ainsworth / ~.DTC007 Annett, J. &Stanton, N.A.(Eds.) (2000).DTC008 Annett, J. (2004)Task AnalysisHierarchical Task Analysis(HTA)~, ~, 2000, J Annett & N A Stanton(Eds) / Taylor & Francis.~, ~, Aug 2004, J Annett / ~.In 'Handbook of Human Factorsand Ergonomics Methods' [Ref 35]DTC009 Annett, J., A method for measuringCunningham, D.J., team skills& Mathias-Jones,P. (2000).Ergonomics 43(8) pp 1076-1094, ~,2000, J Annett, D J Cunningham &P Mathias-Jones / ~.Nov 2006 Page A1-6 Issue 4

Annex 1 – ReferencesDTC010 Annett, J., Duncan, Task AnalysisK.D., Stammers,R.B., & Gray, M.(1971).~, ~, 1971, J Annett, K D Duncan, RB Stammers & M Gray / HMSO.DTC011 Avionics Proceedings of the 1999 Report 99-0815, ~, 1999, ~ / ERAConference (1999) Avionics Conference, Technology.Heathrow, London, 17-18thNov 1999DTC012 Baber, C. &Stanton, N. A.(1996).DTC013 Baber, C. &Stanton, N. A.(1996).DTC014 Baber, C. &Stanton, N. A.(1999).Human error identification Applied Ergonomics 27(2) pp 119-techniques applied to public131, ~, 1996, C Baber & N Atechnology: predictions Stanton / ~.compared with observeduseObservation as a technique ~, ~, 1996, C Baber & N A Stanton /for Usability Evaluations ~.In 'Usability Evaluation in Industry'[Ref DTC098] pp 85-94Analytical prototyping ~, ~, 1999, C Baber & N A Stanton /~.In 'Interface Technology: theleading edge' [Ref DTC138]DTC015 Baber, C. &Stanton, N.A.(1994).Task analysis for erroridentificationErgonomics 37 pp 1923-1941, ~,1994, C Baber& N A Stanton / ~.DTC016 Baber, C. (1996). Repertory Grid Theory andits application to productevaluation~, ~, 1996, C Baber / ~.In 'Usability Evaluation in Industry'[Ref DTC098] pp 157-165DTC017 Baber, C. (2004). Repertory Grid for ProductEvaluation~, ~, Aug 2004, C Baber / ~.In 'Handbook of Human Factorsand Ergonomics Methods' [Ref 35]DTC018 Baber, C. andMellor, B.A.(2001).DTC019 Baber, C. andStanton, N. A.(2002).Modelling multimodalhuman-computerinteraction using criticalpath analysisTask Analysis For ErrorIdentification: theory,method and validationInternational Journal of HumanComputer Studies 54 pp 613-636,~, 2001, C Baber & B A Mellor / ~.Theoretical Issues in ErgonomicsScience 3(2) pp 212-227, ~, 2002,C Baber & N A Stanton / ~.DTC020 Baber, C., Walker,G., Stanton, N. S.,& Salmon, P.(2004).Report on Initial Trials ofWP1.1 Methodologyconducted at fire servicetraining collegeDTC021 Baker, D. (2004). Behavioural ObservationScales (BOS)WP1.1.1/01, ~, Jan 2004, C Baber,G Walker, N A Stanton & P Salmon/ HFI DTC.~, ~, Aug 2004, D Baker / ~.In 'Handbook of Human Factorsand Ergonomics Methods' [Ref 35]Nov 2006 Page A1-7 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)DTC022 Bartlett, F.C.(1932)DTC023 Bass, A., Aspinal,J., Walter, G., &Stanton, N. A.(1995).Remembering: a study inexperimental and socialpsychologyA software toolkit forhierarchical task analysis~, ~, 1932, F C Bartlett / CambridgeUniversity Press.Applied Ergonomics 26(2) pp 147-151, ~, 1995, A Bass, J Aspinal, GWalter & N A Stanton / ~.DTC024 Biennial CanadianConference onProcess Safetyand LossManagement(1993)Proceedings of the firstBiennial CanadianConference on ProcessSafety and LossManagement, Edmonton,Alberta, CanadaDTC025 Bowers, C. A., & Team WorkloadJentsch, F. (2004).~, ~, 1993, ~ / Institute for RiskResearch, University of Waterloo.~, ~, Aug 2004, C A Bowers & FJentsch / ~.In 'Handbook of Human Factorsand Ergonomics Methods' [Ref 35]DTC026 Bowers, C. A.,Baker, D. P., &Salas, E. (1994).DTC027 Bowers, C. A.,Morgan, B. B.,Salas, E., &Prince, C. (1993).Measuring the importanceof teamwork: The reliabilityand validity of job/taskanalysis indices for teamtraining designMilitary Psychology 6(4) pp 205-214, ~, 1994, C A Bowers, D PBaker & E Salas / ~.Assessment of coordinationMilitary Psychology 5(2) pp 95-112,demand for aircrew coordinationtraining E Salas & C Prince /~, 1993, C A Bowers, B B Morgan,~.DTC028 Brewer, W.F.(2000).Bartlett’s concept of theschema and its impact ontheories of knowledgerepresentation incontemporary cognitivepsychology~, ~, 2000, W F Brewer / ~.In 'Bartlett, Culture and Cognition'[Ref DTC155] pp 69-89DTC029 Burford, B. (1993). Designing Adaptive ATMs ~, ~, 1993, B Burford / University ofBirmingham.Unpublished MSc ThesisDTC030 Burke, C. S.(2003).Team Task Analysis ~, ~, 2003, C S Burke / ~.In 'Handbook of Human Factorsand Ergonomics Methods' [Ref 35]DTC031 Card, S. K., Moran, The Psychology of HumanT. P.; Newell, A. Computer Interaction(1983).~, ~, 1983, S K Card, T P Moran &A Newell / Lawrence ErlbaumAssociates.Nov 2006 Page A1-8 Issue 4

Annex 1 – ReferencesDTC032 Casali, J. G. &Wierwille, W. W(1983).A comparison of ratingscale, secondary task,physiological, and primarytask workload estimationtechniques in a simulatedflight task emphasisingcommunications loadHuman Factors 25 pp 623-641, ~,1983, J G Casali & W W Wierwille /~.DTC033 Center forChemical ProcessSafety (CCPS)(1994).Guidelines for PreventingHuman Error in ProcessSafety~, ~, 1994, Center for ChemicalProcess Safety (CCPS) / AmericanInstitute of Chemical Engineers.Reprinted in 'The OccupationalErgonomics Handbook' [RefDTC100]DTC034 Cha, D. W (2001). Comparative study ofsubjective workloadassessment techniques forthe evaluation of ITSorientatedhuman-machineinterface systemsJournal of Korean Society ofTransportation 19(3) pp 45058, ~,2001, D W Cha / ~.DTC035 Chew J. C &Whiteside J.(1990)DTC036 CHI’88Empowering People:Proceedings of CHI’90Conference on HumanFactors in ComputerSystems, Monterey, CAProceedings of CHI’88Conference on HumanFactors in ComputerSystems~, ~, 1990, J C Chew & J Whiteside(Eds) / ACM Press.~, ~, 1988, ~ / ~.DTC037 Chin, J. P., Diehl,V. A., & Norman,K. L. (1988).Development of aninstrument Measuring UserSatisfaction of the Human-Computer Interface~, ~, 1988, J P Chin, V A Diehl & KL Norman / ~.In 'Proceedings of CHI’88Conference on Human Factors inComputer Systems' [Ref DTC036]DTC038 Ciavarelli, A.(2002).Human Factors Checklist:An Aircraft AccidentInvestigation Tool~, ~, 2002, A Ciavarelli / School ofAviation Safety, California.DTC039 Cooper, G. E., &Harper, R. P.(1969).The use of pilot rating in theReport No. ASD-TR-76-19, ~, 1969,evaluation of aircraft G E Cooper & R P Harper / Nationalhandling qualities Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration.DTC040 Crawford, J. O.,Taylor, C., & Po,N. L. W. (2001).A case study of on-screenprototypes and usabilityevaluation of electronictimers and food menusystemsInternational Journal of HumanComputer Interaction 13(2) pp 187-201, ~, 2001, J O Crawford, CTaylor & N L W Po / ~.Nov 2006 Page A1-9 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)DTC041 Dean, T. F. (1997). Directory of Design supportmethodsADA 328 375, ~, Sep 1997, Dean,T. F. / Defence TechnicalInformation Centre, DTIC-AM.MATRIS Office.DTC042 Dennehy, K.(1997).DTC043 Diaper, D., &Stanton, N. S.(2004)DTC044 Driskell, J. E., &Mullen, B. (2004).Cranfield – SituationAwareness Scale, UserManualThe Handbook of TaskAnalysis for Human-Computer InteractionSocial Network AnalysisCOA Report No. 9702, ~, Jan 1997,Dennehy, K. / Applied PsychologyUnit, College of Aeronautics,Cranfield University.~, ~, 2004, D Diaper & N S Stanton(Eds) / Lawrence ErlbaumAssociates.~, ~, Aug 2004, J E Driskell & BMullen / ~.In 'Handbook of Human Factorsand Ergonomics Methods' [Ref 35]DTC045 Drury, C. G.(1990).DTC046 Durso, F.T.,Hackworth, C.A.,Truitt, T.,Crutchfield, J.,Manning, C.A.(1998).Methods for direct ~, ~, 1990, C G Drury / ~.observation of performance In 'Evaluation of Human Work: APractical Ergonomics Methodology'[Ref DTC207]Situation awareness as apredictor of performance inen route air trafficcontrollersAir Traffic Quarterly 6 pp 1-20, ~,1998, Durso, F.T., Hackworth, C.A.,Truitt, T., Crutchfield, J., Manning,C.A. / ~.DTC047 Durso, F.T., Truitt, Expertise and Chess: aT.R., Hackworth, Pilot Study ComparingC.A., Crutchfield, Situation AwarenessJ.M., Nikolic, D., MethodologiesMoertl, P.M., Ohrt,D. & Manning, C.A.(1995).~, ~, 1995, F T Durso, T R Truitt, CA Hackworth, J M Crutchfield, DNikolic, P M Moertl, D Ohrt & C AManning / ~.In 'Experimental Analysis andMeasurement of SituationAwareness' [Ref DTC060]DTC048 Easterby R. &Zwaga H. (1984)DTC049 Easterby, R.(1984).Information DesignTasks, processes anddisplay design~, ~, 1984, R Easterby & H Zwaga(Eds) / Whiley.~, ~, 1984, R Easterby / ~.In 'Information Design' [RefDTC048] pp 19-36DTC050 Embrey, D. E.(1986).DTC051 Embrey, D. E.(1993).SHERPA: A systematichuman error reduction andprediction approach~, ~, 1986, Embrey, D. E. / ~.Paper presented at the InternationalMeeting on Advances in NuclearPower Systems, Knoxville,TennesseeQuantitative and qualitative Institute of Chemical Engineersprediction of human error in Symposium Series 130 pp 329-350,safety assessments ~, 1993, Embrey, D. E. / ~.Nov 2006 Page A1-10 Issue 4

Annex 1 – ReferencesDTC052 Endsley, M. R.(1989).DTC053 Endsley, M. R.(1993).Final Report: Situationawareness in an advancedstrategic missionNorthrop Document 89-32, ~, 1989,M R Endsley / NorthropCorporation.A survey of situation The International Journal of Aviationawareness requirements in Psychology 3 pp 157-168, ~, 1993,Air-to-Air Combat fighters M R Endsley / ~.DTC054 Endsley, M. R.(1995b).Measurement of SituationAwareness in DynamicSystemsHuman Factors 37 pp 65-84, ~,1995, M R Endsley / ~.DTC055 Endsley, M. R., Situation awareness: ASollenberger, R., & comparison of measuresStein, E. (2000).~, ~, 2000, M R Endsley, RSollenberger & E Stein / ~.In 'Proceedings of the HumanPerformance, Situation Awarenessand Automation: User-CenteredDesign for the New Millennium' [RefDTC086]DTC056 Endsley, M., R.(1995a).Towards a theory ofSituation Awareness inDynamic SystemsHuman Factors 37 pp 32-64, ~,1995, M R Endsley / ~.DTC057 Eyferth, K.,Niessen, C.,Spath, O. (2003).A model of air traffic Aerospace Science and Technologycontrollers conflict detection3, ~, 2003, Eyferth, K., Niessen, C.,and conflict resolution Spath, O. / ~.DTC058 Farmer, E.W., Dimensions of operatorJordan, C.S., workloadBelyavin, A.J.,Bunting, A.J.,Tattersall, A.J. andJones D.M. (1995).Report DRA/AS/MMI/CR95098/1, ~,1995, Farmer, E.W., Jordan, C.S.,Belyavin, A.J., Bunting, A.J.,Tattersall, A.J. and Jones D.M. /Defence Evaluation & ResearchAgency.DTC059 Flanagan, J. C.(1954).The Critical IncidentTechniquePsychological Bulletin 51 pp 327-358, ~, 1954, Flanagan, J. C. / ~.DTC060 Garland D.J. &Endsley M. (1995)Experimental Analysis andMeasurement of SituationAwareness~, ~, 1995, DJ Garland & M Endsley(Eds) / Embry-Riddle AeronauticalUniversity Press.DTC061 Gertmann, D. I.,Blackman, H. S.(1994).Human Reliability andSafety Analysis DataHandbook~, ~, 1994, D I Gertmann & H SBlackman / John Wiley & Sons.Reprinted in 'The OccupationalErgonomics Handbook' [RefDTC100]DTC062 Gertmann, D. I.,Blackman, H. S.,Haney, L. N.,Seidler, K. S., andHahn, H. A.(1992).INTENT: A method forestimating human errorprobabilities for decisionbased errorsReliability Engineering and SystemSafety (35) pp 127-137, ~, 1992, D IGertmann, H S Blackman, L NHaney, K S Seidler & H A Hahn / ~.Reprinted in 'The OccupationalErgonomics Handbook' [RefDTC100]Nov 2006 Page A1-11 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)DTC063 Glendon, A.I. andMcKenna, E.F.(1995).DTC064 Go, K., & Carroll,J., M. (2003).Human Safety and RiskManagementScenario-Based TaskAnalysis~, ~, 1995, Glendon, A.I. andMcKenna, E.F. / Chapman and Hall.~, ~, 2003, K Go & J M Carroll / ~.In 'The Handbook of Task Analysisfor Human-Computer Interaction'[Ref DTC043]DTC065 Goillau, P. J., &Kelly, C. (1996).DTC066 Gray, W.D., John,B.E. and Atwood,M.E. (1993).Malvern Capacity Estimate(MACE) – a proposedcognitive measure forcomplex systems~, ~, 1996, P J Goillau & C Kelly / ~.In 'First International Conference onEngineering Psychology andCognitive Ergonomics' [RefDTC088]Project Ernestine: Human-Computer Interaction 8 ppvalidating a GOMS analysis237-309, ~, 1993, Gray, W.D.,for predicting and John, B.E. and Atwood, M.E. / ~.explaining real-worldperformanceDTC067 Greenberg, S.(2003).DTC068 Hahn, A. H. andDeVries, J. A.(1991).Working through Task-Centred System DesignIdentification of HumanErrors of CommissionUsing SNEAK analysis~, ~, 2003, S Greenberg / ~.In 'The Handbook of Task Analysisfor Human-Computer Interaction'[Ref DTC043]~, ~, 1991, A H Hahn & J A DeVries/ ~.In 'Proceedings of the HumanFactors Society 35th AnnualMeeting' [Ref DTC077] pp 1080-1084; Reprinted in 'TheOccupational ErgonomicsHandbook' [Ref DTC100]DTC069 Harris D., Duffy V.,Smith M.,Stephanidis C.(2003)Human-Centred Computing– Cognitive, Social andErgonomic Aspects~, ~, 2003, D Harris, V Duffy, MSmith, C Stephanidis (Eds) /Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.DTC070 Harris, D. (1999)DTC071 Harrison, A.(1997).Engineering Psychology ~, ~, 1999, D Harris (Ed) / Ashgateand Cognitive Ergonomics -Publishing.Vol 3A Survival Guide to CriticalPath Analysis~, ~, 1997, Harrison, A. /Butterworth-Heinemann.DTC072 Hart, S. G., &Staveland, L. E.(1988).Development of a multidimensionalworkloadrating scale: Results ofempirical and theoreticalresearch~, ~, 1988 , S G Hart & L EStaveland / ~.In 'Human Mental Workload' [RefDTC144]Nov 2006 Page A1-12 Issue 4

Annex 1 – ReferencesDTC073 Hauss, Y. &Eyferth, K. (2003).Securing future ATMconcepts’safety bymeasuring situationawareness in ATCAerospace Science and Technology3, ~, 2003, Hauss, Y. & Eyferth, K. /~.DTC074 HCI-Aero 2002Proceedings of HCI-Aero ~, ~, 2002, ~ / ~.2002, MIT, Cambridge, MADTC075 HF Society (1985) Proceedings of the HumanFactors Society 29thAnnual MeetingDTC076 HF Society (1989) Proceedings of the HumanFactors Society 33rdAnnual MeetingDTC077 HF Society (1991) Proceedings of the HumanFactors Society 35thAnnual Meeting~, ~, 1985, ~ / Human FactorsSociety.~, ~, 1989, ~ / Human FactorsSociety.~, ~, 1991, ~ / Human FactorsSociety.DTC078 Hilburn, B. G.(1997).Free Flight and Air Traffic ~, ~, 1997, Hilburn, B. G. / ~.Controller Mental Workload Presented at 'The 9th Symposiumon Aviation Psychology, Columbus,Ohio, USA' see [Ref DTC183]DTC079 Hogg, D. N., Development of a situation Ergonomics 38(11) pp 2394-2413,Folleso, K., Strand-awareness measure to ~, 1995, Hogg, D. N., Folleso, K.,Volden, F., &Torralba, B.(1995).evaluate advanced alarmsystems in nuclear powerplant control roomsStrand-Volden, F., & Torralba, B. /~.DTC080 Hollnagel E. (2003) Handbook of CognitiveTask Design~, ~, 2003, E Hollnagel (Ed) /Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.DTC081 Hollnagel, E.(1993).Human Reliability Analysis:context and control~, ~, 1993, Hollnagel, E. / AcademicPress.DTC082 Hollnagel, E.(1998).Cognitive Reliability andError Analysis Method –CREAM~, 1st Edition, 1998, Hollnagel, E. /Elsevier Science.DTC083 Hone, K.S. andBaber, C. (1999).Modelling the effect of International Journal of Humanconstraint on speech-basedComputer Studies 50 pp 85-105, ~,human computer 1999, Hone, K.S. and Baber, C. / ~.interactionDTC084 Human Interface Proceedings of the Human ~, ~, 2000, ~ / ~.Symposium (2000) Interface Symposium 2000,Tokyo, JapanNov 2006 Page A1-13 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)DTC085 HumanProceedings of the HumanPerformance, Performance, SituationSituation Awareness andAwareness and Automation: User CentredAutomation (2000) Design for the NewMillennium Conference,Savannah, Georgia, 16-19Oct 2000~, ~, 2000, ~ / ~.DTC086 HumanPerformance,SituationAwareness andAutomation: User-Centered Designfor the NewMillennium (2000)Proceedings of the Human ~, ~, 2000, ~ / SA Technologies Inc.Performance, SituationAwareness andAutomation: User-CenteredDesign for the NewMillenniumDTC087 Hyponen, H.(1999).Focus Groups ~, ~, 1999, H Hyponen / ~.In 'The Methods Lab: UserResearch for Design' [Ref DTC205]DTC088 Int. Conf. On First InternationalEngineering Conference on EngineeringPsychology and Psychology and CognitiveCognitive ErgonomicsErgonomics (1996)DTC089 Isaac, A., Shorrick,S.T., Kirwan, B.,(2002).Human Error in Europeanair traffic management: TheHERA project~, ~, 1996, ~ / ~.Reliability Engineering and SystemSafety (75) pp 257-272, ~, 2002,Isaac, A., Shorrick, S.T., Kirwan, B./ ~.DTC090 ISO 13407 (1999). Human-centred designprocesses for interactivesystemsDTC091 ISO 9126 (2000). Software engineering -product qualityDTC092 ISO 9241 (1998). Ergonomics of office workwith VDTs-Guidance onUsabilityDTC093 Jacko J. and SearsThe Human-ComputerA. (2002) Interaction HandbookISO 13407, ~, 1999, ~ / ISO.ISO 9126, ~, 2000, ~ / ISO.BS EN ISO 9241 Part 11, ~, 1998,~ / ISO.~, ~, 2002, J Jacko and A Sears(Eds) / Lawrence ErlbaumAssociates.DTC094 Jeannott, E., Kelly,C., Thompson, D.(2003).The development ofSituation Awarenessmeasures in ATM systemsEATMP Report HRS/HSP-005-REP-01, ~, 2003, Jeannott, E.,Kelly, C., Thompson, D. / ~.Nov 2006 Page A1-14 Issue 4

Annex 1 – ReferencesDTC095 Jentsch, F., &Bowers, C. A.(2004).Team communicationsanalysis~, ~, Aug 2004, F Jentsch & C ABowers / ~.In 'Handbook of Human Factorsand Ergonomics Methods' [Ref 35]DTC096 Johnson, P., Tasks, skills andDiaper, D. & Long, knowledge: Task analysisJ. (1984). for knowledge-baseddescriptions~, ~, 1984, P Johnson, D Diaper & JLong / ~.In 'Interact '84 - First IFIPConference on Human-ComputerInteraction' [Ref DTC163] pp 23-27DTC097 Jones, D. G., andKaber, D. B.(2004).~ ~, ~, Aug 2004, D G Jones & D BKaber / ~.In 'Handbook of Human Factorsand Ergonomics Methods' [Ref 35]~ Jones (2000) ~ No citation reference in report.~ Jones & Endsley(2000)~ No citation reference in report.DTC098 Jordan P. et al(1996)DTC099 Jordan, C. S.,Farmer, E. W., &Belyavin, A. J.(1995).DTC100 Karwowski, W., &Marras, W. S.(1999).Usability Evaluation inIndustryThe DRA Workload scales(DRAWS): A validatedworkload assessmenttechniqueThe OccupationalErgonomics Handbook~, ~, 1996, P W Jordan, B Thomas,B A Weerdmeester & I L McClelland(Eds) / Taylor and Francis.~, ~, 1995, Jordan, C. S., Farmer,E. W., & Belyavin, A. J. / ~.In 'Proceedings of the 8thInternational Symposium onAviation Psychology' [Ref DTC182]Volume 2 pp 1013-1018~, ~, 1999, W Karwowski & W SMarras (Eds) / CRC Press LLC.DTC101 Kennedy, R., &Kirwan, B. (1998).Development of a Hazardand Operability-basedmethod for identifyingsafety managementvulnerabilities in high risksystemsDTC102 Kieras, D. (2003) GOMS Models for TaskAnalysisSafety Science (30) pp 249-274, ~,1998, Kennedy, R., & Kirwan, B. /~.~, ~, 2003, D Kieras / ~.In 'The Handbook of Task Analysisfor Human-Computer Interaction'[Ref DTC043] pp 83-117DTC103 Kim, I. S. (2001).Human reliability analysis inAnnals of Nuclear Energy 28 ppthe man-machine interface 1069-1081, ~, 2001, Kim, I. S. / ~.design reviewDTC104 Kirakowski, J.(1996).The Software usabilitymeasurement inventory:background and usage~, ~, 1996, J Kirakowski / ~.In 'Usability Evaluation in Industry'[Ref DTC098]Nov 2006 Page A1-15 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)DTC105 Kirwan, B. (1990). Human reliabilityassessmentDTC106 Kirwan, B. (1992a). Human error identificationin human reliabilityassessment. Part 1:Overview of approachesDTC107 Kirwan, B. (1992b). Human error identificationin human reliabilityassessment. Part 2:detailed comparison oftechniques~, ~, 1990, B Kirwan / ~.In 'Evaluation of Human Work: APractical Ergonomics Methodology'[Ref DTC207] 2nd Edit pp 921-968Applied Ergonomics 23(5) pp 299-318, ~, 1992, B Kirwan / ~.Applied Ergonomics 23 pp 371-381,~, 1992, B Kirwan / ~.DTC108 Kirwan, B. (1994). A guide to Practical HumanReliability Assessment~, ~, 1994 , B Kirwan / Taylor andFrancis.DTC109 Kirwan, B. (1996). Human Error Recovery and Project IMC/GNSR/HF/5011, ~, MarAssessment (HERA) Guide 1996, B Kirwan / IndustrialErgonomics Group, School ofManufacturing Engineering,University of Birmingham.DTC110 Kirwan, B. (1996). The validation of three Applied Ergonomics 27(6) pp 359-Human Reliability 373, ~, 1996, B Kirwan / ~.Quantification techniques –THERP, HEART andJHEDI: Part 1 – techniquedescriptions and validationissuesDTC111 Kirwan, B. (1997). The validation of three Applied Ergonomics 28(1) pp 17-25,Human Reliability ~, 1997, B Kirwan / ~.Quantification techniques –THERP, HEART andJHEDI: Part 2 – Results ofvalidation exerciseDTC112 Kirwan, B. (1997). The validation of three Applied Ergonomics 28(1) pp 27-39,Human Reliability ~, 1997, B Kirwan / ~.Quantification techniques –THERP, HEART andJHEDI: Part 3 – Practicalaspects of the usage of thetechniquesDTC113 Kirwan, B. (1998a). Human error identificationtechniques for riskassessment of high-risksystems – Part 1: Reviewand evaluation oftechniquesApplied Ergonomics 29 pp 157-177,~, 1998, B Kirwan / ~.Nov 2006 Page A1-16 Issue 4

Annex 1 – ReferencesDTC114 Kirwan, B. (1998b). Human error identificationtechniques for riskassessment of high-risksystems – Part 2: Towardsa framework approachApplied Ergonomics 29(5) pp 299-319, ~, 1998, B Kirwan / ~.DTC115 Kirwan, B.,Ainsworth, L. K.(1992).A Guide to Task Analysis~, ~, 1992, B Kirwan & L KAinsworth (Eds) / Taylor andFrancis.DTC116 Kirwan, B., Evans,A., Donohoe, L.,Kilner, A.,Lamoureux, .,Atkinson, T., &MacKendrick, H.(1997).Human Factors in the ATMSystem Design Life Cycle~, ~, 1997, Kirwan, B., Evans, A.,Donohoe, L., Kilner, A., Lamoureux,., Atkinson, T., & MacKendrick, H. /~.FAA/Eurocontrol ATM R&DSeminar, Paris, FranceDTC117 Klein, G. &Armstrong, A. A.(2003).DTC118 Klein, G. (2000).Critical Decision MethodCognitive Task Analysis ofTeams~, ~, 2003, G Klein & A AArmstrong / ~.In 'Handbook of Human Factorsand Ergonomics Methods' [Ref 35]~, ~, 2000, G Klein / ~.In 'Cognitive Task Analysis' [RefDTC160] pp 417-431DTC119 Klein, G. A.,Calderwood, R., &MacGregor, D.(1989).Critical Decision Method for IEEE Transactions on Systems,Eliciting Knowledge Man and Cybernetics 19(3) pp 462-472, ~, 1989, Klein, G. A.,Calderwood, R., & MacGregor, D. /~.DTC120 Klinger, D. W., and Team DecisionHahn, B. B. (2004). Requirement Exercise:Making Team DecisionRequirements Explicit~, ~, Aug 2004, D W Klinger & B BHahn / ~.In 'Handbook of Human Factorsand Ergonomics Methods' [Ref 35]DTC121 Lawrence, D.,Atwood, M.E.,Dews, S. andTurner, T. (1995).Social interaction in the useand design of aworkstation: two contexts ofinteraction~, ~, 1995, D Lawrence, M EAtwood, S Dews & T Turner / ~.In 'The Social and InteractionalDimensions of Human-ComputerInteraction' [Ref DTC185] pp 240-260DTC122 Lewis, C., & Task centred user interface ~, ~, 1993, Lewis, C., & Reiman, J. /Reiman, J. (1993). design: A practical University of Colorado, Boulderintroduction.Shareware book available from'http://hcibib.org/tcuid/'Nov 2006 Page A1-17 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)DTC123 Lewis, C., Polson, Testing a WalkthroughP., Wharton, C. & Methodology for Theory-Rieman, J. (1990). Based Design of Walk-Upand-UseInterfaces~, ~, 1990, C Lewis, P Polson, CWharton & J Rieman / ~.In 'Empowering People:Proceedings of CHI’90 Conferenceon Human Factors in ComputerSystems, Monterey, CA' [RefDTC035] pp 235-241DTC124 Lim, K.Y. & Long,J. (1994).The MUSE Method forUsability Engineering~, ~, 1994, Lim, K.Y. & Long, J. /Cambridge University Press.DTC125 Lockyer, K. andGordon, J. (1991).Critical Path Analysis andOther Project NetworkTechniques~, ~, 1991, Lockyer, K. and Gordon,J. / Pitman.~ Luximon &Goonetilleke(2001)~ No citation reference in report.DTC126 MacMillan, J., Questionnaires forPaley, M. J., Entin, Distributed Assessment ofE. B., and Entin, E. Team Mutual AwarenessE. (2004).~, ~, Aug 2004, J MacMillan, M JPaley, E B Entin & E E Entin / ~.In 'Handbook of Human Factorsand Ergonomics Methods' [Ref 35]DTC127 Marsden, P., &Kirby, M. (2004).Allocation of Functions~, ~, Aug 2004, P Marsden & MKirby / ~.In 'Handbook of Human Factorsand Ergonomics Methods' [Ref 35]DTC128 Marshall, A.,Stanton, N.,Young, M.,Development of the HumanError Template – A newmethodology for assessingSalmon, P., Harris, design induced errors onD., Demagalski, J., aircraft flight decksWaldmann, T.,Dekker, S. (2003).DTC129 Matthews, M. D. &Beal, S. A. (2002).~, ~, 2003, Marshall, A., Stanton,N., Young, M., Salmon, P., Harris,D., Demagalski, J., Waldmann, T.,Dekker, S. / ~.Assessing Situation Research Report 1795, ~, 2002,Awareness in Field TrainingMatthews, M. D. & Beal, S. A. / U.S.ExercisesArmy Research Institute for theBehavioural and Social Sciences.DTC130 Matthews, M. D.,Pleban, R. J.,Endsley, M. R., &Strater, L. D.(2000).Measures of InfantrySituation Awareness for aVirtual MOUT Environment~, ~, 2000, Matthews, M. D.,Pleban, R. J., Endsley, M. R., &Strater, L. D. / ~.In 'Proceedings of the HumanPerformance, Situation Awarenessand Automation: User CentredDesign for the New MillenniumConference, Savannah, Georgia,16-19 Oct 2000' [Ref DTC085}Nov 2006 Page A1-18 Issue 4

Annex 1 – ReferencesDTC131 McGuinness, B. & Assessing Human FactorsEbbage, L. (2000). in Command and Control:Workload and SituationalAwareness Metrics~, ~, 2000, McGuinness, B. &Ebbage, L. / ~.DTC132 McGuinness, B. &Foy, L. (2000).A subjective measure ofSA: the Crew AwarenessRating Scale (CARS)~, ~, 2000, McGuinness, B. & Foy,L. / ~.Presented at 'The HumanPerformance, Situation Awarenessand Automation: User CentredDesign for the New MillenniumConference, Savannah, Georgia,16-19 Oct 2000' see [Ref DTC085]DTC133 McGuinness, B.(1999).Situational Awareness andthe Crew AwarenessRating Scale (CARS)~, ~, 1999, McGuinness, B. / .In 'Proceedings of the 1999Avionics Conference, Heathrow,London, 17-18th Nov 1999' [RefDTC011] Paper 4.3DTC134 Militello, L. G. &Militello, J. B.(2000).DTC135 Neerincx, M. A.(2003).DTC136 Nielsen J andMack R (~)Applied Cognitive TaskAnalysis (ACTA): Apractitioner’s toolkit forunderstanding cognitivetask demandsCognitive Task LoadAnalysis: Allocating Tasksand Designing SupportUsability InspectionMethods~, ~, 2000 , L G Militello & J BMilitello / ~.In 'Task Analysis' [Ref DTC007] pp90-113~, ~, 2003, M A Neerincx / ~.In 'Handbook of Cognitive TaskDesign' [Ref DTC080] pp 281-305~, ~, ~, J Nielsen and R Mack (Eds)/ John Wiley & Sons Inc.DTC137 Nielsen, J. &Molich, R. (1990).Heuristic evaluation of userinterfaces~, ~, 1990, J Nielsen & R Molich / ~.In 'Empowering People:Proceedings of CHI’90 Conferenceon Human Factors in ComputerSystems, Monterey, CA' [RefDTC035] pp 249-256~ Norman (1988) ~ No citation reference in report.DTC138 Noyes J. M. &Cook M. (1999)Interface Technology: theleading edge~, ~, 1999, J M Noyes & M Cook(Eds) / Research Studies Press.DTC139 O’Hare, D.,Wiggins, M.,Williams, A., &Wong, W. (2000).DTC140 Olson, J.R. andOlson, G.M.(1990).Cognitive task analyses fordecision centred designand trainingThe growth of cognitivemodelling in humancomputerinteraction sinceGOMS~, ~, 2000, D O’Hare, M Wiggins, AWilliams & W Wong / ~.In 'Task Analysis' [Ref DTC007] pp170-190Human-Computer Interaction 3 pp309-350, ~, 1990, Olson, J.R. andOlson, G.M. / ~.Nov 2006 Page A1-19 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)DTC141 Ormerod, T. C.(2000).Using task analysis as aprimary design method:The SGT approach~, ~, 2000, T C Ormerod / ~.In 'Cognitive Task Analysis' [RefDTC160] pp 181-200DTC142 Ormerod, T. C., &Shepherd, A.(2003).DTC143 Ormerod, T.C.,Richardson, J. &Shepherd, A.(1998).Using task analysis forinformation requirementsspecification: The sub-goaltemplate (SGT) method~, ~, 2003, T C Ormerod & AShepherd / ~.In 'The Handbook of Task Analysisfor Human-Computer Interaction'[Ref DTC043] pp 347-366Enhancing the usability of a Ergonomics 41(11) pp 1642-1663,task analysis method: A ~, 1998, T C Ormerod, Jnotation and environment Richardson & A Shepherd / ~.for requirementsReprinted in 'Task Analysis' [RefDTC007] pp 114-135DTC144 P. A. Hancock & N. Human Mental Workload ~, ~, 1988, P. A. Hancock & N.Meshkati (1988)Meshkati (Eds) / Elsevier Science.DTC145 Patrick, J., Gregov, Analysing and training taskA. & Halliday, P. analysis(2000).Instructional Science 28(4) pp 51-79, ~, 2000, Patrick, J., Gregov, A.& Halliday, P. / ~.DTC146 Pennycook, W. A.,& Embrey, D. E.(1993).An operating approach toerror analysis~, ~, 1993, W A Pennycook & D EEmbrey / ~.In 'Proceedings of the first BiennialCanadian Conference on ProcessSafety and Loss Management.Edmonton, Alberta, Canada' [RefDTC024]; Reprinted in 'TheOccupational ErgonomicsHandbook' [Ref DTC100]DTC147 Pocock, S.,Harrison, M.,Wright, P., Fields,B. (2001).THEA – A Reference Guide~, ~, 2001, Pocock, S., Harrison,M., Wright, P., Fields, B. / ~.Unpublished workDTC148 Pocock, S.,Harrison, M.,Wright, P.,Johnoson, P.(2001).THEA: A technique forHuman Error AssessmentEarly in Design~, ~, 2001, Pocock, S., Harrison,M., Wright, P., Johnoson, P. / ~.Unpublished workDTC149 Polson, P. G.,Lewis, C., Rieman,J. & Wharton, C.(1992).DTC150 Ravden, S. J., AndJohnson, G. I.(1989).Cognitive walkthroughs: amethod for theory basedevaluation of userinterfacesEvaluating Usability ofHuman-ComputerInterfaces: A practicalmethodInternational Journal of Man-Machine Studies 36 pp 741-773, ~,1992, Polson, P. G., Lewis, C.,Rieman, J. & Wharton, C. / ~.~, ~, 1989, Ravden, S. J., AndJohnson, G. I. / Ellis Horwood.Nov 2006 Page A1-20 Issue 4

