Trip Report

25 July 2005

Trip Report

Department of Defense

Human Factors Engineering Technical Advisory Group (DOD HFE TAG) Meeting #53 – 23-26 May 2005

The 53^rdmeeting of the DoD HFE TAG was held in Panama City, FL. The meeting was chaired by Ms. Dawn Woods, Army Natick Soldier Center. The theme of the meeting was “Anchoring Science: The Science of Human Factors and Human Systems Integration.” Approximately 115 people attended the meeting, representing the US Army, US Navy, US Air Force, DARPA, US Coast Guard, NASA, FAA, several human factors-related technical societies and industry associations. Personnel representing industry and academia attended as invited speakers.

Four items are attached:

· Background of the DoD HFE TAG, attachment (1)

· Meeting schedule, attachment (2)

· DoD HFE TAG Operating Board, attachment (3)

· TAG attendees, attachment (4)

· DoD HFE TAG Policies, attachment (5)

Plenary Session Presentations

The DoD HFE TAG Chair for the 53^rd meeting, Ms. Dawn Woods, welcomed attendees summarized results of the morning’s Executive Committee meeting:

Welcome from the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Panama City. Mr. Kirk Dye, technical Operations Manager, provided a welcome briefing. The NSWC Panama City is one of 11 laboratories. It specializes in mine/countermine, special warfare, joint command and control and diving support systems.

Overview of the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Panama City. Mr. Richard Roesch ((850) 235-5281, j.richard.roesch@navy.mil), head of the Human Systems Integration (HSI) branch, provided a brief overview of the center. The maxim of the human factors group is “honor thy user.” One hundred percent of the human engineers are “hands-on” and most are divers. The types of systems they work with include:

- SEAL Delivery Vehicles - Prototype Fabrication Facilities

- Multiple Surface Craft - Helicopter support systems

- Portable Usability Lab - MDAS-2 (measurement system)

The largest program on center currently is the LCS (Littoral Combat Ship). The LCS will deliver robotic platforms. It will carry the MH-60 countermine helicopter (much smaller than the MH-53). It will perform Command and Control in remote areas, support explosive ordnance disposal missions using unmanned underwater vehicles and will carry a multitude of equipment, including diver-held SONARs, mine detection systems, etc.

Joint Systems Integration Command Laboratory for Assessing Human Performance and HSI Issues. Mr. Robert Kohout, Director, Capability Assessments, Joint Systems Integration Command (JSIC), US Joint Forces Command. The JSIC mission is to enhance joint C²and solver interoperability problems. The JSIC:

Develops operational prototypes
Performs capability assessments
Conducts interoperability demonstrations to assess readiness and end-to-end operational effectiveness of information exchange.

The Capability Assessments Directorate provides recommendations concerning new warfighting capabilities. They evaluate maturity, jointness, and warfighting utility. Usability assessments fall into the category of Warfighting and Utility, along with evaluations of usefulness, systems performance, security accreditation, operations and support costs. Human factors assessments include software and hardware assessment, ease of use, performance accuracy and reliability as well as speed of performance.

Use of the JNTC for Human Performance Evaluation and Testing. Mr. Stanley Bloyer, Joint Forces Command JNTC (Joint National Training Capability) Liaison to the Joint Gulf Range, spoke about some of the transformations taking place in joint training. JTFEX-04-02 was a joint task force exercise conducted off the East coast in Jun 2004. This exercise combined live, virtual and constructive forces for joint command and control exercises. The operational forces were capable of full spectrum tactics in joint scenarios. Joint performance was assessed while forces followed joint doctrine, tactics, techniques and procedures. Following completion of the exercise a full after action report was prepared. Three to four major JNTC events occur each year. There is a need to increase the frequency to about 20 per year in order to drastically increase the number of personnel who can be trained in the conduct of joint operations.

Both OSD and JFCOM are pushing development and use of realistic joint training environments. JETAs (Joint Experimentation Test and Assessment) are the mechanism for conducting these joint evaluations. LCOL Douglas L. Clark (757) 203-7331 is the point of contact.

