National Academies Press: OpenBook

Design Considerations for Airport EOCs (2018)

Chapter: Section 6 - Ergonomic and Human Factors

« Previous: Section 5 - Site Selection
Page 49
Suggested Citation:"Section 6 - Ergonomic and Human Factors." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Design Considerations for Airport EOCs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25280.
×
Page 49
Page 50
Suggested Citation:"Section 6 - Ergonomic and Human Factors." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Design Considerations for Airport EOCs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25280.
×
Page 50
Page 51
Suggested Citation:"Section 6 - Ergonomic and Human Factors." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Design Considerations for Airport EOCs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25280.
×
Page 51
Page 52
Suggested Citation:"Section 6 - Ergonomic and Human Factors." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Design Considerations for Airport EOCs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25280.
×
Page 52
Page 53
Suggested Citation:"Section 6 - Ergonomic and Human Factors." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Design Considerations for Airport EOCs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25280.
×
Page 53
Page 54
Suggested Citation:"Section 6 - Ergonomic and Human Factors." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Design Considerations for Airport EOCs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25280.
×
Page 54
Page 55
Suggested Citation:"Section 6 - Ergonomic and Human Factors." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Design Considerations for Airport EOCs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25280.
×
Page 55
Page 56
Suggested Citation:"Section 6 - Ergonomic and Human Factors." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Design Considerations for Airport EOCs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25280.
×
Page 56
Page 57
Suggested Citation:"Section 6 - Ergonomic and Human Factors." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Design Considerations for Airport EOCs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25280.
×
Page 57
Page 58
Suggested Citation:"Section 6 - Ergonomic and Human Factors." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Design Considerations for Airport EOCs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25280.
×
Page 58
Page 59
Suggested Citation:"Section 6 - Ergonomic and Human Factors." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Design Considerations for Airport EOCs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25280.
×
Page 59
Page 60
Suggested Citation:"Section 6 - Ergonomic and Human Factors." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Design Considerations for Airport EOCs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25280.
×
Page 60
Page 61
Suggested Citation:"Section 6 - Ergonomic and Human Factors." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Design Considerations for Airport EOCs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25280.
×
Page 61
Page 62
Suggested Citation:"Section 6 - Ergonomic and Human Factors." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Design Considerations for Airport EOCs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25280.
×
Page 62
Page 63
Suggested Citation:"Section 6 - Ergonomic and Human Factors." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Design Considerations for Airport EOCs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25280.
×
Page 63
Page 64
Suggested Citation:"Section 6 - Ergonomic and Human Factors." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Design Considerations for Airport EOCs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25280.
×
Page 64
Page 65
Suggested Citation:"Section 6 - Ergonomic and Human Factors." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Design Considerations for Airport EOCs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25280.
×
Page 65
Page 66
Suggested Citation:"Section 6 - Ergonomic and Human Factors." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Design Considerations for Airport EOCs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25280.
×
Page 66
Page 67
Suggested Citation:"Section 6 - Ergonomic and Human Factors." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Design Considerations for Airport EOCs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25280.
×
Page 67

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

49 Introduction EOCs and associated spaces are complex environments supported by many integrated tech- nologies. As such, a detailed operational review is critical prior to the development of a layout to accommodate the necessary human machine interface (HMI) relationships appropriately. Complete task analysis and operational planning should be carefully and completely developed prior to any facility planning, to guide the design, construction, and eventual operation of the facility successfully. See Figure 6-1 for an overview of ergonomic EOC planning. The following sections will look at all three major aspects of ergonomics (physical, cognitive, and organizational) as well as human factors and how they should be considered within the airport EOC environment. General layout and design recommendations should be made based on theoretical research as well as current best practices and ergonomic standards. Lessons learned and case studies should include not only airport EOC application but also other mission- critical EOC applications. Survey Responses Through surveying of 27 airports of various sizes, much feedback was received regarding the ergonomics and human factors of current EOCs. Although not always a 24/7 control room, when activated, an EOC becomes a mission-critical facility with the potential for extended use. Therefore, the planning and design needs to meet or exceed the standards of a control room— and the human factor element is paramount. Survey responses showed several trends across airports of all sizes, the most prominent trends indicating that ergonomics and human factors are below standard, and in many cases, have been neglected. Not one airport surveyed had an ergonomic mandate in place. This is largely due to the lack of awareness as to the impact that these factors have on the overall effectiveness of the EOC environment, especially in long periods of operation. The following were the most prominent items in the related feedback: • Traffic flow—Nearly every survey indicated that flow was inefficient, or restricted when the room was populated with the required personnel. • Overall size—Many EOCs have been placed in a certain space “because it was available” and are often not adequately sized for the number of personnel required during activation. • Noise—Noise from multiple conversations, phones, and equipment was noted as an inter- ruption to decision making and communication. • Work surface area—Given the number of people, variety of operations, and amount of equipment, the amount of work surface area was often reported as inadequate. S E C T I O N 6 Ergonomic and Human Factors

Source: Evans Consoles. Figure 6-1. Ergonomic approach to EOC designs.

