Manprint in the Program Initiation Phase of System Acquisition

For the U.S. Army Human Engineering Laboratory (USAHEL), Carlow Associates recently completed development of the MANPRINT Integrated Decision/Engineering Aid (IDEA) for the Program Initiation Phase of system development. The IDEA includes a standard MANPRINT process describing activities, events and products for the Phase, a decision aid and analyst's workstation to support the application of MANPRINT technology to the Program Initiation Phase, and computer-based MANPRINT tools to support the Program Initiation Phase. Specific tools included in IDEA are: 1) an early comparability analysis tool (ECA) which provides baseline system lessons learned and high MANPRINT drivers, 2) an automated task analysis tool, 3) an allocation of function tool which enables and supports the determination of the required role of the soldier in the system, and 4) a workload and human performance simulation tool based on a task network and probabilistic process variables. Efforts involved in the MANPRINT process development addressed the integration of the activities and products of Human Factors Engineering (HFE), Manpower, Personnel and Training (MPT), and System Safety (SS) and Health Hazard Assessment (HHA) with the activities of the Materiel Acquisition Process (MAP), and identification of MANPRINT technology requirements to support the application of this process.

Download Full-text

Determination of Program Initiation Phase Manprint Requirements for the Lighter, Amphibious Heavy-Lift (Lamp-H)

Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting ◽

10.1177/154193128803201626 ◽

1988 ◽

Vol 32 (16) ◽

pp. 1113-1116

Author(s):

Christopher C. Heasly ◽

Kathryn E. Permenter ◽

Thomas B. Malone ◽

Clifford C. Baker ◽

Louis G. Lawrence

Keyword(s):

Lessons Learned ◽

Weapon System ◽

Human Engineering ◽

Initiation Phase ◽

Heavy Lift ◽

Air Cushion ◽

System Acquisition ◽

Machine Systems ◽

Early Phases

The objective of this paper is to describe the approach utilized in the development of MANPRINT requirements for the Lighter, Amphibious — Heavy Lift (LAMP-H). LAMP-H is an air cushioned vehicle with a crew of six: a pilot, a navigator, and four stevedores who load and unload equipment from the vessel. The project was initiated during the program initiation phase of development. Several types of Air Cushion Vehicle (ACV) lighter craft were evaluated as baseline comparison systems for LAMP-H. The effort involved insuring compliance with human engineering design criteria and practice, incorporating lessons learned from analogous air-cushioned vehicles lighter craft, and addressing habitability, noise and other design issues affecting crew performance of tasks critical to the operation and maintenance of the LAMP-H. This paper details the analyses and techniques implemented in the early phases of the weapon system acquisition process for designing improved soldier-machine systems, as well as the products of the effort.

Download Full-text

Human Factors for Naval Systems: Enhanced Hardman

Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting ◽

10.1177/154193128803201623 ◽

1988 ◽

Vol 32 (16) ◽

pp. 1100-1103

Author(s):

Thomas B. Malone ◽

Clifford C. Baker

Keyword(s):

Human Factors ◽

Life Support ◽

System Development ◽

Human Factors Engineering ◽

Weapon System ◽

Acquisition Process ◽

System Acquisition ◽

Support Engineering ◽

And Training ◽

The U.S

The U.S. Navy is developing methods for integrating the disciplines concerned with personnel considerations into the weapon system acquisition process. This integration essentially involves human factors engineering, manpower, personnel and training, and life support engineering. Since the Navy already has the HARDMAN methodology in place to ensure that manpower, personnel and training concerns are addressed early in system development, the process of integration of personnel issues will involve expanding the HARDMAN methods and data to include human factors engineering and life support engineering, resulting in the Enhanced HARDMAN process. This paper describes the objectives of Enhanced HARDMAN.

