ML20097A125
| ML20097A125 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05200002 |
| Issue date: | 05/31/1992 |
| From: | ABB COMBUSTION ENGINEERING NUCLEAR FUEL (FORMERLY |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20097A119 | List: |
| References | |
| NPX80-IC-DR-791, NPX80-IC-DR-791-02, NPX80-IC-DR-791-2, NUDOCS 9206020177 | |
| Download: ML20097A125 (157) | |
Text
,, . ._ ,. . . . . _ _ _ . . _ _ _. . . - .._ - _ _ . . _ _ _ .
l l
1 I
HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING STANDARDS, GUIDELINES, AND BASES FOR NUPLEX 80+
Report NPX80-IC-DR 791-02 I
Combustion. Engineering, Inc.
May 1992 -
l
}ER*R8ba8?aajgg,
i i
i HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING STANDARDS, GUIDELINES, AND BASES FOR NUPLEX 80+*
Report NPX80-lC-DR 791-02 PART A: STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES A-1
, , ,.1-- .- - - - -
4 - . e, - - - - , , , ,, - -- --
NPX80-lC DR 79102
1.0 INTRODUCTION
)
1.0 INTRODUCTION
ALWR program requirements include mandates for equipment standardization and usability, enhanced operator support from the Man Machine Interface (MMI), and the general integration of human factors in design. The Human Factors Engineering i Standards and Guidelines Document (herein referred to as the HFE Standards) is a key part of the System 80+ approach to improving the MMI, thereby contributing to the assurance of safety I through improved defense in depth.
i 1.1 Scope
- The HFE Standards are part of the Human Factors Program Plan for System 80+. The program ensures a consistent and usable ,
MM! for the System 80+ design. In addition, it affords mechanisms for documenting h' man factors des;gn bases, and provides accountability for HFE in the design process.
The scope of the HFE Standards includes the design of the Nuplex 80+ Control Complex facilities, and the certified System 80+ NSSS and BOP facilities, equipment, and systems. In addition, portions of the HFE Standards may be found applicable to site specific facihties, procured items, and programmatic issues.
However, these are not presently within the scope of the HFE Standards (or the larger Human Factors Program.) See the ,
Human Factors Program Plan for System 80+ for more detail on the program.
1.2 Applicability The contents of the HFE Standards and Guidelines Document aoply, as appropriate, to all System 80+ system and equipment designs built by ABB Combustion Engineering and its subcontractors for use by operations and maintenance personnel (see subject of Conformance Criteria under Section 1.4.b).
In general all System 80+ Man-Machine Interfaces (MMis) should follow the methodologies and conventions established for the main control complex to the extent practical. These methodologies and conventions adhere to the guidance provided in this document A-2
NPX80 IC DR 791-02
1.0 INTRODUCTION
and are defined in the Nuplex 80+ Control _ Complex design documentation. Where deviations from these conventions are warranted, the guidance in this document shall be applied and the deviations must be evaluated from a human factors perspective relative to the consistency of the overall System 80+ MfAl.
1.3 Approach '
The HFE Standards have been created in keeping with the following philosophy approach.
a) Limitations of Generic Guidance - A growing number of generic human factors guidance documents are available to provide designers with rules for design format in various domains. The application of such guidance tends to enhance the usability of the designer's products (e.g., usability of software, maintainabi!!ty of equipment, readability of printed matter, etc.)
While they are a useful resource for many designers, their utility is often limited (particularly in large, complex design projects) for the following reasons:
Substantial redundancy exists between documents
- Unresolved conflicts exist within documents Guidance is generic, and does not adequately constrain, direct, or standardize the design Guidance is usually in a form that does not facilitate testing or evaluation of design products Thus, th5 guidance was treated as source material from which to generate a more useful design guide specifically for the System 80+ project.
b) Develoo Soecific Standards from Generic Guidance - The HFE Standards for System 80+ have been based on a selection of well-established, generic guidance documents available from the NRC, EPRI, DOE, the military, and other recognized authorities. This generic guidance ("should") has been used as a point of departure to develop, wherever possible, more specific standards ("shall") within bounds of the original guidance. .These more restrictive constraints will contribute to standardizing and directing the efforts of designers.
A-3
NPX80-IC DR 791-02
1.0 INTRODUCTION
c) Minimize Redundancy and Maximize _ Cross Reference - A design decision for the document was to minimize the use of r?dundant entries, and instead, to maximize the use of cross-reference. This was done with the goal of minimizing the size and number of conflicts in the document, in the hope that it would therefore be easier to learn. It does presume that designers who will be using the HFE Standards, become familiar with its contents.
d) Playida 1ases for Exclanation and Review - Bas 6s in the form of rt.mences and explanations for individual items will be provided for the HFE Standards in a companion basis document. This material is intended to provide reviewers with a justification for specific guidance items, it is also intended to support informed departures from the Standards if non-conformance appears to be warranted.
if there are any questions on the content, basis, or need for conformance to the material contained in the HFE Standards & ,
Guidelines, or the associated Basis Document, contact the Supervisor of Control Complex Engineering for System 80+.
Comments on the form, content, and overall usability of this document are important and appreciated, and should also be directed to the Supervisor c' Control Complex Engineering for System 80+.
1.4 Evaluative Criteria Two general types of evaluative criteria are identified as potentially applicable to the products of HFE design activities: performance and conformance criteria. Their general applicability to evaluating HFE in the products of the System 80+ design, and their specific applic+ility to evaluating implementation of the HFE Standards, are explained as follows.
a) Performance Criteria In general, the application of the HFE Standards, as well as other applications M HFE in the System 80+ design, contribute to the assuranc( i safety, reliab;tity, availability, maintainability, and inspectability goals will be met.
This implies the belief that application of HFE contributes, in l
general, to an increase in performance on such theoretically l
A-4 l
., e. - - ,, . . ~ . , , , ,
c-_... , - , ,
NPX80-IC DR 791-02
1.0 INTRODUCTION
oblective measures as cpeed and accuracy, while reducing ,
workload, tra:ning requirements, and the likelihood of errors (or costly consequences). At the present time, however, the System 80+ design is expected, by analysis, to meet the such goals without taking particular credit for human performance being specified. Thus, no effort will be made to use objective +
measures to analyze or quantify contribution of the HFE -
Standards to achieving overall System 80+ goals.
The General HFE goal, beyond meeting specific System 80+
program requirements, is to improve the nachilty i of the System 80+ design. Operability and maintainability are two ad hoc '
- types" of usability, distinguishing two relatively distinct job per'nrmance contexts for any given item. Evaluation of operabliity and maintainability wiil be conducted in the form of various validation activities at to-be-determined points in the design process. Validation testing will demonstrate that the usability of the design aspect in question is sufficient to permit specific criterion tasks to be successfully accomplished.
b) ConformancaCriteria - In terms of interpretations of specific guidance, use of the term "shall" denotes a testable standard, while use of the term "should" denotes suggested (i.e.,
nontestable) guidance. Conformance to specified standards shall be verified for ali System 80+ design activities-Nonconformance to individual standards must be documented in all areas, and either be corrected or Justified in terms of the basis for the violated HFE standard. The HFE Program Plan will incorporate the actual requirements and mechanisms for L imp lementing this scheme.
9 1.5 Document Definitions The following definitions apply for use within the present document. They are presented to clarify concepts used to explain the goals and tasks that System 80+ design engineers need to y perform as part of the Human Factors program. While the terms L may be usefulin other contexts, they are not presented with the intention that they will be piaced in wider use. However, it is intended that these definitions be applied consistently throughout the Human Factors Program.
r A-5
NPX80-IC DR 79102
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The list of terms follows.
Ala[m - A prioritized status annunciator in the Nuplex 80+
Information System. Non-alarm annunciators (operator aids) are also used to alert the operator to certain status changes, but they have no priority and do not reflect undesirable or abnormal conditions.
Annunciator - An alerting display mechanism denoting a defined status transition on a monitored variable in the Nuplex 80+ -
Information System.
Caution - An equipment or operational hazard.
Contrast Ratio - The ratio between the luminance of a target and its background. Various different formulations exist; a simple one is (6 + L_ min).
Contrcls - Devices, particularly remote devices, used to adjust, mar ipulate, tune, change (etc.) the discrete status of a component or system, or the continuously distributed valt.e of a component or <
system parameter.
Danger - A direct or immediate personnel safety hazard.
DeScriotor - A descriptor is the software-based equivalent of an equipment label displayed on a VDU screen (and assigned in a database).
Designator - A designator is the unique, alphanumerically encoded
- tag number" that identifies each component, parameter, system object, etc. in the. design. In a designator, logical uniqueness and data compactness take precedence over obvious meaning (Compare with "Name").
HFE Guideline - A generic, non testable HFE design recommendation ("should") based on subjective HFE principals that is intended to provide designers with useful input in making MMI design decisions.
HFE Standard A specific, testable HFE design requirement
("shall") based on objective HFE principals. Nonconformance to an HFE Standard requires a documented justification to be filed l
A6
I NPX80 IC-DR 791-02
1.0 INTRODUCTION
with the HFE Group.
j!!uminance - The amount of light falling on a surface from ambient and local sources, measured in lux or footcandles.
Label - A label is a semi-permanent physical attachment to an object that bears one of several types of key information (i.e., its name, component designator, specific instructions, warnings, etc.
Laydown Space - Workspace required to accommodate material and activities (tools, parts, etc.) for staging expected maintenance -
operations.
Luminance - The photometric correlate of the psychological sensation of brightness, related to the amount of light emitted in a given direction by a lutninous source; measured in candelas per square meter or foottamberts.
Maintainability - The degree to which any system, equipment, component, etc. enables maintenance tasks to be quickly, easily, and correctly performed by virtue of its design or installation.
Maintenance Task - A tasl< performed to enable or ensure that a component, equipment, system, etc. will adequately perform its design function when operated. Maintenance tasks are construed broadly to include such tasks as formal inspection, surveillance, preventive maintenance, alignment, testing, troubleshooting, repair, replacement, or required modification, and their associated routine activities.
Name - A name (i.e., for a system, equipment, etc.) is a unique and directly meaningfulidentifier that facilitates verbal exchange and reference. in a name, obvious meaning takes precedence over logical uniqueness or data compactness (Compare with
" Designator").
.01M - The complete set of operations and maintenance activities for which HFE should provide development support so that systems and equipment are designed and built to enable satisfactory performance by the human component of those activities.
Ooerability - The degree to which any system, equipment, A-7 i
NPX80-IC DR-791-02
1.0 INTRODUCTION
compe nent, etc. enables operations tasks to be quickly, easily, and correctly performed by virtue of its design or installation.
Daerations Tasks - Tasks performed to a component, equipment, system, etc. in the course of sen/ing its design function in the overall system. Operations tasks are construed broadly to include such tasks as startup, shutdown, and other changes in mode, status, or configuration; also regulation, control, and planned responses to anticipated abnormal operating conditions, and their associated routine activities.
_ Operator Aids Non-alarrn annunciators on certain status variable information.
Parameter Nariable) - A continuously distributed variable with a range of possible values. Compare with Status.
Pull Space - The location and dimension of a spatial envelope that can accommodate the removal of a component from its installed position in the plant. The pull space dimension must accommodate necessary personnel and equipment, and its location must enable use of necessary lifting and rigging features.
Prior to equipment installation in the phnt (or its analysis by CAD),
an equipment pull space dimension (i.e., independent of location) can be specified by the equipment designer.
Readina/ Working Dista.nce - The maximum distance of the opetator from a piece of equipment, at which at task can be correctly performed, by design. Determining this distance typically must consider physical reach envelopes, and/or text size on particular displays.
Eqaln_g - The division of the operating range of an indicating or control interface device into numbered, proportioned units.
Statiis Nariable) - A discretely distributed variable v ith a set of possible stata and transitions. Compare with Parameter.
Tag - A tag is a temporary attachment applied to equipment by O&M personnel to indicate and/or manage certain temporary status conditions (e.g., danger, caution, calibration status, etc.) It is defined here to render it distinct from hardware labels and software descriptors.
A-8
(
NPX80 IC DR-791-02
1.0 INTRODUCTION
. Usability - The degree of ease with which an operator, or user, can use the system to achieve the design intended goal of that system. Use of the system is defined as having two components:
operability and maintainability. Design for usability must incorporate human performance characteristics and limitations in order to minimize the likelihood of costly human error while performing either of these components. Also, when assessing the design with respect to usability one m*;st consider how well the performance of the user is facilitated by the design, evaluating performance on these two components.
Virtual Devices - User-interface mechanisms that have functional characteristics that mimic physical devices (e.g., switches, pushbuttons, etc.), but are primarily implemented throu0h software on VDU screens.
l A-9 l
- . . _ , . _ . . _ _ , . - _ . _ . _ _ . , _ - . . , . - . _ , - - ~ _ _ _ - - . . . _ . , _ ,
NPX80 lC-DR 791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVEN110NS 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS Section 2 contains material that applies to the. formal and presentation of yisuaj information. The term format" is used to indicate that the subject is the form and appearance of general types of information; the subject of specific information nontenj has been intentionally avoided. The term
" visual" is used to indicate that this includes text, labels, signs, symbols, scales, etc. but excludes auJ: tory information and communications.
Unless specified, the guidance and standards given here are to be applied to any visualinformation presentation medium. Section 2 has five subsections: _
2.1 Gcneral Principals of Information Format 2.2 Print & Text Format Conventions 2.3 Graphics & Non-Text Format Conventions 2.4 Numerical Scaling 2.5 Eqc.pment Labeling The development of procedures, manuals, and other programmatically managed documents are beyond the scope of the HFE Standards.
Thus, while the contents of this or other sections may be helpfulin developing such guidance, it has not been developed or offered for this purpose.
A - 10
NPX80 IC DR 79102 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS 2.1 General Principles of Information Format This section presente eight general principles of information display j format. They combine to form a useful set of goals which should help to l guide the implombi,tation of the more specific HFE Standards and ,
Guidelines on informatiori format. i a) Simole - Content considerations aside, a simpler format tends to be easier to use. Thus, uninformative complexities in a format should be eliminated. These might be unnecessary dividing lines on a page, superfluous data on a screen, or uninformative words in a title. Such items add " visual noise" to a presentation (rather than useful information or " visual signal") and create unnecessary competition for the attention of the operator.
b) Meaninofgj - A presentation should be inherently meaningful to the reader. This surpasses the concept that an item simply bears information, implying also that the information can be readily '
understood. For example, the two telephone numbers 1(800)433-4357 and 1(800)HFE HELP can be said to provide the same information, but only one is inherently meaningful. From the standpoint of dialing information, the first, purely numeric encoding is adequate. However, in the second alphanumeric version, meaningful organization simplifies the reader's learning and memory tasks, and makes errors easier to detect as well. Note that to provide a meaningful organ'zation, it is necessary to know and/or assume something about the reader's knowledge level (e.g., before reading this document, readers might not have recognized "HFE" as
- Human Factors Engineering".) It is also necessary to have a certain degree of flexibility ;.i choosing your terms. This is not always c) UnambiguRus - An item is ambiguous if its intended meaning is uncertain or obscured. This occurs if there is insufficient information in a presentation, e.g., combining *high water temperature"_ and " low oil pressure" into a single " engine trouble" light on an automobile's dashboard. Note that to be confident that a reference is made without ambiguity requires the designer to know or assume something about how an information element will be used, i.e., what the operator needs to do with it, or as a result of receiving it. An engine trouble light might be appropriate if the driver's response is intended to be "stop the motor & have the car taken to your mechanic" rather than "stop the motor, let the motor A - 11
__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ - ~ . _ _ . _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ . _- _ _ _ _ _ _
l l
NPX80 IC-DR 791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS cool off, check the fluid level, check belts and pump..." etc.
d) Consistent - Meanings and relationships should be consistent among similarly elements in similar contexts. When relationships between such elements vary, users must learn and remember each separate case, and keep them organized by the distinctive features of otherwise similar contexts or situations. This is laborious and error prone.
e) Comoatible - Where relationships cannot be entirely consistent ,
between contexts, they still should be compatible (i.e., should not ,
conflict) with one another. For example, CRT screens may use the color red to denote active components, while red may also be applied to the color coding of equipment danger tags and placards. Because the two contexts of use are thoroughly separate, no conflict is identified. Compatibility between the motion of a control and associated display is a particularly important topic; the design of these two components and their relationships can tolerate some inconsistency, but they must never be incompatible.
f) Readable - Information presented in any form needs to be readable. This requires that the style and presentation of individual characters, symbols, etc. be legible (i.e., discriminable and unambiguous), and that the conventions for combining the symbols into words, codes, abbreviations, etc. produce material that can be easily read and processed.
1 g) Salient - Salience is attention getting capacity. In general, it is important that a displayed item's salience be matched to its -
purpose and position. Thus, an item must be relatively noticeable, i.e., avaliable and able to effectively compete for the attention of the operator with its surroundingo, such that there is a high probability that it will be noticed as necessary to serve its purpose.
, For example, an alarm must be intrusive to perform its function, while a component label needs only to be noticeably located and readably sized. Since excess salience can produce distraction 4 and possibly stress, it is no more desirable for an item than inadequate salience. No'e that determination of appropriate salience for an item requires some knowledge and/or assumotions about the item's environment, h) Lon. Je of Users. Tasks. & Workino Environment - This last A - 12
NPX80 IC DR 791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVEN1lONS item is implied throughout the other principles. From a human factors standpoint, good design of any engineered item must include the usability of its features. This requires consideration of various users (e.g., both operators and maintainers, in terms of their knowledge and abilities), their tasks (goals, problems, procedures, equipment), and the working environment (normal ;
and emergency conditions, other .. tornal constraints, etc.)
Designers should attempt to consider all these aspects in their own design efforts.
l l
l l
\
A - 13 l
o .
l
NPX80-lC-DR-791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS 2.2 Print & Text Format Conventions 2.2.1 Names & Designators l The importance of clear and consistent use of terminology in the design cannot be overstressed. Yet, the development of names and numbering schemes begins esrly in the design process, and is difficult to coordinate and integrate the many participating activities. These problems ultimately impact on the operab;lity and maintainability of the finished plant, where labeling, communications, and procedures will build upon the designers' initial use of terminology.
This section distinguishes several basic types of terminologies, and provides guidance for their consistent development und use.
An important basic distinction is made between equipment names and designators. Both names and designators provide a means to unambiguously identify and refer to objects (e.g., equipment, components, signals, etc.) in written materials and verbal communications. However, while similar, their roles are distinct.
2.2.1.1 Names In a name, the emphasis is on verbal exchange and reference. Names should be both meaningful and unique; however, in a name. obvion meaning takes orecedence_over logical uniqueness or da.la comoactness. Names are therefore less complete and unambiguous than are designators (see 2.2.1.2), but more convenient and " robust" in terms of human communications.
a) Names should be chosen to be brief but meaningful. Each word shoulit be specific and necessary. For example, the " Control Rod Drive Mechanism Control" loses little if changed to " Rod Drive L Control".
b) Names should clarify the unique function of the item, and minimize l
l confusion and maintain compatibility with other existing names, j Thus the "Circulati g Water System" might be better named the l " Tertiary Cooling System", (i.e., the third cooling loop accepts heat from the Secondary Coolin0 System.)
. c) Namer of systems and key components should be chosen to l provide a unique acronym or abbreviation. TMs is facilitated by A-14
l NPX80 lC-0R !31-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS using relativety specific, rather than generic, terms to form the name. (See 2.2.2, Abbrovlations ano Acronyms.)
2.2.t.2 Desigaators >
in a designator f.e., a uniquely coded alphanumeric string used for nurrbering of system objects) the emphasis is on uniqueness. In addhion, designators can carry several pieces of distinct information in a
.ralatively c0mpact coding. Jn a designator. logical uniqueness ancLdata
.CQfEDDG10.ess take preedEctLover obvious meanino. Thus, designators have camputational advantages, but they are harder to refer to and iese -
" robust"in terms of human communication 3.
- 2.2.2 Abbreviations & Acronyms for O&M Terminology it is often desirable to shorten frequently used termino;ogy to make labels smaller, communications shorter, or documentation more compact.
Abbreviations and acronyrr,s are methods of shortening terms and collections of terms,_ respectively, so that the information carried in the full word verrlon can be carried by a small fraction of the original letters.
Both processes ettempt to discard from the full term its least informative letters, while retalning a few of its most informative letters. In a good shcrtened term, the result is unlque (so it will not be confused with other similar abbreviations) and memorable (11 recalls to mind the original full term).
Several methods exist to generate short forms of terminology. They do not always apply equa0y well to a given term; sometimes none of them apply very well. In addition, when a large number of terms are being shortened and cornbined into a set, additional problems are encountered. It may be desirable for related or similar items show their relations in the shortened term. On the other hand, terms with unrelated meanings rnay end up with abbreviations that look cimilar. Certain characters will tend to be used more than others, eventually becoming _
overused (e.g., "c': control, console, component, cooling, circulating, chill, etc.) The !arger the list growy. 74 more these problems will tend to occur, even if the development of names for the system is carefully controlled and developed. However, often names will not be carefu!!y developed, using too many terms, each with too little geauine information.
If these problems are not actively managed, the results tend to be too A 15
NPX80 lC-DR 79102 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS many shortened terms, redundant terms for single items, multiple items with the same abbreviation, shortened terms that vary widely in length, '
and worst of all, cryptic terms that are unique but indecipherable, and do not serve as a memory aid.
The remainder of this Section prov' des guidance to support the generation of abbreviations and acronyms.
2.2.2.1 Algorithms The guidance for generating abbrevi6tions and acronyms is presented as ah algorithm in Figures 2.2.2.1a and 2.2.2.1b.
2.2.2.2 Apprrwori Abbreviations List Acronyms and abbreviatiom che'l be combined and maMtained on a single list. known as the Approved Abbreviations List. This list will be provided in two versions: alphabetically by short form, and alphabetically by fu! form.
2.2.2.3 Management of the Approved Abbreviations List Tlw Approved Abbreviations List shall support consistent development of meaningful materials for use by operators, maintahors, designers, '
engineers, technicians, and other O&M technical staff. The list will be controlled and updated as necessary to incorporate new terms. This list of abbreviated O&M terms should not incorporate organizational or administrative terms unless these will be used in labelir.g, procedures, tech specs, etc.
2.2.3 Alphanumeric Characters for Labels & Text Alphanumeric characters obviously have wide-ranging applications in a large engineering facility. Inadequate implementations of characters and text conflict directly with the general principle to provide readable information (Item f, Section 2.1).
Many issues impact significantly on the selection of adequate characters, l including ambient lighting, print and background colors, display medium characteristics, and conditions of degraded usability (e.g., off-normal-viewing angles or distances, emergency lighting, facemesks, foreign matter, physical wear or damage to the character medium, etc.) This section does not address these matters individually, but provides broadly A - 16
NPX80-IC DR 791-02 8.0 MAINTAINABILITY l Go to Multi. word wo, YES N00'W" gg,7 NO g- _
Is th \ YES Use k as Jown g
the O&M Ist?
W o are a woneccepted YES
- M N la addi' ion industry or oAural to the O&M list mortkm7 NO,,
YES Do not abbreviato 1]8*warg lettere?
NO ,
Can a rnora YES Repeat rrmaningM f
+ l be sk? -
NO
/oO r/
a candidate m YES Test R against HF criteria:
abbreviatior) h rnind? 1? 3 to 5 letters long 2' Not airsady used on O&M hst J DecognizatWrrernoraDW 4 < 2/3 le h d ttw word 5)'* Sounds
- e original word NO, ,
ABBREVIATION ALGORITKid (single words)
Figure 2.2.2.1.a (1 of 2)
A 17
i l
l I
NPX80 lC DR.791-02 8.0 MAINTAINADILITY Below are two stralogos; Try ea@ spsinst to itF crtfula THUNCATE Tile WORD COWRESS WORD Keep the 1st syllable, cr 1) Eliminste wwsde and thent ccnsonants aher te ist 36 letters first loner EkT*we ned-to4ast corarat 3 Emeriment with .
- Rerroval (and Replacerrent of 1 or more remaining Consonants, stWsng with the nestelast consonant and workin NOOR, g back towards beg!nning of word Depiscemort, from left, of 1 or rnare letters
/<e te W criteria mosdy sidsAe:f?
il 3 to 5 letters long &crra abtnWation tar
?? tbt already used on O&M lis: YES , mMton to O&M kst 3J R e/ memorable ai<2/3 of the word
$? ' Sounds lika original word l
'N to e
noname using rnare uncuenfamau iertr<s) and start again from te ino 1'
l ABBREVIATION ALGORITHM (single words)
Figure 2.2.2.1.a (2 of 2)
A - 18 f
1
._ . ._ _ .. . _ . . _ _ . . _ _ _ . _ . ~ _ _ _
NPX80-IC DR 791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMKT CONVENTIONS YES Do rot treh uronyms Irorn
%',fyr d ' g* /
b -,
ant ow e {inom 14
'"I IU'"'"9 .80 "'0"Y"'
Are g ogrnost,o,r,,a4 utlng each abbrenatort if tte
,q W \ YES e obtweviatkes d each word WW
,, y ,,edg ,, a re4we tcr) much space then en 3 terms W
- - ~ ~ . _ . J f-L._..._ . .L Form Candidate Mroryrt 1 Use fkst le'ter d sects ( ) term:
2 Attempt to corvorm to es patterns in O&M ist.
3 DMoo or contine corts terms if usou
- 4 Flemove excees letiers Doub8e Consonants thphonated termo thnmportart wryde (and, or, the, etc) t
/ the FF CrtierLa satisled7
' ES Subtrdt to life Group for adoto)
' 1 Not eheedy used on O&M list
- to O&M 6st 2 Flecogreebis 3 Pronounceable to o
m oty wrms 1 Use Synccyms 2 Ae-word 3 Add durnmy terms l ,
3 i
i n a re.uns no unsatsfactory, try Sogio Word Algontfyn kN each word d term j
ACRONYM ALGORITHM (Multiple Words) .
l Figure 2.2.2.1b A - 19 l
l
NPX80 lC-DR 791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS l
l I
applicable guidance on the basic issues governing font selection, namely, j character form and size. Additional cross-references are provided to l other topics where applicable. i l
2.2.3.1 Style a) PlatrLRiock Fonts - Plain block "sans serif" style fonts (i.e.,
character sets) shall be used in all applications. Examples of block sans serif include Lincoln / Mitre. Leroy, Amel, Helvetica, Swiss Roman, Gothic ... (etc.)
we.u . rm ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOP 9RsTuVWXYZ l 2 3 it 5 i 'l F F W r
t ov ere ABc DEFGHI J KLWNOPQR s T UVWXYZ 1234567895 AMCLForg ABCDCFGHIJKLMNOPQ RSTUVWXYZ 012345 6789 Figure 2.2.3.1 Examples of Font Types b) DescendersmSuoer/Subscriots - The font shall allow for true descenders, superscripts and subscripts (See 2.2.3.2f, Vertical Spacing, and 2.2.3.2g, Descender Length).
c) Confusable Characters - Fonts used shall enable positive absolute discrimination (i.e., discrimination without relative comparisons) of similar characters such as:
I and 1 O and0 S and 5 U and V I and L O and O T and Y X and K d) .Upoer Case - Upper case characters should be used where text is presented as singular isolated terms (emphasis on visibility), such l
as equipment labels, screen titles, or low resolution dot matrix i displays.
i A - 20 l-1
NPX80-IC DR-791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS l 1
e) Mixed Cate - Mixed case lettering should be used for written instructions, software messages, and other cases where text is presented as word strings, phrases or sentences (emphasis on readability) Mixed case shat! be used for abbreviations and uniti of measurement as is common practice (see Wooster's New Collegiate Dictionary or equivalent.)
