1、 g49g50g3g38g50g51g60g44g49g42g3g58g44g55g43g50g56g55g3g37g54g44g3g51g40g53g48g44g54g54g44g50g49g3g40g59g38g40g51g55g3g36g54g3g51g40g53g48g44g55g55g40g39g3g37g60g3g38g50g51g60g53g44g42g43g55g3g47g36g58control centresThe European Standard EN ISO 11064-7:2006 has the status of a British StandardICS 13
2、.180Ergonomic design of control centres Part 7: Principles for the evaluation of BRITISH STANDARDBS EN ISO 11064-7:2006BS EN ISO 11064-7:2006This British Standard was published under the authority of the Standards Policy and Strategy Committee on 28 April 2006 BSI 2006ISBN 0 580 48162 XThe British S
3、tandards which implement international or European publications referred to in this document may be found in the BSI Catalogue under the section entitled “International Standards Correspondence Index”, or by using the “Search” facility of the BSI Electronic Catalogue or of British Standards Online.T
4、his publication does not purport to include all the necessary provisions of a contract. Users are responsible for its correct application. Compliance with a British Standard does not of itself confer immunity from legal obligations.Summary of pagesThis document comprises a front cover, an inside fro
5、nt cover, the EN ISO title page, the EN ISO foreword page, the ISO title page, pages ii to v, a blank page, pages 1 to 20, an inside back cover and a back cover.The BSI copyright notice displayed in this document indicates when the document was last issued.Amendments issued since publicationAmd. No.
6、 Date CommentsA list of organizations represented on this committee can be obtained on request to its secretary.Cross-referencesenquiries on the interpretation, or proposals for change, and keep UK interests informed; monitor related international and European developments and promulgate them in the
7、 UK.National forewordThis British Standard is the official English language version of EN ISO 11064-7:2006. It is identical with ISO 11064-7:2006.The UK participation in its preparation was entrusted to Technical Committee PH/9, Applied ergonomics, which has the responsibility to: aid enquirers to u
8、nderstand the text; present to the responsible international/European committee any EUROPEAN STANDARDNORME EUROPENNEEUROPISCHE NORMEN ISO 11064-7April 2006ICS 13.180English VersionErgonomic design of control centres - Part 7: Principles for theevaluation of control centres (ISO 11064-7:2006)Concepti
9、on ergonomique des centres de commande -Partie 7: Principes pour lvaluation des centres decommande (ISO 11064-7:2006)Ergonomische Gestaltung von Leitzentralen - Teil 7:Grundstze fr die Bewertung von Leitzentralen (ISO11064-7:2006)This European Standard was approved by CEN on 23 March 2006.CEN member
10、s are bound to comply with the CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations which stipulate the conditions for giving this EuropeanStandard the status of a national standard without any alteration. Up-to-date lists and bibliographical references concerning such nationalstandards may be obtained on application t
11、o the Central Secretariat or to any CEN member.This European Standard exists in three official versions (English, French, German). A version in any other language made by translationunder the responsibility of a CEN member into its own language and notified to the Central Secretariat has the same st
12、atus as the officialversions.CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France,Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania,Slovakia,
13、Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and United Kingdom.EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATIONCOMIT EUROPEN DE NORMALISATIONEUROPISCHES KOMITEE FR NORMUNGManagement Centre: rue de Stassart, 36 B-1050 Brussels 2006 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reservedworldwide for CEN
14、national Members.Ref. No. EN ISO 11064-7:2006: EForeword This document (EN ISO 11064-7:2006) has been prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 159 “Ergonomics“ in collaboration with Technical Committee CEN/TC 122 “Ergonomics“, the secretariat of which is held by DIN. This European Standard shall be gi
15、ven the status of a national standard, either by publication of an identical text or by endorsement, at the latest by October 2006, and conflicting national standards shall be withdrawn at the latest by October 2006. According to the CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations, the national standards organizat
16、ions of the following countries are bound to implement this European Standard: Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovaki
17、a, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and United Kingdom. Endorsement notice The text of ISO 11064-7:2006 has been approved by CEN as EN ISO 11064-7:2006 without any modifications. EN ISO 11064-7:2006Reference numberISO 11064-7:2006(E)INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ISO11064-7First edition2006-04-01Ergonom
