Wearable Control Room: A Prototype for Experimental Testing of New Concepts in Plant Operation

ELSEVIER

('oryflght (EJIFAC Automateu Systems Baseu on Human Skill and Knowledge. Gbteborg. Sweden. 2003

IFAC PUBLICATIONS www.elsevier.comllocalelifac

WEARABLE CONTROL ROOM: A PROTOTYPE FOR EXPERIMENTAL TESTING OF NEW CONCEPTS IN PLANT OPERATION

Magnus Reigstad

I,

Asgeir Dreivoldsmo 2 and Ole Morten Strand 3

1 Norwegian University ofScience and Technology (NTNU), Department ofEngineering Cybernetics, 7491 Trondheim, Norway: http://[email protected]. +4799155191 21nstitutefor Energy Technology, 175/ Halden,Norway: http://www·[email protected] 3 Norwegian University ofScience and Technology (NTNU), Department oftelecommunications, 7491 Trondheim, Norway

Abstract: This paper is presenting a wearable control room prototype developed for testing technology, usability, wearability and applicability of wearable computers in process environments. Problem areas related to introduction of wearable equipment in the process industry are discussed. Copyright © 2003 IFAC Keywords: Computer aided work, Process control, Man/machine interaction, User interfaces, Co-operation, Communication systems, Information systems.

for flexible information presentation and operation will arise. One solution to this challenge is to give the PFP access to a control room that can be carried with them. By using a wearable control room, PFP can get the opportunity to monitor and control central parts of a plant from any physical location. Furthermore, enhanced information and communication access can also be provided.

I. INTRODUCTION A project on wearable information and communication systems has since 1999 developed methods, system architectures and technologies for using wearable computers in the process industry. The project started out with a vision for Plant floor Personnel (PFP). This was a vision for a wearable computer that enables PFP to undertake all functions of today's central control room, while working on the plant floor. In other words, a vision for a wearable control room (WCR).

The content of this paper is twofold. The first part is presenting a WCR prototype and some demonstration applications. The second part are looking at some of the problem areas identified when using and testing the WCR, particularly questions concerning factors pertaining to WCR interaction and control.

A requirement for running a process plant with more automation and less staff is that the same level of control is maintained. With this challenge, PFP still out in the plant will have to be more independent with regard to the control room. The PFP need a certain amount of information and control during their daily work. Since PFP today work in close co-operation with the control room, the need for a support system

2. WCR PROTOTYPE An early prototype is developed in the WCR project (Figure I). This prototype has several purposes:

159

Concept demonstrator: The prototype has been used to demonstrate the possibilities for the use of wearable computer technology in industrial and military applications. The system has been demonstrated to most of the major oil companies operating in the North Sea, large inspection companies and the Norwegian military. Technological test bed: The technology developed throughout the project has been implemented as modules in the WCR and new modules are being developed. Usability and wearability test bed: Several interaction modalities (Skourup and Reigstad, 2002), hardware and software components have been tested to find effects on usability. Weight distribution, equipment type and placement on the user are also being considered in a usability and wearability context. Applicability test bed: Some demonstration applications (WCR tools) are developed and will be tested in order to explore application areas in which the WCR can be utilised.

HUMAN

I

1L.. __'NTE __ RF_A_CE _ _1 I SYSTEM

I

Fig. 2. Overview of the input and output modalities used for interaction with the WCR.

The WCR test bed development is now in an analysis phase. The hardware and software that will serve as the base for further development and testing of the WCR are presented in the following sections.

The head and hand orientation of WCR users can be used as a pointing and scrolling device. Head orientation is also used to control a spatial display (for P&ID and large drawings), and virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) presentation of infonnation. Body position tracking is used for automatic filtering of infonnation that is relevant to the current position of the user, and to navigate in VR and AR information. A wearable eye tracking system is under development. This eye tracker is now being tested as a pointing device, as a supplement to head tracking, and for registration of what visual infonnation the user is looking at. The eye tracker may also be used to make speech recognition more robust, by taking advantage of the redundancy between the operator's speech commands and simultaneous gaze at objects presented on the headmounted display. A tag scanner is connected to the WCR prototype for identification and selection of process equipment. The WCR can also get input through other sensors (middle of figure 2) that are sensing the user or the plant environment. The following sensors are included: Video, audio, temperature and gas sensors. As shown at the bottom of Figure 2 the WCR can present infonnation to the user through the haptic, visual or auditory senses.

Fig. 1. Front and back of the first WCR prototype. Vital parts of the WCR is today integrated with the PFPs protective equipment.

