Overview
Description of task(s) to be completed: You are required to write a piece of individual coursework addressing the task below.
Human systems engineering (HSE) seeks to ensure we address human considerations within systems engineering (SE) across the whole life cycle. It is important to consider HF methods and key areas of HF knowledge within SE, these might include human physical, cognitive, social, or organisational characteristics.(use Unit 1.4 HSE - exercise part 1. Pg:11)
methods For example: • Task Analysis • Human Error / Reliability • Operational Scenario Modelling
ON CASE phpher alpha
From page 28
Unit 2.1 HSE - Human System Int…
Your assignment has three part:
Part 1: Discuss the role of Human Factors (HF) modelling and HF knowledge across the Systems Engineering (SE) life cycle of a complex socio technical system(it will be the Piper Alpha offshore production platform). You may refer to examples from your group exercise on the module or your wider reading, to help illustrate this(11 SOURCES) [40 marks]
Part 2: As part of your answer to part 1, create at least one new HF related model view. This can be based on work done within the group exercise but should be clearly identified as a new or modified view created by you [20 marks]
Piper alpha case
SoI: Permit to Work and Pump Maintenance Management System
HTA properly. + full SHERPA table+ FULT TREE
Explain it sharply in 250 to 300 words.
Part 3: Write a short discussion of the following question: “how do we include specialist human factors knowledge into the practice of Model Based Systems Engineering, and how is this affected by the increasing use of autonomous solution technologies?(this shuould be Digital Permit to Work System with Automated Conflict Detection.)
” [40 marks]
• Teacher notes
• Units 1 to 5
• Wider reading
• HTA + SHERPA + small Fault Tree
• MBSE + autonomy focus
Total word count about 2000 words.
Title Human Systems Engineering Across the Systems Engineering Life Cycle: A Human Factors Analysis of the Piper Alpha Disaster
System Context Complex socio technical system: Piper Alpha offshore production platform System of Interest: Permit to Work and Pump Maintenance Management System
- Introduction – 150 words
Purpose Define Human Systems Engineering. Define socio technical systems. State that Piper Alpha is analysed across the SE life cycle. State that the paper integrates HF modelling and MBSE.
Use • Unit 1 concepts • Reason 1990, Swiss Cheese model introduced briefly • ISO 15288 mentioned once for life cycle framing
No deep analysis here. Just framing.
- Part 1 – HF Across the SE Life Cycle in Piper Alpha – 700 words
2.1 Piper Alpha as a Complex Socio Technical System Explain interaction of: • Physical equipment • Human operators • Procedures • Organisational culture • Management pressure
Use Cullen for factual grounding.
2.2 Key Areas of HF Knowledge Discuss: • Physical factors • Cognitive factors • Social factors • Organisational factors
Use Unit 1 material.
2.3 HF Across the SE Life Cycle Structure using ISO 15288 phases: • Concept • Design • Implementation • Operation • Modification
Use Unit 3.2 life cycle thinking.
2.4 Swiss Cheese Model Application One focused analytical paragraph. Explain layered failure across: • Technical defences • Procedural controls • Human verification • Organisational oversight
Use Reason 1990 clearly here.
2.5 Architectural Considerations Short paragraph linking to Unit 5: Physical system architecture influenced risk coupling. Human operators embedded within hazardous layout. HF must influence architecture, not only procedures.
- Part 2 – HF Model View – 300 words
Method chosen
HTA + SHERPA + small Fault Tree
3.1 HTA Top goal Safely return Pump A to operational service
Five main tasks Review permits Confirm maintenance completion Verify physical isolation Obtain supervisory authorisation Initiate restart
Brief explanation only.
3.2 SHERPA Select only critical subtasks such as: 1.3 Identify outstanding safety work 2.3 Confirm no conflicting permit 3.1 Confirm valve reinstated 4.3 Authorise restart
For each briefly state:
Error mode
Consequence
Recovery possibility
Criticality
Keep concise.
3.3 Small Fault Tree
Top event
Unsafe pump restart
Contributing branches Failure to detect open safety valve Failure of permit reconciliation Supervisory approval under incomplete information
Explain that this connects task error to system level hazard.
No long tables. Keep analytical.
- Part 3 – HF Integration into MBSE and Impact of Autonomy – 700 words
This is your strongest section.
4.1 Integrating HF into MBSE Explain how HF knowledge enters models through: • Requirements • Functional allocation • Logical architecture • Physical architecture • Verification criteria
Use
INCOSE Handbook 5th edition
ISO 15288
JSP 912
IOGP
Explain traceability of human requirements.
4.2 Architectural Allocation of Function Link to Unit 5: Humans are system elements in architecture. Autonomy shifts function allocation.
4.3 Autonomous Solution Technologies in Your SoI
Two selected technologies:
Digital Permit to Work with automated conflict detection Robotic inspection and valve verification
Explain clearly how these relate directly to your SoI.
4.4 Impact of Autonomy on Traditional HF
Discuss: Shift from manual task execution to supervisory control Trust calibration issues Mode awareness Skill degradation Automation bias Responsibility ambiguity
Use
Parasuraman et al. 2000
Bainbridge 1983
4.5 Critical Reflection
Explain two major impacts:
Impact 1 HF must now model human automation interaction rather than only human task execution.
Impact 2 MBSE must explicitly represent authority boundaries, override logic, and recovery pathways.
Keep critical tone. Not promotional of AI.
- Conclusion – 150 words
Summarise: HF must span life cycle, architecture, modelling, and autonomy. Piper Alpha demonstrates consequences of poor integration. MBSE provides structure for embedding HF. Autonomy changes but does not remove human risk.
No new references.
Final Reference Set
Reason 1990 Cullen 1990 ISO 15288 IOGP 2011 Stanton et al. 2013 Embrey 1986 INCOSE 2023 INCOSE UK Z12 2017 JSP 912 Parasuraman et al. 2000 Bainbridge 1983
This structure:
• Uses class material
• Uses wider reading
• Includes HF model view
• Includes critical analysis
• Integrates MBSE
• Reflects on autonomy without turning into AI essay
• Shows architectural thinking
Figure 1. Human Factors Activities Across the Systems Engineering Life Cycle (adapted from module material).
Where to place it:
Place it in Part 1, after you introduce HF across the life cycle.
Then explicitly refer to it in the text, for example:
“As shown in Figure 1, human factors activities span requirements definition, architectural allocation, verification and in-service monitoring, rather than being confined to detailed design.”
Then in Part 3, refer back to it when discussing autonomy:
“With increasing automation, task allocation and verification activities shown in Figure 1 become more complex, requiring explicit modelling of human–automation interaction.”