D4.1 Global Strategy HMI - tacoproject.eu€¦ · Global Strategy HMI D4.1 TaCo Grant: 699382 Call:...

Global Strategy HMI D4.1

TaCo Grant: 699382 Call: H2020-SESAR-2015-1 Topic: Sesar-01-2015 Automation in ATM Consortium coordinator: Deep Blue Edition date: 19 February 2018 Edition: 01.00.00

EXPLORATORY RESEARCH

2

“© – 2018 – Deep Blue, ENAC, MATS. All rights reserved. Licensed to the SESAR Joint Undertaking under conditions.

Authoring & Approval

Authors of the document

Name/Beneficiary Position/Title Date

Stéphane Conversy/ENAC Project Contributor 31/01/2018

Jérémie Garcia/ENAC Project Contributor 01/02/2018

Mathieu Cousy/ENAC Project Contributor 01/02/2018

Reviewers internal to the project


Damiano Taurino/DBL Project Coordinator 22/02/2018

Giuseppe Frau/DBL Project Contributor 10/02/2018

Approved for submission to the SJU By — Representatives of beneficiaries involved in the project


Damiano Taurino/DBL Project Coordinator 22/02/2018

Stéphane Conversy/ENAC Project Contributor 19/02/2018

Rejected By - Representatives of beneficiaries involved in the project


Document History

Edition Date Status Author Justification

00.00.00 31/01/2018 Draft Stéphane Conversy Initial

00.01.00 12/02/2018 Draft Stéphane Conversy Revision

00.02.00 16/02/2018 Draft Stéphane Conversy Revision

00.04.00 19/02/2018 Consolidated Stéphane Conversy Revision

01.00.00 22/02/2018 Issued Stéphane Conversy Final review

D4.1 GLOBAL STRATEGY HMI

© – 2018 – Deep Blue, ENAC, MATS All rights reserved. Licensed to the SESAR Joint Undertaking under conditions

3

TaCo TAKE CONTROL – AUTOMATED SOLUTIONS FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF GROUND AIRPORT MOVEMENTS

This deliverable has received funding from the SESAR Joint Undertaking under grant agreement No 699382 under European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation.

Abstract

TaCo project addresses the effective collaboration between the human operators and the automation as a solution to challenges brought by the management of complex airport operations.

This document describes the Human-Machine Interface (HMI) to control the global automation strategy on the airport. The HMI consists in a set of interactors to select a peculiar strategy, to control the parameters of the algorithm, and to control the resulting sequence of departures in a Departure Manager. The selected global strategy is turned into parameters for the algorithm described in [3].

This deliverable consists in the description of interactions i.e. the sequence of actions and reactions between the graphical representation and the gestures from the end-user. The specifications of the interactions come in several forms, included in or accompanying this document: drawings, scenarios, and videos. The interactions have been designed and discussed with the Air Traffic Controllers (ATCO) from Malta. The interactions comply with the requirements and operational needs described in defined in D2.1 – Automated airport – Problem definition [1].

4


Table of Contents

Abstract ................................................................................................................................... 3

1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 6

1.1 Purpose and Scope of this document.............................................................................. 6

1.2 Deliverable Structure ..................................................................................................... 6

1.3 List of Acronyms ............................................................................................................ 7

2 Methodology ............................................................................................................. 8

3 HMI Architecture and Components ........................................................................... 10

3.1 Overview ..................................................................................................................... 10

3.2 The Global Strategy Selector HMI ................................................................................. 11

3.3 The Departure Manager Configuration HMI .................................................................. 13 3.3.1 HMI .................................................................................................................................................. 13 3.3.2 Presets ............................................................................................................................................. 14

3.4 The Unsolved Constraints HMI ..................................................................................... 15

3.5 The Departure Manager HMI ....................................................................................... 15

4 Scenarios and Interactions ....................................................................................... 18

4.1 Applying different strategies ........................................................................................ 18 4.1.1 “Less fuel consumption” strategy ................................................................................................... 19 4.1.2 “Runway usage” strategy ................................................................................................................ 20

4.2 Applying a strategy and solving unsolved constraints ................................................... 22

5 Deliverable items, status of interactions and dissemination levels ............................ 26

5.1 Deliverable items......................................................................................................... 26