Ergonomic and Human Factors 51 • Poor configuration (no breakout rooms or break areas)—Inadequate space for non-task activities, such as space for food and drink, bags, and clothing as well as the lack of any quiet space for rest during lulls in activity was noted. Human Factors and Ergonomics Human factors and ergonomics, as related to the design of an EOC, consider a human- centered design approach to optimal system design that incorporates the interactions among three interrelated categories: organizational, cognitive, and physical considerations. The term “ergonomics” is often associated with the physical aspects of the system (equipment, work- station, environmental conditions, etc.), and sometimes this is termed “micro-ergonomics,” whereas the term “human factors” is often used to refer to the “cognitive ergonomics” aspects of a system. Organizational ergonomic considerations are also often termed “macro-ergonomics.” A brief description of each of these considerations is given below. Organizational Ergonomics Organizational ergonomics is a branch of ergonomics that is concerned with the interaction among humans, technology, and other elements in a system. This category of ergonomics looks at issues such as social interactions and patterns of communication, leadership, and teamwork. This is a critical element of control center design to ensure adequate task loading and effective communication flow in both normal and upset scenarios. Cognitive Ergonomics Cognitive ergonomics is concerned with the mental processes around a combination of tasks. It is a study of how people observe information, the way in which people understand its implications, and how that determines the decisions people make. It is important to recognize the constraints of human cognitive abilities and accommodate those within a functional design. This is particularly important in a mission-critical facility where multiple processes and alarms are monitored by one person. Understanding responding staff’s memory, perception, reasoning, and motor response in relation to operational needs is critical. Such considerations are especially important given that EOC operating conditions are likely to present people with multiple stressors, especially time stress and multitask loading. Cognitive ergonomics also considers issues of SA, which are critical to the effective performance of the EOC. Physical Ergonomics Physical ergonomics focuses on the body’s response to physical work demands and is con- cerned with the impact of the physical work environment (repetition, vibrations, workstation arrangement, etc.) on the responding staff. Designs for physical ergonomics considerations include the consideration of biomechanics, anthropometric data, and employee habits. When designing with physical ergonomics in mind, it is important to identify primary, secondary, and tertiary tasks at the workstation. These categories should be reviewed in normal and critical operational modes and the workstations set up to accommodate the most ergonomic positioning in both operational scenarios. Theoretical Research The goal of human-centered ergonomic design is to create a system in which human partici- pants perform at an optimal level with minimum risk of error, regardless of how stressful the

52 Design Considerations for Airport EOCs situation might be. To do this requires considering characteristics of the work to be performed (i.e., the tasks, operations, and organizational factors), the technology to be used to perform that work (both the hardware and the software required), and the physical setting in which work is being performed, which includes consideration of the environmental conditions (temperature, light, noise, vibration, ventilation, air quality), the physical workstations (chair, desk, keyboard, mouse, screen, etc.), and the architectural design (spatial layout, windows, doors, color). This ergonomic approach to systems is an iterative process that proceeds through a series of phases as the system design evolves from concept to operational. Standards The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) has promulgated a series of stan- dards concerned with the ergonomic principles for designing various arrangements of rooms and spaces in a control suite. These standards provide guidance on the physical layout of an EOC, including the design of workstations and ambient environmental considerations: thermal environment, air quality, lighting environment, acoustic environment, vibration, aesthetics, and interior layout design. The following standards are available: • ISO 11064-1:2000 Ergonomic design of control centers—Part 1: Principles for the design of control centers: This standard specifies ergonomic principles, recommendations and requirements to be applied in the design of primarily non-mobile control centers. It covers all types of control centers and addresses the expansion, refurbishment, and technological upgrades of control centers. • ISO 11064-2:2000 Ergonomic design of control centers—Part 2: Principles for the arrange- ment of control suites: This standard specifically deals with the ergonomic design principles for the arrangements of rooms and spaces in a control suite. It includes identification of functional areas, space provisions for each functional area, operational links between functional areas and optimal layouts. The ergonomic design principles are based on an analysis of functions and tasks that must be performed in the EOC. • ISO 11064-3:1999 Ergonomic design of control centers—Part 3: Control room layout: This standard includes ergonomic design requirements, recommendations and guide- lines for primarily non-mobile control room layouts, workstation arrangements, the use of off-workstation visual displays, and control room maintenance. • ISO 11064-4:2013 Ergonomic design of control centers—Part 4: Layout and dimensions of workstations: This standard specifies ergonomic design principles, recommendations, and requirements for the design of seated, visual-display-based workstations with emphasis on layout and dimensions, along with some consideration of standing workstations. It assumes that work- stations will incorporate flat-display screens. • ISO 11064-5:2008 Ergonomic design of control centers—Part 5: Displays and controls: This standard presents ergonomic design principles, requirements, and recommendations for displays, controls, and their interaction in the design of control-center hardware and software. • ISO 11064-6:2005 Ergonomic design of control centers—Part 6: Environmental requirements for control centers: This standard presents environmental requirements for the thermal environment (in tem- perate regions), air quality, lighting environment, acoustic environment, vibration, aesthetics

