6-18-2015 PPA Field Evaluations
-
Upload
johanna-oxstrand -
Category
Documents
-
view
156 -
download
0
Transcript of 6-18-2015 PPA Field Evaluations
www.inl.gov
Computer Based Procedures
Insights From Field Evaluations at Nuclear Power Plants
Johanna OxstrandIdaho National Laboratory
Procedure Professionals Association SymposiumSt. Petersburg, FL, June 23-25, 2015.
Computer-Based Procedures (CBPs)Research Objectives• Define design requirements• Streamline and distill information• Use dynamic presentation to:
– Increase efficiency – Improve the ease of use– Reduce opportunities for errors– Incorporate human performance
tools• We do NOT investigate how to
display a document on an electronic device Field Evaluations
Catawba
2014
Palo Verde 2014
Diablo Canyon
2015Vogtle2015
Development and Evaluation of PrototypesPalo
Verde 2012
Catawba 2012
INL2013
Palo Verde 2014
Qualitative Study (2012)Model of
Procedure UsageIdentification of Requirements
Why is research on CBPs needed?• Standardized design guidance
for CBP enables– Taking multiple sources of disparate
information and present it in a succinct and easily comprehensive manner
– Human error reduction and increased efficiency
– Maintaining field workers’ focus on task at hand
• Advanced technology provides the opportunity for– Automatic job aids (e.g.,
calculations) and place-keeping – Digital correct component verification– On demand just-in-time training and
info (e.g., photos, videos)– Real time plant configuration and
control status
Design Concepts• Dynamic Context Sensitivity• Simplified Step Logic
• Digital Correct Component Verification• Automatic Place-Keeping
Examples
Field Evaluations• Objectives:
– Verify that the prototype system can be used in the real world with a real work package.
– Evaluating new design concepts and functionality.
– Identify the barriers and challenges.– Evaluate usability of the system
based on real-world experience. • Method:
– Plant work package is loaded in the prototype system.
– The system is used to conduct tasks in the plant.
– Data collection.
Field evaluations vs Laboratory studies • Real world conditions• More complex tasks• Longer duration• More dependent on
field workers’ feedback
Field Evaluation Activities• Conducted
– Catawba• April – May, 2014.
– Palo Verde• September 2014 – February, 2015
• Ongoing – Diablo Canyon
• April, 2015– Vogtle 1 or 2
• June, 2015
• Future studies– Would you like to host a
study?
Duke Energy’s Catawba Nuclear Station• Functional test of back-
up air compressor–Weekly test of one of
three compressors• CBP functionality– Context sensitivity– Continuous actions–Multiple branching– Additional info in steps– Digital CCV– Nexus 4
Results from Catawba • Conditional logic increased
efficiency and simplified task flow– Streamlined sequence of
complex steps– Fast transfer between
procedure sections• Most appreciated
functionality:– Photos of components– Documents are easily
accessible– Automatic placekeeping– Digital CCV
Feedback
“I wish I had this when I was new! Instead I spent a lot of time trying to locate components in the plant.”
“This would be very useful during outage or anytime you’re schedule to do a job you only do once in a while.”
APS’ Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station• HVAC preventive
maintenance –Weekly readings on all
three units’ HVAC system
• CBP functionality– Previous logs– Validate input (in range)– Trending–Multiple users –Multiple days– Nexus 7
Results from Palo Verde• Autonomy in task flow
is hard to predict and design– Computerized support
and guidance?– “Skill of the Craft”?
• Low response and load times are essential for success
Table vs. CBWO
Table vs. CBWO
Table vs. CBWO
PG&E: Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP)• Initial plant visit: February, 2015• Launch of study: April, 2015
Field evaluation study (using two separate tasks):• Swapping Auxiliary Salt Water Pumps
– Shared between control room operator and operators in the field
• Swapping Ventilation Supply and Exhaust Fan Sets– Field operators
• Nexus 10 and Nexus 7
Preliminary Feedback - Most appreciated functionality• Available information – Pictures of valves– OVID drawings with
highlighted flow path• Automatic placekeeping – N/A-ing of steps
Preliminary Feedback - Future functionality• Valve locations• Stop and restart in the
middle• Automatic update of
plant logs• Messaging function
(e.g. to send updates to Work Control)
• Support left handed operation of the devices
Southern Nuclear Company: Plant Vogtle 1 & 2• Initial plant visit: March, 2015• Launch of study: June, 2015
Field Evaluation Study• Reoccurring Battery and Charger
Inspection and Maintenance • Task shared between
Maintenance Technicians and Operations
• Automatic population of data sheets
• Printable copy for archiving• Nexus 10 and Nexus 7
New Layouts – Quick Evaluation• Do you have 5 minutes to spare?• Help us find out what you like and don’t like with
our new layout options!