2.2.3.2 Dimensions Character size is an important component of readability. Apparent size is :
. determined by the physical size of the character, and the distance from which it is viewed. Thus, the first step in choosing character size for an j application is to determine the reading / working distance from which the characters must be read. Character height is the usually the princ!ple dimension to which the remaining dimensions of the character are referenced.
a) Readino/Workina Distance - The intended user's reading / working distance and its basis (i.e., statement of type of tasks supported) shall be specified in the equipment design documentation for applications that require text or print to be displayed. Reading distances shall not be assumed to be less than 20 inches, b) Character Height - Since size of text interacts with other variables to determine legibility and readability the following standards are provided. Apparent character height shall subtend at least 12 minutes of arc, and should subtend between 18 and 28 minutes of visual arc, at the specified design basis reading / working distance.
, To calculate the minimum character height needed to meet this standard for a given viewing distance, the formula is:
Minimum 0.003491 x Reading Distance =
Character (12 min)
Height This guidance aesumes that the VDU screens, on which characters might be displayed are of "high resolution" i.e image quality of the text is at least 12 lines of vertical resolution (i.e., a 7 x 9 character matrix) per character, that lighting r.ieets the Standards specified in 7.1, Illur-ination, and that text will not be read from more than 30 degrees off-axis, if it is necessary to violate these assumptions, larger characters should be used.
A - 21
__u_ - _ _ _ _ _ _.. _ _. _ . . _ _ _ . _ - . ~ _ , , _ .
NPX80-IC DR 70102 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS Table 2 2.3.2 offers character heights based on the design basis viewind distances at the Main Control Console in the control room.
Max Viewing Distance l Min Character Height (12 min)
"at the Panel"= 36 in 0.125 in
" Adjacent Panel"= 50 in 0.175 in "Across the MCC"= 151 in 0.527 in Table 2.2.3.2 Character Heights for Ranges of Viewing Distances c) Character Width - Width of characters within a character set is predetermined by the selection of font style and height, in general, a typical character's width should be about 60% of its height, although individual characters will vary from this value.
d) Stroke Width - Stroke width shall be 1/7 to 1/9 of character height for standard applications of text and print.
e) Horizontal Snaging - Minimum spacing between characters shall be one pixel, one stroke width, or 20% of median character width (whichever is greater). Between words minimum spacing shall be one character width. Multiple or variable spacing between words in text (such as occurs when text is full justified) should not be used.
f) Vertical Soacing - Spacing between the baseline of one line of text and the top of the next line of text shall be at least 50% of the character height. Spacing between lines of continuous text shall not exceed 150% of character height. Spacing between the lines shall be sufficient to visibly separate adjacent leaders and descenders (i.e., by at least one blank pixel for VDUs, or by 10%
of the character height for printed and engraved text).
g) Descender LengtJJ - Descenders shall descend below the line by a minimum distance of 25% of the uppercase character height. See Figure 2.2.3.2.
A - 22
NPX80-IC DR 791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS l
II: bbleeding I Q
font' ! ::: 4 elze point, - - 'escent site --
. . t,
. I. I li, ,
-}IEn"te' !
Figure 2.2.3.2 Character Dimensions 2.2.3.3 Other Concerns a) Equipment Labels. For embossing, engraving and other design requirements of the physical label itself, see 2.5, Equipment Labels.
b) Warnina Laptis. Titles on warning labels (e.g. Caution Warning, radioactivity, etc.) shall be 3 times the minimum specification for legible character size at the specified reading distance. Text beneath the title should use the standard size for characters based on the viewing distance. Additional information on waming labels is contained in 2.5.10.
c) y_pU Resolution. The minimum font matrix size shall be 7 by 9
. dots or pixels per character (12 raster lines per text line).
r A - 23
NPX80-IC-DR-791-02 . 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS 2.3 Graphics & Non-Textual Format Conventions 2.3.1. General Conventions The General Principles of Information Format of 2.1 shall be applied to graphics and non-textual formats, 2.3.1.1 Accessibility of Information Displays and indications should be organized so that information that is most frer,uently needed or is most critical to guide actions and make operating decisions can be eatify acquired.
2.3.1.2 Actual Equipment Responses indicating devices for remotely instrumented equipment shall present actual equipment responses, and shall not substitute indication of ordered action or control power indication.
2.3.1.3 Positive Indications The absence or loss of a signal or visual indication shall not be used to inform or alert the operator of a condition. The absence of a signal or visual indication may be used to indicate c " power off" condition for operational displays, but not for maintenance displays.
2.3.1.4 Display Failure Indications Displays should be designed so that failure of the display or display circuitry is readily distinguished from the range of possible readings for the parameter.
2.3.2 Color Color coding is employed to differentiate between classes of displayed information and supports visual search in complex, dense, or critical displays. Color applications shall not conflict or be incompatible (e.g.,
opposite meanings.using the same color, different colors for the same meaning, etc.) with color associations specified. Color associations specified shall be uted consistently in specified systems, and should be used consistently throughout the plant. The use of assigned co! ors for other purposes in other separate contexts may be permitted if necessary and contexts are clearly separate. Such continued development of the A - 24
NPX80-!C-DR-791-02 2.0 INFORMATiON FORMAT CONVENTIONS System 80+ color coding conventions shall be reported to the Supervisor of Control Complex Engineering for review and incorporation in these guidelines.
2.3.2.1 Number of Colors No more than 9 colors, including white and black, should be used in a ,
coding system supporting time-critical decision behavior. The selected colors should be maximally discriminable.
2.3.2.2 Redundant Coding Dimensione Color coding shall not be the only method or dimension used to encode and display a set of distinctions. Shape, fill, intensity, or other redundant code dimension shall be used.
-2.3.2.3 Color Assignments The following color conventions have been established for and shall be used in the System 80+ design. They have been selected to be compatible with common usage and existing industry conventions. Color assignments are presented within specified contexts. Some colors have distinct meanings in different contexts. This is permissible if conflicts and incompatibilities among the assignments are avoided a) Control Panels & Associated Disotavs - Component states shall be cotid only in terms of their objective physical. status (see 2.3.1.2, Actua' Equipment Response). Component status symbols will not be coded to show normality / abnormality. Mode-sensitive alerting mechanisms (alarm tiles, operator aids, and associated messages) will direct the operator / maintainer's attention to this type of information; within this context, operators will then be resoonsible for evaluating the acceptability or normality of the indicated conditions.
The following color set will be used where color is app!ied in the context of. control panels, for both control and indicating devices:
n Black -
Background color, text for control panel iabels -
on white background L
l Blue -
Component Control Status: Auto permissive /
on-line A - 25
NPX80-IC-DR-791-02 - 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS Green -
Flow Status (of remotely indicated or controlled components): Off/ inactive /De-energized / Flow Preventive (e.g., Valve Closed, Breaker Open, Pump Off, etc.)
Yellow -
Alarm annunciators Orange -
Component Control Status: Manual; Non-alarm annunciator Red -
Flow Status (of remotely indicated or controlled components):
On/ Active / Energized / Flow Permissive (e.g.,
Valve Open, Breaker Shut, Pump On, etc.)
Grey -
Static data (i.e. data that is not changing dynamically) such as menu options, dividing lines, piping, non-controllable components and non-instrumented valves, graph grids, and defcult graphical items without other assigned color conventions Cyan -
Descriptors of dynamic process parameter values White -
Dynamic data 1.e process parameter values and system's response to operator touch, e.g.,- menu selection until appropriate system response occurs, background for labels, color
- of text on the momentary actuation switch lens.
~ian -
Control Panel Surfaces Light Brown - Control Panel demarcations Dark Brown - Control Panel Mimic Flowpaths Purple -
Background for white-lettered discrete indicator control panel labels containing post accident monitoring parameters A - 26
NPX80-IC-DR 791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS b) P_ersonnel Safety & Physical Hazards. The following specifications are general. They are consistent with applicable OSHA standards in 10 CFR 1910 Sections 144, " Safety Color Code for Marking Physical Hazards" and are not incompatible with the color assignments in 2.3.2.3 Green - Safe; Go
. Yellow & Orange -
Caution: Attention Red -
Danger; Stop; Fire Hazard, Fire Safety Magenta -
Radiation Hazard c) Labels. See 2.5.6, Label Colors.
2.3.3 Emphasis Coding (Brightness & Flash)
Emphasis coding or highlighting should be used to direct and prioritize the operator's attention to plant, system, and equipment status changes based their importance to operator evaluation, decision-making, and action requirernents. Salience (i.e., atter%n-getting capacity) between levels of a coding dimension should ordered by priority or importance, so that more important categories have more salient coding assignments.
2.3.3.1 Consistency Emphasis methods used to encode specific information (i.e., beyond their call for attention) shall have the same meaning in similar applications.
2.3.3.2 Brightness Coding When brightness coding (i.e., contrast enhancement, or increased difference between figure and background intensity) is used for
). highlighting, the number of brightness levels used should be limited to
_ two and shall be simited to three distinct levels. Levels shall differ by a ratio of at least 2:1 or more. (Note: situations may occur where some minor adjustment of intensity between different, but similarly coded, shape or size symbols in a may be necessary to make them look subjectively similar; this is a display implementation issue and not a coding distinction.)
A - 27 i
e - , --
NPX80-IC-DR 791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS 2.3.3.3_ Flash Coding Flashing of a symbol or message (e.g. on-off or alternating high-low brightness) shall be reserved for alerts and (re) directions of operator attention to status changes, a) Number of Flash Rates. No more than 2 flash rates shall be used, with the faster rate denoting higher priority.
b) Sinale Flash rate. When a single flash rate is used, the rate shall be between 3 and 5 Hz, with a minimum of 50 msec of signal "on" time between flashes of the signal"off".
c) More than one flash rate. When more a second flash rate is used, the lower priority flash shall be between 1 and 2 Hz.
d) Duty Cycle. When 2 flash rates are used the "on-off" t,ycle times should be in a ratio from 1:1 (50% duty cycle) to 1:3 (25% duty cycle). Higher priority information shall have the duty cycle closest to 50%.
e) Synchronization. Simultaneously active flashing devices of the same rates shall be synchronized.
2.3.4 Shapes / Symbols Shape or pictorial symbol coding should be used to provide visually direct representation. Symbols should be easily recognized pictorial analogs or symbols of the component, system, or action, and should be based on established standards and conventions (e.g. P&lDs).
2.3.4.1 Size a) Eg.r_celyed r Absolute Size. The smallest citribute of the symbol that is required for its unambiguous interpretation shall subtend 12 minutes of visual arc at the design basis reading / working
. distance. Overall symbols dimensions should exceed 20 minutes of arc across the width of the smallest rectangle that can enclose
-the symbol.
b) Relative Size. Size coding of information on indications (other than proportional numeric scales) is not recommended. When the size difference of symbols is to be used as the means of A - 28
NPX80-lC DR 791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS discrimination, there shall be at least a 150% difference in size, with a maximum of three levels of size difference permitted.
2.3.4.2 Number of Symbols The number of different symbolic codes that are used on a single MMI display snould be reasonably minimized, and shall not exceed 20. The total number of symbols should be limited but subject to the e requirements of the task analysis, i.e. if a new symbol is necessary for operations and information display it should not be disallowed based on the standards portrayed here, 2.3.4.3 Fill Coding (Symbol Modifiers)
' Coding dimensions may be added to a symbol, to indicate changes in the status of a symbol's referent, in System 80+, the flow status of valves, pumps, and breaker components shall be indicated by filled (i.e.,
flow-preventive) and unfilled (i.e., flow-permissive) component symbols.
2.3.4.4 Meaning of Symbols The symbols used in System 80+ are presented in Figure 2.3.4.4.
i A - 29 9
' ' " = t re r **-+=+c -- -
NPX80-IC-DR-79142 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS VALVES PUMPS YdVY - gg TEREE-TAY' -
VALYE POSITIVE CENTRIFUGAL DISPLACEWENT SffETY OFF
' -><(- CLOSED ISOLATION < M OPEN STEAM GENERATOR VALVE V MIABLE s~ NPOSITION g ]
WTfULLY CORE 15 EAT EXCHANGER -
u V
PRESSURIZER HEATERS TANK sunu. URGE LARGE SunLL T,.s ON oN /\ M V v g 0FF U.
Figure 2.3.4.4 System E'0+ Symbols (page 1 of 2)
A - 30
NPX80-lC-DR-791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS ELECTRIC GENERATOR FLOW TURBINE RESTRICTOR SUMP t
A W I ION-EXCHANGER
+1 I ~-
O CLOSED 1 I
+ -
--e e--- open +
~
TRANSFORMER
+ _
- +
FILTER r
T LOWER DAMPER-STRAINER
--e.-
O - OPEN
- O SYSTEM hCLOSED OFF k - TROTTLED A OFF t
- Figure 2.3 4.4 System 80+ Symbols (page 2 of 2)
A - 31
NPX80-IC-DR-791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS 2.3.5 Graphs and Graphics Graphic displays should be used to display data showing relations or changes in space or time; when operators must quickly scan and compare related sets of data, or when operators must monitor slowly changing data for trends.
2.3.5.1 Consistent Scaling When operators must compare graphic data across a series of charts or graphs, the same scale shall be used for each chart (see Figure 2.3.51.).
1 I [~" } IfN j 1%x P$ 5-soo P= i l T E a
+
lw-c 3 l-= E-i 5-=
+ a M 0 Figure 2.3.5.1 Example of incompatible Adjacent Scales 2.3.5.2 Direct Display of Comparisons When operators must routinely determine difference readings between two sets of data, or the quantitative margin between a parameter and a limit, then the difference or margin value should be displayed directly as a curve in its own right. See 4.1.2, Direct Usability of Data.
2.3.53 Grid Lines If the operator must use the graph to precisely extract point values then sca!e graduation on axes shall be extended to form a grid in a two-dimensional graph. Grid lines shall be unobtrusive (low intensity) and shall not obscure data c ements. Grid lines should be displayed or suppressed at the option of the operatcr A - 32
NPX80-IC-DR-791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS 2.3.5.4 Scales See 2.4, humerical Scaling on page 30. 2.3.5.5 Labeling of Axes _ The horizontal (x-axis) should be used to plot time or the postulated cause and the vertical (y-axis) should be used to plot the monitored parametor. See also sections 2.5 Equipment Labelling and 2.2.2 Abbreviations and Acronyms. 2.3.5.6 Values When graphed data represents _only positive numbers, the graph should be displayed with the origin at the lower left. When the data include negative values and the axes extend in both directions from a zero point, the origin should be displayed in the center of the graph. Time history displays shall have the origin in the lower right hand corner of the display (e.g.,30 minutes ago equals -30 minutes). 2.3.5.7 Scale Range Descriptors Graphics with multiple scale ranges or resolutions shall display a unique descriptor for each scale. When a graphic display changes range in l response to parameter input (e.g., autoranging narrow to wide range), a non-alarm annunciation of the scale descriptor (e.g., flashing, required acknowledgment) shall direct the operator's attention to the change in scale _ (See also 2.4, Numerical Scaling). The display of current values on L the indicator shall not be prevented by a failure to acknowledge the scale ! change annunciation. 2.3.5.8 Bar Graphs t Bar graphs should be used for comparing a single measure across a set of several entities or a variable sampled at discrete intervais. Where bars i are to be compared, the bars should be arranged in parallel and spaced closely enough, normally not more than one bar width, so that a direct visual comparison can be made without eye movement. i 2.3.5.9 Panel Mimic Layouts Process flow lines (mimic lines) shall be included in all layouts of controls and dedicated Indicators where the relationship of actual plant A - 33
c NPX80-IC-DR-791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS components is not apparent from the layout and labeling of controls and indicators alone. Labels shall be provided in process mimits such that all flow lines lead to or from'a specified component, a source label (e.g., "from makeup"), or a destination iabel (e.g., "to letdown"). Demarcation lines anci mirnic flow lines on control panels shall be 3/16" wide. i i L ! A - 34 l
I NPX80-IC.DR 791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS 2.4 Numerical Scaling Scaling is the division of the operating range of an indicating or control device into numbered, proportioned units. Other sections that should be applied to the development of scaled displays include 2.2, Print and Text Format Conventions; 2.3.2, Color; and 3.1.1, Display-Control Compatibility. Sections to which this guidance should be applied includes 3.5, Instrument Meters and Gauges; and 4.0, Software. 2.4.1 Scale Range a) Sufficiency - Interface hardnre devices shall have sufficient scale range to accommodate all anticipated normal and abnormal operating conditions. b) Nominal Readings - Interface hardware devices shall provide scale range such that nominal readings or settings fall between 20% and 90% of full scale during normal operations.- c) - Multiole Ranges - The high end range of the device shall be sufficient to prevent over-ranging during anticipated conditions, if sufficient high end range causes normal operati:ns to occur below 20% of scale, then multiple ranges should be considered. (See'2.3.5.7, Scale Range Descriptors, and 2.4.6., Nonlinear Scaling.)
- 2.4.2 Scale Demarcation ano Numbering Demarcation refers to the techniques used to portray an analog scale range as a series of measured divisions separated by graduation marks.
See also 2.4.7, Units of Measure. a) Graduation Size - Major (numbered) and minor (unnumbered) graduations shall have different sizes. Diffeient lengths may be more legible for quantitative point readings; diffe.ent widths may be more visibic (though less accurate) if only qualitative check ,*eadings are required. Graduations shall be proportioned as shown in Figure 2.4.2.a. Intermediate graduations (either numbered or L l A - 35 t
NPX80-IC-DR-791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS unnumbered) are unnecessary if minor, unnumbered graduations number four or less. b) Graduation Intervals - Scales shall be graduated (and numbered) in intervals of one, two, or five units, or multiples thereof by powers of ten, as shown in Figure 2.4.2.b. (Multiplying a scale by a power of ten may be denoted as part of the overall scale label, rather than at each numbered graduation.) Major scale marker 3 9 p 0012% intermediate scale marker 0 012S r =-.,.r L!Il!Illi Minimum separatical betweeft centers (.05) Figure 2.4.2.a Graduation Dimensions in inches for Viewing Distance of 3 feet GOOD FAIR 1 2 3 4 5 2 4 6 8 to 5 to 15 20 25 20 40 60 80 100 to 20 30 40 50 Figure 2.4.2.b Graduation Intervals c) .N_psbered & IJnrunbered Graduations - Between the
-numbered graduations, unnumbered graduations should not exceed four and shall not exceed nine in number.
d) Percentage Scaling - Percentages shall not be used unless they have been identified as the standard for a specific parameter. Where percentages are used,0% of scale will A - 36
NPX80-IC-DR-791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS correspond to the low end of the parameter range (e.g.,
- minimum level, flow, power, capacity, etc.); similar.'y,100%
- of scale shall correspond to the high end of the parameter range.
2,4.3 Scale Precision Precision refers to the finest level of significant graduated data on the device scale. a) Analog Scale Precision - Interface Hardware devices with analog scale ranges shall provide scale demarcation not less than one-half the minimum precision required by the user's tasks. For example, if a task requires reading pressure to within 10 pounds of accuracy, then the minimum required scale precision would be 20 pound graduations (25 pound graduations wculd be too coarse, while 10 pound graduations would be acceptable, but finer than required.) b) Digital Scale Precision - interface hardware devices with digital scale ranges shall provide scale resolution (i.e., number of decimal places) greater than or equal the minimum precision required by the user's tasks. For example, if a task requires reading temperature to within half a degree of accuracy, then the minimum required scale precision would be a single decimal place following the zero (no places following the decimal point would be too coarse, while two decimal places would be acceptable, but finer than required.) c) Excessive Precision - Scale precision shall not exceed the accuracy of the detector-instrument ensemble. Unnecessary scale precision (e.g., more than one decimal-place or scale division beyond that required by the task) should be avoided, or be suppressible by the user. 2.4.4 Scale Labeling Scale labelling shall adhere to the conventions specified under 2.2, Print and Text Format Conventions; and 2.5, Equipment Labels. A - 37
1 l NPX60-lC-DR-791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS 2.4.5 Scale Zone Banding Zone banding with color or graphical highlights to denote normal, abnormal, or other categorical operating ranges of a parameter should, if applied, be conspicuous, distinct, and not interfere with the quantitative reading of the display. Zone banding should not be used unless the implementation is one where parameter zones can be reliably and usefully defined, and where the implementation can account for relevant mode 1ependencies in the interpretation and display of the parameter. 2.4.6 Nonlinear Scaling Logarithmic or other nonlinear scaling shall be reserved for devices that require at least three orders of magnitude of precise range, and for which nonlinear scaling is deemed conventional or appropriate (e.g., source range reactor powar). 2.4.7 Engineering Units The use of engineering units shall conform to the standards of [TBD]. L l-i A - 38
NPX80-IC-DR 791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS 2.5 Equipment Labels 2.5.1 ' Applicability a) Identification Labels - _ Identification labels (names and designators) shall be provided on all specific equipment, components, structural features, etc , where personnel must identify and perform O&M-related actions, or where personnel need to be directed to avoid equipment or personnel safety hazards, b) Other Labels - Other specific types of labels (e.g., Warnings, Instructiorn) should be applied as specified in this section, c) VDUs - Names and designators identifying equipment status and plant parameter items on VDU screens are descriotors. not labels, and are covered elsewhere (seo 4.0, Software.) 2.5.2 Terminology Terminology on equipment labeis shall utilize controlled names and nomenclature, approved acronyms and abbreviations, and equipment designators, to help assure that labels are informative, unambiguous, and consistent (see 2.1, General Principles of information Format; 2.2.1, Names and Designators; and 2.2.2, Abbreviation and Acronyms.) 2.5.3 Scan Codes Installed equipment items with unique designators shall incorporate some form of scan code system [TBD) into thea labels that will provide access to O&M databases. 2.5.4 Size a) Label Text - Equipment labels shall use upper case characters - (unless providing lengthy instructions), be sized to be legible f om the normal working position of the operator, and otherwise conform to the contents of 2.2.3, Alphanumeric Characters for
- Labels and Text. Subject to these constraints, character size may be further determined by hierarchical labeling requirements (see 2.5.11d). However, if there is a conflict between the hierarchical labeling requirements and the viewing distance character size requirements, the viewing distance requirements are to be followed.
A - 39
NPX80-IC-DR-791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS b) Label Width - The width of the label base shall provide at least one blank character at the start and end of the longest line of text. c) Label HeighJ - The height of the label base shall provide an unoccupied margin of at least 50% of cnaracter height preceding , the first and following the last line of text. 2.5.5 Layout of Identification Labels Generic equipment identification labels shall have the following layout: a) Name - The item's name will occupy one or more horizontal lines on the tag as appropriate to the application (e.g., space available, label technology, etc.) b) .Qesignator - The item's designator shall follow the item's name. The designator should appear on a single line of the label. If this is a problem, then 1) get a wider label base, or 2) break the designator at an existing hyphenation. Designators shall not be broken at any point other than where they m e already hyphenated by their standard format. c) Scan Code - The item's scan code shall be [TBD]. l 2.5.6 Label Colors a) The standard color for identification and other generic information labels shall be black letters on white background. b) The standard color for danger labels (i.e., personnel safety I warnings) shall be white letters on red background, I c) The standard color for caution labels (i.e., equipment protect.cn or availability warnings) shall be black letters on yellow background. d) The standard color for radiation hazard labels shall be magente letters on yellow background e) . The color of the text and/or background on a label shall not bc used to identify systems or trains (e.g., safety train A, loop B, etc.) A - 40
=- - . . - .. -. . .. .
NPX80-IC-DR-791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS 2.5.7 Cor 'etion & Materiels Choice of appropriate label material and construction depends on the spec;fic application. Thus: a) System Descriptions should specify conditions of the ambient environment that labeling must tolerate (e.g., temperature, humidity, chemistry, vibration, etc.) b) Detailed system procurement documentation should include specification of the selected labeling technology, and verification of its durability under the applicable plant ambient conditions. c) Informal or improvised labels such as dymo tape, handwritten paper and tape, etc., shall not be used. 2.5.8 Position & Mounting a) Labels on plant equipment should be placed in an obvious and well-lit position that E ffords a horizontal viewing orientation to the operator or maintainer, b) Labels shall be mounted in a way that is semi-permanent (i.e., can be removed, but remains affixed under daily wear and tear), is appropriate to the item, and will not damage the metal of the item, c) Screw mounted and similar hardware-mounted labels cause damage to the labelled item, and shall not be used. Screw-mounted labels also tend to warp, are harder to read, and require otherwise unnecessary space for the screws. 2.5.9 Data & Instruction Labels a) It may be useful to provide a label with key data or brief instructions at the' point of use or entry. b) Instruction labels should be near to but operationally " preceding" the point of operation. This will generally be above, to the left of, ( or in front of the point in question. c) Instructions should be presented as a series of itemized steps, rather than in narrative or paragraph form. A 41
NPX80-IC-DR-791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS 2.5.10 Warning Labels Warning labels should be provided near to but operationally
" preceding" the point of hazard, entry, or opeiation (i.e., where the hazard can be avoided, and accidents prevented, outside of appropriate guards and/or barriers.) Warning labels shall identify the nature and/or extent of the hazard, and tell what to do to minimize the specified hazard.
a) General Warnings - General warnings (not annunciators; see 5.0) . have been defined to be of two types: Danger (immediate personnel safety hazard) and Caudon (equipment or personnel ' operat;ons hazard). Both have distinctive color schemes, and are illustrated in Figure 2.5.10. WHITE IING
/ yYELLOW Danger Sign Caution Sign Figure 2.5.10 Examples of Warning Labels (from 29 CFR Subpart G Section 1926.200) b) _ Radiation Hazards - Radiation hazards shall be denoted using current industry conventions and standard ALARA practices.
l Posting of "High Radiation Areas", "RWP" areas, etc., shall be via l standaro yellow and magenta signs. Lettering on signs shall use Bold Boston font (see 2.2.3.1, Style) for key headings. Yellow and magenta ropes shat! be employed as appropriate. 2.5.11 Panel Labels a) Materials - Labels shall be engraved from a layered (sandwich) material where the inner color is the lettering color which is engraved down to the material. Label material shall be rigid, low-A - 42
. . - - .. - - - _. - - - . - ~ . - - - - -.
