NO AI WRITING

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]

Rubric
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

---

1. 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.

---

1. 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.

---

1. 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.

---

1. 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.

---

1. 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:

Answers all rubric requirements
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 humanautomation interaction.

WRITE MY PAPER