한국철도학회논문집 (Journal of the Korean Society for Railway)

  • 제13권3호
  • /
  • Pages.264-270
  • /
  • 2010
  • /
  • 1738-6225(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-2235(eISSN)
한국철도학회 (The Korean Society for Railway)
권호 표지

도시철도 역사 내 안전 감시 시스템의 생태학적 인터페이스디자인(EID)을 위한 작업 영역 분석(WDA) 적용

Applying Work Domain Analysis for Ecological Interface Design of Safety Monitoring System in the Urban Railway Station

  • 이석원 (고려대학교 공과대학 산업경영공학과) ;
  • 이봉근 (고려대학교 공과대학 산업경영공학과) ;
  • 백지승 (고려대학교 공과대학 산업경영공학과) ;
  • 조성식 (고려대학교 공과대학 산업경영공학과) ;
  • 명노해 (고려대학교 공과대학 산업경영공학과)
  • 투고 : 2010.03.26
  • 심사 : 2010.06.07
  • 발행 : 2010.06.26
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구에서는 역사 내 철도 안전 감시 시스템의 최적 디스플레이 설계를 위하여 생태학적 인터페이스 디자인(EID, Ecological Interface Design) 프레임웍을 적용하였다. 특히, EID 개발을 위한 가장 선행적 연구인 작업 영역 분석(WDA, Work Domain Analysis)을 실시하였다. 먼저 WDA를 위한 시스템 경계를 도시철도의 역사 내 안전 감시 시스템으로 설정하고, Abstraction Hierarchy (AH)를 이용하여 역무원의 작업 환경을 분석하였다. AH 결과 역무원이 작업 환경에서 얻게 되는 정보의 흐름을 다섯 단계의 수준(Functional Purpose, Values and Priority Measures, Purpose-related Functions, Object-related Process, Physical Object)으로 전개할 수 있었고, 각각의 수준의 정보로 이루어진 작업 영역 모델(WDM, Work Domain Model)을 얻었다. 이 WDM이 도시철도 안전 감시 시스템의 작업 환경을 얼마나 반영하는지 평가하기 위하여 10년 이상의 역무실 직무 경험이 있는 전문가를 대상으로 Scenario Mapping법을 실시하였다. 평가된 WDM을 바탕으로 현재 역사 내 안전 감시 시스템이 제공하고 있는 정보는 물론이고, 현재 안전 감시 시스템이 제공해주고 있지 못하는 13개의 요구 정보를 추가로 추출하였다. 이렇게 추출된 요구 정보는 도시철도 안전 감시 시스템의 EID에 반드시 반영되어야 할 필수적인 정보로 활용될 수 있다.