Annex 1 – ReferencesDTC151 Reason, J. (1990). Human Error~, ~, 1990, Reason, J. / CambridgeUniversity Press.DTC152 Reid, G. B. &Nygren, T. E.(1988).The subjective workload ~, ~, 1988 , G B Reid & T E Nygrenassessment technique: A / ~.scaling procedure for In 'Human Mental Workload' [Refmeasuring mental workload DTC144]DTC153 Roscoe, A., & Ellis, A subjective rating scale for TR90019, ~, 1990, Roscoe, A., &G. (1990). assessing pilot workload in Ellis, G. / RAE.flightDTC154 Rubio, S., Diaz, E., Evaluation of SubjectiveMartin, J., and Mental Workload: APuente, J. M. comparison of SWAT,(2004).NASA-TLX, and WorkloadProfile MethodsApplied Psychology: Aninternational review 53(1) pp 61-86,~, 2004, Rubio, S., Diaz, E., Martin,J., and Puente, J. M. / ~.DTC155 Saito A. (2000)Bartlett, Culture andCognition~, ~, 2000, A Saito (Ed) /Psychology Press.DTC156 Salmon, P. M,Stanton, N.A,Young, M.S,Harris, D,Demagalski, J,Marshall, A,Waldmann, T,Dekker, S (2003).Predicting Design InducedPilot Error: A comparison ofSHERPA, Human ErrorHAZOP, HEIST and HET, anewly developed aviationspecific HEI method~, ~, 2003, P M Salmon, N AStanton, M S Young, D Harris,JDemagalski, A Marshall, TWaldmann & S Dekker / ~.In 'Human-Centred Computing –Cognitive, Social and ErgonomicAspects' [Ref DTC069]DTC157 Salmon, P.,Stanton, N. A.,Young, M. S.,Harris, D.,Demagalski, J.,Marshall, A.,Waldman, T.,Dekker, S. W. A.(2002).Using existing HEItechniques to predict piloterror: A comparison ofSHERPA, HAZOP, andHEIST~, ~, 2002, Salmon, P., Stanton, N.A., Young, M. S., Harris, D.,Demagalski, J., Marshall, A.,Waldman, T., Dekker, S. W. A. / ~.In 'Proceedings of HCI-Aero 2002,MIT, Cambridge, MA' [Ref DTC074]DTC158 Salvendy, G.(1997).Handbook of human factors~, 2nd Edition, 1997, Salvendy, G. /and ergonomicsJohn Wiley and Sons.DTC159 Sanders, M. S., &McCormick, E. J.(1993).Human Factors inEngineering and Design~, ~, 1993, Sanders, M. S., &McCormick, E. J. / McGraw-HillPublications.DTC160 Schraagen J. M., Cognitive Task AnalysisChipman S. F.,Shalin V. L. (2000)~, ~, 2000, J M Schraagen, S FChipman, V L Shalin (Eds) /Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Nov 2006 Page A1-21 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)DTC161 Seigal, A. I.,Bartter, W. D.,Wolf, J. J., Knee,H. E., & Haas, P.M. (1984).DTC162 Selcon, S. J., &Taylor, R. M.(1989).Maintenance PersonnelPerformance Simulation(MAPPS) Model: SummaryDescriptionNUREG/CR-3626, ~, 1984, Seigal,A. I., Bartter, W. D., Wolf, J. J.,Knee, H. E., & Haas, P. M. / U.SNuclear Regulatory Commission,Washington, D.C..Evaluation of the Situation ~, ~, 1989, S J Selcon & R M TaylorAwareness Rating / ~.Technique (SART) as a toolIn 'Proceedings of AGARDfor aircrew system design Symposium on SituationalAwareness in Aerospace Operation,Copenhagen, DK' [Ref DTC002]DTC163 Shackel B. (1984) Interact '84 - First IFIPConference on Human-Computer Interaction~, ~, 1984, B Shackel (Ed) /Elsevier.DTC164 Shepherd, A.(2002).Hierarchical Task Analysis ~, ~, 2002, Shepherd, A. / Taylor &Francis.DTC165 Shorrock, S.T., The development ofKirwan, B., (1999). TRACEr: a technique forthe retrospective analysisof cognitive errors in ATCDTC166 Shorrock, S.T., Development andKirwan, B., (2000). application of a humanerror identification tool forair traffic control~, ~, 1999, S T Shorrock & BKirwan / ~.In 'Engineering Psychology andCognitive Ergonomics - Vol 3' [RefDTC070]Applied Ergonomics 33 pp 319-336,~, 2000, Shorrock, S.T., Kirwan, B. /~.~ Shorrock (1997) ~ No citation reference in report.DTC167 Stanton N. A.(1998)Human factors in consumer ~, ~, 1998, N A Stanton (Ed) /productsTaylor & Francis.DTC168 Stanton, N. A, andYoung, M. S.(1999).A guide to methodology inergonomics: Designing forhuman use~, ~, 1999, N A Stanton & M SYoung / Taylor and Francis.DTC169 Stanton, N. A. &Baber, C. (2002).DTC170 Stanton, N. A. &Stevenage, S. V.(1998).Error by design: methods toDesign Studies 23(4) pp 363-384,predict device usability ~, 2002, Stanton, N. A. & Baber, C./ ~.Learning to predict humanerror: issues ofacceptability, reliability andvalidityErgonomics 41(11) pp 1737-1756,~, 1998, Stanton, N. A. &Stevenage, S. V. / ~.DTC171 Stanton, N. A. &Wilson, J. (2000).Human Factors: stepchange improvements ineffectiveness and safetyDrilling Contractor Jan/Feb 2000 pp46-41, ~, 2000, Stanton, N. A. &Wilson, J. / ~.DTC172 Stanton, N. A. &Young, M. (1998).Is utility in the mind of thebeholder? A review ofergonomics methodsApplied Ergonomics 29(1) pp 41-54,~, 1998, N A Stanton & M S Young/ ~.Nov 2006 Page A1-22 Issue 4

Annex 1 – ReferencesDTC173 Stanton, N. A. &Young, M. (1999).DTC174 Stanton, N. A.(1995).What price ergonomics? Ergonomics 37 pp 1923-1941, ~,1999, N A Stanton & M S Young /~.Also 'Methodology for designingerror-tolerant consumer products'Nature 399 pp 197-198Analysing worker activity: anew approach to riskassessment?Health and Safety Bulletin (240)Dec pp 9-11, ~, 1995, Stanton, N.A. / ~.DTC175 Stanton, N. A.(2002).DTC176 Stanton, N. A.(2004).DTC177 Stanton, N. A., &Baber, C. (1996).Human error identificationin human computerinteractionThe Psychology of Taskanalysis todayA systems approach tohuman error identification~, ~, 2002, N A Stanton / ~.In 'The Human-ComputerInteraction Handbook' [RefDTC093]~, ~, 2004, N A Stanton / ~.In 'The Handbook of Task Analysisfor Human-Computer Interaction'[Ref DTC043]Safety Science (22) pp 215-228, ~,1996, Stanton, N. A., & Baber, C. /~.DTC178 Stanton, N. A., &Baber, C. (1996).Task analysis for erroridentification: applying HEIto product design andevaluation~, ~, 1996, N A Stanton & C Baber /~.In 'Usability Evaluation in Industry'[Ref DTC098] pp 215-224DTC179 Stanton, N. A., &Baber, C. (1998).DTC180 Swann, C. D. andPreston, M. L.(1995).A systems analysis ofconsumer productsTwenty-five years ofHAZOPs~, ~, 1998, N A Stanton & C Baber /~.In 'Human factors in consumerproducts' [Ref DTC167] pp 75-90Journal of Loss Prevention in theProcess Industries 8(6) pp 349-353,~, 1995, Swann, C. D. and Preston,M. L. / ~.DTC181 Swezey, R. W.,Owens, J. M.,Task and trainingrequirements analysis~, ~, 2000, R W Swezey, J MOwens, M L Bergondy & E Salas /Bergondy, M. L., & methodology (TTRAM): An ~.Salas, E. (2000). analytic methodology for In 'Task Analysis' [Ref DTC007]identifying potential training pp150-169uses of simulator networksin teamwork-intensive taskenvironmentsDTC182 Symposium on Proceedings of the 8thAviationInternational SymposiumPsychology (1995) on Aviation Psychology~, ~, 1995, ~ / ~.Nov 2006 Page A1-23 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)DTC183 Symposium on Proceedings of the 9thAviationSymposium on AviationPsychology (1997) Psychology, Columbus,Ohio, USA~, ~, 1997, ~ / ~.DTC184 Taylor, R. M.(1990).DTC185 Thomas P.J.(1995)DTC186 Tsang, P. S., &Velazquez, V. L.(1996).DTC187 Van Welie, M., &Van Der Veer, G.(2003)Situational AwarenessRating Technique (SART):The development of a toolfor aircrew systems design~, ~, 1990, R M Taylor / ~.In 'Situational Awareness inAerospace Operations, Neuilly SurSeine, France' [Ref DTC003] pp3/1-3/17The Social and~, ~, 1995, P J Thomas (Ed) /Interactional Dimensions of Cambridge University Press.Human-ComputerInteractionDiagnosticity and Ergonomics 39 pp 358-381, ~,multidimensional subjective 1996, Tsang, P. S., & Velazquez, V.workload ratingsL. / ~.Groupware Task Analysis ~, ~, 2003, M Van Welie & G VanDer Veer / ~.In 'Handbook of Cognitive TaskDesign' [Ref DTC080] pp 447-477DTC188 Verplank, B.,Fulton, J., Black,A., Moggridge, B.(1993).Observation and Invention– Use of scenarios ininteraction design~, ~, 1993, Verplank, B., Fulton, J.,Black, A., Moggridge, B. / ~.Tutorial notes for InterCHI'93.AmsterdamDTC189 Vidulich, M. A.(1989).DTC190 Vidulich, M. A., &Hughes, E. R.(1991).DTC191 Vidulich, M. A., &Tsang, P. S.(1985).DTC192 Vidulich, M. A., &Tsang, P. S.(1986).The use of judgementmatrices in subjectiveworkload assessment: Thesubjective WorkloadDominance (SWORD)techniqueTesting a subjective metricof situation awarenessAssessing subjectiveworkload assessment. Acomparison of SWAT andthe NASA bipolar methodsCollecting NASA WorkloadRatings~, ~, 1989, M A Vidulich / ~.In 'Proceedings of the HumanFactors Society 33rd AnnualMeeting' [Ref DTC076] pp 1406-1410~, ~, 1991, M A Vidulich & E RHughes / ~.In 'Proceedings of the HumanFactors Society 35th AnnualMeeting' [Ref DTC077] pp 1307-1311~, ~, 1985, M A Vidulich & P STsang / ~.In 'Proceedings of the HumanFactors Society 29th AnnualMeeting' [Ref DTC075] pp 71-75~, ~, 1986, Vidulich, M. A., & Tsang,P. S. / NASA Ames ResearchCenter.Nov 2006 Page A1-24 Issue 4

Annex 1 – ReferencesDTC193 Vidulich, M. A., &Tsang, P. S.(1986).Technique of subjectiveworkload assessment: Acomparison of SWAT andthe NASA bipolar methodErgonomics 29(11) pp 1385-1398,~, 1986, Vidulich, M. A., & Tsang,P. S. / ~.DTC194 Vidulich, M. A.,Ward, G. F., &Schueren, J.(1991).DTC195 Waag, W. L., &Houck, M. R(1994).DTC196 Walker, G. H(2004)DTC197 Walker, G.H.,Stanton, N.A., &Young, M.S.(2001).Using Subjective WorkloadDominance (SWORD)technique for ProjectiveWorkload AssessmentHuman Factors 33(6) pp 677-691,~, 1991, Vidulich, M. A., Ward, G.F., & Schueren, J. / ~.Tools for assessing Aviation, Space and Environmentalsituational awareness in an Medicine 65(5) pp A13-A19, ~,operational fighter 1994, Waag, W. L., & Houck, M. R /environment~.Verbal Protocol Analysis ~, ~, Aug 2004, G H Walker / ~.In 'Handbook of Human Factorsand Ergonomics Methods' [Ref 35]An on-road investigation ofvehicle feedback and itsrole in driver cognition:Implications for cognitiveergonomicsInternational Journal of CognitiveErgonomics 5(4) pp 421-444, ~,2001, Walker, G.H., Stanton, N.A.,& Young, M.S. / ~.DTC198 Watts, L. A., & Reasoning about tasks,Monk, A. F. (2000). activities and technology tosupport collaboration~, ~, 2000, L A Watts & A F Monk /~.In 'Task Analysis' [Ref DTC007]DTC199 Weber, R.P.(1990).DTC200 Whalley (1988).Basic Content AnalysisMinimising the cause ofhuman error~, ~, 1990, Weber, R.P. / SagePublications.~, ~, 1988 , Whalley / ~.In 'A Guide to Task Analysis' [RefDTC115]DTC201 Wharton, C.,Rieman, J., Lewis,C., Polson, P.The Cognitive WalkthroughMethod: A PractitionersGuide~, ~, ~, C Wharton, J Rieman, CLewis, P Polson / ~.In 'Usability Inspection Methods'[Ref DTC136]DTC202 Wickens, C. D.,Gordon, S. E. andLui, Y. (1998).An introduction to HumanFactors Engineering~, ~, 1998, Wickens, C. D., Gordon,S. E. and Lui, Y. / Longman.DTC203 Wierwille, W. W., & Recommendations forEggemeier, F. T. mental workload(1993).measurement in a test andevaluation environmentHuman Factors 35 pp 263-282, ~,1993, Wierwille, W. W., &Eggemeier, F. T. / ~.~ Wierwinke (1974) ~ No citation reference in report.DTC204 Wilkinson P.R.(1992).The Integration ofAdvanced Cockpit andSystems Design~, ~, 1992, P R Wilkinson / ~.In 'AGARD Avionics PanelSymposium, Madrid' [Ref DTC004]Paper 26Nov 2006 Page A1-25 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)DTC205 Williams, H. A.,Bound, J., &Coleman, R.(1999).DTC206 Williams, J. C.(1986).The Methods Lab: UserResearch for DesignHEART – a proposedmethod for assessing andreducing human error~, ~, 1999, H A Williams, J Bound &R Coleman / Design for AgeingNetwork.~, ~, 1986, J C Williams / ~.In '9th Advances in ReliabilityTechnology Symposium, Universityof Bradford' [Ref DTC001]DTC207 Wilson, J.R., &Corlett, N.E.(1995).~ Woodson, Tillman& Tillman (1992)Evaluation of Human Work: ~, 2nd Edition, 1995, J R Wilson &A Practical Ergonomics N E Corlett / Taylor and Francis.Methodology~ No citation reference in report.DTC208 Yamaoka, T. andBaber, C. (2000).3 point task analysis andhuman error estimation~, ~, 2000, T Yamaoka & C Baber /~.In 'Proceedings of the HumanInterface Symposium 2000, Tokyo,Japan' [Ref DTC084] pp 395-398DTC209 Young, M. S., & Mental WorkloadStanton, N. (2004).~, ~, Aug 2004, M S Young & NStanton / ~.In 'Handbook of Human Factorsand Ergonomics Methods' [Ref 35]Nov 2006 Page A1-26 Issue 4MAP-01-011 Annex 1_22.doc

ANNEX 2 – STANDARDS AND GUIDELINESCONTENTSA2 Standards and Guidelines......................................................................................... A2-3Nov 2006 Page A2-1 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)Nov 2006 Page A2-2 Issue 4

Annex 2 – Standards and GuidelinesA2Standards and GuidelinesThis annex provides a list of standards and guidelines for use when conductingHFI. These can be used as references for the purposes of requirementsidentification. The standards may be included in the procurement specificationand the invitation to tender for compliance by suppliers. They may be referred toin order to obtain guidance on the conduct of HFI activities or to obtain qualitycriteria for judging the adequacy of HFI outputs. Some general standards alsoprovide advice on the conduct of product assessment and acceptance.The following information is provided for each standard or guideline:• Reference (as used in MAP-01-010 and MAP-01-011)• Title• Date / Issue• Authority• Status (at Jan 2006)• Technical Area(s) to which the publication appliesThe main table is generally sorted in alphabetical order of reference.• Key to spreadsheet Technical Area abbreviations:MAP-01-011ChapterMCA Manpower, Complementing and Accommodation Chapter 4TO Team Organisation Chapter 5CC Crew characteristics Chapter 6TRG Training Chapter 7GA General arrangement Chapter 8OS Operational spaces Chapter 9AS Accommodation spaces Chapter 10MS Miscellaneous spaces Chapter 11PMMH Personnel movement and material handling Chapter 12HIE Habitability and internal environment Chapter 13EL Equipment Layout Chapter 14OUEI Operability and user-equipment interaction Chapter 15M&S Maintenance and support Chapter 16SAF Safety Chapter 17Nov 2006 Page A2-3 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)Nov 2006 Page A2-4 Issue 4

Annex 2 – Standards and GuidelinesReference Title Date /Issue0-85296-960-0 Regulations for the Electrical andElectronic Equipment of Ships withRecommended Practice for theirimplementationAIAA G-035Guide to Human PerformanceMeasurementsAuthority1990 IEEStatus(at Jan 2006)Technical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 42000 ANSI Current OANEP 15ANEP 16ANEP 21Supplement 1 to STANAG 4154 GeneralCriteria and Common Procedures forSeakeeping Performance AssessmentFast Patrol BoatSupplement 2 to STANAG 4154 GeneralCriteria and Common Procedures forSeakeeping Performance AssessmentMine Counter Measure VesselsProcedure for Ship Manning for NATOSurface Ships1989 /Edition 11989 /Edition 11991 /Edition 1NATO MASNATO MASNATO MAS Current O OANEP 22ANEP 24ANEP 25ANEP 26ANEP 27Human Factors Consideration for theDetermination of Automation PolicyGuidelines for Shipboard HabitabilityRequirements for Combat and SurfaceShipsGuidelines for Environmental Factors inNATO Surface ShipsErgonomic Data for Shipboard SpaceDesign in NATO Surface ShipsHuman Factors Guidelines for the Designof MMIs in Operational Rooms1992 NATO MAS Current O1993 NATO MAS Current O O1991 NATO MAS Current O1993 NATO MAS Current O O O O O1993 NATO MAS Current ONov 2006 Page A2-5 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)ANEP17Reference Title Date /IssueSupplement 3 to STANAG 4154 Ad HocCriteria for Hydrofoil Vessels SeakeepingPerformance Assessment1990 /Edition 1AuthorityNATO MASStatus(at Jan 2006)Technical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 4APP6(A) Military Symbols for Land Based Systems 1999 NATO Current OASHRAE 55Thermal Environmental Conditions forHuman Occupancy2004 ASHRAE/ANSI Current OBR 67 Admiralty Manual of Seamanship 1995 /Amdt. 7FSAG1995 - CurrentBR 862 Vol 1Handbook for Naval Magazine andExplosive Regulations - Volume 12004 /Amdt. 1DNA Current OBR 862 Vol 2Handbook for Naval Magazine andExplosive Regulations - Volume 22004 /Amdt. 1DNA Current OBR 1326 Air Purification in Submarines 1990 /Amdt. 2DME Aug 90 - Current OBR 1326(A)Materials Toxicity Guide Regulations(Submarines)2000 /Amdt. 1DME Sep 00 - Current OBR 1750AHandbook of Naval Medical Standards.(Application of the PULHHEEMS System)1998 /3MDG(N) 1998 - Current OBR 1806 British Maritime Doctrine 2004 DNSD CurrentBR 2000(20)Ship Engineering Practice, SafetyConsiderations and Precautions2004 DME Current OBR 2170 Vol 1 Ships NBCD Manual Volume 1 1999 /3FSAG 1999 - Current O OBR 2170 Vol 2Ships NBCD Manual Volume 2 NBCDefence2000 /2FSAG Sep 00 - Current O ONov 2006 Page A2-6 Issue 4

Annex 2 – Standards and GuidelinesReference Title Date /IssueBR 2170 Vol 3 Ships NBCD Manual Volume 3, NBCDStores Catalogue for HM Surface Shipsand RFAsBR 2170 Vol 4 Ships NBCD Manual Volume 4,Submarines2005 /11999 /3AuthorityStatus(at Jan 2006)FSAG Current O OFSAG 1999 - Current O OTechnical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 4BR 2170 Vol 5 Ships NBCD Manual Volume 5,2002 FSAG Current O OAdvancement and Training RequirementsBR 2203 Ship Husbandry Manual. OBR 3939 Hull Preservation Processes. OBR 4017 Naval Manning Manual 2004 NMA Current O OBR 4050BR 8420Instructions for the Conduct of NavalWeapons Inspections and TrialsRoyal Naval Systems Approach toTraining Quality Standard.2005 /Edition 3Amendment 11999 /Errata 1DSSCRNSETTCurrentBR 8541Safety Requirements for ArmamentStores for Naval Use1996 DST(EWS) 1996 - Current O OBR 9147 MOD(N) Health & Safety Management 2000 CESO(N) Apr 00 - Current OBS 3044Guide to Ergonomic principles in thedesign and selection of Office Furniture1990 BSI Current OBS 3693 (incorporatingAmdt No. 1)BS EN 340BS EN 527-1Supplement 3 to STANAG 4154 Ad HocCriteria for Hydrofoil Vessels SeakeepingPerformance AssessmentProtective Clothing. GeneralRequirements.Office furniture. Work tables and desks.Dimensions.1991 /Edition 1NATO MAS2003 BSI Current O2000 BSI CorrentNov 2006 Page A2-7 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)Reference Title Date /IssueBS EN 563BS EN 614-1BS EN 614-2Safety of Machinery. Temperatures ofTouchable Surfaces. Ergonomics data toestablish temperature limit values for hotsurfaces.Safety of Machinery. Ergonomic DesignPrinciples. Terminology and generalprinciplesSafety of Machinery. Ergonomic DesignPrinciples. Interactions between thedesign of machinery and work tasksAuthorityStatus(at Jan 2006)Technical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 41994 BSI Current O1995 BSI Current O2000 BSI CurrentBS EN 894-1BS EN 894-2BS EN 894-3BS EN 1005-3BS EN 1335-1BS EN 60073Safety of Machinery. ErgonomicsRequirements for the Design of Displaysand Control Actuators. Part 1: Generalprincipals for human interactions withdisplays and control actuators.Safety of Machinery. ErgonomicsRequirements for the Design of Displaysand Control Actuators. Part 2: DisplaysSafety of Machinery. ErgonomicsRequirements for the Design of Displaysand Control Actuators. Part 3: ControlActuatorsSafety of machinery - Human physicalperformance - Part 3: Recommendedforce limits for machinery operationOffice Furniture. Office work chair. Part1: Dimensions – Determination ofDimensionsBasic and safety principles for manmachineinterface, marking andidentification - Coding principles forindicators and actuators1997 BSI Current O1997 BSI Current O2000 BSI Current2002 BSI2000 BSI Current2002 BSINov 2006 Page A2-8 Issue 4

Annex 2 – Standards and GuidelinesReference Title Date /IssueBS EN 60447BS EN 60721-3-6 / IEC721-3-6Basic and safety principles for manmachineinterface and identification -Actuating principlesClassification of environmental conditions- Part 3: Classification of groups ofenvironmental parameters and theirseverities - Section 3.6 Ship environmentBS EN ISO 8468:1995 Ships Bridge Layout and AssociatedEquipment – Requirements andGuidelinesBS EN ISO 9241 Part 1 Ergonomic Requirements for Office Workwith Visual Display Terminals: GeneralIntroductionBS EN 29241-2:1993,ISO 9241-2:1992Ergonomic Requirements for Office Workwith Visual Display Terminals: Guidanceon task requirementsAuthority2004 BSI1993/1987 BSIStatus(at Jan 2006)Technical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 41994 ISO Current O O O1997 BSI Current1993 Current OBS EN 29241-3:1993,ISO 9241-3:1992Ergonomic Requirements for Office Workwith Visual Display Terminals: Visualdisplay requirements1993 BSI Current OBS EN ISO 9241 Part 4 Ergonomic Requirements for Office Workwith Visual Display Terminals: KeyboardrequirementsBS EN ISO 9241 Part 5 Ergonomic Requirements for Office Workwith Visual Display Terminals:Workstation Layout and PosturalRequirementsBS EN ISO 9241 Part 6 Ergonomic Requirements for Office Workwith Visual Display Terminals:Environmental Requirements1998 BSI Current O1999 BSI Current O2000 BSI Current ONov 2006 Page A2-9 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)Reference Title Date /IssueBS EN ISO 9241 Part 7 Ergonomic Requirements for Office Workwith Visual Display Terminals: DisplayRequirements with ReflectionsAuthorityStatus(at Jan 2006)Technical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 41998 BSI Current OBS EN ISO 9241 Part 8 Ergonomic Requirements for Office Workwith Visual Display Terminals:Requirements for Displayed ColoursBS EN ISO 9241 Part 9 Ergonomic Requirements for Office Workwith Visual Display Terminals:Requirements for Non-Keyboard InputDevicesBS EN ISO 9241 Part10BS EN ISO 9241 Part11BS EN ISO 9241 Part12Ergonomic Requirements for Office Workwith Visual Display Terminals: DialogueprinciplesErgonomic Requirements for Office Workwith Visual Display Terminals: Guidanceon usabilityErgonomic Requirements for Office Workwith Visual Display Terminals:Presentation of information1998 BSI Current O2000 BSI Current O1996 BSI Current O1998 BSI Current O1999 BSI Current OBS EN ISO 9241 Part13BS EN ISO 9241 Part14BS EN ISO 9241 Part15Ergonomic Requirements for Office Workwith Visual Display Terminals: UserguidanceErgonomic Requirements for Office Workwith Visual Display Terminals: MenudialoguesErgonomic Requirements for Office Workwith Visual Display Terminals: Commanddialogues1999 BSI Current O2000 BSI Current O1998 BSI Current ONov 2006 Page A2-10 Issue 4

Annex 2 – Standards and GuidelinesReference Title Date /IssueBS EN ISO 9241 Part16Ergonomic Requirements for Office Workwith Visual Display Terminals: Directmanipulation dialoguesAuthorityStatus(at Jan 2006)Technical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 41999 BSI Current OBS EN ISO 9241 Part17BS ISO 9921-1BS EN ISO 10075-1:2000(ISO 10075:1991).BS EN ISO 10075-2BS EN ISO 10075-3BS EN ISO 11064-1BS EN ISO 11064-2BS EN ISO 11064-3BS EN ISO 11064-4Ergonomic Requirements for Office Workwith Visual Display Terminals: Form fillingdialoguesErgonomic assessment of speechcommunication - Part 1: Speechinterference levels and communicationdistances for persons with normal hearingin direct communication distances forpersons with normal hearing capacity indirect communication (SIL method)Ergonomic principles related to mentalworkload - Part 1: General terms anddefinitionsErgonomic principles related to mentalworkload. Part 2: Design principles.Ergonomic principles related to mentalworkload. Principles and requirementsconcerning methods for measuring andassessing mental workload.Ergonomic design of control centres. Part1: Principles for the design of controlcentresErgonomic design of control centres. Part2: Principles for the arrangement ofcontrol suitesErgonomic design of control centres. Part3: Control room layoutErgonomic design of control centres. Part4. Layout and Dimensions of Workstations1998 BSI Current O1996 BSI Current O2000 BSI Current O2000 BSI2004 BSI2001 BSI2001 BSI2000 BSI Current O O2004 BSINov 2006 Page A2-11 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)Reference Title Date /IssueBS EN ISO 11399 Ergonomics of the thermal environment -Principles and application of relevantinternational standardsAuthorityStatus(at Jan 2006)Technical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 42001 BSI Current OCIBSE CLCD CIBSE Code for Lighting 2002 CIBSECIBSE Guide A CIBSE Guide A: Environmental Design1999 CIBSE(6th Edition) (Includes CorrigendaDecember 03)CIBSE LG 1CIBSE Lighting Guide 1: The Industrial1989 CIBSEEnvironmentCIBSE LG 3 CIBSE Lighting Guide 3:1996 CIBSEVisual Environment for Display ScreenUseCIBSE LG 3CIBSE Lighting Guide 3:2001 CIBSEAddendumAddendum 2001: The Visual Environmentfor Display Screen Use - A New Standardfor PerformanceCIBSE LG 7CIBSE Lighting Guide 7: Lighting for1993 CIBSEOfficesCIBSE LG 12 CIBSE Lighting Guide 12:Emergency Lighting Design Guide2004 CIBSEDef Stan 00-00 Part1/Issue 3Standards for Defence Part 1 MoD UKStandardization Policy, Organizations andImplementationDef Stan 00-25 Part 14 Human Factors For Designers ofEquipment: Military Land Vehicle Design1999 DStan2000 /1Aug-00Def Stan 00-25 Part 15 Human Factors for Designers of Systems:Principles and ProcessDef Stan 00-25 Part 16 Human Factors for Designers of Systems:Introduction and Manpower Domain -Technical Guidance and Data2004 DStan O O O O O O O O O O2004 DStan O O ONov 2006 Page A2-12 Issue 4

Annex 2 – Standards and GuidelinesReference Title Date /IssueDef Stan 00-25 Part 17 Human Factors for Designers of Systems:Personnel Domain - Technical Guidanceand DataDef Stan 00-25 Part 18 Human Factors for Designers of Systems:Training Domain - Technical Guidanceand DataDef Stan 00-25 Part 19 Human Factors for Designers of Systems:Human Engineering Domain - TechnicalGuidance and DataDef Stan 00-25 Part 20 Human Factors for Designers of Systems:Health Hazard Assessment Domain -Technical Guidance and DataDef Stan 00-25 Part 21 Human Factors for Designers of Systems:System Safety Domain - TechnicalGuidance and DataDef Stan 00-25 Part 25 Human Factors for Designers of Systems:Supporting Information - TechnicalGuidance and DataDef Stan 00-40: Part 1 Reliability and maintainability (R&M) -Managerial responsibilities andrequirements for programmes and plansAuthorityStatus(at Jan 2006)Technical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 42004 DStan O O O O O O O O O2004 DStan O O2004 DStan O O O O O O O O O2004 DStan O O O2004 DStan O O2004 DStan2003 /5CurrentODef Stan 00-40: Part 4 Reliability and maintainability (R&M) -Guidance for writing NATO R&Mrequirements documents (ARMP-4)2003 /2CurrentODef Stan 00-40: Part 6 Reliability and maintainability (R&M) - InserviceR&M (ARMP-6)1988 /1CurrentODef Stan 00-56: Part 1 Safety Management Requirements forDefence Systems: Part 1: Requirements2004 /3CurrentODef Stan 00-56: Part 2 Safety Management Requirements forDefence Systems: Part 2: Guidance2004 /3CurrentONov 2006 Page A2-13 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)Reference Title Date /IssueAuthorityStatus(at Jan 2006)Technical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 4Def Stan 00-60: Part 0 Integrated Logistics Support - Applicationof Integrated Logistics Support (ILS)2004 /6ODef Stan 00-60: Part 1 Integrated Logistics Support - LogisticSupport Analysis (LSA) and LogisticSupport Analysis Records (LSAR)Def Stan 00-60: Part 3 Integrated Logistics Support - Guidancefor Application of Software SupportDef Stan 00-60: Part 10 Integrated Logistics Support - ElectronicDocumentationDef Stan 00-60: Part 20 Integrated Logistics Support - Applicationof Supply Support ProceduresDef Stan 00-60: Part 21 Integrated Logistics Support - Proceduresfor internal provisioningDef Stan 00-60: Part 22 Integrated Logistics Support - Proceduresfor codification2004 /32004 /32002 /52004 /72004 /62003 /5OOOOOODef Stan 02-3 Guide to Standards and SpecificationsCategory 3Def Stan 02-101: Part 1 Requirements for Design and Fitting Outof Workshops, Maintenance Spaces andEngineering Stores for HM Surface Ships:Part 1: Common Requirements Category2Def Stan 02-101: Part 2 Requirements for Design and Fitting Outof Workshops, Maintenance Spaces andEngineering Stores for HM Surface Ships:Part 2: Specific Requirements Category 22000 /12000 /12000 /1Apr 00 - CurrentApr 00 - Current O OApr 00 - Current O ONov 2006 Page A2-14 Issue 4

Annex 2 – Standards and GuidelinesReference Title Date /IssueDef Stan 02-102: Part 1 Requirements for Air-Conditioning andVentilation: Part 1 HM Surface Ships andRoyal Fleet Auxiliaries2000 /2AuthorityStatus(at Jan 2006)Technical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 4DPA and DLO Sep 00 - Current ODef Stan 02-105: Part 1 Requirements for the Fitting Out of Offices(excluding Operational/CommunicationsOffices) in HM Surface Ships andSubmarines: Part 1: GeneralRequirements Category 3Def Stan 02-105: Part 2 Requirements for the Fitting Out of Offices(excluding Operational/CommunicationsOffices) in HM Surface Ships andSubmarines: Part 2: SpecificRequirements – Surface Ships Category 3Def Stan 02-105: Part 3 Requirements for the Fitting Out of Offices(excluding Operational/CommunicationsOffices) in HM Surface Ships andSubmarines: Part 3: SpecificRequirements – Submarines Category 3Def Stan 02-106: Part 1 Requirements for Medical and DentalOrganisation in HM Surface Ships andSubmarines: Part 1: CommonRequirements – Medical and DentalFacilities Category 2Def Stan 02-106: Part 2 Requirements for Medical and DentalOrganisation in HM Surface Ships andSubmarines: Part 2: SpecificRequirements – Medical and DentalFacilities in HM Surface Ships Category 22000 /22004 /22004 /22000 /12000 /1DPA and DLO Apr 00 - Current O ODPA and DLO Current O OCurrent O OApr 00 - Current O O OApr 00 - Current O O ONov 2006 Page A2-15 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)Reference Title Date /IssueDef Stan 02-106: Part 3 Requirements for Medical and DentalOrganisation in HM Surface Ships andSubmarines: Part 3: SpecificRequirements – Medical Organisation forAction in HM Surface Ships Category 2Def Stan 02-106: Part 4 Requirements for Medical and DentalOrganisation in HM Surface Ships andSubmarines: Part 4: Medical and DentalFacilities in Submarines Category2Def Stan 02-107 Requirements for Accommodation in HMSurface Warships and Submarines –Category 2Def Stan 02-113 Requirements for Mechanical HandlingCategory 22000 /12000 /12002 /22006 /Amd 1AuthorityDefence LogisticsFleet (DlogFleet)Status(at Jan 2006)Technical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 4Apr 00 - Current O OApr 00 - Current O OCurrentInterimOO ODef Stan 02-115 Details and List of Weatherdeck and SideArrangements for Surface Ships Category3Def Stan 02-117 Requirements for Anchoring, Berthing,Towing, Securing to a Buoy and MooringCategory 2Def Stan 02-120 Requirements for WCs, Urinals,Bathrooms and Washing Facilities in HMSurface Warships and SubmarinesCategory 3Def Stan 02-121: Part 1 Requirements for Galley & AssociatedSpaces: Part 1: Common Requirements -Category 2Def Stan 02-121: Part 2 Requirements for Galley & AssociatedSpaces: Part 2: Specific Requirement -Surface Ships - Category 22000 /12002 /22002 /22006 /22006 /2Apr 00 - CurrentODPA and DLO Current ODPA and DLO Current O OCurrent O OCurrent O ONov 2006 Page A2-16 Issue 4