Developing a Shared Repository of Performance Metrics for Evaluating HSI Processes and Performance. Mr. John Rice (john.m.rice@navy.mil) briefly discussed the Shared Repository of Performance Metrics and Measurements (SHARRPM&M). This repository is being developed to assist HSI in objectively measuring mission, organization, unit, team work station and human performance. One emphasis is in realistically including humans in the test of systems.

Human Factors Integration within Systems Case. Mr. Iain Macleod (i.macleod@cranfield.ac.uk), Ministry of Defence, Human Factors Integration DTC (Defence Technology Center) spoke on the need for the British MoD to develop a Human Factors Integration case, in addition to the safety case and R&M case the already exist. Safety and R&M cases must be developed for every system development program. Some of the reasons supporting a HFI case are:

Focus on capability requirements and associated system performance
Need consideration of network centric as a socio-technical system
Essential to consider NEC roles for knowledgeable information management and exploitation
Renewed emphasis on effects of technology on system fit for purpose
Massive overruns
New emphasis on cost effective training.

Sub-Group Meetings Attended at the DOD HFE TAG:

Human Factors Standardization (HFS) Mr. Alan Poston, FAA, chaired the meeting (alan.poston@faa.gov). The HFS website is: http://dtica.dtic.mil/hftag/hfs.html

MIL-STD-1472F. New hot issues have been submitted to validate existing lifting data. Waivers are no longer needed to use MIL-STD-1472 in contracts (since October 2004). This was formally documented in an OSD letter of 29 March 2005 that stated that “it is no longer required to obtain a waiver from the Milestone Decision Authority to cite military specifications and standards in solicitations and contracts.” The subject of changing MIL-STD-147t from a design standard to an interface standard was briefly discussed – with the new OSD guidance, this may no longer be necessary. Barry Tillman has updated the anthropometry data in MIL-STD-1472; the update will be implemented via an amendment or revision. Paul Berger has contributed revisions to the table specifying acceptable system response times.

MIL-STD-1474: The Army Research Laboratory (Human Research and Engineering Directorate) is proposing an ear model for use in MIL-STD-1474. Working groups will probably be established to discuss this with a draft release of the standard when it is released in October or November 2005.

DIDs: No input.

MIL-STD-1787: No input.

Joint Services Specification Guide (JSSG): No input.

NASA MSIS: No input.

Electronic Industries Association HEB-1: The GEIA has placed update of HEB-1 into the ballet. The first revision expands the scope from military only to military and commercial. Dr. Mark Brauer has authored an introduction. Votes are due to the committee by 27 May 2005. The update would then be distributed for publication (expected by July 2005). EIA 632 “Systems Engineering” is also in the revision cycle. Lou Adams plans to distribute it for comment shortly.

Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (HFES)/ISO/TC159: No input.

Index of Government Standards: No input.

Human Factors Design Digest: Al Poston will look into obtaining Government Printing Office (GPO) reprints.

Human Systems Integration Guidance: Steve Merriman raised an issue that there is no DOD guidance (handbook, etc) on the implementation of HSI on the program or system of systems level. He suggested that this would be a welcome addition that should improve HSI program quality and responsiveness.

It was noted that there are now 11 or 12 HFAC documents and no budget to maintain them. Cletis Booher and Alan Poston will raise this as an issue at the up-coming HFES annual meeting. It was also noted that there is a chapter in a new book on the history of human factors standards that is co-authored by Joe McDaniel and Jerry Chaikin.

Training Interest Group.

System Safety/Health Hazards/Survivability. Co-chairs for the meeting were Mr. Ben Gibson, AMEDDC&S (ben.Gibson@amedd.army.mil, (210) 221-1622) and Mr. Stephen Merriman, The Boeing Company, (stephen.c.merriman@boeing.com, (972) 994-6419. It was announced that there will be new co-chairs of this SubTAG, beginning with the next meeting in November 2005: Mr. George Murnyak (Army) and Dr. Michael Fineberg (SAIC-TS/I). Mr. Gibson was recognized as having done a great job in chairing or co-chairing the SS/HH/Sv SubTAG for many years. Steve Merriman will become co-chair of the User Computer Interaction SubTAG beginning with the next meeting.