Ergonomic and Human Factors 53 and interior design, along with recommendations for the ergonomic design, upgrading, or refurbishment of control rooms and other functional areas within the EOC. • ISO 11064-7:2006 Ergonomic design of control centers—Part 7: Principles for the evaluation of control centers: This standard establishes ergonomic principles for the evaluation of control centers, including the control suite, control room, workstations, displays and controls, and work environment. • ANSI/HFES 100:2007 Human Factors Engineering of Computer Workstations: This standard provides specific guidance for the design and installation of computer work- stations, including displays, input devices, and furniture. The standard can be applied to a range of environments and accommodate a wide variety of users. • Canadian Standards Association (CSA)-Z412-00 (R2016)—Guideline on Office Ergonomics: This guideline provides step-by-step instructions of the ergonomics process for the optimal design of office systems where computers are being used, including the design of jobs and work organization, layout of the office, environmental conditions, and workstation design. It is intended predominately for office workers and employers who are responsible for health, safety, and/or ergonomics programs in the workplace. Ergonomic Operational Design Guidelines and Considerations When in operation, the EOC can be a stressful setting in which difficult human decision making will need to happen as quickly and accurately as possible. The wide range of alternative scenarios that could occur also requires that the EOC be somewhat flexible in its capabilities. In such challenging situations, it is extremely important that attention be paid to optimizing the ergonomic design of all relevant aspects of the system. Programmatic Requirements for the EOC The programming and design process should be aimed at identifying and achieving insti- tutional-driven goals in addition to accommodating all requirements identified during the operational analysis and operational layout planning phases of design. Programmatic require- ments for mission-critical operations typically include mission goals, performance, operational requirements, space needs, functional adjacencies, and technical requirements. Additionally, programmatic requirements may include provisions for long-term future use, expansion, or facility flexibility. A Programmatic Process chart can be found in Figure 6-2. Typically, it is suggested that EOC programming be executed as an inclusive process that engages all stakeholders who will share in the management, use, construction, and operation of the facility. In some circumstances, security, or other considerations may drive the extent to which some programmatic requirements of the facility may be shared among stakeholders. The intent of early engagement is to gather and document the needs and concerns of the participating stakeholders. Encouraging frequent communication and feedback among the stakeholder group throughout the programming and design process is advisable. Figure 6-11, at the end of this sec- tion, provides a general checklist to be followed during an ergonomic and operational assessment. Operational Analysis Information gathered from the various stakeholders will vary. All information is useful to developing a control center that is responsive to organizational objectives and user

Source: Evans Consoles. Figure 6-2. Programmatic process for EOC design.

Ergonomic and Human Factors 55 needs. In general, stakeholders may be expected to provide useful programmatic information as follows: Executive and Operational Management • What are the functional objectives? • Are there technical or aesthetic institutional standards to incorporate? • What are the overall tasks to be performed? • What is the planned staffing for activation? • What ancillary spaces are required to fully support EOC operations? • What are the current operational challenges to be addressed? • How do the EOC room parameters change between short- and long-term activations? • How does management see the individual staff requirements in terms of tasks to be completed and required interactions with other operators, supervisors, and managers? EOC Operators • What are the positions within the control center? • What are the individual task loads for each position? • What equipment are they currently using? • How is their time during an average hour divided among each piece of equipment? • How does that change during a long-term activation? • What types of errors typically occur? • How frequently do they occur and when do the operators themselves experience highs and lows in energy and awareness? IT and Systems Integrators • What equipment is used or proposed for use in the control center? • Where is the equipment best located? • What challenges are anticipated in setting up, operating, and maintaining the equipment? • How will the control center systems be integrated with remote operations, facilities, and equipment? Space Requirements EOC facilities can vary greatly in terms of purpose, size, population, and programmatic com- plexity. Most are unique in their requirements and physical configuration. These characteristics can depend on several factors such as airport size, location, city/state procedures, etc. In specific and limited circumstances, modular and pre-fabricated control centers are available; however, these products would typically not meet the needs of large airports. Operational Planning When designing the EOC itself, it is important to first review the current operating model to highlight which processes are working well and which could be better optimized. This review includes current technology used and planned upgrades, operational goals, shift length, and changes in the typical length of EOC activation based on the emergency operating plans. Once the current operating state is fully defined, it is important to outline the future operating plans. This includes identifying the visual requirements needed for each task or position, future position planning, and the communication needs of each group within the EOC. How will they be communicating and who are they speaking with? Facilitating this commu- nication through adjacencies in the layout can cut down on noise and distraction to others within the EOC.