Annex 2 – Standards and GuidelinesReference Title Date /IssueDef Stan 02-121: Part 3 Requirements for Galleys and AssociatedSpaces: Part 3: Specific Requirements forConventional Submarines (supersedesNES 135 in part) Category 2Def Stan 02-121: Part 4 Requirements for Galley & AssociatedSpaces: Part 4: Specific Requirements -Nuclear Submarines - Category 22000 /12006 /2Def Stan 02-122 Requirements for Catering Equipment 2002 /1AuthorityStatus(at Jan 2006)Technical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 4DPA and DLO Apr 00 - Current O ODPA and DLOCurrent O OODef Stan 02-123: Part 1 Requirements for Laundries andAssociated Compartments: Part 1:Laundries and Associated CompartmentsCategory 2Def Stan 02-123: Part 2 Requirements for Laundries andAssociated Compartments: Part 2:Laundry Machinery, Equipment andFittings Category 2Def Stan 02-125 Requirements for NAAFI Compartmentsin Surface Ships and Submarines –Category 3Def Stan 02-126: Part 1 Requirements for Stores Compartments inHM Surface Ships and Submarines: Part1: Common Requirements Category 3Def Stan 02-126: Part 2 Requirements for Stores Compartments inHM Surface Ships and Submarines: Part2: Specific Requirements - Surface ShipsCategory 3Def Stan 02-126: Part 3 Requirements for Stores Compartments inHM Surface Ships and Submarines: Part3: Specific Requirements – SubmarinesCategory 32002 /22002 /22004 /22004 /22004 /22004 /2DPA and DLO Current O O ODPA and DLO Current O O ODPA and DLO Current ODPA and DLo Current ODPA and DLO Current ODPA and DLO Current ONov 2006 Page A2-17 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)Reference Title Date /IssueDef Stan 02-139 Code of Practice for Ship Husbandry 2000 /1AuthorityStatus(at Jan 2006)Technical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 4Apr 00 – Jul 05 O ODef Stan 02-148 Requirements for Life Saving EquipmentCategory 12000 /1Def Stan 02-149 Escape and Access Policy in Surface2000 /Ships Category 21Def Stan 02-162: Part 1 Requirements for the Manufacture, Test 2000 /and Installation of Guard Stanchions,1Rails and associated Safety Fittings: Part1: Weather Decks Category 2Def Stan 02-307 Workshop Equipment Category 2 2004 /2Def Stan 02-341: Part 1 Requirements for Cleaning of Items,2000 /Components & Equipment for Fluid1Systems – Cleaning Category 2Def Stan 02-520Guide to Design Procedures for VersatileConsole System Category 32003 /2Apr 00 - CurrentApr 00 - Current O OApr 00 - CurrentODPA and DLO Current OApr 00 - CurrentDPA and DLO Current OOODef Stan 02-542: Part 1 Guide to Design and User Requirementsof Internal Communications Systems: Part1: Surface Ships Category 2Def Stan 02-551 Guide to Internal CommunicationEquipment - Main Broadcast andAssociated Items Category 2Def Stan 02-556 Guide to Internal CommunicationEquipment - Headsets and AssociatedItems including Microphone and ReceiverInsets Category N/ADef Stan 02-557: Part 1 Guide to Internal CommunicationEquipment - Loudspeaker and AssociatedItems: Part 1: Selection and Siting ofLoudspeakers Category 22000 /12002 /22005 /32004 /2Apr 00 - Current O ODPA and DLO Current O ODLO Current OCurrent O ONov 2006 Page A2-18 Issue 4

Annex 2 – Standards and GuidelinesReference Title Date /IssueDef Stan 02-557: Part 2 Guide to Internal CommunicationEquipment - Loudspeaker and AssociatedItems: Part 2: Range of Loudspeakersand Associated Items Category 2Def Stan 02-558 Guide to Internal CommunicationEquipment – Handsets and AssociatedItems Category 2Def Stan 02-559 Guide to Internal CommunicationEquipment – Microphones and AssociatedItems Category 2Def Stan 02-562 Guide to Internal CommunicationEquipment, Non-VCS Units (RICE 1, CCHand SINBAD) Category 2Def Stan 02-575 Guide to Design of Closed CircuitTelevision and Surveillance SystemsCategory 2Def Stan 02-576 Guide to Closed Circuit TelevisionSurveillance Equipment Category 32004 /22004 /22004 /22000 /12000 /12001 /1AuthorityStatus(at Jan 2006)Technical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 4Current O ODPA and DLO Current OCurrentApr 00 - CurrentApr 00 - CurrentDPA and DLO Nov 01 - Current OOOODef Stan 02-587: Part 1 Requirements for Lighting Systems: Part1: Surface Ships Category 3Def Stan 02-587: Part 2 Requirements for Lighting Systems: Part2: Submarines Category 32001 /22000 /1Feb 01 - Interim O OApr 00 - Current O ODef Stan 02-599Def Stan 02-603Def Stan 02-626Policy Requirements and DesignGuidance for Alarm and Warning SystemsCategory N/AGuide to the Policy, Design andInstallation of Fire Detection Systems inShips Category 1Control and Surveillance Equipment forPlant and System Installations (Toincorporate NES 599) Category 22001 /12001 /22000 /1Jun 01 - Current O O ODPA and DLO Current O O OApr 00 - CurrentONov 2006 Page A2-19 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)Reference Title Date /IssueDef Stan 02-635 Requirements for Electric Motors andControl Gear Associated with DomesticWorkshops and Similar MachineryCategory 3Def Stan 02-707: Part 1 Symbols and Abbreviations: Part 1: Guideto the General Use of Symbols Category3Def Stan 02-707: Part 2 Symbols and Abbreviations: Part 2: Guideto Abbreviations and System Code LettersCategory 3Def Stan 02-716 Requirements for Winterisation onSurface Ships Category 22000 /12000 /12000 /12002 /2Def Stan 02-720 Waste Disposal Policy Category 2 2002 /2Def Stan 02-721: Part 1 Garbage Disposal in Surface Ships: Part 2000 /1: General Requirements Category21AuthorityStatus(at Jan 2006)Apr 00 - CurrentTechnical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 4Apr 00 - Current O O OApr 00 - Current O O ODPA and DLO Current ODPA and DLO Current OApr 00 - CurrentOO O ODef Stan 02-721: Part 2 Garbage Disposal in Surface Ships: Part2: Requirements for Equipment Category2Def Stan 02-726 Requirements for Cleanliness of Shipsduring Build Category 3Def Stan 02-728 Requirements for Domestic Hot and ColdFresh Water Systems Category 2Def Stan 02-784 Requirements for Safety Signs andColours Category 2Def Stan 02-795 Requirements for Health PhysicsLaboratories in Nuclear SubmarinesCategory 2Def Stan 07-204: Part 1 The Requirements for Fire Protection andDamage Control for Surface Ships –Category 2 Part 1: Policy for SurfaceShips2000 /12000 /22001 /22002 /22000 /12000 /1Apr 00 - CurrentO O ODPA and DLO Apr 00 - Current ODPA and DLO Apr 00 - Current O O OCurrentOApr 00 - CurrentOApr 00 - Current O O ONov 2006 Page A2-20 Issue 4

Annex 2 – Standards and GuidelinesReference Title Date /IssueDef Stan 07-204: Part 3 The Requirements for Fire Protection andDamage Control for Surface Ships –Category 2: Part 3: Surface Ship andSubmarine EquipmentDef Stan 07-205: Part 1 Requirements for Galleys and AssociatedSpaces: Category 2. Part 1: CommonRequirementsDef Stan 07-205: Part 2 Requirements for Galleys and AssociatedSpaces: Category 2. Part 2: SpecificRequirements for Surface ShipsDef Stan 07-205: Part 4 Requirements for Galleys and AssociatedSpaces: Category 2. Part 4: SpecificRequirements for Nuclear Submarines2000 /12000 /12000 /12000 /1AuthorityStatus(at Jan 2006)Technical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 4Apr 00 - Current O O OApr 00 - Current O OApr 00 - Current O OApr 00 - Current O ODef Stan 07-228Requirements and Safety Regulations forElectrical Equipment and InstallationsFitted in Magazines, Submarine WeaponStowage Compartments and DesignatedDanger Areas and Designated Areas –Category 12000 /1Apr 00 - CurrentODef Stan 07-232Guide to Design Use Requirements ofInternal Communications SystemsSubmarines – Category 22000 /1Apr 00 - Current O ODef Stan 07-233Guide to System Design and Descriptionof Rationalised Internal CommunicationsEquipment Mk II Category 22000 /1Apr 00 - CurrentODef Stan 07-238Guide to Design of Training andRecreational Television Systems –Category 22000 /1Apr 00 - Current O ONov 2006 Page A2-21 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)Reference Title Date /IssueDef Stan 07-239 Guide to System Design of Voice InternalCommunications Equipment forSubmarines Category 2Def Stan 07-248: Part 1 Requirements for the Guarding of SecureCompartments and Protectively MarkedMaterial and Equipments Category 2.Part 1: Surface ShipsDef Stan 07-248: Part 2 Requirements for the Guarding of SecureCompartments and Protectively MarkedMaterial and Equipments. Category 2.Part 2: SubmarinesDef Stan 07-252 Requirements for the Preparation andPainting of Submarines – Category 22000 /12000 /12000 /12000 /1AuthorityStatus(at Jan 2006)Technical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 4Apr 00 - Current O OApr 00 - CurrentApr 00 - CurrentApr 00 - CurrentOOODef Stan 07-254: Part 2 Design Guide on the Reduction ofAcoustic Noise in Surface Ships.Category 3. Part 2: Reduction of InternalAirborne NoiseDef Stan 07-265 Requirements and Arrangements ofCommunications and Electronic WarfareOffices in HM Ships and RFAs Category 22000 /12000 /1Apr 00 - CurrentApr 00 - CurrentOODef Stan 07-279 Requirements for Replenishment at Sea -Surface Ships Category 22003 /2CurrentODef Stan 08-101: Part 1 Requirements for the Construction andSystem Arrangements in Magazines andWeapon Storage Compartments.Category 1. Part 1: HM Surface ShipsDef Stan 08-101: Part 2 Requirements for the Construction andSystem Arrangements in Magazines andWeapon Storage Compartments.Category 1. Part 2: HM Submarines2000 /12000 /1Apr 00 - CurrentApr 00 - CurrentOONov 2006 Page A2-22 Issue 4

Annex 2 – Standards and GuidelinesReference Title Date /IssueDef Stan 08-103: Part 2 Requirements for Maintenance Envelopesand Removal Routes: Category 2. Part 2:Requirements for Submarines2000 /1AuthorityStatus(at Jan 2006)Technical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 4Apr 00 - Current O ODef Stan 08-107Def Stan 08-111Def Stan 08-123Def Stan 08-132General Requirements for the Design ofElectrotechnical and Naval WeaponEquipment – Category 2Requirements for Damage Surveillanceand Control Management Systems in HMSurface Ships, Submarines and RoyalFleet Auxiliaries – Category 1Requirements for the Design and Testingof Equipment to meet EnvironmentalConditions – Category 2Requirements for Hazard Stateboards inSurface Ships – Category 22001 /22002 /22000 /12000 /1Nov 01 - CurrentApr 00 - CurrentApr 00 - CurrentApr 00 - CurrentOOOODef Stan 08-144 Material Requirements for the NBCDefence of Surface Ships including RFAs– Category 1Def Stan 08-147: Part 2 The Requirements for Fire Protection andDamage Control for Surface Ships:Category 1. Part 2: SubmarinesDef Stan 08-155 Guide to the System Design andDescription of Rationalised InternalCommunications Equipment Mk1 andMk2 VariationsDef Stan 08-157 Guide to the Design of Flight DeckCommunications Systems2003 /2Amdt. 12001 /12001 /12001 /1CurrentONov 01 - Current O OApr 01 - Current O OJun 01 - Current O ODef Stan 08-158Guide to Internal CommunicationEquipment - Flight Deck Communications– Category 22001 /1Jun 01 - Current O ONov 2006 Page A2-23 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)Reference Title Date /IssueDef Stan 08-159: Part 2 Requirements for Air-Conditioning andVentilation. – Category 2. Part 2: HMSubmarinesDef Stan 09-56 Submarine Noise Reduction(CONFIDENTIAL)Def Stan 21-8 Safety Requirements for the Design ofElectrotechnical and Naval WeaponEquipment Category 2Def Stan 21-17 Requirements for MaintainabilityDemonstrations of Naval Systems2001 /1AuthorityStatus(at Jan 2006)Jun 01 - CurrentTechnical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 4~ O2000 /12000 /2Aug 00 - Current O OAug 00 - CurrentOODef Stan 22-7DSAT QSSpecifications for Extending Ladders andFolding Platform Step-Ladders -Aluminium Alloy Category 3The Defence Systems Approach toTraining Quality Standard2000 /12003 /1DG T&EAug 00 - CurrentOODTSM 1DTSM 2DTSM 3Defence Training Support Manual (DTSM)1: The Analysis, Design and Developmentof TrainingDefence Training Support Manual (DTSM)2: The Glossary of Defence TrainingTerminologyDefence Training Support Manual (DTSM)3: Training Needs Analysis (TNA)May 2004 /Final 1.0Apr 2005Sep 2004 /Final 1.0DG T&EDG T&EDG T&EOODTSM 4Defence Training Support Manual (DTSM)4: The Evaluation of TrainingMar 2005 /Final 1.1DG T&EODTSM 5DTSM 6Defence Training Support Manual (DTSM)5: Technology Based Training DeliverySolutionsDefence Training Support Manual (DTSM)6: The Audit and Inspection of IndividualTrainingSep 2005 /Final 1.0Sep 2005 /Draft 2.0DG T&EDG T&ENov 2006 Page A2-24 Issue 4

Annex 2 – Standards and GuidelinesReference Title Date /IssueAuthorityStatus(at Jan 2006)Technical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 4HASAW 1974/c.37 Health & Safety at Work Act 1974 HMSO Current OHS(G) 60 (rev)Upper Limb Disorders in the Workplace(Second Edition)2002 /Edition 2HSECurrentINDG 75Introducing the Noise at WorkRegulationsA brief guide to the requirements forcontrolling noiseat workINDG 136COSHH - A Brief Guide to theRegulations - What you need to knowabout the Control of SubstancesHazardous to Health Regulations 2002(COSHH).INDG 143Getting to grips with Manual Handling. Ashort guideINDG 171Upper Limb Disorders Assessing theRisksINDG 220A Guide to The Construction (Health,Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996INDG 291Simple Guide to the Provision and Use ofWork Equipment Regulations 1998ISO 9355 Part 1: 1999 Ergonomics requirements for the designof displays and control actuators - Part 1:Human Interactions with displays andcontrol actuatorsISO 9355 Part 2 Ergonomics requirements for the designof displays and control actuators - Part 2:DisplaysISO/IEC 9995: Part 1 Information technology – Keyboardlayouts for text and office systems. Part 1:General Principles Governing KeyboardLayouts1999 HSEApr 2005 /Revision 3HSE2004 HSE2000 HSEJun 2004Jun 2004HSEHSE1999 ISO Current (1999 Issue) O1999 ISO Current (1999 Issue) O1994 /First EditionISOONov 2006 Page A2-25 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)Reference Title Date /IssueISO/IEC 9995: Part 2 Information technology – Keyboardlayouts for text and office systems. Part 2:Alphanumeric SectionISO/IEC 9995: Part 3 Information technology – Keyboardlayouts for text and office systems: Part 3:Complementary layouts of thealphanumeric zone of the alphanumericsectionISO/IEC 9995: Part 4 Information technology – Keyboardlayouts for text and office systems: Part 4:Numeric sectionISO/IEC 9995: Part 5 Information technology – Keyboardlayouts for text and office systems: Part:Editing sectionISO/IEC 9995: Part 6 Information technology – Keyboardlayouts for text and office systems: PartFunction SectionISO/IEC 9995: Part 7 Information technology – Keyboardlayouts for text and office systems: Part:Symbols used to represent functionsISO/IEC 9995: Part 8 Information technology – Keyboardlayouts for text and office systems: PartAllocation of Letters to the Keys ofNumeric KeyboardISO 11428: 1996 Ergonomics - Visual danger signals -General requirements, design and testing2002 /Second Edition2002 /Second Edition2002 /Second Edition1994 /First Edition1994 /First Edition2002 /Second Edition1994 /First EditionAuthorityISOISOISOISOISOISOISOStatus(at Jan 2006)Technical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 41996 ISO Current OISO 11429: 1996Ergonomics - System of auditory andvisual danger and information signals1996 ISO Current OJSP 392 Instructions for Radiological Protection 2005 /4JSP 430 MoD Ship Safety Management. (4 parts) 2005 /Issue 3 Amdt 1CNNTSP Current O ODNA/SSMOONov 2006 Page A2-26 Issue 4

Annex 2 – Standards and GuidelinesJSP 502Reference Title Date /IssueThe Tri-Service Guide to Training NeedsAnalysis (TNA)AuthorityStatus(at Jan 2006)2001 AMS Jul 01 - Current OTechnical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 4L5/2005 Control of substances hazardous to health(Fifth edition) The Control of SubstancesHazardous to Health Regulations 2002(as amended). Approved Code ofPractice and guidance.L21/2000 Management of health and safety at work.Management of Health and Safety atWork Regulations 1999. Approved Codeof Practice and GuidanceL22/1998 Safe use of Work Equipment – Provisionand use of Work Equipment Regulations(PUWER) 1998 – Approved Code ofPractice and Guidance.L23/1992 The Manual handling OperationsRegulations 1992 (as amended).Guidance on RegulationsL24/1998 Workplace health, safety and welfare –Workplace (Health Safety and Welfare)Regulations 1992 (as amended by theQuarries Miscellaneous Health and SafetyProvisions Regulations 1995) ApprovedCode of Practice and Guidance.L25/2000 Personal protective equipment at work.Personal Protective Equipment at WorkRegulations 1992. Guidance onRegulations L25.L26/2002 Work with display screen equipment.Health and Safety (Display ScreenEquipment) Regulations 1992 asamended by the health and safety(Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations2002. L26. Guidance on Regulations.2005 HSE2000 HSC1998 /Edition 12004 /Edition 32001 /Edition 12HSEHSEHSE2000 HSE2003 /Edition 2CurrentCurrentCurrentHSE Current ONov 2006 Page A2-27 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)Reference Title Date /IssueL27/2002 Work with asbestos which does notnormally require a licence (FourthEdition). Control of Asbestos at WorkRegulations 2002. L27. Approved Codeof PracticeL73/1999 RIDDOR Explained - A Guide to theReporting of injuries, Diseases andDangerous Occurrences Regulations1995MAP-01-010Maritime Acquisition Publication HumanFactors Integration (HFI) - ManagementGuide (STGP 10)MAP-01-011Maritime Acquisition Publication HumanFactors Integration (HFI) - TechnicalGuide (STGP 11)POSMSProject Oriented Safety ManagementSystemprEN 894Safety of Machinery. ErgonomicsRequirements for the Design of Displaysand Control Actuators. Part 4: Locationand arrangement of displays and controlactuatorsSI 1992/2792 The Health and Safety (Display ScreenEquipment) Regulations 1992 (DSERegs) (as amended)SI 1992/2793 The Manual Handling OperationsRegulations 1992 (as amended)SI 1992/3004 The Workplace (Health, Safety andWelfare) Regulations 1992 (as amended)Authority2003 HSE1999 HSE2006 /Issue 42006 /Issue 4SSGSSGStatus(at Jan 2006)Technical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 42005 /ASEG Current OIssue 2.02004 CEN1992 HMSO Current O O1992 HMSO Current O1992 HMSO Current OSI 1992/3139SI 1994/3260Personal Protective Equipment (ECDirective) Regulations 1992 (as amended)The Electrical Equipment (Safety)Regulations 19941992 HMSO1994 HMSO Current ONov 2006 Page A2-28 Issue 4

Annex 2 – Standards and GuidelinesReference Title Date /IssueSI 1995/3163SI 1998/2306SI 1998/2307SI 1999/3242SI 2002/2677SSP 20SSP 27 Part 1SSP 27 Part 2SSP 27 Part 3SSP 27 Part 4The Reporting of Injuries, Diseases andDangerous Occurrences Regulations1995 (RIDDOR)The Provision and Use of WorkEquipment Regulations 1998 (PUWER)The Lifting Operations and LiftingEquipment Regulations 1998 (asamended)The Management of Health and Safety atWork Regulations 1999 (MHSAW)The Control of Substances Hazardous toHealth Regulations 2002 (as amended)Warship Engineering Management Guide(will become MAP-01-020)Guidance on Machinery Control andSurveillance System Specification,Response and Assessment. Part 1 -IntroductionGuidance on Machinery Control andSurveillance System Specification,Response and Assessment. Part 2 –Preparation and issue of the TechnicalSpecificationGuidance on Machinery Control andSurveillance System Specification,Response and Assessment. Part 3 -Response to the Technical SpecificationGuidance on Machinery Control andSurveillance System Specification,Response and Assessment. Part 4 -Assessment of Responses to theTechnical SpecificationAuthorityStatus(at Jan 2006)Technical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 41995 HMSO Current O1998 HMSO Current O~ HMSO1999 HMSO Current O2002 HMSO Current O(since 1998) /DNA1Mar 1991 DME Current OMar 1991 DME CurrentMar 1991 DME CurrentMar 1991 DME CurrentNov 2006 Page A2-29 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)Reference Title Date /IssueSSP 27 Part 5SSP 30SSP 34SSP 38SSP 53SSP 59Guidance on Machinery Control andSurveillance System Specification,Response and Assessment. Part 5 -Supporting InformationGuidance Handbook for Project Staff inthe Naval Weapon Equipment AreaGuide for the Preparation of Statementsof Technical Requirements for theDevelopment of Systems and EquipmentTechnical Procedural Requirements forthe Procurement and Upkeep of NavalWeapon EquipmentAcceptance into Naval Service ofWeapons, Weapon Systems and WeaponEquipment DPA, AN210.Combat System Design Strategy – ProjectManagers Guide (SM832).AuthorityStatus(at Jan 2006)Mar 1991 DME Current~ /DNARestricted2~ CDPI To be issued~ /11996 /71996 /2DNADNACurrentCurrentDNA Plus Amdt. 1CurrentTechnical AreasSAF - Ch 17M&S - Ch 16OUEI - Ch 15EL - Ch 14HIE - Ch 13PMMH - Ch 12MS - Ch 11AS - Ch 10OS - Ch 9GA - Ch 8TRG - Ch 7CC - Ch 6TO - Ch 5MCA - Ch 4OSTANAG 1241 NATO Standard Identity Description2005 /NATO MASStructure for Tactical UseEdition 5STANAG 2899 Protection of Hearing 1991 NATO MAS Edition 3 - current OSTANAG 4154Common Procedures for Sea keeping inthe Ship Design Process2000 NATO MAS Edition 3 - current OSTANAG 4293Guidelines for the Acoustical Environmentin NATO Surface Ships1990 /Edition 1Amdt 1NATO MAS Edition 1 - current ONov 2006 Page A2-30 Issue 4MAP-01-011 Annex 2_24.doc

ANNEX 3 – HF TECHNIQUES, METHODS AND TOOLSA3.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................3-5A3.1.1 System Design Approaches.............................................................3-6A3.1.2 The Impact of Applying a Technique etc..........................................3-6A3.1.3 Other Techniques and Methods.......................................................3-7A3.2 Data Collection Techniques............................................................................3-10A3.2.1 Interviews .......................................................................................3-10A3.2.2 Questionnaires ...............................................................................3-12A3.2.3 Observational analysis ...................................................................3-13A3.2.4 Focus Groups.................................................................................3-15A3.3 Requirements Analysis Techniques ...............................................................3-17A3.3.1 Functions Analysis .........................................................................3-18A3.3.2 Allocation of Functions ...................................................................3-18A3.3.3 Mission Analysis.............................................................................3-20A3.3.4 Task-Centred System Design (TCSD) ...........................................3-21A3.3.5 Design Scenario Analysis...............................................................3-22A3.3.6 Operational Scenario Description...................................................3-23A3.3.7 Mission Critical Task Identification .................................................3-24A3.3.8 Operability Criteria Definition..........................................................3-24A3.3.9 User Performance Criteria..............................................................3-25A3.4 Task Analysis Techniques..............................................................................3-27A3.4.1 Hierarchical Task Analysis .............................................................3-28A3.4.2 Tabular Task Analysis....................................................................3-29A3.4.3 Task Decomposition.......................................................................3-30A3.4.4 Verbal Protocol Analysis ................................................................3-31A3.4.5 Timeline Analysis ...........................................................................3-32A3.4.6 Goals, Operators, Methods and Selection Rules Technique .........3-33A3.4.7 Critical Path Analysis (CPA)...........................................................3-34A3.4.8 Keystroke Level Model (KLM) ........................................................3-35A3.5 Cognitive Task Analysis Techniques..............................................................3-37A3.5.1 Cognitive Walkthrough ...................................................................3-37A3.5.2 Applied Cognitive Task Analysis ....................................................3-38A3.5.3 Critical Incident Technique.............................................................3-39A3.5.4 Critical Decision Method.................................................................3-41A3.6 Mental Workload Assessment Techniques ....................................................3-43A3.6.1 Physiological measures..................................................................3-43A3.6.2 Primary and Secondary Task Performance Measures...................3-44A3.6.3 Task Load Index (NASA-TLX)........................................................3-46A3.6.4 Defence Research Agency Workload Scales (DRAWS)................3-47A3.6.5 Subjective Workload Assessment Technique (SWAT) ..................3-48A3.6.6 Subjective Workload Dominance (SWORD) Technique ................3-49A3.6.7 Workload Profile Technique ...........................................................3-49A3.6.8 Cognitive Task Load Analysis ........................................................3-51May 2006 Page A3-1 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)A3.6.9 Pro-SWORD...................................................................................3-51A3.6.10 Modified Cooper-Harper Scales.....................................................3-52A3.6.11 Individual Self-Assessment (ISA)...................................................3-53A3.7 Situation Awareness Techniques ...................................................................3-55A3.7.1 SA Requirements Analysis.............................................................3-56A3.7.2 Crew Awareness Rating Scale (CARS) .........................................3-57A3.7.3 Mission Awareness Rating Scale (MARS) .....................................3-58A3.7.4 Situation Awareness Rating Scales (SARS) ..................................3-59A3.7.5 Situation Awareness Rating Technique (SART) ............................3-60A3.7.6 Cranfield Situation Awareness Scale (C-SAS)...............................3-61A3.7.7 Situation Awareness SWORD (SA-SWORD).................................3-62A3.7.8 Situation Awareness Behavioural Rating Scale (SABARS) ...........3-64A3.7.9 Situation Awareness Global Assessment Technique (SAGAT) .....3-65A3.8 Team Design Techniques...............................................................................3-67A3.8.1 Complement Validation ..................................................................3-67A3.8.2 Job Design .....................................................................................3-68A3.8.3 Role Definition................................................................................3-69A3.8.4 Task & Role Performance Modelling..............................................3-70A3.8.5 Task & Role Prototyping.................................................................3-71A3.8.6 Training Needs Analysis.................................................................3-72A3.8.7 Target Audience Description..........................................................3-73A3.9 Team Performance Analysis Techniques.......................................................3-75A3.9.1 Team Task Analysis Techniques ...................................................3-75A3.9.2 HTA Team......................................................................................3-76A3.9.3 Team Cognitive Task Analysis.......................................................3-77A3.9.4 Groupware Task Analysis ..............................................................3-78A3.9.5 Behavioural Observation Scales ....................................................3-79A3.9.6 Decision Requirements Exercise ...................................................3-80A3.9.7 Team Workload Assessment .........................................................3-81A3.9.8 Distributed Assessment of Team Mutual Awareness.....................3-82A3.9.9 Co-ordination Demands Analysis...................................................3-83A3.9.10 Team Communication and Co-Ordination Analysis .......................3-84A3.9.11 Comms Usage Diagrams ...............................................................3-84A3.9.12 Social Network Analysis.................................................................3-85A3.9.13 Task and Training Requirements Methodology (TTRAM)..............3-86A3.10 Human Reliability Analysis Techniques..........................................................3-88A3.10.1 Human Error HAZOP .....................................................................3-89A3.10.2 Event Tree Analysis .......................................................................3-90A3.10.3 Fault Tree Analysis.........................................................................3-91A3.10.4 Murphy Diagrams...........................................................................3-92A3.10.5 SHERPA 3-93A3.10.6 TRACEr 3-94A3.10.7 SPEAR 3-95A3.10.8 CREAM 3-96May 2006 Page A3-2 Issue 4

