Managing the lifecycle of your robot

‘Robot’ for this paper is assumed to be a cognitive device, acting as a co-worker within a team of human workers: a mobile device, with a degree of autonomy, interchangeable prostheses, interacting freely with surrounding humans, in a civilian environment. An exemplar lifecycle is the MoD’s CADMID lifecycle., and the paper concentrates on the In-service phase, for reasons of space. The approach is from a management perspective; a road-map is provided to acquire a robot, to put it to work, and to support both it and the team during its in-service phase. The emphasis is on what management needs to consider and the structures that need to be in place in order to run this process

Ergonomic issues arising from the `Next Manufacturing Revolution'

The paper outlines briefly the contents of the government-sponsored document, ‘The Next Manufacturing Revolution’, with its emphasis on practices appropriate to the demands for sustainability required by population growth and emissions control, and then explores some of the implications of the contents for the practice of ergonomics, particularly in relation to job design. It is clear that there are some significant extensions required to the knowledge classes, processes and practices of ergonomists; there are also some implications for the Institute’s role as a source of advice

Ethics and the killer robot

Ethics and the killer robo

Decision-making systems and the product-to-service shift

Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this paper is first, to provide input to the “through life knowledge and information management” grand challenge and second to provide industry with a tool for assessing the quality of the process(es) by which decisions are reached. Design/methodology/approach – An iterative approach is used with two student-based case studies, followed by two research institution case studies, and then two industrial case studies. Validation of the tool by managers is undertaken in another case study. Findings – An analytic framework is created which allows managers to categorise and display the characteristics of their decision processes. By assessing the resulting voids and clusters within the framework, the efficacy of the process can be determined. The framework has an associated management process, first to enable managers to see and compare instances of other situations, especially those leading to “disaster”, and second to upgrade the tool itself as assessments are undertaken. Research limitations/implications – The tool has been developed in a UK manufacturing environment. It has demonstrated its usefulness in the defence industry, but its wider applicability is not yet known. It requires industrialization to make it usable by managers. Practical implications – Use of the tool has already led to significant changes to the capability development process in a major defence company, and has been used by a board in a civilian company to understand why they have cost overruns and delivery problems. Originality/value – The paper has not discovered another, simple-to-use tool for the same purpose

Working towards a holistic organizational systems model

This paper presents an integration effort of a number of soft factors modelling tools and considers the potential impact of such an overall tool in a system of systems environment. The paper introduces the tools developed and how it is envisaged they will work together to provide a comprehensive, coherent output. It is suggested that a suite of interoperable tools of this form benefit any system whose lifecycle includes an organisational component, from bid to disposal, including the operational organisational support

Predicting the performance of teams in systems

The paper describes the development of a tool to predict the success of a team executing a system process. It is expected to be used by systems engineers in initial stages of systems design, when concepts are still fluid, including the team(s) who are expected to be operators within the system. Currently, the tool is undergoing verification and validation; to date, the tool predicts well and shows promise. An unexpected finding is that the tool creates an a priori case for Human Factors Integration in projects, to reduce the probability of substandard operational performance

Systems of systems engineering thesaurus approach: from concept to realisation

The developing discipline of Systems of Systems Engineering (SoSE) is gaining attention in an increasingly broad range of domains; however, each domain comes with its own set of terms and concepts so that there may be confusion between different domains ostensibly engaged in similar challenges. SoSE is faced with concept multiplicity (one term, more than one concept) and term multiplicity (one concept, more than one term). It is unrealistic to expect long-established domains to simply change ontology to match with other domains, but a means of recognising related concepts and terms across domains and across industrial sectors will enable more rapid progress to be made in the development of SoSE. The approach taken to generating a thesaurus, through which such relationships can be documented, is presented. The approach is essentially consultative among SoSE experts and the current version of the thesaurus is available online. A combination of problem statement definition and logical decomposition has been used; the method is described and application is illustrated using well-known term

'Good engineering governance' - an issue for ergonomists

Engineering Governance can be summarised as two questions: 'Are we doing the right things?' and 'Are we doing those things right?'. It forms a part of Corporate Governance, and in the manufacturing domain it is the key to long-term survival amid changing commercial contexts. The paper will outline some of the ergonomics issues of importance in this topic; 'ownership' of goverrnance; implications for design, production and operation; and, perhaps most important for Ergonomists, the resulting implications for the design of jobs. These implications cover organisational discipline, the inclusion of suitable, 'effort-free' metrics in engineering processes, the allocation of responsibility and authority over resources, support for individuals, the need for trust and a culture of honesty and reliability, and the necessity for organisational follow-through