5.2 Status of interactions ................................................................................................... 26

5.3 Dissemination levels .................................................................................................... 27

6 Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 28

References ...................................................................................................................... 29



5

Table of Figures

Figure 1: HMI for the supervisor controller .......................................................................................... 10 Figure 2: HMI for the ground controller ................................................................................................ 11 Figure 3: “Exclusive-choice” Global Strategy HMI ................................................................................. 11 Figure 4: “Multiple-choices” Global Strategy HMI ................................................................................ 12 Figure 5: “Weighted choices” Global Strategy HMI .............................................................................. 12 Figure 5: “Weighted choices” Formula ................................................................................................. 12 Figure 6: DMAN Configuration HMI ...................................................................................................... 14 Figure 7: Unsolved Constraints HMI ...................................................................................................... 15 Figure 8: DMAN HMI ............................................................................................................................. 16 Figure 9: Representation modes for separation ................................................................................... 17 Figure 10: Initial situation ...................................................................................................................... 18 Figure 11: Status of DMAN after selection of the “less fuel consumption” strategy ............................ 19 Figure 12: Status of radar for the “less fuel consumption” strategy, AMC102 at parking ................... 19 Figure 13: Status of DMAN after a delay occurred and the information arrived soon enough ............ 20 Figure 14: Status of DMAN after selection of the “runway usage” strategy ........................................ 20 Figure 15: Status of radar for the “runway usage” strategy, AMC102 at runway holding point .......... 21 Figure 16: Status of DMAN after a delay occurred ............................................................................... 21 Figure 17: Initial condition with the Runway usage strategy applied to the DMAN. ............................ 22 Figure 18: Applying the save fuel strategy raises unsolved constraints. .............................................. 22 Figure 19: Selecting a problem to display possible actions for solving it. Animations are displayed in red. ........................................................................................................................................................ 23 Figure 20: Updating the suggested configuration parameters manually. ............................................ 24 Figure 21: Updated DMAN configuration producing a new sequence without problem. .................... 25

Table of Tables Table 1: Design schedule and participants. ............................................................................................. 8 Table 1 : Preset values for DMAN Configuration according to strategies. ............................................ 14

6


1 Introduction

1.1 Purpose and Scope of this document

One objective of the “Take Control” (TaCo) project is to provide the ATCOs with means to decide and adjust a global strategy for the automation of taxiing [1]. The strategies correspond to key-performance indicators as defined in [1] and includes for example “minimizing fuel consumption” or “maximize runway usage”. The strategy choice is fed to an algorithm that computes and optimizes a departure sequence, as described in [3].

This document describes the Human Machine Interfaces to control the global strategy and monitor its implementation on the traffic. In particular, the document includes mock-ups of the Interface, the Design Rationale behind the choices we made and realistic scenarios illustrating their use based on Operational Requirements and Use Cases from [1] .

Since the taxiing strategy might have a strong impact on the work of the tower ATCO at Malta, the traffic information should be shared between the ground and tower control positions, especially on the construction of the departure sequence. Hence, we designed and implemented a configurable departure manager, as required by O.N. 04.2 “Providing a departure sequence“ [1].

The opinions expressed herein reflect the author’s view only. Under no circumstances shall the SESAR Joint Undertaking be responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained herein.

1.2 Deliverable Structure

Section 1 introduces the document.

Section 2 introduces the methodology we followed to design the Global Strategy HMI.

Section 3 describes the HMI architecture and the main components of the HMI.

Section 4 illustrates the envisioned use of this HMI through several use cases and scenarios.

Section 5 summarizes the content of the document, the status of the deliverables and their dissemination levels.

Section 6 concludes the document and links the deliverable to future ones.