A3.10.9 HEIST 3-97A3.10.10 THEA 3-98A3.10.11 HET 3-100A3.10.12 HEART 3-101A3.10.13 TAFEI 3-101A3.10.14 HERA 3-102A3.11 Workspace, Workstation and HMI Design Techniques ................................3-104A3.11.1 Link Analysis ................................................................................3-104A3.11.2 Workspace Design .......................................................................3-105A3.11.3 Workstation Design ......................................................................3-106A3.11.4 Environmental Design ..................................................................3-107A3.11.5 Synthetic User Modelling (Anthropometric)..................................3-108A3.11.6 Human Factors Trade-Off Analysis..............................................3-109A3.11.7 Human Factors Style Guide .........................................................3-110A3.11.8 Health and Safety Analysis ..........................................................3-110A3.11.9 Layout Analysis ............................................................................3-111A3.11.10 Repertory Grid Analysis ...............................................................3-112A3.11.11 Walkthrough Analysis...................................................................3-113A3.12 Human-Machine Interface Evaluation Techniques.......................................3-115A3.12.1 Heuristics 3-115A3.12.2 Checklists 3-116A3.12.3 Interface Surveys .........................................................................3-118A3.12.4 User Satisfaction Questionnaires.................................................3-119A3.12.4.1 Questionnaire for User Interface Satisfaction (QUIS) 3-119A3.12.4.2 Software Usability Measurement Inventory (SUMI)...3-120A3.12.4.3 System Usability Scale (SUS) ...................................3-121A3.12.5 User Trials 3-122May 2006 Page A3-3 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)May 2006 Page A3-4 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and ToolsA3.1 IntroductionThis Annex provides details of a number of HF techniques, methods and relatedtools. The details have been drawn from three sources:• Information produced by the Human Factors Integration DefenceTechnology Centre (HFI DTC) 1 under two work packages: Work Package1.3.2 – Design Methods Review and Work Package 1.3.3 – EvaluationMethods Review; reported in ‘Human Factors Design & EvaluationMethods Review’ [Ref 32].• Legacy information obtained from Annex A3 of STGP 11 ‘HFI TechnicalGuide‘ [Ref 33].• Information synthesised to support the update from STGP 11 [Ref 33] (i.e.Issue 3) to this version of the document - MAP-01-011 (i.e. Issue 4).In this Annex, the information is presented in summary form, with information onthe various methods and tools being grouped into a series of families of related‘techniques’, eg:• Task Analysis techniques.• Human Performance analysis techniques.• Human Reliability analysis techniques.• Human-Machine Interface evaluation techniques.As stated above, much of the information in this Annex has been taken from theDTC report ‘Human Factors Design & Evaluation Methods Review’ [Ref 32]. TheDTC work screened and evaluated over 200 techniques, methods and toolssuitable for use in the design and evaluation of future C4I systems; with many ofthese techniques etc having a wider applicability. The 590-page study reportreviewed 91 techniques, methods and tools in considerable detail. This Annexdoes not attempt to fully summarise the report. Material has been filtered toexclude techniques etc that are unlikely to benefit Naval acquisition projects;thus the Annex excludes Civil Aviation and Civil Air Traffic Control applications.Further, the Annex discusses the approaches and the factors associated withtheir use, within a naval acquisition context. For greater detail on specifictechniques, methods and tools, the reader is directed to the published DTCreport [Ref 32].Note … Citations from the DTC report are used in this Annex and are listedin Annex 1. Citations are identified by a number of the form ‘DTCnnn’.Legacy information on HF methods and tools from STGP 11 [Ref 33] has beenprocessed into a standard form, consistent with the new information from theDTC work. As a result of feedback from STGP 11 users, some of the legacy1 The HFI DTC is a collaborative programme between MoD, Industry and Academia toundertake focussed research to support UK military capability acquisition.May 2006 Page A3-5 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)information (e.g. associated HFI activities and associated standards and guides)has been omitted for clarity.A3.1.1System Design ApproachesModel system design approaches exist, such as that defined inBS ISO/IEC 15288 ‘Systems engineering - System life cycle processes’ [Ref 34]and work is being conducted by the HFI DTC (2005), which is seeking to developa generic Defence Acquisition system design model.However, individual acquisition projects will be delivered through a variety ofcontractual arrangements (eg purchaser-prime supplier and sub-contractors,purchaser / provider alliances or possibly PFI arrangements) and differentproviders will adopt different approaches to the system design.Therefore this Annex does not assume any particular approach to system designand information is provided that will be common to many, if not all, designapproaches.A3.1.2The Impact of Applying a Technique etcThe techniques, method and tools described here constitute a portfolio ofresources that are available to support HFI development, realisation andvalidation. There is no suggestion that all or any of these techniques etc must beused, see also Sect A3.1.3 below. Whether or not a particular technique etc isneeded, or the extent to which a technique etc needs to be applied, is a projectspecificconsideration, requiring informed Human Factors Specialist input.Each technique, method or tool has associated resource and time implications.When considering the applicability of a particular technique etc to a givenAcquisition project, the reader should note that in most cases, the resourcesrequired to apply many of the listed techniques etc will be in proportion to the sizeand complexity of the project. Where a technique, method or tool is generallyresource-friendly, this is stated in the text. A much more important discriminatoris the dependency of many of the techniques etc on adequate source data orprior analysis, such as task analysis. These factors may differ depending onwhether a project is a green field design, or whether there is access to legacydata and experience. This should be taken into account when assessing thesuitability of a technique, method or tool to a particular application.The reader must note that inclusion in this Annex of a particular technique,method or tool does not constitute formal MoD approval or endorsement. Thesuitability of any HF technique etc must be re-assessed for each proposedproject-specific application, with input from HF professionals. Likewise, exclusionof a technique, method or tool from this Annex does not signify MoD disapproval.Additional information on design and assessment techniques, methods and toolsis available in Stanton et al ‘Handbook of Human Factors and ErgonomicsMethods’ [Ref 35].May 2006 Page A3-6 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and ToolsA3.1.3Other Techniques and MethodsThis Annex cannot be an exhaustive description of HF and HF-relatedtechniques, methods and tools. Thus, there are other methods and techniquesthat have been identified in the body of this document but that are not explicitlyidentified and described in this Annex. For completeness, these methods (asidentified in the text) are listed below within their family of related techniques.Note … Some of these techniques and methods are of a general natureand are used outside HFI. Some of the techniques etc identify a class ofmethods or tools without identifying the specific method or tool; forexample, the Environmental Measurement of Noise has a variety ofrecognised methods and tools associated with it, depending upon theapplication.• Data Collection Techniques• Accident Rate Data.• Document Reviews.• Environmental Measurements:oooooooAir Flow.Humidity.Lighting/Glare.Noise.Radiation Levels.Temperature.Vibration.• Human Error Data.• Lost-time Data.• Near-miss Data.• Specialist Knowledge Extraction.• Specific HF Research Studies.• Requirements Analysis Techniques• HF Requirements Definition.• Operability Scenario Definition.• System Requirements.May 2006 Page A3-7 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Cognitive Task Analysis Techniques• Skills Analysis.• Workload Measurement Techniques• Workload Measurement.• Team Design Techniques• External Validation (of training).• Internal Validation (of training).• Role Analysis.• Task Design.• Task Synthesis.• Training Effectiveness Analysis.• Team Performance Analysis Techniques• Task Performance Measurement.• Workload Analysis.• Safety Assessment Techniques• Escape Analysis - consult EENA for advice.• Hazards and Operability Analysis (HAZOP).• Hazard Analysis (HAZAN).• Risk Assessment.• Risk Reduction.• Workspace, Workstation and HMI Design Techniques• User-Equipment Interface Design.• User-Equipment Interface Prototyping.• HMI Evaluation Techniques• Operability Evaluation.• Other Techniques• Audit.• Cost Benefit Analysis.May 2006 Page A3-8 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• Investment Appraisal.• Risk Analysis.• Safety Case.• Structured Analysis.• Trend Analysis.May 2006 Page A3-9 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)A3.2 Data Collection TechniquesThe starting point of any design effort normally involves collecting specific dataregarding the system or type of system being developed. This allows the designteam to evaluate the system or type of system that is being designed.HF practitioners use a range of data collection techniques in order to collect thespecific information regarding the system or product under analysis, including thetasks catered for by the system, the individuals performing the tasks, the tasksthemselves (task steps and sequence), the technology used by the system inconducting the tasks (control, displays, communication technology etc), thesystem environment and the organisational environment.There are multiple data collection techniques used by HF practitioners, howeverfour of the most common are:• Interviews (Structured, Semi-Structured and Informal);• Questionnaires;• Observations and Checklists; and,• Focus Groups.Typically data collected using these and similar techniques are the starting pointor inputs for other HF techniques, such as task analysis, human erroridentification and workload analysis.The main advantage associated with the use of data collection techniques is thewealth of data that is collected and the fact that the analyst(s) using thetechniques have a high degree of control over the data collection process andare able to direct the data collection procedure as they see fit in order to meet theoverall objective.However there are also disadvantages, the primary of which is the large amountof resources required when designing the data collection procedures(questionnaires designs, pilots and runs) and in analysing the collecting data(due to the large volume collected). In addition, it can also be difficult to getpersonnel and subject matter experts (SMEs) to take part in interviews and ofteninstitutions do not readily agree to their personnel being observed whilst at work.The following sub-sections provide an overview of the identified data collectiontechniques.A3.2.1InterviewsInterviews have been used extensively in Human Factors to gather specificinformation regarding many different areas, such as system design, systemusability, attitudes, job analysis, task analysis, error and many more. Along withobservational techniques, interviews are probably the most commonly usedHuman Factors technique for information gathering. A number of Human Factorstechniques are also interview based, with specifically designed probes orMay 2006 Page A3-10 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Toolsquestions, such as the Critical Decision Method (DTC117 - Klein & Armstrong2003), Applied Cognitive Task Analysis (DTC134 - Militello 2000) and cognitivewalkthrough analysis (DTC149 - Polson et al 1992). There are three types ofinterview typically employed by the HF practitioner.1. Structured Interview – The analyst probes the participant using a set ofpre-defined questions. The content of the interview (questions and theirorder) is pre-determined and no scope for further discussion is permitted.Due to the rigid nature, structured interviews are not often employed in thedata collection process. A structured interview is only used when the typeof data required is rigidly defined, and no further data is required.2. Semi-structured Interview – Some of the questions and their order is predetermined.However, the interviewer also allows flexibility in directing theinterview, and new issues or topics can be embarked on. Due to theirflexibility, the semi-structured interview is the most commonly used type ofinterview. The analyst uses specific questions to obtain the required data,but also has the scope to probe novel areas further.3. Unstructured Interview – The interview has no structure whatsoever andthe interviewer goes into the interview ‘blind’. Whilst their total flexibility isattractive, unstructured interviews are infrequently used, as theirunstructured nature may result in crucial data being missed or ignored.As well as different types of interviews available, there are also different types ofquestions used during the interview process. When conducting an interview,there are three main types of question that the interviewer can use.1. Open-ended question – An open-ended question allows the analyst toanswer in whatever way they wish and elaborate on their answer. Openendedquestions are used to elicit more than simple yes/no information.For example, if querying the interviewee about the usability of a certaindevice, a closed question would be; “Did you think that the system wasusable?” This type of question will more often than not elicit merely a yesor no answer. An open-ended question approach to the same topic wouldbe something like, “What do you think about the usability of the system”.This type of open-ended question encourages the interviewee to sharemore that the typical yes/no answer, and gives the interviewer an avenueto gain much deeper, valuable information.2. Probing question – A probing question is normally used after an openended or closed question to gather more specific data regarding theinterviewee’s previous answer. Typical examples of a probing questionwould be, “Why did you think that the system was not usable?” or “How didit make you feel when you made that error with the system?”3. Closed questions – A closed question can be used to elicit specificinformation. Closed questions typically prompt a yes or no reply• Advantages• Interviews can be used to gather data regarding anything e.g. usability ofexisting systems, potential design flaws, errors etc.May 2006 Page A3-11 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Interviews can be used at any stage in the design process.• The use of SME’s as interviewee’s gives interviews the potential to be verypowerful.• The interviewer has full control over the interview and can direct theinterview in way. This allows the collection of specific data.• Response data can be treated statistically.• A structured interview offers consistency and thoroughness (DTC173 -Stanton & Young 1999).• Interviews are a very flexible technique.• Interviews have been used extensively in the past for a number of differenttypes of analysis.• Specific, structured Human Factors interviews already exist, such as ACTAand the Critical Decision Method.• Disadvantages• The construction and data analysis process ensures that the interviewtechnique is a very time consuming one.• The reliability and validity of the technique is difficult to address.• Interviews are susceptible to both interviewer and interviewee bias.• Transcribing the data is a laborious, time consuming process.• Conducting an interview correctly is a difficult thing to do.A3.2.2QuestionnairesQuestionnaires offer a very flexible way of quickly collecting large amounts ofdata from large amounts of subjects. Questionnaires have been used in manyforms to collect data regarding numerous issues within ergonomics and design.Questionnaires can be used to collect information regarding almost anything atall, including usability, user satisfaction, opinions and attitudes. More specifically,questionnaires can be used in the design process to evaluate concept andprototypical designs, to probe user perceptions and to evaluate existing systemdesigns. A multitude of questionnaires are available to the Human Factorspractitioner and the system designer. Established questionnaires such as thesystem usability scale (SUS), the Questionnaire for User Interface Satisfaction(QUIS) and the Software Usability Measurement Inventory (SUMI) are availablefor practitioners to apply to designs and existing systems. Alternatively, specificquestionnaires can be designed and administered during the design process, inorder to determine user requirements and to evaluate design concepts.May 2006 Page A3-12 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• Advantages• When the questionnaire is properly designed, the data analysis phaseshould be quick and very straightforward.• Very few resources are required once the questionnaire has beendesigned.• Numerous questionnaires already exist in the Human Factors literature(QUIS, SUMI, SUS etc), allowing the Human Factors practitioner to choosethe most appropriate for the study purposes. This also removes the timeassociated with the design of the questionnaire. Also, results can also becompared with past results obtained using the same questionnaire.• Questionnaires offer a very flexible way of collecting high volumes of datafrom high numbers of subjects. The ‘anytime, anyplace’ aspect of datacollection is very appealing.• Very easy to administer to large numbers of participants.• Skilled questionnaire designers can use the questions to direct the datacollection.• Disadvantages• Reliability and validity of questionnaires is questionable.• The questionnaire design process is a very lengthy one, requiring greatskill on the analyst’s part.• Piloting of the questionnaire adds considerable time to the process.• Typically, response rates are low e.g. around 10% for postalquestionnaires.• The answers provided in questionnaires are often rushed and noncommittal.• Questionnaires are prone to a number of different biases, such as prestigebias.• Questionnaires offer limited output.A3.2.3Observational analysisObservational techniques are a family of techniques that are used to gather dataregarding the physical or verbal aspects of a particular task or scenario.Observational techniques are used to collect data regarding various aspects ofsystem and task performance, such as data regarding the tasks catered for bythe system, the individuals performing the tasks, the tasks themselves (task stepsand sequence), errors made, communications between individuals, thetechnology used by the system in conducting the tasks (controls, displays,May 2006 Page A3-13 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)communication technology etc), the system environment and the organisationalenvironment Observation has been extensively used in the Human Factorscommunity for a number of applications, ranging from control room operation topublic technology use (DTC013 - Baber and Stanton 1996). The most obviousand widely used form of observational technique is direct visual observation,whereby an analyst records visually and verbally a particular task or scenario. Anumber of observational techniques exist, including direct observation, participantobservation and remote observation.• Advantages• Observation technique data provides a ‘real life’ insight into man-machine,and team interaction.• A broad range of data can be elicited from an observational study,including task sequences, task analysis, error data, task times, verbalinteraction and task performance.• Observation has been used extensively in a wide range of domains.• Observation provides objective information.• Detailed physical task performance data is recorded, including socialinteractions and any environmental task influences (DTC115 - Kirwan &Ainsworth 1992).• Observation is excellent for the initial stages of the task analysisprocedure.• Observation analysis can be used to highlight problems with existingoperational systems. It can be used in this way to inform the design of newsystems or devices.• Specific Scenarios are observed in their ‘real world’ setting.• Disadvantages• The main criticism of observational techniques centres on theirintrusiveness. Knowing that they are being watched tends to elicit new anddifferent behaviours in participants. For example, when observing controlroom operators, they may exhibit a performance that is exact in terms oftraining requirements. This may be due to the fact that the operator’s donot wish to be caught bending the rules or bypassing a certain procedure.• Observational techniques are extremely time consuming in theirapplication, particularly the data analysis process. When conducting anobservation, a certain scenario cannot simply be conjured out of thin air. Ifan emergency scenario is required, the observation may go on for anumber of weeks before the required scenario occurs. Also, the dataanalysis procedure is even more time consuming. Kirwan & Ainsworth(DTC115 - 1992) suggest that when conducting the transcription process, 1hour of recorded audio data takes on analyst approximately 8 hours totranscribe.May 2006 Page A3-14 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• Cognitive aspects of the task under analysis are not elicited usingobservational techniques. Verbal protocol analysis is more suited forcollecting data on the cognitive aspects of task performance.• An observational study can be both difficult and expensive to set up andconduct. Many re-iterations may take place before the observation can becarried out. Also, the use of recording equipment ensures that thetechnique is not a cheap one.• Causality is a problem. Errors can be observed and recorded during anobservation but why the errors occur may not always be clear.• The analyst has a very low level of experimental control.• In most cases, a team of analysts is required to perform an observationstudy.A3.2.4Focus GroupsA focus group is a group interview approach that involves using a group of SME’sto discuss a particular design concept or prototype. Originally used in marketresearch, focus groups normally involve a group of SME’s and 1 to 2 moderatorsdiscussing critical design points of a certain system or product design. Theoutput of a focus group is normally a list of agreed and disagreed statements.Focus groups can be used for almost any purpose, including predicting potentialhuman error in a certain system, usability problems associated with a designconcept or to evaluate a prototypical design in terms of usability, workload, error,performance times etc. Hypponen (DTC087 - 1999) suggests that focus groupsare used to gather raw data regarding user needs in the concept developmentphase of a design and that they can also be used to clarify issues during thedesign. Focus groups can also be used as an evaluation tool in order to evaluateexisting system design with regard to errors, usability etc. Focus groups wereoriginally used in the IT domain but have been used in numerous different areasto inform the design process.• Advantages• The make up of the focus group is down to the analyst. A correctlyassembled focus group can provide a very powerful input into the designprocess.• A focus group can discuss anything from probability of error to interfacelayout.• The analyst(s) has complete control of the focus and direction of theanalysis and can change this at any time.• Very powerful data can be elicited from a focus group type analysis.• Focus group type interviews allow the analyst to quickly survey a greatnumber of opinions.May 2006 Page A3-15 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• People discuss issues more freely in a group context.• Disadvantages• Assembling the desired focus group is a very difficult thing to do. Gettingsuch a diverse group of experts together at the same location and at thesame time is a very difficult.• The chemistry within the focus group has a huge effect upon the datacollected.• The reliability and validity of focus groups is questionable.• Large amounts of data are gathered. This is very time consuming totranscribe and analyse.May 2006 Page A3-16 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and ToolsA3.3 Requirements Analysis TechniquesWithin the overall system design process, the tasks of identifying, deriving andrecording the requirements that a given system must satisfy, constitute afundamental and critical building block. It is these requirements that, whenapplied with the appropriate design techniques Human Factors specialists mustcontribute by identifying Human Factors requirements.Iconic sources of Requirements in Defence Acquisition include the UserRequirements Document (URD) and the System Requirements Document (SRD).Historically, these vehicles have proved less than fully effective in capturing HFrelatedrequirements. Improved approaches to HF requirements capture arehowever, under consideration.Human Factors requirements must embrace a multiplicity of factors, including:• Requirements derived from URD statements.• Requirements derived from SRD statements.• Intrinsic human requirements.• Intrinsic defence system user requirements (relevant to the military userpopulation).• System-specific defence system user requirements (relevant to particularapplication).A number of techniques exist with which to identify and extract Human Factorrelated requirements and the application of these in broad terms these are in,broad terms, related to understanding the goals and tasks of the human within aspecified system. These techniques include:• Functions Analysis• Allocation of Function• Mission Analysis.• Task-Centred System Design (TCSD).• Design Scenario Analysis.• Operational Scenario Description• Mission Critical Task identification• Operability Criteria Definition• User Performance CriteriaAn overview of each of these techniques is provided in the following sub-sectionsincluding the main strengths and weakness of each approach.May 2006 Page A3-17 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)A3.3.1Functions AnalysisAn important, but often-disregarded aspect of HFI, is the need to base designson a sound understanding of required system functions.Consideration of the human component is covered in the Allocation of Functionssection. However, an important pre-cursor to Allocation of Functions is theidentification of all required system functions.The purpose of Function Analysis is therefore to identify system functions,particularly those requiring human implementation and involvement, and toexamine behavioural implications. Functions Analysis is therefore the analysis ofthe relatively broad activities (functions) that may be implemented by personnelalone, by equipment alone, or, as in most cases, by some combination of both.Function Analysis is conducted during the Concept and Assessment phases ofthe CADMID cycle.Two alternative methods to identify functions are Hierarchical decomposition offunctions, and object-oriented functions analysis and the chosen method shouldcomply with the requirements modelling environment and provide visibility of thehuman role in relation to platform or equipment functions. For software-basedsystems, providers may adopt particular design approaches that depend uponindustry–standard or proprietary software design methods and tools.• Advantages• Functions Analysis is a critical activity, as it forms the baseline and goals ofsubsequent analysis – successfully conducted Functions Analysis will forma solid foundation for all subsequent study.• It is a precursor to Allocation of Function.• Functions Analysis is a cross-disciplinary effort driven by a number offactors, Human Factors is a contributory part.• Disadvantages• Dependent on the project, it can be resource intensive.A3.3.2Allocation of FunctionsA pivotal part of the system design process is Allocation of Functions. In theDefence Acquisition context, the process is also referred to as Partitioning.Allocation of Functions (AoF) is the process of assigning functions within asystem either to the technology component (mechanisation or automation), to thehuman component (operator and maintainer tasks) or increasingly, to acombination of both of these. In practice, the process is not stand-alone. It maybe highly iterative, and may occur as a result of other processes such as navalComplement generation, where, in order to optimise manpower and whole-lifecosts, automation may be proffered to human-only solution.May 2006 Page A3-18 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and ToolsIn the Post-WW2 period, when the Human Factors discipline was in a formativestage, AoF was achieved using the ‘Fitts List’ approach. Lists of the variouscapabilities and limitations of men and machines were produced, covering suchaspects as available force, power, degree of articulation, speed, strength,accuracy and repeatability. However cognitive processes were catered for onlyin basic ways, such as memory capacity and ability to recognise patterns.In the intervening period, human capabilities have changed little, although moreis known about them. In contrast, machine capabilities, particularly thoseprovided by computer technology, have increased by an almost immeasurableextent. As a result, automation can now be considered as an option for anincreasing range of functions, hitherto considered unfeasible.A consequence of this explosion in machine capabilities, and an associated fall intheir cost of ownership, system designs have become more complex, which inturn has changed the way in which the human component needs to be used.The human component of Defence systems is becoming the most dominantfactor in whole-life cost of ownership.Whilst AoF still asks the question “which system component should perform thisfunction”, the answer is often not a simple binary choice. Increasingly, high-levelfunctions are achieved through a combination of human and machine functions.Often, the optimum solution involves the machine policing the human and thehuman policing the machine, but each one in very different ways. Machines candetect human errors, but human skills may still be needed to detect machinefaults cost-effectively. Thus AoF may be more appropriately considered as‘Optimising the way in which functions are achieved’.In modern systems, allocation of functions may not be fixed, but may bedesigned to vary depending on dynamic factors such as incoming data rate,mission phase, platform state and operator workload. So-called DynamicAllocation of Functions address this by providing additional support to the humansay, when workload is high, but returns a function to the human at other times sothat the human can stay practiced and ‘in the loop’.Important pre-cursors to AoF are the existence of adequate user and systemrequirements specifications, Target Audience Description data, system designconstraints and clear system objective and targets.There is no single defined process for AoF. It may be approached throughcomprehensive listings or taxonomies of system functions, such as may exist forformal system architectural design purposes. In this case, each function and itsrelated sub-functions are considered systematically. AoF may equallyapproached by considering lists of proposed or defined operator and maintainertasks, to evaluate which ones would best involve automation, and to what degreethat involvement should be. Often, such structures embody sub-systemhierarchies that will facilitate systematic AoF.In either case, expert judgments should be supported by reference to relevantsources of validated human performance data. This may require input fromHuman Factors professionals.Where functions and associated tasks require performance that exceeds humancapabilities, AoF decisions will be clear. In other cases, dichotomies areMay 2006 Page A3-19 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)resolved by the need to respect relevant Legislation or safety-case principles thatlimit human involvement in hazardous tasks. Similarly, the overall system safetycase may call for levels of system accuracy and reliability that preclude humanexecution of a function.In many other cases, appropriate AoF may be based as much on overall cost ofownership metrics and issues of feasibility associated with existing operationaland management structures as on pure technical and sociological factors.Sound knowledge of the customer’s operational and managerial environment istherefore an essential component to the AoF process.AoF typically occurs during the Assessment and Demonstration phases of aproject. It requires a multi-disciplinary approach with access to appropriateSMEs. Valid human performance source data are required, as are skilledanalysts, together with input from Human Factors professionals. AoF maytherefore be very resource demanding.• Advantages• Analysis of functions allows the designers to ensure that the tasks arecarried out by the most efficient system component.• The AoF provides a structure to the automation decision process and alsoensures that automation decisions are traceable.• Provided that the appropriate personnel are used, the procedure is asimple and straightforward one.• Disadvantages• The process is time consuming and involves a great deal of work (e.g.HTA, stakeholder analysis, allocation of functions etc).• A multi-disciplinary team of HF specialists, potential end-users, anddesigners are required in order to conduct the analysis properly. It may bedifficult to assemble such a team.A3.3.3Mission AnalysisMission Analysis considers a comprehensive set of defined operational missionprofiles. A sub-set of profiles is selected to encompass the critical or limitingdemands on the system. Each mission profile is divided into a number of phasesand related operating modes. Each mode is then divided into task steps, whichare then categorized in terms of frequency, criticality, demands, etc. For eachidentified task the associated system functions are identified. Essentially, thisconstitutes the allocation of the task to the machine component, the humancomponent or a sharing of the function between the two (Otherwise calledAllocation of Functions, Sect A3.3.2). For each task, the necessary informationand control affordances (i.e. cues to functionality) are then identified. MissionAnalysis is simple to apply, but depends crucially on the selection of appropriatescenarios. It may be resource demanding.May 2006 Page A3-20 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• Advantages• The output of a mission analysis clearly specifies the system requirementsto the designers.• An exhaustive analysis of the potential user requirements of the system isconducted, including an analysis of user requirements and an analysis ofthe systems future use.• The design team can use the mission analysis output to guide the design,ensuring that all requirements are catered for.• Disadvantages• The procedure involved in a mission analysis appears to be very timeconsuming and laborious.• The selection of a representative mission profile is crucial. It may be thatelements of system usage are not catered for by the analysis, due to theselection of an inappropriate mission profile.• No data regarding the reliability and validity of the technique are availablein the literature.A3.3.4Task-Centred System Design (TCSD)TCSD is a simple, potentially low-cost method to evaluate system designconcepts. It identifies potential users, user tasks, and uses design scenarios andwalk-through type analyses. This is an evolutionary approach, in which designmodifications occur naturally through analyst interaction and intercommunication.It is thus less suited to formal design environments where strict design traceabilityis required. The validity of the technique is questionable in formal system design.A suitable, multi-disciplined team of analysts is required.• Advantages• TCSD is a simplistic technique to use that immediately informs systemdesign.• Design modifications occur naturally throughout the analysis.• Considers the end users and the set of tasks that the design is required tosupport.• The use of design scenarios allows the design to be evaluated, as it wouldbe used.• Correctly assembled TCSD teams can be very powerful.• The design concept is evaluated and modified as a result of a TCSDanalysis.May 2006 Page A3-21 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Not as resource intensive as other techniques.• Disadvantages• Validity and reliability of the technique is questionable.• The use of such a simplistic technique in the design of a military commandand control may be questioned.• Whilst the techniques simplicity is the main advantage associated with itsuse, this leads to criticisms regarding depth of the analysis.• Although TCSD is not as resource intensive as other techniques, it is still atime consuming technique to apply.• Assembling the TCSD team may prove difficult. For example, a TCSDanalysis for the design of a military command and control system wouldrequire numerous specialists (Human Factors, military, design, systemoperators etc). Getting such a team together in one place at one timecould prove very difficult.• TCSD generates huge amounts of data.A3.3.5Design Scenario AnalysisDesign Scenario Analysis uses a storyboard approach to assist designers topropose, visualise, evaluate and modify design concepts. In its classic form, themethod identifies actors, assumptions about the environment, goals, objectives,sequences of actions and events. The questions Who, What, Why, Where andWhen are used to create the storyboard. Design Scenario Analysis is a flexible,powerful, low-cost vehicle to evolve and communicate system design information.The method requires appropriate scenarios to be defined and a multi-disciplinedteam to contribute to the process.• Advantages• Scenario analyses offer a quick and easy method of seeing the designconcept working in future contexts. This can help highlight any designflaws and future problems associated with the initial design.• Scenario analysis is a very flexible technique.• Scenario type analyses promote broad thinking.• Scenario analyses can provide a format for communicating designconcepts and issues between designers and design teams.• Quick, cheap and easy technique to apply.• Scenario type analysis can also be used to develop operator mentalmodels.May 2006 Page A3-22 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• Scenario analysis output is immediately useful, giving a sketch drawing ofthe design in action and also highlighting any problems that may beencountered.• Any number of scenarios can be evaluated, ranging from ‘normal’ to ‘worsecase’ scenarios.• Disadvantages• Scenarios are not very precise and many potential scenarios may bemissed or left out by the analysis team.• Could be time consuming for large scenarios.• To reap the full benefit of a scenario analysis, a multi-discipline team needsto be put together. This could prove quite difficult to achieve.A3.3.6Operational Scenario DescriptionThe purpose of Operational Scenario Description is to provide a description of aset of military activities and relevant events and features.This is achieved by deriving the operational scenarios from the missions for thesystem and then deciding on the use for which the operational scenario isrequired. The scenarios are then represented as operational sequencediagrams, time-lines or event lists with background contextual data (e.g. maps,routes, contacts, threats etc.) and a supporting narrative.Operational scenarios are required from Concept stage onwards and aredeveloped in parallel with subject matter experts (SMEs) are required to provideinformation about likely scenarios.• Advantages• Operational Scenario Description provides contextual information for use intask analysis and synthesis, role definition, job and team design.• Operational Scenario Description provides the operational context fordefining user performance criteria.• Operational Scenario Description provides events and time-lines for userperformance modelling, workload analysis, link analysis, health & safetyanalysis and human reliability analysis.• Operational Scenario Description provides information about real-worldevents and time-lines for use in user-equipment interface, workstation andworkspace design.• Operational Scenario Description provides scenario data for use in userequipmentand task-role prototyping.May 2006 Page A3-23 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Operational Scenario Description provides scenario data for use in HFIassessments of the design.• Disadvantages• Operational Scenario Description analysis can be time consuming for largescenarios.• To reap the full benefit of a Operational Scenario Description analysis, amulti-discipline team needs to be put together. This could prove quitedifficult to achieve.A3.3.7Mission Critical Task IdentificationThe purpose of Mission Critical Task Identification is to isolate mission criticaltasks likely to be performed by personnel at an early stage in the systemdevelopment process. This focuses early HFI analysis in a cost-effective way.Mission Critical Task identification is achieved using operational scenarios toidentify relevant sub-systems that play a part in the scenarios, e.g. machinerycontrol and surveillance, sonar and deck handling. The allocation of functionsanalysis is used to isolate high-level user and maintainer tasks and subjectmatter experts are used to estimate the frequency, difficulty and importance oftasks to mission success. The tasks with the highest ratings are isolated for usein Human Factors trade-offs.Mission Critical Task Identification is conducted during the Concept andAssessment phases of the CADMID cycle using subject matter experts to identifymission critical tasks.• Advantages• Mission Critical Task Identification focuses early HFI analysis in a costeffectiveway• Disadvantages• Mission Critical Task Identification can be time consuming and resourceintensive.• To reap the full benefit of Mission Critical Task Identification, a multidisciplineteam needs to be put together. This could prove quite difficult toachieve.A3.3.8Operability Criteria DefinitionThe goal of Operability Criteria Definition is to provide design guidelines andassessment criteria for the user equipment interface of systems by providingcriteria for the effectiveness, efficiency, consistency (including inter-operability),and ease of learning and acceptability of user equipment interfaces.May 2006 Page A3-24 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and ToolsOperability criteria links mission-critical user performance to the specifics of thedesign, for example a user performance criterion established for time to respondto a type of threat will be linked to the way that information about new threats isdisplayed. An alert about a new threat might be signalled to the user visually bya change to the display.Operability criteria will state parameters to which such an alert must conform, e.g.it must be possible to isolate the alert within x seconds, the user response mustbe achievable within y seconds etc. The way that the alert is designed on thedisplay (using shape, colour, brightness, position etc.) can then be designed tomeet, and be evaluated against, the stated criteria.General operability principles have been defined that apply to the overall designof user-equipment interfaces. For example, visual displays should be formattedin a way that is compatible with the actions to be performed by users. Thesegeneral principles are turned into specific operability criteria relevant to the classof equipment, the type of users and the tasks they must perform. Operabilitycriteria are therefore important in terms of trials planning and planning forAcceptance.Operability criteria are defined from Assessment phase onwards so that they areavailable for the evaluation of design options including commercial off-the-shelfcomponents. Criteria should be finalised early in Manufacture. HFI specialistscan advise on the form of such criteria for each class of equipment.The definition of operability criteria is essential for mission- and safety criticalaspects of the equipment. Costs and risks of development are reduced whenoperability criteria are defined prior to equipment design.• Advantages• The definition of operability criteria is essential for mission- and safetycritical aspects of the equipment.• Costs and risks of development are reduced when operability criteria aredefined prior to equipment design.• Disadvantages• Operability Criteria Definition can be time consuming and resourceintensive.A3.3.9User Performance CriteriaThe goal of User Performance Criteria is to develop quantitative and qualitativeexpressions of the human performance that must be achievable within the wholesystem. These are used to identify design requirements, to conduct designassessments and to perform trade-offs between system options.Human performance criteria are developed by decomposition of the overallsystem performance requirements. The allocation of functions will determine theoverall scope of human activity in the system and outline broad types ofMay 2006 Page A3-25 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)performance that must be achieved. User performance criteria are generated formission-critical tasks and refined during task analysis and task synthesis, e.g.time to respond to a system detection of a specified type of contact. Standardsmay also establish general parameters of human performance that must besupported, e.g. legibility of displayed information.User performance criteria support a wide range of design activities. Userequipmentinterface, workstation, workspace and environmental design shouldoptimise achievement of the required levels of user performance. Task & Roleperformance modelling and prototyping should focus on mission-criticalperformance issues. If user performance criteria cannot be achieved then tradeoffsmay be required between system options in order to identify the optimalbalance that can be achieved. User performance is also a factor that needs to besystematically assessed during health and safety analysis.• Advantages• User Performance Criteria is essential in order to identify designrequirements, to conduct design assessments and to perform trade-offsbetween system options.• Costs and risks of development are reduced when User PerformanceCriteria is applied defined prior to equipment design.• Disadvantages• User Performance Criteria can be time consuming and resource intensive.May 2006 Page A3-26 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and ToolsA3.4 Task Analysis TechniquesTask analysis techniques are used to understand and represent human andsystem performance in a particular task or scenario and the task analysis oftask(s) is the next natural step after the data collection process. However taskanalysis is both a technique-specific and a generic term.When used in the specific sense, it relates to techniques that analyse a set ofexisting, or at least pre-defined, user, operator or maintainer tasks and activitiesas part of the operation of a socio-technical system. Through direct or indirectobservation, interaction with operators and maintainers and appropriate datarecording, human tasks are identified, measured, analysed, decomposed andinterrelated to a level of granularity that suits the analyst’s purpose.When used in the generic sense, the term task analysis is often used to describea set of related techniques that include task decomposition, task description, andtask synthesis, where sets of tasks are assembled to form higher order taskdescriptors.HF practitioners use a range of different techniques depending on the goal of thetask analysis, however some of the more commonly used techniques include:• Hierarchical Task Analysis (HTA)• Tabular Task Analysis (TTA)• Task Decomposition• Verbal Protocol Analysis• Timeline Analysis• Critical Path Analysis (CPA)• Goals, Operators, Methods and Selection Rules (GOMS)• Keystroke Level Model (KLM)It should be noted that the concept of task analysis has evolved and nowencompasses the cognitive, team and decision-making aspects of tasks andwork analysis and these are covered later in this annex, see under Sect A3.5Cognitive Task Analysis Techniques, Sect A3.6 Mental Workload AssessmentTechniques, Sect A3.8 Team Design Techniques and Sect A3.9 TeamPerformance Analysis TechniquesThe use of Task Analysis techniques can be extremely resource and timeconsumingand therefore two key tenets to be considered when conducting taskanalysis are:• Task Analysis should be applied where necessary to obtain data that isknown to be required and does not already exist. A search for legacysystem task analyses that may provide a starting point is recommended.