A method and system for evaluating the ergonomics of manual operation of a multi-functional control panel

Abstract

The present invention discloses a method and system for evaluating the manual work efficiency of a multi-functional control panel, belonging to the technical field of industrial design. During the design and use of the multi-functional control panel, multiple factors have important impacts on the manual work efficiency, including the types, arrangements, orientations, elevation angles, sizes of the control elements, as well as the operation task processes, etc.; these factors not only have significant main effects on the manual work efficiency of the multi-functional control panel, but also have significant interaction effects with each other and have a great impact on the work efficiency. By performing variance analysis and regression analysis on the above factors and their interactions, the specific impacts on the manual work efficiency of the multi-functional control panel are obtained, and a simple-form work efficiency evaluation system is constructed. Only by inputting some parameters of the control elements, the manual work efficiency of the multi-functional control panel can be evaluated conveniently, quickly and more accurately.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention belongs to the technical field of industrial design, and particularly relates to a method and system for evaluating the work efficiency of manual operations of a multifunctional control panel. Background Art

[0002] Due to the limitations of technology or algorithms, the application of automation is relatively successful in closed-loop systems. However, in open-loop control systems, many important operations or controls still need to be manually completed by humans. Even when the level of intelligence has not reached a quite high level, the effect of automation is rather unsatisfactory. Therefore, in many current operation processes, the manual operation links that remain are often very important and require higher operation speed and operation accuracy, which also puts forward higher requirements for the work efficiency evaluation of control devices.

[0003] In actual industrial design, in order to improve the monitoring and operation efficiency of operators, control devices are mostly medium-sized or large-sized multifunctional control panels with high integration and multifunction levels. During the design process of the multifunctional control panel, it is often only grouped according to the type of control elements or control functions, or the ergonomic work efficiency evaluation method and scale are used to quickly evaluate from the perspective of considering the operation posture. These methods mainly consider the independent effects of various factors in the working environment and are used as simple evaluation methods. For example, the OWAS operation posture analysis system can conduct a whole-body analysis and evaluation, and the RULA rapid upper limb evaluation.

[0004] The construction methods of many evaluation models are different, and there are also certain deviations in the work efficiency evaluation results under specific working conditions. One of the sources of deviation is that these scale-based evaluations classify and look up tables according to the evaluated postures, and then simply sum up the work efficiency scores of the evaluation parts one by one, ignoring the interaction effects between many work efficiency influencing factors. Generally speaking, many existing work efficiency evaluation methods can be quickly applied and can roughly evaluate the working conditions. However, due to ignoring the interaction effects between work efficiency influencing factors, they all have certain limitations. And the interaction effects between various factors should be considered for accurately evaluating the operation or designing the operation interface.

[0005] In addition, these methods only simply score the operation postures in zones. The number of variable levels available for selection within each zone is also very limited. They do not consider the characteristics of the control panel itself, such as the attributes and layout forms of the control elements, and it is difficult to restore the action details during the control operation process, resulting in insufficiently fine evaluation. At the same time, the postures referred to by these evaluation methods are quasi-static, and they do not consider the great influence of the task flow characteristics and sequence effects in the control operation on the work efficiency.

[0006] With the increasing requirements for the work efficiency of opponents and the continuous emergence of new, multi-functional, and complex interaction interfaces, the evaluation and analysis of work efficiency have become more important and complex. At the same time, traditional work efficiency evaluations are increasingly unable to handle these complex analyses. It is necessary to provide a more targeted method for the ergonomic evaluation of complex operation interfaces, especially considering various factors unique to multi-functional control panels, the characteristics of the operation task process, and the impact of their interactions. In addition, the simplicity and convenience of the method should be ensured, enabling rapid evaluation and presenting the results in an intuitive form without overly increasing the costs of design, evaluation, and optimization. Summary of the Invention

[0007] In view of the above-mentioned defects in the prior art, the present invention provides a method and system for evaluating the manual work efficiency of a multi-functional control panel. During the design and use of the multi-functional control panel, multiple factors have important impacts on manual work efficiency, including the types, arrangements, orientations, elevation angles, sizes of control elements, and the operation task process, etc.; these factors not only have significant main effects on the manual work efficiency of the multi-functional control panel, but also have significant interaction effects with each other and have a great impact on work efficiency. Through variance analysis and regression analysis of the above factors and their interactions, the specific impacts on the manual work efficiency of the multi-functional control panel are obtained, and a simple-form work efficiency evaluation system (only for the case where the dominant hand is the right hand) is constructed. Only by inputting some parameters of the control element, the manual work efficiency of the multi-functional control panel can be evaluated conveniently, quickly, and more accurately.