The first speaker was Angela O’Dea, Ph.D, Klein Associates, Panama City FL (850-914-3188 x146, angela@decisionmaking.com) who spoke on Decision Making in Uncertain Environments. The rational choice model does not work well under stress conditions. The recognition-primed decision model does a much better job.

The second speaker was Dr. Barry Shender, NAVAIR Fellow, Naval Air Systems Command (barry.shender@navy.mil) who spoke on Joint Service Needs for Integrated Aircrew Protection. The details of a plan developed to address joint USN/USAF (and where applicable US Army) needs in the area of aviation life support was presented. Many of the deficiencies with current equipment can be traced to the development of individual product lines that can be difficult to integrate together. This leads to excess bulk, weight, thermal burden and reduced mobility. This in turn impacts the ability of aircrew to perform their tasks, thereby decreasing both mission success rates and lethality. By leveraging the USN AILSS (Aircrew Integrated Life Support System) and USAF IAE (Integrated Aircrew Ensemble) efforts in integration and materials engineering, a joint system can be developed to meet common aircrew needs. Products from the joint effort will optimally support physiologic needs and result in improved cognitive performance (better SA, less fatigue) for current and future long duration missions. By using innovative engineering technologies, this effort will decrease the life cycle costs by reducing logistics requirements.

Specific emphasis is given to reducing musculoskeletal injury risk to the head and spine in this approach, which is essential with the increased use of helmet-mounted systems. The products from this effort will enhance flight safety, accommodate the expanding aircrew population, and anticipate the changing needs of aviators to meet new threats by tailoring protection to match physiologic needs, through the use of unobtrusive sensor technologies to predict pilot state.

The second presenter was Mr. Iain S. MacLeod, Department of Information Systems, Cranfield University (i.macleod@cranfield.ac.uk) who spoke on “Awareness and the Problem with SA.” Mr. MacLeod briefly reviewed the two constructs in the UK: situational awareness and situation awareness and went on to review efforts in the SA area by Dr. Mica Endsley, Mavor Kid and Prince, and Geoffrey Hone (of Cranfield Univ.). The Hone model reduces Endsley’s definition of SA and reduces it to three questions:

· WHO is where?

· What ARE they doing?

· What WILL they do?

The three-stage model deals with local and global SA over time. The next step is to assign values to levels of SA; this requires that all the factors contributing to SA be identified and quantified prior to integrating them. Following this presentation, Mr. MacLeod discussed task analysis toolset and the HTS Toolset that is used for hierarchical task analysis.

The last presenter was Stephen C. Merriman, The Boeing Company, (972) 994-6419 stephen.c.merriman@boeing.com, who spoke on “The Safe Association.” The history, organization, goals and objectives of the SAFE association were described. Members represent the fields of engineering, psychology, medicine, physiology, management, education, industrial safety, survival training, fire and rescue, human factors, equipment design and many sub-fields associated with the design and operation of vehicles. Corporate sustaining membership is strong, representing many subsystem manufacturers worldwide. SAFE has 10 chapters, including two outside the United States (Europe and Japan). The SAFE annual symposium features papers and exhibits on advances in technology, modeling, research, and applications, including human factors. Additional information may be obtained from the SAFE Association at www.safeassociation.org or by calling (541) 895-3012.

Technical Society/Industry Sub-Group. The Technical Society/Industry (TS/I) Sub TAG met twice during the TAG meeting on Tuesday morning and afternoon. Mr. Bill Lytle (William.b.lytle@lmco.com, (303) 971-8972) chaired the two meetings. The main speaker for this SubTAG meeting was Dr. Mica Endsley, SA technologies 770-5655-9859, mica@satechnologies.com) who spoke on how knowledge about SA is used to support system design. Information overload has finally happened, thanks to the expansion of sensors, communications, noise, conflicting data, etc. Humans must still find, sort, integrate and process information to do their jobs. Goals are key organizing features for cognitive work. Work involves juggling between goals. Behavior is not completely linear. Priorities of goals change in response to world events and behavior. Goals drive process. Some SA principles are to:

· Provide global overview with detailed information when needed

· Organize data according to goals

· Support diagnostic activities in one place

· Integrate information

· Make it easy to get needed information – reduce communications and minimize the need to wade through multiple screens.