NPX,80 IC-DR 791-02 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS glare, durable, and heat resistant to 140'F. A typical label material such as Gravoply 11 or Setonply is acceptable with the understanding that they scratch easily; more durable materials such as Gravoply I shou ld be substituted in harsh heal environments, b) Positioning - Labels on panels shall be placed in a horizontal orientation, flat on the panol, and above the pertinent component. c) Mounting - Panel labels shall be mounted on clean surfaces with double sided tape or properly cured glue, such that firm, continuous adhesion occurs over the entire rear surface of the label. Labels shall be no thicker than 3/16" so that they do not present an unacceptable protuberance. d) Hierarchical Labelino - The height of the characters on control panels can be used to portray the hierarchical structure of the system and its components. The letter heights shown in Table 2.5.11 should be used as a sample framework for panel labeling.
- Each different !evel is at least 33% larger than the previous levet to ensure that different levels are discriminable. It is not necessary to use all the levels, but the application of levels for a given set of panels (i.e., in a single control room) shall be consistent.
2.5.12 Tanks, Filters, Heat Exchangers, & Pipes These items, in addition to identification, shall be labelled to indicate contents, rated pressure, and direction of flow. Piping shall be so labelled every [TBD) feet. 2.5.13 Structural Features Structural members such as frames, penetrations, padeyes shall be labelled for identification and any appropriate ratings (e.g., load, clearance, etc.) 2.5.14 Geographical Locations A you-are-here map should be provided as a navigation aid at all building, equipment roorrs and workspace entrances. These should explicitly indicate present location, major features on the same level, and emergency egress routes. I l' l A - 43 y %- y
l NPX80-IC-DR 79142 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS i The maps shall be aligned with the terraini with the assumption that the upward direction on a vertical map is equivalent to the forward direction on a horizontal map.
.Iypa Character - Examole B91Qht Full Panel Label 1" actor Panel Whole System Label 3/4" CVCS Subsystem Label in Major 1/2" Shutdown Component Group Cooling Warning Header 3/8" " Caution" Subgroup Meter Scale _ 1/4" Reactor Numbers Coolant Pumps Individual Components 3/16" RCP 1 A Warning Text 3/16" "Do not operate when..." .
Mimic Source / Destination 1/8" " Note: later Label lock between..." Comoonent Meter Label 1/8" "To SDC HX"/"RC-HS-105" Test Point Label 1/10" " Jumper between contacts 1 xd e- MW i Table 2.5.11 Relative Size of Characters in Panel Labe;;ing Hierarchy l' h A - 44
NPXbO-lC-DR-791-02 3,0 DISPLAY AND CONTROL HARDWARE 3.0 DISPLAY AND CONTROL HARDWARE The physical devices discussed in this section are associated with indicating (i.e., display) and control interfaces between an operator and plant systems, They have been collected here under the term
" interface hardware". In some cases (i.e., touch screens, Section 3.4.8) an interface hardware device is provided to serve as both display and control functions simultaneously. Thus, it was decided that a high-level division into hardware and software might be more clearcut than an attempt to separate the contents into categories of indications and controls.
Section 3.0 begins with general design principles (Section 3.1) that apply broadly to many types of interface hardware. Remaining parts of Section 3.0 present guidance that is more device-specific in nature. Since the purpose of this document is to guide the implementation of the System 80+ design and the Nuplex 80+ control complex, the guidance provided is limited to that which is applicable to System 80+ devices, design features, etc. If, as an designer, implementer, or procurer, you encounter a need for devices (and guidance) not specified in this document, contact the Supervisor of Control Complex Engineering for assistance. All hardware that is electrically powered shall be designed with respect to the safety standards as set forth in OSHA requirements specified in 29 CFR Subpart S Section 1910.301-1910.308. i A - 45
~ - . .- . .
NPX80-lC-DR-791-02 3.0 DISPLAY AND CONTROL HARDWARE 3.1 Design Principles j Design Principles are a collection of HFE standards and guidance that apply generally to the physical selection and implementation of many types of display and/or control devices (as opposed to their information formats, in Sections 2.2 and 2.3). These
-principles have been collected here to minimize the redundant presentation of similar material throughout the document.
However, it is important to consider how each piece of guidance applies to a particular design problem. Generic guidance cannot be implemented without thoughtful interpretation. The following principles of interface hardware design will be covered in Section 3.1: 3.1.1 - Display-Control Compatibility 3.1.2 - Feedback 3.1.3 - Failure Indications 3.1.4 - Emergency Control Provisions 1 3.1.5 - Prevention of Accidental Actuation 3.1.6 - Redundancy 3.1.7 - Durability 3.1.8 - Maintainability Y l l A - 46 l
NPX80-IC-DR'791-02 3.0 DISPLAY AND CONTROL HARDWARE 3.1.1 Display-Control Coropatibility To minimize operator workload and error, control device movements and display response shall conform to the population stereotypes provided in Table 3.1.1 and Figure 3.1.1. Function Control Action on, Start Up, right. f orward. Run clockwise, pull y-' off, Stop Down, lett, backward, j , counterclockwise, put Right Ciudwise, right ) Left counterclockwise, le f t Ra;se . Up / Lower Down increase Forward, up, right. - so clockwise f .m Decrease Backward, down, le f t, I t 3 counterclockwise i t 0
-o Table 3.1.1 User Population Stereotypes Figure 3.1.1 Control Actions 3.1.2 Feedback Control devices shall be located near or integrated with a display or other indicating device that will provide prompt reporting of the actual results of control actions on systems or components (see 2.3.1.2, Actual Equipment Response). Each control device shall have a corresponding feedback indication on which users can verify proper operation of the controlled equipment.
3.1.3 Failure indications a) Interface Devices - When an interface device fails or t'ecomes inoperative it should be apparent to, and readily verifiable by the operator (see also 2.3.1.4, Display Failure Indications). b) Positive Indications - Failure of necessary or critical A - 47
NPX80-IC-DR-791-02 3.0 DISPLAY AND CONTROL HARDWARE fanctio,ns, systems, or equipment, or the activation of backup equipment on the loss of main equipment fun _ction, shall result in a positive indication such as a failure light, warning annunciator, etc., rather than a loss of similar "run" indications (i.e., a negative indication; see 2.3.1.3, Positive Indications). 3.1.4 Emergency Control Provisions a) Emergencv Garb - Interface hardware shall be operable by personnel wearing required emergency garb, in all locations where the anticipated need exists in the system design basis. b) Backun Controls - If emergency or backup interface
~ hardware is required, its configuration shall be the same as its counterpart for normal operation.
3.1.5 Prevention of Accidental Actuation Interface hardware should be designed and located so that accidental activation is unlikely, pa ticularly for devices whose accidental activation may cause equipment damage, personnel injury, or degraded system readiness or performance. 3.1.5.1 Noninterference Protective mechanisms should not interfere with the normal operation of the cor, ol, adjacent controls and associated displays. In addition, any protective cover should not obscure position indication. 3.1.5.2 Protective Methods Seven methods are provided to inhibit the inadvertent activation of a control. Methods a, b, and c -
-(Location, Resistance, and Dead-Man Controls) are good general control device approaches and should ~
be generally implemented if appropriate. Methods d, e, f, and g (Recess, Cover Guards,- Mechanical interlocks, and Delay Locks) are not as broadly applicable as the other methods, but may be usefulif none of the first three methods can be applied and l l A - 48
NPX80-lC-DR-791-02 3.0 DISPLAY AND CONTROL HARDWARE accidental activation is a concern, a) Location - Instrumentation and interface devices should be
-located so that personnel are not likely to strike them accidentally while conducting other normal movements or activities in the vicinity. Sensing, control, or display devices that are fragile, critical, or periodically require alignment should not be located near high-traffic paths. If a concern exists that a device may be accidentally struck or actuated, then use one or more of the following protective methods to prevent inadvertent actuation.
b) Resistance - Control devices should be provided with sufficient resistance (e.g., spring-loading, viscous damping, etc.) so that a definite or sustained effort is required for activation. This force should not be excessive, as it will hinder intended operation. An acceptable required force would be 10 to 1~ Newtons and shall not exceed 30 Newtons. Section 3.2 provides specific ranges for various individual control types. c) Dead-man Controls - Where appropriate, control devices should be configured to return the system to a conservative, unchanging, or otherwise stable state when operating force is removed from the control, so that operator inattention wil: be less likely to result in an undesired system condition. d) Recess - Controls may be recessed by physical barriers. The control shall be entirely contained in the envelop described by the recess or barrier. See Figure 3.1.5.2.d e) Cover G@El. - A hinged or removable . aver may be placed over a control. Do not use safety or lock wire as they interfere with the proper use of the device. See Figure 3.1.5.2.e. f) Mechanical interlock A control device may be provided with a mechanical interlock that requires an additional prior movement or operation on the device before it can be actuated. A - 49
NPX80-IC-DR 791-02 3.0 D! SPLAY AND CONTROL HARDWARE DIS- ARMED SWITCH PROTECTIVE HOUSING Figure 3.1.5.2.d Recessed Button With Barrier g) Delay Lock -' A control device may incorporate a time delay lock on the actuating mechanism. When actuation is attempted, the delay is initiated; the control device will not accept the input until after the de.ay interval has elapsed. ! A - 50 i
NPX-lC-DR 79102 7.0 CONTROL ROOM ENVIRONMENT
' f0r writing, a esk r ot e wrtng u ace s all be o ded i t
,immediate work area.
I l I i l
' I i
1 - I
', I
, N- '
a 4/ / 36" min. l 30" min. >
' r l
Figure 7.6.2.3.a Seated Operator i i A - 101
NPX IC DR-791-02 7.0 CONTROL ROOM ENVIRONMENT P ) fd l /Y f.
- g. -.
lA I.arW. ('"% , H gh Clearaw 4 7.5 Min. t g w- ays
==u ...
26*' Min Seat Height 1$" .18"
" E b 6 u
.3 . . ._
, Figure 7.6.2.3.b Legroom & Kick Space 7.6.3 Workstation Layout j The procedure for panel layout is given in the Panel L 9 out Guidelines Document, NPX80-lC DP-791-01. Some . idaL guidance on panel layout is provided here.
'I.6.3.1 Group Spacing Separate groups of components should be spaced apart sufficiently so that the group boundary is obvious. Spacing between groups should be greater than the width of a typical i
control or display in the group, and at least twice size of spacing i between components within the group. q 7.6.3.2 Demarcation Demarcation should also be used to make group boundaries obvious, particularly where ample space between groups of components is not available. Una of moderate contrast with the panel surface shall be used (see Section 2.3.2.3, Color I A - 102 6, u
NPX IC-DR-791-02 7.0 CONTROL HOOM ENVIRONMENT Assignments). Demarcation lines should be easily removed and replaced, for maintenance. See Figure 7.6.3.5 for an example of demarcation. SPACING oEMARCATloN LY { TURNING G TuR NE b- EI RUNBACK - 3 y p,iiiir.4 - p 4; I pugnep C _=__ o o o
?
J w w$ o 1 9 Figure 7,6.3.2 Demarcation of Component Groups (example) 7.6.3.3 Component Spacing This section gives guidance for the spacing of adjacent components. Separatic n between control devices should be sufficient such that access to one device cannot be impeded by adjacent devices, and that erroneous activation of components can be reasonably avolded. The components themselves are discussed in some detail in Section 3.2, Switches and Pushbuttons. See also Section 3.1.5, Accidental Activation. a) Leaend Switches - Legend s.vitch assemblies or modules should be separated by 2 inches at their edge from adjacent modules. However, legend switch modules that meet the requirements of Section 3.2 may, if necessary, be mounted as closely as other engineering considerations permit. See also Section 3.2.1.1, Pushbutton Dimensions. b) Simult6neous AcipatiDO - Where simultaneous actuation of devices is necessary, the devices should not be separated by more than 40 inches. A 'iO3
NPX IC DA 701-02 7.0 CONTROL ROOM ENVIRONMENT 7.6.3.4 Arrangement of Physicany Similai Components a) Consistent Layout - The layout of similar control and display sets shall be consistent at all locations. b) Orientalipa - Horizcntal rows rather than vertical columns should be used. t c) Parsino Rows of_Comoonents No more than 5 similar components shall be laid in an unbroken row or column. If more than 5 similar components must be laid out together, the row must be broken or parsed into groups or segments with additional spacing, ideally these would be meaningful subgroups, however, if there is no meaningful organization evident, arbitrary parsing is better than none. d) #irror Images - Plant relationships may show bilateral (i.e., left-right) symmetry, and this may be an effective organizing framework for displays and controls. However, arbitrary reversal of component layout relationships (mirror-imaging) that , does not denote a meaningful attribute of the system can contribute to errors, and should be avoided. 7.6.3.5 Large Matrices Matrices of similar components should have labeled coordinate axes for identification of any single component within the grid. The left and top sides of the matrix should be used for labeling. , Large (more than 5 by 5 elemere) matrices shall be broken up using physical spacing or demarcation discussed in Sections 7.6.3.1 and 7.6.3.2. 7.6.3.6 Paired Controls & Displays Controls and related displays shall be closely placed so that the two items are readily associated and can be used conveniently with one another. The control shall be placed so that the display is not obscured by the operator during control operation. It is preferred that the display be above the control for that reason as shown in Figure 7.6.3.9. See also Section 3.1.1, Display-Control Compatibility. A - 104 w_ __ ___ . . __. . _ _ . _ - , _ _ - __ _
NPX IC-DR 79102 7.0 CONTROL HOOM ENVIRONMENT D C VOLT 5 Et
/
1 t g (~ l LIKE TMt$ NOT LIKE THis Figure 7.6.3.9 Control and Display Pairs 7.6.4 Display Position The principle concerns in display positioning (besides display size, covered in Section 2.2.3.2, Text Dimensions) are the vertical and horizontal displacement (angle) from the operator's straight-ahead line of sight, and the angular (non-perpendicular) orientation of the display surface with regard to the operator. The values given in the following guidance are based on the limits of the normal visual field; particular hardware may result in additional limitations. In addition, evaluation of working position, eye height, display location, and resulting viewing angles must be performed (e.g., Figure 7.6.4.1.a) in order to apply these criteria; they cannot be further simplified outside the context of specific design question.1 7.6.4.1 Display Position - Vertical Displacement a) Seated Oomator - Displays shall not be placed at a height that requires the 5%ile female to look more than 70' above the horizontel, or the 5%ile male to look more than 90' below the horizontal. Frequently used displays should not be placed at a height that requires the 5%i!e female to look more than 20' above the horizontal, or the 5%ile male to look more than 40-below the horizontal. See Figure 7.6.4.1.a and 7.6.4.1.b. i b) jltanding Ooerator - Displays shall not be placed at a height A - 105 l
NPX IC-DR 791-02 7.0 CONTROL ROOM ENVIRONMENT that requires the 5%ile female to look more than 85' above the , horizontal, or the 5%ile male to look more than 90* below the i horizontal. Frequently used displays should not be placed at a height that requires the 5%ile female to look more than 35' abc'va the horizontal, or the 5%ile male to lock rnore than 25' below the horizontal. See Figure 7.6.4.1.a and 7.6.4.1.b. SUAL tD
!!&'Olf .
5
** t**ents *
;\, ,- : -
I ,'
\ M*
f o Il y gyg , il / HEtOHf 6 HostiroNTAL ll s' s II~ N O,. . . . . Lot 0*, H / HORI2ONTAL
*)-
e#,', ,
.Les_o*_
GdHT~~ ,( i . I .e - - - {c,emiu )* - J,'!"
,,,,t,
[ 34 - 12-< , Figure 7.6.4.1.a Analysis of Vertical Viewing Angles (example) A - 106
I
' ^
NPX lC-DR 791-02 7.0 CONTROL ROOM ENVIRONMENT i 1 ', T e n. i
- VE AT10AL LIMITS W msn.
v n u w Los w.
-f w
w a. $ - Figure 7.6.4.1.b Vertical Displacement & Surface Orientation
. 7.6.4.2 Display Orientation - Horizontal Displacement Displays shall not be placed farther than 95* to the leit or right of center'(i.e., of straight-ahead line of sight). Frequently used
. displays should not be placed more than 35 .off center. See Figure 7.6.4.2. .
HORIZONTAL LIMIT 5
" 7."2 [h
=*~. :
m ..
\ !
9 sY \ t
. Figure 7.6.4.2 Horizontal Display Limits A - 107 % < , y -
e . b y,- - . , . . -
--n,-.,., c' e , .e ,,, ,ne.,---,--,,,,ew~w,_- -w,~.~t...--.w',w',n,,
..-u-,, ,,r,.., ,-r r- .. . , - ,---n.
NPX IC DR-791-02 7.0 CONTROL ROOM ENVIRONMENT 7.6.4.3 Display Suriace Angle ideally (ignoring glare concerns, curved screens, etc.) display surfaces would be perpendicular (i e.,90-) to the operator's line of sight; departures from 90' degrade readability. Display surfaces should be designed to be read at angles between 90* and 60', and shall not be designed to be read at angles of less than 45*. Note that this angular value is not constant for any display (other than an idealized ' point" display) and should be evaluated, relative to the operator's expected position, from the furthest off angle active point on the display surface.
\ \
$n.
*re:'
49# ),/~ Ri2ONt2 Leos
\
ACTUAL 45" LOS f'wt J Figure 7.6.4.3 Display Surface Angle 7.6.4.4 Display Dietance Displays shall not be designed for use at less than 18 inches from the operator. l A-108
NPX-IC DR 791-02 7.0 CONTROL ROOM ENVIRONMENT 7.6.5 Desks Desks should conform to the dimensions in Figure 7.6.5. k%.?' Z~ ~0 .,,, N
\ s pg s - "*" g.-
~
- 3. 3, .
i
~. ; ~.
d - MS n# to" mm, * '- t - ,, Kew room wenn 25" m. Figure 7.6.5 Desk Dimensions 7.6.6 Chairs Chairs used at desks and seated workstations should conform to the following guidance. a) Backrests - Workstation chairs shali have supportive Dack rests, including support for the lower lumbar region. A 100* angle between the back and the seat should be used for office tasks (i.e., keyboard tasks). b) Armrests - Workstation chalis shall have armrests. c) Lwibi'anina - Worketation chairs should be well cushioned, with rem'ening resilience when the seat is occupied, d) Covering - Workstation chairs shall be covered in breathable cloth material. e) Saat Hei Qbt - Normal workstation chairs shall be adjustable from at least 15 to 18 inches. For sit-stand stations the range should cover 26 to 32 inches. A - 109
NPX-lC DR 791-02 7.0 CONTROL ROOM ENVIRONMENT f) Footrosin - Footrests shall be used where seat heights are grester than the normal 15 to 18 inch ranDe. If footrests are necessary, they shall be located so that the seat height can be adjusted in the range of 15 to 18 inches above the footrest, and cover the full circular motion of the chair. g) .Rolelinn 8 Pen!!an - Workstation chairs shall provide 360-rotation and an adjustable spring-loaded recline of approximately 30*, so that operators can easily adjust their position at the console. h) Mobi!!h - Workstation seating should permit operators to easily and safely adjust their location at the console. Thus, workstation chairs shall have five legs with casters as shown in Figure 7.6.6. Casters should be large (at least 2"), and high quality. 4 r == EN Figure 7.0.6 Chair Dimensions A 110
NPX80-IC DR 791-02 8.0 MAINTAINABILITY 8.0 MAINTAINABILITY 8.1 Introductiort Maintenance tasks are defined in Section 1.4 as the subset of O&M activities that is performed to enable or ensure that components, equipment, systems, etc. will adequately perform their design function when they are required for operations. As described beluw, three categories of treatment for maintainability guidance have buen identified. , a) Ibcerlao with General Issumi - There is much overlap between the general design issues presented in this guide, and those in the area of design-for maintainability. Thus, the contents of this document should be examined and applied both from the standpoint of maintainability as well as that of operability. Preceding inples with maintenance-related implications include: Anthropometry Color Cod:ng Doors, Hatches, & Hallways Equipment Guards. Labelling Lighting Names & Designators - Nr se St.affolds & Railings Stairways & Ladders Storage Work Platforms These aspects of System 80+ equipment and systems must accommodate the needs of maintainers as well as operators. b) Goeciali?.ed Problems and Data - A number of issues would require an extensive amount of specialized data with narrow applicability, merely to generate generic maintainability guidance. Such issues are beyond the scope of this document. For examplo: Comprehensive OSHA Standards Sclection of Protective Garb Occupancy Limits for Hazardous Environments l A - 111 o
NPX80-IC DR 791-02 8.0 MAINTAINABILITY Note that all OSHA standards apply throughout the design. The HFE Standards should in no case conflict with OSHA standards. However, adherence to the HFE Standards is not adequate assurance that OSHA standards have been met. Reference to applicable OSHA standards is therefore always a necessity. Contsct the Supervisor, Control Complex Engineering, if HFE assistance in these areas is needed. c) Maintainability Standards and Guidelincs - The remainder of Section 8 contains a collection of standards and Guidance material that applies broadly, but uniquely, to maintainability (and associated personnel safety) issues. 8.2 Design of Equipment for Maintainability 8.2.1 Facilitate Frequent and Expected Activities a) Acoly General HFE Princiofes The contents of Sections 1.0 through 8.0 of the HFE Standards shall be applied to all aspects of equipment maintainability (e.g., labelling, lighting, etc.) b) Analyze Exoected Tasks - Analyze the likely and expected tasks of the maintainer as the design progresses. What is the sequence a use of features? What are the possible and likely errors, end are the consequences potentially significant? What , could be easier, better organized, require less memory, or less training and experience? These are all opportunities to improve the design.
, c) Utilize Standard Material- Use of standard equipment, hardware, and tools should be maximized within the constraints of performance requirements. Special tools should be considered only in cases where the operator is afforded a substantial advantage over the use of more standard tools.
d) Afford CJLSylemoval & Rectacement - The number of fasteners and connectors used should be limited to that required by the integrity of the equipment. TW number of turns or actions required to secure the faste iers and connections should be minimized. Use locking hinges on one side of equipment covers where acceptable. Utilize quick disconnects or A - 112
. . - . _. = - - -. - - . _ - _- . . - _ .- .. ._
NPX80-IC DR-791-02 8.0 MAINTAINABILITY aggregate connectors (i.e., multi lead / single plug) on appropriate modular items. See also 8.2.3, in situ Maintenance. e) jmolement Fool-Proof FeaturLS - See Section 8.2.2 below. f) Design for in-Situ Maintenance - See Section 8.2.3 below. 8.2.2 Fool-proof Features To the extent practical, equipment should be designed to be fool-proof in connection, operation, inspection, surveillance, etc. That is, it should incorporate ' forcing functions" on the operator's actions that prevent human errors from resulting in actual improper equipment operation or operational status, reductions in plant availability or safety readiness, damage to equipment, or harm to personnel. Forcing functions are most suitable in situations where one correct way can be specified for the action (s) in question to be performed, and having flexibility to deviate from this way is undesirable. a) Jacoroorate Alignment Aids - Electrical and mochanical connectors, asremblies, linkages, and cases should be designed with keys, seats, alignment pins, asymmetric bolt patterns, etc. that will prevent improper corinection or assembly, thereby avoiding equipment damage. Correct alignments should be marked, labeled, or otherwise clearly visible to the technician during actual in-service assembly. b) Provide Interlocks _for Personnel Safety Interlocks shall be used to secure high voltage to_ electrical cabinets,- breaker enclosures, etc. when the door is opened or the cover is removed. Such interlocks should be defeatable to permit work on energized equipment, where necessary. l l c) Ensure Dejjberate Test Switch Status - Test switches shall provide detentes or other means to prevent intermediate or uncertain positioning of the switch.- (See also Section 3.1.5 on use of switch guards to prevent unintended actuation.) L .d) Avoid TeIncorary Connections - Temporary connections of test leads, jumper wires, test connections, etc. shall be permitted only where it is directly necessary to install test equipment that would not typically be part of its own features. Jumpered test A - 113 l
NPXBO-lC DR 79102 8.0 MAINTAINABILITY l connections should be hard wired through test switch positions. Whnre temporary connections are necessary they shall be readily accessible, clearly labeled or coded, and keyed to prevent equipment damage. e) _ Utilize Caotive Herdware - Equipment inspection covers, component modules, and other frequently removed assemblies shall, utilize captive hardwaro to prevent loss or cauipment damage (e.g., on rotating equipment, instrument cabinets, etc.) f) .Ujilize G.vides and Stoos - Guides, tracks, and stops shall be implemented on equipment racks, drawers, and ) subassemblies, to facilitate their proper und deliberate manipulation, and te prevent equipment damage or personnel , injury. Examples of these principles ro four,d in Figure 8.2.2 8.2.3 in Situ Maintenance Equipment should be designed and installed to facilitate on line and in situ inspection, service, and repair to the maximum extent possible. a) fdg_ke Service-Prone ltems Accessible Service access for frequently serviced or easy access items should be from 2.5 - 4 feet above floor level. Equipment installations and component layouts should minimize the need to remove outer, working items before the inner, to-be-serviced item can be reached. Items requiring more frequent inspection, service, or replacement should be the most readily accessible (i.e., located towards the periphery) on tha equipment or installation, b) fdske Maintenance Transaction Points 6CROSSible Component lubrication points, fill and/or drain points, isolation points, adjustment points, test points, etc. should be easy to see, reacn, and use, and shall be labeled with their name and specifications or requirements (e.g., oil grada and sump capacity), if any. n c) Make Service CommoditiqSAygilable - Connections for various air, water, waste drain, and electrical power services should be readily accessible in several locations of every workspace. Inlets / outlets for all of these services should be immediately A - 114 i
, , ,,-y , , , . c .m . , - .- , , ~ . . . . - , -
- - . - - , ~ . ~ - ,
NPX80-lC DR 791-02 8.0 MAINTAINABILITY adjacent to each row or island of equipment. d) .L!til_ize Modular Construction i&C and electrical equipments should be of modular construction wherever possible to simplify replacement in the event of component failure. Testing , features must be organized to enable easy isciation of the faulty module for replacement.
- t. lac phyescal 6mfures to ac to a kllaadve en produde impropt samernedy actJverkan in damage during m.nintenarut J -
. . . L... /
2 G 2 - g {i'Ir$ W L .__]~~~PM t g
=-~- ~
$ g i
~
( One interlocks tu preclude imprurwt
} naquence of smaintenanct tasha
{
& %:b \%ig 1%
Phyalcstty ley intere!.anyteatde units no that k 16 Impnmelble to N insert e among unit #
, I
%.::, _I .:)De 0 g* .
\'.'t. ' .*.*.f ,Mg s
e e ,- e====.
- Une physical features to predutie damage to equipment through trnprtger matntenatice One alignment pins to preclude imprtger connections A -
Figure 8.2.2 Fool Proof Design A - 115
NPX80 lC-DR 791-02 8.0 MAINTAINABILITY e) .Elent[Q0l g_Labc!s Equipment items that are entered in the , planned maintenance system shall be labelled to incorporate a selected scanning technology (TBD] to provide a direct interface to the planned maintenance system database through portable laptop type computers. This will make checks and updates of the database easier and more rePable (see Section 2.5, Equipment Labelling). f) Enhance Work Area Visibility - Design of equipment for planned maintenance should enisance visibility of the related components. Cabinet enclosures shall be painted non-glare white on the inside. Enclosures subject to frequent access (once a month or greater) shall provide effective, permanently installed lighting. g) Provide Data & Instructions as Labels For frequently used data or instructions that will change infrequently, if ever, provide the information as a permanently installed label at the point of use (see Section 2.5, Labeling.)
