Situational awareness wg survey results q1 2013
Download
1 / 11

Situational Awareness WG Survey Results – Q1 2013 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 57 Views
  • Uploaded on

Situational Awareness WG Survey Results – Q1 2013. Survey Preamble.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Situational Awareness WG Survey Results – Q1 2013' - isleen


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Situational awareness wg survey results q1 2013

Situational Awareness WGSurvey Results – Q1 2013


Survey Preamble

The scope of the SA (Situation Awareness) working group is to analyze the effectiveness of information delivery systems in mining equipment and develop a unified display design, to mitigate against the proliferation of screens within equipment cabs. This working group comprises a variety of stakeholders representing a cross-section of relevant mining and mining-related organizations. This stakeholder network will help guide the direction of the working group towards a common, mutually beneficial end. For now, the focus is on shovel displays; however it should be noted that this work is expected to form the foundation for similar work with other equipment in the future. The following survey aims to collect input from stakeholders for the direction of next steps in the Common User Interface project and to create a strategy for greater outreach to and inclusion of industry in the project. We appreciate your taking the time to complete the survey. In the interest of your time, please provide a brief, 2-3 line response to questions, or feel free to use bulleted lists, etc, in your answers.


Q1: Describe the SA working group’s mandate based on your understanding

Eliminate clutter and screen sprawl / improve situational awareness in the cab

Developing frameworks or guidelines on how to consolidate systems so that unified screen may be used


Q2: understandingDo you feel the first round of work completed by Situational Awareness (SA) Technologies was well aligned with the project scope? Can you identify any areas that were lacking?

  • Two themes to the responses (excluding those that declined to answer due to being new to the group):

    • Fully aligned (and this was the overwhelming response from 7 of 11 respondents)

    • Two respondents mentioned that the initial work described the ‘end’ but we should be focusing more on the means to the end.

  • Areas identified as lacking:

    • Alarm/message prioritization

    • Optimal alarm / message delivery methods

    • Justification or the science to back the UI design


Q3. What understandingdo you think are the biggest threats to the success of this project?

  • Lack of buy-in from:

    • stakeholder companies at executive level

    • mining equipment and software vendors

  • Lack of time from working group participants

  • Overstepping the bounds of the MSGC goal


  • Q4. understandingWhat do you think are the biggest benefits and opportunities brought on by this work?

    Increased safety

    Increased productivity

    More efficient use of available technology (reduced training time, increasing operator acceptance)


    Q5. The mission of the MSGC is to make all information publicly available and to engage the mining industry on the results of the first phase; what issues and/or challenges do you see and how do you see accomplishing this?

    • Challenges:

      • Resistance from OEM/OTMS (“what’s in it for me?”, perceived as encroaching into their territory)

      • Conflicts of interest

    • Addressing these issues:

      • Communication: publishing papers, presentations at conferences

      • Licensing the output of the work (GNU/GPL perhaps)

      • Emphasizing that the vendor-driven solutions rather than user-driven are unsustainable




    Q8. in 2013?What do you envisage as the final outcome of the projet?

    Mock-up of unified display

    Guidelines on how applications should be expected to interface to a single display

    Industry awareness of SA

    A real-world deployment of a unified display


    Q9. in 2013?Name at least 2 companies/stakeholders that are not currently represented in the working group who you think are most important to get involved


    ad