Uncertainty management is critical to managing SA. There is a need to make critical information salient with regard to timeliness (information age), source of data (e.g, which sensor or platform?), and coverage reliability. Automation must keep people in the loop and aid repetitive tasks, support SA rather than provide decisions and build in the capability for the user to oversee the automation.

Modeling and Simulation. Not attended.

Controls and Displays. Not attended.

Human Factors Engineering/Human Systems Integration: Management and Applications. Not attended.

Personnel Selection and Classification. Not attended.

Sustained/Continuous Operations (SUSOPS/CONOPS). Not attended.

Workload and Stress. Not attended.

User-Computer Interface. Not attended.

Human Factors in Telemedicine and Biomedical Technologies. Not attended.

DoD Human Systems Integration Test & Evaluation Working Group

This working group met in conjunction with TAG-53. It is a multi-service forum comprising developmental testers, operational testers, evaluators, researchers, material developers, the medical community and end-users. The group serves as a forum for exchange of information and ideas, development of T&E terms, metrics, methodologies, modeling and simulation tools, instrumentation and survey techniques. The point of contact is Ms. Reta Morgan Reynolds, US Army Aberdeen Test Center, (410) 278-4139, reta.reynolds@atc.army.mil.

Mr. Paul Tennant, Deputy Director of the Future Force Directorate, US Army Aberdeen Test Center provided opening remarks. The main drivers of T&E transformation are:

· Network Centric Operations/Warfare (NCO/W) and Effects-Based Operations (EBO)

· Capabilities-based Acquisition

· Testing in a Joint environment

· HSI- Soldier-as-a-system.

Within NCO/W, HSI must work in four domains:

· Physical – hardware/software interfaces plus environment

· Information

· Cognitive – leadership and morale

· Social – shared SA/SU, collaboration, and cultural impacts.

The following findings emerged from a recent investigation of the status of HSI T&E:

· HSI processes are neither common nor coherent

· There is a wide variety of performance parameters

· There is insufficient differentiation of military T&E requirements

· There is insufficient specification of network centric test contexts

· There is insufficient data collection capability in complex systems testing

· “Social Network” impacts on system performance are not well understood

· MANPRINT/HSI requirements are not well integrated into T&E.

Needs include:

· SA test techniques

· Methods for assessing impacts of new operational concepts

· Definition of what NCO/W means to HSI T&E

· How to deal with dynamic distributed collaboration in HSI T&E

· How to collect data on the fly, without stopping test operations

· Methods and metrics for conduction system-of-systems testing

· How to spread T&E resources to get more bang for the buck

· Identify the top five items that the Working Group should focus on

DOD HFE TAG Operating Board Meeting: Not attended.

ATTACHMENT (1)

DOD HFE TAG Background

The DoD HFE TAG was begun via memorandum of agreement signed by the Service Secretaries in November 1976. Goals of the TAG were established as follows:

• Provide a mechanism for exchange of technical information in the development and

application of human factors engineering.

• Enhance working level coordination among Government agencies involved in HFE

technology research, development and application.

• Identify human factors engineering technical issues and technology gaps.

• Encourage and sponsor in-depth technical interaction, including subgroups as required in

selected topical areas.

• Assist as required in the preparation and coordination of Tri-Service documents such as

Technology Coordinating Papers and Topical Reviews.

The TAG addresses research and technologies designed to impact man-machine system development and operation throughout the complete system life cycle. Topics include:

• Procedures for use by HFE specialists, system analysts and design engineers in providing

HFE support during system development and modification

• Methodologies to identify and solve operator/maintainer problems related to equipment

design, operation and cost/effectiveness

• Mechanisms for applying HFE technologies, including formal and informal approaches to

validation and implementation, and the determination of time windows for application.

