All of which is fair enough, but your crane has physical controls which (if well designed) indicate their state to the user. If the crane doesn’t work, the user can presumably readily check which control is preventing it doing so. From Simon’s description, his CNC unit has no such user feedback - if it did, he wouldn’t have been caught out. If turning the motor off and the speed to zero on reset was a deliberate decision in the interest of safety, then there needs to be a way to indicate to the user this non-obvious behaviour - it’s still a design issue, it seems to me.
Nick.
Not quite, the crane indication for the driver is all healthy, it does not indicate to the driver where the fault is or how to reset, that requires an engineer (if it's a critical safety fault) who is in another part of the crane. Even non critical faults that the driver can reset still require a two step authentication restart, in our case, turn everything off, set all controls to zero, reset and restart (power on). Reset and restart are two separate buttons and on two separate panels, thereby reducing the chance of accidental restart. The latest cranes with the highest safety rating required you to physically get out of the seat or if tall enough, just reach over at arms length to reset. There is no indication to the driver other than a singular fault lamp, he just has to follow set procedure to clear and reset.
Reset will set all drives to zero, if they haven't already be tripped to zero (usually the drive will also be monitoring the critical safety loop and trip it's self to zero), it'll reset the safety chain (if the fault has cleared) and enable the crane to be powered on. Restart will then bring in the main power, the really dangerous stuff and enable all controls.
In Simons case the non-obvious behaviour is only non obvious to those who do not understand (through no fault of their own) how the system works, I'll wager in the instructions some where it'll be written that in the event of a fault the motor speed may also be set to zero. If people are not normally exposed to this type of system then it's unfair for them to know (intuitively) how to reset.
This moves it from a design issue to an education/training and information issue. I'll readily concede that if the motor speed is set to zero in a fault condition then it really should have some sort of visual indication, it doesn't have to be obvious (but it helps) but whatever it is, it should at least be documented.
Most design issues I've come across are usually due to lack of training, education, instruction or documentation. It's hard to blame designers if operators simply don't RTFM
What is interesting is how people perceive what is good or bad, difficult or easy, intuitive or stupid, that's what makes writing manuals or designing hardware/software so bloody difficult, you have to try and cater for everyone; I don't think I ever accomplished that
What ever I figured was common sense and others would find intuitive never seemed to happen, the majority got it, but a small handful didn't, not their fault, they just view things differently. I just tried to make sure everything anyone might ever need to know was in the documentation.
Anyway, I'll let Simon have his thread back now
, control systems and operation design were something I enjoyed the most, wasn't so keen on running the training course though.