56 Design Considerations for Airport EOCs Before a conceptual plan can be developed, the individual positions within the room and their equipment requirements need to be identified. The amount of equipment and identification of primary, secondary, and tertiary sources of information will directly affect the furniture require- ments within the room. Once layout of the equipment for each position has been iden tified, the optimal furniture can be selected and an appropriate layout designed. Conceptual Design Considerations The following utilizes the standards and recommendations discussed in the preceding topics of this section to outline general control center design guidelines as they relate to the general mission requirements of an Airport EOC. Further detail on these topics can be found in Section 7 of this Guidebook. The layout of an EOC can be critical in assisting smooth operational processes. There are many factors to consider when laying out an EOC and adjacent areas. The physical layout of the EOC should reflect the organizational processes to be supported within the EOC. It is critical to complete full operational planning, including adjacency study, of critical facilities as well as staff positions and equipment prior to determining any layout selections. This will ensure that the desired process and goals are supported by the facility. Please refer to Figure 6-6 for a sample adjacency analysis and further adjacency discussion. Although this image focuses on adjacencies between rooms in a facility, the same chart can be created for adjacencies among positions within the operations center. EOC activations are often long-term events, covering natural break times in a work day. As well, it is not uncommon for there to be participants within the EOC facility who do not have badge access within the area and are escorted on site. It is important to consider and accommo- date this as completely as possible when planning an emergency operations suite. For employee comfort, safety, and responsiveness, the following areas within the common secure perimeter should be considered: adjacent kitchen/kitchenette facilities, restroom facilities, smoking areas, and prayer/quiet rooms. Co-Location of Operation Facilities What is Co-Location? In addition to EOCs, most airports typically include operational space for many other functions, including safety and security, direct facility operations, main- tenance and utility operations, fire, emergency response, and police and security operations. Historically, most organizations have developed separate system monitoring functions running in parallel and independent of each other. Contemporary control suites/EOCs are designed to support integrated operations that bring multiple functions together under one roof. This has proven to be very beneficial as organizations are able to leverage efficiencies at multiple levels to improve their operation. These control suites, designed as multi-functional, collaborative environments, are widely seen in many of the following markets: • Public safety, • Process control, • Utilities, and • Transportation. The emerging trend in co-location of facilities has been facilitated by the rapid growth in technology in the fields of process monitoring and control, communication, audio–visual (AV), and IT. Most control applications are now available electronically with remote reporting and interface capabilities. These developments, combined with new flexibilities in modern video management systems, allow advanced content sharing and collaboration, which has increased

Ergonomic and Human Factors 57 the modern control facility’s ability to manage multiple operations and share information within a single facility. Advantages of Co-Location? Often, there is a benefit to co-locating emergency response and operations facilities to optimize SA and communication. Co-location of facilities can offer many operational advantages, unique design characteristics, and reduce overall cost for construction, maintenance, and technology. Some of those efficiencies include: • Collaborative discovery of operational efficiencies, • Elimination of duplicate facilities, • Enhanced security, • Technology consolidation and reduced maintenance, • Improved communications, and • Functional cross training. An example of floor layouts for co-located facilities can be found in Figure 6-3 and Figure 6-4. In the examples presented in Figures 6-3 and 6-4, the main floor houses the operations center, with a two-story high AV wall and ceiling. On the second floor is the multi-function EOC/training center, as well as the security center, both with sightlines to the operations center and the AV wall. Multi-use Areas. Often, an EOC is undermined by the fact that the facility is not used often. This can make it difficult to obtain the necessary budget to maintain the EOC facility to the level required in any given emergency. As shown below, there are many possible set-ups for an EOC, most that leave the EOC empty during non-emergency events. Many facilities are adopting a multi-use design that allows the EOC to act as a training or simulation room when not in use OPERATIONS CENTER EMERGENCY DISPATCH CENTER EOC/TRAINING CENTER SECOND FLOORMAIN FLOOR Source: Evans Consoles. Figure 6-3. A sample floor plan of a co-located facility.

