Barco

There are five key criteria to consider in creating an ideal control room design, which should include a visualization system that can:

1. Integrate multiple applications, while respecting security regulations
2. Offer one keyboard/mouse/audio setup, with no need to switch between workstations
3. Be a standard system, not needing a lot of integration effort
4. Not violate the warranty agreements from application vendors
5. Incorporate ergonomic principles

The sweet spot of system integration
At one end of the spectrum, we find operator workspaces composed of numerous applications, all running on stand-alone systems.

Monitoring and control are conducted via separate operator stations, each with a dedicated screen, mouse and keyboard. Function key and HMI (Human Machine Interface) conventions also vary from application to application. For reporting tasks, operators must gather information from multiple systems − which is time-consuming, slowing down operator response times, and requiring the operator to remember information from several different systems (because drag & drop is not available across these disparate systems).

Sounds like a recipe for disaster? It is ... tried and tested. Psychological studies show that interpretation and retention are reduced during periods of stress, which leads to overload and operator error¹. Integrated systems, on the other hand, provide many advantages and opportunities. At the positive end of the spectrum, we have control rooms in which all necessary process control and safety information is presented by a single integrated system, allowing information from different sources to be made available to other support applications (such as Information Management Systems, shift logs, production monitoring, etc.), so that reports, key performance indicators and other data can be easily shared. Such a system enables reports to be generated and distributed automatically, relieving the operator of this task. The main drawback of such a solution, however, is the cost, time and effort of implementation.

But there might be a more practical way − the sweet spot − to achieving higher operator efficiency: some level of desktop integration that is more cost- and time-effective than full system integration and that does not risk invalidating application warranties and maintenance agreements. As we’ll explain later on, visual integration allows ‘blending on glass’ and avoids security compliance issues and vendor dependencies. 

“Psychological studies show that interpretation and retention are reduced during periods of stress, which leads to overload and operator error.”

Control room layout and impact on efficiency
Lack of some level of integration can have a major impact on the control room’s physical design − impacting space requirements, layout and workstation ergonomics. At the negative end of the spectrum, we find control rooms with a lot of separate system hardware components assembled in an ad hoc, haphazard way. The result is a confused layout and cluttered workstations, with no overall structure, requiring operators to move both physically and mentally between systems. When operators must move from one system to another to complete a task, the chance of human error increases, and the movement might cause a delay in noticing an event. This can slow down operator response time and leaves little chance for an early recovery. KVM (keyboard, video and mouse) switches can reduce the number of keyboard and mouse sets, but they require the operator to manually select which system the KVM is connected to. Also, KVM solutions − typically a one-application / one-screen concept − have very limited flexibility with regard to optimizing visualization.

Good system integration presents the opportunity for a much more efficient and ergonomic control room layout. Indeed, we are seeing more compact workstations with displays for both process control and information management, along with Large Screen Displays either on or off workstation. All of these elements are used together to create a more unified workspace. Moreover, less hardware reduces weight, so that adjustable desks with sit/stand options can be used − which result in better posture and the opportunity for movement, improving operator health and reducing staff turnover.

In a unified workstation, information from different systems can be brought together and presented in accordance with ergonomic principles − i.e. key information in the primary field of view, less important information in the secondary field. A single keyboard and mouse are used to access multiple screens or applications, reducing clutter and confusion. A unified workstation also combines audio outputs, freeing up workspace and eliminating the costs of multiple speakers.

In addition to the ergonomic advantages, these unified workstations can contribute to improving operator communication and situational awareness, especially in large control rooms. One important aspect that Human Factors design studies look at is ‘adjacencies’ − that is, which operator roles are most closely related; which operators communicate most frequently; which operators need a common overview of a portion of the process? A more compact layout enables operators to be grouped more effectively and improves direct communication between them.

As a more integrated workspace also reduces the operator’s switching between applications (both physically and mentally), operator frustration and workload are reduced, which can help optimize staffing. Another cost-benefit of more compact workstations is that the size of the control room can be reduced, with figures of up to 35% reduction in floor space being quoted².

“Good system integration presents the opportunity for a much more efficient and ergonomic control room layout.”

....................................