• Task Analysis needs only to be conducted to the required level ofgranularity. In many cases, a high-level (and therefore less resourceMay 2006 Page A3-27 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)demanding) task analysis will suffice. However, in a given project situation,it may be justifiable to carry out a fully detailed task analysis that cansupport several phase of design, rather than to undertake several morelimited analyses at various project phases.The development of a task analysis is often an iterative process, as the taskanalysis will evolve in accordance with the complexity and maturity of a systemdesign.In general, moderate degrees of validity may be claimed for well-executed TaskAnalyses. However, due to inter-analyst variability, only low levels of reliabilitymay be achievableThe following sub-sections provide an overview of the identified 2 task analysistechniques.A3.4.1Hierarchical Task AnalysisHTA involves breaking down the task under analysis into a hierarchy of goals,operations and plans. Tasks are broken down into hierarchical set of tasks, subtasks and plans. The goals, operations and plans categories used in HTA aredescribed below.1. Goals – The unobservable task goals associated with the task in question.2. Operations – The observable behaviours or activities that the operator hasto perform in order to accomplish the goal of the task in question.3. Plans – The unobservable decisions and planning made on behalf of theoperator.HTA is widely used in HF and often forms the first step in a number of analyses,such as HEI, HRA and mental workload assessment; see also Sect A3.9.2 for itsapplication in HTA Team (HTA-T).• Advantages• HTA is a technique that is both easy to learn and easy to implement.• HTA is the starting point for numerous Human Factors techniques.• Quick to use in most instances.• Comprehensive technique covers all sub-tasks of the task in question.• HTA has been used extensively in a wide range of contexts.• Conducting an HTA gives the user a great insight into the task underanalysis.2 For details see ‘Human Factors Design & Evaluation Methods Review’ [Ref 32].May 2006 Page A3-28 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• HTA is an excellent technique to use when requiring a task description forfurther analysis. If performed correctly, the HTA should depict everythingthat needs to be done in order to complete the task in question.• As a generic method HTA is adaptable to a wide range of purposes.• Tasks can be analysed to any required level of detail, depending on thepurpose.• When used correctly HTA provides an exhaustive analysis of the problemaddressed.• Disadvantages• Provides mainly descriptive information rather than analytical information.• HTA contains little that can be used directly to provide design solutions.• HTA does not cater for the cognitive components of a task.• Can be time consuming for the more complex and larger tasks.• Requires handling by an analyst well trained in a variety of methods of datacollection and in relevant Human Factors principles.• Requires time in proportion to the complexity of the task and the depth ofthe analysis.A3.4.2Tabular Task AnalysisTabular Task Analysis (TTA) is a task description technique that can be usedanalyse a particular task or scenario in terms of the required task steps and theinterface used. A TTA takes each bottom level task step from a HTA andanalyses specific aspects of the task step, such as displays and controls used,potential errors, time constraints, feedback, triggering events etc. The make-upof the TTA is dependent upon the nature of the analysis required. For example, ifthe purpose of the TTA is to evaluate the error potential of the task(s) underanalysis, then the columns used will be based upon errors, their causes and theirconsequences.• Advantages• Flexible technique, allowing any factors associated with the task to beassessed.• A TTA analysis has the potential to provide a very comprehensive analysisof a particular task.• The method is entirely generic and can be used in any domain.• TTA provides a much more detailed description of tasks than traditionaltask analysis techniques do.May 2006 Page A3-29 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• As the analyst has control over the TTA categories used, potentially anyaspect of a task can be evaluated. In particular, the technique could beadapted to assess the cognitive components associated with tasks (goals,decisions, SA).• Potentially extremely exhaustive, if the correct categories are used.• Disadvantages• As the TTA is potentially so exhaustive, it is a very time consumingtechnique to apply and analyse. The HTA only serves to add to the highapplication time. Furthermore, obtaining information about the tasks(observation, interview etc) creates even more work for the analyst.• Data regarding the reliability and validity of the technique is not available inthe literature.• A HTA for the task/system under analysis may suffice in most cases.A3.4.3Task DecompositionTask decomposition begins with a task description, such as a HTA describinghow each step of the task under analysis is performed. The analyst then gathersfurther information about specific aspects of each task step (such as time taken,controls used, cues initiating each action etc). The information for each of thetask steps can then be presented using a set of sub-headings. This allows therelevant information for each task step to be decomposed into a series ofstatements regarding the task. The categories used to decompose the tasksteps should be chosen by the analyst based on the requirements of theanalysis. There are numerous decomposition categories that can be used andnew categories can be developed if required by the analysis.It is recommended that the analyst should develop a set of specific categories forthe system under analysis. The task decomposition technique can be used atany stage in the design process, either in the early design stages to provide adetailed task analysis and determine which aspects of the task require furthersystem design inputs or to evaluate existing operational systems or devices.• Advantages• Through choosing which decomposition categories to use, the analyst candetermine the direction of the analysis.• Flexible technique, allowing any factors associated with the task to beassessed.• A task decomposition analysis has the potential to provide a verycomprehensive analysis of a particular task.• The structure of the method ensures that all issues of interest areconsidered and evaluated for each of the task steps.May 2006 Page A3-30 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• The method is entirely generic and can be used in any domain.• Task decomposition provides a much more detailed description of tasksthan traditional task analysis techniques do.• As the analyst has control over the decomposition categories used,potentially any aspect of a task can be evaluated. In particular, thetechnique could be adapted to assess the cognitive componentsassociated with tasks (goals, decisions, SA).• Potentially extremely exhaustive, if the correct decomposition categoriesare used.• Disadvantages• As the task decomposition is potentially so exhaustive, it is a very timeconsuming technique to apply and analyse. The HTA only serves to add tothe high application time. Furthermore, obtaining information about thetasks (observation, interview etc) creates even more work for the analyst.• Task decomposition can be laborious to perform, involving observations,interviews etc.• The development of decomposition categories would also add further timecosts. For use in command and control military environments, it isapparent that a set of categories would have to be developed.A3.4.4Verbal Protocol AnalysisVerbal Protocol Analysis (VPA) is used to make ‘valid inferences’ from thecontent of discourse (DTC199 - Weber 1990). In other words, VPA is used toderive the processes, cognitive and physical, that an individual uses to perform atask. VPA involves creating a written transcript of operator behaviour as theyperform the task under analysis. The transcript is based upon the operator‘thinking aloud’ as he conducts the task under analysis. VPA has been usedextensively as a means of gaining an insight into the cognitive aspects ofcomplex behaviours.• Advantages• Verbal protocol analysis provides a rich data source.• Protocol analysis is particularly effective when used to analyse sequencesof activities.• Verbalisations can provide a genuine insight into cognitive processes.• Domain experts can provide excellent verbal data.• Verbal protocol analysis has been used extensively in a wide variety ofdomains.May 2006 Page A3-31 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Simple to conduct with the right equipment.• Disadvantages• Data analysis (encoding) can become extremely laborious and timeconsuming.• Verbal Protocol Analysis is a very time consuming method to apply (datacollection and data analysis).• It is difficult to verbalise cognitive behaviour. Researchers have beencautioned in the past for relying on verbal protocol data (DTC134 - Militello2000).• Verbal commentary can sometimes serve to change the nature of the task.• Complex tasks involving high demand can often lead to a reduced quantityof verbalisations (DTC196 - Walker 2004).• Strict procedure is often not adhered to fully.• VPA is prone to bias on the participant’s behalf.A3.4.5Timeline AnalysisAlthough not a set methodology, timeline analysis is an approach that can beused in order to depict scenarios in terms of tasks and their associated taskperformance times. Timeline analysis can be used to display the functional andtemporal requirements of a task. Timeline analysis can be used bothpredicatively and retrospectively, and the output is typically a graph. Timelineanalysis can also combined with workload analysis to represent the workloadassociated with each task step. In terms of analysing command and control andteam-based tasks, the appeal of timeline analysis lies in the fact that it couldpotentially depict individual and team task steps over time• Advantages• Timeline graphs can be used to compare the performance timesassociated with two different systems or designs.• Timeline analysis could be used to represent team-based tasks andparallel activity.• Timeline analysis can be used to highlight problematic tasks or tasksequences in the design of systems and processes.• Workload analysis can be mapped directly onto a timeline graph. Thismakes for a very powerful analysis.• Timeline analysis is a simple technique requiring little training.• Requires very few resources once data collection phase is complete.May 2006 Page A3-32 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• Disadvantages• The reliability and validity of the technique is questionable.• Observation data is often flawed by a number of biases.• When used predicatively, timeline analysis can only model error freeperformance.• Initial data collection phase is time consuming and resource intensive.A3.4.6Goals, Operators, Methods and Selection Rules TechniqueThe Goals, Operators, Methods and Selection Rules (GOMS) technique is part ofa family of HCI orientated techniques that is used to provide a description ofhuman performance in terms of the user’s goals, operators, methods andselection rules. GOMS attempts to define the user’s goals, decompose thesegoals into sub-goals and demonstrate how the goals are achieved through userinteraction. GOMS can be used to provide a description of how a user performsa task, to predict performance times and to predict human learning. Whilst theGOMS techniques are most commonly used for the evaluation of existingdesigns or systems, it is also feasible that they could be used to inform thedesign process, particularly to determine the impact of a design on the user.The GOMS technique is based upon the assumption that the user’s interactionwith a computer is similar to solving problems. Problems are broken down intosub-problems, and these sub-problems are broken down further. Four basiccomponents of human interaction are used within the GOMS technique. Theseare defined below:1. Goals – The goal represents exactly what the user wishes to achievethrough the interaction. The goals are decomposed until an appropriatestopping point is achieved.2. Operators – The operators are the motor or cognitive actions that the userperforms during the interaction. The goals are achieved throughperforming the operators.3. Methods – The methods describe the user’s procedures for accomplishingthe goals in terms of operators and sub-goals. Often there are more thanone set of methods available to the user.4. Selection Rules – When there is more than one method for achieving agoal available to a user, selection rules highlight which of the availablemethods should be used.• Advantages• GOMS can be used to provide a hierarchical description of task activity.• The methods part of a GOMS analysis allows the analyst to describe anumber of different potential task routes.May 2006 Page A3-33 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• GOMS analysis can aid designers in choosing between systems, asperformance and learning times can be specified.• Disadvantages• GOMS is a difficult technique to apply. Far simpler task analysistechniques are available.• Time consuming.• Appears to be restricted to HCI. As it was developed specifically for use inHCI, most of the language is HCI orientated.• A high level of training and practice would be required.• GOMS does not deal with error occurrence.• GOMS analysis is limited as it only models error-free, expert performance.• Context is not taken into consideration.• The GOMS methods remain largely unvalidated outside of HCI.A3.4.7Critical Path Analysis (CPA)Critical Path Analysis (CPA) is a project management tool that is used tocalculate the combination of tasks that will most affect the time taken to completea job. Any change in the tasks on the ‘critical path’ will change the overall jobcompletion time (and changes in tasks off the critical path, within limits, can beaccommodated without problem). Generally the critical path is defined both interms of time, so that a task will need to be completed before a subsequent taskcan begin, and modality, so that two tasks sharing the same modality must beperformed in series.An example of CPA in use is when a telephone company wanted to re-equip itsexchanges with new computer equipment. Critical path analysis was used toinvestigate the relationship between computer use and other activities in callhandling. It was shown that computer use did not lie on the critical path, soinvestment in such equipment would not have improved performance.• Advantages• CPA allows the analyst gain a better understanding of the task via splittingthe task into the activities that need to be carried out in order to ensuresuccessful task completion.• CPA allows the consideration of parallel unit task activity.• CPA gives predicted performance task times for the full task and also foreach task step.• CPA determines a logical, temporal description of the task in question.May 2006 Page A3-34 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• CPA does not require a great deal of training.• Structured and comprehensive procedure.• Can accommodate parallelism in user performance.• Provides reasonable fit with observed data.• It is suggested that CPA can be used to address the shortcomings of KLM(see Sect A3.4.8).• Disadvantages• Can be tedious and time consuming for complex tasks.• CPA only models error free performance and cannot deal withunpredictable events such as the ones seen in man-machine interactions.• Modality can be difficult to define.• Can only be used for activities that can be described in terms ofperformance times.• Times not available for all actions.• Can be overly simplistic, particularly for tasks that are mainly cognitive innature.A3.4.8Keystroke Level Model (KLM)The Keystroke Level model (KLM) is a very simple technique that is used topredict task execution time in HCI. Part of the GOMS family of methods, KLMuses a number of pre-determined operators to predict expert error free taskexecution times. KLM uses four physical motor operators, one mental operatorand one system response operator. These are:1. Keystroking (K) – Represents a keystroke or button press (on any buttondevice)2. Pointing (P) – Represents pointing to a target on a display with a mouse3. Homing (H) – Represents the hand movement of the user when movinghis hands between keys, buttons etc.4. Drawing (D) – Represents the drawing of straight line segments using amouse.5. Mental operator (M) – Represents the user’s mental preparation toexecute a physical operation.6. System response operator (R) – Represents the system response time.May 2006 Page A3-35 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)Each operator has an associated execution time. Total task performance time isequal to the sum of each operator exhibited in the task.• Advantages• KLM is a very easy and quick technique to use.• KLM requires very little training (DTC168 - Stanton & Young 1999).• KLM has been used in different domains, such as driving (DTC168 -Stanton & Young 1999).• KLM can be used to quickly compare the task times for two differentdevices or systems.• Gives an immediately useful output of estimated task performance time.• Encouraging reliability and validity data (DTC168 - Stanton & Young 1999).• Disadvantages• KLM was designed specifically for computer-based tasks (HCI). Newoperators may have to be developed for the technique to be used in otherdomains.• KLM only models error free expert performance.• KLM does not take context into account.• There is limited validation evidence associated with the use of KLM outsideof HCI.• KLM assumes that all performance is serial and cannot deal with Parallelactivity.• KLM ignores other unit task activity and also variation in performance.• KLM ignores flexible human activity (DTC018 - Baber and Mellor 2001).May 2006 Page A3-36 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and ToolsA3.5 Cognitive Task Analysis TechniquesRather than focussing on physical actions and human-to-humancommunications, Cognitive Task Analysis (CTA) techniques seek to examine theinternal data and mental processes of those involved in operation of the system.As such, they may reveal data that would otherwise not be revealed usingordinary task analysis techniques. The use of CTA is indicated wherever highoperator mental workload or high mental process reliability is needed.A number of CTA techniques have been developed for different applications,however four of the most common and accepted are:• Cognitive Walkthrough• Applied Cognitive Task Analysis• Critical Incident Technique• Critical Decision MethodCTA may utilise several of the data collection and tasks analysis techniquesdescribed in previous section. CTA requires the use of trained and skilledanalysts, and may be highly resource demanding. Whilst the CTA techniqueslisted here have been subjected to varying degrees of formal validation,questions remain over their reliability.The following sub-sections provide an overview of the identified 3 CTA techniques.A3.5.1Cognitive WalkthroughThe cognitive walkthrough technique is designed for the evaluation of HMIsduring the early and formative stages of their design in order to highlight potentialproblems and shortcomings. It could also be used retrospectively to evaluatecompleted or realised HMI designs. The technique comprises a set of criteriathat the analyst uses to evaluate the HMI in relation to each of the required usertasks. Although originally developed to support the design of software-basedinterfaces, the technique has more general applicability. The technique is basedon theories of exploratory learning and focuses on the ease with which the abilityto use of the interface can be acquired. Each task step is considered in turn.The analyst considers, inter-alia, goals and goal mismatches, availability of actionchoice, labelling, links and time constraints. The techniques must be applied bya skilled analyst.• Advantages• The cognitive walkthrough technique presents a structured approach tohighlighting the design flaws of an interface.• Can be used very early in the design cycle of an interface.3 For details see ‘Human Factors Design & Evaluation Methods Review’ [Ref 32].May 2006 Page A3-37 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Designed to be used by non-cognitive psychology professionals.• The cognitive walkthrough technique is based upon sound underpinningtheory, including Norman’s model of action execution.• Easy to learn and apply.• The output from a cognitive walkthrough analysis appears to be veryuseful.• Disadvantages• The cognitive walkthrough technique is limited to cater only for ease oflearning of an interface.• Requires validation.• May be time consuming for more complex tasks.• Recorded data would require in depth analysis in order to be useful.• A large part of the analysis is based upon analyst skill. For example, thepercentage estimates used with the walkthrough criteria require a ‘bestguess’.• Cognitive walkthrough requires access to the personnel involved in thetask(s) under analysis.A3.5.2Applied Cognitive Task AnalysisApplied Cognitive Task Analysis (ACTA) is a toolkit of interview techniques thatcan be used to elicit information regarding cognitive demands associated with thetask or scenario under analysis. The techniques within the ACTA framework canbe used to determine the cognitive skills and demands associated with aparticular task or scenario. The output of ACTA is typically used to aid systemdesign. The ACTA procedure consists of the following components:1. Task diagram interview - The task diagram interview is used to give theanalyst an overview of the task under analysis. The task diagram interviewalso allows the analyst to identify any cognitive aspects of the task thatrequire further analysis.2. Knowledge audit - During the knowledge audit part of ACTA, the analystdetermines the expertise required for each part of the task. The analystprobes subject matter experts (SME’s) for specific examples.3. Simulation Interview - The simulation interview allows the analyst toprobe specific cognitive aspects of the task based upon a specific scenario.4. Cognitive demands table - The cognitive demands table is used to groupand sort the data.May 2006 Page A3-38 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and ToolsSystems designers can use ACTA: no training in cognitive psychology isrequired. However, the analyst must be trained in the technique and this trainingload could be significant.• Advantages• Analysts using the technique do not require training in cognitivepsychology.• Requires fewer resources than traditional cognitive task analysistechniques (DTC134 - Militello 2000).• Research information indicates that participants found the ACTAtechniques easy to use and flexible, and that the output of the interviewswas clear and the knowledge representations to be useful.• Probes and questions are provided for the analyst, facilitating relevant dataextraction.• Disadvantages• The quality of data is very much dependent upon the skill of the analyst.• The consistency of such a technique is questionable.• The technique would appear to be time consuming in its application.• The training time for the ACTA techniques is also quite high.• The analysis of the data appears to be a laborious process.• As with most cognitive task analysis techniques, ACTA requires furthervalidation. At the moment there is little in the way of validation studiesassociated with the ACTA techniques.• The quality of the data obtained depends both on the SME’s used and theanalyst applying the techniques.A3.5.3Critical Incident TechniqueCritical Incident Technique (CIT) uses interview techniques to facilitate operatorrecall of critical incidents or events, including decisions made and actions takenby themselves, and by others involved in the incident. The technique is typicallyapplied to an existing system, using real-word incident data and experience. Intheory, it could be used in a predictive manner in the design of a new system,provided that the SMEs involved had a sound grasp of the intended system andits characteristics. A simple set of probes is used to elicit SME recall andresponse.The analyst constructs an accurate timeline of the incident. Significant eventsare recorded on the timeline, together with operator actions, re-actions, and, asfar as possible, operator thought processes and insights as they occurred.May 2006 Page A3-39 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)Based on the timeline information, the analyst identifies specific aspects of theincident that require more detailed analysis, such as person-to-personcommunications, interpretation of alarm information, etc. A further set of probesis used to explore operator thinking, reasoning and decision-making.The technique is resource friendly. It examines previously identified incidents,possibly those experienced frequently. It does not therefore explore novel orhighly infrequent situations. The cognitive probes used may require modificationto a particular domain or incident type. The reliability of the method may not behigh, since it relies on SME memory and SME verbalisation skills. Within a teamof interviewees, individual SME recall and interpretation of the same an incidentmay differ.• Advantages• The CIT can be used to elicit specific information regarding decisionmaking in complex systems.• The technique requires relatively little effort to apply.• The incidents, on which the technique concentrates, have alreadyoccurred, removing the need for costly, time consuming to construct eventsimulations.• CIT is easy to apply.• Has been used extensively in a number of domains and has the potentialto be used anywhere.• Real life incidents are analysed using the CIT, ensuring a morecomprehensive, realistic analysis than simulation techniques.• CIT is a very flexible technique.• Cost effective.• High face validity (DTC115 - Kirwan & Ainsworth 1992).• Disadvantages• The reliability of such a technique is questionable. Klein (DTC117 - Klein &Armstrong 2003) suggests that methods that analyse retrospectiveincidents are associated with concerns of data reliability, due to evidenceof memory degradation.• A high level of expertise in interview techniques is required.• After the fact data collection has a number of concerns associated with it.Such as degradation, correlation with performance etc.• Relies upon the accurate recall of events.• Operators may not wish to recall events or incidents in which thereperformance is under scrutiny.May 2006 Page A3-40 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• Analyst(s) may struggle to obtain accurate descriptions of past events.A3.5.4Critical Decision MethodSimilar to CIT, the Critical Decision Method (CDM) is a semi-structured interviewmethod that uses a set of cognitive probes to explore expert decision-making.The authors claim that the method can identify training needs, help to developtraining materials and support expert system development. CDM has beenapplied in the Military domain.Two analysts are required, working as a pair. Video and audio recording facilitiesare needed. One or more defined scenarios or incidents are analysed. CDM istypically used to examine off-normal or emergency situations. The Subject SMEprovides a verbal description of the incident from inception to ‘closure’. Theanalysts construct an accurate time line. Significant events are also recorded onthe timeline, together with operator actions, re-actions, and, as far as possible,operator thought processes and insights as they occurred.Decision points identified in the incident description are then further analysedusing a set of specific probes covering goals, options, knowledge used, situationawareness, hypotheses, and time influences.The method is moderately resource friendly. It examines previously identifiedincidents, possibly those experienced frequently. It does not therefore explorenovel or highly infrequent situations. The cognitive probes used are well proven.The reliability of the method may not be high, since it relies on SME memory andSME verbalisation skills. Within a team of interviewees, individual SME recalland interpretation of the same an incident may differ.• Advantages• The CDM can be used to elicit specific information regarding decisionmaking in complex systems.• The technique requires relatively little effort to apply.• The incidents, on which the technique concentrates, have alreadyoccurred, removing the need for costly, time consuming to construct eventsimulations.• Once familiar with the technique, CDM is easy to apply• Has been used extensively in a number of domains and has the potentialto be used anywhere.• Real life incidents are analysed using the CDM, ensuring a morecomprehensive, realistic analysis than simulation techniques.• The cognitive probes used in the CDM have been used for a number ofyears and are efficient at capturing the decision making process (DTC117 -Klein & Armstrong 2003).May 2006 Page A3-41 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Disadvantages• The reliability of such a technique is questionable. Klein & Armstrong(DTC117) suggests that methods that analyse retrospective incidents areassociated with concerns of data reliability, due to evidence of memorydegradation.• CDM will never be an exact description of an incident.• The CDM is a resource intensive technique. The data analysis part isespecially time consuming.• A high level of expertise and training is required in order to use the CDM toits maximum effect.• The CDM requires a team (minimum of 2) of interviewer’s for eachinterviewee.• The CDM relies upon interviewee verbal reports in order to reconstructincidents. How far a verbal report accurately represents the cognitiveprocesses of the decision maker is questionable. Interviewees could easilymisrepresent the facts. Certainly, glorification of events would be oneworry associated with this sort of analysis.• After the fact data collection has a number of concerns associated with it.Such as degradation, correlation with performance etc.May 2006 Page A3-42 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and ToolsA3.6 Mental Workload Assessment TechniquesThe increased use of technology within the world we live today places anincreased demand upon the operators of modern systems and the assessment ofmental workload (MWL) is therefore of the utmost importance during the design,development and evaluation of new systems. Within a military environment,Command and Control personnel are subjected to demands imposes anincreased demand on the users of assessment of mental workload.There are a broad range of assessment techniques that can be used to assessMWL and influence design during the development of a system as well as toassess the impact of MWL on an existing system. These include:• Physiological measures• Primary and Secondary task performance measures• Task Load Index (NASA-TLX)• Defence Research Agency Workload Scales (DRAWS)• Subjective Workload Assessment Technique (SWAT)• Subjective Workload Dominance (SWORD)• Workload Profile Technique• Cognitive Task Load Analysis• Pro-SWORD• Modified Cooper-Harper Scales• Individual Self-Assessment (ISA)The following sub-sections provide an overview of the identified 4 MWLtechniques.A3.6.1Physiological measuresThe use of physiological measures as indicators of MWL is based upon theassumption that as task demand increases, marked changes in various operatorphysiological systems are apparent. There are numerous physiologicalmeasurement techniques available to the HF analyst including heart rate, heartrate variability, endogenous blink rate, brain activity, electro-dermal response,eye movements, papillary responses and event-related potentials. Many of thesetechniques are intrusive, and require specialist equipment and specialistoperators to conduct the tests and analyse the results. Thus they belong to thelaboratory, rather than the industrial workplace.4 For details see ‘Human Factors Design & Evaluation Methods Review’ [Ref 32].May 2006 Page A3-43 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Advantages• Various physiological techniques have demonstrated a sensitivity to taskdemand variations.• When using physiological techniques, data is recorded continuouslythroughout task performance.• Physiological measurements can often be taken in a real world setting,removing the need for a simulation of the task.• Advances in technology have resulted in an increased accuracy andsensitivity of the various physiological measurement tools.• Physiological measurement does not interfere with primary taskperformance.• Disadvantages• The data is easily confounded by extraneous interference (DTC209 -Young & Stanton 2004)• The equipment used to measure physiological responses is typicallyphysically obtrusive.• The equipment is also typically expensive to acquire, temperamental anddifficult to operate.• Physiological data is very difficult to obtain and analyse.• In order to use physiological techniques effectively, the analyst(s) requiresa thorough understanding of physiological responses to workload.• It may be difficult to use certain equipment in the field (e.g. brain and eyemeasurement equipment).A3.6.2Primary and Secondary Task Performance MeasuresAnother popular laboratory approach is the use of Primary and Secondary taskperformance measures. Here, Primary task performance measures of MWLinvolve assessing the suitable aspects of participant performance during thetask(s) under analysis, assuming that an increase in workload will facilitate aperformance decrement of some sort.The secondary task performance measures involve the addition of a secondarytask, whereby participants are required to maintain performance on the primarytask and also perform a secondary task as and when the primary task allows.The secondary task is designed to compete for the same resources as theprimary task and any differences in workload between primary tasks are thenreflected in the performance of the secondary task.May 2006 Page A3-44 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and ToolsExamples of secondary task used in the past include tracking tasks, memorytasks, rotated figures tasks and mental arithmetic tasks.• Advantages• Primary task performance measures offer a direct index of performance.• Primary task performance measures are particularly effective whenmeasuring workload in tasks that are lengthy in duration (DTC209 - Young& Stanton 2004).• Primary task measures are also useful when measuring operator overload.• Requires no further effort on behalf of the analyst to set up and record, asprimary task performance is normally measured anyway.• Secondary task performance measures are effective at discriminatingbetween tasks when no difference was observed assessing performancealone.• Primary and secondary task performance measures are easy to use, as acomputer typically records the required data.• When using a battery of MWL assessment techniques to determine MWL,the data obtained can be crosschecked for reliability purposes.• Disadvantages• Primary task performance measures alone may not distinguish betweendifferent levels of workload, particularly minimal ones. Different operatorsmay still achieve the same performance levels under completely differentworkload conditions.• Young & Stanton (DTC209 - 2004) suggest that primary task performanceis not a reliable measure when used in isolation.• Secondary task performance measures have been found to be onlysensitive to gross changes in MWL.• Secondary task performance measures are intrusive to primary taskperformance.• Great care is required during the design and selection of the secondarytask to be used. The analyst must ensure that the secondary taskcompetes for the same resources as the primary task. According to Young& Stanton (DTC209 - 2004), the secondary task must be carefully designedin order to be a true measure of spare attentional capacity.• Extra work and resources are required in developing the secondary taskperformance measure.• The techniques need to be used together to be effective.May 2006 Page A3-45 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Using primary and secondary task performance measures may proveexpensive, as simulators and computers are required.A3.6.3Task Load Index (NASA-TLX)The NASA Task Load Index (TLX) (DTC072 - Hart and Staveland 1988) is amulti-dimensional rating tool is a subjective workload assessment tool thatworkload rating based upon a weighted average of six workload sub-scaleratings. The six sub-scales and their associated definitions are given below:1. Mental demand – How much thinking, deciding, calculating, remembering,looking, searching etc was required and was the task easy or demanding,simple or complex, exacting or forgiving?2. Physical demand – How much physical activity was required e.g. pushing,pulling, turning, controlling, activating etc. Was the task easy ordemanding, slow or brisk, slack or strenuous, restful or laborious?3. Temporal demand – How much time pressure did you feel due to the rateor pace at which the tasks or task elements occurred? Was the pace slowand leisurely or rapid and frantic?4. Effort – How hard did you have to work (Mentally and physically) toaccomplish your level of performance?5. Performance – How successful do you think you were in accomplishingthe goals of the task set by the analyst (or yourself)? How satisfied wereyou with your performance in accomplishing these goals.6. Frustration level – How insecure, discouraged, irritated, stressed andannoyed versus secure, gratified, content, relaxed and complacent did youfeel during the task?NASA-TLX is the most commonly used subjective workload assessmenttechnique and has been applied to the civil and military aviation, driving, andNuclear power plant control room operation and air traffic control domains.• Advantages• NASA TLX provides a quick and simple technique for estimating operatorworkload.• NASA TLX sub-scales are generic, so the technique can be applied to anydomain.• The NASA TLX has been tested thoroughly in the past and has also beenthe subject of a number of validation studies.• The provision of the TLX software package removes most of the work forthe analyst, resulting in a very quick and simple procedure. For thosewithout computers, the TLX is also available in a pen and paper format.• Probably the most widely used technique for estimating operator workload.May 2006 Page A3-46 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• The NASA TLX is a multidimensional approach to workload assessmentthat is non-intrusive to primary task performance.• A number of studies have shown its superiority over the SWAT technique.• Disadvantages• When administered on-line, the TLX can be intrusive.• When administered after the fact, participants may have forgotten highworkload aspects of the task.• Workload ratings may be correlated with task performance e.g. subjectswho performed poorly on the primary task may rate their workload as veryhigh and vice versa. This is not always the case.• Weighting procedure is laborious and adds more time to the procedure.A3.6.4Defence Research Agency Workload Scales (DRAWS)DRAWS is a subjective mental workload assessment technique that wasdeveloped in order to investigate the construct of workload and its underlyingdimensions. It is multi-dimensional similar to the NASA TLX technique in that itinvolves participants being queried for their subjective ratings of the four differentworkload dimensions:1. Input demand – the demand associated with the acquisition of informationfrom any external sources.2. Central demand – the demand associated with the operators cognitiveprocesses involved in the task.3. Output demand – the demand associated with any required responsesinvolved in the task.4. Time pressure – the demand associated with any time constraintsimposed upon the operator.DRAWS is typically administered on-line and involves verbally querying theparticipant for a subjective rating between 0 and 100 for each dimension duringtask performance.• Advantages• DRAWS is a very easy technique to administer, requiring only fourworkload ratings and is subsequently very quick in its application.• Sensitivity to workload variation has been demonstrated (DTC099 - Jordan,Farmer & Belyavin 1995).• The workload dimensions used in the DRAWS technique were validated ina number of studies during the development of the technique.May 2006 Page A3-47 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Although developed for application in the aviation domain, the workloaddimensions are generic, allowing the technique to be applied in anydomain.• Disadvantages• Intrusive to task performance.• Limited applications reported in the literature.• The technique has not been used repeatedly, unlike other subjectiveworkload assessment techniques such as NASA TLX or SWAT.• The workload ratings may correlate highly with performance.• Limited validation evidence is available in the literature. The techniquerequires considerable further testing.A3.6.5Subjective Workload Assessment Technique (SWAT)SWAT is a workload assessment technique that was developed to assess pilotworkload in cockpit environments. SWAT is probably one the most commonlyused of the subjective techniques to measure operator workload and like NASATLX, SWAT is a multidimensional tool that uses three dimensions:1. Time load – the extent to which a task is performed within a time limit andthe extent to which a multiple tasks must be performed concurrently.2. Mental effort load – the associated attentional demands of a task, such asattending to multiple sources of information and performing calculation.3. Stress load – the operator variables such as fatigue, level of training andemotional state.After an initial weighting procedure, participants are asked to rate eachdimension (on a scale of 1 to 3) and from this a workload score is thencalculated.• Advantages• SWAT is a multidimensional approach to workload assessment that isquick, simple and unobtrusive when administered after the event.• The SWAT workload dimensions are generic, so the technique can beapplied to any domain.• The SWAT technique is one of the most widely used and well knowsubjective workload assessment techniques available, and has beensubjected to a number of validation studies.• The Pro-SWAT variation allows the technique to be used predicatively.May 2006 Page A3-48 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• Disadvantages• SWAT can be intrusive if administered on-line.• When SWAT is administered after the fact, participants may have forgottenhigh or low workload aspects of the task.• Pro-SWAT has yet to be validated thoroughly and is still in its infancy.• In a number of validation studies it has been reported that the NASA TLX issuperior to SWAT in terms of sensitivity, particularly for low mentalworkloads.• The initial SWAT combination ranking procedure is very time consuming(No citation reference - Luximon & Goonetilleke 2001).• Workload ratings may be correlated with task performance e.g. subjectswho performed poorly on the primary task may rate their workload as veryhigh and vice versa. This is not always the case.A3.6.6Subjective Workload Dominance (SWORD) TechniqueSWORD is a subjective workload assessment technique that has been used bothretrospectively that uses a paired comparison of tasks in order to provide a ratingof workload for each individual task.SWORD is administered post trial and participants are required to rate one task’sdominance over another in terms of workload imposed.• Advantages• SWORD is easy to learn and use, and is very quick in its application.• It is non intrusive, has a high face validity and has been demonstrated tohave a sensitivity to workload variations.• Disadvantages• The SWORD technique has not been as widely used as other workloadassessment techniques, such as SWAT and the NASA TLX.• Data is collected post-trial.A3.6.7Workload Profile TechniqueThe workload profile technique is a multi-dimensional subjective mental workloadassessment technique that is based upon participant’s rating the demandimposed by the task under analysis for each dimension as defined by multipleresource theory. The workload dimensions are:• Perceptual/Central processingMay 2006 Page A3-49 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Response selection and execution• Spatial processing• Verbal processing• Visual processing• Auditory processing• Manual output• Speech outputOnce the task(s) under analysis are completed participants assign a ratingbetween 0 (no demand) and 1 (maximum demand) to each of the workloaddimensions. The ratings for each task are then summed in order to determine anoverall workload rating.• Advantages• The technique is based upon sound underpinning theory (MultipleResource Theory).• It is a multi-dimensional MWL assessment technique that is quick and easyto use and requires minimal analyst training.• As well as offering an overall task workload rating, the output also providesa workload rating for each of the eight-workload dimensions.• As the technique is applied post-trial, it can be applied in the field.• Disadvantages• It may be difficult for participants to rate workload on a scale of 0 to 1. Amore sophisticated scale may be required in order to gain a moreappropriate measure of workload.• There is little evidence of actual use of the technique.• Limited validation evidence associated with the technique.• Participants require an understanding of workload and multiple resourcetheory and are therefore are likely to require briefing before conducting theassessment.• In a study comparing the NASA-TLX, SWAT and workload profiletechniques, it has been reported that there were problems with some of theparticipants understanding the different dimensions used in the workloadprofile technique.May 2006 Page A3-50 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and ToolsA3.6.8Cognitive Task Load AnalysisCognitive task load analysis (CTLA) is typically in the early design stages to aidthe provision of an optimal cognitive load for the system design. CTLA has beenused in its present format in naval domain and is based upon a model ofcognitive task load that describes the effects of task characteristics upon operatormental workload. According to the model, cognitive (or mental) task load iscomprised of percentage time occupied, level of information processing and thenumber of task set switches exhibited during the task and is based upon thetheory that the operator should not be occupied by one task for more than 70-80% of the total time.The three variables of time occupied, level of information processing and task setswitches are combined to determine the level of cognitive load imposed by thetask.• Advantages• The technique is based upon sound theoretical underpinning.• CTLA can be used during the design of systems and processes to highlighttasks or scenarios that impose especially high cognitive task demands.• CTLA seems to be suited to analysing control room type tasks orscenarios.• Disadvantages• The technique appears to be quite complex and would be very timeconsuming in its application, primarily due to the initial data collection.• A high level of training would be required.• There is no guidance on the rating of cognitive task load. It would bedifficult to give task load a numerical rating based upon the underlyingmodel.• Initial data collection would be very time consuming.• The CTLA technique requires validation and evidence of the use of thetechnique is limited.A3.6.9Pro-SWORDPro-SWORD (Subjective Workload Dominance Technique) is the predictivevariant of SWORD and uses paired comparison of tasks in order to provide arating of workload for each individual task. In contrast to SWORD, tasks arerated for their dominance before the trial begins, and then rated post-test tocheck for the sensitivity of the predictions.May 2006 Page A3-51 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Advantages• Pro-SWORD is easy to learn and use and very quick in application.• It is non-intrusive and has a high face validity.• SWORD has been demonstrated to have sensitivity to workload variations(DTC152 - Ried and Nygren 1988)• Disadvantages• SWORD is viewed as a dated approach to workload assessment.• Data is collected post task.• Workload projections are more accurate when domain experts are used.• Further validation is required.• The SWORD technique has not been as widely used as other workloadassessment techniques, such as SWAT, Modified Cooper-Harper Scalesand the NASA TLX.A3.6.10Modified Cooper-Harper ScalesThe Modified Cooper Harper (MCH) scale is a uni-dimensional measure that isadministered post-trial, and involves the participant simply following the decisiontree, answering questions regarding the task and system under analysis, in orderto elicit an appropriate workload rating.It was originally developed as an aircraft handling measurement tool and thescales were used to attain subjective pilot ratings of the controllability of aircraft.However, MCH scales have been widely used over to measure workload in avariety of domains.• Advantages• MCH scales are very easy and quick to use, requiring no additionalequipment and viewed are inexpensive, unobtrusive, easily administeredand easily transferable.• MCH is a non-intrusive measure of workload and data obtained when usinguni-dimensional tools is easier to analyse than when using multidimensionaltools• A number of validation studies have been conducted using the CooperHarper scales. Wierwinke (No citation reference - Wierwinke 1974)reported a high co-efficient between subjective difficulty rating andobjective workload level.