18、ic design of control centres Part 7: Principles for the evaluation of control centres Conception ergonomique des centres de commande Partie 7: Principes pour lvaluation des centres de commande EN ISO 11064-7:2006ii iiiContents Page Foreword iv Introduction v 1 Scope . 1 2 Normative references . 1 3
19、Terms and definitions. 1 4 Requirements and recommendations for evaluation process. 3 4.1 General verification and validation (V HSI software; communications facilities; procedures (written or electronic form); EN ISO 11064-7:20066 workstation and console configurations; design of the overall work e
20、nvironment; training and selection of personnel; team working; auxiliary shutdown rooms and panels; local control rooms; local control panels or stations; the needs of maintenance personnel; other needs of the operators (storage, relaxation areas, rest rooms, etc.). 4.4 Verification and validation c
21、riteria a) The criteria developed shall cover the complete set of ergonomics issues that are relevant to a project. b) Criteria should be defined for the evaluations of each ergonomic issue and for the objectives that the evaluation is intended to reach. NOTE 1 The criteria can be derived from the s
22、ource documents in use for the project: performance aspects; safety principles; availability and reliability requirements; operator interface and display principles; requirements from applicable standards and guidelines; recommendations and requirements from ergonomics literature. NOTE 2 Performance
23、 criteria can be classified into several types, for example: requirement-referenced criteria the comparison of the performance of the system to an accepted performance requirement; benchmark-referenced criteria the comparison of the performance of the system to a benchmark system that is defined as
24、acceptable; normative referenced criteria the comparison of the performance of the system to norms established for the performance based on many system evaluations; expert-judgement referenced criteria the comparison of the performance of the system to criteria established through the judgement of s
25、ubject-matter experts. EN ISO 11064-7:200674.5 Verification and validation input documents a) The design projects evaluation team should collect all important documentation related to the topic under consideration and used in the design process. NOTE The documentation will be the basis for the human
26、 factors evaluation process. b) A design projects evaluation team should have access to appropriate documentation. c) The evaluation team should have access to the members of the team responsible for design and documentation. d) The evaluation team should have access to a human factors operating exp
27、erience review. 4.6 Verification and validation team a) The human factors evaluation team should be independent of, but have access to, the design team. Individuals should not be members of both the design and evaluation teams. b) The communication between the independent human factors evaluation te
28、am and the designers should be supported and stimulated. c) The human factors evaluation team should be suitably placed in the project organization, i.e., have responsibility, authority and positioning within an organization, such that the commitment to human factors V architectural design and civil
29、 engineering; systems analysis; instrumentation and control systems; information and computer systems; human factors engineering/ergonomics; facility operation and training (user representatives). 4.7 Verification and validation resources a) The design project shall supply suitable resources for the
30、 evaluation team. b) Suitable working materials for the conduct of V control centre components and features; measurements (noise, lighting, heating); questionnaire and interview records; EN ISO 11064-7:20068 records of operator responses to specific tests (e.g. simulator based tests or assessments);
31、 human engineering discrepancies (HEDs), used to identify their location and nature so that follow-up action can be taken; resolution of HEDs. 4.8 Verification and validation methods The following should be considered when determining verification and validation methods. a) The evaluation method(s)
32、and/or technique(s) used should be systematic and well documented. NOTE Many human factors evaluation techniques are applicable in a control centre context. A few of the most commonly used techniques are briefly described in Annex C (for more information, see IEEE Std 84510). The evaluation techniqu
33、es may be divided into different categories that are related to the way each technique is used. b) The evaluation methods should be practical, and effective. c) Fast and inexpensive evaluation methods should be used wherever possible and the more sophisticated and expensive methods restricted to tho
34、se evaluations that require them. 4.9 Verification and validation measures a) The evaluation process should, as far as possible, include quantitative measures of the required features and performance. NOTE 1 With reference to verification and validation: in a few cases it might not be possible to de
35、rive objective evidence of meeting requirements. For these cases, appropriate subjective assessments could be an alternative. b) Overall goals such as safety and availability are often difficult to measure and other aspects should be addressed during evaluation of control centres and human-system in
36、terfaces. The following are examples of some human performance measures that should be considered: 1) “Compatibility” the way in which things are presented to operators, and the responses to be expected from the operators, are compatible with human input-output abilities and limitations. NOTE 2 Comp
37、atibility means that operators should be able to read displays, reach controls, etc., regardless of overall system objectives. 2) “Understandability” the information displayed is easily understood and the manual control actions achieve the desired system response. NOTE 3 Understandability means that
38、 the structure, format and content of the human-system dialogue results in meaningful communication. 3) “Situation awareness” the situation is understood and, based on current status and past history, offers the possibility of future predictions. 4) “Controllability” upon which the operator can base
39、 future decisions. NOTE 4 Controllability means to have a certain control of the present situation and knowledge of the history that has led up to the existing status. 5) “Mental workload” measures are based on the hypothesis that the operator has limited cognitive processing capacity. NOTE 5 Publis
40、hed literature describes mental workload as that portion of the operators limited capacity actually required to perform a particular task. EN ISO 11064-7:200696) Measures of “teamwork”. NOTE 6 The major factors usually listed when describing effective team processes concern its “potency”. This inclu
41、des social support for team members by helping each other. Other factors include positive social interactions, sharing of workload, communication and cooperation within the team. All these factors are positively related to team effectiveness, productivity and satisfaction. 7) Measures of “Learnabili
42、ty”. NOTE 7 Learnability means that inexperienced users can easily learn how to use the system with little or no need to consult manuals. 8) Measures of “improved performance” such as “effectiveness”, “efficiency” and “satisfaction”. NOTE 8 Improved performance means to make a difficult task easier
43、or enable an operator to accomplish a task that might otherwise be impossible. “Effectiveness”, “efficiency” and “satisfaction” together form the three measures of usability. ISO 9241-112gives details on how to measure usability. NOTE 9 Effectiveness: a human-system environment is effective if it su
44、pports the operator (or crew) to improve their performance, e.g. reduction of human error such as procedure violations. NOTE 10 Efficiency means that the resources expended in relation to the accuracy and completeness with which users achieve goals, e.g. task times. NOTE 11 Satisfaction signifies th
45、e promotion of maximum comfort and positive attitudes through which users achieve goals. 9) Systems performance measures relevant to facility safety (e.g. by keeping specific process parameters within a certain range). 10) Workstation layout, including dynamic anthropometry evaluations as well as ph
46、ysical positioning and interactions. 4.10 Verification and validation results a) The results from the evaluation should be recorded and documented, including any deviations from criteria. b) The process for assessing deviations found in the evaluation should be systematic and documented. c) All devi
47、ations found in the evaluation should be acted on. d) The evaluation team should check for any risk of side effects of any design changes made because of deviations or non-conformities. EN ISO 11064-7:200610 Annex A (informative) Checklist for V b) evaluation (to actually perform the V c) resolution
48、 (to identify and implement solutions to the deviations identified during the V there is a greater quantity of information and an additional burden in operating the interface equipment. These lead to a greater need to specify system requirements in cognitive rather than physical terms. This requires
49、 techniques such as cognitive task analysis. d) Changes in skill demands Although systems are increasingly automated, they also create new, usually highly skilled tasks for operators. Operators must understand and evaluate the performance of automatic systems, or even take over from them when they fail. It is difficult to see how this level of skill can reasonably be expected of operators, when the same