58 Design Considerations for Airport EOCs during an emergency. Focusing on design flexibility can allow a single room to support multiple functions, as illustrated in Figure 6-5. When to Consider Co-Location or Multi-use Areas? Consideration of a consolidated operations center should always include an assessment of existing conditions. The scope of this assessment will vary from airport to airport and should address all the considered operations, not just emergency. Assessments to include in an emer- gency operations master plan can include: Location Assessment. Existing operations centers, the associated space they occupy, and the systems monitored should be mapped on an airport-wide basis. An assessment should be made regarding how efficiently the space is being used and whether the available space affects the performance of the existing operations in normal and emergency situations. Consideration may also be given to the relationship between the EOC and associated field staff. Use and Interaction Assessment. The current use of existing EOCs should be understood and documented. Current and potential interactions among existing EOCs, control rooms, systems, operators, and field staff should be evaluated to identify needed linkages and potential consolidation benefits. It is important also to understand operational contingency planning and the technology and communication systems that support the backup operations. Figure 6-6 demonstrates a sample adjacency and interaction analysis. Technology Assessment. The AV and IT technology infrastructure should also be evaluated in terms of type, capacity, condition, and suitability for supporting operational objectives. The technology assessment may also include an evaluation of how existing space can support future technology upgrades. OPERATIONS CENTER EMERGENCY DISPATCH CENTER EOC/TRAINING CENTER VIDEO WALL FOR CROSS-FUNCTIONAL INFORMATION SHARING Source: Evans Consoles. Figure 6-4. A photographic sample of a co-located facility.

Training Scenario Activated Scenario Source: Evans Consoles. Figure 6-5. An illustration of a multi-use warm (semi-activated EOC in a constant ready state but not fully activated) EOC. One side of the facility is an active EOC with limited personnel, and the other is used for training purposes. During an emergency event, the moveable wall system is removed, and the tables easily converted to accommodate the operations of a full EOC activation.

60 Design Considerations for Airport EOCs Threat Assessment. As a matter of routine operations, most airports should have a threat assessment and associated contingency planning for each control facility, as was discussed in Section 5 of the Guidebook. This information should be compiled and factored into the evalua- tion of existing control room operations and potential consolidation strategies. New facilities allow for optimum site planning, access control, security, hardening, and other requirements typically associated with mission-critical functions. However, while these factors are relatively easy to incorporate into greenfield facilities, it is somewhat more challenging for existing facilities. Often built decades ago, the infrastructure, security, vulnerability to threat, and technology of existing operations centers may not readily allow for consolidation. This often leads facilities to continuing to operate on a dispersed model. In the end, this can often be a significantly more expensive operating model. EOC Style • Stand-alone—Only set up in the case of an emergency event, • Stand-alone warm EOCs—Continuously staffed by a limited number of personnel who would be participants in the EOC when activated, or • Dual use—A multi-functional room that is used for other purposes during non-emergency events, but that can be quickly and easily set up as an EOC when necessary. In any of these scenarios it is important to design the facility assuming a full EOC activation. Inside the EOC there should be sufficient space as well as easily accessible power and data to accommodate the number of personnel, including future growth assumptions (usually 25%), support personnel and necessary AV, printers, and excess computer requirements. It is important Source: Evans Consoles. Figure 6-6. Sample adjacency analysis for room adjacencies (PSOC = port security operations center).