7

1.3 List of Acronyms

ADC Aerodrome Controller

ATCO Air Traffic Control Officer

A-SMGCS Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System

CFMU Central Flow Management Unit

CTOT Calculated Take Off Time

DMAN Departure Manager

EEC Eurocontrol

ENAC Ecole Nationale de l’Aviation Civile

GMC Ground Movement Controller

HMI Human Machine Interface

ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization

LMML Malta International Airport

LOC Localizer

MATS Malta Air Traffic Services

ON Operational Need

TaCo Take Control

TOBT Target Off Block Time

TSAT Target Start up Approval Time

8


2 Methodology

A motto of the TaCo project is to design solutions with respect to the actual problems encountered by users, or in other words to maximize the usability of the solutions. Usability is the “extent to which a product can be used by specified users to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction in a specified context of use” [5]. Human-centered design is concerned with the design of such usable systems. HCD is “an approach to systems design and development that aims to make interactive systems more usable by focusing on the use of the system and applying human factors/ergonomics and usability knowledge and techniques”. In particular, the design is based upon an explicit understanding of users, tasks and environments and is driven and refined by user-centered evaluation.

Users + Experts + Designers

Malta

Sep 2016

Interviews

Toulouse

Jan 2017

Work scenarios

Malta

Jun 2017

Evaluation and Design Scenarios

Malta

Apr 2018

Evaluation

Designers Research Proposal

Problem Definition

and

Operational Requirements

Work scenario Consolidation + Draft of design Scenarios

More complete Interactions and Design scenarios

Table 1: Design schedule and participants.

Table 1 includes the design schedule and the participants of the design session. We first analyzed the activity of ATCOS by conducted interviews of ATCOs and Experts at MATS facilities. We then organized a workshop in Toulouse with ATCOs from MATS to collaboratively mockup work scenarios i.e. highly illustrated description of sequences of events and actions that occurred on the airport in the recent past. Those scenarios were later reworked, improved and detailed by the designer team, before being sent to MATS ATCOs for validation. This resulted in a number of Use Cases [1], a solid base for the shared understanding of the problem the project members were addressing in the TaCo project.

The designers then performed in-house design sessions to mock-up some ideas and partially implemented a number of them, including the selection of the global strategy and the use of a DMAN as an implementation of the strategy. Another workshop was conducted in Malta to present the design work to ATCOs and make them react to it. In particular, designers, ATCOs and experts discussed together how the choice of strategies would influence the taxiing traffic. In that occasion, TaCo team



9

had the occasion to make some direct observations of controllers’ everyday work in the control tower of Malta Airport. The designers then performed other in-house design sessions taking into account the feedback from ATCOs and the considerations collected during the observations.

This deliverable is the result of the last step. The HMIs will be presented again to ATCOs in a final evaluation workshop in Malta (WP5), together with the work done on the Domain-Specific Graphical Language (D4.2).

10


3 HMI Architecture and Components

This section introduces the Human-Machine Interfaces. First, we present an overview of the interface for two kinds of users. We then present in more details each component.

3.1 Overview

The envisioned system is composed of 2 interconnected positions: one for the supervisor controller, and one for the ground controller. The envisioned activity of the supervisor consists in managing the airport at a ‘strategy’ level according to the planned traffic. The supervisor would be in charge of selecting the global strategy that is suitable according to the planned traffic, checking that the selecting strategy complies with the rules of the airport, and adjust the strategy if it does not. The role of the ground controller would be to manage the traffic at a ‘tactical’ level, using information on the planned traffic, and being aware of the selected strategy while not be able to change it. This ‘inability’ could be discussed with the ATCOs during the evaluation (WP5).

The HMI for the supervisor (Figure 1) and for the ground controller (Figure 2) are composed of 4 main Human-Machine components: the Global Strategy Selector HMI, the Departure Manager Configuration HMI, the Unsolved Constraints HMI and the Departure Manager HMI.

As described in [3], the Global Strategy HMI controls the values of the parameter in the Departure Manager Configuration HMI, which in turn controls the algorithm that compute the sequence in the Departure Manager.

A particular DMAN configuration is called a preset. As described below, each strategy “loads” a preset into the DMAN Configuration HMI.

Figure 1: HMI for the supervisor controller

From l. to r. , Global Strategy Selector, DMAN Configuration, Unsolved Constraints, DMAN



11

Figure 2: HMI for the ground controller

From l. to r, Global Strategy Selector (view only), DMAN

3.2 The Global Strategy Selector HMI

The Global Strategy Selector HMI enables the supervisor to control and view the status of the Global Strategy. We have designed three versions of the Global Strategy Selector HMI. The three versions differ in the amount of control allowed to the user. We will propose the three versions to the Malta ATCOs to foster discussions and evaluations, and to provide design rationale for a final decision (that may include keeping all the solutions alive and let the users custom their view at runtime).

The first version uses an HMI based on radio buttons (Figure 3). Each strategy is associated to a radio button. Radio buttons enable users to choose one strategy exclusively. The strengths of this approach lie in its simplicity: there is no ambiguity as to the status of the current strategy. The weaknesses lie in the fact that users will not be able to favor multiple strategies.

Figure 3: “Exclusive-choice” Global Strategy HMI

The second version uses an HMI based on check boxes (Figure 4). Each strategy is associated to a check box. Check boxes enable users to select or unselect multiple strategies. When two or more strategies are selected, the parameters of the DMAN Configuration HMI are the average of the values of the parameters of each selected strategy. The strength of this approach is that one can enable a combination of strategies. However, it is unclear whether the combination leads to meaningful results in terms of departure sequence. There is a risk that no result be particularly satisfying, especially if the

12


selected strategies are mostly opposite ones (e.g. less noise and runway usage as the last one implies to start early).

Figure 4: “Multiple-choices” Global Strategy HMI

The third version uses an HMI based on sliders (Figure 5). Each strategy is associated to a slider that controls a real weight between 0 and 1. This approach enables users to specify a “weighted sum” of particular strategies. The control algorithm works as follows. Each slider controls a value between 0 and 1. A sum over all slider values is made, which gives a value between 0 and n (n being the number of parameters). Each slider value is normalized by dividing by the sum. Each value of the DMAN Configuration HMI is set to the weighted sum of the presets corresponding to a strategy (see the example formula for TSAT in ).

The strength of this approach is that the user can finely control the relative weight of multiple strategy. However, the outcome of such configuration might be difficult to predict. Furthermore, the understanding of the internal mechanisms might not be clear for the users, especially if they have to remind it in stressful situation.

Figure 5: “Weighted choices” Global Strategy HMI

Figure 6: “Weighted choices” Formula



13

The Global Strategy Selector HMI is meant to be controlled by the supervisor, while the ground controller would only be able to monitor it so as to be aware of the current strategy.

3.3 The Departure Manager Configuration HMI

The Departure Manager (DMAN) Configuration HMI allows the supervisor to check the value of the parameters that feed the departure sequence manager once a particular strategy has been selected. It also allows the user to finely control each parameter if need be.

There are four controllable parameters: “CTOT range”, “Max Take Off queue length”, “TSAT range” and “Holding time range”.

• “CTOT range” represents the range of allowed values around the CTOT (max anticipation: -5min, max delay: +10mn, values issued by Eurocontrol).

• “Maximum take-off queue length” is the maximum number of aircraft allowed to be in queue at the runway holding points. At LMML this number is 3 at its maximum.

• “TSAT range” is the additional waiting time allowed after the TOBT. When this parameter increases, it means the aircraft will preferably wait at the parking rather than queueing at the holding points. Max TSAT is 5min at LMML.

• “Holding time range” is the waiting time allowed at the runway holding points. When this parameter increases, it means the aircraft will start taxiing as soon as they are ready and then wait at the runway holding points. Max holding time is 5min at LMML.

The parameters have been selected according to the sub requirements of REQ-TACO-OSED-ON.04100 “Coordination between the ADC and GMC for international IFR departures”, REQ-TACO-OSED-ON.0420 “Providing a departure sequence“ and O.N. 04.5 “Providing Runway Separation for departures” [1].

3.3.1 HMI

Figure 7 represents the DMAN Configuration HMI:

• “CTOT range” is controllable with a range slider and allows to delay by up to 10min or to advance by up to 5 min the take-off with respect to CTOT. A range slider enables users to press and drag independently the end-values of a thumb. The values are arranged around a tick that marks the take-off (icon of a departing aircraft).

• “Max Take Off queue length” is controllable thanks to a spinner widget: the user can click on a “minus” or a “plus” button to decrement or increment the value.

• “TSAT range” and “Holding time range” parameters are expressed in minutes. They are both controllable with a slider: users can press on one end and drag to finely control the parameter (the resolution is 10s). The sliders are arranged with opposite directions: the layout of the interface has been designed to facilitate understanding of what the parameters control. The layout of these two widgets is compatible with the order of operations: “TSAT range” occurs after “off block time” (base of TSAT range slider), then the flight performs taxiing (curvy arrow)), then waits during “holding time range” until time of Take Off (end of Holding time range” slider).

14


Figure 7: DMAN Configuration HMI

3.3.2 Presets

As described above, each selection of a global strategy “loads” a preset into the DMAN Configuration HMI. Table 2 provides the values for each configuration. These presets are configurable and their accuracy and effectiveness will be improved by their continuous monitoring and assessment during pre-operational and operational usage of TaCo.

CTOT Queue Length TSAT Holding time

Less fuel [-5mn;+10mn] (EEC) 0 Max (5mn LMML) 0mn

Runway usage [-5mn;+10mn] (EEC) Max (3 LMML) 0mn Max (5mn LLML)

Predictability [-3mn;+3mn] Max (3 LMML) Max (5mn LMML) Max (5mn LLML)

Capacity/Resilience [-5mn;+10mn] (EEC) 1/2 2mn 2mn

Table 2 : Preset values for DMAN Configuration according to strategies.

The rationale behind the presets is as follows:

• Less fuel: no queue at the runway holding point, no holding time at runway to minimize fuel consumption. Maximum allowance for CTOT and TSAT to allow the algorithm to find solutions.

• Runway usage: maximum queue at runway holding point, holding time at runway and TSAT at parking to maximize runway usage. Maximum allowance for CTOT to allow the algorithm to find solutions.

• Predictability: more constraints on CTOT ([-3;3]. Maximum allowance for CTOT, Queue and TSAT to allow the algorithm to find solutions.



15

• Capacity/resilience: maximum CTOT value to allow resilience, only one or two in the queue to avoid any congestion in case of aircraft problem, medium values for TSAT and Holding time to both allow flexibility while limiting possible congestion.

3.4 The Unsolved Constraints HMI

The Unsolved Constraints HMI synthesizes all constraints that were not met by the algorithm (Figure 8). There are two kinds of constraints: holding capacity and runway separation. “Holding capacity” refers to an excess in flights waiting at the runway holding point. The view displays both the computed value, and the maximum as authorized in the DMAN configuration HMI. “Runway separation” lists all pairs of flight that are not separated on the runway. Each pair displays the two callsigns, the predicted separation time with a red background, and the separation time to respect (e.g. “ < 2’ ”). The unsolved constraints are also displayed on the list of flights of the DMAN (see below).

Figure 8: Unsolved Constraints HMI

The view can also suggest to the user means to reconfigure the algorithm so as to solve the unsolved constraints. The suggestions are displayed thanks to animations on the relevant graphical components in the DMAN Configuration HMI (see section 4.2 for an example of its usage and for illustrations).

3.5 The Departure Manager HMI

The (A)DMAN HMI enables ATCOs (supervisor and ground) to monitor and control the sequence of departures (Figure 9). The HMI is composed of three components: a vertical list of flights, a property sheet to progressively disclose more information on a particular flight, and a two similar control boxes to edit the CTOT and TOBT values of a particular flight.

The vertical list is a column of ‘strips’ corresponding to each flight. The strips are arranged according to a flight dimension, usually the time of departure/arrival. Each strip displays information on the flight: callsign, whether it is departing or arriving, the overall time with engines on (with a circle arrow), the aircraft type (e.g. M)) and TOBT or CTOT (hh:mm:ss). Separations between flights are represented with a space and the separation time. If the separation time is not respected by the algorithm, the

16


background is red. There are two display modes for separation: either proportional or ordered only (Figure 10).

Figure 9: DMAN HMI

The user can disclose more information by clicking on a strip. A property sheet linked to the flight with a connecter appears and display additional fields: CTOT, TOBT, Taxi Time, TSAT, Waiting time and Take-off time.

The user can modify the values of CTOT and TOBT e.g. to compensate discrepancies from the plan or to mitigate contingencies such as delay. Edition is triggered by clicking on the CTOT or TBOT field, which in turn displays a control box containing a spinner widget. The spinner allows the user to decrement or increment the time value by steps of xx seconds. The control box is linked with the respective property in the property sheet with a dashed connector.