Download Full-text

MPTS Methodology in the Navy: Enhanced Hardman

Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting ◽

10.1177/154193128903301602 ◽

1989 ◽

Vol 33 (16) ◽

pp. 1044-1048

Author(s):

Thomas B. Malone

Keyword(s):

Data Base ◽

Life Support ◽

Lessons Learned ◽

Human Engineering ◽

Defense System ◽

Acquisition Process ◽

Front End ◽

System Acquisition ◽

Measures Of Effectiveness ◽

And Training

Enhanced HARDMAN constitutes the Navy's implementation of the DoD Directive 5000.53 “Manpower, Personnel, Training and Safety (MPTS) in the Defense System Acquisition Process”. Enhanced HARDMAN integrates the domains of human engineering, manpower, personnel and training (MPT), and life support and safety through: 1) a front-end analysis applicable to all domains and to the integration of domain requirements; 2) a consolidated data base applying to all domains; 3) acquisition of lessons learned for all domains; and 4) application of Enhanced HARDMAN measures of effectiveness and T&E activities addressing all domains. The elements of Enhanced HARDMAN are: a standardized and formalized Enhanced HARDMAN process addressing MPTS activities and products at each phase of the weapon system acquisition process; a consolidated Enhanced HARDMAN data base; automated Enhanced HARDMAN analysis tools; Enhanced HARDMAN analyst productivity tools; and a report generator for producing Enhanced HARDMAN plans and reports.

Download Full-text

Early Consideration of Human Factors in Military System Design

Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting ◽

10.1177/154193128603001310 ◽

1986 ◽

Vol 30 (13) ◽

pp. 1286-1286

Author(s):

Eleanor L. Criswell

Keyword(s):

Human Factors ◽

System Design ◽

Air Force ◽

Program Implementation ◽

Lessons Learned ◽

Human Factors Engineering ◽

The Past ◽

Design Changes ◽

System Acquisition ◽

And Training

The goal of this symposium is to present the status and future directions of programs aimed at consideration of human factors early in military system design. Military initiatives of this nature are not new, but in the past they have not become integral parts of the military system acquisition process. Recent programs in each service, however, reflect more serious and in-depth attempts to use human factors data to influence and evaluate system design than has been the case in the past. The Army now requires MANPRINT analyses, Navy HARDMAN analyses are mandated, and the Air Force is now pilot testing its own program called MPTIS. This symposium consists of introductory remarks by Dr. Joseph Peters of Science Applications International Corporation, and papers from LTC William 0. Blackwood, HQ Department of the Army, CDR George S. Council, Jr., Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, and COL AI Grieshaber, HQ, U. S. Air Force. Dr. Peters' paper, “Human Factors Issues in Military System Design,” defines “human factors” as a combination of human factors engineering, biomedical engineering, manpower/personnel, and training elements. The paper presents three measures of success of human factors programs early in system acquisition: long-lasting policy, committed management, and availability of scientific technology for program Implementation and evaluation. LTC Blackwood's paper discusses the importance the Army places on its MANPRINT program. MANPRINT program history, status, and possible program evolution are addressed. CDR Council's paper addresses the potential for the addition of human factors to the Navy HARDMAN program which addresses manpower, personnel, and training. CDR Council suggests that human factors advocates present a human factors program which is clearly defined and limited in scope to render it easily appreciated by Navy management, and that advocates can benefit from lessons learned during the institutionalization of HARDMAN. COL Grieshaber's paper “MPT in the Air Force” describes a pilot MPT (manpower, personnel, training) program at Aeronautical Systems Division, Wright Patterson AFB. This program will analyze aircraft system designs for their MPT requirements, suggest design changes where requirements exceed Air Force availabilities, and assess design changes for their MPT impact.

Download Full-text

Gathering Meaningful Data From Novices and or in Simplified Operating Environments to Inform Us About Highly Complex Operational Environments

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting ◽

10.1177/1541931213601011 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 60 (1) ◽

pp. 47-50

Author(s):

Niav Hughes ◽

Amy D’Agostino

Keyword(s):

