A General Methodology for Adapting Industrial HMIs to Human Operators

Modern production systems are becoming more and more complex to comply with diversified market needs, flexible production, and competitiveness. Despite technological progress, the presence of human operators is still fundamental in production plants, since they have the important role of supervising and monitoring processes, by interacting with such complex machines. The complexity of machines implies an increased complexity of human–machine interfaces (HMIs), which are the main point of contact between the operator and the machine. Thus, HMIs cannot be considered anymore an accessory to the machine and their improvement has become an important part of the design of the whole machines, to enable a nonstressful interaction and make them easy to also use less skilled operators. In this article, we present a general framework for the design of HMIs that adapt to the skills and capabilities of the operator, with the ultimate aim of enabling a smooth and efficient interaction and improving user’s situation awareness. Adaptation is achieved by considering three different levels: perception (i.e., how information is presented), cognition (i.e., what information is presented), and interaction (i.e., how interaction is enabled). For each level, general guidelines for adaptation are provided, thus defining a meta-HMI independent of the application. Finally, some examples of how the proposed adaptation patterns can be applied to the case of procedural and extraordinary maintenance tasks are presented. Note to Practitioners—This article was motivated by the problem of facilitating the interaction of human operators with human–machine interfaces (HMIs) of complex industrial systems. Standard industrial HMIs are static and do not consider the user’s characteristics. As a consequence, least-skilled operators are prevented from their use and/or have poor performance. In this article, we suggest a novel methodology to the design of adaptive industrial HMIs that adapt to the skills and capabilities of operators and compensate their limitations (e.g., due to age or inexperience). In particular, we propose a methodological framework that consists of general rules to accommodate the user’s characteristics. Adaptation is achieved at three different levels: perception (i.e., how information is presented), cognition (i.e., what information is presented), and interaction (i.e., how interaction is enabled). The presented rules are independent of the target application. Nevertheless, we establish a relationship between such design rules and user’s impairments and capabilities and kind of working tasks. Hence, designers of HMIs are called to instantiate them considering the specific requirements and characteristics of the users and the working tasks of the application at hand.

[1]  Zofia Mockałło,et al.  Smart and adaptive interfaces for INCLUSIVE work environment , 2017 .

[2]  Francesco Leali,et al.  Survey on human–robot collaboration in industrial settings: Safety, intuitive interfaces and applications , 2018, Mechatronics.

[3]  Fabio Paternò,et al.  ConcurTaskTrees: A Diagrammatic Notation for Specifying Task Models , 1997, INTERACT.

[4]  Deniz Erdogmus,et al.  The Future of Human-in-the-Loop Cyber-Physical Systems , 2013, Computer.

[5]  Angelica N. Nieto Lee,et al.  Enhancement of industrial monitoring systems by utilizing context awareness , 2013, 2013 IEEE International Multi-Disciplinary Conference on Cognitive Methods in Situation Awareness and Decision Support (CogSIMA).

[6]  Lorenzo Sabattini,et al.  Methodological approach for the design of a complex inclusive human-machine system , 2017, 2017 13th IEEE Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE).

[7]  François Jammes,et al.  Service-oriented paradigms in industrial automation , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics.

[8]  A. Chan,et al.  A review of technology acceptance by older adults , 2011 .

[9]  Birgit Vogel-Heuser,et al.  Model-based training of manual procedures in automated production systems , 2018, Mechatronics.

[10]  Lorenzo Sabattini,et al.  Systematic approach to develop a flexible adaptive human-machine system , 2018 .

[11]  John Klahn,et al.  Principles of universal design , 2010 .

[12]  Frédérique Biennier,et al.  HCIDL: Human-computer interface description language for multi-target, multimodal, plastic user interfaces , 2018, Future Computing and Informatics Journal.

[13]  Mica R. Endsley,et al.  Toward a Theory of Situation Awareness in Dynamic Systems , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[14]  Lorenzo Sabattini,et al.  MATE Robots Simplifying My Work: The Benefits and Socioethical Implications , 2017, IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine.

[15]  Cesare Fantuzzi,et al.  MyAID: a Troubleshooting Application for Supporting Human Operators in Industrial Environment , 2016 .

[16]  Lorenzo Sabattini,et al.  Measurement and classification of human characteristics and capabilities during interaction tasks , 2019, Paladyn J. Behav. Robotics.

[17]  Peigen Li,et al.  Toward New-Generation Intelligent Manufacturing , 2018 .

[18]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  Usability engineering , 1997, The Computer Science and Engineering Handbook.

[19]  Ludger Overmeyer,et al.  Multimodal speech and gesture control of AGVs, including EEG-based measurements of cognitive workload , 2016 .

[20]  Dimitris Mourtzis,et al.  A cloud-based cyber-physical system for adaptive shop-floor scheduling and condition-based maintenance , 2018 .

[21]  Birgit Vogel-Heuser,et al.  Adapting Virtual Training Systems for Industrial Procedures to the Needs of Older People , 2019, 2019 IEEE 17th International Conference on Industrial Informatics (INDIN).

[22]  D. Norman The Design of Everyday Things: Revised and Expanded Edition , 2013 .

[23]  Joëlle Coutaz,et al.  CAMELEON-RT: A Software Architecture Reference Model for Distributed, Migratable, and Plastic User Interfaces , 2004, EUSAI.

[24]  Lorenzo Sabattini,et al.  Systematic Approach to Develop a Flexible Adaptive Human-Machine Interface in Socio-Technological Systems , 2018, Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing.

[25]  Susumu Saito,et al.  Ergonomics of human-system interaction , 1994 .

[26]  Ehud Sharlin,et al.  On tangible user interfaces, humans and spatiality , 2004, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[27]  René de Koster,et al.  Exploring the role of picker personality in predicting picking performance with pick by voice, pick to light and RF-terminal picking , 2016 .

[28]  Paul Gruhn Human Machine Interface (HMI) Design: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly (and what makes them so) , 2011 .

[29]  Mathey Wiesbeck,et al.  Adaptive Human-Machine Interfaces in Cognitive Production Environments , 2007, 2007 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo.

[30]  Christopher M. Schlick,et al.  Investigation of Input Devices for the Age-differentiated Design of Human-Computer Interaction , 2008 .

[31]  Birgit Vogel-Heuser,et al.  Improvement of maintenance through speech interaction in cyber-physical production systems , 2017, 2017 IEEE 15th International Conference on Industrial Informatics (INDIN).

[32]  Eurofound Sixth European Working Conditions Survey – Overview Report , 2016 .