Quantification of Rail Signaller Demand Through Simulation

  • Lise Delamare
  • David Golightly
  • Graham Goswell
  • Peter Treble
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 726)


Demand factors are understood to play a substantial role in the experience of workload in rail signalling operations. Quantifying these demand parameters in signalling operations can inform both decisions about operational practice as well as technology design. To date, however, tools to estimate demand have either relied on assessor judgement of static or aggregated parameters, can be time-consuming to produce, and challenging when a workstation is changing or being developed. In order to anticipate the evolution of railway signalling, the Dynamic Modelling of Operator Demand (D-MOD) tool uses signalling simulation to derive accurate demand parameter measurements. This paper presents the architecture and design of the D-MOD platform, as well as the types of parameters that have been identified and quantified. Different categories of parameter, including static, dynamic and performance parameters have been captured and validated. Future directions for the tool are discussed.


Rail signalling Demand Workload Simulation Quantification 



Thank you to all Human Factors consultants, Network Rail, RSSB for their attendance to our Human Factors signalling working group. This project is co-founded by Innovate UK and EPSRC as part of the Knowledge Transfer Partnership programme.


  1. 1.
    Sharples, S., Millen, L., Golightly, D., Balfe, N.: The impact of automation on rail signalling operations. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part F: J. Rail Rapid Transit 244, 1–13 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wilson, J.R., Farrington-Darby, T., Cox, G., Bye, R., Hockey, G.R.J.: The railway as a socio-technical system: human factors at the heart of successful rail engineering. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part F: J. Rail Rapid Transit 221(1), 101–115 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pickup, L., Wilson, J.R., Sharpies, S., Norris, B., Clarke, T., Young, M.S.: Fundamental examination of mental workload in the rail industry. Theor. Issues Ergon. Sci. 6(6), 463–482 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pickup, L., Balfe, N., Lowe, E., Wilson, J.R.: ‘He’s not from around here: the significance of local knowledge. Rail Hum. Factors: Supporting Reliab. Saf. cost Reduction, 357 (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pickup, L., Wilson, J., Lowe, E.: The operational demand evaluation checklist (ODEC) of workload for railway signalling. Appl. Ergon. 41(3), 393–402 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wright, K., Crabb, R.: Making the invisible visible: an objective measure of cognitive workload for signallers. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Rail Human Factor, London (2015)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Golightly, D., Wilson, J.R., Lowe, E., Sharples, S.: The role of situation awareness for understanding signalling and control in rail operations. Theor. Issues Ergon. Sci. 11(12), 84–98 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Delamare, D., Golightly, D., Treble, P., Lumby, A.: D-MOD dynamic modelling of operator demand a new simulator module for the evaluation of signaller’s demand. Presented at IEEE ICIRT 2016, Birmingham, UK (2016)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Delamare, D., Golightly, D., Goswell, G., Treble, P.: D-MOD The use of full-fidelity simulators for the quantification of signaller’s demand. In: 7th International Conference on Railway Operations Modelling and Analysis (2017)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kopardekar, P.H., Schwartz, A., Magyarits, S., Rhodes, J.: Airspace complexity measurement: An air traffic control simulation analysis. Int. J. Ind. Eng.: Theory Appl. Pract. 16(1), 61–70 (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Aldrich, T.B., Szabo, S.M., Bierbaum, C.R.: The development and application of models to predict operator workload during system design. In: McMillan, G.R., Beevis, D., Salas, E., Strub, M.H., Sutton, R., Van Breda, L. (eds.) Applications of Human Performance Models to System Design, pp. 65–80. Springer, Heidelberg (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hart, S.G., Staveland, L.E.: Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): results of empirical and theoretical research. Adv. Psychol. 52, 139–183 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Krehl, C., Balfe, N.: Cognitive workload analysis in rail signalling environments. Cogn. Technol. Work 16(3), 359–371 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Weeda, C., Zeilstra, M.P.: Prediction of mental workload of monitoring tasks. In: Nadashi, N., Scott, A., Wilson, J.R., Mills, A. (eds.) Rail human factors supporting reliability, safety and cost reduction. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Rail Human Factors, London pp. 633–640 (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gibson, W.H., Mills, A., Basacik, D., Harrison, C.: The incident factor classification system and signals passed at danger. Paper Presented at the 5th Conference of Rail Human Factors, London, UK (2015)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shanahan, P., Gregory, D., Lowe, E.: Signaller workload exploration and assessment tool (SWEAT). In: Wilson, J.R., Mills, A., Clarke, T., Rajan, J., Dadashi, N. (eds.) Proceedings of 3rd Rail Human Factors Conference, pp. 434–443 (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lise Delamare
    • 1
    • 2
  • David Golightly
    • 2
  • Graham Goswell
    • 1
  • Peter Treble
    • 1
  1. 1.Hitachi Information Control System Europe Ltd (Hitachi ICSE)Bradford-on-AvonUK
  2. 2.Human Factors Research Group (HFRG)University of NottinghamNottinghamUK

Personalised recommendations