Human Performance ◽

Methodological Approach ◽

Performance Testing ◽

Lessons Learned ◽

Performance Data ◽

Operational Experience ◽

Human Factors Engineering ◽

Operating Environments ◽

Research Questions ◽

Meaningful Data

Much of the basis for current U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Human Factors Engineering (HFE) guidance comes from data from other domains (e.g. aviation, defense), qualitative data from operational experience in NPPs, and a limited amount from empirical studies in a nuclear environment. A simulator is one tool that can be used to gather more empirical nuclear specific human performance data. Although this may seem like a simple undertaking, getting trained operators for human-performance testing can be very challenging. In addition, when operators can be secured for human performance testing the operator sample is quite small, allowing for only qualitative analysis or limited quantitative analysis. Thus, the NRC initiated research to determine: 1) if novices can successfully perform realistic operator tasks, 2) if a simulator can create a cognitively similar environment to that which NPP operators face, and if 1 and 2 are successful, 3) how the resulting performance data can be used and interpreted. For our research, we determined that the environment needed to be simplified in such a way that would induce participants to experience both the complexity and cognitive requirements incurred by trained operators. In other words, the methodological approach adhered to the principal of different but equal; the roles, procedures and interface are different, but they are different in such a way that is controlled and meant to induce the same type of cognition and level of workload that would be experienced by an operator population. The simplification of the NPP environment has been very challenging and there have been many lessons learned. The panelists are challenged to make recommendations for investigators for best practices for gathering meaningful data from novices and or in simplified operating environments to inform us about highly complex operational environments. Some discussion questions relevant to this topic include: What type of research questions should we ask of the novice population? How can we use the data in a meaningful way? What type of research questions should be avoided with this population? How can we use novices to inform us about the “human” (not the trained operator) piece of performance? How can we simplify operational environments and still gain valuable data and insights? How can we use a trained operator population in these simplified environments?

Download Full-text

Integration of Human Factors Engineering within the System Acquisition Process

Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting ◽

10.1177/154193128603000806 ◽

1986 ◽

Vol 30 (8) ◽

pp. 758-762 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Grace P. Waldrop

Keyword(s):

Human Factors ◽

Health Hazard ◽

Critical Role ◽

Training System ◽

Human Factors Engineering ◽

Acquisition Process ◽

Safety And Health ◽

System Acquisition ◽

The U.S ◽

Human Component

The U.S. Army's Manpower and Personnel Integration (MANPRINT) requirement is designed to fully integrate the Materiel Acquisition Process (MAP) to include Human Factors Engineering (HFE), Manpower, Personnel, Training, System Safety, and Health Hazard Assessment early in the cycle. This effort represents an excellent opportunity for HFE practitioners to influence the system design process with considerations for the human component. However, MANPRINT also represents the necessity for a variety of disciplines to work together and communicate data during all phases of the MAP. This task requires full documentation of all efforts and utilization of valid methodologies. The broad base of data contained within HFE analyses gives it a critical role in the integration process.

Download Full-text

Human Factors Support of Nasa's Safety Directorate on the Space Station Processing Facility (SSPF) Kennedy Space Center, FL

Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting ◽

10.1177/154193129203601305 ◽

1992 ◽

Vol 36 (13) ◽

pp. 945-949

Author(s):

H. Greig Lindner

Keyword(s):

Human Factors ◽

Computer Aided Design ◽

Space Station ◽

Pilot Project ◽

Lessons Learned ◽

Human Factors Engineering ◽

Human Engineering ◽

Kennedy Space Center ◽

Processing Facility ◽

Kennedy Space

A Human Factors Engineering (HFE) pilot project was undertaken by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) on the Space Station Processing Facility (SSPF) at the Kennedy Space Center, Florida in 1991. It is to demonstrate the use of Human Factors in supporting the role of NASA Safety in achieving their objective of reducing the causes of accidents by helping to eliminate error producing situations. The initial phase of this endeavor consisted of a review of the design drawings for the SSPF, identifying all human factors concerns with special emphases on those which affected personnel safety, operational efficiency and hazards which might produce damage to expensive payloads. Where drawings did not completely disclose the characteristics of the intended operations, other facilities at the Kennedy Space Center were visited to obtain “Lessons Learned” insights that could be applied to the drawing critique. As Human Factors concerns and/or Safety issues were identified, they were discussed with the appropriate engineering personnel to effect a workable solution. During the lecture presentation, examples of identified HF & Safety deficiencies will be presented by the use of drawings, photographs in viewgraph form and a video of an accident to the Magellan Spacecraft. Discussion of the findings of the Magellan Spacecraft Mishap Review Board will elaborate on their conclusion that the lack of Human Factors Engineering was a major Contributor to this incident. A video segment showing an advanced and innovative Human Factors (HF) modeling technique will graphically demonstrate the potential application of conducting Human Engineering (HE) evaluations in conjunction with Engineering Prototyping in a Computer Aided Design (CAD) environment.

Download Full-text