? ??
We look forward to future collaboration endeavors! [email protected], [email protected], and [email protected]
SCREENSHOTS AND DESCRIPTIONS
INL Prototype System as of October 2014
Login Screen• Log in by either typing
name or scanning barcode on badge.
• Option to log out or switch users.
• Selection of work order or procedure.
• Option to select ongoing work order or create a new instance.
Work Order Summary• Provides the same
information as the coversheet on the paper-based version.
• Barcode is generated based on instance information inserted when logging in to the system.
• The navigation menu will appear when swiping right or using menu option (see red circle).
Automatic Placekeeping• The step to take action on is
marked with the blue boarder. Past and future steps can be reviewed but no action can be taken.
• In this example, the technician decides in what order to take the readings, i.e., which chiller to go to in what order.
• The technician can exit the readings before they are complete and come back to complete them later.
• Conducted steps have a blue checkmark and displays the taken action, decision, or reading.
Correct Component Verification (CCV)• Option to conduct Digital CCV
by scanning a barcode associated with the component.
• The system will notify the user if incorrect component barcode was scanned, i.e., if the verification was conducted on wrong component.
• When the user has located the component he/she will have the option to either re-scan the barcode or conduct a manual component verification.
Conditional Statements• Conditional statements are
presented as binary questions.• Based on the answer, the
system will take the user down the relevant path through the instructions.
• The system will mark non-relevant steps as Non Applicable (N/A’d).
• Second screenshot shows the system updating the instruction based on the input that the chiller is not running. Steps associated with a running chiller will be N/A’d.
Taking Readings• Readings from previous logs are
automatically populated in the instruction (e.g., Refrigerant 124A’s Last Log Level)
• To insert a reading the user clicks on the text field and the keyboard will appear.
• To edit previous entered values, the user clicks on the value.
• In this example the readings can be taken in any order, hence there is no automatic placekeeping to guide the user to the next relevant step.
• Conducted steps are marked with a checkmark.
Calculations• Calculations are automatically
conducted by the system based on the readings.
• The user has the option to view the calculation for review purposes.
• The user has to accept the result or override it. If the calculation is overridden, the user has the option to insert a comment to document the decision.
Trending• Trends based on previous logged
readings are available to the user.
Other Functions• The system informs the user of
units to be used.• There is an option to provide
comments at each step (see red circle). There is also a general comment section in the work order. All comments (incl. the ones made on individual steps) are saved in the general comments.
• If abnormal readings are encountered, the user is required to document actions taken.
Locate place-keeping function on page Visibility of place-keeping function
Visual search: Number of distracters and saliency of those distracters
• Identify actions to be taken• Compare actions to mental model
• Understanding of constrained language• Complexity of step logic• Accuracy of mental model
• Working Memory• Long-term Memory
Compare expected conditions to actual conditions
• Accuracy of mental model that dictates expected conditions• Detection of cues that indicate departure from expected conditions
• Salience of cues that indicate departure of expected conditions• Long-term Memory
Compare location, label, and equipment description in procedure to those on the actual equipment
• Ability to correctly read both the procedure and the equipment information• Ability to integrate the values/text read and compare them accurately
• Text comprehension• Working Memory
Compare expected conditions to actual conditions
• Accuracy of mental model that dictates expected conditions• Detection of cues that indicate departure from expected conditions
• Long-term Memory• Salience of cues that indicate departure of expected conditions
Check for indications that there are more parts to the step (e.g., was the current action a sub-step?)
• Existence of indications that signal the step is not complete• Visibility of indications that step is not complete
• Prospective Memory• Salience of cues
Identification of cues that signal dependency (i.e., warning)
• Existence of cue that signals dependency• Visibility of cue
• Prospective Memory• Salience of cues
Technique Cognitive factors that determine task success or failure
Conditions that must be satisfied to ensure task success
Start
Read procedure step
Do I understand step?
Do other steps depend on this step?
Develop action plan/strategy
Locate component
Are the initial conditions as expected?
Predict expected system response
Execute step
Was step executed correctly?
Was expected response achieved?
Yes
Next step
Yes
Evaluate situationNo
Call supervisior
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Right location, label, and name?
Am I on the right step?No
Is the step complete?
Yes
No Yes
No
Yes