This paper presents an application of the Ecological Interface Design (EID) theoretical framework for developing an optimal display of railway safety monitoring system (SMS) in stations. Especially, Work Domain Analysis (WDA) which is the preceding research for EID was conducted. This study proceeds as follows: First, urban railway SMS in stations was defined as a system boundary for WDA, and work environment for station personnels was analysed through Abstraction Hierarchy (AH). AH represents five levels (Functional Purpose, Values and Priority Measures, Purpose-related Functions, Object-related Process, Physical Object) of informations that station personnels obtain from work environment, and Work Domain Model (WDM) was derived as a result of the AH. To confirm how well WDM represents the real work environment of SMS, Scenario Mapping was conducted with experts who has been working as a station personnel for more than ten years. Lastly, thirteen additional information requirements that are not provided by the existing SMS as well as all the information that are provided by the existing SMS were extracted using confirmed WDM. These information requirements can be used as essential information for EID of urban railway SMS.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. A. Kumar, P.K. Sinha (2008) Human error control in railways, Jordan Journal of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, 2(4), pp. 183-190.
  2. Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs (2008) Analysis of Railway Accidents and Accident Cases (철도사고 분석 및 사고사례).
  3. D.S. Kim, D.H. Baek, W.C. Yoon (2007) An investigation of human error analysis techniques in various industries with implications for the Korean railway industry, Journal of the Korean Society for Railway, 10(1), pp. 7-15.
  4. H.W. Kwak, C.H. Park (2005) Analysis on Daegu subway fire accident 1: Human errors and system, The Korean Journal of Experimental Psychology, 17(3), pp. 311-326.
  5. J.R. Wilson, B. J. Norris (2006) Human factors in support of a successful railway: A review, Cognition, Technology and Work, 8(2), pp. 4-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-005-0016-6
  6. L.A. Cordiner, J.R. Wilson, S. Roberts (1999) Evaluation of control room human factors: A case study in the railway industry, Proceedings of International Conference on Human Interface in Control Rooms, Cockpits and Command Centres, pp. 26-30.
  7. B. Sandblad, W. Andersson, I. Frej, A. Gideon (1997) The role of human-computer interaction in design of new train traffic control systems, Proceedings of World Congress on Railway Research, Vol. A, pp. 777-783.
  8. C.D. Wickens, J.G. Hollands (2000) Engineering Psychology and Human Performance, 3rd ed., Prentice-Hall.
  9. K.B. Bennett, A.L. Nagy, J.M. Flach (1997) Visual displays. In G. Salvendy (Ed.), Handbook of human factors and ergonomics, 2nd ed, Wiley.
  10. C.M. Burns, D.J. Bryant, B.A. Chalmers (2005) Boundary, purpose, and values in work-domain models: Models of naval command and control, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans, 35(5), pp. 603-616. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMCA.2005.851153
  11. J. Rasmussen, K.J. Vicente (1989) Coping with human errors through system design: Implications for ecological interface design, International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 31(5), pp. 517-534. https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7373(89)90014-X
  12. K.J. Vicente, J. Rasmussen (1990) The ecology of human machine systems: II. Mediating "Direct Perception" in complex work domains, Ecological Psychology, 2(3), pp. 207-250. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326969eco0203_2
  13. K.J. Vicente, J. Rasmussen (1992) Ecological interface design: Theoretical foundations, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 22(4), pp. 589-606. https://doi.org/10.1109/21.156574
  14. J.J. Gibson (1986) The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  15. C.M. Burns, J.R. Hajdukiewicz (2004) Ecological Interface Design, CRC Press.
  16. G. Olsson, P.L. Lee (1994) Effective interface for process operators - A prototype, Journal of Process Control, 4(2), pp. 99- 107. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-1524(94)80028-6
  17. N. Dinadis, K.J. Vicente (1996) Ecological interface design for a power plant feedwater subsystem, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, 43(6), pp. 266-277. https://doi.org/10.1109/23.485965
  18. C.M. Burns (2000) Putting it all together: Improving display integration in ecological displays, Human Factors, 42(2), pp. 226-241. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872000779656471
  19. N. Lau, $\Phi$. Veland, J. Kwok, G.A. Jamieson (2008) Ecological interface design in the nuclear domain: An application to the secondary subsystems of a boiling water reactor plant simulator, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, 55(6), pp. 3579- 3596. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2008.2005979
  20. N. Dinadis, K.J. Vicente (1999) Designing functional visualizations for aircraft system status displays, International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 9(3), pp. 241-269. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327108ijap0903_4
  21. S. Chéry, K.J. Vicente, P. Farrell (1999) Perceptual control theory and ecological interface design: Lessons learned from the CDU, Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 43rd Annual Meeting, pp. 389-393.
  22. J. Kuo, C.M. Burns (2000) Work domain analysis for virtual private networks, Proceedings of the 2000 International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, pp. 1972-1977.
  23. T.D. Sharp, A.J. Helmicki (1998) The application of the ecological interface design approach to neonatal intensive care medicine, Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 42nd Annual Meeting, pp. 350-354.
  24. J.R. Hajdukiewicz, K.J. Vicente, D.J. Doyle, P. Milgram, C.M. Burns (2001) Modeling a medical environment: An ontology for integrated medical informatics design, International Journal of Medical Informatics, 62(1), pp. 79-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1386-5056(01)00128-9
  25. C.M. Burns, D.J. Bryant, B.A. Chalmers (2000) A work domain model to support shipboard command and control, Proceedings of the 2000 International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernertics, pp. 2228-2233.
  26. A.M. Bisantz, E.M. Roth, B. Brickman, L.L. Gosbee, L. Hettinger, J. McKinney (2003) Integrating cognitive analyses in a large-scale system design process, International Journal of Human Machine Studies, 58(2), pp. 177-206.
  27. K.J. Vicente (2002) Ecological interface design: Progress and challenge, Human Factors, 44(1), pp. 62-78. https://doi.org/10.1518/0018720024494829
  28. J. Rasmussen (1985) The role of hierarchical knowledge representation in decision making and system management, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 15(2), pp. 234-243.
  29. N. Naikar, R. Hopcroft, A. Moylan (2005) Work domain analysis: Theoretical concepts and methodology, Technical Report No. DSTO-TR-1665, Australian Goverment, Department of Defence, Defence Science and Technology Organization.
  30. D.P. Jenkins, N.A. Stanton, P.M. Salmon, G.H. Walker, M.S. Young (2008) Using cognitive work analysis to explore activity allocation within military domain, Ergonomics, 51(6), pp. 798-815. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130801915246
  31. C.M. Burns, D.J. Bryant, B.A. Chalmers (2001) Scenario mapping with work domain analysis, Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 45th Annual Meeting, pp. 424-428.