' h) Enable Control Device Reohir with Controlled Device On-line -
Devio3s should he removable without changing the status of the controlled function, or precluding use of the panel. ' Equipment indicating lamps should be replaceable without risk of equipment actuation. i) Provide Personnel Safety Features Personnel should be reasonably protected against all specific hazards and equipment (e.g., cutting, rotating, c; other moving parts, electrical voltage, hydraulic or gas pressure, extremn temperatures, toxic or caustic chemicals, radiation or contamination levels.) Design the system to be free of, resistant to, or interlocked to avoid unnecessary hazards (see Section 8.2.2, Fool Proof Design). If the presence of the hazard cannot be avoided, provide. guards against exposure tt remaining hazards. Always provide attention-getting, informative warninos outside the hazard envelope at its entry and/or initiation points. L A - 116
- - _ - - - . - - - . _ - . - . - - . ~ . - - . - . - . - - -
NPX80 lC DR 791-02 8.0 MAINTAINABILIW 8.3 Facility Arrangements & Installations 8.3.1 Access, Pull, & Laydown Space a) Enminal Comoonent Clearances - Major components and large piping (2 feet or more in diameter including insulation) should have a nominal clearance for maintenance purposes of not less than 50 inches and shall have nominal clearance of not less than 36 inches from structural features and other components. (The standard value accommodates only the need for personnel access, and does not account for additional pull and laydown space that a particular equipment may require.) b) Dual Comoonents - Parallel components or other redundant component trains should not be arranged in an inboard-outboard or other manner that restricts access to one of the components. Such systems should be staggered, stacked, or otherwise arranged in a fashio,1 that allows acceptable access to, or 'emoval of, either unit, c) Comoo&nt Heights - Components that are large, or that may require frequent inspection or maintenance should be placed 3 to 5 feet above floor or walkway level. Items considered for overhead placement should be relatively small (e.D., valves not greater than 1 foot in diameter), in'requently or remotely operated, and require infrequent inspection or maintenance, d) Pull Soace Specifications - Pull spaces for all major components (> 50 pounds) shall bu specified in detailed plant design layouts using the CAD system. The pull space specifications shall incorporate pull space dimensions from the system design documents, and ensure that necessary padeyes and lif ting or pulling devices are available to the component. e) _ Cabinet Entrv If physical entry of a cabinet space is anticipated, and the cabiaet must be less than 78 inches tall, an easily removeble top, or installed " pop up" top arrangement, should be considered. f) Accessibility of Local Indicators and Controls - All locs.1 indications and controls shall be properly lit and safely accessible without the aid of stools, ladders, crawling under pipes, etc. Indicators and controls shall conform to the same guidelines for visibility and operability as in the main control A - 117 -- _ . _ . . ~ _- . . . , - - - . - , . . - -
NPX80-IC DR 79102 0.0 MAINTAINABILITY room. The use of flashlights, mirrors and similar aids to see right glasses, bordon tube indicators and other on-component data presentations shall not be riecessary. , g) . Spare Paits and Tools - Spare parts and tools for use in routine maintenance shall be placed or stored in locations around the plant from which they may not accidentally or casually be removed. However, storage space access sha'l not be blocked or delayed by the use of keys and/or combination locks. Spare parts of infrequent use or high value shall have a warehouse control mechanism. However, frequently used items such as light bulbs, screws, etc. shall be readily accessible around the plant. 8.3.2 Cranes, Hoists, & Ufting TBD S.3.3 Scaffolds, Stands, & Miscellaneous Facilities - TBD A - 118
NPX80 lC DR 79102 8.0 MAINTAINABILITY 8.4 Special Requirements for Contaminated Systems a) Access Control Points - Potentially contaminated workspaces ; should be designed with a specified access control point area. This requires space for cban and contaminated waste containers, step-off pads, boundary markers or mounts, a r frisking and air sampling station, status postings, anti-contamination garb and other supplies, paperwork, a writing area, appropriate lighting, and probably a computer terminal ; Remote viewing facilities, either temporary or permanent, may also be desirable. b) Comoonent Acceas - Consistent with Al. ARA principles, extra design effort should be made to avoid unnecessary placement of noncontaminated system components inside potentially , contaminated workspaces. Similarly, extra effort should be made to provide adequate access, pull space, etc. for all components inside such workspaces. Dual trains of systems whose operation results in high rad levels (e.g., purification) should be separated such that operation of one does not raise , dose levels near the other (so that one can be maintained while the other is operated). c) Temporary _Shleiding - Equipment trains of radioactive systems , should be separated by sufficient space to accommodate ! temporary shielding and still provide adequate personnel and equipment clearance (see Section 8.3.1, Access, Pull, & : Laydown Space.) d) plains - Workspace drains should be arranged to minimize the potential for spread of contamination. Floor drainage should be away from aisles, traffic paths, and open areas. Equipment drain lines should drain directly to floor die!n connections. e) Insulation & Lagging - Insulation and lagging in and near potentially contaminated systems should be designed for easy removal with little or no creation of hazardous dust particles. f) Hot Tools - Separate storage arrangements shall be provided for tools and equipment used for hot (i.e., contaminated)- maintenance activities. Such tools must be clearly and permanently marked as contaminated. g) Terminal Boards - Physically oversized terminal boards and L A - 119
, . ~ .- - . . - . - -
NPX80 IC DR 79142 - 8.0 MAINTAINADILITY connecting hardware for electrical and l&C components should be specified for use in potentially contaminated equipment workspaces, to facilitate handling by technicians wearing rubber gloves. h) .Ladd&s - Ladders into contaminated spaces chall be a minimum of 18 inches in width to accommodate antir booted feet. k 6 0 A - 120 -
NPX80 lC DR 791-02 8.0 MAINTAINABILITY 8.5 Equipment Design Documentation of Maintenance Task Data & Requirements a) Planned Maintenance Requirements - Equipment design documentation shall identify the expected maintenance and repair )ctivities required to maintain the equipment in a state of operational readiness For each maintenance activity, this should include specification of necessary tools, test devices, skills, manpower, system modes, performance time and , frequency requirements, and the additional system activities necessary to return the unit to service, b) Installation Reogirements Equipment design documentation shall identify the requirements for arrangement, instellation, and removal of the equipment in plant systems. This shall include specification of O&M personnel access requirements, pull space dimensions, expected laydown space requirements, lifting and support requirements, and special fixtures, if necessary. , c) Eaib.tw_.hiodes Equipment design documentation shall identify equipment failure modes, diagnostic symptoms, and consequent effects, as a basis for planning, troubleshooting, and training. d) yjsual Aids Equipment design documentation shallinclude a complete set of visual aids to support maintenance and repair of the equipment. ; e) _ Parts List Equipment design documentation shallinclude a complete parts list. A - 121
NPX80-IC DR 791-02 8.0 MAINTAINABILITY 8.6 Software Maintainability As " virtual equipment", software code must be maintainable by programming staff in the sense that it occasionally needs to be debugged or modified. The following guidance applies to the design of software code that supports these subsequent maintenance activities. a) Provide. Clear & Comotete Comments - Verbal explanation of the code is invaluable to maintainers who must figure out exactly how it works. Similarly, mean;ogful variable names can also be helpful. b) Use Modular Tooh - Program coae is more cort.prehensible if generic or macro " tools" are built as subroutines, and the main prograrn consists primarily of calls to thuse subroutines. c) ADoly Format ConventioDS Stating and using of a set of format conventions can make code structure easier to identify and read. Thus, programming language keywords might be upper cased, and variable names mix-cased; logical structures could be made more evident by allocating a new line to each keyword and its arguments, etc. d) Use Seouential Flow of Control - Sequential flow of control in the style of structured programming is easier to understand and trace. e) Avoid Tricks & Kluges - The use of convenient but confusing or inelegant programming tricks (i.e., a "kluge") to solve problems should be avoided. i A - 122
I I HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING i l STANDARDS, GUIDELINES, AND BASES i FOR NUPLEX 80+'" Report NPX80 IC DR-791-02 PARTB: BASES B-1 i. i-
NPX80-IC DR-791-03 Bases
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose Part u ~ provides the underlying bases for the material presented in , the Human Factors Engineering (HFE) Standards and Guidelines - (SAG) for the_ System 80+ design. The purpose of the SAG Basis is to provide references, records, explanations, and controls on the HFE SAG. It is thus controlled as part of the System 80+ design documentation. The compilation and maintenance of the SAG Basis supports . many activities and personnel, both during design and throughout first of a-kind engineering. It formally retains valuable HFE products of literature review and interdisciplinary design development. It reduces and avoids effort spent on revisiting issues that have already been resolved. It minimizes the amount of generally extraneous material that users encounter in the actual ' SAG riocument, it provides an efficient mechanism for justifying design selections to auditors and reviewers. Most importantly, it enables designers to make informed tradeoffs and resolutions where better understanding of pertinent HFE criteria is required. The SAG and the SAG Basis were developed primarily by HFE Spec!clists working as part of the System 80+ design team. While the availability of this material should reduce the volume of HFE questions that must be individually addressed, the SAG and its basis do not substitute for the continued involvement of HFE specialists in the System 80+ design process. 1.2 Approach The SAG Basis material draws on diverse sources to provide what is felt to be the best practical guidance that can be afforded to the design. As a part of the design, it may therefore incorporate tradeoffs and constraints that originate with the equipmcnt or tasl< environment, rather than just isolated HFE material. SAG Basis information may take one of two forms: B-2
- . - - . .. _ ..- -_. - - ~
NPX80 IC DR 791-03 Bases
- 1) Re_forence - Where existing guidance has been accepted as sufficient, direct reference to its source is provided.
- 2) Rationale - in some cases, an unequivocal or definitive HFE basis may not exist in the general literature. This may reflect an intractable evaluation problem, a r31atively new technology, or the case that generic guidance is too vague to serve as a criterion for the specific System 80+ design. In such cases, design decisions may be predominated by larger concepts, consistency issues, qualitative evaluation, and tradeoffs. In these cases, a rationale is provided to explain the reasons and justification for the decision. References may be identified in a Rationale, but by definition may not always be available.
Some SAG document subheadings are simply introductory or other general explanatory material. Where a subheading does not itself present design standards or guidance immediately below, the statement "No SAG entr/es" will appear below in its corresponding SAG Basis entry. References provided in a higher level heading apply to SAG entries at lower levels unless more specific basis material is provided. The SAG Basis begins with Chapter 2 of the SAG, since Chapter 1 was introductory material. l l B-3 1
i l NPX80-lC DR 791-03 Bases 2.0 INFORMATION FORMAT CONVENTIONS No SAG entries 2.1 General Principles of Information Format l Rat /onale: Problems in information perception are a fundamental : source of human error. Such error likely situations can often be mitigated by improving the format of the information. The eight general formatting prheiples provided here are self-evident, and thus by definition provide their own basis. Their purpose here 1s . to clarify the goals and philosophy of the Chapter's approach, to guide designer's in their subsequent interpretation and use of more specific standards and guidelines. I 2.2 Print & Text Format Conventions No SAG entries 2.2.1 Names, Designators, & Controlled Nomenclature Rat /onale: Distinguishing between names and designators allows a- Jncourages their separate development, to guide improvement of what remains an awkward area. It permits either or both types of reference, when appropriate, useful, and acceptable; acceptable usage will vary with and must be defined and controlled within specific contexts (e.g., procedures, phone communications, equipment labeling, etc.). - Use of both references has the notably important advantage of redundancy, whic' 's the information theoretic parameter correlate of message secui. ,. Use of diverse but redundant terms (name and ; designation) thus constitute a message with a built-in check, and has training value as well. 2.2.1.1 Names Rr/erences: AWSIP 1472D - 5.5.3.1, 5.5.4.1, 5.5.4.2 NUREG-0700 - 6.6.3.1.a, 6.6.3.2.d 2.2.1.2 Designators B-4
._ _. . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ - _ . _ _ . . _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ ~ . _ _ . _
l
\
NPX80 lC-DR 791-03 Bases Rationale: TPs SAG entry is simply high level guidance that is - itself a first principle of any logically rigorous coding scheme. 2.2.1.3 Controlled Nomenclature
References:
MIL-STD-1472.Q - 5.5.4.2 NUREG-0700 - 6.6.3.2, 6.6.3.3.a 2.2.2 Abbreviations & Acronyms for O&M Terminology
- No SAG entries 2.2.2.1 Abbreviation & Acronym Algorithms
References:
Human Fard.0LS,2Z,2 (Ehrenreich,1985) Human Performance Enginee_rji0g (Bailey,1982) . 2.2.2.2 Approved O&M Abbreviations List
References:
_NUREG 0700 - 6.6.3.3.a 2.2.3 Alphanumeric Characters for Labels & Text Rationale: The complexity of interactions among vaiables and performance measures make perception and processing of text a challenging area in which to perform generalizable research. Each situation tends to create a unique opportunity for study. Thus, the present approach seeks to provide simple but robust results that will safely enable the vast majority of d3 signers to address their - particular design tasks and problems. 2.2.3,1 Style No SAG entries 2.2.3.1.a Plain Block Fonts
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.6.4.2.a.2, 6.7.2.2.g.1 Rat /onale: A variety of concerns and diverso issues are behind this selection. One clear prohibition is against elaborate or highly B-5
-Y--- ..y, _, , , . . _ _ . . _ _._,.-._,.._-,,,___,,m,,__-.____.,.,..__._..__,.....,._,_,_,,m,r. _.. , , , , , ,_ , _ _ . , . _ , , , _ .. , , ,,.,d.- m , .y .mm., , . - . .-
._- -.- --- -. . - ..-.- - - - - - . - - ..~..-. - .- - .
l l NPX80-IC DR 79143 Bases stylized text (e.g., old english) which never enhances readability. , Next _is possibly a concern for lower resolution electronic displays ! (less than 12 lines of vert! cal resolution per character), on which scrifs tend increasingly to degrade rather than enhance perception. Also, plain block letters are the most manageable for ; tabricating cut and stamped panel and equipment labels. Some ; studies do suggest that serifs improve readability of high ! resolution text (e.g., good quality printed copy) particularly at
. smaller sizes or under other degraded conditions. However, informal comparisons seem to indicate that plain fonts (e.g., Swiss Roman) are subjectively preferred to those with serifs (e.g., Times Poman) in " cleanliness" of structured text copy. In any case, this latter effect is comparatively small. The guidance in NUREG 0700 for " plain block fonts" was thus retained as robust and acceptable for the widest variety of applications.
2.2.3.1.b Descenders, Super / subscripts
References:
.blASA-STQ3DQ0No_f 1/Rev A - 9.4.2.3.3.9.l.2.b 2.2.3.1.c Confusable Characters
References:
AilL STD 1472Q - 5.2.4.10 2.2.3.1.d Upper Case
References:
#1L STD 1472D - 5.2.6.6.4.1, 5.2.6.8.5, 5.5.5.4.1 NUREG-0700 - 6.6.4.2.a.1 NASA-STD-3000Nol 1/Rev A - 9.5.3.1.W.3.b Rationale: Use of upper case ena. acters are general ly specified for labels, isolated words (e.g., presentation overheads), and low resolution displays (e.g., dot matrix with less than 12 vertical lines of resolution per character.) The issue in labelling is primarily to maximize size, and thus visibility and legibility at distance (contrast these with readability, for which conventional mixed caso is superior; see 2.2.3.1.e.) Dot matrix displays, with already low resolution, are similarly restricted to upper case cnaracters, to .
preclude display of characters using only part of tho availab!e (but already undesirably low) resolution. Since such displays tend to be brief (isolated characters or terms), legibility takes priority over B-6
NPX80 lC DR-791-03 Bases readability, 2.2.3.1.0 Mixed Case l
References:
MIL STD-14, RQ - 5.2.6.6.4.1 NASA-STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A 9.5.3.1.14.3.b User-comouter Interface in Process Controj, p. 73 (Gilmore, Gertman, and Blackman,1989) l I Rationale: Use of mixed case characters is generally specified for ; text of message length or greater, for readability, in reading, i beyond adequate legibility, the need is for smroth continuous uptake of information. Given adequate legibilit) word perception takes advantage of information inherent in the combination of word shapes and message context. Use of all upper case text slows reading significantly, because word shapes, an important source of reading information, are significantly degraded. (Note: Tasks that require readability should utilize reasonably high resolution displays; i.e., with a minimu n of 12 vertical lin. s of resolution per character.) in the case of abbreviations, units of measure, etc., mixed case is specified to avoid confusion by ramaining consistent with cultural conventions. 2.2.3.2 vimension: No SAG entries 2.2.3.2.a Reading / Working Distance Rationale: Since perceived letter height is really determined by reading distance, it is more valuable to evaluate this variable first, then to determine letter height. The approach has the benefit of focussing designers' attention on the most important consideration (what is the user doing?) and requires them to document the decision. 2.2.3.2.b Character Height
References:
NU REG-0700 6.5,1.3.a, 6.6.4.1.a.1, 6.7.2.2 MIL-STD 1472D - 5.2.6.6.4.2, 5.2.6.8.4, 5.2.6.9.2 ANSI /HFS 100-198 - 6.14 . B7 wM ,m _ - ._ . ,, - -
NPX80-IC-DR 79103 - Rases NASA-STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.4.2.3.3.2.d.6,
.9.4.2.3.3.9.l.3.a USE 1000 Ver 2d - 3.1.1.1.1.a
- Handbook of Human Factors - 5.1.8
- Erconomic Design for Peoole at Work - lil.B.4.a(1)
User-Comouter Interface in Process Control - Character Size and Proportion (p. 71-73) Engineerino Data Comoendium - 11.109, 11.111, 11.112, 11.118 Rationale: The formula relating visual angle, rc, ding distance, and
-character height is:
Char. Height (inches) Visual Angle (minutes-of-arc) = 3438 ------------------- Reading Distance (inches) Numerous studies have examined text legibility as a function of character size and reading distance, and the added impact on
. legibility of such variables as screen resolution, contrast, color, ,
ambient lighting levels, viewing angle,Lfont, stroke width, etc. In addition, familiarity with the displayed text can have a powerful
' impact on performance. ~ In general, the literature suggests the '
following ' generalizations for individuals with 20/20 vision, viewing
. unfamdiar text, under good reading conditions:
- 1) The threshold (i.e., > 50% correct) for legibility (1.e. .
identificar.y. of random letters) is around 5 or 6 minutes-of-arc.
- 2) Relatively fm .A s nominally within 3 times simple reaction time) and accuree A, N 95% correct) legibility is possible above 8 to 9 minutes-cf-arc with the full effort of the reader. (That is, the .
crossover from data-limbd to resource-limited perceptual pe_rformance appears to occur at about'1.5 times the legibility- - threshold.) This is the most important lower limit on text size, performance quickly degrades below this point. Furthermore, some margin needs to be provided to this limit in order to account for routine degradation of actual reading conditions due to poor
- light, off angle viewing, etc.
m. l ~Y B-8
. m
~ . ~ ..L_. . . . - . _ _ . . _ . . . , ,_.,E'.,..m.. .,,,.._.~.,,,,E., ,, , .,_..m, ,., - ,y - ., .
i l l NPX80-lC-DR 791-03 Bases l
- 3) Reading effort (i.e., for sequential text) declines with larger text size over a relatively wide range of values. 20 minutes-of arc is perhaps an ideal point value, and many guidelines quote values from 15 to 22 minutes-of-arc as preferred. Such values provide acceptable readability for a range of +/- 50% of the expected reading distance (note that, for a variety of reasons, readers routinely tolerate self-imposed inoptimal reading distances).
- 4) Reading effort begins to increase again as 30 minc.es-of-arc is approached and exceeded. This occurs because the larger text begins to interfere with the smooth flow of saccadic eye movements, which is due to the limited range of sharp foveal vision.
- 5) Note that in the iderature, there is sufficient variability of professional opinion for the range of preferred values to overlap with limiting values at either end of the scale. These values could vary further as more of the interacting variables are considered.
- 6) As a point of reference in common experience, Wordperfect provides approximately .125 inch lowercase letters and .188 inch uppercase letters on a 13 inch screen with a VGA adapter; this translates to a range of 12 to 18 minutes-of-arc at a 36 inch reading distance. (Note that workstation guidelines anticipate readir ; distances ranging well below half this value; reading from a distance of 16 inches, the uppercase letters subtend over 40 minutes-of-arc.)
Tradeoffs for Nuplex 80 + were resolved bearing in mind that while larger text might be desirable from the standpoint of reading isolated words, the drawback would be a large increase in panel and screen areas to accommodate the larger text. This had obvious drawbacks in terms of human perfonnance. As a result,- the approach taken was to define the working distances imposed by_ tasks, then ensum that the characters provided for use from
- these distances were of adequate size (12 minutes of-arc was selected as a robust stsndard minimum, per the above analysis).
Note that no credit was taken for familiarity of the reader with the displayed material; but this is held to be an important generally beneficial effect thc can reasonably be assumed to exist for - B-9 _ -. . . = _ _ _ - . - _ _ . -- - - - _ _ - _ . . - . - . . ..
NPX80-lC-DR 791-03 Bases trained operators viewing familiar panels, labels, and so on. Furthermore, ino data with the greatest uncertainty appears primarily on DPS screens; since these are afforded at every panel, operators have maximum flexibility to " optimize" proximal (i.e., perceived) text size as necessary, by adjusting their own reading distance. 2.2.3.2.c Character Width
References:
NUREG-0700 - 0.6.4.2.b lluman Factors in Enginegring & Design (Sanders & McCormick,1987) - p. 87 Rationale: The common availability of proportional fonts, anc; desirability of their use, makes inflexible standardization of width-to-height ratio (the generally used parameter) undesirable for general text. A good general value of width-to-hei0ht ratio is 3:5 (equivalent to the 60% value stated in the SAG); ratios approaching 1:1 may be appropriate for engraved or transiliuminated characters. 2.2.3.2.d Stroke Width Rc/erences: NUREG-0700 - 6.6.4.2.c Human Factors in Engineering & Design (Sanders & McCormick,1987) - p. L6 Rationale: Stroke width varies with, and is determined as a part of, the selection of font style (unless the further step of building a custom font from scratch is possible, which depends on hardware and software, and is a nontrivial design task in itself). Thus, it is not simply a matter of adjusting this parameter to a desired value. Appropriate stroke width also. depends on text and background color contrast effects. As a result of these constraints and interactions, stroke width is more pras;cally treated as one of the elements) hat must be considered in the tradeoffs and selection of a text fon' Text font selection / development should thus ensure that cha: ac:er stroke width'is appropriate for the demands of its particular application. Assuming good contrast, stroke widths of white-on-black letters B - 10 l-
NPX80-IC-DR-751-03 Bases typically are best from 1/8 to 1/10, while stroke widths of black-on white lotters typically are best from 1/6 to 1/8 (Note: white letters on black background appear thicker than their black on- ; white counterparts due to a perceptual effect called ' irradiation".)- Under low light, with poor contrast between text and background, or for black letters on highly luminous background, bolder print (e.g., stroke widths 1/5 of character height) is appropriate. On the other hand, highly luminous letters on dark background may warrant finer print (e.g., stroke width 1/12 of charat ;er height). A robust value of stroke width for general application is 1/8 the height of the character. 2.2.3.2.e Horizontal Spacing
References:
NUREG-07QQ - 6.6.4.2.d Mser-comouter Interface in Process Control, p. 73 (Gilmore, Gertman, and Blackman,1989) 2.2.3.2.f Vertical Spacing
References:
NURES-0700 - 6.6.4.2. User-comouter Interface in Process Control. p. 73 (Gilmore, Gertman, and Blackman,1989) 2.2.3.2.g Descender Length Rationale: Full or true descenders form larger and more distinct characters. The only potential drawback of such characters is that with insufficient line spacing, descenders may overlap with the largest letters on the line below. However, since the vertical text spacing requirements were determined to permit the use of full
- descenders, this is not a problem in the present context.
_2.2.3.3 _ Other Concerns .
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.7.2.2.g 2 NASA-STD-3000flol 1/Rev A - 9.4.2.3.3.0.i.1 . t
- 2.3 Graphics & Non-Textual Format Conventions 2.3.1 General Conventions .
l B - 11
NPX80-IC-DR-791-03 Bases 2.3.1.1 Accessibility of Information Rationale: This is held to be a seM-evident first principle, and is really more philosophy than guidance. 2.3.1.2 Actual Equipment Response
References:
NASA-STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.4.2.3.2.b MIL-STD-1472D - 5.2.2.1.2 NUREG-0700 - 6.5.1.1.e 2.3.1.3 Positive Indications
References:
NASA.STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.4.2.3.2.c MIL-STD-1472D - 5.2.2.1.4 2.3.1.4- Display Failuro Indications
References:
NASA-STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.4.2.3.2.g.1 MIL-STP-1472D - 5.2.1.3.6 NUREG-070Q - 6.5.1.1.f 2.3.2 Color No SAG entries 2.3.2.1 Number of Colors
References:
NASA-STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.5.3.2.i.2-NUREG-0700 - 6.5.1.6.b.2 2.3.2.2 Redundancy of Color
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.5.1.6.a 2.3.2.3 Color Assignments
References:
.N UREG4700 - 6.5.1.6, 6.6.4.1.b, 6.6.6.3, 6.6.6.4.a, 6.7.2.7.k-m NASA-STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev.A - 9.5.3.2.i B - 12
k NPX80-IC-DR-791-03 Bases
,QSHA 1D CFR 29 - Part 1910.144 Rationale: The use of color coding is a well understood problem in theory, but remains awkward from a practical standpoint. The number of items that designers find useful to color code far exceeds the number that can be effectively encompassed (from a human memory and absolute judgement standpoint) by a single system. In addition, arbitrary constraints due to pre-existing coding conventions, characteristics of human color perceotion, and technological limitations impose further limits on color coding schemes. It is not possible to satisfy all of these requirements simultaneously and continue to make good use of the benefits that color coding affords.
Within these limitations, System 80+ applies the following philosophy and approach to color coding:
- 1) Maintain compatibility with and standardize the application of existing industry conventions.
- 2) Identify well-defined and separate contexts which are mutua!!y distinct, within which separate, unconflicting color codes can be developed and applied.
- 3) Individual codes should be fully compatible and consistent within the contexts to which they apply.
- 4) Color coding is always' applied redundantly with some other unambiguous coding scheme.
- 5) The preceding goals notwithstanding, applicabie coding standards. guidelines, and good practice shall continue to be applied within appropriate contexts.