• The MCH scales have been widely used to measure workload in a varietyof domains.May 2006 Page A3-52 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• Disadvantages• MCH is dated and uni-dimensional.• It was originally developed to rate controllability of aircraft.• Limited to manual control tasks.• NASA TLX and SWAT are more appropriate.• Data is collected post-trial. This is subject to a number of problems, suchas a correlation with performance. Participants are also poor at reportingpast mental events.A3.6.11Individual Self-Assessment (ISA)ISA is a very simple subjective workload assessment technique that wasdeveloped to assess air traffic controller’s mental workload during the design offuture air traffic management systems. It is based upon participants self-ratingtheir workload during a task (normally every two minutes) on a scale of 1 (low) to5 (high). Kirwan et al (DTC116 - 1997) used the following ISA scale to assess airtraffic controllers (ATC) workload.Typically, the ISA scale is presented to the participants in the form of a colourcodedkeypad, which flashes when a workload rating is required, and theparticipant simply pushes the button that corresponds to their perceived workloadrating. However, where appropriate, the workload ratings can be requested andacquired verbally.ISA allows a profile of operator workload throughout the task to be constructedand allows the analyst to ascertain excessively high or low workload parts of thetask under analysis. The main appeal of the ISA technique lies in its lowresource usage and its low intrusiveness.• Advantages• ISA is a very simple technique to learn and use.• The output allows a workload profile for the task under analysis to beconstructed.• ISA is very quick in its application as data collection occurs during the trial.• Has been used extensively in numerous domains.• Requires very little in the way of resources.• Whilst the technique is obtrusive to the primary task, it is probably the leastintrusive of the on-line workload assessment techniques.• Low cost.May 2006 Page A3-53 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Disadvantages• ISA is intrusive to primary task performance.• Limited validation evidence associated with the technique.• ISA is a very simplistic technique, offering only a limited assessment ofoperator workload.• Participants are not very efficient at reporting mental events.May 2006 Page A3-54 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and ToolsA3.7 Situation Awareness TechniquesThe term Situation Awareness (SA) refers to the level of awareness an individualhas of his current, ongoing and predicted situation in relation to his workingenvironment. Although originally identified in the design of World War Onemilitary systems, Situation Awareness has assumed increasing relevance andimportance in the design and operation of data rich computer-based systems,where information processing overload may be the key challenge.Several competing theories and models exist. The Three-Level Model is the mostpopular of these.1. SA Level 1 – Perception of elements in the environment.2. SA Level 2 – Comprehension of elements and their meaning.3. SA Level 3 – Projection on of future system status.Situation Awareness assessment techniques employ data collection and analysistechniques described elsewhere in this Annex, including observer assessmentand self-assessment techniques. Collectively, these comprise SA RequirementsAnalysis. A technique particular to SA Assessment is that of ‘freezing’ a situationor simulation, during which subject awareness is probed.Situation Awareness assessment thus usually requires an operational tasksimulation environment that possesses sufficient fidelity and validity, based onadequate requirements analysis.There are a number of different SA tool available to the HF practitioner including:• SA Requirements Analysis• Crew Awareness Rating Scale (CARS)• Mission Awareness Rating Scale (MARS)• Situation Awareness Rating Scales (SARS)• Situation Awareness Rating Technique (SART)• Cranfield Situation Awareness Scale (C-SAS)• Situation Awareness Subjective Workload Dominance (SA-SWORD)• Situation Awareness Behavioural Rating Scale (SABARS)• Situation Awareness Global Assessment Technique (SAGAT)The following sub-sections provide an overview of the identified 5 SA techniques.5 For details see ‘Human Factors Design & Evaluation Methods Review’ [Ref 32].May 2006 Page A3-55 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)A3.7.1SA Requirements AnalysisA Situational Awareness (SA) requirements analysis should be conducted for thetask environment under analysis. This ensures the validity of the SA assessmenttechnique used, in that it specifies what exactly SA in the environment underanalysis is comprised of and thus determines those elements of SA that thechosen assessment technique should measure.For example, when using an on-line probe technique such as SAGAT, the resultsof an SA requirements analysis form the content of the SA queries used.Similarly, an SA requirements analysis is used to construct those behaviours thatare rated in observer rating techniques such as SABARS.Whilst there are numerous techniques available to the HF practitioner for theassessment of SA, there is limited information on how to conduct an SArequirements analysis for novel domains, such as military command and controlenvironments. A typical SA Requirements Analysis procedure involves the useof unstructured interviews, goal-directed task analysis and structuredquestionnaires in order to determine the SA requirements for the task(s) orenvironment under analysis. The results of the SA requirements analysis canthen be used during the development of the SA queries that are used in the SAanalysis.• Advantages• An SA requirements analysis output specifies those elements required forthe achievement and maintenance of SA in the system or task underanalysis.• The output can be used to develop queries designed to assess operatorSA in the task or scenario under analysis.• If conducted properly, the technique has the potential to be verycomprehensive.• Uses SME’s with high levels of relevant experience, ensuringcomprehensiveness.• The SA requirements analysis procedure has been used extensively in anumber of different domains e.g. aviation, air traffic control and the military.• The use of appropriate SME’s ensures the validity of the SA requirementsidentified.• Disadvantages• The SA requirements analysis procedure is a lengthy one, requiringinterviews, observation, task analysis and the administration ofquestionnaires. A huge amount of resources are invested whenconducting an SA requirements analysis.• Requires access to numerous SME’s for a lengthy period of time. Thisaccess may be difficult to obtain.May 2006 Page A3-56 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and ToolsA3.7.2Crew Awareness Rating Scale (CARS)The Crew awareness rating scale (CARS) technique is a situation awarenessassessment technique that has been used to assess command and controlcommanders SA and workload.The CARS rating comprises two separate sets of questions based upon the threelevel model of SA. CARS is made up of two subscales, the content subscale andthe workload subscale. The content subscale consists of three statementsdesigned to elicit ratings based upon ease of identification, understanding andprojection of task SA elements (i.e. levels 1, 2 and 3 SA). The fourth statement isdesigned to assess how well the participant identifies relevant task related goalsin the situation. The workload subscale also consists of four statements, whichare designed to assess how difficult, in terms of mental effort, it is for theparticipant in question to identify, understand, project the future states of the SArelated elements in the situation.• Advantages• The CARS technique was developed specifically for infantry exercises andhas been applied in that setting.• The method is less intrusive than on-line probe techniques such as theSAGAT technique.• CARS is a generic technique and requires minimal modification to be usedin other domains e.g. the MARS technique.• Quick and easy to use, requiring minimal training.• The CARS technique could potentially be used in conjunction with on-lineprobe techniques to ensure comprehensiveness.• CARS offers a very low cost assessment of SA and workload.• Disadvantages• Questions may be asked regarding the construct validity of the technique.It could certainly be argued that rather than measuring SA itself, CARS isactually rating the difficulty in acquiring and maintaining SA.• The technique has limited validation evidence associated with it. Thetechnique certainly requires further validation in military or infantry settings.• As the CARS questionnaire is administered and completed post-trial, it issubject to problems such as poor recall of events and forgetting on the partof the participants. It is apparent that participants are limited in theaccurate recall of mental operations. For lengthy scenarios, participantsmay not be able to recall events whereby they were finding it difficult oreasy to perceive mission critical cues.May 2006 Page A3-57 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Similar to the above problem, the completion of the CARS questionnairemay result in a correlation of SA ratings with performance. Thoseparticipants who have performed optimally during the task may rate SAachievement as easy.• Only an overall rating is acquired, rather than a rating at different points inthe task. It may be that the output of the technique is of limited use. Forexample, a design concept may only acquire an overall rating associatedwith SA, rather than numerous SA ratings throughout the task, some ofwhich would potentially pinpoint specific problems with the new design.A3.7.3Mission Awareness Rating Scale (MARS)The mission awareness rating scale (MARS) technique is a situation awarenessassessment technique designed specifically for use in the assessment of SA inmilitary exercises. MARS is a development of the crew awareness rating scaletechnique that has been used to assess operator SA in a number of domains.The CARS rating comprises two separate sets of questions based upon the threelevel model of SA. MARS also comprises two subscales, the content subscaleand the workload subscale. The content subscale consists of three statementsdesigned to elicit ratings based upon ease of identification, understanding andprojection of mission critical cues (i.e. levels 1, 2 and 3 SA). The fourthstatement is designed to assess how aware the participant felt they were duringthe mission. The workload subscale also consists of four statements, which aredesigned to assess how difficult, in terms of mental effort, it is for the participantin question to identify, understand, and project the future states of the missioncritical cues in the situation. The fourth statement in the workload subscale isdesigned to assess how difficult it was mentally for the participant to achieve theappropriate mission goals.The MARS technique was developed for use in ‘real world’ field settings, ratherthan in simulations of military exercises. The technique is normally administereddirectly after the completion of the task or mission under analysis.• Advantages• The MARS technique was developed specifically for infantry exercises andhas been applied in that setting.• The method is less intrusive than on-line probe techniques such as theSAGAT technique.• MARS is based upon the CARS technique, which has been applied inother domains.• The techniques generic make-up allows the MARS technique to be usedacross domains with minimal modification.• Quick and easy to use, requiring minimal training.• The MARS technique could potentially be used in conjunction with on-lineprobe techniques to ensure comprehensiveness.May 2006 Page A3-58 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• Disadvantages• Questions may be asked regarding the construct validity of the technique.It could certainly be argued that rather than measuring SA itself, MARS isactually rating the difficulty in acquiring and maintaining SA.• The technique has limited validation evidence associated with it. Thetechnique certainly requires further validation in military or infantry settings.• As the MARS questionnaire is administered and completed post-trial, it issubject to problems such as poor recall of events and forgetting on the partof the participants. It is apparent that participants are limited in theaccurate recall of mental operations. For lengthy scenarios, participantsmay not be able to recall events whereby they were finding it difficult oreasy to perceive mission critical cues.• Similar to the above problem, the completion of the MARS questionnairepost-trial may result in a correlation of SA ratings with performance. Thoseparticipants who have performed optimally during the task may rate SAachievement as easy.• Only an overall rating is acquired, rather than a rating at different points inthe task. It may be that the output of the technique is of limited use. Forexample, a design concept may only acquire an overall rating associatedwith SA, rather than numerous SA ratings throughout the task, some ofwhich would potentially pinpoint specific problems with the new design.A3.7.4Situation Awareness Rating Scales (SARS)The situation awareness rating scales technique (SARS) is a subjective rating SAmeasurement technique that was developed for the military aviation domain andwas developed in order to define the SA construct, to determine how well pilotscan assess other pilots SA and also to examine the relationship between pilotjudgements of SA and actual performance.When using the SARS technique, participants subjectively rate their performanceon a six-point rating scale (from acceptable to outstanding) for 31 facets of fighterpilot SA. The SARS SA categories and associated behaviours were developedfrom interviews with experienced F-15 pilots. The 31 SARS behaviours aredivided into 8 categories representing phases of mission performance. The eightcategories are: general traits, tactical game plan, communication, informationinterpretation, and tactical employment beyond visual range, tactical employmentvisual and tactical employment general.• Advantages• The 31 dimensions appear to offer an exhaustive account of fighter pilotSA.• The technique goes further than other SA techniques such as SAGAT inthat it assesses other facets of SA, such as decision-making,communication and plan development.May 2006 Page A3-59 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Encouraging validation data (No citation reference - Jones 2000, DTC195 -Waag & Houck 1994)• A very simple technique requiring little training.• Less intrusive than freeze techniques.• The technique can be used in ‘real-world’ settings, as well as simulatedones.• The technique does not restrict itself to the three levels of SA proposed byEndsley (DTC054 & DTC056 - 1995)• Disadvantages• As the SARS behaviours represent SA requirements when flying F-15s incombat type scenarios, the use of the technique in other domains is verydoubtful. Significant re-development would have to take place for thetechnique to be used in C4I environments.• The technique has been used infrequently and requires further validation.• The technique is administered post-trial, which carries a number ofassociated problems. Typically, post-trial subjective ratings of SA correlatewith task performance (i.e. I performed well, so I must have had good SA).Also, participants may forget the periods of the task when they possesseda poor level of SA.• The SA data is subjectiveA3.7.5Situation Awareness Rating Technique (SART)The situation awareness rating technique (SART) is a quick and easy self–ratingSA measurement technique that was developed for the subjective estimation ofSA. The technique was developed from interviews with operational RAF aircrewaimed at eliciting relevant workload and SA knowledge. As a result of theseinterviews, 10 dimensions that could be used to measure pilot SA were derived.These 10 dimensions are used in conjunction with a Likert scale, categories (lowvs. high), or pairwise comparisons in order to rate pilot SA. When using thesedimensions the technique becomes the 10D-SART.Furthermore, for a quicker version of 10D-SART, the 10 dimensions can begrouped into three dimensions, in order to create 3D SART.• Advantages• SART is very quick and easy to apply, requiring minimal training.• The SART dimensions were derived directly from interviews with RAFpersonnel, thus the technique was developed using specific aircrewknowledge.May 2006 Page A3-60 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• SA dimensions are generic and so can be applied to other domains, suchas command and control systems.• High ecological validity.• SART is a widely used method and has a number of associated validationstudies.• Removes secondary task loading associated with other techniques.• Requires very little training.• Disadvantages• Similar to other self-rating techniques SART suffers from problems withparticipants associating performance with SA. Typically, if a participantperforms well in the trial, the SA rating will be high and vice versa. Thisclearly is not always the case.• How can subjects report bad SA if they are not aware of it.• Data is usually obtained ‘after the fact’ which causes problems such asparticipants ‘forgetting’ periods when they had low SA.• Data is subjective.• Administrating SART during performance/trials is very intrusive uponprimary task performance.• The SART dimensions only reflect a limited portion of SA.• SART consistently performs worse than SAGAT in various validationstudies.• Testing of the technique often reveals a correlation between SA andperformance, and also between SA and workload.A3.7.6Cranfield Situation Awareness Scale (C-SAS)The Cranfield situation awareness scale (C-SAS) is a very quick and easy SArating scale that can be applied during or post-trial performance. Originallydeveloped for use in assessing student pilot SA during training procedures, C-SAS can be applied subjectively (completed by the participant) or objectively(completed by an observer). Ratings are given for five SA related sub-scalesusing an appropriate rating scale e.g. 1 (very poor) – 5 (very good). The five subscalesused by the C-SAS technique are:• Pilot knowledge• Understanding and anticipation of future events• Management of stress, effort and commitmentMay 2006 Page A3-61 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Capacity to perceive, assimilate and assess information• Overall SAParticipant SA is then calculated by summing the sub-scale scores. The higherthe total score, the higher the SA of the participant.• Advantages• The technique is very quick and easy to use, requiring almost no training.• Although developed for use in aviation, the C-SAS sub-scales are genericand could potentially be used in any domain.• C-SAS shows promise as a back-up measure of SA. It seems that thetechnique would be suited for use alongside a direct measure of SA, suchas SAGAT. This would allow a comparison of the SA measured and theSA related behaviours exhibited.• Disadvantages• When used as an observer-rating tool, the extent to which it measures SAis questionable. As C-SAS can only offer an experts view on observable,SA related behaviours, it should be remembered that the technique doesnot offer a direct assessment of SA.• The extent to which an observer can rate the internal construct of SA isquestionable.• To use the technique appropriately, domain experts are required.• There are no data regarding the reliability and validity of the techniqueavailable in the literature.• The technique has been subjected to only limited use.• According to Endsley (DTC054 & DTC056 - 1995) the rating of SA byobservers is limited.• When used as a self-rating tool, the extent to which the sub-scales providean assessment of SA is questionable.• Participants are rating SA ‘after the fact’.• A host of problems are associated with collecting SA data post-trial, suchas forgetting, and a correlation between SA ratings and performance.A3.7.7Situation Awareness SWORD (SA-SWORD)The SA-SWORD is an adaptation of the SWORD workload assessmenttechnique that has been used to assess pilot situation awareness. TheSubjective Workload Dominance Technique (SWORD) is a subjective workloadassessment technique that has been used both retrospectively and predicatively.May 2006 Page A3-62 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and ToolsOriginally designed as a retrospective workload assessment technique, SWORDuses subjective paired comparisons of tasks in order to provide a rating ofworkload for each individual task. When using SWORD, participants rate onetask’s dominance over another in terms of workload imposed. A variation of theSWORD technique has been developed to assess pilot SA when using twodifferent displays (FCR display and the HSF display). The SA-SWORDtechnique involves participants rating their SA across different combinations offactors such as displays, enemy threat and flight segment. For example, whencomparing two cockpit displays, participants are asked to rate the display, whichprovided the greater level of SA.• Advantages• Very easy technique to learn and use.• The SA-SWORD technique can be used in any domain.• In a study using the SA-SWORD technique, pilots were interviewed inorder to evaluate the validity and ease of use of the technique (DTC190 -Vidulich & Hughes 1991). According to Vidulich & Hughes (DTC190 -1991) comments regarding the technique were either positive or neutral,indicating a promising level of face validity and user acceptance.• The SA-SWORD technique would be a very useful technique to use whencomparing two different interface design concepts and their effect uponoperator SA.• Intrusiveness is reduced, as SA-SWORD is administered post-trial.• Has the potential to be used as a back up SA assessment technique.• Disadvantages• A very clear definition of SA would need to be developed in order for thetechnique to work. For example, each participant may have different ideasas to what SA actually is, and as a result, the data obtained would beincorrect.• The technique does not provide a direct measure of SA. The analyst ismerely given an assessment of the conditions in which SA is highest.• SA is reported post-trial• Similar to other post-trial subjective techniques, SA ratings may becorrelated with performance.• There is limited evidence of the use of the SA-SWORD technique in theliterature.• Limited validation evidence.• Unlike SAGAT, the SA-SWORD technique is not based upon anyunderpinning theory.May 2006 Page A3-63 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)A3.7.8Situation Awareness Behavioural Rating Scale (SABARS)The situation awareness behavioural rating scale (SABARS) is an objective SArating technique that has been used to assess infantry personnel situationawareness in field training exercises. The technique involves domain expertsobserving participants during a task performance and rating them on 28observable SA related behaviours. A five point rating scale (1=Very poor, 5=Very good) and an additional ‘not applicable’ category are used. The 28behaviour items were gathered during an SA requirements analysis of militaryoperations in urbanised terrain (MOUT) and are designed specifically to assessplatoon leader SA. Since the SABARS technique rates observable behaviours, itis worthwhile to remind the reader that it does not actually rate a participant’sinternal level of SA, rather it offers a rating of those behaviours that may provideassumptions regarding the participant’s internal level of SA.• Advantages• The behaviour items used in the SABARS scale were generated from aninfantry SA requirements exercise.• The technique is quick and easy to use.• Requires minimal training.• Has been used in a military context.• It appears that SABARS shows promise as a back-up measure of SA. Itseems that the technique would be suited for use alongside a directmeasure of SA, such as SAGAT. This would allow a comparison of the SAmeasured and the SA related behaviours exhibited.• Disadvantages• As SABARS is an observer-rating tool, the extent to which it measures SAis questionable. As SABARS can only offer an expert’s view onobservable, SA related behaviours, it should be remembered that thetechnique does not offer a direct assessment of SA.• The extent to which an observer can rate the internal construct of SA isquestionable.• To use the technique appropriately, a number of domain experts arerequired.• Access to the tasks under analysis is required. This may be difficult toobtain, particularly in military settings.• To use the technique elsewhere, a new set of domain specific behaviourswould be required. This requires significant effort in terms of time andmanpower.• Limited validation evidence.May 2006 Page A3-64 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• It appears that the technique could be prone to bias.• The technique has been subjected to only limited use.• Matthews & Beal (DTC129 - 2002) report disappointing results for theSABARS technique.• According to Endsley (DTC054 & DTC056 - 1995) using observation, as anassessment of participant SA is limited.A3.7.9Situation Awareness Global Assessment Technique (SAGAT)The situation awareness (SA) global assessment technique (SAGAT) is an onlineprobe technique that was developed to assess pilot SA across the threelevels. SAGAT consists of a set of queries regarding the SA requirements for thetask or environment under analysis, including level 1 SA (perception of theelements), level 2 SA (comprehension of their meaning) and level 3 SA(projection of future status). Although developed specifically for military aviationpurposes, a number of different versions of SAGAT exist, including a specific airto-airtactical aircraft version, an advanced bomber aircraft version and an Airtraffic control version, SAGAT-TRACON. The technique itself is a simulatorbased, on-line questionnaire including queries regarding pilot SA that uses the‘freeze technique’ in its administration.The SAGAT technique is undoubtedly the most widely used SA assessmenttechnique used by HF practitioners. As a result, a number of variations of thetechnique exist. The Situation Awareness Probes (SAPS) technique wasdeveloped by DERA to assess military helicopter pilot SA and is a modification ofSAGAT that uses fewer probes to achieve minimal intrusiveness. SALSA is anadaptation of the SAGAT technique that has been used to assess air trafficcontroller SA. The SAVANT technique was developed by the FAA technicalcentre and is a combination of the SAGAT and SPAM techniques.• Advantages• SAGAT directly measures participant SA.• SAGAT provides an objective assessment of participant SA.• SAGAT queries can be designed to encapsulate all operator SArequirements.• SAGAT has been extensively used in the past and has a wealth ofassociated validation evidence (No citation reference - Jones & Endsley2000, DTC046 - Durso et al 1998, DTC060 - Garland & Endsley 1995).• On-line probing removes the problem of subjects biasing their attentiontowards certain aspects of the situation.• On-line probing also removes the various problems associated withparticipants reporting SA ‘after the fact’, such as a correlation between SAMay 2006 Page A3-65 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)and performance and also participants forgetting parts of the trial wherethey had a low level of SA.• The use of random sampling provides unbiased SA scores that can becompared statistically across trials, subjects and systems (DTC054 &DTC056 - Endsley 1995).• SAGAT possesses direct face validity (DTC054 & DTC056 - Endsley1995).• The method can be suitably tailored for use in any domain.• SAGAT is the most widely used and validated SA measurement techniqueavailable to date.• Disadvantages• Using the technique requires expensive high fidelity simulators andcomputers.• The SAGAT queries are intrusive to the primary task of system operation.• When using the SAGAT the simulation must be stopped or frozen anumber of times in order to collect the data.• The method cannot be used in ‘real world’ or field settings.• Based upon the very simplistic three level model of SA.• Significant development would be required in order to use the technique indomains other than aviation.• SAGAT does not appear suited to the assessment of team SA.• A SAGAT analysis requires extensive preparation. An appropriate SArequirements analysis is normally required, which requires considerableeffort.May 2006 Page A3-66 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and ToolsA3.8 Team Design TechniquesThe purpose of Team Design is to identify viable, effective and flexibleorganisations to meet the full range of mission requirements.The hierarchical departmental structure onboard Ships is the responsibility of therelevant user organisation. However, within this structure, teams and sub-teamswill be formed to meet mission requirements, e.g. Command Team, Sonar Sub-Team. These teams are heavily influenced by the technology provided toachieve mission objectives and to support team communication. There are anumber of methods for such analyses exist, several of which are modifications oradaptations of methods used for the assessment of individual operatorperformance:• Complement Validation• Job Design• Role Definition• Task & Role Performance Modelling• Task & Role Prototyping• Training Needs Analysis• Target Audience DescriptionThe role definition and job design forms the primary inputs to team design. Theoutput of task and role performance modelling and prototyping will provideestimates of the number of personnel required. The interaction between jobs androles within teams is modelled using network diagrams or other means to ensurethat critical information is routed through the team. The need to support cooperativeworking places requirements on the definition of the technology, userequipmentinterface design and the layout of workstations and workplaces. Thestructure of teams and the number of personnel needed to perform each job willdetermine the size of the complement.Team Design proceeds from the Assessment Phase and may be explored inConcept Phase and is finalised during the Manufacture Phase. It is a vitalongoing activity when new ways of co-operative working and radical changes toorganisational structure are being introduced, e.g. smaller Command teams,control of highly automated platform management systems.The following sub-sections provide an overview of each of the aforementionedtechniques and identify their associated strengths and weaknesses.A3.8.1Complement ValidationThe aim of complement validation is to reduce Whole-Life Costs by ensuring thatthe number and types of personnel required to man a system are validatedagainst the actual workload. It is a fundamental aid in the synthesis of new ShipMay 2006 Page A3-67 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)complements and will assist DPA, DLO and FLEET-NPS in decisions about thevarious system options.Complement validation is an iterative process based on the use of systematic ormathematical modelling that is continually refined in parallel with systemdevelopment. The mission requirements form the top-level structure of eachcomplement model with operational scenarios used for particular model runs.The task synthesis, role definition, job design and team design each provideinformation about the numbers and types of personnel required to operate andmaintain the system. This information is combined for each system option toexplore complement size and structure until an agreed Scheme of Complementis defined by FLEET-NPS. Complement size will affect platform and workspacelayout, habitability, environmental and health and safety design issues.Complement modelling and validation is utilised from the Concept phase of theCADMID cycle through to the In–Service phase and requires FLEET-NPS andsubject matter expertise.It is an intensive process requiring careful attention to assumptions, collation ofdata and sampling of operational scenarios. It is mandatory for new platformsand complex systems, manning estimates also need to be assessed duringplatform modification and equipment refits.• Advantages• Complement validation leads to a reduction in whole life costs.• Validates the human element of the system against the actual workload tobe conducted.• Assist in decisions of system options.• Disadvantages• Complement validation is an iterative and resource intensive technique thatrequires support from a wide range of parties during its application.A3.8.2Job DesignThe purpose of job design is to ensure that the tasks and roles allocated to a jobare appropriately structured and achievable and encompasses combination oftasks and roles to form a job that can be performed by an individual.New jobs cannot be created as a by-product of the systems design processwithout FLEET-NPS involvement. The Branch structure and the definition of jobsare a FLEET-NPS responsibility. Whether or not the Branch structure changes,existing jobs may be radically changed and significant new components may beadded as a result of the introduction of new technology and work practices.Whatever the impetus is for job re-design it is important that the jobs affected areproperly structured and achievable. The role definition provides the primary inputand the target audience description will contain details about current jobs. Whenit is clear how jobs could be restructured various work organisation strategies areMay 2006 Page A3-68 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Toolsexplored to ensure that the jobs are viable and satisfying. Job rotation, jobenlargement and job enrichment are examples of work organisation strategies.These strategies attempt to ensure that personnel are allocated duties thatinclude sufficient variety, autonomy, complexity and responsibility to maintainmotivation and performance. Jobs also need to be structured in a way that iscompatible with available career development both in terms of specialisation andrank progression.Future Branch structure changes may be apparent at the Concept phase of theCADMID design cycle and is likely to continue up to Manufacture phase and willrequire involvement by FLEET-NPS, FOTR and user organisations (e.g.Customer 2).Job design is an ongoing background activity that may pay huge dividends interms of future use of the system. Conversely, failure to consider this aspect maycause future problems for the user organization as morale and retention maysuffer.• Advantages• Job design will, if applied correctly, pay huge dividends in terms of futureuse of the system• Disadvantages• Failure to consider Job Design may cause future problems for the userorganisation as morale and retention may suffer.• Job Design is an iterative and resource intensive technique that requiressupport from a wide range of parties during its application.A3.8.3Role DefinitionThe purpose of Role Definition is to develop the roles that will be assigned toavailable personnel to operate and maintain the system.New roles may be required in order to take advantage of opportunities affordedby greater automation; to enable reductions in crew size; to provide greaterflexibility in assigning roles to different jobs; or to reflect changes to the Branchstructure.In simple terms a role is defined by combining a set of related tasks. Tasks maybe combined where they share a common mission goal, e.g. optimise detectionof air contacts; or require common specialist skills and knowledge, e.g.management of data networks; or deal with the same real-world objects, e.g.loading supplies during RAS; or are conducted in the same place and time, e.g.watch keeping duties on bridge.The Target Audience Description, Skills Analysis and Link Analysis provideinformation for these purposes. Each role should consist of tasks that are jointlycompatible, produce a clear output, are not overly repetitive or continually pacedand which can be associated with a clear responsibility. Task & RoleMay 2006 Page A3-69 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)performance modelling and prototyping studies may be required to check thatnew roles and their allocation to jobs are feasible.Role definition continues until all tasks are assigned in a way that optimisesmanning costs, productivity level, organisational effectiveness and flexibility,health and safety and individual motivation and job satisfaction. In summary, roledefinition contributes to the following:• Definition of access and configuration requirements available at the userequipmentinterface (including user privileges and security levels).• Design of jobs based on the allocation of roles.• Identification of skills and knowledge requirements relevant to training andallocation of roles to Branches.• Design of the team organisation.• Complement modelling and validation.Role definition may start as early as the Concept phase of the CADMID cycle andmay not be completed until Manufacture. HFI specialist advice may be requiredto supplement subject matter experts and FLEET-NPS requirements.• Advantages• Role definition identifies the access and configuration requirementsavailable at the user-equipment interface (including user privileges andsecurity levels).• Role definition supports the design of jobs based on the allocation of roles.• Role definitions support the identification of skills and knowledgerequirements relevant to training and allocation of roles to Branches.• Role definition supports the design of the team organisation.• Role definition supports Complement modelling and validation.• Disadvantages• Role Definition is an iterative and resource intensive technique thatrequires support from a wide range of parties during its application.A3.8.4Task & Role Performance ModellingThe purpose of Task & Role Performance Modelling is to assess the feasibility ofthe tasks and roles assigned to personnel prior to the construction of the system.Task & Role Performance Modelling can be defined as the process ofrepresenting task and role performance in operational scenarios to determinetask and role effectiveness, efficiency and reliability. Events and conditionsactivate tasks that require user role time and effort.May 2006 Page A3-70 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and ToolsThe information contained in the task synthesis and the role definition isrepresented within a mathematical model. The roles are assigned to users thatform the primary resources and events and conditions activate tasks that requireuser role time and effort. The model is run against time-lines derived fromoperational scenarios and the time and effort required of users performing rolesis estimated.The results are used to assess compatibility with required user-performancecriteria and to determine the resource loading (number of personnel required).This process is performed iteratively until performance and resourcerequirements are optimised. The output may be used to identify functional anduser-equipment design requirements and areas requiring more intensiveinvestigation through task and role prototyping.Task and role performance modelling may start as early as the Assessmentphase and can be appropriate in the Demonstration phase. An appropriatemodelling environment is required together with HFI specialist and subject matterexpert advice.• Advantages• Task & Role Performance Modelling validates tasks and roles assigned topersonnel prior to the construction of the system.• Task & Role Performance Modelling identifies functional and userequipmentdesign requirements.• Task & Role Performance Modelling identifies areas requiring moreintensive investigation through task and role prototyping• Disadvantages• Task & Role Performance Modelling is an iterative and resource intensivetechnique that requires support from a wide range of parties during itsapplication.A3.8.5Task & Role PrototypingThe goal of Task & Role Prototyping is resolve task and role definition issues byassessing the performance of users with the equipment. The results informdecisions about the use of automation and the allocation of tasks and roles tousers.The main inputs into Task & Role Prototyping are the task synthesis, the roledefinition, operability scenarios and the user-performance criteria. However,unlike user-equipment interface prototyping the main emphasis here is on theperformance of user roles rather than the design of the equipment.Individual or team performance may be assessed in scenarios. The prototypingenvironment used may vary from simple mock-ups to full-scale simulations (e.g.shore development facility). Measures of performance include task speed andaccuracy, throughput time per work unit (e.g. time to process a contact fromMay 2006 Page A3-71 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)detection to Command decision), communication load and efficiency, user roleconflicts and the maintenance of overall team effectiveness. Observation,recording, interview and subjective rating scales can all be used. Userrepresentatives need to be properly sampled, thoroughly briefed, provided with ascript or series of simulated events and debriefed. The results will inform furtherrole definition, team design, the use of automation and equipment and trainingneeds.Task and Role Prototyping can be used as early as the Assessment phase ifcommercial-off-the-shelf or demonstrators are available, however, it is mostuseful during Demonstration Phase.In summary Task and Role Prototyping is resource intensive and should bedirected at problem areas providing a high return in reducing development andoperational costs and risks.• Advantages• When directed at problem areas Task and Role Prototyping provides ahigh return in reducing development and operational costs and risks• Disadvantages• Task and Role Prototyping is resource intensive.A3.8.6Training Needs AnalysisThe purpose of Training Needs Analysis (TNA) is to identify the skills andknowledge that users require to perform their jobs. The goals of users can bebroken down into:• Identification of the performance required by personnel to meet theiroperational objectives.• Identification of the training performance that must be supported to enableacquisition of skills and knowledge.• Identification of the training media options and to select the best option interms of cost, training capacity, acquisition and retention of skills andknowledge and compatibility with the overall training system.A TNA is conducted in parallel with the development of new platforms andequipment. Existing training policy is reviewed to identify aspects that will applyto future training. Training throughput is estimated based on the complementsize and types of personnel that will man the system (as described in the targetaudience description and role definition).Task synthesis and skills analysis are used to identify the skills and knowledge tobe acquired, the conditions under which performance must be exhibited and theinformation and actions comprising each task.Operational Performance Statements (OPS) summarise job-related objectives tobe supported by training. Training Performance Statements (TPS) identify theMay 2006 Page A3-72 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Toolstraining objectives to be attained by trainees. Each TPS is decomposed into aset of enabling objectives detailing specific learning that is required to attain thatTPS. The OPS and TPS are used to help identify training media optionsincluding the following: location (afloat or ashore); type of trainer (part taskprocedural, full-system simulator etc.); method of training (computer basedinstruction, classroom training, on-the-job, self instruction etc.); and requiredlevels of physical, dynamic and instructional fidelity. Training options areevaluated and the most cost-effective approach is selected. Training coursewareand device specifications are developed for the chosen option using the finaldesign specifications.TNA is mandatory for all new platforms and equipments and the TNA processstarts during the Assessment phase and is completed in the Manufacture phaseat which stage training courseware and devices are developed to come intoservice with the relevant platform or equipment. FOTR, RN ICG and subjectmatter experts are required for the conduct of the TNA.• Advantages• TNA is a systematic and proven approach.• TNA will identify the performance required by personnel to meet theiroperational objectives.• TNA will identify the training performance that must be supported to enableacquisition of skills and knowledge.• TNA will identify the training media options and provide justification toselect the best option in terms of cost, training capacity, acquisition andretention of skills and knowledge.• Disadvantages• A TNA is a labour intensive activity that is iterative and is dependent onsystem maturity.A3.8.7Target Audience DescriptionThe purpose of a Target Audience Description (TAD) is to provide a summary ofpersonnel capabilities and limitations for use in manning studies; training needsanalysis, system design, habitability assessment and health and safety analysis.A Project Specific Target Audience Description (PSTAD) is specified for eachproject. This helps ensure that the platform and equipment is designed in such away as to match the characteristics of the available manpower.The target audience description is developed in accordance with the needs of theproject and the characteristics of the system. The information is developed fromthe baseline information in the Early Human Factors Analysis (EHFA) andcollated from existing standards, research, e.g. at INM, surveys, demographicsdata, service documentation and interviews. The organisations that are likely toprovide personnel are identified and the jobs affected are specified in detail. ThisMay 2006 Page A3-73 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)includes descriptions of the future Branch structure, drafting policy and specificjob titles.The target audience description is maintained and (when required) refinedthroughout the project from Concept until In-Service. The target audiencedescription requires concentrated project effort and additional advice from HFISpecialists.• Advantages• The generation and management of a PSTAD is essential to ensure that abaseline exists against which all supporting HF analysis can be conducted.• The RN Generic TAD (GTAD) reduces the resources required to developand maintain a TAD• The RN GTAD ensures that all projects utilise the same TAD baseline.• Disadvantages• None identified.May 2006 Page A3-74 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and ToolsA3.9 Team Performance Analysis TechniquesWhilst there is a need to evaluate the performance of individuals who undertaketasks, there is an increasing need to consider the overall performance of teamsof people. A number of methods for such analyses exist, several of which aremodifications or adaptations of methods used for the assessment of individualoperator performance.• Team task analysis techniques• HTA Team• Team Cognitive Task Analysis• Groupware Task Analysis• Behavioural observation scales• Decision requirements exercise• Team Workload Assessment• Distributed Assessment of Team Mutual Awareness• Co-ordination demands analysis• Team Communication and Co-Ordination Analysis• Comms Usage Diagrams• Social Network Analysis• Task and Training Requirements Methodology (TTRAM)These methods can be considered as sub-families that are focussed on particularaspects of analysis. The following sub-sections provide an overview of theidentified Team Performance Analysis techniques including identification of theirassociated strengths and weaknesses.A3.9.1Team Task Analysis TechniquesTeam Task Analysis (Team-TA) is a task analysis technique that provides adescription of tasks distributed across a team and the requirements associatedwith the tasks in terms of operator knowledge, skills, and abilities. Typically,Team-TA is used to inform team task design, team training procedures and teamperformance measurement. Team-TA aims to analyse team-based scenarios bygathering data regarding teamwork and task work.1. Teamwork – Individuals interacting or co-ordinating tasks that areimportant to the team’s goals.2. Task work – Individuals performing individual tasks.May 2006 Page A3-75 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)According to Burke (DTC030 - 2003), the Team-TA procedure has not yet beenwidely adopted by organisations, with the exception of the US military andaviation communities. Never the less, Team-TA appears to be a very usefulprocedure for eliciting data regarding operating skills and team co-ordination.Although a set procedure for Team-TA does not exist, Burke (DTC030 - 2003)attempted to integrate the existing Team-TA literature into a set of guidelines forconducting a Team-TA.• Advantages• Team-TA goes further than individual task analysis techniques byspecifying the knowledge, skills and abilities required to complete eachtask step.• The output from Team-TA can be used in the development of team trainingprocedures and in team job design.• The Team-TA output specifically states which tasks are team based andwhich tasks are individually performed. This is extremely useful whendesigning new systems.• Team-TA can be used to address team task performance issues.• Team-TA provides a systematic view of the tasks that make up thescenario under analysis.• Team-TA could be used in the identification of team-based errors.• Disadvantages• Team-TA is a hugely time consuming technique to conduct.• SME’s and domain experts are required throughout the procedure. Theacquisition of SME’s can sometimes prove very difficult.• There is no rigid procedure for the Team-TA technique. As a result,reliability is questionable.• Great skill is required on behalf of the analyst in order to elicit the requiredinformation throughout the Team-TA procedure.A3.9.2HTA TeamHTA Team (HTA-T) has been used in a number of team analyses, includingthose for Defence systems. It is an extension of the widely used HTA technique.HTA-T is simple to apply, but may be resource demanding for the largestapplications. It has formed the pre-cursor method for the application of otherHuman Reliability assessment methods, such as TAFEI and SHERPA.May 2006 Page A3-76 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• Advantages / DisadvantagesThe reader is referred to Section A3.4.1 for further information a list of HTAadvantages and disadvantages.A3.9.3Team Cognitive Task AnalysisTeam cognitive task analysis (TCTA) is a technique used to describe thecognitive skills that a team or group individuals are required to undertake in orderto perform a particular task or set of tasks. TCTA can be used to betterunderstand how a team operates in terms of the decision-making strategiesemployed.TCTA uses real life events and scenarios and is suited to the analysis of complexsystems. It may however, be resource demanding, requiring trained analysts toconduct it. Video and audio recording facilities are needed.• Advantages• The TCTA can be used to elicit specific information regarding teamdecision making in complex systems.• The output can be used to inform teams of effective decision-makingstrategies.• Decision-making barriers identified can be removed from the system ofprocess under analysis, facilitating improved team performance.• The incidents that the technique analyses have already occurred, removingthe need for costly, time consuming to construct event simulations.• Once familiar with the technique, TCTA is easy to apply.• Has been used extensively in a number of domains and has the potentialto be used anywhere.• Real life incidents are analysed using the TCTA, ensuring a morecomprehensive, realistic analysis than simulation techniques.• Disadvantages• The reliability of such a technique is questionable. Klein & Armstrong(DTC117 - Klein & Armstrong 2003) suggests that methods that analyseretrospective incidents are associated with concerns of data reliability, dueto evidence of memory degradation.• TCTA is a resource intensive technique, including observation andinterviews, both of which require significant effort.• A high level of expertise and training is required in order to use TCTA to itsmaximum effect (DTC117 - Klein & Armstrong 2003).May 2006 Page A3-77 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• TCTA relies upon interviewee verbal reports in order to reconstructincidents. How far a verbal report accurately represents the cognitiveprocesses of the decision maker is questionable. Interviewees could easilymisrepresent facts. Certainly, glorification of events would be one worryassociated with this sort of analysis.• After the fact data collection has a number of concerns associated with it.Such as degradation, correlation with performance etc.A3.9.4Groupware Task AnalysisGroupware Task Analysis (GTA) is a team task analysis technique that is used tostudy and evaluate group or team activities in order to inform the design andanalysis of similar team systems. GTA comprises a conceptual frameworkfocussing upon the relevant aspects that require consideration when designingsystems or processes for teams or organisation. The technique entails thedescription of two task models.1. Task model 1 – Task model 1 is essentially a description of the situation atthe current time in the system that is being designed. This is developed inorder to enhance the design teams understanding of the current worksituation. In the design of C4I systems, Task Model 1 would include adescription of the command and control systems that are currently used.2. Task model 2 – Task model 2 involves re-designing the current system orsituation outlined in task model 1. This should include technologicalsolutions to problems highlighted in task model 1 and also technologicalanswers to requirements specified. Task model 2 should represent amodel of the future task world when the new design is implemented.The techniques used when conducting a GTA are determined by the availableresources. Once the two task models are completed, the design of the newsystem can begin, including specification of functionality and also the way inwhich the system is presented to the user.• Advantages• GTA output provides a detailed description of the system requirements andhighlights specific issues that need to be addressed in the new design.• Task model 2 can potentially highlight the technologies required and theiravailability.• GTA provides the design team with a detailed understanding of the currentsituation and problems.• GTA seems to be suited to the analysis of existing command and controlsystems.May 2006 Page A3-78 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• Disadvantages• GTA appears to be extremely resource intensive and time consuming in itsapplication.• Limited evidence of use in the literature.• The technique provides limited guidance for its application.• A large team of analysts would be required in order to conduct a GTAanalysis.A3.9.5Behavioural Observation ScalesBehavioural Observation Scales (BOS) are used to assess multiple componentsof team performance. Typically BOS analyses involve the appropriate SMEsobserving team performance and then rating the team’s performance via anappropriate behavioural rating scale. BOS techniques are typically used in teamtraining exercises to provide feedback regarding team performance. It appearsthat BOS techniques would also be useful in the assessment of teamperformance in C4I environments, particularly when evaluating design concepts.Factors such as communication between team members and informationexchange can be assessed using the appropriate BOS.BOS is limited to what can be observed, so internal mental processes cannot berevealed using this method.• Advantages• BOS can be used to provide an assessment of observable teambehaviours exhibited during task performance, including communication,information exchange, leadership, teamwork and task work performancecan all be assessed using an appropriate BOS.• BOS seems to be suited for use in the assessment of team performance inC4I environments.• The output can be used to inform the development of team trainingexercises and procedures.• BOS can be used to assess both teamwork and task work.• BOS can be tailored for use in any environment.• Disadvantages• Existing scales may be inappropriate for use in C4I environments. Thedevelopment of a new scale from scratch requires considerable effort onbehalf of the analyst.• There is a limit to what can be accurately assessed via observation ofparticipant behaviour. BOS can only be used to provide an assessment ofMay 2006 Page A3-79 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)observable behaviour exhibited during task performance. As a result,crucial components of team performance, such as SA, decision-makingand workload cannot be assessed accurately using a BOS.• A BOS analysis is time consuming to conduct, requiring the developmentof the scale, training of the raters, observation of the task under analysisand rating of the required behaviours. Even for a small-scale analysis,considerable time is required.• The reliability of such techniques remains a concern.A3.9.6Decision Requirements ExerciseThe team Decision Requirements Exercise (DRX) is an adaptation of the criticaldecision method that is used to highlight critical decisions made by a teamsduring task performance, and also to analyse the factors surrounding decisionse.g. why the decision was made, how it was made, what factors affected thedecision etc. The DRX technique was originally used during the training ofnuclear power control room crews, as a debriefing tool. Typically, a decisionrequirements table is constructed and a number of critical decisions are analysedwithin a group-interview type scenario. It is recommend that DRX should beused for the following purposes to:• Calibrate a teams understanding of its own objectives.• Calibrate understanding of roles, functions and the requirements of eachteam member.• Highlight any potential barriers to information flow.• Facilitate the sharing of knowledge and expertise across team members.• Advantages• Specific decisions are analysed and recommendations made regarding theachievement of effective decision making in future similar scenarios.• The output seems to be very useful for use in the training of teamprocedures.• The analyst can control the analysis, selecting the decisions that areanalysed and also the factors surrounding the decisions that are focussedupon.• The DRX can be used to elicit specific information regarding team decisionmaking in complex systems.• The incidents, which the technique concentrates on, have alreadyoccurred, removing the need for costly, time consuming work to constructevent simulations.May 2006 Page A3-80 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• Real life incidents are analysed using the DRX, ensuring a morecomprehensive, realistic analysis than simulation techniques.• Disadvantages• The reliability of such a technique is questionable, as it has beensuggested that methods that analyse retrospective incidents areassociated with concerns of data reliability, due to evidence of memorydegradation.• DRX may struggle to create an exact description of an incident.• The DRX is a resource intensive technique.• A high level of expertise and training is required in order to use the DRXtechnique to its maximum effect (DTC117 - Klein & Armstrong 2003).• The DRX technique relies upon interviewee verbal reports in order toreconstruct incidents. How far a verbal report accurately represents thecognitive processes of the decision maker is questionable. Theparticipants used could easily misrepresent the facts. Certainly,glorification of events would be one worry associated with this sort ofanalysis.• It may be difficult to gain sole access to team members for a period of time.• After the fact data collection has a number of concerns associated with it.Such as degradation, and a correlation with task performance.A3.9.7Team Workload AssessmentTeam Workload Assessment is based on the NASA-TLX (Sect A3.6.3). Subjectsuse questionnaires to self-assess their own mental workload and that of thewhole team. A linear rating scale is used. Associated software (WEIGHT) isused to present subjects with pair-wise comparisons of each of six factors. Themethod is resource friendly and can be applied at low cost.• Advantages• The output provides an estimate of individual and team workload.• Quick and easy to apply.• Low cost.• The NASA-TLX technique is widely used and has been subjected tonumerous validation studies.• The NASA TLX sub-scales are generic, so the technique can be applied toany domain.• Offers a multi-dimensional assessment of workload.May 2006 Page A3-81 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Disadvantages• The extent to which team members can provide an accurate assessment ofoverall team workload is questionable and requires further testing.• A host of problems are associated with collecting data post-trial.Participants may have forgotten high or low workload aspects of the taskand workload ratings may also be correlated with task performance e.g.subjects who performed poorly on the primary task may rate their workloadas very high and vice versa. This is not always the case.• The approach is seen as cumbersome by some HF practitioners and doesnot provide separate estimates for teamwork vs. task-work.A3.9.8Distributed Assessment of Team Mutual AwarenessThe Distributed Assessment of Team Mutual Awareness questionnaires methodis based upon a team mutual awareness model, the methodology comprisesthree questionnaires:• The task mutual awareness questionnaire.• Workload awareness questionnaire.• Teamwork awareness questionnaire.The task mutual awareness questionnaire involves the participants recallingsalient events that occurred during the task under analysis and then describingthe tasks that they were performing during these events and also the tasks thatthey think the other team members were performing during these events.The workload awareness questionnaire is a subjective workload assessmenttechnique based upon the NASA TLX and involves team members subjectivelyrating their own workload on the dimensions: mental demand, temporal demand,performance effort and frustration. Team members also provide an overall ratingof the other team member’s workload and also provide a rating for each TLXdimension for the team as a whole.The teamwork awareness questionnaire is used to rate the team on fourcomponents of teamwork processes. Team members offer subjective ratings ofthe teams performance on the following team behaviours: Communication, backup,co-ordination and information management, and leadership/team orientation.Each of the questionnaires are administered post-trial in order to gain a measureof ‘team mutual awareness’.• Advantages• The questionnaire techniques used are quick, cheap and easy to apply.• Minimal training is required in order to use the technique effectively.May 2006 Page A3-82 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• A number of measures are provided, including team and individualworkload.• Disadvantages• Each technique uses subjective ratings provided by participants once thetask is complete. There are a number of problems associated with thisform of data collection. Participants are not efficient at accurately recallingmental events and have a tendency to forget certain aspects (such as lowworkload periods of the task). There is also a tendency for participants tocorrelate workload measures with task performance.A3.9.9Co-ordination Demands AnalysisCo-ordination Demands Analysis (CDA) is used to determine the extent to whichthe task(s) under analysis require a co-ordination of team member behaviour.CDA is used to identify the extent to which team members have to work witheach other in order to accomplish the task(s) under analysis. The CDAprocedure allows researchers and practitioners to identify the operational skillsneeded within team tasks and also the teamwork skills needed for smoothcoordination among team members. Teamwork skills are extracted from a HTAand rated against behaviour taxonomy. A typical CDA behaviour taxonomyconsists of communication, situational awareness, decision-making, missionanalysis, leadership, adaptability, and accommodation. From these individualscores a ‘total coordination’ figure can be derived. The rating is based upon theextent to which the teamwork behaviour was apparent during the completion ofthe task step in question.• Advantages• The output of a CDA is very useful, offering an insight into the use ofteamwork behaviours and also a rating of team coordination and itscomponents.• CDA seems to be very suitable for use in analysing team coordination incommand and control environments.• The aforementioned teamwork taxonomy covers all aspects of teamperformance and coordination.• The teamwork taxonomy is generic, allowing the technique to be used inany domain without modification.• CDA provides a breakdown of team performance in terms of task stepsand the level of co-ordination required.• Disadvantages• The rating procedure is time consuming and laborious.• For the technique to be used properly, the appropriate SME’s are required.It may be difficult to gain access to such personnel for long periods of time.May 2006 Page A3-83 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• The reliability of such a technique is doubtful. Different SME’s may offerdifferent ratings for the same task.A3.9.10Team Communication and Co-Ordination AnalysisOne way of investigating team performance is to analyse the communicationsmade between different team members. Team Communication and Co-Ordination Analysis (TCCA) is an approach to the assessment of teamcommunication whereby the frequency and pattern of communications betweenteam members is analysed. A simple frequency count can be used to measurethe frequency of different types of communication. Analysing the patterns ofcommunications involves recording the speaker and the content of thecommunication.• Advantages• Communications analysis provides an assessment of the communicationsoccurring in the team under analysis. This can be useful for trainingpurposes, understanding errors in communication, analysing theimportance of individuals within a team and for analysing thecommunication resources used.• The output can help provide a better understanding the of teamscommunications requirements, in terms of content and technology.• Can be used to highlight redundant roles in the team.• The output can be effectively used during training procedures.• Disadvantages• The coding of communications is time consuming and laborious.• Recording communications during task performance is also tedious.A3.9.11Comms Usage DiagramsComms Usage Diagrams (CUD) is a relatively simple approach to analysingcommunications between teams in different geographic locations. The methodidentifies the Why, What and How of communication. It does not identifytemporal characteristics or human errors, although communication systemproblems can be revealed. Data collection is likely to be resource demanding,requiring multiple analysts. Video and audio recording facilities are needed.Representative subjects are required to participate. The method is more likely tobe suited to the analysis of mission-critical or safety-related communication.• Advantages• The CUD output is particularly neat offering a task description and athorough description of collaborative activity, including the order of activity,May 2006 Page A3-84 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Toolsthe personnel involved, the technology used and the associatedadvantages and disadvantages.• A CUD output could be very useful in highlighting communicationproblems, their causes and potential solutions.• CUD type analysis seems to be very suited to analysing command andcontrol scenarios.• It appears that the CUD technique could be modified in order to make itmore comprehensive. In particular, a timeline and error occurrence couldbe incorporated into the CUD output table.• Although the CUD technique was developed and originally used intelecommunications, it is a generic technique and could potentially beapplied in any domain involving communication or collaboration.• Disadvantages• Neither time nor error occurrence are catered for by the CUD technique inits current form.• The initial data collection phase of the CUD technique is very timeconsuming and labour intensive, including interviews, observationalanalysis and talk-through analysis.• No validity or reliability data are available for the technique.• Application of the CUD technique appears to be limited.• A team of analysts would be required to conduct a CUD analysis.A3.9.12Social Network AnalysisSocial Network Analysis (SNA) is a technique used to analyse and represent therelationships existing between teams of personnel or social groups. A socialnetwork is a set or team of actors (such as members of a military infantry unit)that possess relationships with one another. The analysis of these relationshipscan be used to demonstrate the different types of relationships, the importanceand the number of relationships within a specified group. SNA utilisesmathematical and graphical procedures to represent relationships within a group.SNA output typically provides a graphical depiction and a mathematical analysisof the relationships exhibited within the group under analysis. For themathematical analysis part of SNA, it is recommended that the concept ofcentrality is rated. Centrality is divided into three components:1. Degree – Represents the number of positions in the group that are in directcontact with the position in question.2. Betweenness – The number of times a position falls between pairs ofpositions in the group.May 2006 Page A3-85 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)3. Closeness – The extent to which the position in question is close to theother positions in the group.Each component should be rated between 0 and 1 (0 = Low centrality, 1 = Highcentrality).• Advantages• SNA could be used to highlight the importance of positions within anetwork or group. Conversely, those positions that appear to be of littleimportance to the network could also be classified.• SNA analyses the importance of relationships between operators in aspecified network.• SNA seems to be suited to analysing the importance of relationships incontrol room networks.• SNA is a generic technique that has the potential to be applied in anydomain.• Disadvantages• For complex networks, it would be difficult to conduct a SNA.• The data collection phase involved in a SNA is resource intensive.• SNA would require more training than other team task analysis techniques.• The SNA would be prone to the various flaws associated withobservational analysis, interviews and questionnaires.• SNA is time consuming in its application.A3.9.13Task and Training Requirements Methodology (TTRAM)The Task and Training Requirements Methodology (TTRAM) technique is madeup of a number of techniques that are used to identify team based task trainingrequirements and to evaluate any associated potential training technologies. Thetechnique was developed for the military aviation domain and has shown to beeffective at discriminating tasks that are prone to skill decay, tasks that are criticalto mission success, tasks that require high levels of teamwork (internal &external) and task that require further training intervention. When using theTTRAM technique, that analyst identifies current training and practice gapsthrough interviews with SME’s, and then determines potential training solutionsfor these gaps. In order to identify the current training and practice gaps, a skilldecay analysis and a practice analysis is conducted, which gives the analyst askill decay index score and a practice effectiveness index score. Uponcomparing the two scores, practice and training gaps are identified. Forexample, a task high skill decay index score compared to a low practiceeffectiveness index score would demonstrate a requirement for additional trainingand practice for the task under analysis.May 2006 Page A3-86 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• Advantages• The output of a TTRAM analysis is extremely useful in a number ofdifferent ways. Tasks prone to skill decay are identified and trainingsolutions are offered. Training gaps are also identified, as are theunderlying skills associated with each task. TTRAM also rates the level ofteamwork required for task steps.• The TTRAM procedure is very exhaustive.• TTRAM would be very suited to the analysis of C4I situations in terms ofthe level of skill required for each task, the potential for skill decay and alsotraining provisions.• Disadvantages• TTRAM is very time consuming in its application.• SMEs are required for a TTRAM analysis. Access to these may provedifficult.• Resource intensive.May 2006 Page A3-87 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)A3.10 Human Reliability Analysis TechniquesHuman Reliability Analysis (HRA) must be considered whenever the humancomponent in a system contributes to system safety or system reliability. Thismay occur where operator actions are required to maintain safety and formallyclaimed in a Safety Case, or where operator performance can directly influenceoverall system performance. HRA is often expressed in terms of Human ErrorIdentification (HEI) and analysis, since it is the errors made by humans that cancontribute most to system unreliability. HRA may be carried out using qualitativeor quantitative approaches. Quantitative approaches may rely upon sources ofhuman error data, but these must be relevant to the application domain to bevalid. HEI methods rely upon information provided from an adequate taskanalysis.The following list provides an example of the range and type of HRA and HEItechniques that have been developed for a range of domains:• Human Error HAZOP• Event Tree and Fault Tree Analyses• Murphy Diagrams• Systematic Human Error Reduction and Prediction Approach (SHERPA)• Human Error Template (HET)• Technique for Retrospective and Predictive Analysis of Cognitive Error(TRACEr)• System for Predictive Error Analysis and Reduction (SPEAR)• Cognitive Reliability Analysis Model (CREAM)• Human Error Identification in Systems Tool (HEIST)• Technique for Human Error Assessment (THEA)• Human Error Assessment and Reduction Technique (HEART)• Technique For Human Error Rate Prediction (THERP)• Task Analysis for Error Identification (TAFEI)• Human Error Recovery Framework (HERA)The following sub-sections provide an overview of each of the defined HRAtechniques including an overview of the associated advantages anddisadvantages or each approach.May 2006 Page A3-88 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and ToolsA3.10.1Human Error HAZOPHuman (Error) HAZOP is an engineering approach derived from the wellestablishHAZOP studies utilised in process industries, using a set of guidewordsapplied to a representation of an industrial process, typically documentedusing a process flow diagram or process and instrumentation diagram (P&ID).Human HAZOP uses a set of human error guidewords to consider possibleoperator errors of commission, misinterpretation and commission. Such as ‘Notdone’, ‘More than’ or ‘Later than’, to each step in a process in order to identifypotential problems that may occur. Typically, HAZOP analyses are conducted onthe final design of a system.When conducting a HAZOP type analysis, a HAZOP team is assembled, usuallyconsisting of operators, design staff, Human Factors specialists and engineers.The HAZOP team consider guidewords for each step in a process to identifywhat may go wrong.Applying guide words like this in a systematic way ensures that all of the possibledeviations are considered. The efficiency of the actual HAZOP analysis is largelydependent upon the HAZOP team.A human error identification variant of the HAZOP has also been developedbased upon a set of Human Factors based guidewords, which are moreapplicable to human error. The error guidewords are applied to each bottom leveltask step in a HTA to determine any credible errors (i.e. those judged by thesubject matter expert to be possible). Once the analyst has recorded adescription of the error, the consequences, cause and recovery path of the errorare also recorded. Finally, the analyst then records any design improvements toremedy the error.• Advantages• A correctly conducted HAZOP analysis has the potential to highlight all ofthe possible errors that could occur in the system.• HAZOP style techniques have received wide acceptance by both theprocess industries and the regulatory authorities.• “Two heads are better than one.” Since a team of experts is used, thetechnique should be more comprehensive than other ‘single analyst’techniques. This also removes the occurrence of ‘far fetched’ errorsgenerated by single analyst techniques.• Appears to be a very exhaustive technique.• Easy to learn and use.• The HAZOP guidewords are generic, allowing the technique to be appliedto a number of different domains.May 2006 Page A3-89 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Disadvantages• The technique can be extremely time consuming. Typical HAZOPanalyses can take up to several weeks to be completed.• The technique requires a mixed team made up of operators: HumanFactors specialists, designers, engineers etc. Building such a team andmaking sure they can all be brought together at the same time is often adifficult task.• HAZOP analysis generates huge amounts of information that has to berecorded and analysed.• Laborious.• Disagreement within the HAZOP team may be a problem.• The guidewords used are either limited or specific to nuclear and petrochemicalindustry.• The human error HAZOP guidewords lack comprehensiveness.A3.10.2Event Tree AnalysisEvent tree analysis is a task analysis technique that uses tree like diagrams torepresent the various possible outcomes associated with operator tasks steps ina scenario. Event tree analysis can also be applied to human operations toinvestigate possible actions and their consequences.Event tree output is normally made up of a tree like diagram consisting of nodes(representing task steps) and exit lines (representing the possible outcomes).Typically, success and failure outcomes are used, but for more complexanalyses, multiple outcomes can be represented.Event tree analysis can be used to depict task sequences and their possibleoutcomes, to identify error potential within a system and to model team-basedtasks. In the early stages of a system design, event tree analysis can be used tohighlight potential error paths within a proposed system design, and can also beused to modify the design in terms of removing tasks, which carry a multitude ofassociated task steps.• Advantages• Event tree analysis can be used to highlight a sequence of tasks steps andtheir associated consequences.• Event tree analysis can be used to highlight error potential and error pathsthroughout a system.• The technique can be used in the early design life cycle to highlight tasksteps that may become problematic (multiple associated response options)and also those task steps that have highly critical consequences.May 2006 Page A3-90 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• If used correctly, the technique could potentially depict anything that couldpossibly go wrong in a system.• Event tree analysis is a relatively easy technique that requires little training.• Event tree analysis has been used extensively in PSA/HRA.• Disadvantages• For large, complex tasks, the event tree can become very large andcomplex.• Can be time consuming in its application.• Task steps are often not explained in the output.A3.10.3Fault Tree AnalysisFault trees are used to depict system failures and their causes. A fault tree issimilar to an event tree diagram and defines the failure event and displays thepossible causes in terms of hardware failure or human error. Fault tree analysiswas originally developed for the analysis of complex systems in the aerospaceand defence industries and they are now used extensively in probabilistic safetyassessment (PSA). Although typically used to evaluate events retrospectively,fault trees can be used at any stage in the design process to predict failureevents and their causes. The fault tree can be used to show the type of failureevent and its various causes. Typically, the failure event or top event is placed atthe top of the fault tree, and the contributing events are placed below. The faulttree is held together by AND and OR gates, which link contributing eventstogether. An AND gate is used when more than one event causes a failure i.e.contributing factors are involved. The events placed directly underneath an ANDgate must occur together for the failure event above to occur. An OR gate isused when the failure event could be caused by more than one contributoryevent in isolation, but not together. The event above the OR gate may occur ifany one of the events below the OR gate occurs. A fault tree analysis could beused in the design of a system in order to contribute to the eradication ofpotential failure causes.• Advantages• Fault trees are useful in that they define possible failure events and theircauses. This is especially useful when looking at failure events withmultiple causes.• Fault tree type analysis has been used extensively in PSA.• Although most commonly used in the analysis of nuclear power plantevents, the technique is generic and can be applied in any domain.• Fault trees can be used to highlight potential weak points in a systemdesign concept (DTC115 - Kirwan & Ainsworth 1992).May 2006 Page A3-91 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• The technique could be particularly useful in modelling team-based errors,where a failure event is caused by multiple events distributed across ateam of personnel.• Fault tree analysis has the potential to be used during the design processin order to remove potential failures associated with a system design.• Disadvantages• When used to depict failures in large, complex systems, fault tree analysiscan be very difficult and time consuming to apply. The fault tree itself canalso quickly become large and complicated.• To utilise the technique quantitatively, a high level of training may berequired (DTC115 - Kirwan & Ainsworth 1992).A3.10.4Murphy DiagramsMurphy diagrams are based on the notion that “if anything can go wrong, it will gowrong”. The technique is very similar to fault tree analysis in that errors offailures are analysed in terms of their potential causes. Although originally usedfor the retrospective analysis of error events whereby the analyst conducts eightMurphy diagrams for the error under analysis, there is no reason why thetechnique could not be used to predict potential error events associated tasksteps in a scenario.The method is suited to highly procedural tasks, is highly traceable and has thepotential to deal with team operations.• Advantages• Easy technique to use and learn, requiring little training.• Murphy diagrams present a useful way for the analyst to identify a numberof different possible causes for a specific error.• High documentability.• Each task step failure is exhaustively described, including proximal anddistal sources.• The technique has the potential to be applied to team-based tasks,depicting teamwork and failures with multiple team-based causes.• Murphy diagrams have the potential to use little resources (low cost, timespent etc).• Although developed for the retrospective analysis of error, there appears tobe no reason why it cannot be used predicatively.May 2006 Page A3-92 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• Disadvantages• The use of a Murphy Diagram as a predictive tool is unknown.• Could become large and unwieldy for large, complex tasks.• There is little guidance for the analyst.• Consistency of the method can be questioned.• Design remedies are based entirely upon the analyst’s subjectivejudgement.• It would be difficult to model time on a Murphy diagram.A3.10.5SHERPAThe Systematic Human Error Reduction and Prediction Approach (SHERPA) toolwas developed as a human error prediction technique that also enabled tasks tobe analysed and potential solutions to errors to be presented in a structuredmanner. The technique is based upon taxonomy of human error, and in itsoriginal form specified the psychological mechanism implicated in the error.The method utilises a eight stage process that is underpinned by a HierarchicalTask Analysis (HTA). On completion of a HTA, each identified task is classifiedusing a specified error taxonomy (Action, retrieval, checking, selection,information communication) upon which the analyst then identifies the credibleerror modes associated with each activity. Once the error modes have beendefined the analyst the considered the consequence of each error and whetherthe error could be recovered. The analyst then rates the probability of the erroroccurring based upon SME opinion and historical data. Following this, theanalyst defines whether the identified error is considered critical based upon theconsequence of occurrence. The final step is based upon developing suitableerror reduction strategies in he form of changes to the work system that couldhave prevented the error from occurring.The purpose of SHERPA is not only to identify potential errors with the currentdesign, but also to guide future design considerations. The structured nature ofthe analysis can help to focus the design remedies on solving problems.• Advantages• Structured and comprehensive procedure, yet maintains usability.• The SHERPA taxonomy prompts analyst for potential errors.• Encouraging validity and reliability data.• Substantial time economy compared to observation.• Error reduction strategies offered as part of the analysis, in addition topredicted errors.May 2006 Page A3-93 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• SHERPA is an easy technique to train and apply.• The SHERPA error taxonomy is generic, allowing the technique to be usedin a number of different domains.• According to the HF literature, SHERPA is the most promising HEItechnique available.• Disadvantages• Can be tedious and time consuming for complex tasks.• Extra work involved if HTA not already available.• Does not model cognitive components of error mechanisms.• Some predicted errors and remedies are unlikely or lack credibility, thusposing a false economy.• Current taxonomy lacks generalisability.A3.10.6TRACErThe Technique for Retrospective and Predictive Analysis of Cognitive Error(TRACEr) is a human error identification (HEI) technique developed specificallyfor use in air traffic control (ATC). TRACEr was developed as a human errorincidence analysis technique that conformed to the following criteria: can beused both predicatively and retrospectively and is represented in a series ofdecision flow diagrams and comprises eight taxonomies or error classificationschemes: Task Error, Information, Performance Shaping Factors (PSFs),External Error Modes (EEMs), Internal Error Modes (IEMs), Psychological ErrorMechanisms (PEMs), Error detection and error correction.• Advantages• TRACEr technique appears to be a very comprehensive approach to errorprediction and error analysis, including IEM, PEM, EEM and PSF analysis• TRACEr is based upon sound scientific theory. Integrating Wickens’smodel of information processing into its model of ATC.• In a prototype study, a participant questionnaire highlightedcomprehensiveness, structure, acceptability of results and usability asstrong points of the technique.• TRACEr has proved successful in analysing errors from AIRPROX reportsand providing error reduction strategies.• Used in the European human error in ATC (HERA) project.• Developed specifically for ATC, based upon previous ATC incidents andinterviews with ATC controllers.May 2006 Page A3-94 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• Disadvantages• The TRACEr technique appears unnecessarily over-complicated for what itactually is, a taxonomy based error analysis tool. A prototype studyhighlighted a number of areas of confusion in participant use of thedifferent categories.• No validation evidence or studies using TRACEr.• For complex tasks, analysis will become laborious and large.• Very high resource usage (time). In a participant questionnaire used inthe prototype study (No citation reference - Shorrock 1997) resource usage(time and expertise) was the most commonly reported area of concern(DTC089 - Isaac, Shorrock and Kirwan 2002).• Training time would be extremely high for such a technique.• Extra work involved if HTA not already available• Existing techniques using similar EEM taxonomies appear to be far simplerand much quicker (SHERPA, HET etc).A3.10.7SPEARThe System for Predictive Error Analysis (SPEAR) is a systematic approach toHEI that is very similar to other systematic HEI techniques, such as SHERPA.The main difference between SPEAR and SHERPA is that the SPEAR techniqueutilises performance-shaping factors (PSF) in order to identify any environmentalor situational factors that may enhance the possibility of error. The SPEARtechnique itself operates on the bottom level tasks (operations) of a HTA of thetask under analysis. Using subjective judgement, the analyst uses the SPEARhuman error taxonomy to classify each task step into a particular behaviour types(Action, Retrieval, Check, Selection or Transmission).Each behaviour has an associated set of EEMs, such as action incomplete,action omitted and right action on wrong object. The analyst then uses thetaxonomy and domain expertise to determine any credible error modes for thetask in question. For each credible error (i.e. those judged by the analyst to bepossible) the analyst should give a description of the form that the error wouldtake, such as, ‘pilot dials in wrong airspeed’. Following this the analyst has todetermine how the operator can recover the error and also any consequencesassociated with the error. Finally, error reduction measures are proposed, underthe categories of procedures, training and equipment.• Advantages• SPEAR provides a structured approach to HEI.• Simple to learn and use.• Unlike SHERPA, SPEAR also considers PSF’s.May 2006 Page A3-95 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Quicker than most HEI techniques.• Disadvantages• HTA provides additional work for the analyst.• Consistency of such techniques is questionable.• Appears to be an almost exact replica of SHERPA.• For large, complex tasks the analysis may become time consuming andunwieldy.A3.10.8CREAMThe Cognitive Reliability and Error Analysis Method (CREAM) (DTC082 -Hollnagel 1998) is a recently developed HEI/HRA method that can be used bothpredicatively, to predict potential human error, and retrospectively, to analyse andquantify error. The objectives of CREAM are to:• Identify those parts of the work, tasks or actions that require or dependupon human cognition, and which therefore may be affected by variationsin cognitive reliability.• Determine the conditions under which the reliability of cognition may bereduced, and where therefore the actions may constitute a source of risk.• Provide an appraisal of the consequences of human performance onsystem safety, which can be used in PRA/PSA.• Develop and specify modifications that improve these conditions, henceserve to increase the reliability of cognition and reduce the risk.CREAM uses the Contextual Control Model (COCOM) model of cognition whichfocuses on how actions are chosen and assumes that the degree of control thatan operator has over his actions is variable and also that the degree of control anoperator holds determines the reliability of his performance.The CREAM technique uses a classification scheme consisting of a number ofgroups that describe the phenotypes (error modes) and genotypes (causes) ofthe erroneous actions and this used by the analyst to predict and describe howerrors could potentially occur and to define the links between the causes andconsequences of the error under analysis. Within the CREAM classificationscheme there are three categories of causes (genotypes): Individual,technological and organisational causes.• Advantages• CREAM has the potential to be extremely exhaustive.• Context is considered when using CREAM.May 2006 Page A3-96 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• CREAM is a clear, structured and systematic approach to erroridentification/quantification.• The same principles of the CREAM method can be used for bothretrospective and predictive analyses.• The method is not domain specific and the potential for use in differentdomains such as command and control is apparent.• CREAM’s classification scheme is detailed and exhaustive, even takinginto account system and environmental (socio-technical) causes of error.• Section in Hollnagel (DTC082 - 1998) on the links between consequentsand antecedents is very useful.• Can be used both qualitatively and quantitatively.• Disadvantages• To the novice analyst, the method appears complicated and daunting.• The exhaustiveness of the classification scheme serves to make themethod larger and more resource intensive than other methods.• CREAM has not been used extensively.• It is apparent that the training and application time for the CREAMtechnique would be considerable.• CREAM does not offer remedial measures i.e. ways to recover humanerroneous actions are not given/considered.• CREAM appears to be very complicated in its application.• CREAM would presumably require analysts with knowledge of HumanFactors and cognitive ergonomics.• Application time would be high, even for very basic analyses.A3.10.9HEISTThe Human Error Identification in Systems Tool (HEIST is a HEI technique that isbased upon a series of tables containing questions or ‘error identifier prompts’surrounding external error modes (EEM), performance shaping factors (PSF) andpsychological error mechanisms (PEM).When using HEIST, the analyst identifies errors through applying a set ofquestions to all of the tasks involved in a scenario. Once this has been done, therecovery potential, consequences and error reduction mechanisms are noted in atabular error-analysis format.The analyst classifies the task step under analysis into one of the SRKbehaviours and then applies the relevant table to the task step and determinesMay 2006 Page A3-97 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)whether any errors are credible or not. For each credible error, the analyst thenrecords the system cause or PEM and error reduction guidelines (both of whichare provided in the HEIST tables) and also the error consequence.Although it can be used as a stand-alone method, HEIST is also used as part ofthe HERA ‘toolkit’ methodology (DTC114 - Kirwan 1998b) as a back up check forany errors identified. It is also suggested that the HEIST can be used by just oneanalyst and also that the analyst does not have to be an expert for the systemunder analysis (DTC108 - Kirwan 1994).• Advantages• As HEIST uses error identifier prompts based upon the SRK framework,the technique has the potential to be exhaustive.• Error identifier prompts aid the analyst in error identification.• Once a credible error has been identified, the HEIST tables provide theEEM’s, PEM’s and error reduction guidelines.• Disadvantages• HEIST is very time consuming in its application.• The need for an initial HTA creates further work for HEIST analysts.• Although the HEIST tables provide error reduction guidelines, these arevery generic and not really specific nor of any use e.g. ergonomic design ofequipment and good system feedback.• A HEIST analysis requires Human Factors/psychology professionals.• No validation evidence is available for the HEIST.• No evidence of the use of HEIST is available in the literature.• Many of the error identifier prompts used by HEIST are repetitive.• It has been reported that HEIST performed poorly when used to predictpotential design induced error on the flight task ‘Land aircraft at NewOrleans using the auto-land system’. HEIST performed the worst out ofHET, SHERPA, Human Error HAZOP and HEIST.A3.10.10 THEAThe Technique for Human Error Assessment (THEA) was developed primarily toaid designers/engineers in identifying potential problems between users andinterfaces in the early design stages of systems design. The technique is ahighly structured one that employs cognitive error analysis based upon Norman’s(No citation reference - 1988) action execution model. THEA also utilises ascenario-based analysis, whereby the analyst exhaustively describes thescenario under analysis before any analysis is carried out. The scenarioMay 2006 Page A3-98 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Toolsdescription gives the analyst a thorough description of the scenario underanalysis, including information such as actions and any contextual factors, whichmay provide opportunity for an error to occur.• Advantages• THEA is a highly structured technique.• The THEA technique can be used by non-Human Factors professionals.• As it is recommended that THEA be used very early in the system lifecycle, potential interface problems can be identified and eradicated veryearly in the design process.• THEA error prompt questions are based on Norman’s action executionmodel.• THEA’s error prompt questions aid the analyst in the identification ofpotential errors.• THEA is more suggestive and easier to apply than typical HRA methods(DTC147 - Pocock, Harrison, Wright & Fields, 1997).• Each error question has associated consequences and design issues toaid the analyst.• THEA appears to be a very generic technique, allowing it to be applied tomany domains, such as command and control.• Disadvantages• Although error questions prompt the analyst for potential errors, THEAdoes not use any error modes and so the analyst may be unclear on thetypes of errors that may occur.• THEA is very resource intensive, particularly with respect to time taken tocomplete an analysis.• Error consequences and design issues provided by THEA are very genericand limited.• At the moment, there appears to be no validation evidence associated withTHEA.• HTA, task decomposition and scenario description create additional workfor the analyst.• For a technique that is supposed to be usable by non-Human Factorsprofessionals, the terminology used in the error analysis questions sectionis confusing and hard to decipher. This could cause problems for non-Human Factors professionals.May 2006 Page A3-99 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)A3.10.11 HETThe Human Error Template (HET) is a human error identification (HEI) techniquethat was developed from a review of existing HEI method external error mode(EEM) taxonomies and an evaluation of pilot error incidence. The HET techniqueis a checklist approach and comes in the form of an error template. HET worksas a simple checklist and is applied to each bottom level task step in ahierarchical task analysis (HTA). The HET technique works by indicating whichof the HET error modes are credible for each task step, based upon analystsubjective judgement. The analyst simply applies each of the HET error modesto the task step in question and determines whether any of the modes produceany credible errors or not. The HET error taxonomy consists of twelve errormodes that were selected based upon a study of actual pilot error incidence andexisting error modes used in contemporary HEI methods.For each credible error (i.e. those judged by the analyst to be possible) theanalyst should give a description of the form that the error would take, such as,‘pilot dials in the airspeed value using the wrong knob’. Next, the analyst has todetermine the outcome or consequence associated with the error e.g. Aircraftstays at current speed and does not slow down for approach. Finally, the analystthen has to determine the likelihood of the error (Low, medium or high) and thecriticality of the error (Low, medium or high). If the error is given a high rating forboth likelihood and criticality, the aspect of the interface involved in the task stepis then rated as a ‘fail’, meaning that it is not suitable for certification.• Advantages• The HET methodology is quick, simple to learn and use and requires verylittle training.• HET utilises a comprehensive error mode taxonomy based upon existingHEI EEM taxonomies, actual pilot error incidence data and pilot error casestudies.• HET is easily auditable as it comes in the form of an error-proforma.• Taxonomy prompts analyst for potential errors.• Reliability and Validity data exists.• Although the error modes in the HET EEM taxonomy were developedspecifically for the aviation domain, they are generic, ensuring that the HETtechnique can potentially be used in a wide range of different domains,such as command and control, ATC, and nuclear reprocessing.• Disadvantages• For large, complex tasks it may become tedious to perform.• Extra work involved if HTA not already available.May 2006 Page A3-100 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and ToolsA3.10.12 HEARTThe Human Error Assessment and Reduction Technique (HEART) was designedprimarily as a quick, simple to use and easily understood HEI technique. HEARTis a highly procedural technique, which attempts to quantify human error andaims only to deal with those errors that will have a gross effect on the system inquestion, in order to reduce the resource usage when applying the technique.The method uses its own values of reliability and also ‘factors of effect’ for anumber of error producing conditions (EPC). The HEART methodology hasmainly been used in nuclear power plant assessments having been used in theUK for the Sizewell B risk assessment and also the risk assessments for UKMagnox and Advanced Gas-Cooled Reactor stations.• Advantages• HEART appears to be quick and simple to use, involving little training.• Each error-producing condition has a remedial measure associated with it.• HEART gives the analyst a quantitative output.• HEART uses fewer resources than other techniques such as SHERPA.• Various validation studies demonstrate evidence of validity.• Disadvantages• Doubts over the consistency of the technique remain. There is little instructure and in the task classification and assignment of error producingcategories stages the analyst has no guidance. The result is that differentanalysts often use the technique differently.• Although it has been involved in a number of validation studies, the HEARTmethodology still requires further validation.• Neither dependence nor EPC interaction is accounted for by HEART.• HEART does not provide enough guidance for the analyst on a number ofkey aspects, such as task classification and also in determining theassessed proportion of effect.• HEART is very subjective, reducing its reliability and consistency.• The technique would require considerable development to be used in otherdomains, such as military operations.A3.10.13 TAFEITask Analysis For Error Identification (TAFEI) is a method that enables people topredict errors with device use by modelling the interaction between the user andthe device under analysis. It assumes that people use devices in a purposefulmanner, such that the interaction may be described as a “cooperativeMay 2006 Page A3-101 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)endeavour”, and it is by this process that problems arise. Furthermore, thetechnique makes the assumption that actions are constrained by the state of theproduct at any particular point in the interaction, and that the device offersinformation to the user about its functionality. Thus, the interaction betweenusers and devices progresses through a sequence of states. At each state, theuser selects the action most relevant to their goal, based on the System Image.• Advantages• Structured and thorough procedure.• Sound theoretical underpinning.• Flexible, generic, methodology.• TAFEI can include error reduction proposals.• TAFEI appears to be relatively simple to apply.• TAFEI represents a flexible, generic method for identifying human errorswhich can be used for the design of anything from kettles to computersystems.• Disadvantages• Not a rapid technique, as HTA and State Space Diagrams (SSD) areprerequisites.• Requires some skill to perform effectively• Limited to goal-directed behaviour• TAFEI may be difficult to learn and also time consuming to train.• It may also be difficult to acquire or construct the SSDs required for aTAFEI analysis. A recent study investigated the use of TAFEI forevaluating design induced pilot error and found that SSDs do not exist forBoeing and Airbus aircraft.A3.10.14 HERAThe Human Error Recovery Assessment (HERA) framework is a prototypemultiple method or ‘toolkit’ approach to human error identification that wasdeveloped in response to a review of HEI methods, which suggested that nosingle HEI/HRA technique possessed all of the relevant components required forefficient HRA/HEI analysis. In conclusion to a review of thirty-eight existingHRA/HEI techniques it was suggested that the best approach would be forpractitioners to utilise a framework type approach to HEI, whereby a mixture ofindependent HRA/HEI tools would be used under one framework.May 2006 Page A3-102 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• Advantages• The multi-method HERA framework ensures that it is highly exhaustive andcomprehensive.• Each of the questions surrounding the goals, PEMs , Plans and PSFanalysis provide the HERA team with associated EEMs. This removes theproblem of selecting the wrong error mode.• The framework approach offers the analyst more than one chance toidentify errors. This should ensure that no potential errors are missed.• The HERA framework allows analysis teams to see the scenario from anumber of different perspectives.• HERA uses existing, proven HEI techniques, such as the human errorHAZOP, THERP and SHERPA techniques.• Disadvantages• Such a framework approach would require a huge amount of time andresources to conduct an analysis.• The technique could become very repetitive, with many errors beingidentified over and over again.• Domain expertise would be required for a number of the modules.• A HERA team would have to be constructed. Such a team requires amixed group made up of operators, Human Factors specialists, designers,engineers etc. Building such a team and making sure they can all bebrought together at the same time would be a difficult thing to do.• Although the HERA technique is vast and contains a number of differentmodules, it is difficult to see how such an approach (using traditional EEMtaxonomies) would perform better than far simpler and quicker approachesto HEI such as SHERPA and HET.• The HERA framework seems too large and overcomplicated for what itactually offers.• Due to the multitude of different techniques used, the training time for suchan approach would be considerably high.May 2006 Page A3-103 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)A3.11 Workspace, Workstation and HMI Design TechniquesWorkspace, Workstation and HMI design techniques are used to help determinethe optimum physical environment incorporating the space in which the users willperform their operational, maintenance and rest tasks. Workspace, Workstationand HMI design techniques include:• Link Analysis• Workspace Design• Workstation Design• Environmental Design• Synthetic User Modelling (Anthropometric)• Human Factors Trade-Off Analysis• Human Factors Style Guide• Health and Safety Analysis• Layout Analysis• Repertory Grid Analysis• Walkthrough AnalysisThe following sub-sections provide an overview of each of the aforementionedworkspace; workstation and HMI design techniques and the associated strengthsand weaknesses.A3.11.1Link AnalysisLink analysis determines the ‘links’ between physical items within the HMI suchas individual workstations, locally operated items of equipment, operatingpositions, access points, communication points and individual items of equipmentwithin the HMI. At a micro level, the analysis can also consider individual pieceof information displayed on computer-driven display screens.Link analysis uses 2-D (or possible pseudo 3-D) representations of the HMI thatcontain sufficient detail for the purpose. Here, accuracy of representationphysical dimensions may be much more important than device detail. Linkanalysis requires adequate knowledge of the operator’s task and tasksequences. Links are identified between each physical feature of the HMI that isrequired to perform a task. Items are connected using ‘links’ according to therequirements of the task. Aspects that are assessed can include: frequency ofaccess to a device or location, importance of the device to the task and the typeof access required (acquire information visually, operate device, move device,etc.). Inter-device linkages are recorded in tabular form.May 2006 Page A3-104 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and ToolsLink analysis is well suited to HMIs where sequence of use and frequency of useare the dominant characteristics of the user interaction. It offers a low-costmeans of optimising HMI design features. If applied to the final design of the HMIit can only identify shortcomings. However, if it is applied to representations ofconceptual designs, or to computer-based models of evolving designs, it canform a useful part of an iterative design cycle with the potential to reduce projectrisk and promote user-centred HMI design.• Advantages• Link analysis is a very straightforward technique that requires minimaltraining.• Link analysis is a quick technique that offers an immediately useful output.• Link analysis output helps to generate design improvements.• Link analysis has been used extensively in the past in a number ofdomains.• Link analysis output prompts logical redesign of system interfaces.• Link analysis can be used throughout the design process to evaluate andmodify design concepts.• Disadvantages• A link analysis requires preliminary data collection such as observation,walkthrough type analysis and a HTA.• Link analysis only considers the basic physical relationship between theuser and the system. Cognitive processes and error mechanisms are notaccounted for.• Link analysis output is not easily quantifiable.A3.11.2Workspace DesignWorkspace design is used to specify the dimensions and layout of spaces inorder optimise human task performance, enable efficient traffic routing andmaterial routing and to control health and safety risks.Workspace design is based the simple context of identifying both the personneland systems within a workspace and their associated characteristics that willdrive the design and layout. Typical considerations will include:• Traffic flow within and through the workspace.• Equipment usage and movement (based upon link analysis results).• Communication patterns and requirements.• Maintenance access requirements and associated support.May 2006 Page A3-105 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Watch keeping regimes.Based upon these factors, a preferred layout for the workspaces is developediteratively through the use of synthetic user modelling, mock-ups, computer aideddesign (CAD) and prototyping. In fact the CAD process now often drives thedesign of compartments and subsequently the HF analysts role may be toreview, amend and apply HF good practice to the design of compartments.Workspace Design is an essential part of platform design and failure for it to becorrectly applied may lead to increased development costs or to operational andhealth and safety risks. It is applied from the Assessment phase to theManufacture phase of the design cycle.• Advantages• Workspace analysis is easy to implement and also simple to use.• Workspace analysis is a very quick technique to perform, offering animmediately useful output.• Workspace analysis be applied to paper diagrams of the compartment /workspace under analysis.• The output provided by the technique is immediately useful, offering aredesign of the workspace under analysis based an understanding of thetasks to be performed and personnel located within the workspace.• Disadvantages• The output of the technique is very limited i.e. it only caters for layout.Errors and task times are ignored.• If an initial task analysis is required, application time can rise dramatically.• Conducting a workspace analysis for complex compartments may be verydifficult and time consuming.A3.11.3Workstation DesignWorkstation design is used to ensure that the spatial arrangement of displays,controls, working surfaces, storage and (where required) seating arrangementsof a workstation are configured so that the user can perform all tasks effectively,efficiently, in comfort and without being exposed to health and safety risks.Workstation design utilises a series of the other tools and techniques to ensurethat the layout of a workstation is compatible with the tasks to be undertakenincluding:1. Allocation of Function – used to define the types and broad degree ofautomation and hence broad type of workstation (HMI or HCI etc).May 2006 Page A3-106 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools2. Target Audience Description – Used to define and understand thevariability of size, reach envelope, movement space and visibility arc ofpersonnel that will use the workstation3. Task Syntheses / Role Definition – used to define the activities that theuser will perform at the workstation4. Layout Analysis & Link Analysis (workstation) – This will be used todetermine the position of the controls and display relevant to position of theuser.Workstation design is an essential part of the equipment design process andfailure to consider the appropriate Human Factors aspects will increase theprobability of providing users with a inefficient, uncomfortable and dissatisfyingwork environment with adverse health and safety impacts. Workstations areoutlined during the Assessment phase of the lifecycle, design during theDemonstration phase utilising techniques such as synthetic user modelling,workstation mock-ups and prototyping.• Advantages• Workstation Design is easy to implement.• Workspace analysis is a very quick technique to perform, offering animmediately useful output.• Workspace analysis be applied to paper diagrams of the workstation /interface under analysis.• The output provided by the technique is immediately useful, offering aredesign of the workstation under analysis based an understanding of thetasks to be performed and the end users.• Disadvantages• The output of the technique is very limited i.e. it only caters for layout. Itdoes not take into account human error and workload.• If an initial task analysis is required, application time can rise dramatically.• Conducting a workstation analysis for complex systems may be verydifficult and time consuming.A3.11.4Environmental DesignThe purpose of environmental design is to ensure that all relevant environmentalfactors are considered and are contained within acceptable limits (upper andlower) to humans.Factors to be considered as part of environmental design include, but are notlimited to, ship motion, noise and vibration, temperature, lighting, atmosphericcontaminants, radiation and waste disposal. Appropriate thresholdsencompassing the range and variability for each factor should be defined basedMay 2006 Page A3-107 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)upon the tasks being performed and the system / equipment being operated.Where appropriate, health and safety warnings and alerts associated with theenvironmental factors are designed into the compartments.Environmental design is an essential design activity and environmentalspecifications will be identified from Concept onwards, however detailed design islikely to be concentrated during the Demonstration phase of the CADMID cycle.• Advantages• Compartments and workspaces will be designed to take into account theenvironmental considerations of the end users.• Compartments and workspaces will be fit for purpose• Early identification of the environmental design requirements will ensurethat the environmental support systems, such the HVAC system, aredesigned to support the required loading.• Disadvantages• None identified.A3.11.5Synthetic User Modelling (Anthropometric)Synthetic User Modelling (Anthropometric) is a technique used to ensure that thedesign of workstations and workspaces takes into account variations of userphysical size, the interaction between the user and the equipment, interactionswith other users, the movement of personnel and equipment within theworkspace and the effect of environmental factors.Synthetic User Modelling can be performed as an integral part of Simulationbaseddesign or as a stand-alone activity in its own right. A three-dimensionalrepresentation of the workspace design is developed. Working surfaces andequipment are represented. The kinematical properties of moveable objects aremodelled, e.g. rotating machinery, door and hatch openings etc. Environmentalfactors are modelled, e.g. ship motion, lighting. Human body size and movementcharacteristics are modelled in accordance with data about the range ofvariability of anthropometric characteristics. The synthetic user model can varyfrom a 2-D representation to a fully interactive dynamic 3-D environment usingcomputer-aided design and/or virtual reality techniques. The model is thenapplied to selectively investigate the compatibility of the workspace design withtask performance and user characteristics.Synthetic User Modelling is used from assessment once the overallarrangements of workspaces have been identified and modelling can continue upto the manufacture stage to assist in safety assessments and integration ofpersonnel and equipments.May 2006 Page A3-108 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• Advantages• The use of Synthetic User Modelling enables the visualisation andassessment of the design of a complete system or individual equipmentprior to construction.• Disadvantages• Even a simple Synthetic User Model can be a resource intense activity.A3.11.6Human Factors Trade-Off AnalysisThe purpose of Human Factors Trade-Off Analysis is to identify the optimalbalance between manpower, personnel, training, Human Factors engineeringand health and safety impact, risks and costs.In summary the HF issues and constraints are identified for each system option inthe Combined Operational Effectiveness and Investment Analysis (COEIA) andthe impact and likelihood of each Human Factor issue or constraint is estimated.The HFI domains and sub-areas are used to further characterise the nature ofissues and risks to which costs may be attached and the HFI issues and risks areused to examine the effect of changing the characteristics of system options witha view to realising an optimum balance between manpower, personnel, training,Human Factors engineering, health and safety.Human Factors Trade-Off Analysis is used during the Concept and Assessmentphases of the CADMID cycle in conjunction with the COEIA studies of systemoptions. Typically it will require the involvement of an HFI specialist and a smallteam of representative stakeholders including DEC, IPT, TES-SSG-ShipDes,DME, FOTR and TES-SA-MA.• Advantages• It provides a means to evaluate and determine the optimal solution from aHuman Factors whole systems perspective.• All HFI domains are (or at least should be) considered in determining theoptimum solution.• It provides a systematic method of justifying selected design solutions fromthe perspective of Human Factors, cost and risk.• Disadvantages• Human Factors Trade-Off Analysis is resource intensive in terms of time,participants and cost.• The requirement to co-ordinate and manage such a wide group ofstakeholders is logistically challenging.May 2006 Page A3-109 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)A3.11.7Human Factors Style GuideThe purpose of a Human Factors Style Guide is to ensure that the userequipmentinterfaces of all equipments are internally consistent and highly interoperableand to promote commonality of the look and feel required by theorganisation.In summary, Human Factors style guides are developed by a HFI specialist withsupporting subject matter expertise as required and should be structured inaccordance with existing standards and current style guides. The content of thestyle guide should address all components of the user-equipment interface andfocus on the achievement of operability criteria.Information about the organisation and the target audience also needs to betaken into account, e.g. language preferences, colour conventions etc. The styleguide consists of design principles stated as rules (for example colour codes forthreat or equipment status) and examples of user equipment design components(display layout, window design, button shape and appearance etc.). The styleguide should be validated with stakeholders as well as with the equipmentdesigners. The style guide should be used to enforce and to check complianceduring the design process.The human factor style guide is selected or developed during the demonstrationphase of the CADMID cycle and is finalised by the start of Manufacture for newequipment, and within In-Service phase for equipment modification or refits. HFIspecialist and subject matter expert advice is required.• Advantages• A Human Factors Style Guide ensures a consistent look and feel isadopted for all user-equipment interfaces.• A Human Factors Style Guide ensures a that the user-equipmentinterfaces are developed in accordance with the requirements of the• Disadvantages• A Human Factors Style Guide may conflict with existing commercial of theshelf (COTS) products existing user interfaces.A3.11.8Health and Safety AnalysisThe purpose of Health and Safety Analysis is to ensure the well–being ofpersonnel who may come into contact with the system. This is achieved throughthe systematic identification of health hazards and safety risks to which personnelmay be exposed and the measures taken, to reduce or control these, in thedesign of the platform or equipment and through operating procedures andtraining.The management process for health hazards and safety is described in detailedwithin JSP 430 [Ref 5]. Using this management system, a health and safetyMay 2006 Page A3-110 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Toolsanalysis is conducted for each iteration of the design process and the healthhazards and safety risks are identified and risk reduction measures specified.Current health and safety risks for the class of system can be used as a baselineand existing standards will also supply suitable frameworks and guidance forhealth and safety assessments. The task synthesis, user-equipment design,workstation design, workspace design and the environmental design should eachbe subject to health and safety assessments.Synthetic user modelling, task and role performance modelling and prototypingcan be used to assess safety-critical aspects. Risk reduction measures that areidentified will include changes to the design, procedures and training. Specificsafety features may also be required including, but not limited to those providinguser protection, alerts and warnings, escape and evacuation facilities.Health and safety analysis proceeds throughout the life of the system from theConcept Phase onwards and is a Mandatory activity for all platforms andequipment.• Advantages• Health and Safety Analysis will ensure the well–being of personnel whomay come into contact with the system• An established and proven systematic approach is in place in the form ofJSP 430 [Ref 5].• For large-scale systems, a dedicated Safety Specialist will conduct Healthand Safety Analysis.• Disadvantages• Health and Safety Analysis is resource intensive in terms of time,participants and cost – however is essential and mandatory activity.A3.11.9Layout AnalysisLayout analysis considers the physical disposition of elements within the HMI inrelation to the various functions performed by the HMI components. Whilst thismay influence the placement of entire devices, increasingly its value lies in theorganisation of elements within computer-driven devices, such as VDU displaysand keyboard and touch-screen interfaces.Layout analysis is based on Human Factors theories that model the way in whichhumans process information. As such, where the user must locate information,interpret information, associate and relate separate items of information to form acomposite picture of system state or the prevailing situation, theory indicates thatthese processes will be facilitated by a ‘logical’ grouping of devices and of displayelements that mirrors the user’s ‘mental model’ of the task in hand.The analysis seeks to order and group information and devices first by functionalassociation or commonality of function. The analysis is then refined byMay 2006 Page A3-111 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)considering frequency of use, importance to task, and the required saliency ofparticular pieces information or devices.Where the HMI supports a multitude of functions or use scenarios, each requiringdifferent physical HMI arrangements, Layout Analysis assists the designer toconsider trade-offs.Layout analysis is well suited to HMIs where multi-functionality and flexibility ofuse sequence of use and frequency of use are the dominant characteristics ofthe user interaction. It offers a low-cost means of optimising HMI designfeatures. If applied to the final design of the HMI it can only identifyshortcomings. However, if it is applied to representations of conceptual designs,or to computer-based models of evolving designs, it can form a useful part of aniterative design cycle with the potential to reduce project risk and promote usercentredHMI design.• Advantages• Layout analysis is very easy to implement and also simple to use.• Low resource usage.• Layout analysis requires very little training.• Layout analysis is a very quick technique to perform, offering animmediately useful output.• Can be applied to paper diagrams of the device/interface under analysis.• The output provided by the technique is immediately useful, offering aredesign of the interface under analysis based upon importance, sequenceand frequency of use.• Disadvantages• Poor reliability/Validity (DTC168 - Stanton & Young 1999).• The output of the technique is very limited i.e. it only caters for layout.Errors and Task times are ignored.• Literature regarding layout analysis is extremely sparse.• If an initial HTA is required, application time can rise dramatically.• Conducting a layout analysis for complex interfaces may be very difficultand time consuming.A3.11.10 Repertory Grid AnalysisRepertory Grid Analysis is an interview-based inter-comparison technique thatexplores user perceptions about two or more alternative devices, products orrealisations of a particular aspect of an HMI. The technique examines userconstructs, such as goodness of labelling, and contrasts, such as inconsistentMay 2006 Page A3-112 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Toolslabelling, in a systematic manner. The analyst then extracts salient factors andfeatures. Quantitative or qualitative results can be produced. Repertory GridAnalysis may be employed at the conceptual stage of design, or to evolving orrealised products. Subject compare and contrast alternatives and are asked toidentify inter-option similarities and differences, with their accompanying reasons.Results are recorded in tabular format.Repertory Grids are structured, flexible and thorough, however the procedure canbe lengthy. Reliability an validity are not judged to be high, but the approach mayhelp broaden a designers view of the user and of how users may perceive theresults of the designer’s work.• Advantages• Structured and thorough procedure.• The technique is generic and can be applied in any domain for anyproduct, system or device.• A very easy technique to use.• Can be used in the early design lifecycle in order determine user opinionson what the design should include, or with existing products for evaluationpurposes.• Repertory grid analysis output is very useful, providing an insight into userperceptions and attitudes.• Little training required.• Disadvantages• The repertory grid procedure is a long and drawn out one.• Tedious and time consuming in its application.• Repertory grid analysis does not always produce usable factors.• If quantitative analysis is required, additional training is also needed.• The reliability and validity of the technique is questionable.• Knowledge of statistics is required.A3.11.11 Walkthrough AnalysisWalkthroughs are typically used in the formative stages of HMI design to identifyfor a particular design or design option: potential problems of use and the likelyacceptability of the HMI, thus reducing project risk. Walkthroughs require accessto knowledgeable and experienced users to provide informed comment.The technique requires a representative set of users to enact a procedure or setof operations in a model of the operating environment that has sufficient fidelity.May 2006 Page A3-113 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)In some cases, where only spatial information is required, very simplerepresentations of the HMI components can be used. Where more detailedinformation is required, greater fidelity, such as representations of individual HMIdevices, may be required. Walkthrough can also be conducted using existinghigh-fidelity simulators, where changes to established procedures are underassessment.The Walkthrough approach allows the analyst to ‘freeze’ the activities, in order tointeract with the subjects. Video and audio recording facilities may be beneficial.The technique can be resource friendly, but requires access to experienced userrepresentatives.High reliability and validity cannot be claimed.• Advantages• When used correctly, a walkthrough can provide a very accuratedescription of the task under analysis and also how a proposed systemdesign would be used.• Walkthrough analysis allows the analyst to stop or interrupt the scenario inorder to query certain points. This is a provision, which is not availablewhen using other techniques such as observational analysis.• A walkthrough analysis does not necessarily require the system underanalysis.• Walkthrough analysis is a simple, quick and low cost technique.• Walkthrough analysis would appear to be a very useful tool in the analysisof distributed (team based) tasks.• Walkthrough analysis can provide a very powerful assessment of a designconcept.• Disadvantages• For the analysis to be fruitful, experienced operators for the system underanalysis are required.• ·Reliability of the technique is questionable.May 2006 Page A3-114 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and ToolsA3.12 Human-Machine Interface Evaluation TechniquesHuman-Machine Interface (HMI) Evaluation Techniques are used to assess theadequacy of the design and realisation of a human-machine interface, device orproduct. In addition to checking consistency within the design and conformitywith specified requirements and standards, the techniques are used to assessmore subjective aspects of the interface, such as usability and user satisfaction.Typical HMI techniques include:• Heuristics.• Checklists.• Interface Surveys.• Satisfaction Questionnaires.• User trials.Some techniques, such as those that check conformity with requirements andconsistency in the way in which design rules have been applied can be utilisedthroughout the various stages of the system life cycle, including those before theHMI is fully implemented. The use of computer-generated 2-D and pseudo 3-Dmodels permit the emerging HMI design to be visualised, allowing logical andspatial checking to be carried out. The use of using full-size models (mock-ups)of parts of the HMI evaluation remains an option to be considered. However, indepthassessment cannot dispense with evaluation of the real, as-built HMI,which needs to be examined in realistic operational conditions to identify theinfluences of the operating environment, platform motion, time pressures andother factors that cannot be satisfactorily measured within a laboratory / designenvironment.The following sub-sections provide an overview of each of the aforementionedHMI techniques and the associated strengths and weaknesses.A3.12.1HeuristicsPrior to conducting any formal assessment of an HMI, a simple and valuableapproach is to conduct a heuristic assessment. A heuristic assessment isprobably the simplest technique available to the Human Factors practitioner andis a quick and easy technique based upon obtaining analyst(s) subjectiveopinions on a design concept or product.Heuristic assessment is based upon a group of informed designers, users, ormaintainers interacting with the HMI, device or product giving their impromptuopinions and reactions. These may be initiated by interaction with the HMI,device or product, or stimulated by the group dynamics of the occasion.Heuristic analysis should be conducted continually throughout the design processin order to evaluate and modify the design concept. The lead analyst may alsointroduce prompts, to direct the group in particular directions and a simple set ofMay 2006 Page A3-115 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)heuristic criteria and guidelines have been developed by Nielsen & Molich(DTC137 - 1990):• Simple and natural dialogue.• Speak the users language.• Minimise user memory load.• Be consistent.• Provide feedback.• Provide clearly marked exits.• Provide shortcuts.• Good error messages.• Prevent errors.However, it should be emphasised that a core aspects of the technique lies in thepotential freedom of approach and richness of responses available to the analyst.• Advantages• A very simple technique to apply requiring very little training.• Heuristic analysis can be very quick.• Useful output that is immediately useful.• Very low resource usage.• Can be used repeatedly throughout the design life cycle.• Disadvantages• Poor reliability, validity and comprehensiveness.• Requires a team of SME’s in order to be worthwhile.• Totally subjective.• Totally unstructured.• Consistency of such a technique is questionable.A3.12.2ChecklistsChecklists contain a pre-determined set of criteria and are one of the simplestforms of HMI assessment techniques. The assessment criteria may be derivedfrom the original system specification as part of a Vee-cycle approach, or may beMay 2006 Page A3-116 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Toolsadapted from published best practice and legacy system experience. Theapplication of checklists often relies on direct visual inspection of the HMI, or thetaking of relatively simple measurements. Functional checking may also becarried out. If a checklist is to be used effectively, persons having familiarity withthe type of HMI and the context of is use should apply the checklist.Checklists are commonly used to assess the physical aspects and characteristicsof the HMI, such as dimensions, layout, orientation, labelling, etc. Checklists canalso be used to assess the more subjective aspects, such as HMI usability:those devised by Ravden & Johnson (DTC150 - 1989) ‘HCI Checklist’ andWoodson, Tillman & Tillman (No citation reference - 1992) ‘Human EngineeringChecklist’ having prominence in the area of software-based HMIs.• Advantages• Checklists are a very simple technique to use.• Checklists are probably one of the quickest methods available, offering animmediately useful output.• Checklists are based upon established knowledge about humanperformance (DTC168 - Stanton and Young 1999)• The technique requires very little training.• Resource usage is very low.• Checklists are very adaptable and can easily be modified in order to usefor other devices/systems. For example, Stanton and Young (DTC168 -1999) suggest that the Ravden and Johnson checklist (DTC150 - 1989),originally designed for HCI, is easily adapted to cater for the usability ofother devices, such as in-car stereos.• A number of different checklists are available to the Human Factorspractitioner.• Disadvantages• A checklist type analysis does not account for errors or cognitive problemsassociated with the device.• Context is ignored by checklists.• Checklist type analysis is very subjective. What one analyst classes asbad design may be classed as suitable by another.• Low consistency.• Not a very sophisticated approach to system design.May 2006 Page A3-117 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)A3.12.3Interface SurveysClosely aligned to the use of checklists are interface surveys that focus on thephysical aspects of a HMI in order to pinpoint design inadequacies for aninterface or design concept. Typical types of interface surveys include:1. Control and Display survey - Used to evaluate the controls and displaysprovided by a particular interface.2. Labelling surveys – Used to examine the labelling provided by theinterface under analysis. Kirwan & Ainsworth (DTC115 - 1992) suggestthat the following aspects of each label are recorded: reference, wording,size, position, and colour.3. Coding consistency survey – Used to analyse any coding used on theinterface under analysis. Typical types of coding used are colour coding(e.g. green for go, red for stop), positional coding, size coding and shapecoding (DTC115 - Kirwan & Ainsworth 1992).4. Operator modification survey - The end users of systems often addtemporary modifications to the interface in order to eradicate designinadequacies. Typically, operators use labels or markings to highlightwhere specific controls should be positioned or place objects such aspaper cups over redundant controls. The modifications made by the endusers offer an intriguing insight into the usability of the interface, oftenhighlighting bad design, poor labelling, and simpler procedures (i.e.missing out one or two actions).5. Sightline surveys – Used to analyse operator sightlines in terms ofdistance, angle and obstructions.6. Environmental survey – Used to measure the state of the ambientenvironment e.g. noise, illumination, temperature and humidity levels.A survey approach implies two things, firstly that the physical interface exists onwhich to conduct the survey, and secondly that defined assessment criteria exist.Sophisticated computer-based models may overcome the first point, but the needto establish agreed and valid assessment criteria remains. Much work ondeveloping HMI survey techniques and guides was carried out in the 1980s in theUS nuclear power domain. These guides can be adapted to other domain uses,but the overall approach can be highly resource demanding.• Advantages• Each of the surveys described are easy to apply, requiring very littletraining.• The surveys are generic and can be applied in any domain.• The output of the surveys offers a useful analysis of the interface underanalysis, highlighting instances of bad design.• Standards and guidelines can be used in conjunction with the techniques inorder to ensure comprehensiveness.May 2006 Page A3-118 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• If all of the surveys are applied, the interface in question is subjected to avery exhaustive analysis.• Disadvantages• The application of the surveys is hugely time consuming.• It is questionable whether such dated survey techniques will be useful inthe analysis of synthetic or virtual environments.• An operational system is required for most of the techniques. The use ofsuch techniques during the design process would be impossible.• Whilst the surveys address the design inadequacies of the interface, noassessment of performance is given.A3.12.4User Satisfaction QuestionnairesA principal objective of the HMI designer is to maximise the degree of usersatisfaction, and therefore user acceptance, within a given user population. UserSatisfaction Questionnaires can be utilised to obtain the views of a range of HMIusers in a structured and consistent way.Satisfaction questionnaires typically address the more subjective, butnevertheless important, aspects of HMI design, such as comprehensibility ofinformation, perceived reliability, ease of use, level of difficulty and ease oflearning.The design of questions must utilise suitable terminology and phraseology.Assessments must be conducted using the real HMI or a high-fidelity real-timesimulation and must be conducted against a pre-determined set of tasks oroperational scenarios. Pre-determined rating scales are used and criteria mustdeveloped against which the need to ‘take action’ in cases of significant userdissatisfaction can be judged.The following three examples provide a précis description of three of the mostcommon type of User Satisfaction Questionnaires, highlighting the associatedadvantages and disadvantages of each tool.A3.12.4.1Questionnaire for User Interface Satisfaction (QUIS)The QUIS technique that has been developed to assess user satisfaction ofhuman-computer interfaces.The QUIS technique is used to elicit user opinions on all usability related aspectsof an interface, including ease of use, system capability, consistency andlearning. QUIS measures the user’s subjective rating of the human-computerinterface under analysis using a series of questions each with an associatedrating scale, typically ascending from 1 to 10.May 2006 Page A3-119 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• Advantages• QUIS is a very quick and easy technique to use, requiring almost notraining.• The output of QUIS is immediately useful, offering an insight into thesystem users’ attitudes regarding the usability of the interface underanalysis.• If the correct sample is used, the systems potential users are in effectrating the usability of the system.• Once an operational system is available, the speed, ease and usefulnessof QUIS allow it to be used again and again to evaluate and modify thedesign concept.• Encouraging reliability and validity statistics.• QUIS statements can be added and removed in order to make the analysismore suitable for the software system in question.• Can be used effectively even with small sample sizes.• Disadvantages• May require substantial development in order to be used to assess C4Isystems.A3.12.4.2Software Usability Measurement Inventory (SUMI)SUMI is a questionnaire technique that uses fifty attitude scale statements inorder to measure the usability of software systems. SUMI has designed to beapplied to any software system that has a display, a keyboard (or other dataentry device) and a peripheral memory device such as a disk drive and has beenused extensively used in the past for a number of different purposes:• Assessing new products during product evaluation.• Product comparisons.• To set targets for future application development.• To set verifiable goals for quality of use attainment.• To track achievement of targets during product development.• To highlight the good and bad points of interfaces.When using SUMI, the sample group are simply given a representative set oftasks to perform with the system under analysis and then are asked to completethe SUMI questionnaire.May 2006 Page A3-120 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• Advantages• SUMI is a very quick and easy technique to use, requiring almost notraining.• The output of SUMI is very useful, offering an insight into the system usersattitudes regarding the systems usability.• If the correct sample is used, the systems potential users are in effectrating the usability of the system.• Once an operational system is available, the speed, ease and usefulnessof SUMI mean that it can be used again and again to evaluate and modifythe design concept.• Encouraging reliability and validity statistics.• SUMI statements can be added and removed in order to make the analysismore suitable for the software system in question.• Can be used effectively even with small sample sizes.• The scoring process is computerised.• SUMI is recognised by the ISO as a method for testing user satisfaction.• Disadvantages• Developed specifically for software systems containing a display, a datainput device and a peripheral memory device. If the system under analysisdoes not possess all of these facets, some modification of the SUMIstatements would be required.• Currently, the technique is only available commercially.A3.12.4.3System Usability Scale (SUS)SUS is a simplistic usability questionnaire, consisting of ten usability statementsthat are rated on a Likert scale of 1 (strongly agree with statement) to 5 (stronglydisagree with statement). The SUS is used to assess the usability of a product ordevice.Both the training and application times for the SUS technique are very low. Sincethe SUS scale uses only ten questions, it is very quick to train and apply.• Advantages• Very easy to use, requiring very little training.• Offers an immediately useful output in the form of a usability ‘rating’ for thedevice under analysis.• Very useful for canvassing user opinions of devices or products.May 2006 Page A3-121 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)• The scale is generic and so the scale can be used in any domain.• The SUS scale is very useful when comparing two or more devices interms of usability.• Its simplicity and speed of use mean that it is a very useful technique touse in conjunction with other usability assessment techniques.• Very quick in its application.• The scale can be adapted to make it more suitable for other domains.• Disadvantages• The output of the SUS is very limited.• Requires an operational version of the device or system under analysis.• Unsophisticated.A3.12.5User TrialsThe most fundamental and highest-integrity HMI Evaluation technique is theconduct of User Trials or Experimentation. Actual system users, or an appropriateset of SMEs test the real HMI under realistic, controlled conditions.In addition to proving HMI functionality, User Trials explore aspects such asadequacy of the HMI in terms usability and efficiency of use, but can also beused to examine the appropriateness of operating procedures and the actualmethod of HMI use under simulated, but realistic operating conditions.User Trials can also provide an opportunity to capture objective data such asoperating times, operator workload and other performance metrics, human errorrates and human communication flows.User Trials should be conducted against a suitable trials plan, with clearly predefinedoperational scenarios and tasks, together with appropriate objectives andassessment criteria.Suitable, non-intrusive measuring equipment and an adequate number of trainedobservers are required. Observers should observe, and not intervene in theconduct of the trial. Post-trial subject interviews and de-briefing should be carriedout.User trials may require significant investment to access the final HMI and itsrelated systems, and assemble adequate numbers and types of userrepresentatives, measuring equipment and sufficient trained observers in theright place at the right time. Sound management of the trial is important. Largeamounts of data may be collected and thus attract significant data processingresource needs. The trial should therefore be based on a sound design, so thatonly relevant data is collected.May 2006 Page A3-122 Issue 4

Annex 3 – HF Techniques, Methods and Tools• Advantages• Potentially a user trial can be used to assess multiple aspects ofperformance using a system design concept, including error, workload,situation awareness and performance time.• When using user trials, the system is evaluated based upon the potentialend-users’ performance.• End-user opinions and advice are elicited during the user trial.• Design recommendations are based upon interviews with the system endusers.• A user trial gives the designers a powerful insight into how the systemunder analysis will be used.• If used throughout the design process, user trials ensure that the end-usersof the system under analysis are considered.• Once the appropriate personnel are gathered, the user trial is simple toconduct.• Disadvantages• Time consuming to conduct.• Large amounts of data are collected, ensuring a lengthy data analysisprocess.• It may be difficult to gain access to the required personnel or end-users.For example, when conducting a user trial for military applications, it mayprove difficult to gain access to the appropriate military personnel for therequired duration.• Often the end-users may be biased towards the old system or procedure.May 2006 Page A3-123 Issue 4

MAP-01-011 – HFI Technical Guide (STGP 11)(This page is intentionally left blank)May 2006 Page A3-124 Issue 4MAP-01-011 Annex 3_26.doc