17

Figure 10: Representation modes for separation

18


4 Scenarios and Interactions

This section illustrates how the set of HMIs described in the previous sections enables users to perform their activity. We present three design scenarios i.e. scenarios with the envisioned sequence of interactions, together with descriptions of the actions performed by the user and reactions from the machine explanation and explanations concerning the intention of the users.

In order to be realistic and in order to foster meaningful comments from actual end-users (MATS ATCOs), the design scenarios are based on the use cases described in [1].

4.1 Applying different strategies

For the sake of comparison, we present two similar scenarios in which some of the steps or configurations are different. This shows how a strategy might lead to a different outcome than another strategy and illustrates how users cope with unplanned events.

All scenarios start with the same set of flights (Figure 11): 3 arrivals at 07:00:00 / 07:07:00 / 07:09:00 and 2 departures:

• AMC102: TOBT (target/requested off-block time) 07:04:30; Predicted taxiing time: 00:04:24

• RYR2955: TOBT 07:10:00; Predicted taxiing time: 00:03:58

All aircrafts belong to the “M” wake turbulence category, hence the separations between flights is 1 minute.

Figure 11: Initial situation



19

4.1.1 “Less fuel consumption” strategy

The supervisor selects the “less fuel consumption” strategy which mainly makes aircraft wait as much as possible at parking and start up the engines at the very last moment (see Figure 12 and Figure 13). Hence, selecting this strategy configures a 3mn waiting time after TOBT (TSAT is the actual time the aircraft leaves block). The algorithm computes a sequence in which AMC102 waits for 1mn10 at parking (TOBT=07:04:30 / TSAT = 07:05:40). This enables AMC102 to take off as soon as it arrives at the runway threshold.

Figure 12: Status of DMAN after selection of the “less fuel consumption” strategy

Figure 13: Status of radar for the “less fuel consumption” strategy, AMC102 at parking

20


However, an unexpected event occurs: DLH2PH is 2 minutes late for arrival. Depending on the time the information on the delay is available, there may by two consequences:

• If the delay is known before 07:04:30 (i.e. AMC102 TOBT), AMC102 can start up sooner and take off between AZ886 and DLH2PH (see Figure 14);

• If the delay is known after 07:04:30, AMC 102 will not be on time to take off and the initial sequence is maintained i.e. it cannot be optimized.

Figure 14: Status of DMAN after a delay occurred and the information arrived soon enough

4.1.2 “Runway usage” strategy

The supervisor selects the “runway usage” strategy which mainly makes aircraft start up as soon as possible on the parking, taxi and wait at the runway threshold i.e. burn fuel during wait (see Figure 15 and Figure 16). Hence, selecting this strategy configures a 3 minutes waiting time at the runway threshold. The algorithm computes a sequence in which AMC102 starts up at 07:04:30 (TSAT = TOBT) and waits 1:10 minutes at runway (Waiting time = 00:01:10), burning fuel unnecessarily but being ready to depart.

Figure 15: Status of DMAN after selection of the “runway usage” strategy



21

Figure 16: Status of radar for the “runway usage” strategy, AMC102 at runway holding point

However, an unexpected event occurs: DLH2PH is 2mn late for arrival. Since AMC 102 is already waiting at runway threshold, it can take off between AZ886 and DLH2PH (Figure 17).

Figure 17: Status of DMAN after a delay occurred

22


4.2 Applying a strategy and solving unsolved constraints

This scenario shows how the supervisor chooses a strategy, how the algorithm is able to detect unsolved constraints, how the unsolved constraints are reported to the user through the HMI, how the HMI suggests possible means of resolution, and how the user changes the configuration of the DMAN to meet the constraints.

In the initial situation the controller uses a “maximize runway usage” strategy as illustrated in Figure 18.

Figure 18: Initial condition with the Runway usage strategy applied to the DMAN.

As the traffic is decreasing, the controller decides to update the strategy to “less fuel consumption” instead of the previous one. She selects the strategy to apply its parameters to the DMAN as presented in Figure 19.

Figure 19: Applying the save fuel strategy raises unsolved constraints.

The newly computed sequence contains an unsolved constraint displayed in the dedicated panel. Here the separation time is too short between two flights. In addition to the unsolved constraints panel, the separation time in the sequence list is colored to help identifying the problem within the sequence.