Individual contexts, and the rationale for their color assignments, are identified below. 2.3.2.3.a (Color coding for) Control Panels und Associated Displays Rationale: Given tha general basis pcsition of Section 2.3.2.3, the Nuplex 80+ system applies color as follows. , B - 13
l NPX80-IC-DR-7914)3 Bases Black - Background DPS CRT color. _ Also character color for white background lamacoid panel labels. [A standard selection for CRT devices. Has high contrast and legibility with the widest selection of other colors. The standard alternatives, white and blue, cffered some benefit for glare reduction but at the cost of reduced flexibility for use of color coding.] Red - Component Flow Status = Active /on/ energized / flow permissive, etc. [ Generalized industry standard; see Appendix A, this section Consistency is established across multiple application contexts by coding flow states of component. Complements use of green. Red / Green distinction applied only to remotely indicated / controlled components; remaining components are grey, denoting static data.] Green - Component Flow Status = Inactive /off/deenergized/ flow preventive, etc. [ Generalized industry standard for fluid systems; see Appendix A, this section. Consistency is established across multiple application contexts by coding flow states of component. Complements use of red. Red / Green distinction applied only to remotely indicated / controlled components; remaining components - are grey, denoting static data.] Yellow - Alarm annunciators. (Highly visible and salient color; use is consistent with general cultural and industrial conventions for cautionary alerts and indications.] Orange - Non-alarm annunciators; Component Control System Status = Manual. -[ Visible and salient color, but with less emphasis / priority than yellow; still consistent with general cultural and industrial conventions for cautionary alerts and indications. Non-alarm annunciator application and control status = manual application are mutually consistent and compatible; both warrant , attention. Complements use of blue to denote automatic control status.] Blue - Component Control System Status = Automatic permissive /on-line. [Non-alerting color is often applied, generally, l as normal or operating indication. - Complements use of orange (alerting) to denote manual control status. Auto "on-line" (blue), is
- not the same as " running" (red); these are separate, orthogonal B - 14 l
L t-- 'um - -
-'-^ -- g --- *am-a+W-
NPX80-IC-DR 791-03 Bases dimensions. It is also not the same as cyan; however, it is compatible (i.e., evaluation indicates no likely errors) with all applications of cyan.] Cyan - Descriptors on dynamic process parameter values. [ Cyan is salient but non alerting. Given the assumption that indicator labels are generally used not so much to be read as to guide operators to the time-varying information, cyan was applied to the descriptors to provide visual landmarks to the data (shown in white). Cyan was not applied to the data itself because its blue content slightly degrades legibility; for perceptual reasons, blue always is a bit fuzzy.] White - DPS CRT dynamic data / text; also system response to touch. Background for black characters on lamacoid panel labels. [ White (on black) is the color of maximum contrast and legibility. Legibility is maximally impor* ant for changing data and message text, since these must be fully evaluated on a frequent basFs (in contrast to their labels). Identifies otherwise uncategorized dynamic (high-information) data / text and thus complements the use of grey for static (low information) data / text. This application is perhaps more easily recognized as appropriate when it is viewed as intensity or brightness coding for emphasis (usually covered as a highlighting technique) rather than color coding. The secondary use of white as indication touch response does not conflict with the live data application, and is effective for the diverse color range of touch targets. ) Grey - Static (non-dynamic) data / text, menu options, non-controllable and non-instrumented components, dividing lines, graph grids, static piping, etc. [ Applied to maintain adequate legibility while distinguishing and highlighting the dynamic data and graphical items in white and other status colors. Low salience reduces " visual noise" by deemphasizing the less informative l elements comprising the relatively familiar framework for the real objects of interest (the dynamic, driven data).] L j Tan Control panel surfaces. [ Selected for low reflectance and aesthetic / environmental considerations (e.g., neutral, low salience) to apply as panel paint color. Used within DPS system to apply a spatial / functional metaphor to the organization of certain menus: B - 15 1
-1
NPX80-IC-DR 791-03 Bases functions (screen pages) are organized as selections within panels (menu); The panel organization corresponds to that in the actual control room. In its limited role as menu framework, it is not an information-bearing " code'.) Ught Brown '- Control panel demarcation, [A neutral, low-salience i color used to provide additional organization of sub-function relations on panellayout. Contrasts but is aesthetically consistent with tan panels and dark brown mimic flowpaths. ] Dark Brown - Panel mimic flowpaths. [A neutral, low-salience color chosen to dominate the light brown panel demarcation; used to convey essential component relations on panel layouts. Contrasts but is aesthetically consistent with tan panels and light brown functional demarcation. ] Purple - Labels for discrete indicators containing post accident monitoring (PAMI) parameters. [ Allows unambiguous discrimination of PAMI indicators. Low to intermediate salience consistent with fairly static infcrmation content. Acceptable background contrast for white letters. ] ! . Discussion: Acolication of Red & Green to Comoonent Statu_s Indication (Note: This seemingly elemental issue is a good example of the practical obstacles that exist to the " correct" or optimal applicatior, of human factors guidance,) Most adults are familiar with green =go and red =stop from early in childhood,- and many industrial workers are also familiar machine shop safety conventions that use large red "off" switches for powerful equipment motors (these are most easily found if an accident. occurs.) These are population stereotypes. If you assume that "go" and " flow" are similar, then by extension, an open valves is green, and shut valves red. These functional conventions apply in Naval reactor plants, which is a training ground for many future commercial reactor operators. These Naval reactors conventions are the exact opposite of those used in most commercial nuclear piants. Commercial nuclear B - 16
NPX8C-IC-DR-79103 Bases conventions are consistent with those used in fossil power plants, where the use of red to indicate active states peruaps stems from the "i;re in the boiler" metaphor. Additional conflicts and constraints on commercial color conventions come from a multitude of sources: regulatory guidance (assign red / green to danger / safe; NUREG-0700), lighting techr. ology (LEDs are not available in biue or white, thus limit:ng the alternatives without degrading reliabi:ity), and degrees of red / green and b!ue/ yellow color blindness (part!cularly among males). The following As evidenced by their use in trtfic lights, color blindness is not a genuine barrier to the use :>f red and green, in large part because tradundant position (or other) coding can be easily applied. Furthermore, ether the existing Naval reactors scheme (with active = green and inactive = red) or the opposite commercial power plant convention can be used to schieve a large amount of internal consistency, if the common dimension of flow '(rather than
- the names of component states) is emphasized in design, training, and procedures.
Control devices should thus be consistently and redundantly coded by both position and color along the fbw dimension. For example, using commercial conventions, the red, flow-producing selection (i.e., pump running, valve open, breaker closed) would always be the right-hand or uppermost switch selection in a pair of red / green pushbuttons. Although the existing difference between the Naval and the opposite commercial plant color conventions is undesirable, it is at this point beyono remediation. Changing either would be a costly and foolish recommendation, due to the burdensome and error-likely impact of expected negativa transfer of training (i.e., interference from previously learned material on the performance of more recently leamed material.) Since a permanent change from ono set of conventions to another (e.g., from military to'
- civilian life) poses the least problem, it is more important to avoid new conflicts, and to ensure continued uniformity and consistency for similar contexts (e.g., when personnel routinely move between facilities as part of their jobs or activities).
B - 17
NPX80-IC-DR-791-03 Bases The safe / normal vs. unsafe / abnormal use of green and red could still be app'ied in distinct contexts that would not be confused with component states, such as zones on parameter displays, if this was highly desirable. Howev moding component status (off, on) for its normality should be avoided, since the normality of component state usually varies with plant conditions. To indicate-unanticipated or abnormal component conditions, yellow was selected as an alarm color that is consistent with generally accepted warning conventions, does not conflict with equipment status, and keep the issues of equipment status and normality distinct. Changing to yet an entirely new set of conventions, though not a favored alternative, had little in its favor due to the present unavailability of some of the most likely alternatives (i.e., blue & _ white) as LEDs. The technological alternative (use of incandescent lightbulbs) dramatically increases heat level, failure rate, and maintenance frequency of the indicating device. 2.3.2.3.b (Color coding for) Personnel Hazards & Physical Safety Hazards
References:
OSHA 10 CFR 29 - Part 1910.144 2.3.3 Emphasis Coding (Brightness & Flash)
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.7.2.7.a Mll.-STD-1472D - 5.15.3.3, 5.15.3.6.20 Rationale: Highlighting refers to techniques of visual emphasis that result in one item having significantly higher salience (i.e., attention-getting capacity) than otherwise similar items within the same context. All Nuplex 80+ coding schemes have been developed to consider.the appropriate allocation of salience to the indication's priority, informativeness, and relative importance in the overall operating scheme. Unsystematic or ad hoc highlighting of individual items is thus discouraged, as this leads to inconsistent, visually noisy displays (non-information overload). Instead, various
-systematic codes and categories are employed to unambiguously denote abnormal conditions, questionable data, etc. This approach represents one of many possible solutions to this collection of problems, and is consistent with the overall intent of the cited references.
B - 18
NPX80 IC-DR 791-03 Bases 2.3.3.1 Consistency Refe snce: NUREG 0700 - 6.7.2.7.b 2.3.3.2 Brightness Coding
References:
- NUREG-0700 - 6.7.2.7.c MIL-STD-1472D - 5.15.3.3.3 NASA-STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.5.3.2.b.2 2.3.3.3 Flash Coding
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.7.2.7.d, 6.7.2.7.e MIL-STD-1472D - 5.15.3.3.2 NASA STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.5.3.2.h Ratlonale: Implementation of flash rate guidance is context and hardware dependent. Flashing is used in the Nuplex 80+ system as a visual code directing attention to changes in alarm or annunciator status. Flash rates are applied as part of a larger coding approach that makes it possible_ for the four alarm states (new, existing, cleared, and reset) to be shown unambiguously under a single tile heading. Different on/off duty cycles (50/50 for new alarms, 25/75 for cleared) are used to code the visual annunciation of the two alarm transition states (new and cleared). Guidance in the literature was vague as to what or_why a 50/50 duty cycle is preferable, although departing frorn that balance in either direction makes it difficult to see the target, depending on flash rate, display persistence, and visual sampling behavior. Stiii, for the range of values specified, no problems were anticipated, and mockup studies indicated that they were quite adequate. In fact, use of the multiple duty cycles made it possible to superimpose both new or cleared alarms on existing alarms (i.e., withia a singe tile) without ambigu?y or loss of any information. (Note, however, that the intensity coding of the alarm color and the size of the different priority tile shapes also contribute to making this a viable scheme, from a usability standpoint. For a tjescription of the entire system,
. see Rev 1 of the System Description for Control Complex Information System for Nuplex 80+, NPX80-lC-SD791-01.
B - 19 l. l
. _ ~ _ . . . . . .- .
NPX80-IC-DR 791-03 Bases However, to rvally understand and see that it works, the dynamic Nuplex 80+ demo is recommended.) 2.3.4 Shapes / Symbols Rationale: Use of shapes in Nuplex 80+ conforms to Piping & Instrumentation Orawing (P&lD) conventions, as extended to a consistent scheme of cr4or applicauons on both white and black-backgrounded VDU devices. This is to help avoid confusion when operators ar. comparing VDUs and drawings. (Shape coding of control handles has yet to t e identified as necessary, simply becausc the design has no hanaled switches at this time.) Graphic. serve as pictoriai sids on labels (in static disp!ays), or as icons, with certain dynamic indicating functions (on software VDUs). In both cases, the symbols lock like something readily associated with whst they represent, rather tnan arbitrary shapes or characters, and are redundantly coded with some other aspect of the' display (9.g., a namo and/or designator). 2.3.4.1 Size
References:
11UBEG-0700 - 6.7.2.2.a NASA-STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.5.3.2.c.1 2.3.4.2 Number of Symbols Heferer:ces: NUREG-0700 - 6.7.2.7.j 2.3.4.3 Fill Coding (Symbol Modifiers)
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.7.2.7.J Rationale: In general, the direct modification of icons with coding
- attributes is limited to denoting the flow state of component (e.g.,
open/ shut). This utilizes, for instrumented components, redundant red / green and hollow / filled codes on the icon itself (uninstrumented components appear gray, though the empty / fill convention will still be applied to denote the component state.) Other coded conditions, like alarms, are presented in a way that allows them to be clearly associated with, yet separate from, the icon itself. l l B - 20
NPX80-IC-DR 791-03 Bases The coding o, component status conditions using fill (hollow = active, and filled = inactive) confoims to and generalizes the standard P&lD valve symbol convention !n which an "open" valve is hollow against its background (black' outline over whhe), while a
" closed" valve is solid black. While this conflicts somewhat with the general perception that active symbols should be more salient than inactive ones, it is judged to be a more consistent (and thus, reliably trained) outcome within the defined cortext than would be that of applying mismatched conventions between P&lDs and VDUs, or applying different conventions for different types of components.
2.3.4.4 Meaning of Symbols Rationale: Nupiex 80+ symbols are based on System 80+ P&lD conventions. 2.3.5 Graphs and Graphics
References:
The Visual Disolay of Quantitative Information, E. R. Tufte,1983. 2.3.5.1 Consistent Scaling
References:
MIL-STD-1472D. - 5.15.3.6.26 2.3.5.2 Direct Display of Comparisons
References:
.MLL-3.1D-1472D - 5.15.3.6.29 2.3.5.3 Grid Unes
References:
MIL-STD-1472D - 5.15.3.6.28 2.3.5.4 Scales No SAG Entries (see Section 2.4) 2.3.5.5 Labeling of Axes l
References:
MIL-HDBK-761 A - 5.3.8.31.1 B - 21 l f
NPX80-IC-DR-791-03 Bases 2.3.5.6 Values Rationale: This is a standard Cartesian Coordinate convention, 2.3.5.7 Scale Range Descriptors
References:
MIL-STD-1472D - 5.15.3.6.25 Rationale: A scale range descriptor is not universally required because some dedicated displays without multiple ranges could utilize the device label without ambiguity. 2.3.5.8 Bar Graphs
References:
MIL-STD-1472D - 5.15.3.6.30, 5.15.3.6.30.1 2.3.5.9 Panel Mimic Layouts
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.6.6.4 2.4 Numerical Scaling - No SAG entries 2.4 1 Scale Range Rationale: The guidance here is largely self-evident and not held to require justification. The one exception is item b, the stancNrd specified on the scale range in which nominal readings should
-occur. The general principalis that the measurement / indication should match the magnitude of the measured parameter fairly closely. For example, if a mcter under normal conditions routinely indicates 10% of full scale (not by any means an unheard of situation), then the meter's resolution was mismatched to the functional requirements of the system by nearly an order of rnagnitude. On tne other hand, indicating devices should have some headroom even when operating at 100% of expected levels since 100% is also a nominal value and may vary up or down. A larger margin was specified at the bottom of the range (0-20%)
than at the top (90-100%) to reflect the loss of resolution as explained previously; also, it is a more normal (and accurate) B - 22
NPX80-lC-DR-791-03 Bases situation for a device to be run at or near a full load, level, etc. rating. 2.4.2 Scale Demarcation and Numbering
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.5.1.5 NASA-STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.5.3.1.4 Rationale: The guidance found in the references has been developed primarily to demarcate analog meter faces. In generalizing the guidance additional issues are noted.. Under _ Item a, Graduation Size. it is observed that the relative lengths (as shown in Figure 2.4.2.a) are best for meter reading of quantitative point values, i.e., leaibilitv. However, for an indicating device that is designed as a qualitative indication, i.e., for check reading of parameters within bands, the issue is not legibility so much as visibility. Graduations in such displays tend to be fewer and more widely spaced, which is acceptab!e if they are not used for detailed counting. Still, they must be readily visible at a glance, perhaps at distance, which implies that the graduation's minimum dimensions may be the more important of the two. Thus, varying the width of demarcations for a given length was found, in certain cases, to be more appropriate and effective. Design of the Discrete Indicator devices forced development of these issues. A standard Nuplex 80+ application for Discrete Indicators is to display time history plots; these are provided along with a digital point value display. Thus the time history plot is not intended to be a source of accurate point value data. Since using standard demarcation guidance produced crowded and ineffective demarcation, different techniques were explored. Under item b, Graduation Intervals, it is noted that quarters are a cognitively easy fraction (familiar from monetary transactions,
-within short term n amory limits), and although they can be awkward _in decim> form (more so than power-of-ten-multiples of-1, 2, or 5), they are still easily counted as whole numbers. Thus, graduating a scale in "whole" quarters (e.g., 25, 50, 75,100, etc.)
=is not necessarily a poor choice, human factors-wise, if it is for some other reason particularly desirable.-
l- B - 23
NPX80-IC-DR 791-03 Bases Under item d, Units of Measure. it is held that this is a programmatic matter in that these standards may vary between customers for culturcl or other reasons; thus, this issue is referred to a different source of standardization. Under item f, Percentage Scaliog, this position reflects that although use of percentages represents a reduction o' parametric information being carried by the data, it is nonetheless a useful (i.e., operator workload-reducing) simplification that will be desirable in specific cases. 2.4.3 Scale Precision
References:
HASA-S_TD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.5.3.1.4.a 2.4.4 Scale Labeling No SAG entries (Cross references only) 2.4.5 Scale Zone Banding
References:
MIL-STD-1472D - 5.2.3.1.10 NUREG-QZQQ - 6.5.2.3 2.4.6 Nonlinear Scaling
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.5.1.5.e 2.5 Equipment Labele No SAG entries 2.5.1 Applicability
References:
MIL-STD-1472D - 5.5.6.1.1
.QbH_A 10 CFR 29 - Part 1910.145
, 2.5.2 Terminology
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.6.3.3 l B - 24
- - -= . - _ - - . .. - - - . .
1 NPX80-IC-L A-791-03 Bases 2.5.3 Scan Codes Rationale: Vanous forms of electr_onic scanning are proven technologies that have obvious potential utility for numerous O&M-tasks. Even if the specific tasks and technology are not yet defined, this is presently considered to be a standard usability feature. 2.5.4 Size
References:
NUREG420.Q - 6.6.4.1.a.2 Rationale: Item a, Label Characters, is primarily a cross-reference to other parts of the SAG document. However, it does establish the rule for resolving conflicts between standards for character siza based on viewing distance versus those based on hierarchical labeling. In such case, size requirements for viewing distance (i.e., readability) take precedence, because _ readability is a
- fundamental necessity for performance, w-hile the hierarchical relationships are only a performance aid.
Items b and c,. Label Width and Label Heiaht, are extensions of text spacing requirements. 2.5.5 Layout of Identification Labels Rationale: This simply establishes a standard for the general configuration of equipment labels. 2.5.6 Label Colors Rationale: See bases under 2.3.2.3 2.5.7 Construction & Materials Rationale: It is more manageable for individual systems to select label construction materials and technoiogy according to their own needs; from the usability standpoint, reasonable cuality and longevity (rather than standardization of the results) is the concern. l B - 25 l
NPX80-IC-DR-791-03 Bases 2.5.8 Position & Mounting Rationale: These entries are self evident and have no additional i justification. 2.5.9 Data & Instruction Labels Rationale: This . material is judged to be self-evident. Items a and b are based on the idea that affording information as it becomes required during an item's natural sequence of use can often be helpful. This approach is exemplified by such obvious instructions as "In case of fire, break glass" as well as the guided instructions found on modern Xerox type machines (though this latter example correctly implies that all applications need not be equally successful), i'em c is a standard improvement afforded by structured procedures that break material into more manageable and easily identified steps. 2.5.10 Warning Labels
References:
OSHA 10 CFR 29 - Part 1910.145 NUREG 0399 - 5.5.3 Rationale: Terms like Danger, Caution, and Warni_ng are extremely valuable and necessary, but it is difficult to assure their consistent and unconflicting use. OSHA 10 CFR 29 defines danger as meaning "immediate hazard," t J caution as meaning
" potential hazard or unsafe practice." NUREG 0899 observes that, ,
in power plant emergency procedures, warnings and cautions are assumed to be synonymous, addressing " conditions, practices, or procedures _which must be observed to avoid personal injury, loss of life, a long-term health hazard, or damage to equipment." US - Navy conventions apply danger tags to denote that operation is prohibited under ANY conditions (other than clearing the tagout), while caution tags denote that if the accompanying cautionary conditions are observed, operation is permissible. Obviously, these definitions are not entirely consistent with one another. To attempt to preserve the distinctions the above references have found useful, the term danger has been applied to immediate - B - 26
NPX80-IC-DR-791-03 Bases personnel safety hazar_ds, and the term caution to ootential equipment or personnel ooerations hazards. 2.5.11 Panel Labels
References:
NUREG4700 - 6.6.2.1, 6.6.2.3, 6.6.2.2, 6.6.1.2 11ASA-STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.5.3.2.c.1 2.5.12 Tanks, Filters, Heat Exchangers, & Pipes Rationale: This was evaluated to be a good standard practice. 2.5.13 Structural Features Rationale: This was evaluated to be a good standard practice. 2.5.14 Geographical Locations Rationale: This was evaluated to be a good standard practice. B - 27
NPX80-IC-DR-791-03 Bases 3.0 DISPLAY AND CONTROL HARDWARE No SAG entries (introductory material) 3.1 Design Principles No SAG entries (introductory material) 3.1.1 Display-Control Compatibility
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.4.2.1, 6.9.3.1 3.1.2 Feedback
References:
NUREG-07QQ - 6.5.1.1.e MIL-STD-1472D - 5.1.1.4, 5.2.2.1.4, 5.15.4.1.13 3.1.3 Failure Indications
References:
See bases under 2.3.1.3 and 2.3.1.4 ' 3.1.4 Emergency Control Provisions
References:
NUREG 0700 - 6.4.1.1.c.2, 6.4.1.1.d 3.1.5 Prevention of Accidental Actuation Rationale NASA-STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.3.3.2 NUREQ-QZQQ - 6.4.1.2 3.1.5.1 Noninterference Rationale }lASA-STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.3.3.2.c, 9.3.3.2.i NUREG-0700 - 6.4.1.2 3.1.5.2 Protective Methods
References:
NASA-STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.3.3.2 NUREG-0700 - 6.4.1.2 3.1.6 Redundancy B - 28 i l
-. ~ . - _ . - . . - . - - , -
NPX80-IC-DR-791-03 Bases-
References:
1NB_EG-0700 - 6.5.1.1.d Rationale: In highly computerized control rooms; more data will be available and presented in a more diverse number of formats than in older, hardwired control rooms. The prior concern for excessive redundancy was really a concern for. overloading operators with an excessivn volume of raw data that contained little or no added informatbn. While this remains a concern, the phrasing of the source guidance should not be misunderstood to imply that redundancy is inherently bad, or that it has to reduce physical operator movement before it is necessarily justified. Virtual movement within software systems should also be minimized to a practical extent. At the same time, one of the advantages of software-based displays is their flexibility for organizing and presenting data in a diversity of useful contexts. An alternative perspective on reducing u mecessary redundancy might therefore be to " ensure usefulness within specific contexS 3.1.7 Durability
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.4.1.1.e 3.1.8 Maintainability No SAG entries (cross reference only) 3.2 - Switch Devices No SAG entries (introductory material) 3.2.1 Pushbuttons No SAG entries (introductory material) 3.2.1.1 Dimensions
References:
_ MIL-STD-1472D - 3.4.3.1.5 NASA-STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.3.3.3.15.a NUREG-0700 - Exhibit 6.8-2 B - 29
A NPX80-lC-DR-791-03 Bases 3.2,1,2 Activation Feedback
References:
MIL-STD-1472D - 5.4.3.1.1.3 NASA-STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A 9.3.3.3.8.a.1, 9.3.3.3.15.c.1 3.2.1.3 Operating Fcrce
References:
MIL-STD-1472D - 5.4.3.1.5 NASA-STD-3000/Vol 11Rev A - 9.3.3.3.8.b 9.3.3.3.15.a NUREG-0700 - Exhibit 6.8 2 3.2.1.4 Legend
References:
NASA-STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.3.3.3.15.c.2, 9.3.3.3.15.c.5 3.2.1.5 Barriers
References:
See basis for 3.1.5, Prevention of Accidental Activation. 3.3 Keyboards No SAG entries 3.3.1 Numenc Keypads
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.7.1.4.b Engineering Data Comoendium - 12.406 3.3.2 Alphanumeric Keyboards
References:
NASA-STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev_A - 9.3.3.4.1.1.a 3.3.2.1 Destructive Key Functions
References:
NASA-STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.3.3.4.1.1.d.2 B - 30
?
l
- NPX80-IC-DR 791-03 Bases.