Road2CPS priorities and recommendations for research and innovation in cyber-physical systems

This document summarises the findings of the Road2CPS project, co-financed by the European Commission under the H2020 Research and Innovation Programme, to develop a roadmap and recommendations for strategic action required for future deployment of Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS). The term Cyber-Physical System describes hardware-software systems, which tightly couple the physical world and the virtual world. They are established from networked embedded systems that are connected with the outside world through sensors and actuators and have the capability to collaborate, adapt, and evolve. In the ARTEMIS Strategic Research Agenda 2016, CPS are described as ‘Embedded Intelligent ICT Systems’ that make products smarter, more interconnected, interdependent, collaborative, and autonomous. In the future world of CPS, a huge number of devices connected to the physical world will be able to exchange data with each other, access web services, and interact with people. Moreover, information systems will sense, monitor and even control the physical world via Cyber-Physical Systems and the Internet of Things (HiPEAC Vision 2015). Cyber-Physical Systems find their application in many highly relevant areas to our society: multi-modal transport, health, smart factories, smart grids and smart cities amongst others. The deployment of Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS) is expected to increase substantially over the next decades, holding great potential for novel applications and innovative product development. Digital technologies have already pervaded day-to-day life massively, affecting all kinds of interactions between humans and their environment. However, the inherent complexity of CPSs, as well as the need to meet optimised performance and comply with essential requirements like safety, privacy, security, raises many questions that are currently being explored by the research community. Road2CPS aims at accelerating uptake and implementation of these efforts. The Road2CPS project identifying and analysing the relevant technology fields and related research priorities to fuel the development of trustworthy CPS, as well as the specific technologies, needs and barriers for a successful implementation in different application domains and to derive recommendations for strategic action. The document at hand was established through an interactive, community-based approach, involving over 300 experts from academia, industry and policy making through a series of workshops and consultations. Visions and priorities of recently produced roadmaps in the area of CPS, IoT (Internet of Things), SoS (System-of-Systems) and FoF (Factories of the Future) were discussed, complemented by sharing views and perspectives on CPS implementation in application domains, evolving multi-sided eco-systems as well as business and policy related barriers, enablers and success factors. From the workshops and accompanying activities recommendations for future research and innovation activities were derived and topics and timelines for their implementation proposed. Amongst the technological topics, and related future research priorities ‘integration, interoperability, standards’ ranged highest in all workshops. The topic is connected to digital platforms and reference architectures, which have already become a key priority theme for the EC and their Digitisation Strategy as well as the work on the right standards to help successful implementation of CPSs. Other themes of very high technology/research relevance revealed to be ‘modelling and simulation’, ‘safety and dependability’, ‘security and privacy’, ‘big data and real-time analysis’, ‘ubiquitous autonomy and forecasting’ as well as ‘HMI/human machine awareness’. Next to this, themes emerged including ‘decision making and support’, ‘CPS engineering (requirements, design)’, ‘CPS life-cycle management’, ‘System-of-Systems’, ‘distributed management’, ‘cognitive CPS’, ‘emergence, complexity, adaptability and flexibility’ and work on the foundations of CPS and ‘cross-disciplinary research/CPS Science’

Extending systems ergonomics thinking to accommodate the socio-technical issues of Systems of Systems

Socio-technical issues for Systems of Systems (SoS) differ in several ways from those for systems, mainly because the individual systems that are components of the SoS are usually owned by different organisations, each responsible for the optimisation and operation of its own system. Consequently, management of the SoS is about negotiation and management of the interfaces. Because of issues of Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs), commercial confidence, and the like, there is seldom sufficient, timely information in circulation about the SoS. Surprises are endemic to SoS, and resilience is a fundamental requirement. This paper outlines the different characteristics of SoS compared to ordinary systems, discusses many of the sociotechnical issues involved, and then outlines a generic approach to these issues, treating the SoS as a ‘wicked problem’. Endemic to this is the need for governance, which is discussed briefly. This is followed by a description of the evident gaps in knowledge about the functioning of SoS, and a listing of tool classes, the development of which would enable progress to be made more effectively. Finally, the paper discusses how the SoS approach might be the best way to entrain ICT to address global drivers, thus pointing to the importance of the SoS approach