[0008] The present invention is realized through the following technical solutions:

[0009] A method for evaluating the manual work efficiency of a multi-functional control panel, the method comprising the following steps:

[0010] Step 1: Determine the reference point of the initial working position (RP point);

[0011] Step 2: Determine the parameter x to be measured of a certain control element i ;

[0012] Step 3: Determine the value of the parameter coefficient β i ;

[0013] Step 4: Calculate the predicted operation time t and evaluation score S of the control element according to the prediction model; the calculation formula of the prediction model is as follows:

[0014]

[0015]

[0016] Step 5: Calculate the estimated operation time \(t\) and evaluation score \(S\) of all the to-be-tested control elements on the to-be-tested panel, and perform weighting according to the importance of each control element (which can be set by yourself according to the actual situation, such as usage frequency, operation fault tolerance rate, importance level of control target actions, etc.), and calculate the final average estimated operation time and evaluation score of the entire panel;

[0017] Step 6: Compare the calculated average estimated operation time and evaluation score of the entire panel with the evaluation scale to obtain the final evaluation result.

[0018] Further, the reference point of the initial working position in Step 1 is the contact point between the fingertip and the side panel with the belt when the user targeted by the panel design raises the right arm naturally and straightens it to point at the to-be-tested panel in the correct working posture.

[0019] Further, the number of selected to-be-tested parameters in Step 2 is 16, that is, \(x_i\) (\(i = 1\sim16\)), as specifically shown in Table 1; i (\(i = 1\sim16\)), as specifically shown in Table 1;

[0020] Table 1 is the table for selecting to-be-tested parameters

[0021]

[0022] Further, the discrimination conditions for large-sized components are as follows:

[0023] If the diameter of the knob (if the radius of the knob is different from the length of the knob handle, the length of the knob handle shall prevail) is greater than 570 mm and the thickness of the knob handle is greater than 100 mm, then the knob component is determined to be large-sized;

[0024] If the diameter of the button is greater than 570 mm, then the button component is determined to be large-sized;

[0025] If the diameter of the handle of the toggle switch is greater than 6 mm, then the toggle switch component is determined to be large-sized.

[0026] Further, the values of the parameter coefficients are shown in Table 2;

[0027] Table 2 is the table for the values of the parameter coefficients

[0028]

[0029] Further, the parameter coefficients in Step 3 correspond one by one to the to-be-tested parameters in Step 2.

[0030] Further, the evaluation scale in Step 6 is shown in Table 3;

[0031] Table 3 is the evaluation scale

[0032]

[0033] On the other hand, the present invention also provides a multi-functional operation panel manual work efficiency evaluation system, including:

[0034] A first determination module, configured to determine a reference point of the initial working position;

[0035] A second determination module, configured to determine a parameter x to be measured of a certain operating element i ;

[0036] A third determination module, configured to determine the value of the parameter coefficient β i ;

[0037] A calculation module, configured to calculate the predicted operation time t and the evaluation score S of the operating element and all operating elements to be measured according to the prediction model;

[0038] A comparison module, configured to compare the calculated average predicted operation time and evaluation score of the entire panel with the evaluation scale.

[0039] Compared with the prior art, the advantages of the present invention are as follows:

[0040] The present invention not only considers the main effects of the influencing factors, but also considers the interaction effects between the factors that have a significant impact on the evaluation results, making the evaluation results more accurate and reliable. Compared with the model that does not consider the interaction effects, the coefficient of determination has increased by 0.2;

[0041] The present invention uses the design parameters of the operation panel itself for evaluation. Therefore, the model includes not only simple factors related to the operation posture, but also detailed factors related to the operation actions, and dynamic factors related to the operation process. This avoids the problem of inaccurate action evaluation and quasi-static evaluation errors, and can perform simple verification evaluation at the initial stage of the panel design without the need for physical verification;

[0042] After 2048 experimental measurements on different subjects with balanced gender and height that almost follow a normal distribution, the standard estimation error between the operation evaluation duration obtained by the prediction model and the single successful operation duration obtained by actual measurement in the present invention is only 0.26 seconds. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0043] In order to more clearly illustrate the specific embodiments of the present invention or the technical solutions in the prior art, the following will briefly introduce the drawings required for the description of the specific embodiments or the prior art. In all the drawings, similar elements or parts are generally identified by similar reference numerals. In the drawings, the elements or parts are not necessarily drawn to scale.

[0044] Figure 1 It is a schematic flow chart of a multi-functional operation panel manual work efficiency evaluation method of the present invention;

[0045] Figure 2 It is a schematic diagram of the elevation angle of the multi-functional control panel;

[0046] Figure 3 It is a schematic diagram of the discrimination dimension of the size of common control elements;

[0047] Among them, a is the schematic diagram of the discrimination dimension of the size of the knob element;

[0048] b is the schematic diagram of the discrimination dimension of the size of the button element;

[0049] c is the schematic diagram of the discrimination dimension of the size of the toggle switch element. Specific implementation manners

[0050] In order to clearly and completely describe the technical solution of the present invention and its specific working process, in combination with the accompanying drawings of the specification, the specific implementation manners of the present invention are as follows:

[0051] In the present invention, unless otherwise clearly defined and limited, terms such as "installation", "connection", "connection", "fixation" and the like shall be understood in a broad sense. For example, it can be a fixed connection, a detachable connection, or integrated; it can be a mechanical connection or an electrical connection; it can be directly connected or indirectly connected through an intermediate medium, and it can be the communication inside two elements or the interaction relationship between two elements, unless otherwise clearly limited. For those of ordinary skill in the art, the specific meanings of the above terms in the present invention can be understood according to specific situations.

[0052] In the present invention, unless otherwise clearly defined and limited, the first feature being "on" or "under" the second feature can be that the first and second features are in direct contact, or the first and second features are indirectly in contact through an intermediate medium. Moreover, the first feature being "above", "over" and "on" the second feature can be that the first feature is directly above or obliquely above the second feature, or merely indicates that the first feature has a higher horizontal height than the second feature. The first feature being "under", "below" and "beneath" the second feature can be that the first feature is directly below or obliquely below the second feature, or merely indicates that the first feature has a lower horizontal height than the second feature.

[0053] In the description of this specification, the descriptions referring to terms such as "one embodiment", "some embodiments", "example", "specific example", or "some examples" mean that the specific features, structures, materials, or characteristics described in connection with the embodiment or example are included in at least one embodiment or example of the present invention. In this specification, the schematic expressions of the above terms do not necessarily refer to the same embodiment or example. Moreover, the specific features, structures, materials, or characteristics described can be combined in a suitable manner in any one or more embodiments or examples. In addition, without contradiction, those skilled in the art can combine and combine the different embodiments or examples described in this specification and the features of different embodiments or examples.

[0054] Embodiment 1

[0055] Starting from the design and application parameters of the multifunctional control panel itself, consider the influence of various factors and their interactions on manual work efficiency; these factors include the types of control elements on the multifunctional control panel, the vertical and horizontal positions of the control elements, the left-right orientation of the control panel relative to the dominant hand (this method only applies to the case where the dominant hand is the right hand), the elevation angle of the control panel, the size of the control elements, and the type of operation task; through the analysis and regression of the objective work efficiency evaluation data obtained from a large number of tests on subjects of different genders and different percentiles, a work efficiency prediction model suitable for the multifunctional control panel was established to guide the analysis, design, and optimization of related products.

[0056] As Figure 1 shown, this embodiment provides a method for evaluating the manual work efficiency of a multifunctional control panel, and the method includes the following steps:

[0057] Step 1: Determine the reference point (RP point) of the initial working position;

[0058] The reference point of the initial working position is the contact point between the fingertip and the side panel when the user targeted by the panel design has the right working posture, with the right arm naturally raised and straightened and pointing to the panel to be measured.

[0059] Step 2: Determine the parameter x to be measured of a certain control element i ;

[0060] The number of parameters to be measured selected is 16, that is, x i (i = 1 to 16), as specifically shown in Table 1;

[0061] Table 1 is the table for selecting parameters to be measured

[0062]

[0063]

[0064] The large-size component discrimination conditions are as follows:

[0065] If the knob diameter (if the knob radius and the handle length are different, the handle length shall prevail) is greater than 570 mm, and the handle thickness is greater than 100 mm, the knob element is judged to be large size;

[0066] If the button diameter is greater than 570 mm, the button element is judged to be large size;

[0067] If the toggle switch handle diameter is greater than 6 mm, the toggle switch element is determined to be large size.

[0068] Step 3: Determine the parameter coefficient β i The value of

[0069] The values ​​of parameter coefficients are shown in Table 2;

[0070] Table 2 Parameter coefficient value table

[0071]

[0072]

[0073] The parameter coefficients described in step 3 correspond one to one with the parameters to be measured described in step 2;

[0074] Step 4: Calculate the estimated operation time t and evaluation score S of the control element according to the prediction model; the prediction model calculation formula is as follows:

[0075]

[0076]

[0077] Step 5: Calculate the estimated operation time t and evaluation score S of all the control elements to be tested on the panel to be tested, and weight them according to the importance of each control element (which can be set according to actual conditions, such as frequency of use, control error tolerance, and importance level of the control target action, etc.), and calculate the final average estimated operation time and evaluation score of the entire panel;

[0078] Step 6: Compare the calculated average estimated operation time and evaluation score of the entire panel with the evaluation scale to obtain the final evaluation result.

[0079] The evaluation scale described in step six is ​​shown in Table 3;

[0080] Table 3 is the evaluation scale

[0081]

[0082] Example 2

[0083] In this embodiment, the manual operation efficiency of a multifunctional control panel with one button, two knobs and one knife switch arranged as shown in the appendix is evaluated. Figure 2 The elevation angle of the multifunctional control panel shown in the appendix is 75°.

[0084] Step 1: Determine the reference point (RP point) of the initial working position. Let the target user of the multifunctional control panel sit in the correct working posture, raise the right arm straight and point it at the panel to be measured. Mark the contact point between the fingertip and the panel to be measured at this time, and this point is the RP point.

[0085] Step 2: Determine the parameter x to be measured of the button in the panel according to Table 1. i This control element is a button, not a knob or a knife switch. Therefore, x1 = 1, x2 = 0, x3 = 0; after measurement, the diameter of the button is 400mm. According to the appendix Figure 3 -b is less than 570mm, so it is determined to be a small-sized element. Therefore, x4 = 0; the elevation angle of the control panel is 75°, so x5 = 75; the button is located in the upper left corner of the panel, to the left of the RP point, so x6 = 1; the button is randomly triggered during use and does not require sequential operation, so x7 = 0; the horizontal distance of the button from the RP point is 20cm, and the vertical distance is 30cm, so x8 = 0.2, x9 = 0.3. Calculate the remaining 7 parameters to be measured from the first 9 parameters to be measured, x 10 = x1x7 = 1×0 = 0, x 11 = x2x7 = 0×0 = 0, x 12 = x3x7 = 0×0 = 0, x 13 = x4x5 = 0×75 = 0, x 14 = x4x7 = 0×0 = 0, x 15 = x5x6 = 75×1 = 75, x 16 = x5x8 = 75×0.2 = 15.

[0086] Step 3: Determine the value of the parameter coefficient β i Make the parameter coefficients correspond to the parameters to be measured one by one, and add the constant coefficient β0, a total of 17 parameter coefficients. At the same time, check whether the parameters to be measured are complete and accurately calculated.

[0087] Step 4: Calculate the predicted operation time t and evaluation score S of the button according to the prediction model.

[0088] t = 2.210 - 0.208×1 - 0.066×0 - 0.083×0 - 0.103×0 + 0.002×75 + 0.056×1 - 0.337×0 + 0.685×0.2 + 0.782×0.3 + 0.107×0 + 0.266×0 + 0.119×0 + 0.002×0 - 0.175×0 + 0.002×75 - 0.004×15 = 2.670;

[0089] S = 61.751×(3.307 - 2.6696) = 39.4;

[0090] Step Five: Repeat the above steps to calculate the predicted operation time t and evaluation score S of all the to-be-tested control elements on the to-be-tested panel. Finally, the button evaluation result is t = 2.670, S = 39.4; the knob 1 evaluation result is t = 1.842, S = 90.5; the knob 2 evaluation result is t = 2.160, S = 70.8; the toggle switch evaluation result is t = 2.052, S = 77.5.

[0091] According to the importance of each control element, weighting is performed. In this example, the importance of the control elements is defined according to their usage frequencies. The proportions of the expected usage times of each element in the total usage times of the entire panel are as follows: button 25%, knob 1 35%, knob 2 35%, toggle switch 5%. After calculation, the final average predicted operation time of the entire panel is t = 2.670×25% + 1.842×35% + 2.160×35% + 2.052×5% = 2.171, and the evaluation score S = 39.4×25% + 90.5×35% + 70.8×35% + 77.5×5% = 70.2.