2.1 WCR hardware and interaction systems

The basic WCR system consists of a helmet and a backpack. On the helmet there is mounted a display, video camera, microphone and inertial source-less head tracker. In the backpack there is a 3D-enabled computer, batteries, position and (,;ientation trackers. Several input and output modalities are available as optional modules. The WCR can be operated through one or all of the modalities presented on the top left side of Figure 2.

2.2 WCR demonstration applications

Current and future issues in field operation have been identified based on input from experienced nuclear and oilrig workers and experimental testing. Table 1 presents a set of modules that may solve some of the issues that was identified.

160

Table I Overview ofWCR software modules that can support PFP tasks. One WCR tool or application can be composed of several of the software modules presented in the table

procedures. The process control and alarm information can also be integrated in the work order system in addition to the work procedures. Route guidance system: Even experienced PFP do not know every functional location in the plant. There is also an increase in outsourcing of maintenance; hence there is an increase in personnel on the plant floor that need help and guidance in identification tasks. Component location and route guidance is done by the AR-route guidance system (as shown in figure 3). Relevant routes in a process installation are plotted into a VR model of the plant using a route editor. In emergency scenarios, support for optimal choice of routes in the guidance system can be provided extemaIly from e.g., operations or emergency centres.

Software modules Supervision and control of plant equipment Communication support with use of audio, video messaging CoIlaboration supported by a flexible shared information space Task guidance with focus on Identification tasks, Guiding to location, Safety guidance and Work task guiding

P\zll f1oo~ persocnd with WCR - - - ?

Information management providing access to information storage, update, retrieval and viewing

These modules can, in combination with the interaction modalities presented in Figure 2, be seen as a digital toolbox supporting tasks done by PFP or other local personnel on the plant floor. Fig. 3. The route guidance system on the WCR draws a route in the users field of view

A number of tasks are currently supported by the wearable computer and communication platform (as described in Reigstad & Dreivoldsmo, 2003). The project has until now focused on five of the WCR 1: Communication and modules in Table collaboration, supervision and control, guidance to location, guidance to work and information viewing.

3. WCR PROBLEM DEFINITIONS Regardless of the on-going technological revolution, limitations of the human remain the same. With this in mind, how can the WCR be effective in use? Is the WCR technology mature enough to be utilised and tested in any form today, and if so, where and how? Where should research and development efforts be focused? The following sections discuss three interlinked problem areas related to these questions.

Some examples of demonstration applications that are under development for use with the WCR are listed below: Process control and monitoring system: The WCR has a dynamic graphical process interface for surveillance and operation of a process plant system built in the Picasso 3 software tool. (Jokstad and Sundling, 2003). The system has a hierarchical structure of process control formats, developed for connection with a full scope simulator of the Oseberg oil field in the orth-Sea. Alarms from the Oseberg plant simulator are handled by the Computerised Alarm Systems Toolbox, COAST, which offers improved flexibility in configuring plant-specific alarm systems (Farbrot and ystad, 2002). Alarms can be presented as a function of the PFP physical location in the plant or as more traditional prioritised alarm lists. In addition to presentation of position based alarms in list view, the WCR uses augmented reality to present alarms. This function makes the impression of alarms status as additional virtual objects appropriately aligned with the process equipment. Work guidance: Administration of work orders is one of the main PFP tasks in some plants. A demo of an electronic work order system has been implemented. Each of the work orders can have several work

3.1 WCR interaction Plant floor environments, equipment and work put restrictions on WCR interaction. PFP often work in hostile environments, canying equipment, tools and protective clothing. Since PFP primary focus is manual maintenance and operation, interaction with the WCR may be a secondary task. Therefore, the vision of the WCR is completely hands free interaction. Interaction with a WCR is defined as both operation (top of Figure 2) and presentation of information (bottom of Figure 2). There are a number of contextual factors that might influence the PFP interaction with the WCR tools.

161

3.2 WCR task support

The WCR modules presented in Table 1 can be divided into two categories; Program modules that are designed to support PFP in tasks they traditionally are performing (Plant floor tasks in Figure 4, e.g. work procedures and identifying equipment) and program modules that are introducing new tasks for PFP to perform in addition to the tasks today (WCR tasks in Figure 4, e.g. process control).

.

WCR modules supporting the traditional PFP tasks can support the user in a way that decrease the workload and increase the efficiency and safety of these tasks. However, WCR modules supporting new PFP tasks could put more tasks on each operator and consequently increase the workload. In return these new tasks may give the PFP better overview of the total situation, and better control with their own work process. The ability to maintain the overview of the plant may also be reduced with poor design and wrong use of the WCR. This is because the user has to direct some attention away from the plant floor environment in order to operate the WCR and to receive the information presented. Consequentially the introduction of the WCR itself can, regardless of what it is supporting, change the user's attention of the plant environment. However, wearable sensors connected to the WCR may help the user in sensing the environment and thus compensate for some of the lost awareness. Nevertheless there is a danger of information overload and a danger of increased workload and decreased awareness with introduction of the WCR.

PositYe or 1l89BWe eItecl on user andIor plant

~ Fig. 4. Interaction factors model. Factors that is present in a process environment is shown in the figure. Changes in these characteristics will change the premise for interaction with the WCR.

Figure 4 shows an interaction factors model that can provide a framework for discussing WCR development prior to the implementation. The figure is showing one static situation. If one of the factors is changed it will induce changes to the other factors and the interaction with the WCR. This model may guide structured reasoning about problems and possible solutions regarding use of WCR in specific plants, supporting specific tasks. The factors can at design time be classified according to the degree with which they are considered as design objects or must be taken as is. This viewpoint may be helpful in determining the limits of the design space of the interaction.

To investigate the immediate effect of the factors on the interaction (presented in figure 4) it is necessary to test the WCR in the field. The strategy for testing interaction is to run these tests in parallel with the prototype application development. The maturity of the technology used in the tests is however important for the validity of such tests.

Two of the factors in figure 4, equipment on plant floor and equipment on the user, have been the main design objects in the project so far, and have been adapted to the user, the plant floor environment, the plant floor tasks and the WCR tasks in order to obtain an interaction of acceptable usability. However, in most cases it is necessary to also alter the other factors to facilitate use of the WCR. These changes should be done at an early stage in the planning of the new systems and before implementing the WCR in the organisation. If the factors in the system are not adapted in a satisfYing way it may give the user increased workload, reduced overview of the situation in the process plant. This may also give a WCR with poor usability and/or wearability. To compensate the user can for examples brake of the plant floor work or change location before interacting with the WCR, which may not be desirable and the efficiency of work will suffer.

3.3 WCR maturity

The technologies used to construct the WCR are, seen in isolation, not mature yet. To get an understanding of the factors that may contribute to the maturity of the WCR the concept of wearability may be helpful. Gemperle et al. (1998) defines wearability as "the interaction between the human body and the wearable object". In our case the object is the "equipment on user" in Figure 4. Furthermore, Gemperle have listed 13 guidelines for wearability. Several of the factors in these guidelines are contributing to the maturity of the WCR technology. From experiments with wearable technology (DT0ivoldsmo et al. 2002) it has been evident that size, weight, heat (energy consumption), and field of view (for augmented reality applications) are examples of factors with insufficient quality from the users point of view. The maturity of wearable technology must also be set in the context of use; how 162

much is the WCR "giving" to the user that cannot be given in any other way. Therefore, the applicability of the WCR is an important factor when considering the maturity of the WCR technology. The maturity of the WCR may be defined as the sum of the three dimensions wearability, usability and applicability; if this sum is acceptable the maturity of the tool will also be acceptable for implementation in a plant organisation. With this definition of maturity it is clear that the maturity of the current WCR is low because of usability and wearability issues. To overcome some of the maturity problems in the experiments with the WCR the tests have to be kept simple. The number of functionalities has to be limited, and it may be necessary to use means to simplify and minimize the interaction with the WCR (e.g. Wizard of Oz simulations, Dahlback et.al (1993). Furthermore the test users have to be motivated to accept a higher weight and size when testing the WCR prototype than they would do in normal working conditions.

These questions should be answered in order to improve our knowledge about the WCR. It has to be investigated whether new designs and work organisation require use of a WCR, and if so, where the WCR is needed.

4. WCR RESEARCH AND DESIGN PHILOSOPHY

Different strategies have been used for getting the most out of end users participation. The WCR has been used as a test bed where radically new designs have been developed up to a working prototype level, and tested under real world conditions (Dreivoldsmo, Johnsen, Louka and Reigstad, 2002). Staffing the projects with representative expertise from all special fields involved has proven to be useful. Engineers, computer-staff, human factors staff, subject matter experts and process operators have been working together in developing the prototype systems. Thereafter the end users have tested the systems in close to real world situations. Dreivoldsmo et al. (2003) describes such a test of wearable equipment where 18 subjects were used for collection of human performance data sufficient for statistical testing of the quality of a radiation visualisation system. A similar procedure will be used in the WCR experiments planned in 2003.

In the current project, detailed knowledge about the current situation and analysis is used to get an overview of all relevant system functions pertaining to the tasks where changes will occur. Development of technology for supporting PFP with wearable control and information systems should be based on the premises, capabilities and needs from the end users of the systems. This requires user participation early in the design phases, accompanied by test and evaluations. However, involving the end users in the design of equipment that will radically change the way they perform their work is a challenging task. While the expertise of the end users is needed to make good systems, it is important to avoid situations where this knowledge obstructs creativeness in the design of new systems.