23

The controller selects the problem in the constraints panel to get suggestions on how to solve it as presented in Figure 20. Once selected, animations emphasize possible changes to the DMAN configuration that would support problem resolutions. In this example, the take-off queue blinks to suggest increasing the queue before the runway and the holding time range is animated to suggest adding possible holding time for the flights.

Figure 20: Selecting a problem to display possible actions for solving it. Animations are displayed in red.

Then, the controller decides to follow the suggestions and updates the parameters as presented in Figure 21. She allows one flight to be in the takeoff queue and increases the possible holding time to two minutes. This will allow the algorithm to find a sequence that preserves the minimum separation time between the two flights.

24


Figure 21: Updating the suggested configuration parameters manually.

Eventually, a new sequence without separation problems is computed and displayed in the sequence list as presented in Figure 22.



25

Figure 22: Updated DMAN configuration producing a new sequence without problem.

26


5 Deliverable items, status of interactions and dissemination levels

5.1 Deliverable items

Apart from this document, the deliverable includes five videos that demonstrate the interactions:

• video “1 - Strategy HMI - radio buttons” demonstrates how to use the radio buttons version of the Strategy HMI, and how this selects a preset of the DMAN Configuration HMI

• video “2 - Strategy HMI - check box” demonstrates how to use the check button version of the Strategy HMI, and how this selects a mix of presets of the DMAN Configuration HMI

• video “3 - Strategy HMI - sliders” demonstrates how to use the sliders version of the Strategy HMI, and how this mixes presets of the DMAN Configuration HMI in a continuous manner.

• video “4 - Unsolved constraints HMI” demonstrates the apparition of unsolved constraints due to a change of strategy or a change of the DMAN Configuration. For this video, the unsolved constraints HMI uses a previous version of the graphical design.

• video “5 - DMAN HMI - Adjusting flight parameters” demonstrates how to adjust flight parameters from the DMAN HMI.

5.2 Status of interactions

All interactions in the videos have been developed using the djnn Framwork [4]. The data are real, and the connection with the algorithm is working.

Video “4 - Unsolved constraints HMI” uses on older version of the design. The Unsolved constraints HMI described in the present document has been implemented in graphics only. The interactions of section 4.2 on the constraints solution propositions are conceptual: only graphical mockups have been produced.

All HMI depicted in the document mostly use level-of-greys graphics. This is a design choice: we want to reserve color for future uses, depending on the feedback of the ATCOs. We are aware that some graphical features need more work. For example, the DMAN should have animations when the sequence changes so as to make users better understand what has changed.



27

5.3 Dissemination level

The dissemination level of the present document and the videos is Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission Services).

28


6 Conclusion

We have described the HMI for the “global strategy” aspect of TaCo. There are two HMIs: one for the supervisor, one for a ground controller. The two HMIs are made of four HMI components: Strategy selector, DMAN Configuration, Unmet Constraints, DMAN. We have illustrated their use through 3 scenarios. Apart from the present document, the deliverable includes 5 videos to better understand the dynamic aspect of the interactions.

This HMI is a part of a more comprehensive HMI. Notably the “global strategy” HMI described here is linked to the “Domain-Specific Graphical Language” HMI currently under design that will be described in D4.2.

Both HMI will be subject to evaluations by Malta ATCOs in April 2018 as part of WP5.



29

References

[1] TaCo project - D2.1 - Problem Definition v02.01.00. Nov. 2017. [2] TaCo project - D2.2 - State of the Art v01.00.00. Jan. 2017. [3] TaCo project - D3.1 - Automation Library v01.01.00. Jan. 2018. [4] Chatty, S., Magnaudet, M., Prun, D., Conversy, S., Rey, S., Poirier, M. Designing, developing and verifying interactive components iteratively with djnn. In Proceedings of the 8th European Congress on Embedded Real Time Software and Systems (long article at ERTS), 2016. [5] ISO/TR 9241-100:2010(E) - Ergonomics of human-system interaction — Part 100: Introduction to standards related to software ergonomics. 2010.

Date post:	14-Jun-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

D4.1 Global Strategy HMI - tacoproject.eu€¦ · Global Strategy HMI D4.1 TaCo Grant: 699382 Call:...

Documents