3.3.3 Dedicated Function Keypads
References:
NASA-STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.3.3.4.1.1.b 3.3.4 Cursor Movement Keys
References:
NASA STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.3.3.4.1.1.d.1.b 3.4 Video Disp!ay Units No SAG entries (introductory material) 3.4.1 Resolution
References:
Handbook of Human Factors - 5.1.8 MIL-STD-1472D - 5.2.6.8.3 Engineering Data Comoendium - 11.117, 11.109, 11.111 3.4.2 Refresh Rate
References:
NASA-STD 3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.4.2.3.3.9.f Enaineering Qat.0 Comoendium - 11.122 3.4.3 Phosphor Persistence '
References:
Video Displav Terminals - Preliminarv Guidelines for ! .Splection. Installation and Uue - 3.3.1 3.4.4 Luminance
References:
NASA-STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.4.2.3.3.9.b NUREG-0700 - 6.2.7.1.d 3.4.5 Contrast
References:
NASA-STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.4.2.3.3.9.c NUREG-0700 - 6.2.7.1.c Engineering Data Comoendium - 1.601
- B - 31
NPX80-lC DR-791-03 Bases 3.4.6 ' Effect of Ainbient illumination on Screen Luminance
References:
MIL-STD-1472D - Table IV, 5.2.6.6.4.3.1 Human Engineering Guide to Eouioment DesigD - 3.9.2, 3.9.3 BUREG4700 - 6.7.2.1.c.1 Handbook of Human Factors - 5.1.6,5.1.7 NASA STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.4.2.3.3.2.e Rationale: There appears to be some confusion on the meaning and interpretation of the literature as it has been quoted and reiterated by successive generations of guidance documents. Van Cott and Kinkade (Human Engineering Guide to Equipment Design) appear closest to the source, which appears to have been the IES Lighting Handbook (1966) and Kodak Pamphlet No. S-3. In Section 3.9.2 they observe that the contribution of amoient illumination to total screen luminance (lets call this the ambient-to-- total-screen luminance ratio) should be minimized, and less than 20% for even the most well-defined images (black-and-white line drawings, alphanumerics, etc.) Images with greater range of intensity or hue should have a relatively smaller ambient contribution; less than 1% is suggested for photngraphic materials. This data is summarized in the last line of Table 3-12, which shows the 20% limit as a decimal (.2) under " Acceptable Limits". The reiteration of this data in MIL-STD-1472D shows the same table as Table IV, with the small change that the " Acceptable Limit" is now shown as .1 (i.e., a 10% contribution of ambient illumination to total screen luminance) and the .2 value is footnoted with the original qualifications (it applies to black-and-white line drawings, etc.) Under.5.2.6.6.4.3.1, what appears to be similar data is presented in ratio format (e.g.,5:1); however, it is referred to as and explained, perhaps erroneously, as a Luminance Ratio (i.e., the contrast ratio between the projected character and background intensities). If this is the same data. it is not being presented as it was originally, in Van Cott and Kinkade, in turn, this MIL-STD-1472D passage been quoted directly by other authoritative sources (e.g.. NASA 3000/Vol 1/Rev A Section 9.4.2.3.3.2.e). - Due to the Cifficulty of further verifying the source or coirectness of this guidance, it is simply observed that the range of unitiess values provided for the tabled,' ambient-to-total-B - 32
)
NPX80-IC-DR-791-03 Bases screen luminance ratio are more or less consistent with values of generally acceptable screen luminance ratios; in either case, the preferred values will be pragmatically irrelevant for the control room workspace (which not a darkened projection theater) and the IPSO backprojection techrutogy. 3.4.7 Electroluminescent Displays
References:
MIL STD 1472D - 5.2.6.9 3.4.8 Large Screen Displays
References:
MIL-STD-1472D - S.2.6.6.1 3.4.9 Touch Screens
References:
Handbock of Human Fa_qtpis t - 11.4.2.2 Rationale: Touch screens were selected for their simplicity and general adequacy for the tasks allocated to VDU interfaces in Nuplex 80+. Through use of touch screens, training requirements were minimized (no command languages to learn); they provide adequate precision for operator tasks (no drawing tasks or other fine work have yet been identified); and they simplify workstation design and qualification (no additional components to accommodate such as a mouse or-lightpen) Problems in the general area of parallax and touch resolution are being managed through development of improved touch screen technologies, and are not anticipated to pose a problem in the fina' design. One task that is expected to require a different interface is detailed data entry and manipulation; physical keyboards will perhaps be desirable, but they are not presently identified as an availability requirement for the controlling workspace. 3.4.9.1 Touch Screen Targets or buttons
References:
MIL-STD 1472D - Figure 14, 5.4.6.4 NUREG 0700 - 6.8.3.1, Exhibit 6.8-2 Engineerino Data Compendiurn -14.401 Effects of Kev Layout. Visual Feedback. and Encodino Algorithm gn Menu _ Selection with LED-B - 33 L
I a. NPX80-lC-DR 791-03 Bases , based Touch Panels. Weiman, N., Beaton, R. J.,_ Knox, S. T., and Glasser, P. C. (1985). - Tech Report No. HFL-604-02.~ Tektronix Human Factors Research Laboratory, Beaverton, OR. Rat /onale: Available guidance on touch target sizes in the human factors literature is taken from ' studies on similar legend switches ! (MIL-STD-1472D). The legend switches are shown as minimum of
'.75 inches on a side, and .875 inches between centers. This guidance accommo_ dates the use of protective switch barriers and displacements, and apparently 1) enables a large fingertip (.75 inches x .75 inches), or possibly a gloved finger, to fit entirely within the boundaries of the switch area,2) guards against inadvertent actuation of the switches, and 3) provides a larger area for inscription. However, while it may be conservatively adequate, it' constrains display space (i.e., it requires large -
buttons). Another fairly well_ validated choice for button size can be found on commercial typewriter /OWERTY keyboards (approximately .5-inches on a side, .75 inches between centers). Though the, keyboard is designed for touch typing (a task performed without view of the keys), it seems to be widely used as a "pushbutton" (hunt-and-peck) interface without particular problem (considering the large number of choices, the speed accuracy tradeoff, etc.)- Note that, this is not dissimilar to the NUREG 0700 Exhibit 6.8-2 Footnote 1 value for "pushbuttons within an array,0.75 inches center-to-center."- Also, like the legend switch, the keyboard dimensions accommodate the " limiting" .75 inch x .75 inch fingertip. m ; Touch targets are yet different from either of these mechanical b _pushbuttons,- however, and they present a different set of task characteristics to the user. The Nuplex 80+. design'uses a "make-_on-break" touch convention. Thus, feedback. of activation (i.e., which target is being touched)
- can precede its final selection, which is made on proper touch l _ release (i.e., breaking screen contact'while the target remains
- touch activated.) Unlike the case with mechanical switches, the user's finger does not need to be contained entirely within a touch
. B - 34 L , , _ _ _ , ._ x .,_ - . . . _ ._ - _ _
t NPX80 'C-DR-791-03 Bases target border (nor be entirely separated from the adjacent target) for proper activation. Spatial overlap is not a problem because the computer can discriminate and provide prompt visual feedback as to which target is being sensed and activated. Although actual touch screen resolution depends on the technology used at well as certain details of the hardware and software implementation, accurate selection can be provided in response to inaccurate touch, and striking multiple keys simultaneously can be prevented. Such software functions offer the potential to cut the limiting effects of fingertip anthropometry (as must be accommodated by the OWERTY example) nearly in half, if otherwise desed, since the limiting fingertip can now be accommodated within the desired target and its adjoining targets. Enough room must remain so that the touch screen implementation can reliably identify the "most" activated target while providing sufficient margin to the edge of the activated target in which the user can view the activation feedback (a visual arigle of 12 min at the panel = .125 inch margin). This discussion simply serves to point out that touch targets can be implemented to eliminate some of th constraints of physical keys and pushbuttons. Nuplex 80+ touch target dimensions nonetheless remain primarily within the conservative envelope of validated physical pushbutton data. A final point concerns touch target spacing, Pushbutton data can be found to indicate that, particularly when display space is tight, , separation is perhaps more important to maintain than size in maintaining speed and accuracy. Thus, more restrictive spacing standards are stated for component-controlling touch targets, where the concern for avoiding (rather than correcting) errors is substantially greater. The larger area devoted on the screen to such devices is not dissimilar to the common convention that larger devices are more important. 3.4.9.2 Touch Target Text Rationale: This treats the margin between text and target borders as requiring as much space as do separate words or lines of text. 3.4.9.3 Touch Target Standardization B 35
I NPX80 lC-DR-791-03 Bases ) Rationale: The purpose of this guidance is to generally encourage orderly aesthetics ir display design. This guidance can be violated for virtually any good reason. and it is probably beneticial to do so, to some extent, to help eriwre that individual display screens each have certain unique visual elements. 3.5 Instrument Meters and Gages
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.5.2.5 3.5.1 Direction of Scale increase
~
References. RU. BEG .Q1DQ - 6.5.2.1 JdlL STD-14Z2Q 5.2.3.2.1 3.5.2 Pointer C w'.cteristics
References:
NUREG.aIQQ - 6.5.2.2.a, 6.5.2.2.b, 6.5.2.2.c 3.5.3 Numeral Orientation L
References:
NUREG-07CO - 6.5.2.4.a h1lL-STD-1472D - 5.2.3.2.2 3.5.4 Orientation on Circular Scales -- Retarences: NUREG-0700 6.5.2.4.b, 6.5.2.4.c 1 AIL STD-1412Q 5.2.3.2.3.2, 5.2.3.2.3.3 3.6 Printers [TBD] s k P B - 36 1
NPX80-lC-DR 791-03 Bases 4.0 SOFTWARE No SAG entr/es (Introductory material and cross references) 4.1 Principals of Organization No SAG entries (Cross references) c.1.1 Information Density , 1 Ro/erences: NUREG-0700 - 6.7.2.5.m I
.U.neLGomputer Interface in Procesji C.natto) p. 80-83 (Display Density) fdll-STD 1472D 5.15.3.2.2.1 The Role of HierarchicaLKO.oydedge_Hepresan ta.tiga in Decisionmaking and.Jyjitem MaDagement.
Rasmussen, J. (1985). Hat /onale: Guidance in this area varies widely, which in part reflects the difficulty of quantifying a meaningfulinformation density metric. Is it the percentage of total characters that are in use? Of total pixels? Is it impacted by the degree of organization of the data? Do demarcation lines count? And so forth. A wide range of guidance has been provided that is consistent with the range of uncenainty in the l'terature, This affords flexibility needed to organize information so that conflicting human engineer ng goals can be pursued (e.g., reduced information burden, and increased access to detail). The Nuplex 80+ system
.mploys a structured hierarchy of information in ihe DPS:
- 1) High level screens have lowest data density, most aggregate information, support (generally skill-based) operator _monitorirtg tasks. Support observation of broad normal status, alerting departure-from-normal status, and directing monitor to lemus of ,
greWor detail.
- 2) Mid level screens have intermediate data density and aggregation, support (generally rule-based) operator CQDtroj tasks, procedural execution and direct observation of automatic systein performance.
B - 37
I NPX80-lC DR 791-03 Bases
- 3) Low level screens have maximum density and minimum aggregation of data, to support (generally knowledge-based) operator diagnostic tasks. These are expected to be used infrequent ly and in potentially unexpected ways; flexibility is stressed over ease of use.
4.1.2 Direct Usability of Data References .tflL STD 1472D - 5.15.3.1.3 NUREG4200 - 6.7.2.4.a 4.1.3 Meanir$gful Grouping and Organization of Data Referencos: NUREG-0700 - 6.7.2.5.a LAIL STD-1472R - 5.15.3.1.4, 5.15.3.5 BASA STD 3000/Vol 1/Rev A 9.6.2.4.3.2 4.1.4 Recurring Data Fields ,
References:
MIL STD 1472Q 5.15.3.1.6 4.1.5 Descriptors L
References:
JJll-STD 1472Q - c.15.3.1.9, 5.15.3.1.10 l N_UEEG-0700 - 6.7.2.4.m 4.1.6 Prompts and Messages
References:
#dL-STD-1472D - 5.15.3.1.9.2 4.2 Menus No SAG entries (Cross reference to touch screens) 4.2.1 Mer.u Item Selection
References:
NASA STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.6.3.1.6.2.a.1, 9.6.3.1.6.2.h.2 The D.coth/ breadth trade-off in the desion of menu-l driven user. interfaces. Kiger, J. l. (1984) l B - 38 l _ m. _
i NPX80 lC DR 791-03 Bases ! Rationale: The nominal two touch input for making screen transitions through the menu hierarchy provides an economical and consistent approach to the user. It also provides the necessary capacity for total system choices while keeping the number of choices within categories to a cognitively manageable level (i.e., less-than 10 choices per menu / category, within accepted working memory limits.) A high level menu provides access to one of seven (again, less than ten), high level menu categories; each of these provides the screen choices available within that high level category. The menu of screen choices is typically organlud at one further level: subfunctions (o g., using panel function categories) are used to organize groups of screens into what is the equivalent of multiple submenus on a sing!e screen page. This achieves a broad, shallow hierarchy of the type that research has shown to be most efficient in terms of overall ' hurnan perfor 1ance (i.e., speeJ/ accuracy). 4.2.2 Organization of Menu Items
References:
NASA.SIQ3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.6.3.1.6.2.c 4.2.3 Menu Ccr nistency Re/erences: NASA-STD-3000/VoL1/Rev A - 9.6.3.1.6.2.f The C_ age Aoainst Ugr Interface Consistency. Lodgard, H. P., (1989) c Rationale: Our interpretation of this very general consistency guideline takes into account that consistency is irnpertant to maintain between similar tasks and contexts, but that different purposes for a menu may warrant different formats. Such menus would be likely to have different organization and/or contents precisely because they correspond to different tasks. Forcing superficial similarity in such cases is not an improvement but a degradation of the interface. Within similar formats and applications, however, conventions should be applied consistently. 4.2.4 Navigational Cues ,
References:
BASA STD-3000/Vol 1/Rev A - 9.6.3.1.6.2.h.3 B - 39 4 w a wv ,w* ,;.m.,--r., e e. e .-efe-.m.er-.ar,-www.,.,e-,yer-.e.m .re,,.wv.,.,wer-gw-e, wow,p.-,..,wg w ., w p , e g --sy,~,p y- c-- m-m.gy,-* . vy w -w- y- w ,-
NPX80 IC DR 791-03 Bases Rationale Due to the flatness of the Nuplex 80+ menu structure, their would be little location information provided by displaying the path structure to your present position in the screen hierarchy. However, present location is still an important piece of information; this is afforded through a screen title descriptor. 4.3 Moving Through Data No SAG entries (introductory material) 4.3.1 Scrolling
References:
NASA-STD-WOO /Vol 1/Rev A - 9.6.3.2.2 4.3.2 Paging Re/erences: NASA STD-3000/Vol 1/ Rey _A 9.G.3.2.3 4.4 Windows
References:
NASA STD-3000/VoL1/Rev A - 9.6.2.7 Handbook of Human-Comouter Interaction - Ch.19 Rationale:- Definition and preferred use of the virtual devices called windows is not agreed upon or well-established. The contents of this section were primarily presented to prohibit certain design features such as 1) enabling operators to make uncontrolled modifications in the screens provided by the certified system, or 2) causing or enabling important information to be obscured. 4.5 Timing Issues 4.5.1 Update Rate of Dynamic data
References:
. MIL-STD-1472D - 5.15.3.4.1 4.5.2 Display Heartbeat Rationale: Steady state plant conditions can result in indications that are indistinguishable from those provided by a locked-up computer processor. To prevent such situations from going B - 40 1
L
, NPX80 lC-DR-79103 Bases I unnoticed, an unobtrusive (i.e., text character-sized), visually active, frequently updated (i.e., at least every .1 seconds) symbol called a display heartbeat has been specified as an element of each VDU screen. 4.5.3 System Response Time
References:
MIL-STD-1472Q 5.15.4.1.1.2 NASA STD-3000/ Val 1/ Reya - 9.6.2.9.1.b. 9.6.2.9.1.d, 9.6.2.9.1.e __ B - 41
l 1 i NPX80 IC DR 791-03 Bases 5.0 ANNUNCIATOR SYSTEMS i No SAG cntries 5.1 General System Characteristics
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.3.1.1 5.1.1 Selection of Annunciator Status Variables
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.3.1.2 5.1.2 Alarm Prioritization
References:
BUREG-0700 - 6.3.1.4
- 5.1.3 Annunciator States No SAG entr/es (Definitional) 5.2 Auditory Alert Subsystem No SAG entries 5.2.1 Audible Intensity
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.2.2.6, 6.3.2.1 Buman Eng. Gulda.121guipment D03100 - Fig 4.3 5.2.2 Auditory Coding
References:
NUREG-0700 '- 6.3.2.2, 6.3.1.5.a Rationale: it is noted here that auditory location coding is not a highly valuable auditory subsystem feature in Nuplex 80+, since any alarm can be acknowledged at any workstation. Thus, considering alarm system operation from the standpoint of cognhive function, the directing-of-attention function that follows
- the alerting function has essentially been shifted from the alerting phase to the acknowledgement phase of operation. This is considered to be an improvement since 1) auditory coding B-42 4 ._ >c_si.,- _ in-+.'. .,7 -.y-n 9 y , --.w,g ,_ +,m y.,.g a w sg -ee a y w- d T-e r- - wps - e'-
NPX80 IC-DR 791-03 Bases mechanisms should minimize their diversity, and are limited in their range of directing ability, and 2) acknowledgement, which was in l older systems rather an undirected operator activity (just press the button) that had to be accompanied by active search, is now a very concise operation; acknowledgement is equivalent to a system query that results in delivery of alarm message (s) to the operator at his present location. 5.3 Visual Indicating Subsystem
References:
NUREG 0700 6.3.3.2.e, 6.3.3.2.f 5.3.1 Annunciator Tile Matrices References. NUREG-0700 - 6.3.3.1.a. 6.3.3.1.b, 6.3.3.3.a. 6.3.3.3.b Rationale: It is noted that support for pattern recognition (detection of an overall condition that is perceptually driven, by seeing that a particularlet of alarms is present), which is often , cited as a benefit of hardwired individual alarm tiles, will be somewhat diminished by the aggregate tiles of Nuplex EO+. This i is an unavoidable tradeoff with the goal of reducing information i overload. Other devices, such as the IPSO overview, the CFMS and success path monitoring, as well as the various alarm system features that afford various information handling functions (e.g., listings, group acknowledgement, mode dependency, and sensor validation), are expected to more than make up for this particular tradeoff. This is one example of how software-based implementation and VDU presentation of alarri,s has an impact on ' their management and use. 5.3.2 Tile Legends
References:
_NUREG-0700 - 6.3.3.4 Rat /onale: On hard tiles, the label must serve as the annunciated l ' message and therefore there should be one tile for each l annunciator. On software tiles, messages can 's linked by L category names on the tile label. Thus, the alerting, directing, and informing functions of an annunciator are now performed by l B - 43
. , ,m..... ... ,.--...,,,, -r, .m.r,
. ' . , - , - . , ,.,m.~., , . , - - . . . ay ,w.,-,.~..,._..,m.-. . , w ,mm . m y, .w
i NPX80-lC-DR 791-03 Bases distinct, more specialized mechanisms. Specific messages can be afforded readily through the computer system, thereby satisfying ; the requirement that each alarm have a unique designator through l the alarm message, rather than the tile itself. 5.4 Operator Response Subsystem No SAG entries 5.4.1 Controls
References:
NUREG-QZQQ - 6.3.4.1 System Description for Control Comolog InformatiQD System foLNuplex 80+ . Rev 01 - 8.2 Rationale: The enhanced flash suppression and raminder features of Nuplex 80+ is part of an integrated solution to respond to specific problems experienced with conventional control room designs for the management of incoming alarms. These problems included information overload (too many alarms), heightened
, stress (insufficient time and support), and lost information (global acknowledgment) associated with older designs.
5.4.2 Annunciator Response Procedures ,
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.3.4.3 L B - 44 l
l NPX80-IC-DR 791-03 Bases 6.0 COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS No SAG entries 6.1 General Requirements No SAG entries 6.1.1 Speech Transmission and Reproduction
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.2.1, 6.1.5.5 MIL SIR 1_4220 - 5.3.7, 5.3.6, 5.3.10, 5.3.11 EPRI NP-43SQ - Ill F 2.2.1, 2.3 6.1.2 Equipment Configuration
References:
MIL STD-1472Q - 5.3.9 NUREG-0700 - 6.2.1.2.b, 6.2.1.3.b EPRI NP-4350 - Ill F 2.2.1 6.1.3 Equipment Controls
References:
MIL STD 1472D - 5.3.10 MJREG-0700 - 6.2.1.5.b 6.1.4 Emergency Communications _
References:
HUBEGd)IQQ - 6.2.1.1.c, 6.2.1.8 A.1.5 Noise Testing
References:
MIL STD-1472D 5.3.12 NUREG-0700 - 6.2.1.1.b Buman Eng. Guide to Equioment Design - Section 5.3.5 6.2 Telephone No SAG entries 6.2.1 Keyboard B 45
l NPX80 lC-DR 791-03 Bases No SAG entries (Cross reference to Numoric Keypads, Section l 3.3.1) i 6.2.2 Function Keys l Rat /onale: These prectices are deemed to be self-evident, if not they are not already general practice. ! 6.2.3 - Hot Unes l Rationale: These practices are deemed to be self-evident, if not they are not already general practice. 6.3 Radio Transceivers No SAG entries 6.3.1 Radio Frequency Interference
References:
_NUREG-0700 6.2.1.4, 6.2.1.5 6.3.2 Portability References .NMBEG-0700 - 6.2.1.4 6.3.3 Sound Controls--
References:
.EPRI NP-4350 - Ill F 2.2.1, 2.3, 4.1.1 6.3.4 Durability Rationale:. This is simply to avoid procuring fragile units.
6.4 Paging' Systems No SAG entries , 6.4.1- Channel Characteristics
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.2.1.6.f EPRI NP-43.50 - lil-F 3.1.1 i B - 46 M
*ie m y, S. -~e,-, - - - , . . . .,h...,.,,,, , , _ , . . - ,, - - , -, , , ,, . ~ , , , - - -a ,.*.-..--,,..$--
l l NPX80-IC DR 791-03 Bases 6.4.2 Station Characteristics i
References:
EPRI NP-4350 - lil F 2.2.1,3.2 6.4.3 Loudspeakers Re/orences: NUREG-0700 6.2.1.6.a.2, 6.2.1.6.c EPRI NP-43jiQ - Ill F 2.1.3,2.3.1 6.5 Sound Powered Phones
References:
RUBEG 0700 - 6.2.1.3 EPRI NP-4350 - Ill F 3.1.2
?
1 i l. 9 l l B. 47 1 1 ,
.u. _..:__ .__1. . . . _ . . ., - - - . . . . - , . . , . - . . . . , - , . , , _ .
1 l NPXBO-IC DR 791-03 Bases 7.0 WORK SPACE ENVIRONMENT l No SAG entries 7.1 Illumination No SAG entr/es (introductory material) 7.1.1 Task Ughting Re/orences: NUREG-0700 - 6.1.5.3.a MIL STD 1472D - 5.8.2 7.1.2 Emergency Ughting Re/erences: BilBIG-QZQQ - 6.1.5.4 7.1.3 Task Area Luminance Ratios
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.1.5.3 11andkook of Human Factors - 6.3.4.4 ANSI /HFS 100-1988 - 5.3 Rationale: Guidance (e.g. NUREG-0700) on task area luminance ratios (the variation in luminous power emitted by sequentially fixated visual areas) are apparently based on old studies whose validity has been severely criticized, of late. What constitutes either ideal or unacceptable values of this parameter (or even how it should best be measured) remains unclear. While extreme ratios (much greater than 100:1) can be said to be a possible source of discomfort or degraded performance and should be avoided, " strict recommendations of luminance ratios of [the frequently cited range between) 3:1 and 10:1 between the task and any other source of luminance in the visual field cannot be justified" (ANSI /HFS 100-1988). Thus, the HFESAG merely suggests that light (dark) task areas should be somewhat brighter (darker) than their surrounds, and that steps should generally be taken to mitigate situations unintentionally produce extreme ratios l (unshaded brilliance, strong shadows, etc.) in a work area. l l 7.1.4 Reducing Glare and Reflectance B - 48 l l _ . _ _ . . - . . - _ . .. - -- - .. . ~ ,_,,,---_ _ , - . . . , _ _ _ . , . _ _ , . _ .
NPX80-IC-DR-791-03 Bases
References:
HUBEG.QZQQ - 6.1.5.3.f, 6.1.5.3.g Handbo.ok of Human Factors - Ch. 5.1, Table 5.1.5 7.2 Noise No SAG entries (Cross-reference to Communications Systems) 7.2.1 Operations Centers and Workspaces References- HUREG-0700 - 6.1.5.5 MIL-STD-1472D - 5.8.3 Rationale: These limits are based primarily on case, effectiveness, and reliability of verbal commJnication and auditory signalling. 7.2.2 Equipment Spaces
References:
.10 CFR 29 (OSHA) - 1910.35 Human Eng. Guide to Eovipment Design Ch. 4 Rat /onale: OSHA limits are default standards, and are based on the long-term health and safety of employees, specifically to protect their hearing abilities. Guidelines provided for System 80+
are conservative with respect to OSHA standards. Standards are not provided since excessive noise from large power plant equipment must be managed by personnel, through stay time and use of ear protection, which are not system design issues. 7.3 Air Quality and Temperature No SAG entries 7.3.1 Temperature and Humidity
References:
HUBEG-QLQQ - G.1.5.1 7.3.2 Ventilation
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.1.5.2 10 QFR 29 (OSHA) - 1910.94 B-49
NPX80-lC-DR-791-03 Bases 7.4 Vibration
References:
MIL-STD-1472D - 5.8.4 7.5 Architectural Features No SAG entries 7.5.1 Operator Comfort
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.1.4.3, 6.1.5.6, 6.1.5.7 7.5.2 Doors
References:
EPRI NP-435Q lilA 2.1.3 10 CFR 29 (OSHA) - Subpart E (Means of Egress) MIL-STD-1472D - 5.7.8 (Ingress and Egress), 5.13.4.2 (Emergency Doors and Exits) 7.5.3 Bathrooms, Kitchens and Other Facilities No SAG entries 7.5.3.1 Bathrooms References! NUREG-0700 - 6.1.5.7.b.1 t 7.5.3.2 Kitchen i
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.1.5.7.b.1 7.5.3.3 Other Facilities
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.1.5.7 7.5.4 Flooring i
References:
jfBI CS-37_A5 - 3.2.11 EPRI NP-2411 10_CFR 29 (OSHA) - Subpart O (Walking & Working Surfaces) 8 - 50
l NPX80-lC OR 79103 Bases 7.5.5 Wall Covering
References:
EPRI CS-3745 - 3.2.11 EPRI NP-2411 7.5.6 Supervisor's Office Ro/erences: _NUREG-070D - 6.1.1.6 Ratlonale: The requirements of this SAG are already incorporated in the Nuplex 80+ design basis and the resulting control complex design; see CESSAR DC Section 18.6.5.4, and 18.6.5.6.1.4. 7.5.7 Nonessential Personnel Access
References:
14UREG 0700 - 6.1.1.7 Rat /onale Nuplex 80+ has a variety of features that limit the intrusiveness of access-authorized but nonessential personnel to control room operations. The Technical Support Center provides authorized visitors a full view of the control room without entering. Furthermore, offices inside the control room have visual and verbal contact with the controlling workspace, while maintaining isolated workspace for collateral operations duties and activities. Finally, the control panels themselves form a natural exclusion boundary around the controlling workspace, while permitting convenient access to all areas of the control room 7.5.8 - Installed Platforms, Workstands. Stairs and Ladders
References:
MlL-STD-1472D - 5.7.7 (Stairs, Ladders, Ramps, Platforms),5.9.11.1 (Work Stands),5.13 (Hazards and Safety) 10 CFR 291910 (OSHA) - Subpart D (Walking & Working Surfaces) EPRI NP-4350 - 7.2 (Stairs), 7.3 (Ladders) 7.5.9 Storage y
- No SAG entries B - 51 L
l-L L l
NPX80 lC DR-791-03 Bases 7.5.9.1 Document Storage
References:
BUREG-!E00 6.1.1.4 7.5.9.2 Personal Storage Space
References:
NUREG-0700 6.1.5.6 7.5.9.3 Emergency Equipment Storage
References:
NUREG4700 - 6.1.4.3 7.6 . Workstations & Panels No SAG entries (introductory) 7.6.1 General Arrangements
References:
NUREG-0700 6.1.1.1, 6.1.1.3.a. 6.1.1.3.b, 6.1.1.3.c, 6.1.1.3.d, 6.1.2.2.e Rationale: Availability of necessary indications and controls is a fundamental requirement and design basis for nuclear [ower plant main control rooms. Beyond minimum availability, the Nuplex 80+ Controlling Workspace concept and design has sought to minimize operator problems with access, visibility, communication, mobility, and intrusion. See Nuplex 804 Design Basis Document NPX80 IC-DP790-01.
. 6.2 Panel Dimensions No SAG entries (Introductory) 7.6.2.1 General Dimensions
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.1.1.3, 6.1.21, 6.1.2.2, 6.1.2.3 MIL-STD 1472D - 5.6, 5.13.5.4 Rationale: The subset of anthropometry data provided in NUREG-0700 is taken from MIL-STD 1472B The same section from MIL-STD-1472D is included in Appendix A in its entirety, for the use of B - 52
- .- ._ . _ _ - - - - -- . . - _ ~
NPX80-IC DR 791-03 Bases designers; the data is unchanged. Note that NUREG-0700 averaged the ground troop and aviator data to get a more representative 95%ile male estimate. Also note that the value of 5%ile female fingertip height in NUREG-0700 (24.2") is footnoted as 5%ile male aviator data. Using the related values of 95%ile male fingertip hei0ht and extended functional reach, and assuming proportionality with the 5%ile female fingertip height and extended functional reach relationships, a value of 20.7" for 5%ile female fingertip height is the result. Finally, NUREG-0700 has some additional values that were taken frorn an EPRI source; these data showed that the distance from the central axis of the_ body to the panel leading edge had a range from 5" (5%ile female) to 5.3" (95%ile male), and that the eye distance forward of the central axis of the body had a range from 3" (5%ile female) to 3.4" (95%ile male). The range of heights on workstations for physically manipulated indicating or control devices for use by operators (not maintainers) is based on the limiting upper reach of the standing 5th% female operator (74.6 inches), and limiting lower reach of the standing 95th% male operator (26.8 inches). These values are based on data for shoulder height (plus 1 inch for shoe height) and functional reach. Actual reach envelopes, however, are unique to each panel (given its benchboard depth and slope) and must be evaluated individually. 7.6.2.2 Stand-up Panels
References:
.liUBEG 0700 - 6.1.2.2 Rationale: Much of the relevant information for stand-up panel dimensions is contained in the previous section. Residual stand-up panel basis material is provided here.
True stand-up panels (e.g., the ACSC panels) are not designed to permit viewing over the top; as well as affording more panel area, this serves an exclusionary function for foot traffic outside the Controlling Workspace. _In addition, tall cabinets (e.g.,78" = 95%ile male stature + 4.5" margin) permit easy entry for maintenance. Cabinets of such height, if used, would afford , display space that is out-of-reach to 5%ile females, even assuming B - 53
NPXBO-lC-DR 791-03 Bases a vertical panel with no benchboard. This is not a tuman factors ! problem as long as the excess height panel "re;l estatc" remains i off. limits for placement of controls and touch screen devices. This is cssured by the standards on height of control placement (see : 3 Section 7.6.1.3). If the shorter panel is deemed desirable, one alternative is to implement a " pop-top" arrangement on the panel with a spring and damper arrangement. Note also that the ACSC panel shown in CESSAR DC Figure 18.6.5 12, Amendment E, Sheet 3 has already been redesigned with a steeper, shallower skirt, so that the 5%ile female reach envelope extends to the top of the panel. 7.6.2.3 Sit-down Panels
References:
NUREG;QZQQ - 6.1.2.3, 6.1.2.7.d MIL STD 14.Z2D - 5.6.2 Rationale: Much of the relevant information for sit down panel dimensions is contained in the General Dimensions section. Residual sit down panel basis material is provided here. Nuplex 80+ sit down panels at the MCC are designed for use in both the sitting and standing positions. Standards driven by task action (i.e., reach requirements) assume standing operators; ; standards driven by monitoring (i.e., visibility) requirements assume seated operators. , Although the MCC panels meet the visibility over the panel specification in NUREG-0700 for standing operators (not greater than 58"), this particular task is not required of operators in Nuplex 80+ (there is nothing for operators to observe below the MCC *
" horizon"; since the wall mounted IPSO is above this horizon, this guidance is distinct from that which delimits the IPSO viewing window when seated, or from elsewhere in the 't.ul room. See Section 7.6.5 on Display Positioning.) The 42 in. aver view guideline is based on 5%ile female eye height (27 inches) plus seat height (15 inches)._
Note also that the 5%ile female operator is also required to stand , when touching interface hardware on the uppermost portion of the , sit-down panel's vertical section (see the MCC panel shown in B - 54
o NPX80 IC DR 79103 Dases CESSAR CC Figure 18.6.5 11, Amendment E, Sheet 3). This is , consistent with the design basis assumption that task actions are being taken by standing operators. While as much as a further 7" reduction in panel height may be possible (while still accommodating the specified VDU hardware), the reduction is not necessary to accommodate the operator, and it could be , considered also as a potential degradation of the maintainer's i task, which requires unimpeded access to the panel. 7.6.3 Workstation Layout
References:
RUBEG-0700 - 6.8.2.1 Rationale: The procedure for panel layout is given in the Panel Layout Guidelines Document, NPX80 lC DP-79101. A discussion of some related issues is still provided here. The Nuplex 80_+ design basis segments control device hardware from other indicating dev;ces. Control devices are placed on the baseboard section, while other indicating devices are placed on the vert l cal section. Within the vertical section, various VDU devices are arranged in a fairly standard fashion, although their plasticity affords variety in applicaiion. The point is, there is relatively little functional grouping taking place on the vertical section. The DPS VDU is in the center; the alarm tile VDU !s in the upper right-hand corner; remaining real estate is allocated to various discrete indicators (both dedicated and non-dedicated parameters.) Layout will correspond primarily to the larger _ organization of panel functions (more frequently used towards center of MCC, etc.; see CESSAR-DC Section 18.6.5); then to correspond to and be compatible with the layout of control devices on the benchboard (see Sections 7.6.3.2 and 7.6.3.3). Application of guidel;nes for grouping are difficult to convert to standards. In general, grouping and layout in terms of functions, - systems, and components will be the most frequently implemented approach (as is true, in Nuplex 80+ ,'of the Organization of panels within consoles based on the Task Analysis). Layout by operational sequence should then be considered next. Finally, B - 55
-..--..-..mee,. _ .._.-. ,,_.. ..,.. ,-. ...,.,-4
, . , . .,w. o 4-,,,, . , ,m_ .., ,- - - y , y,,,... . w , -., - + . - ,..,, , -.--.n v , n-w- . - . ,, - - . - , - . - - -
NPX80-lC DR 791-03 Bases within a panet/ function, layout by importance and/or frequency may be useful, with the most frequently used items in the most central or accessibi T,ation (tMugh some important but infrequently used iter -, such as manual safety injection switches, should be readily accessible but not too convenient to actuate - inadvertently). This is a generic order, and design requirements or , evaluation may implicate another order as preferable in any . particular case. This accommodation-by aspects layout strategy is not unlike a correlation equation that seeks out the largest variance sources ; (i.e., the most powerful explanations) f'rst. In both cases, this is held to be parsimonious; thus the approach conforms to one of the fundamental principals of good science (given that more precise causal and interactive relationships cannot presently be : determined among the variables.) 7.6.3.1 Group Spacing -
References:
BUREG-0700 - 6.8.1.3.a ; 7.6.3.2 Demarcation Ro/erences: BUREG 0700 6.8.1.3.b 7.6.3.3 Component Spacing
References:
_NUREG 0700 - Exhibit 6.8 2, Footnote 2. MIL-STD-1472D - 5.6.2 Rationale: The guidance for separation of simultaneously ectuated components is based on 5%ile female anthropometry: shoulder breadth (15.0 inches) plus twice the shoulder-to elbow (2 x 12.1 = l 24.2 inches) length, yielding 39.2 inches as a conservative j approximation of working (broad) reach. 7.6.3.4 Arrangement of Physically Similar Components
References:
DLIBEG-0700 - 6.8.3.2 j 7.6.3.5 Large Matrices B 56 l l l h _ - . - , , , . , . - , . , ~ . . , , . - . - , . . . , . , _ . , - . , , . , . , , .,-n ,,.,-n , n.-,n.,,,-,-n,n. . , , ~ . ,,,_n-nv,v..- -,.,n,
NPX80 lC DR 791-03 Bases References.- NUREG-0700 6.8.3.2.d 7.6.3.6 Paired Controls & Displays
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.9.1.1 7.6.4 Display Positioning No SAG entries 7.6.4.1. Display Position - Vertcal Displacement Referencos: _NUREGEQQ - 6.1.2.2.o.1.a, 6.1.2.3.e.1, 6.7.2.3.c.1.b, 6.7.2.3.c.2.b, 6.7.2.3.d.1.b, 6.7.2.3.d.2.b 7.C.4.2 Display Position - Horizontal Displacement
References:
MUREG 0700 - 6.7.2.3.c.1.a, 6./.2.3.c.2.a 7.6.4.3 Display Plano Angle References NUREG-0700 - 6.7.2.3.b Enoineerino Data Comoendium - 11.109. CRT Symbol Size, Viewing Angle, and Vertical Resolution: Effects on identification Accuracy. Rat /onale: Results in 11.109 indicate that for
- larger (8.1 and 14.3 min arc) characters" off angle viewing was relatively unaffected up to 30- (equivalent, in our guidance, to a display surface angle of -
60-); screens in the study were high resolution (> = 15 scan lines per character height), character stimuli wc;e random.
-7.6.4.4 Display Distance
References:
NUREQQZQQ - 6.7.2.3.a 7.6.5 Desks
References:
NUREG-0700 - 6.12.7.d B - 57.
. . - - . . - . - . . . . - . . _ . . . . . . = - . - = - . - . . . = - - - - .
i NPX80 lC DR 791-03 Bases ! 7.6.6 Chairs f
References:
NUREG4700 6.1.2.8 ! s L F
- B - 58 i
,.:-, , ,. ..,:.... . _ . ,- . . , - . - , . ~ . . . . . . - - . . , , . . . - . . . - . - . . .
1 NPX80-IC-DR 79103 Bases 8.0 MAINTAINABILITY No SAG entries 8.1 Introduction No SAG entries (defines approach) 8.2 Design of Equipment for Maintainability ) l No SAG entries l 8.2.1- Facilitate Frequent and Expected Activities
References:
EPRI NP-4350 IV A 2.2, 2.3, 2.5, 2.6, UCRL-15673 - 1.1,1.5,1.9,1.11 NUREG/CR-3517 - 8.5 8.2.2 Foot-proof Features
References:
NUREG/CR 3517 - 2.3, 8.3.1 8.2.3 In Situ Maintenance Re/erences: .EPRI NP-4350 - IV-A 2.1, 2.3, 2,4, 2.8
.QCEL 15673 - 1.1,1.2,1.4,1.7,1.9,1.10,1.12
.liUREG/CR-3517 3.3, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 3.10, 6.5 MLL-STD 1472Q 5.6.2
' Rationale: .The guidabca given in 8.2.3.a on height above floor level for frequently serviced or easy-access items (2.5 - 4 feet) is based on MIL-STD-1472D anthropometric data for standing 5%ile female shoulder height (48 inches) and seated 95% male elbow
- lght (31 inches).
8.3 Facility Arrangements & Installations No SAG entries l 8.3.1 Access, Pull, & Laydown Space i B - 59 l _ _ _ , _ - _ - . ~ _-,.--__-__:__- __ _ _ . _
l I NPX80-lC-DR 79103 Bases
References:
EPRI NP-4350 Ill A 3.2.2; lil E 4.0, 5.0; IV-A 2.1 UCRL-15622 1.4, 2.1 NUREGE,J1311Z 3.3, 3.4, 3.5.6, 6.5.1, 8.4 MIL-STD 1472D - 5.G.2 Rat /onalo; The guidance given in 8.3.1.e on cabinet height for anticipated entry (78 inches) is based on MIL-STD 1472D anthropometric data for standing 95%ile male shoulder stature (74 inches) plus 4 inches for maneuvering. 8.3.2 Cranes. Hoists, & Ufting
References:
.1Q.CFR 291910 (QSJJ6) - 1910.179 EPRI NP-4350 - Ill E 3.0, 4.0 NUREG/CR_;15.12 - 7.5 8.3.3 Scaffolds, Stands, & Miscellaneous Facilities
References:
10 CFR 291910 (OSHA) Subparts D (Walking-Working Surfaces), E (Means of Egress), F (Powered Platforms, Manlifts, etc.), N (Materials Handling & Storage), O (Machinery & Machine Guarding). 8.4 Special Requirements for Contaminated Systems
References:
EPRI NP-4350 lil-A 2.3.2, 2.4 NUREG/CR-3517 - 4.7 10 CFR 29 (OSHA) - 1910.96 8.5 Equipment Design Documentation of Mainter:ance Task Data & Requirements Rationale: This is standard good design practice. 8.6 Software Maintainability
- Rationale
- Legislation of software engineering practices is beyond the sc. ope of this document. However, those tips are fairly well-established good general practices, and are thus encocraged.
l B - 60 'X ., . __ . _- -
. . , = . . . _ - . . - . -_ - - - - . - . _- . . . - - . . _ _ - . . - ~ _
l NPX80-IC DR 79103 Bases REFERENCES
- 1) ANSI /HFS 100198 - American National Standard for Hw -
Factors Engineering of Visual Display Terminal Workstaut . Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society (1988).
- 2) MIL-HDBK 761 A - Human Engineering Guidelines for Management Information Systems. Washington, DC:
Department of Defense (1989).
- 3) MIL STD-1472D - Human Engineering Design Criteria for Military Systems, Equipment, and Facilities. Washington, DC:
Department of Defense (1981).
- 4) NASA STD-3000 Man-Systems integration Standards.
Houston, TX: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (1989).
- 5) NP-4350 - Human Engineering Design Guidelines for Maintainability. Palo Alto, CA: Electric Power Research Institute (1985).
- 6) NPX80-IC-SD-791 System Description for Control Complex Information System for Nuplex 80+, Rev. 01.
Windsor, CT: ABB Combustion Engineering (1991). NUREG-0700 Guidelines for Control Room Design Reviews.
- 7) _ - Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulator / Commissicn (1
- 8) NUREG-0899 - Guidelines for the Preparation of Emerger.cy Operating Procedures. Wasnington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1982).
- 9) NUREG/CR-3517 - Recommendations to the NRC on Human Engineering Guidelines for Nuclear Power Plant Maintainability. Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1985).
- 10) UCRL 15673 - Human Factors Design Guidelines for Maintainability of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities.
Washington. DC: Department of Energy (1985). B - 61
a NPX80-lC DR 79103 Bases
- 11) USE-1000 Space Station Freedom Program Human-Computer interface Guide. Houston, TX: National Aeronr.atics and Space Administration (1988).
- 12) 10 CFR 29 Code of Federal Regulations, Occupational Health and Safety Administration. Washington, DC: Office of the Federal Register (1990).
- 13) Bailey, R. W, (1982). Human Performance Engineering: A guide for system designers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
- 14) Boff, K. R., & Lincoln, J. E. (1988). Engineering Data Compendium: Human Perception and Performance. Wright-Patterson AFB, OH: Armstrong Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory.
- 15) Ehrenreich, (1985). Computer Abbreviations: Evidence and a Synthesis. Human Factors,2Z,2,143156.
- 16) Gilmore, W. E., Gertman, D. l., & Bhackman, H. S. (1989).
User-Computer interface in Process Control: A human factors engineering handbook. Idaho Falls, ID: Idahe National Engineering Laboratory.
- 17) Helander, M. (Ed.) Handbook of Human Computer ;
interaction. New York, NY: North-Holland (1988)._
- 18) Kiger, J. l. (1984). The Depth / breadth Tradeoff in the Design of Menu-driven user interfaces. Irliemational Journal of MaA Machine Stutie.s,20, 201213.
- 19) Ledgard, H. P._ (1989). The Case Against User interface Consistency . Communications of the ACM,22,10,1164-1173,
- 20) Rasmussen, J. (1985). The Role of Hierarchical Knowledge l Representation in Decisionmaking and System Management.-
IEEE Transactions on Systems. Man. and Cybernetics, SMC-15, 2, 234-243. B - 62 l
NPX80-IC DA 791-03 Bases ;
- 21) Rodgers, S. H. (Ed.) Ergonomic Design for People at Work.
Rochester, NY: Eastman Kodak Company (1983).
- 22) Salvendy, G. (Ed.) Handbook of Human Factors. New York, NY: Wiley (1982).
- 23) Sanders, M. S., & McCormick, E. J. (1987). Human Factors lo Engineering and Design. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
- 24) Tufte, E. R. (1983). The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. Chesire, CT: Graphics Press.
- 25) Van Cott, H. P., & Kinkade, R. G. (Ed.s) Human Engineering Guide to Equipment Design. Washington, DC: Department of Defense (1972).
- 26) Weiman, N., Beaton, R. J., Knox, S. T., & Glasser, P. C.
(1985). Effects of Key Layout, Visual Feedback, and Encoding Algorithm on Menu Selection with LED-based Touch Panels (Tech Report HFL-604-02). Beaverton, OR: Tektronix. L L l L B 63 l l
'b NPX80-IC DR-/91-C3 Bases .
APPEND!X A MIL-STD-1472D Section 5.6 Anthropometry (pp. 129 143, 148-152). l: r-l: B - 64 L i
~
. -- ~ . - . . - - . - . .- . _...--.- - .~..-- _- -~
MIL-STD-14720 5.6 Anthroponetry. 5.6.1 Gen e ra_l,. Design and sizing shall insure accommodation, compatibi;ity, operability, and maintainability by the user population. Generally, design limits shall be based upon a range from the 5th percentile female- to the 95th percentile nale values for critical body dimensions, as appropriate, except for Naval aviator special populations (see 5.6.4). Foi any body dimension, the 5th percentile value indicates that five percent of the population will be equal to or smaller than that value, and 95 percent will be larger; conversely, the 95th percentile values indicates that 95 percent of the population will be equal to or smaller than that value and five per at will be larger. Therefore, _use of a design range from tN Sth to 95th percentile values will theoretically provide coverage for 90 percent of "< user population for that dimension. Where two or more dimensions are use simultaneously as design parameters, appropriate multivariate data and techniques should be utilized. (See Appendix for representative references.) The limited anthropometric data presented in this section in Figures _23 through 28 and Tables _X111 through. XVI!! are intended to provide general design guidance. 00D-HDBK-743- should be consulted for more extensive data. Use of these data shall take the following into consideration;
- a. The nature, frequency, safety, and difficulty of the related tasks to be perfomed by the operator or wearer'of the equipment,
- b. Tne position of tne body during pertumance of these tasks.
- c. fiobility or flexibility requirements imposed by these tasks.
- d. . Increments in the design-critical dimensions imposed by the need to compensate for obstacles, projections, etc.
- e. Increments in the du ign-critical dimensions imposed by protective clothing or equipment, packages, lines, padding, etc.
5.6.2 Anthropometric data._ The anthroponetric data presented in Tables XIll through XVIII are nude body measurements; data in centimeters are given in the upper half of-each table, and data in inches are shown in the lower half of each table. (Note: The anthroponetric data shown in these tables have been compiled and collated from several sources. The data.on Ground Troaps consist of measurements on a series of 6682 U.S. Amy men and a series
- of 2008 U.S. Marines, bnth neasured in 1966, as well as of 287 U.S. Army men c.easured in 1977. The deta on Aviators represent 1482 U.S. Army aviation personnel, measured in 1970; 1549 U.S. Navy pilots, measured in 1964; and L 2420 U.S. Air Force flying personnel, nessured .in 1967. The data on military l
women consist-of measurements of 1300 U.S. Army-WAC personnel and Amy nurses, L measured in 1977; and 1905 U.S. Air Force WAF personnel and Air Force nurses, !' measured in 1968.) Blanks in the tables indicate that data are not available l, for those dimensions.- Te :hnical reports (see appendix)-should be consulted for definitions of specti ed measurements, methods of data collection and 129 1
MIL-STD-14720' Ib 2 il: a-p 12 -- -- - 13* -= f O -
'1 1 L \
u ._ I I 123
-4 5
/
1 I
/ 7 ,
,l .;
- h,lp
",a
- SAM AS 12, HOWEVER, e
? 10 RIGHT SHOULDER is EXTENDED AS FAR FORWARD AS POSSIBLE j' gg WHILE KEEF;NG THE SACK OF
. THE LEFT shout. DER FIRMLY -
o oo o o o . o o o . AGAINST THE SACK WALL. m. FIGUM 23. STANDING BODY DIMENSIONS 130 L e o l
MIL-ST0 14720 r TABLE Xill. STANDING BODY DIMENSIONS PERCENTILE VALUESM8GQW Sth PERCENTILE 96th PERCENTILE GROUND GROUND TROOPS AVI ATORS WOMEN TROOPS AVIATORS WOMEN WElG F." (kg) 55.5 60.4 46.4 91.6 58.0 74.5 STANDING BODY DIMENSIONS 1 STATURE 161.8 164.2 152.4 185.6 187.7 174.1 2 EYE HEIGHT (STANDINGl 151.1 152.1 140.9 173.3 175.2 162.2 2 SHOULDER (ACROMIALE) HEIGHT 133.6 133.3 12J.0 154.2 1 54.8 143.7 4 CHEST (NIPPLE) HEIGHT
- 117.9 120.8 109.3 136.5 138.5 127.8 5 ELBOW (RADIALE) HEIGHT 101.0 104.8 94.9 117J 120.0 110.7 6 FINGEDTIP (DACTYLION)
HEIGHT 61.5 73.2 7 WAIST HEIGHT- 96.8 97.6 93.1 115.2 115.1 110.3 8 CROTCH HEIGHT 76.3 74.7 68.1 91.8 92.0 8M S GLUTEAL FURROW HEIGHT 73.3 74.6 66.4 87.7 88.1 81.0 10 KNEECAP HEIGHT 47.5' 46.8 432 58.6 57.8 52.5 11 CALF HEIGHT. 31.1 30.9 29.0 40.6 39.3 36.6 12 FUNCTIONAL REACH 72.6 73.1 64.0 00.9 67.0 80.4 13 FUNCTIONAL REACH, EXTENDED 84.2 82.3 73.5 101.2 97.3 92.7 PERCENTILE VALUESM WElGHT (Ib) 122.4 133.1 102.3 201.9 211.6 164.3 STANDING BODY DIMENSIONS 1 STATURE 64.1 64.6 6: ~ *79.1 - '*m?SF 68.5 2 EYE HEIGHT (STANDING) 59.5 59.9 ASW Mek iM W d 63.9 3 SHOULDER (ACHOMIALE) HEIGHT. 52.6 - 52.5 :484>. tShku m 40.8* 56.6 4 CHEST (NIPPLE) HEIGHT
- 46.4 47.5 43.0 53.7 54.5 50'.3 5 ELBOW (RADIALE) HEIGHT 39.8 41.3 37A4 . 46A l m 47.2+- 43.6 6 FINGEPTIP (DACTYLION)
HEIGHT - 24.2 7.?.? ' 38A e 7 WAIST HEIGHT 38.0 38.4 36.6 45.3 45.3 43.4 8 CROTCH HEIGHT 30.0 29.4 26 2 36.1 36.2 33.0 9 GLUTEAL FURROW HEIGHT 28.8 29.4 26;t 34.5 34.7 31.9 10 KNEECAP HEIGHT 18.7 18.4 17.2 23.1 22.8 20.7 11 CALF HEIGHT 12.2 12.2 11.4 16.0 15.5 14.4 12 FUNCTIONAL REACH 28.6 28.8 18ES d C3E8q u, ., $ 31.7 13 FUNCTIONAL REACH, EXTENDED 33.2 32.4 28.9 39J 38.3 36.5
'8USTPOINT HEIGHT FOR WOMEN -
( 131
., , _ , . . _ . . . _ . _ , _ . . _ . . _ . _ . _ . _ . ~ . _ . _ . _ .._. . . _
=-
? Mit.-STD-14720
).
lk m
'Y , t o Eg,,9 V'
a 14 ' ^
,1
. i: < i{ ,-- v 15.1719 M 21
,, l f
25 '
,, , n ,
~)
i fb
- 3. _
N '
!I 7
-a ,
9
. ZI M H_<N-
__ m :s N. - ._ r_l. y., at-i :
' FIGURE 24. - SEATED BODY DIMENSIONS-132 f:
4 3
, y , ~ . . , - e r- 3-r--
MIL-STD-14720 TABLE XIV, SEATED BODY DIMENSIONS PE RCENTILE VALUES IN CENTIMETE RS 95th PE RCENTILE Sch P_E RCENTILE G R ol,' O CROUND _T ROOPS AVIATORS WOMEN TROOPS AVIATORS WOMEN SE ATED BOOY DIMENSIDNS 14 VERTICAL ARM RE ACH, 1286 1340 117 4 1478 1532 1394 SITTING 15 StTTING HEIGHT, ERECT 83 5 85 7 79 0 96 9 98 8 90 9 to StTTING HEIGHT, RE L AXED 81 5 83 4 77 5 94 8 96 b 89 7 17 EYE HEIGHT, StTTING 72 0 73 6 67.7 64 6 86 1 79 1 ERECT 18 EYE HEIGHT,54TTING 70 0 71 6 64 2 82 5 84 0 77 9' RELAXE0 19 MID-SHOULDER HEIGHT 56 6 58 3 53 7 67.7 69.2 62 5 20 SHOULDE R HEIGHT, 54 2 54 6 49 9 SS 4 66.9 60 3 SITTING 21 SHOULDER-ELBOW LENGTH 33 3 33.2 30 8 40 2 39 7 36 6 22 ELBOW-GRIP LENGTH 31.7 32 6 29 6 33.3 37.9 35 4 23 ELBOW-FINGERTIP LE NGTH 43 8 44 7 40 0 52 0 E1.7 47.5 24 ELBOW REST HEIGHT 17 5 187 16 1 28 0 29 5 26 9 25 THIGH CLE ARANCE HEIGHT 12.4 10 4 18 8 17.5 26 KNEE HEIGHT, SITTING 49.7 48 9 46 9 60 2 59 9 55 5 27 POPLITE AL HEIGHT 39 7 38 4 38 0 50 0 47.7 45 7 29 BUTTOCK-KNEE LENGTH $4 9 55 9 53 1 65.8 65 5 632 29 BUTTOCK -POPLITE AL 45.8 44 9 43 4 54.5 54 6 52 6 LENGTH 30 SUTTOCK-HEEL LENGTH 46 7 56 4 31 FUNCTIONT L LEG LENGTH 110 6 103 9 99.6 127.7 120 4 118 6 PERCENTILE VALUES IN INCHES SE ATED 800Y DIMENSIONS 14 VERTICAL ARM ME ACH, 50 6 52.8 462 58 2 60.3 54 9 SITTING 15 SITTING HE AGHT. E RECT 32.9 33.7 31.1 38 2 38.8 35 9 16 $1TTING HEIGHT. AELAktD 32.1 32.8 30 5 37.3 38 0 35 3 17 EYE HEIGM,$1TTING 28.3 30.0 26.6 33.3 33 9 31.2 ERECT 18 EYE HEIGHT, SITTING 27.6 28.2 26.1 32.5 33.1 30 7 RELAXED , 19 MID-SHOULDER HElGHT 22.3 23 0 21.2 26.7 77.3 24 6 20 StCULDER HEIGHT, 21.3 21 5 19 8 25.7 25 9 23 7 SITTING 21 SHOULDER-ELBOW LENGTH 13.1 13 *. 12 1 15,8 15.6 14 4 22 ELBOW-GRIP LENGTH 12.5 12A 11 6 15,1 14.9 14 0 23 EL80W-FINGERTIP LENGTH 17.3 17 6 15.7 20.5 20.4 -18.7 a.s 74 6.4 11.0 11.8 10.6 24 EL90W RE' c HEIGHT 49 41 7.4 69 25 THIGH CLE AR ANCE HEIGHT
- 19.3 18 5 23.7 23 a 21 8 26 1(NEE HEIGHT, SITTING 19 8 15.1 15 0 19,7 18 8. 18.0 77 POPLITE.4L HEIGHT 15.6 22 0 20 9 25.9 25 8 24.9 28 BUTTOCK-KNEE LENGTH 21 8 29 BUTTOCK-POPLITE AL 17.9 17.7 17,1 21 5 21.5 20 7 LENGTH 30 BUTTOCK--HEEL LENGTH 18 4 22.2 31 FUNCTIONAL LEG LENGTH (3.5 40 9 39 2 50.3 47 4 44.7
{ 133
]
l i i
.,A._. ,&. g J a_4 a., 4.1.1 44 (da.J-J" .J 4- ,_s. p MIL-STD-14720 -
9' A, . w =j ,. e 73 O {f f -- e ' A
-}
1 -
,, arn
= =
=
~s a n (3[b f= }) ;g ,
i tm d =, (
= '
n g o u u( 3j ' n ( a !
/l N [.
- ' FIGURE ~ 25. DEPTH ANb BREADTH ClMENSIONS i
I~ l 1 134
MIL-STD-1472D TABLE XV. DEPTH AND BREADTH DIMENSIONS PERCENTILE VALUES IN CENTIMETERS Sth PERCENTILE 95th PERCENTILE GROUND TROOPS AVIATORS WOMEN GROUND TROOPS l AVI ATORS WOMEN DEPTH AND BREADTH DIMENSIONS 32 CHEST DEPTH
- 18.9 20.4 19.6 26.7 27.8 27.2 33 BUTTOCK DEPTH 20.7 18.4 27.4 24.3 34 CHEST BREADTH 27.3 29.5 25.1 34.4 38.5 31.4 35 HIP BREADTH, STANDING 30.2 31.7 31.5 36.7 38A 39.5 36 SHOULDE R (BIDELTOID) 41.5 43.2 38.2 49.8 52.6 45.8 BREADTH 37 FOREARM-FOREARM 39 2 43.2 33.0 53.6 60.7 44.9 BREADTH 38 HIP DRE ADTH, SITTING 30.7 33.3 33.0 38.4 42.4 43.9 39 KNEE-TO-KNEE BREADTH 19.1 25.5 PEROENTILE VALUES IN INCHES DEPTH AND BREADTH DIMENSIONS 32 CHEST DEPTH' 7.5 8.0 7.7 10.5 11.0 10.7 33 BUTTOCK DEPTH 8.2 72 10.8 9.6 34 CHEST BREADTH 10.8 11.6 9.9 13.5 15.1 12.4 36 HIP BREADTH, STANDING 11.9 12.5 12.4 14.5 15.3 .
15.6 36 SHOULDER (BIDELTOID) 16.3 17.0 15.0 19.6 20.7 18.0 BREADTH _ 37 FOREARM-FOREARM 15.7 17.0 13.0 21.1 23.9 17.7 BREADTH 38 HIP BRE ADTH, SITTING 12.1 131 13.0 15.1 1(,.7 17.3 39 KNEE-TO-KNEE BREADTH ' 7.5 10.0 1
'SUST DEPTH FOR WOMEN
? t-l l -( l35 l
=_- .. .-
MIL-STD-14720 t s -- , { N ' MN , , 47 I 'g-d 41 i, yq
;kf y.
0'
-; L; i L' % "-
43', {k' h\ ,
\
}
t. 4, / s1 J I l u ' 9 , , l( ) \{ 50 l' " sa i , M [L
- FIGURE 26. CIRCUMFERENCES AND SURFACE DIMENSIONS 136
M1L-STD-14720 TABLE XVI. CIRCUMFERENCES AND SURFACE OlMENSIONS PERCENTILE VALUESIN CENTIMETERS kh PE RCENTILE 95th PE RCE NTILE GROUND GROUND TROOPS AVI ATOR$ WOMEN TROOPS AVI ATORS WOMEN CIRCUMF E RENCES 40 NECK C4RCUMFERENCE 34 2 34 6 29 9 41 0 41 6 36 7 41 CHEST CIRCUMFE RENCE' 83 8 87 5 18 4 1058 109 9 100 2 42 W AIST CIRCUMF E RE NCE 68 4 73 5 59 5 95 9 101 7 83 5 43 HIP CIRCUMF E RENCE 851 67 1 85 5 106 9 108 4 1061 44 HIP CIRCUMF E RE NCE, 97 0 87.7 119 3 110 8
$1TTING 45 VERTICAL TRUNK CIRCUM- 1506 154 3 142 2 178 6 181 9 166.3 F E RENCE, S T ANDING e6 VER1 SCAL TRUNK CIRCUM- 1504 134 8 1750 1610 F E RENCE, SITTING 47 mRM $CYE CIRCUMF ERENCE 33 6 39 9 33 6 50 3 53 0 41,7 48 BICEPS CIRCUMF E RENCE, 27 0 27 8 23 2 37 0 34 9 30 8 FLEXED 49 E LBOW CIRCUMF E RE NCE, 28 5 23 5 34 2 30 0 FLEXED 50 FORE ARM CIRCUMF E RENCE. 26 1 26 3 22 2 33 1 33 1 27 5 FLEXED 51 WRI5T CIRCUMFE RENCE 15.7 15.3 13 6 18 6 19 7 16.2 52 UPPER THIGH CIRCUM- 48.1 49 6 48 7 63 9 66 9 64 5 FERENCE 53 CAI ~ CIRCUMF E RE NCE 31 6 33 3 30 6 41 2 41.3 39 2 54 ANhE CIRCUMF E RE NCE 19.3 20 0 18 7 25.2 24 8 23 3 55 WAIST BACK LENGTH 39.2 42 4 36.7 H8 50 9 45 4 56 W Al$T FRONT LENGTH 36.1 35.7 30.5 48.2 44 2 41 4 PE RCENTILE V ALUES IN INCHE S CIRCUMFE RENCE S i 40 NECK CIRCUMF E RE NC'. 13.5 13 6 11 8 16.1 16 4 14 4 41 CHEST CIRCUMFE RENCE' 33 0 34 4 30 8 41.7 43 3 33 5 42 W AIST CIRCUMF ERENCE 26 9 28 9 23 4 37.8 40 0 32 9 43 HIP CIRCUMFERENCE 33 5 34.3 J3.7 42.1 42 7 41 8 44 HIP CIRCUMF E RENCE, 38.2 34 5 47.0 43 6 SITTING 45 VERTICAL TRUNK CIRCUM 59 3 61 8 56 0 70.3 71 6 65 5 F ER E NCE, STAN D4 NG 46 VE RTICAL TRUNK CIRC'JM- 59 2 531 68 9 43 4 F E RE NCE,41TTING 47 ARM SCYE CIRCUMF E RENCE 15 6 15 7 132 19 8 20 9 18 4 48 BlCEPS CIRCUMF E RENCE. 10 6 11.0 9.1 18 6 14 5 12.1 FLEXED 49 EL30W CIRCUMFERENCE. 112 92 13 5 11.8 FLEXED 50 FORE ARM CIRCUMF CRENCE, 10.3 10 4 S7 130 13 0 10 8 FLEXED 51 WRIST CIRCUMFERENCE 62 60 54 1.3 76 64 52 UPPER THIGH CtRCUM- 18 9 19.5 19.2 25.1 26.3 25.4 FERENCE 53 CALF CIRCUMFERENCE 12.4 131 12.0 16 2 16.3 15 4 54 ANKLE CIRCUMFERENCE 76 79 74 99 97 9.2 55 WAl5T BACK LENGTH 15 4 167 14 4 20.0 20 0 17.9 56 WAIST FRONT LENGTH 142 14 1 12 0 18.2 17.4 16 3
'8UST CIRCUMFERENCE FOR WOMEN k 137 1
\
MIL-STD-14720 I-
=_ es. -
__ .r_ ' n ~ ,, % l
}
a A f .
- e o .)
e t I t- - V. I r% 67 ,,
~ '
M4
/ j
[ 62 83
\
f-g/ o o g = ,4 r T h , t JI FIGURE 27. HAND AND FOOT DIMENSIONS 138 O
MIL-STD-14720 TABLE XVil. HAND AND FOOT DIMENSIONS PERCENTILE VALUES IN CENTIMETERS Sth PE RCENTILE 95th PERCENTILE GROUND GP.OUNDl TROOPS AVIATORS WOMEN TROOPS AVIATORS WOMEN HAND DIMENSIONS 57 HAND LENGTH 17.4 17.7 16.1 20.7 20.7 20 0 58 PALM LENGTH 9.6 10.0 9.0 11.7 11.9 10.8 59 HAND BREADTH 8.1 8.2 6.9 9.7 9.7 8.5 60 HAND CIRCUMFERFNCE 19.5 19.6 16.8 23.6 23.1 19.9 61 HAND THICKNESS 2.4 3.5 FOOT DIMENSIONS 62 FOOT LENGTH 24.5 24.4 22.2 29.0 29.0 26.5 63 INSTEP LENGTH 17.7 17.5 16.3 21.7 21.4 19.6 64 FOOT BREADTH 9.0 90 8.0 10.0 11.6 9.8 65 FOOT CIRCUMFEFIENCE 22.5 22.6 20.8 27.4 27.0 24.5 66 HEEL-ANKLE CIRCUMFERENCE 31.3 30.7 28.5 37.0 36.3 33.3 PERCENTILE VALUES IN INCHES H AND DIMENSIONS 57 HAND LENGTH 6.85 6.98 6.32 8.13 8.14 7.89 58 PALM LENGTH 3.77 3.92 3.56 4.61 4.69 4.24 59 HAND BREADTH 3.20 3.22 2,72 3.83 3E0 3.33 60 HAND CIRCUMFERENCE 7.68 7.71 6.62 9.28 9.11 7.82 61 HAND THICKNESS 0.95 1.37 FOOT DIMENSIONS 62 FOOT LENGTH 9.65 9.62 8.74 11.41 11.42 10.42 631NSTEP LENGTH 6.97 6.88 6.41 8.54 8.42 7.70
- 64 FOOT BRE ADTH 3.53 3.54 3.16 429 4.58 3.84 66 FOOT CIRCUMFERENCE R.86 8.91 8.17 10.79 10.62 9.65 66 HEEL-ANGLE CIRCUMFERENCE 12.32 12.08 11.21 14.57 14.30 13.11 139 L
Mit-STD-14720 I n ^' _~ 4 3 -:-* a "t -
, ~;, ,
% s' 4, ,,-.
~ 3 M.f ],,' -g q ? \ ; w;3g_ge+a' u[5 A ., _ _
.)*
ee r ^
.. -. s .
t % 51 ~ j l L rv.~ { - l, ,,.'h)
--* 91 +-
. FIGURE 28. HEAD AND FACE DIMENSIONS I
140 i t-I h
Mll.-STD-14720 TABLE XVill. HEAD AND FACE DIMENSIONS PERCENTILE VALUES IN CENTIMETERS Sth PERCENTILE 95th PERCENTILE GROUND GROUND THOOPS AVIATORS WOMEN TROOPS AVIATORS WOMEN HEAD AND FACE DIMENSIONS 67 HEAD CIRCUMFERENCE 53.2 53.8 52.2 58 8 59.9 57.7 68 BITRAGIONCORONAL CURVATURE 31 3 33.4 31.3 36.1 37.8 36.3 69 BITRAGIONMENTON CURVATUM 29.0 30.1 27.3 33.1 34.7 31.6 70 BITRAGION. SUBMANDIBULAR CURVATURE 26.7 28.4 24.5 30.7 33.6 28.9 71 HEAD LENGTH 18.2 18.6 17.3 20.7 21.0 19.8 72 PRONARALE TO WALL 20.8 21.4 19.7 23.5 24.1 23.2 73 TRAGION TO WALL 8.5 9.2 8.8 12.6 12.1 11.8 74 HEAD DIAGONAL (MENTON-OCCIPUT) 24.4 26.9 75 HEAD BREADTH 14.2 14.4 13.5 16.3 16.5 15A 76 BITRAGION BREADTH 12.5 13.1 12.1 14.5 15.2 13.8 77 BIAURICULAR BREADTH 16.5 17.5 14.2 19.4 20.2 17.4 78 HEAD HEIGHT (TRAG.. TOP OF HEAD) 11.9 12.0 11.6 14.5 14.4 14.3 79 GLABELLA TO TOP OF HEAD 6.5 7.2 7.1 9.4 10.9 9.9 80 PRONASALE TO TOP OF HEAD 11.6 13.0 11.9 15.1 16.6 16.8 81 FACE LENGTH (MENTON SELLIONI 10.6 10.2 9.6 13.1 13.0 11.8 82 FACE (BlZYGOMATIC) BREADTH 12.8 12.4 11.9 14.9 1* 1 144 83 BIOCULAR BREADTH 9.3 8.4 8.5 10.5 10.5 84 INTERPUPILLARY BREADTH 5.1 b.3 5.1 6.8 6.5 85 INTEROCULAR BREADTH 2.7 2.7 3.8 3.7 86 LIP TO LIP L ENGTH 1.1 2.3 87 LIP. LENGTH (MOUTH BREADTH) 4.5 3.7 5.9 5.1 88 EAR LENGTH 55 5.9 4.5 6.9 7.3 6.0 89 EAR LENGTH ABOVE TRAGION 2.5 3.1 90 EAR BREADTH 32 3.0 2.4 5.0 4.3 3.5 91 EAR PROTRUSION 1.6 2.8 (Continue:f) l 141
MIL-STD-14720 l TABLE XVill HEAD AND FACE' DIMENSIONS (CONCLUDED) PERCENTILE VALUES IN INCHES -l i 5th PERCENTILE 95th PERCENTILE l GROUNO . GROUND I TROOPS AVIATORS WOMEN TROOPS AVIATORS WOMEN 1 HEAD AND FACE DIMEN$10NS 87 HEAD CIRCl!MFERENCE 20.94 21.18 20.57 23.16 23.59 22.73 SS SITRAGION4;ORONAL-CURVATURE- 12.56 13.14 1 2.31 14.21 14.90 14.29 SS 5!TRAGIONMENTON - CURVATURE 11.42 11.86 10.74 13.03 13.86 112.46 70 BITRAGION-
' SU8 MANDIBULAR
-CURVATURE. 10.51 11.18 9.63 12.09 13.23 11.37 71 HEAD LENGTH 7.19 7.32 6.80 8.14 8.27 7J0 72 PRONASALE TO WALL 8.18 8.42 7.88 9.27 9.50 9.15 73 TRAGION TO WALL 3.33 3.62 3.47 4.95 4.77 4.64
.74 HEAD DIAGONAL (MENTONCCCIPUT) 9.60 10.59 75 HEAD BREADTH 5.59 . 5.67 - 5.33 6.40 6.50- 8.12 78 SITRAGION BREASTH 4 92 5.17 4.76 5.71 5.98 5.45 77 SIAURICULAR BREADTH 6.50- 639 5.61 7.64 .7.95 6.84 78 HEAD HEIGHT (TRAG. TOP OF HEAD)E 4.69 4.74 4.55 5.72 5.69 5.62 79 GLARELLA TO TOP-OF HEAD .
2.56- 2.81 2.79 3.70 4.30 3.88 80 PRONASALE TO TOP -> OF HEAD 4.57 . 5.12 4.70 5.94 644 6.61 31 FACE LENGTH -
- (MENTON 4ELLION) 4,17 e.04 3.79 5.17 5.13 4.63 82 FACE (BIZYGOMATIC)
BREADTH - 5.04 4.87. .4.39 5.88 5.94 5.53 83 BIOCULAR BREADTH = 3.66 3.31- 3.47 4.29 3.99 4.14 34 INTERPUPILLARY BREADTH 2.01 2.10 2.00 2.67 2.75 -2.57 85 INTEROCULAR BREAD 7H 1.08 1.0S 1.50 1.45 86 LIP TO L;P LENGTH 0.41 0.92 87 LIP L5NG1H (MOUTH BREADTH) 1.76 1.46 2.30 2.01 ~ -t 88 - EAR LENGTH ' 2.17 2.31 1.77 2.72' 2.88 2.34 30 EAR LENGTH ABOVE-
- TRAGION . 0.97 1.36 90 EAM SREADTH - 1.50- 1.19 0.95 1.97 1.70 1.38 91 EAR PROTRUSION 0.65- 1.09 1
? 142 t g
t MIL-STD-14720 more detailed anthropometric data; definit'"9 or more specific data should be _ obtained from the service agency responsible for anthropometry. 5.6.3 Use of data. 5.6.3.1 Data limitations. Because the antk oometric_ data pro ented here
' represent nude body measurements, suitable allownces shall be made for light or heavy clothing, flying suits, helmets, boots, body armor, load-carrying equipment, protective equipment, and other worn or carried items, when utiliziag these data for design criteria.
5.6.3,2 Clearance dimensions. Clearance dimensions (e.g., for passageways and accesses), which nust accommodate or allow passage of the body or parts of the body, shall be based upon the 95th percentile values for applicable body dimensions. 5.6.3.3_ Li_miting dimensions. Limiting dimensions -(reaching distance, control movement, displays, test points, handrails, etc.) which restrict or are limited by extensions of the body shall be based upon the 5th percentile values for. applicable body dimensions.
-5.6.3.4 Adjustable dimensions. Seats, restraint systems, safety harnesses,
~
belts, controls or any equipment that r.ust be adjusted for the comfort or performance of the individual user shall be adjustable over the range of the 5th to 95th percentile values for the applicable body member (s). 5.6.3.5 Clothing and personal eaufpment. Clothing and personal equipment (including protective or specialized equipment worn or carried by the individual) shall be designed and sized to accommodate at least the 5th through the 95th percentile values of body dimensions. Pertinent dimensions of essential or critical equipment (e.g., aviators' helmets) shall be based . on the_ lst and 99th percentile values. Where two or more dimensions are used simultaneously as design parameters, appropriate multivariate data and techniques shall be utilized. (See appendix for representative references,.) 5.6.4 Special populations. Where equipment will be used, inclusively or exclusively, by selected or specialized segments of the military population (e.g., Army tank crews, Navy divers, etc.) er population ranges other than the 5 .95th percentiles (e.g., disproportionate anthropometric accommodation test cases), appropriate available anthropometric data on these specialized populations, contained in 000-HOBK-743, shall be utilized for design and sizing criteria. ' Where equipment is intended for use by foreign military personnel, appropriate anthropometric data on such populations shall be utilized for design and sizing criteria. (See appendix _for representative references.) ( 143
MIL STD-14720 TABLE XIX. ANTHROPOMETRIC DATA FOR COMMON WORKING POSITIONS PERCENTILE VALUES IN CENTIMETERS Sth PERCENTILE 95th PEROENTILE MEN WOMEN MEN WOMEN 58.6 48.8 90.2 74.6
- 1. WEIGHT - CLOTHED (KILOGRAM $l 168.5 156.8 189.0 178.7
- 2. STATURE -CLOTHED 72.6 64.0 86.4 79.0
- 3. FUNCTIONAL REACH
- 4. FUNCTIONAL REACH, EXTENDED 84.2 73.5 101.2 92.7 200.4 185.3 230.5 215.1 I
- 5. OVERHEAD REACH HEIGHT
- 6. OVERHEAD REACH BREADTH 35.2 31.5 41.9 37.9 125.6 112.7 149.8 138.6
- 7. BENT TORSO HEIGHT
- 8. BENT TORSO BREADTH 40.9 38.8 48.3 43.5
- 9. OVERHEAD REACH, SITTING 127.9 117.4 146.9 139.4
- 10. FUNCTIONAL LEG LENGTH 110.6 99.6 127.7 118.6
- 11. KNEELING HEIGHT 121.9 114.5 136.9 1 30.3
- 12. KNEELING LEG LENGTH 63.9 59.2 75.5 70.5
- 13. BENT KNEE HEIGHT, SUPINE 44.7 41.3 53.5 49.6 150,8 140.3 173.0 163.8
- 14. HORIZONTAL LENGTH. KNEES BENT PERCENTILE VALUES IN INCHES 129.1 107.6 196.8 164.5
- 1. WElGHT - CLOTHED (POUNDS) 66.4 61.8 74.4 70.3
- 2. STATURE -CLOTHED 28.6 25.2 34.0 31.1
- 3. FUNCTIONAL REACH
- 4. FUNCTIONAL REACH, EXTENDED 33.2 28.9 39.8 36.5 78.9 73.0 90.8 84.7
- 5. OVERHEAD REACH HEIGHT 13.9 12.4 16.5 14.9
- 6. OVERHEAD REACH BREADTH 49.4 44.4 59.0 54.6
- 7. BENT TORSO HEIGHT 16.1 14.5 19.0 17.1
- 8. BENT TORSO BREADTH
- 9. OVERHEAD REACH,$1TTING 50.3 46.2 57.9 54.9 43.5 39.2 50.3 46.7
,- 10. FUNCTlONAL LEG LENGTH 48.0 45.1 53.9 51.3
- 11. KNEELING HEIGHT 25.2 23.3 29.7 27.8
- 12. KNEELING LEG LENGTH 17.6 16.3 21.1 19.5
- 13. BENT KNEE HEIGHT. SUP1NE
- 14. HORIZONTAL LENGTH, KNEES BENT 59.4 55.2 68.1 64.5
*See Figure 28 for illustration of each meseenwnt.
1 i l i i e 148 l l ?
~A MIL-ST D-14720 -
l 1 O U .Y n ;c ,: c a h WEIGHT (CLOTHED) @ STATURE STANDING (CLOTHED) ERECT; HEELS WEARING F ATIGUES & COMBAT 800TS; STANDING TOGETHE R; WElGHT DIS-IN CENTER OF SCALE - TRIBUTED EOUALLY ON SOTH FEET. MEASURED FROM STANDING SURFACE TO TOP OF HEAD. (/ N . I g/ " I
~~
L 'I [f e FUNCTION AL RE ACH, EXTENDED-h FUNCTIONAL REACH - STANDING ERECT; LOOKING STRAIGHT h STANDING ERECT; LOOKING STRAIGHT AHEAD;BOTH SHOULDERS AGAINST AHEAD; RIGHT SHOULDER EXTENDED ; WALL; RIGHT ARM HORIZONTAL. AS FAR FORWARD AS POSSISLE WHILE - MEASURED FROM WALL TO TIP OF BACK OF LEFT SHOULDER FORMLY AGAINST WALL; ARM HORIZONTAL. INDEX FINGER-ME ASURED FROM WALL TO TIP OF INDEX FINGER. FIGURE 29. ANTHROPOMETRIC OATA FOR WORKSPACES
-(.
149
. _ , -y_
MIL-ST0-14720 ( v
/
l s , [
' > i
& ^
ktp< ;- A 1 i , I h OVERHEAD REACH HEIOHT - h OVERHEAD RE ACH BREADTH - STANDING WITH HEELS 23 em STANDING WITH HEELS 73 cm APART ' AND TOES 15 cm F ROM WALL; ARMS AFART AND TOES 18 em FROM WALL; ARMS EXTENDED OVER- EX TENDED OVERl4EAD WITH FISTS TOUCHING AND AGAINSTWALL; tot HEAD WITH FISTS TDUCHING PHALANGES HORIZONTAL, MEASURED AND AGAINST WALL;1st PHALANGES HORIZONTAL. HORIZONTALLY ACROSS ARMS OR MEASURED FROM FLOOR TO- SHOULDERS.WHICHEVER is WIDER.
- HIGHEST POINT ON 1st PHALANGES
~
7 >
. )
/.</ V, , /,
A el
' l l s /
tk , . ,\ j y pf 4 h SENT TORSO BREADTH - STANDING WITH FEET 30 cm APART: h . BENT TORSO HEIG T - STANDING With FEET 30 cm APART; . BENDING OVER AND PLACING THE PALMS OF THE HANDS OH KNEECAPS; E L90WS BENDING OVER AND PLACING PALMS OF THE MANDS ON KNEECAPS; ELBOWS AND AND KNEES LOCKED: LOOKING FORWARD; KNEES LOCKED; LOOKING FORWARDi HEAD TILTED AS FA81 SACK AS POSSISLE. HEAD TILTED AS FAR BACK AS POSSIBLE. MEASURED AS MAXIMUM HORIZONTAL MEASURED FROM FLOOR TO TOP OF HEAD. DISTANCE ACROSS SHOULDERS. FIGURE 29. ANTHROPOMETRIC DATA FOR WORKSPACES (CONTINUED)- 150
._ ... , . . . . - . . - - .-- - - ~ . . . . . . . - - . --
' MIL-ST0-14720
'(,
" l
') .
V A ( s . y, g[
- -Y h OVERHEAD REACH, SITTING - . h FUNCTIONAL LEG LENGTH SITTING ERECT; RIGHT SIDE AGAINST SITTING ERECT ON EDGE OF CHAIR;-
WALL; RIGHT ARM EXTENDED UPWARD RIGHT LEG EXTENDED FORWARD WITH pat.M FLAT AGAINST WALL AND WITH KNEE STRAIGHTENED. FINGERS EXTENDED.' MEASURED FROM MEASURED FROM HEEL ALONG
- SITTING SURFACE TO TIF OF MIDOLE Axil OF LEO TO POST 2RIOR
~ TiNGER.- - WAIST, .
i' V { r 7
'# k f .,l h '
)?
,f -h ,
If \f f .
.h .)-
.} .
I l)
/
h; KNEEUNG HEIGHT--: h KNEELING LEG LENGTH - KNEELING WITHTOES EXTENDED AND. KNEELING WITH TOES EXTENDED . Lif,HTLY TOUCHiNu REAR WALL: TORSO - AND LIGHTLY TOUCHING REAR
' ERECT WITH ARMS HANGING LOOSELY - WALL; TORSO ERECT WITH ARMS
'AT SIDES. MEASURED FROM FLOOR TO - . HANGING LOOSELY AT SIDES.
TOP OF HEAO. MEASURED FROM WALL TO
. ANTERIOR PORTION OF DOTH KNEES.
- FIGURE --29. ANTHROPOMETRIC DATA FOR WORKSPACES (CONTINUED)
.- (
151 l
MIL-STD-14720
*I
.,.N-
,'. o (
h BENT KNEE HEIGHT,St#1NE - LYING $UPINE; KNEES RAISED UNTIL ANGLE BEYWEEN UPPER AND LOWER LEGS APPROX-IMATES 90*; TOES LIGHTLY TOUCHING WALL. MELSURED FROM FLOOM TO HIGNEST POINT ON KNEE 3.
./ "A g, - -
HORIZONTAL LENGTH. KNEES BENT -
~ h' LYING SUPINE: KNEES RAISED UNTIL ANGLE BETWEEN UPPER AND LOWER LEGS APPROXIMATES 80*; TOES LIGHTLY TOUCHING WALL. ME ASURED FROM WALL TO TOP OF HEAD.
FIGURE 29.-ANTHROPOMETRIC DATA FOR WORKSPACES (CONCLUDED) 152 v ,}}