[0092] Step Six: Compare the calculated average predicted operation time and evaluation score of the entire panel with the evaluation scale in Table 3 to obtain the final evaluation result. The average predicted operation time of each element of the entire panel is 2.171 seconds, and the overall manual operation efficiency evaluation score is 70.2 points. By comparing with Table 3, it can be given that the manual operation efficiency of this multifunctional control panel is good.

[0093] Example 3

[0094] This example provides a multifunctional control panel manual operation efficiency evaluation system, including:

[0095] The first determination module is used to determine the reference point of the initial working position;

[0096] The second determination module is used to determine the to-be-tested parameter x of a certain control element i ;

[0097] The third determination module is used to determine the parameter coefficient β ivalue of;

[0098] A calculation module, configured to calculate the predicted operation time t and evaluation score S of the manipulation element and all manipulation elements to be measured according to a prediction model;

[0099] A comparison module, configured to compare the calculated average predicted operation time and evaluation score of the entire panel with an evaluation scale.

[0100] The preferred embodiments of the present invention have been described in detail above in conjunction with the accompanying drawings. However, the present invention is not limited to the specific details in the above embodiments. Within the scope of the technical concept of the present invention, various simple modifications can be made to the technical solutions of the present invention, and these simple modifications all fall within the protection scope of the present invention.

[0101] In addition, it should be noted that, among the various specific technical features described in the above specific embodiments, they can be combined in any suitable manner without conflict. To avoid unnecessary repetition, the present invention will not separately describe various possible combination methods.

[0102] Furthermore, any combination can be made between various different embodiments of the present invention as long as it does not violate the idea of the present invention, and it should also be regarded as the content disclosed by the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the ergonomics of manual operations on a multifunctional control panel, characterized in that, The method includes the following steps: Step 1: Determine the reference point RP of the initial working position; Step 2: Determine the parameter x to be measured of a certain operating element i ; Step 3: Determine the value of the parameter coefficient β i ; Step 4: Calculate the predicted operation time t and evaluation score S of the control element according to the prediction model; the calculation formula of the prediction model is as follows: Step 5: Calculate the predicted operation time t and evaluation score S of all the control elements to be measured on the panel to be measured, and perform weighting according to the importance of each control element to calculate the final average predicted operation time and evaluation score of the entire panel; Step 6: Compare the calculated average predicted operation time and evaluation score of the entire panel with the evaluation scale to obtain the final evaluation result; The reference point of the initial working position described in Step 1 is the contact point between the fingertip and the side panel with the side panel when the user targeted by the panel design raises the right arm naturally, straightens it and points it at the panel to be measured in the correct working posture; The number of the to-be-measured parameters selected in Step 2 is 16, i.e., x i , where i = 1 - 16, as specifically shown in Table 1; among them, for the value of the said x, when it is "yes", the value is 1, and when it is "no", the value is 0; Table 1 is the selection table of the parameters to be measured The values of the parameter coefficients are shown in Table 2; Table 2 is the value table of the parameter coefficients 2. The multifunctional control panel manual work efficiency evaluation method according to claim 1, wherein, The discrimination conditions for large-sized components are as follows: If the diameter of the knob is greater than 570 mm and the thickness of the knob handle is greater than 100 mm, the knob element is determined to be large-sized; If the diameter of the button is greater than 570 mm, the button element is determined to be large-sized; If the diameter of the handle of the toggle switch is greater than 6 mm, the toggle switch element is determined to be large-sized.

3. A multifunctional control panel manual work efficiency evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that The parameter coefficients described in Step 3 correspond one by one to the parameters to be measured described in Step 2.

4. A method for evaluating the manual work efficiency of a multifunctional control panel according to claim 1, characterized in that, The evaluation scale described in Step 6 is shown in Table 3; Table 3 is the evaluation scale 5. A multifunctional operation panel manual work efficiency evaluation system for implementing the evaluation method according to any one of claims 1-4, characterized in that, including: The first determination module is used to determine the reference point of the initial working position; A second determination module, configured to determine a parameter x to be measured of a certain operating element i ; A third determination module, configured to determine the value of a parameter coefficient β i ; The calculation module is used to calculate the predicted operation time t and evaluation score S of the control element and all the control elements to be measured according to the prediction model; The comparison module is used to compare the calculated average predicted operation time and evaluation score of the entire panel with the evaluation scale.

Images