The TAG comprises technical representatives from Government agencies with research and development responsibilities in the topical areas mentioned above. Additional representatives from activities with allied interests affiliate with the TAG as appropriate. Technical experts in special topic areas may augment attendance at specific meetings. Also participating in the TAG are official representatives of technical societies (e.g., Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, SAFE Association) and industrial associations (e.g., Electronics Industry Alliance) with a stated interest in HFE. These representatives may attend subgroup and general plenary sessions and they must be credentialed by the TAG prior to attending any meetings.

To facilitate detailed technical information exchange, the TAG is composed of committees and subgroups, or “SubTAGs.” Committees are established to address specific issues or problems and are disestablished upon completion of their tasks. Sub TAGs address problems of a general or continuing nature within a specific field of HFE technology. Membership in Sub TAGs and committees may include non-government personnel involved in research, development and application. Attendance by non-government individuals is possible if the person is either sponsored by a government agency or if accepted by the TAG chair prior to the meeting Chairing of the various subgroups and committees is typically rotated among the Services and in some cases, NASA, as provided in individual charters.

The current sub-groups typically meeting at the HFE TAG meeting were as follows.

• Controls and Displays (Controls/Displays)

• Design: Tools and Techniques (Design)

• Human Factors Engineering/Human Systems Integration: Management and

Applications (HSI)

• Human Factors in Extreme Environments (Extreme Environments)

• Human Factors in Operational Medicine

• Human Factors Standardization (HFS)

• Human Factors Test and Evaluation (T&E)

• Human Modeling and Simulation (Modeling)

• Personnel Selection and Classification

• Sustained/Continuous Operations (SUSOPS/CONOPS)

• System Safety/Health Hazards/Survivability (SS/HH/SV)

• Technical Society/Industry (TS/I)

• Workload and Stress (Workload)

• User-Computer Interaction (UCI)

A special interest group, “Human Factors in Training,” held a half-day meeting during this TAG on Tuesday.

ATTACHMENT (2)

DOD HFE TAG MEETING# 53

Monday, 23 May

0830 - 1000 Executive Committee meeting

1000 - 1100 New member orientation

1100 - 1300 Luncheon Break

1300 - 1700 Plenary Session

1800 - 2000 Mixer

Tuesday, 24 May

0730 - 0830 Technical Society/Industry

0830 - 1100 Human Factors Standardization

0830 - 1100 User-Computer Interaction

0830 - 1430 Human Factors in Training Interest Group

0930 - 1000 Networking, coffee

1100 - 1230 Luncheon Break

1230 - 1430 Controls and Displays

1230 - 1430 Sustained Continuous Operations

1430 - 1500 Networking, coffee

1500 - 1700 Service Caucuses & TS/I Meetings

Wednesday, 25 May

~~0830 - 1100 Human Modeling and Simulation~~ cancelled

0830 - 1100 System Safety/Health Hazards/Survivability

0830 - 1700 Human Systems Test and Evaluation Working Group

0930 - 1000 Networking, coffee

1100 - 1230 Luncheon Break

1230 - 1700 Tour

1800 - 2200 Social

Thursday, 26 May

0830 - 1430 Personnel Selection and Classification

0830 - 1100 Human Factors in Extreme Environments

0830 - 1100 Human Systems Test and Evaluation Working Group

0930 - 1000 Networking, coffee

1100 - 1230 Luncheon Break

1230 - 1430 Design: Tools and Techniques

1230 - 1430 Human Factors Engineering/Human Systems Integration: Management and Applications

1430- 1500 Networking, coffee

~~1500 -1700 Workload and Stress~~ cancelled

1500 - 1700 Human Factors Test and Evaluation

1700 - 1830 Operating Board

The DoD HFE TAG Chair for the 53rd meeting, Ms. Dawn Woods, welcomed attendees summarized results of the morning’s Executive Committee meeting:

Ex Officio Members - SubTAG Chairs

The DoD HFE TAG Chair for the 53^rd meeting, Ms. Dawn Woods, welcomed attendees summarized results of the morning’s Executive Committee meeting: