[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Designing human–system cooperation in industry 4.0 with cognitive work analysis: a first evaluation

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Cognition, Technology & Work Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

One objective of Industry 4.0 is to reach a better system performance as well as to have a better consideration of humans. This would be done by benefiting from knowledge and experience of humans, and balancing in a reactive way some complex or complicated tasks with intelligent systems. Several studies already dealt with such an objective, but few are done at a methodological level, which forbids, for example, the correct evaluation of design choices in terms of human awareness of the situation or mental workload when designing intelligent manufacturing systems integrating the human. Indeed, increasing the intelligence and autonomy of industrial systems and their composing entities (resources, products, robots…), as fostered by Industry 4.0, increases their overall complexity. This modification reduces the ability to understand the behaviors of these systems, and leads to the difficulty for humans not only to elaborate alternative decisions when required, but also to make effective decisions and understand their consequences. This paper evaluates such a design methodology, the Cognitive Work Analysis (CWA), and its applicability when designing an assistance system to support Human in the control of Intelligent Manufacturing System in Industry 4.0. Among several functions identified through the application of CWA, the assistant system might have to integrate a digital twin of the intelligent manufacturing system. The evaluation of the methodology through the one of the designed assistant systems is done using a micro-world, which is an intelligent manufacturing cell composed of intelligent mobile ground robots, products, and static production robots interacting together and with a human supervisor in charge of the reaching of several time-based and energy-based performances indicators. The assistant system embeds a digital twin of the intelligent manufacturing system. Twenty-three participants took part in experiments to evaluate the designed assistance system. First results show that the assistance system enables participants to have a correct awareness of the situation and a correct evaluation of their alternative decisions, while their mental workload is managed and expected production performances are reached. This paper contains an analysis of these experiments and points out some limits of the CWA method in the context of Industry 4.0, especially the lack of tool enabling to specify clearly the cooperation processes between the supervisor and the intelligent manufacturing system. This paper concludes with potential research avenues, the main one being the potential benefits of coupling CWA with human–machine cooperation principles to fine tune and adapt the cooperation between the human and the intelligent manufacturing system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
£29.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  • Arias NB, Hashemi S, Andersen PB, Træholt C, Romero R (2018) V2G enabled EVs providing frequency containment reserves: field results. 2017 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology (ICIT).https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIT.2018.8352459

  • Baxter G, Sommerville I (2010) Socio-technical systems: from design methods to systems engineering. Interact Comput 23(1):4–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger T, Deneux D, Bonte T, Cocquebert E, Trentesaux D (2015) Arezzo-flexible manufacturing system: a generic flexible manufacturing system shop floor emulator approach for high-level control virtual commissioning. Concurrent Eng 23(4):333–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burns CM, Hajdukiewicz J (2004) Ecological interface design. CRC Press, London, pp 1–307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Challenger R, Clegg CW, Shepherd C (2013) Function allocation in complex systems: reframing an old problem. Ergonomics 56(7):1051–1069

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chipman SF, Schraagen JM, Shalin VL (2000) Introduction to cognitive task analysis. In: Schraagen JM, Chipman SF, Shalin VL (eds) Cognitive task analysis. Mahwah, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Dencker K, Fasth Å, Stahre J, Mårtensson L, Lundholm T, Akillioglu H (2009) Proactive assembly systems-realising the potential of human collaboration with automation. Ann Rev Control 33(2):230–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Endsley MR, Kiris EO (1995) The out-of-the-loop performance problem and level of control in automation. Hum Factors 37(2):381–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fantini P, Pinzone M, Taisch M (2018) Placing the operator at the centre of industry 4.0 design: modelling and assessing human activities within cyber-physical systems. Comput Ind Eng 139:105058

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flemisch F, Abbink DA, Itoh M, Pacaux-Lemoine MP, Weßel G (2019) Joining the blunt and the pointy end of the spear: towards a common framework of joint action, human-machine cooperation, cooperative guidance and control, shared, traded and supervisory control. Cogn Technol Work 21(4):555–568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flemisch F, Heesen M, Hesse T, Kelsch J, Schieben A, Beller J (2012) Towards a dynamic balance between humans and automation: authority, ability, responsibility and control in shared and cooperative control situations. Cogn Technol Work 14(1):3–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frohm J, Lindström V, Stahre J, Winroth M (2008) Levels of automation in manufacturing. Ergonomia Int J Ergonom Human Factors 30(3):1–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Gely C, Trentesaux D, Le Mortellec A (2020) Maintenance of the autonomous train: a human-machine cooperation framework. Springer, Cham, pp 135–148

    Google Scholar 

  • Goom MK (1996) Function allocation and MANPRINT. In: Beevis D, Essens P, Schuffel H (eds) Improving function allocation for integrated systems design. Technical Report CSERIAC SOAR 96-01. Crew Systems Ergonomics Information Analysis Centre, Wright-Patterson Airforce Base, OH, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorecky D, Schmitt M, Loskyll M, Zühlke D (2014) Human-machine-interaction in the industry 4.0 era. 12th IEEE International Conference on Industrial Informatics (INDIN) 289–294.

  • Grosse EH, Glock CH, Patrick Neumann W (2017) Human factors in order picking: a content analysis of the literature. Int J Prod Res 55(5):1260–1276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch-Kreinsen H (2014) Wandel von Produktionsarbeit – „Industrie 4.0. Vol. 38. Technische Universität Dortmund: Dortmund: Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät.

  • Hoc J-M, Lemoine M-P (1998) Cognitive evaluation of human-human and human-machine cooperation modes in air traffic control. Int J Aviat Psychol 8(1):1–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollnagel E, Woods DD (2005) Joint Cognitive Systems: foundations of cognitive systems engineering. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hozdić E (2015) Smart factory for industry 4.0: a review. Int J Modern Manufact Technol 2(1):2067–3604

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins DP, Stanton NA, Walker GH, Salmon PM, Young MS (2008) Applying cognitive work analysis to the design of rapidly reconfigurable interfaces in complex networks. Theor Issues Ergonom Sci 9(4):273–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones AT, Romero D, Wuest T (2018) Modeling agents as joint cognitive systems in smart manufacturing systems. Manufact Lett 17:6–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindström V, Winroth M (2010) Aligning manufacturing strategy and levels of automation: a case study. J Eng Technol Manage 27(3–4):148–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longo F, Nicoletti L, Padovano A (2017) Computers & industrial engineering smart operators in industry 4. 0: a human-centered approach to enhance operators ’ capabilities and competencies within the new smart factory context. Comput Ind Eng 113:144–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MoD (1989) Defence standard 00–25. Human factors for designers of equipment 12(1).

  • Naikar N, Moylan A, Pearce B (2006) Analysing activity in complex systems with cognitive work analysis: concepts, guidelines and case study for control task analysis. Theor Issues Ergonom Sci 7(4):371–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norman DA, Draper SW (1986) User centered design. In: D.A. Norman and S.W. Draper (eds) Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Oborski P (2004) Man-machine interactions in advanced manufacturing systems. Int J Adv Manufact Technol 23(3–4):227–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pacaux-Lemoine MP, Trentesaux D (2019) Ethical risks of human-machine symbiosis in industry 4.0: insights from the human-machine cooperation approach. IFAC PapersOnLine 52(19):19–24

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Pacaux-Lemoine, Marie-Pierre and Serge Debernard. 2007. “Common Work Space or How to Support Cooperative Activities Between Human Operators: Application to Fighter Aircraft.” Pp. 796–805 in Engineering Psychology and Cognitive Ergonomics. Vol. 4562, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, edited by D. Harris. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg.

  • Pacaux-Lemoine, Marie-Pierre, Philippe Simon, and Jean-christophe Popieul (2015) Human-Machine Cooperation Principles to Support Driving Automation Systems Design. In 3rd International Symposium on Future Active Safety Technology Toward zero traffic accidents (FAST-zero’15). Gothenburg, Sweden.

