Human factors three ways – a comparison of approaches to HF integration on a single rail engineering project

Human factors integration is a relatively new consideration for rail engineering projects in Australia. This paper uses the example of a large rail engineering project, recently completed in Victoria, Australia, as a case... [ view full abstract ]

Human factors integration is a relatively new consideration for rail engineering projects in Australia. This paper uses the example of a large rail engineering project, recently completed in Victoria, Australia, as a case study to look at how human factors is applied at project level, and takes a “lessons learned” approach to provide considerations for future projects on where value might be added. The project in question involved the development of a new rail corridor and included the design and construction of new stations, signalling works, development of a new train control system, level crossing grade separations and power and communications works. The extensive scope was broken up in to a number of distinct, largely geographical work packages that were each managed by a separate project team, all governed by a single rail authority. Each package was required as part of their safety management system to demonstrate consideration of human factors (HF) in engineering design, including in accordance with the client’s project HF integration plan. Given the staggered rollout of each work package, there has been opportunity to review how each tackled the challenge of incorporating a relatively new discipline into their engineering design and safety management processes, to compare the method of integrating HF and to examine the efficacy and challenges of each approach. This paper examines the approach taken by three of the work packages (defined as Work Packs 1, 2 and 3), each positioning the human factors function under the umbrella of Engineering but with a progressive development in scope evident, with the HF role respectively as a standalone function, as part of a Systems Assurance team or integrated into a model for Systems Assurance, operating at a more system-wide level; all work packs utilised the expertise of the same HF consultant to support the project works. Each Work Pack has been compared on elements including the level and timeliness of HF engagement, degree of integration into both the engineering design teams and the project processes, opportunity to influence design and safety outcomes, and the management and usefulness of the HF deliverables as far as aligning with stakeholder requirements and demonstrating the contribution the HF consultant was able to make to the work package outputs. The aim of this review was to establish a model for effective HF integration that might be utilised by future projects to aid in achieving the most benefit from this vital role.