Ergonomics Evaluation of Cabin Human–Machine Interface Based on SHEL Model

  • Hongjun XueEmail author
  • Jiayu Chen
  • Ye Yuan
  • Xiaoyan Zhang
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 576)


Effective evaluation of cabin human–machine interface is key to the design quality of human–machine interface, and good interface design can reduce human error. This paper established a cabin evaluation model based on account of SHEL. The method used an improved fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method to restrict the influence of experimenters’ subjective randomness and personal preference on weight coefficient to the maximum extent through expert self-evaluation and subjective judgment process control mechanism. An evaluation experiment of cabin human–machine interface had been conducted to validate the model proposed. The results showed that the model can be used to evaluate the human–machine interface and was more effective compared with the traditional method. The evaluation results of the model can be used to instruct the design of cabin interface.


SHEL model Ergonomics evaluation Man–machine interface Expert evaluation method Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation 


  1. 1.
    He J (2013) Research on the correlation between hand-eye coordination mode and cognitive process of cockpit pilot. Shanghai, ChinaGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yang H, Zhao J, Guo J (2009) Theoretical study on accident prevention of human-machine system. Chin J Saf Sci 19:21–26Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shi J (2007) Research on multi-objective optimization of distribution network based on fuzzy evaluation. Shangdong, ChinaGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jin H, Peng W, Wang Y (2010) Study on man-machine evaluation of products. In: Proceedings of 2010 2nd International conference on intelligent human-machine systems and cybemetics, vol 1, pp 48–51Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Subramanian N, Ramanathan R (2012) A review of applications of analytic hierarchy in operations management. Int J Prod Econ 138:215–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen L, Chang S (2011) An Approach of AHP for human factors analysis in the aircraft icing accident. In: 2nd International symposium on aircraft airworthiness, vol 1, pp 63–69Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhang K, Chen H, Shang L (2011) Application of comprehensive evaluation method in ship cockpit design. J Wuhan Univ Technol 35:1077–1080Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wang Y, Wang H (2011) Research on human factors in aviation maintenance based on gray theory. Chin J Ergon 17:60–63Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lin Y, Lee P (2009) Effective evaluation model under the condition of insufficient and uncertain information. Expert Syst Appl 36:5600–5604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yu K (2012) Study on comprehensive evaluation of man-machine interface in large ship cab. Harbin, ChinaGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yuan X, Hao D, Liu H (2017) Study on evaluation methods of cockpit human-computer interface of civil aircraft. Civil Aircraft Des Res 1:20–21Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hongjun Xue
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jiayu Chen
    • 1
  • Ye Yuan
    • 1
  • Xiaoyan Zhang
    • 1
  1. 1.Northwestern Polytechnical UniversityXi’anChina

Personalised recommendations