The problems areas discussed in the previous section have to be considered and planned for in future experimental tests with the WCR. A central question is how these problems can be overcome, avoided or measured in a test situation? Applicability measures of the WCR could be biased when the new technology is introduced as add-on to already established systems and working procedures. Applied in an environment built for traditional operation, the WCR introduction is inducing changes that alter the premises for the surveillance, control and maintenance systems it is designed to improve. The use of this type of new technology should therefore be seen as important parameter that needs to be considered in connection with the philosophy for operation of the whole plant. Successful development and implementation of a WCR will require a different view of the process plant organisation. As a consequence of the introduction of wearable equipment, the traditional relationship between control room and plant floor will change. There will be a need to redesign the structure of information and the information flow and communication between the actors in supervision, control and maintenance of the plants. A central challenge in the planning of future systems will be to identify the advantages of new technology and reallocate new functions to humans and machines. At the early stages of development a number of questions should be asked. WHY change the current situation? WHAT is needed to fill the gaps left open by removing current functions from the system? HOW can the new technology be used for making the system operational in the new situation?

CONCLUSION The WCR prototype presented in this paper is ready to be tested in controlled industry environments. There are still many unanswered questions, and the results from the tests planed in 2003 may be inconclusive regarding WCR applicability due to the evertheless, immaturity of the WCR technology. WCR experiments will provide knowledge about wearable information and communication use and technology that will bring us one step further.

FURTHER WORK An infrastructure is under development for testing the WCR in conjunction with a control centre and a plant environment. This infrastructure is based on the 163

(volume I.) (pp. C3 P9. Halden, Norway: OECD Halden Reactor Project. Internet: http://www.external.hrp.no/picasso/papers/storefje 1I2002.pdf Reigstad, M. and Dmivoldsmo, A. (2003). Wearable control rooms: New technology can change collaboration, communication and information flow in future field operations. In proceedings of the 22nd European Annual Conference on Human Decision Making and Control, Sweden, Linkoping 2-4 June 2003. Skourup, C. and Reigstad, M. (2002) Operators in Process industry: Interacting with Wearable Computers. Cognition, Technology & Work 4: 245-255

concepts of a communication backbone supporting a virtual plant organisation presented in Reigstad and Dmivoldsmo (2003). The scenario for analysis selected for testing is the use of a virtual organisation for supporting distributed collaborative work on normally unmanned process facilities. New functions introduced by the virtual organisation will be described according to what behavioural activities will take place during this specific type of work including functions of the: Plant floor operator with wearable equipment Central control centre Expert support as an integrated part of the virtual organisation In the first tests, scheduled to October 2003, the \'fCR is the gateway to a communication backbone from the plant floor (PFP) and a virtual reality system is the gateway to the backbone from the control centre (Control room personnel and experts). The applicability of WCR and virtual reality in communication and collaboration will be focused in this test. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This work is supported by the Institute for Energy Technology and the Norwegian Research Council as a part of the research projects: I. KIKS, Wearable Information and Communication System. 2. Development of a prototype of an "Experimental Operation Centre" for the petroleum industry.

REFERENCES Dahlbiick, N., A. Jonsson, and L. Ahrenberg. (1993) "Wizard of Oz studies - why and how." Knowledge-Based Systems 6(4): 258-266 Dmivoldsmo, A. (2003). New tools and technology for the study of human performance in simulator experiments. Manuscript submitted for publication. Dmivoldsmo, A., Johnsen, T., Louka, M.N. & Reigstad, M. (2002). Using wearable equipment for an augmented presentation of radiation. In proceedings of the EPRI Wireless Conference, Orlando, Florida 19 - 21 November 2002. Farbrot, J.E. & Nystad, B.H. (2002). Extended summary of Halden Work Report, HWR-689: COAST - current status of the alarm system toolbox. Proceedings of the man-machine systems research sessions at the enlarged Halden programme group meeting, Gol, Norway, 8th to 13 September 2002 (volume I.) (pp. C3 P3. Halden, Norway: OECD Halden Reactor Project. Gemperle, F., Kasabach, c., Stivoric, J., Bauer, M., Martin, R. (1998) Design for wearability. Second International Symposium on Wearable Computers Los Alamitos, CA, USA Jokstad, H. & Sundling, C.V. (2002). Picasso-3 User Interface Management System. Proceedings of the man-machine systems research sessions at the enlarged Halden programme group meeting

164