Ergonomic and Human Factors 61 to keep in mind that overhead power and data drops create disrupted sightlines to common AV, as well as limit the flexibility of the layout design. A raised access floor with power and data cabling accommodated within the plenum (space under raised flooring which is used for running cables and utilities and also often used for air circulation) is recommended. Shared Visual Displays. The audio–visual system in an EOC is an essential element that can greatly contribute to the overall quality, safety, and efficiency of the activated EOC. AV sys- tem designs can vary greatly depending on the site, equipment, as well as operational model and communication/collaboration requirements. The placement of the AV system(s) should be determined once the desired layout is complete to maintain ergonomic sightlines for operational efficiency. Video Management Systems. Modern video management systems can be a key component of advanced SA for those inside and outside the EOC. The ability to share and view information between positions via wall-mounted systems, conference or breakout rooms, and even mobile devices increases the efficiency of decision making and assists in limiting unnecessary personnel inside the EOC. Many video management systems will include collaboration tools for inter active information sharing between mobile sites and the EOC, allowing for quicker updates and com- mand disbursements. Suggested “Low-tech,” Traditional Displays. Although the advances in modern technology are drastic and have increased SA exponentially, there is still a recognized need for traditional displays and equipment within an EOC. Standard whiteboards, laminated setup instructions, printed procedure manuals, and physical incident command forms (with appropriate writing implements) are still invaluable for some incidents. Although traditional displays and forms can lead to longer reaction times and reduced information capture/sharing, they are essential for incidents where there are power issues within the EOC. Specific Human Factors and Ergonomics Considerations for Furnishings and Equipment This section will describe the furniture requirements for successful interactions between operators and their physical environment to maximize SA and performance. This section assumes that operators will be able to move and change posture during EOC operation. The recommendations also assume that operators will vary in size and that the adjustability will accommodate a range of staff sizes (5th percentile female to 95th percentile male). In general, when designing a workstation, it is recommended to focus on the personnel and equipment independently of the physical workstation itself. Ideally, the console should be designed according to the ergonomic placement of the equipment, rather than the other way around (see Figure 6-7). In an EOC there is potential for several different operators to work at different times at the same workstation. Flexibility of all aspects described in the sections below will allow for adjustability of equipment for users of varying sizes. Computer Equipment. Placing the computer equipment to be used by each staff person in the optimal ergonomic reach and visual zones for each person will improve performance and will help determine the work surface area that is required along with the EOC layout options. Computer Equipment—Work Surface Heights. The optimal location of computer equip- ment depends in part on the anthropometric dimensions of the individual staff person. For the United States, the average woman is 5´4.2˝ (163 cm) tall, and the average man is 5´9.6˝ (176.9 cm). However, that range of human sizes varies considerably beyond this, such that for a U.S. woman, the height varies between a 5th percentile (4´11.8˝; 152 cm) and a 95th percentile

62 Design Considerations for Airport EOCs (5´8.5˝; 173.9 cm) and for a U.S. man this varies between a 5th percentile (5´4.8˝; 164.5 cm) and a 95th percentile (6´2.5˝; 189.3 cm) (PeopleSize, 2008). Seated Working. Seated work is less tiring than standing work, but it requires that the staff person also has a chair, which increases the amount of space needed for each workstation. For seated working the work surfaces can either be: • Seated fixed height—Operators are not all a standard size so when a work surface for seated work has a fixed height then it will result in variations in personnel posture depending on their seated height. In general, for optimal keyboard and mouse position on a fixed desk or a fixed table, the surface height should be between 23.2˝–28.3˝ (59–72 cm) high. • Seated adjustable height—For optimal keyboard and mouse position on an adjustable height desk, the surface height should be adjustable between at least 21.6˝–28.7˝ (55–73 cm) high. Standing Working. The advantage of standing work is it requires less space because of the lack of a chair. The disadvantage is that over time standing is more tiring than sitting. For stand- ing work, the work surfaces can either be: • Standing fixed height—Operators are not all a standard size so when a work surface for stand- ing work has a fixed height then it will result in variations in personnel posture depending on their height. In general, for optimal keyboard and mouse position on a fixed desk or a fixed table, the surface height should be between 39.4˝–43.3˝ (100–110 cm) high to accommodate either female or male operators. • Standing adjustable height—For optimal keyboard and mouse position on an adjustable height desk, the surface height should be adjustable between at least 36.2˝–46.8˝ (92–119 cm) high to accommodate either female or male operators. It is possible to retrofit a sit–stand height-adjustable work surface to a regular table or desk surface so that staff can alternate between working sitting and working standing to better main- tain their performance and comfort over time. Equipment and cabling requirements also need to be accommodated by the workstation design. Separation of power and data cabling, as well as accessibility for efficient maintenance, all need to be considered during the design process. Computer Equipment—Horizontal Work Area. The horizontal work area is typically organized for reach and for vision (Figure 6-8). For reach, the horizontal work area is organized into a primary zone of convenient reach where usual work tasks are performed, e.g., for computer Source: Evans Consoles. Figure 6-7. Prioritizing the workstation design.

Ergonomic and Human Factors 63 work, this is where the keyboard, mouse, or other input device should be located; a secondary zone of convenient reach is one where occasional work tasks are performed, e.g., for computer work with separate displays, the secondary zone is where displays should be positioned for comfortable viewing. The remaining horizontal space is non-work area, which often is used for storing infrequently used items. If a person is using more than one screen, then a curved arrangement of monitors can be used, and this can accommodate two, three, four, or more computer monitors. The horizontal area required will depend on the number of screens being used. The size of the work surface area will be affected by whether a desktop, laptop, or tablet is being used to perform the task. • For a desktop computer, the design of the keyboard and other input devices, such as a mouse or a trackball, will affect the required work surface area, as well as the size and number of monitors. In addition, the amount of hard copy paperwork required and any other required technologies, e.g., landline phone, printer, etc., will affect the work surface size, design, and layout. • If the workstation is a console, then it is important to determine the console base by consid- ering the equipment to be housed within the console. If system units are to be used at the console, how many computers will need to be accommodated? Are there any specific storage requirements at the console position? Will the console be capable of a sit/stand adjustment? The horizontal work area should allow for a comfortable viewing distance to the computer screen(s). For those with normal vision, or normally corrected vision, a single computer screen should be centered on the head position of the staff person so that they are looking straight ahead. The screen should be positioned at a comfortable distance between 20˝ (50 cm) to 30˝ (76 cm), depending on the size of the critical information to be viewed. Ideally, if a separate screen is being used, as with a desktop computer, then this should also be on an articulating arm to allow easy position adjustment. If the screen is that of a laptop computer then it is probably too low for a Source: Evans Consoles. Figure 6-8. Horizontal ergonomic work areas.

64 Design Considerations for Airport EOCs fixed height work surface, causing uncomfortable neck flexion. Ideally, a laptop screen should be connected to an external monitor for easier viewing or the laptop should be placed on a riser to elevate the screen. An external keyboard and mouse may be required for the laptop in this case. If two screens are being used with one as a primary screen and the second one as an advisory screen, the primary screen should be positioned as described above with the secondary screen placed either to the right or left of the primary screen and at an angle so that a small horizontal head turn will bring the advisory screen into clear view. If two screens are being used and they are equally important, then the two screens should be angled on either side of the midline of vision so that they form a gentle V-shape. If this is the configuration, then choosing computer monitors that have a very small bezel is recommended. If more than two screens are used, they should be arrayed in a curve to follow the line of vision. The easiest guideline for this is to sit upright, fully extend an arm horizontally with middle finger out pointing, and they should almost touch the center of each of the screens as the arm is moved from left to right. See Figure 6-9. Computer Equipment—Vertical Work Area. The vertical work area is typically organized into a primary zone of convenient reach where usual work tasks are performed, typically at elbow level. For computer work this is the height of the work surface where the keyboard, mouse, or other input device should be located. For optimal visibility, the computer monitor(s) should be positioned so that the center of the monitor is below the horizontal ear and eye-line (an angle of around 20° below the horizontal). The screen(s) should be adjustable so that it can be tilted for clear vision without any reflected glare from overhead lighting or windows. See Figure 6-10. Source: Evans Consoles. Figure 6-9. Workstation with two or more screens.

Ergonomic and Human Factors 65 Seating Ergonomic Office Chair. If a person will be sitting to undertake much of their work in the EOC, then it is important that they are sitting in an ergonomic chair that can be adjusted to fit their body. The criteria for an ergonomic chair are specified in national standards (e.g., USA: American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (HFES) 100-2007 Human Factors Engineering of Computer Workstations; Canada: CSA-Z412-00 (R2016), Guideline on Office Ergonomics). The following are the basic criteria for a suitable ergonomic chair: • Easy to adjust from a seated position, comfortable, and appropriate to the task being undertaken; • Seat height-adjustable, preferably utilizing a gas lift for ease of adjustment; • Seat pan with a curved, “waterfall” front edge, to minimize pressure on the underside of the thighs; • Backrest that is height, angle, and depth adjustable and provides good lumbar support; • Covered by a breathable material; • A five-star base for stability and safety; and • Chair casters appropriate for floor covering. Arm rests are optional. They help decrease the forces on the shoulders and back but can limit access to the desk. Some workers prefer to rest their forearms on the work surface. If provided, it is preferable the armrests are height- and position-adjustable. If the chair has arms, then it is important that these can be lowered so that they do not interfere with access to the work surface. If a person must look at information displays for long periods of time, (especially for regular and social media monitoring) and these are mounted above head level, then the chair should provide a high back with head and neck support so that the displays can be comfortably viewed from a reclined seated posture. Alternative Seating. The EOC may have alternative seating designs. If a person is standing to do work, then a stool can be provided for occasional sitting. If a person needs to move locations, then a stool with casters can be provided. If operators need to hold meetings fewer than 15 minutes long, then these can be undertaken while standing. For meetings lasting longer than 15 minutes, some type of chair is recommended. This can be a fixed height conference chair or a stool if the meeting is less than 60 minutes, but for longer meetings an ergonomic chair should be available. Source: Evans Consoles. Figure 6-10. Vertical ergonomic work areas.

66 Design Considerations for Airport EOCs Other Furniture Considerations. If a person must refer to paper documents, especially any large format paper documents or heavy manuals, then adequate work surface should be provided. This can be achieved using tables or other horizontal work surfaces. If there is a need for the storage of any materials in the EOC, then adequate storage should be provided (e.g., file drawer, mobile file pedestal). If any food or beverages are to be prepared or consumed in the EOC then adequate equipment should be provided (e.g., refrigerator, coffee maker). If food is to be prepared or consumed in the EOC then adequate surfaces for both should be provided. The furniture in the EOC should be configured so that operators have adequate clearance to adjust their furniture and to move around the EOC as required. The EOC spatial layout should be optimized to facilitate this ease of movement as well as ease of ingress/egress for the EOC. Environmental Considerations Lighting, acoustics, technology, and furniture design will be discussed in detail, and recom- mendations will be made which highlight the major elements of an effective airport EOC design. Windows. The addition of windows to an EOC is recommended for psychological and physiological reasons, however, while providing a view to the outside of the EOC, windows also can create a significant difference in luminance within the room, resulting in glare and a possible drop in performance. If windows are not a primary source of information, the layout should be designed so that they are neither directly behind nor in front of the EOC operators. User- controlled blinds are also recommended to give personnel the ability to eliminate any potential sources of glare. Wherever possible, workstations should be located a minimum of 9’10” from any windows. Lighting Design. Consideration should be given to the different visual demands expected of the EOC operators and their ability to perceive information from electronic screen sources and written text. The ability to perceive and react to both stimuli in short- and long-term activations is critical in the EOC facility. Lighting should be designed to allow flexible levels through dimming controls and zoning in different task areas. It is recommended that illuminance levels on works surfaces be maintained at recommended levels. This can be best achieved using a combination of ambient and task lighting. Please see Section 7 for more details. Acoustic Design. Understanding how operators work within a given area will determine how acoustics need to be addressed. Currently, dissatisfaction with noise levels is believed to be one of the biggest disruptors of performance, yet it is often one of the last issues addressed in the design of buildings. The goal of acoustic treatment is to maximize the operators’ SA of alarms and processes being monitored while also minimizing noisy distractions, and this includes dis- tracting conversations. It is important that auditory alarms are discriminable from one another and against the background noise level in the EOC. It is crucial to position operators to optimize operational adjacencies and collaboration tasks, which requires an in-depth understanding of their workflow and interactions. The ideal ambient noise level in an emergency operations environment is 30–35dB (ISO). The potential for building components (walls, ceilings, doors, windows, etc.) to contribute to mini- mizing sound transmission from space to space is significant. Please see Section 7 for more details. See Figure 6-11 for a checklist on operational and ergonomic assessment.

Ergonomic and Human Factors 67 Operational Analysis Clarify goals for EOC, including operating procedures and requirements Complete observation, interviews, and current operations assessment activities Complete a current technology assessment and consider future plans Identify recognized constraints (budget, physical, etc.) Define the typical length of EOC engagement Define the typical shift length for EOC position Operational Planning Define task requirements for each position within the room Identify visual requirements for personnel within the room Identify verbal communication requirements among personnel within the room Identify auditory requirements within the room (alarms, radios, etc.) Identify visual requirements to equipment within the room Define growth requirements for the facility Develop EOC model (hot, warm, cold, or multi-use facility) Identify Position Requirements Define number of console positions Define the equipment that needs to rest on the work surface for each position Define the equipment needed in each workstation for each position Identify the need for storage furniture within the room Identify any requirements for mobility of positions and equipment Decide if task assignment and shift length require a seated or standing position Identify Sightline Requirements Identify all shared visual displays within the room Identify facility constraints for AV screens (including any ocular acuity distances from AV manufacturer) Complete a video management system needs assessment Define redundancy plans Conceptual Design Select optimal layout for EOC based on recognized operational plan above Select optimal furniture and equipment based on recognized operational plan above Determine placement of shared devices Identify HMI mapping needs Select video management system Define position layouts for EOC Verification of Concept Conduct ergonomic assessment of proposed concept Conduct traffic flow analysis Conduct communication flow analysis This checklist outlines the steps to be taken to complete an operational and ergonomic assessment if an outside advisor has not been consulted. Checklist: Operational and Ergonomic Assessment Source: Faith Group, LLC. Figure 6-11. Operational and ergonomic assessment checklist.

Next: Section 7 - Architectural Considerations »
Design Considerations for Airport EOCs Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB's Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) Research Report 189: Design Considerations for Airport EOCs will guide airport staff in the planning and design of an airport emergency operations center (EOC). This report provides EOC design considerations in the areas of physical space, technology, function, operations, and governance. The guidance includes lessons learned, a Concept and Development Planning Decision Tree flow chart, and several useful checklists to help airport staff work through all of the considerations involved in establishing or enhancing an EOC.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!