  • Pacaux-Lemoine MP, Flemisch F (2018) Layers of shared and cooperative control, assistance and automation. Cogn Technol Work 49(19):159–164

    Google Scholar 

  • Pacaux-Lemoine MP, Trentesaux D, Rey GZ, Millot P (2017) Designing intelligent manufacturing systems through human-machine cooperation principles: a human-centered approach. Comput Ind Eng 111:581–595

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pach C, Berger T, Sallez Y, Bonte T, Adam E, Trentesaux D (2014) Reactive and energy-aware scheduling of flexible manufacturing systems using potential fields. Comput Ind 65(3):434–448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papantonopoulos S (2004) System design in normative and actual practice: a comparative study of cognitive task allocation in advanced manufacturing systems. Human Factors Ergonom Manufact 14(2):181–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papcun P, Kajáti E, Koziorek J (2018) Human machine interface in concept of industry 4.0. World Symp Digital Intell Syst Mach 2018:289–296

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen J, Pejtersen AM, Goodstein LP (1994) Cognitive systems engineering. Wiley, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen J (1986) Information processing and human-machine interaction: an approach to cognitive engineering. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen J (1997) Risk management in a dynamic society: a modelling problem. Saf Sci 27(2):183–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen J, Vicente KIMJ (1989) Coping with human errors through system design: implications for ecological interface design. Int J Man-Mach Stud 31:517–534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rauffet, Philippe, Christine Chauvin, Gael Morel, and Pascal Berruet. 2015. “Designing Sociotechnical Systems: A CWA-Based Method for Dynamic Function Allocation.” ECCE 2015 – European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics 21.

  • Romero D, Stahre J, Taisch M (2020) The operator 4.0: towards socially sustainable factories of the future. Comput Ind Eng 139(2–5)

  • Romero, David, Peter Bernus, Ovidiu Noran, Johan Stahre, and Åsa Fast-Berglund. 2016. “The Operator 4.0: Human Cyber-Physical Systems & Adaptive Automation Towards Human-Automation Symbiosis Work Systems.” Pp. 677–86 in Advances in Production Management Systems. Initiatives for a Sustainable World: IFIP WG 5.7 International Conference, APMS 2016, Iguassu Falls, Brazil, September 3–7, 2016, Revised Selected Papers, edited by I. Nääs, O. Vendrametto, J. Mendes Reis, R. F. Gonçalves, M. T. Silva, G. von Cieminski, and D. Kiritsis. Cham: Springer International Publishing.

  • Romero, David, Thorsten Wuest, Johan Stahre, and Dominic Goreky. 2017. “Social Factory Architecture : Social Networking Services and Production Scenarios Through the Social Internet of Things , Services and ... Social Factory Architecture : Social Networking Services.” (September).

  • Rüßmann M, Lorenz M, Gerbert P, Waldner M, Justus J, Engel P, Harnisch M (2015) Industry 4.0: the future of productivity and growth in manufacturing industries. Boston Consulting Group.

  • Säfsten K, Winroth M, Stahre J (2007) The content and process of automation strategies. Int J Prod Econ 110(1–2):25–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt K (2002) The problem with ‘awareness.’ Comput Supp Cooper Work 11:285–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanton NA, Salmon PM, Walker GH, Jenkins DP (2017) Cognitive work analysis: applications, extensions and future. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Vicente KJ (1999) Cognitive work analysis: toward safe, productive, and healthy computer-based work. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Walker GH, Stanton NA, Salmon PM, Jenkins DP (2014) Human performance under two different command and control paradigms. App Ergon 45(3):706–713

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang S, Wan J, Zhang C (2016) Implementing smart factory of industrie 4.0: an outlook. Int J Distrib Sens Netw 4:1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittenberg C (2016) Human-CPS interaction—requirements and human-machine interaction methods for the industry 4.0. IFAC-PapersOnLine 49(19):420–425

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research presented in this paper is carried out in the context of the HUMANISM N° ANR-17-CE10-0009 research program, funded by the ANR ‘‘Agence Nationale de la Recherche”. The authors gratefully acknowledge these institutions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. LAMIH CNRS UMR 8201, UPHF, 59313, Valenciennes, France

    Marie-Pierre Pacaux-Lemoine, Quentin Berdal & Damien Trentesaux

  2. Lab-STICC - CNRS UMR 6285, University of South Brittany, 56100, Lorient, France

    Clément Guérin, Philippe Rauffet & Christine Chauvin

Authors
  1. Marie-Pierre Pacaux-Lemoine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Quentin Berdal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Clément Guérin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Philippe Rauffet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Christine Chauvin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Damien Trentesaux
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marie-Pierre Pacaux-Lemoine.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pacaux-Lemoine, MP., Berdal, Q., Guérin, C. et al. Designing human–system cooperation in industry 4.0 with cognitive work analysis: a first evaluation. Cogn Tech Work 24, 93–111 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-021-00667-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-021-00667-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation