Interview Questions for HMI Design and Development

While the terms HMI and GUI are often used interchangeably, there’s a subtle yet important distinction. GUI, or Graphical User Interface, is a broad term encompassing any visual interface that allows users to interact with a computer or device. Think of the desktop on your laptop, the app icons on your phone, or even a simple calculator. HMI, or Human-Machine Interface, is a more specialized subset focusing on the interaction between a human and a machine, particularly in industrial settings or complex systems. It prioritizes efficiency, safety, and clear communication in often demanding environments. A GUI is concerned with the visual appeal and user experience more broadly, while an HMI emphasizes clear, concise, and unambiguous communication of critical information and controls within a machine-specific context. For example, the control panel of a nuclear power plant is an HMI, while the interface of a simple photo editing app is a GUI. The HMI must prioritize safety and critical data display, even above aesthetic appeal, unlike a GUI where usability and aesthetics often hold equal weight.

My experience with HMI design principles centers around the core tenets of usability, efficiency, and safety. I adhere to best practices like minimizing cognitive load by using clear and concise visual cues, employing consistent layouts and iconography across different screens to avoid confusion, and designing for diverse users with varying levels of technical expertise. I always prioritize clear feedback mechanisms to ensure users understand the system’s response to their actions. For example, in a factory setting, I might design an HMI with color-coded alarms, clearly indicating the severity of a problem and guiding the operator to the appropriate response. This avoids the ambiguity of text-based alarms, which can lead to critical mistakes under pressure. I’ve been involved in projects that required strict adherence to industry standards and guidelines, such as ISA-101, to ensure the safety and reliability of the system. This includes implementing robust error handling and fault tolerance in the HMI design.

I’m proficient in a variety of HMI development tools and technologies, including industry-standard platforms like Wonderware InTouch, Rockwell FactoryTalk View SE/ME, and Siemens WinCC. I have experience working with SCADA systems and integrating them with various industrial protocols like Modbus, Profibus, and Ethernet/IP. My skills also encompass programming languages such as C#, VB.NET, and Javascript, used for creating custom functionalities and integrating with backend systems. I’m also comfortable working with web-based HMI technologies using frameworks like React and Angular for creating responsive and scalable interfaces.

Ensuring HMI usability and accessibility is paramount. My approach involves employing several key strategies:

• User-centered design: Conducting thorough user research and incorporating feedback throughout the design process, using methods such as surveys, interviews, and usability testing.
• Clear visual hierarchy: Using size, color, and contrast to effectively guide the user’s attention to the most important information.
• Accessibility guidelines: Adhering to standards like WCAG (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines) to accommodate users with disabilities, such as providing alternative text for images and ensuring sufficient color contrast. This is critical in industrial settings where a visually impaired operator needs to react to critical alarms.
• Localization and internationalization: Supporting multiple languages to cater to a diverse user base.
• Intuitive navigation: Creating a clear and logical flow of information and user actions. For example, using breadcrumbs to help operators quickly navigate complex systems.

Designing an effective HMI for a complex system is an iterative process. It begins with a deep understanding of the system’s functionality and the operator’s tasks. I follow a structured approach:

1. Requirements gathering: Collaborating with stakeholders to define functional and non-functional requirements, including safety and regulatory compliance.
2. Information architecture design: Defining the hierarchy and relationships between different screens and information elements.
3. Wireframing and prototyping: Creating low-fidelity prototypes to test the information architecture and user flow.
4. UI design: Developing a high-fidelity prototype with visuals, including layouts, color schemes, and typography.
5. Usability testing: Conducting thorough testing with representative users to identify and address usability issues.
6. Development and implementation: Building the HMI using chosen tools and technologies.
7. Testing and validation: Rigorous testing of the completed HMI to ensure it meets all requirements and performs as expected.

Conflicting requirements are inevitable in HMI design. My approach involves:

1. Prioritization: Working with stakeholders to identify the most critical requirements and prioritize them based on factors like safety, usability, and feasibility.
2. Trade-off analysis: Evaluating the impact of each requirement and exploring potential compromises to balance competing needs. For example, if aesthetics conflict with safety-critical information display, we prioritize safety.
3. Compromise and negotiation: Facilitating discussions among stakeholders to reach a consensus on how to address conflicting requirements.
4. Documentation: Carefully documenting all decisions and justifications to ensure transparency and accountability.

I have experience with both Agile and Waterfall methodologies in HMI development. Waterfall’s structured approach, with its distinct phases, is suitable for projects with well-defined requirements and minimal expected changes. However, for more complex and dynamic projects, Agile’s iterative nature, with its emphasis on flexibility and collaboration, is preferable. In Agile, the HMI is developed in short sprints, allowing for continuous feedback and adaptation throughout the development lifecycle. This iterative process allows for quicker identification and resolution of issues. My preference depends heavily on the project’s scope, complexity, and the client’s preferences. I adapt my approach to best suit the project’s needs and maximize efficiency and client satisfaction.

Testing and validating an HMI design is a crucial step to ensure it’s user-friendly and effective. It’s not a single test but a multifaceted process involving several methodologies. Think of it like baking a cake – you wouldn’t just taste it once; you’d check the texture, taste, and overall appearance.

• Usability Testing: This involves observing real users interacting with the HMI prototype. We carefully select participants who represent the target audience and observe their interactions, noting where they struggle or encounter difficulties. This can involve eye-tracking technology for precise data on visual attention.

• Heuristic Evaluation: Experts in HMI design review the interface against established usability principles (heuristics) to identify potential problems. This is akin to a chef reviewing the recipe for the cake to ensure the ingredients and steps are optimal.

• Formal Inspections: These are structured reviews where a team evaluates the HMI for compliance with design standards, consistency, and error handling. Think of it as a quality check before the cake goes to the customer.

• Cognitive Walkthroughs: This method involves simulating a user’s thought process while interacting with the HMI to identify potential confusion points. It helps anticipate user errors before they occur.

• A/B Testing: If there are alternative design options, A/B testing helps compare their effectiveness by presenting them to different user groups. This is similar to experimenting with different cake recipes to determine the most preferred.

The data gathered from these methods is analyzed to identify areas for improvement and refine the design until it meets the usability and performance requirements. A well-executed testing strategy significantly reduces the risk of deploying a subpar HMI.

Many usability issues plague HMI designs, often stemming from a lack of consideration for the user’s context and mental model. Let’s explore some common ones and their solutions:

• Poor Information Architecture: Users can’t find what they need. Solution: Use clear and consistent navigation, well-defined menus, and intuitive information grouping.

• Inconsistent Design Language: Different parts of the HMI look and behave differently. Solution: Establish and consistently apply a style guide to ensure visual harmony and predictability.

• Cognitive Overload: Too much information presented at once overwhelms the user. Solution: Prioritize essential information, use visual hierarchy effectively, and consider chunking information into manageable pieces.

• Poor Error Handling: Error messages are confusing or unhelpful. Solution: Design clear and informative error messages that guide users toward corrective action.

• Lack of Feedback: Users don’t know if their actions are being processed. Solution: Provide visual or auditory feedback to confirm user actions and indicate progress.

• Inadequate Accessibility: The HMI is not usable by people with disabilities. Solution: Follow accessibility guidelines (e.g., WCAG) to ensure usability for everyone. This may involve considering alternative input methods, visual cues, and clear auditory feedback.

Avoiding these issues requires a user-centered design approach. Involving users early and often in the design process, coupled with rigorous testing, is key to creating a successful HMI.

Prototyping and iterative design are fundamental to my HMI development process. I’ve extensively used tools like Figma, Adobe XD, and Axure RP to create interactive prototypes at various fidelity levels – from low-fidelity paper prototypes to high-fidelity interactive simulations.

For example, in a recent project for a medical device, I started with paper prototypes to quickly explore different layout options and get feedback from clinicians. Then, I moved to a higher-fidelity prototype in Axure, incorporating interactive elements and realistic data visualizations to test the workflow and user experience before embarking on the full development.

The iterative process involves creating a prototype, testing it with users, gathering feedback, and refining the design based on the findings. This cycle is repeated until the HMI meets the usability and functionality requirements. This iterative approach minimizes design flaws and ensures a user-friendly final product. Each iteration provides a chance to validate assumptions and adjust the design based on real user data.

Human factors engineering (HFE) is the cornerstone of effective HMI design. It focuses on understanding human capabilities and limitations and applying that knowledge to create interfaces that are safe, efficient, and enjoyable to use. In HMI design, HFE considers various aspects:

• Cognitive Ergonomics: This involves understanding how users process information, make decisions, and remember things. We need to design HMIs that minimize cognitive load and support effective decision-making under pressure.

• Physical Ergonomics: This deals with the physical aspects of the interaction, such as the layout of controls, the size and shape of buttons, and the overall physical comfort of the user. Think about the placement of buttons and displays to minimize reaching and strain.

• Sensory Ergonomics: This focuses on how users perceive information through their senses – vision, hearing, and touch. For instance, choosing appropriate colors, fonts, and auditory alerts for different scenarios.

By integrating HFE principles, we ensure that the HMI is tailored to the user’s physical and cognitive abilities, ultimately reducing errors and improving performance. A well-designed HMI minimizes user fatigue and maximizes efficiency.

User feedback is essential for successful HMI design. I incorporate feedback throughout the entire design process using a variety of methods:

• Usability testing sessions: Direct observation of users interacting with the HMI and gathering their verbal and nonverbal feedback.

• Surveys and questionnaires: Gathering quantitative and qualitative data about user satisfaction, ease of use, and areas for improvement.

• Focus groups: Facilitated discussions with groups of users to explore their experiences and perspectives in a collaborative setting.

• A/B testing: Comparing different design options based on user preferences and performance data.

• Heuristic evaluation feedback: Integrating the assessments from usability experts.

The feedback is analyzed and prioritized to inform design decisions. We don’t necessarily implement every suggestion, but we carefully evaluate each point and decide if and how to incorporate it into the design. This iterative process ensures that the final HMI meets the needs and expectations of the target users.

Documenting HMI designs is crucial for communication, collaboration, and maintenance. My preferred methods include:

• Wireframes: Low-fidelity representations of the HMI layout, focusing on the structure and information architecture.

• Mockups: Higher-fidelity visual representations, showing the appearance and feel of the HMI.

• Interactive Prototypes: Allow stakeholders to experience the HMI’s functionality and workflow.

• Style Guides: Documenting the design system, including color palettes, typography, and component specifications to ensure consistency across the HMI.

• User Flow Diagrams: Visualizing the user’s journey through the HMI to identify potential pain points.

• Technical Specifications: Detailed documentation of the technical implementation, including programming languages, libraries, and hardware specifications.

These documentation methods ensure clear communication among designers, developers, and stakeholders throughout the HMI development lifecycle. Well-maintained documentation significantly improves collaboration, reduces ambiguity, and simplifies future maintenance.

Version control is essential for managing HMI projects, especially in collaborative environments. I primarily use Git, a distributed version control system, for this purpose. This allows multiple developers to work on the same project simultaneously without overwriting each other’s work.

We use a branching strategy, creating separate branches for new features or bug fixes. This allows parallel development without affecting the main codebase. Each change is committed with a clear and concise description, making it easy to track the evolution of the HMI design. We also use a code review process, where other team members review and approve changes before they are merged into the main branch. This ensures code quality and consistency. Using a platform like GitLab or GitHub further enhances the process by offering features like issue tracking, pull requests, and project management tools.

This systematic approach to version control allows us to easily track changes, revert to previous versions if necessary, and ensure a stable and reliable HMI product. It also facilitates collaboration, minimizes conflicts, and improves the overall quality of the final product.

My experience encompasses a wide range of HMI communication protocols, focusing primarily on OPC UA and Modbus, but also including experience with proprietary protocols. OPC UA (Open Platform Communications Unified Architecture) is a key protocol for its robust security features and platform independence, making it ideal for industrial automation environments requiring interoperability between various systems. I’ve utilized OPC UA to connect HMIs to Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs) from different manufacturers, seamlessly integrating data from diverse sources into a unified dashboard. Modbus, on the other hand, is a simpler, widely adopted protocol, particularly prevalent in older systems. I’ve used Modbus extensively in legacy system upgrades, carefully handling the complexities of migrating data and ensuring compatibility while modernizing the HMI interface. Understanding the nuances of each protocol—their strengths, limitations, and specific implementation requirements—is crucial for choosing the right solution for each project, optimizing efficiency and minimizing integration challenges.

For example, in one project involving a legacy system heavily reliant on Modbus, we faced challenges with data latency. By strategically optimizing the communication cycle and implementing data caching within the HMI, we successfully reduced the latency and enhanced the real-time responsiveness of the interface, leading to improved operator efficiency and reduced downtime. In another project, we used OPC UA’s security features to build a highly secure system for a pharmaceutical manufacturing plant, where data integrity and security were paramount.

Integrating HMIs with other systems is a core aspect of my work. This often involves connecting the HMI to various backend systems such as SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) systems, databases (SQL, NoSQL), cloud platforms (AWS, Azure), and MES (Manufacturing Execution Systems). I typically utilize APIs (Application Programming Interfaces) and middleware solutions to facilitate seamless data exchange. The specific integration strategy depends heavily on the target systems and their capabilities. For instance, if integrating with a SCADA system, I might leverage OPC UA to create a robust and secure data bridge. If integrating with a cloud platform, I would use cloud-based APIs and potentially employ message queues like RabbitMQ or Kafka for asynchronous communication, ensuring the HMI remains responsive even under high data loads.

One project involved integrating an HMI with a legacy SCADA system and a modern ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) system. We used a combination of OPC UA to connect to the SCADA system and custom APIs to integrate with the ERP. We had to carefully manage data transformation between these systems and ensure data consistency. We designed a robust data mapping layer to handle these differences, preventing data conflicts and guaranteeing the accuracy of information displayed on the HMI.

HMI security is paramount, especially in industrial control systems. My approach to securing an HMI system follows a multi-layered strategy. This includes implementing network segmentation to isolate the HMI network from other corporate networks, using strong authentication mechanisms (multi-factor authentication, strong passwords), regular software updates to patch vulnerabilities, and utilizing encryption protocols like TLS/SSL for secure communication. Furthermore, access control mechanisms are critical to limit user access based on roles and responsibilities, preventing unauthorized modifications or data breaches. Regular security audits and penetration testing are also vital in identifying and mitigating potential vulnerabilities before they can be exploited.

For example, in a recent project, we implemented a secure network architecture with VLANs (Virtual LANs) to isolate the HMI network from other plant networks. We used certificate-based authentication to ensure only authorized devices can connect to the HMI. In addition, we regularly conducted vulnerability scans and penetration testing to proactively identify and address potential security flaws.

Optimizing HMI performance across diverse devices and platforms requires a multifaceted approach. This begins with efficient code design and development practices, leveraging appropriate development frameworks to optimize resource utilization. For example, using asynchronous programming techniques minimizes blocking operations, ensuring a responsive interface. Secondly, I optimize graphics and images for different screen resolutions and device capabilities. Using vector graphics, when possible, provides scalability without sacrificing quality. Thirdly, I carefully consider data handling strategies, potentially using data caching and efficient data compression to minimize network traffic and processing loads. Finally, rigorous testing across different target devices is crucial to identify and address any performance bottlenecks specific to individual platforms.

For instance, in a project involving a wide range of devices, from ruggedized industrial tablets to smaller handheld devices, we used responsive design principles to ensure optimal display and interactivity across all screen sizes. We also implemented a caching mechanism to reduce the load on the server and improve responsiveness, especially in low-bandwidth environments.

My experience spans various HMI development frameworks, including popular choices like Ignition, WinCC OA, and FactoryTalk View SE. Each framework offers unique strengths and weaknesses, making the choice highly project-dependent. Ignition, with its flexible architecture and scripting capabilities, is well-suited for complex projects requiring custom functionalities. WinCC OA stands out for its robust capabilities in large-scale industrial automation environments. FactoryTalk View SE excels in simpler projects needing strong integration with Rockwell Automation hardware. The decision of which framework to employ often rests on factors like project scope, budget, existing infrastructure, required features, and team expertise. A deep understanding of these frameworks enables me to select the best tool for the task, maximizing efficiency and minimizing development time.

For instance, in a project involving a large-scale chemical plant, we chose WinCC OA for its ability to manage a vast amount of data from many different PLCs and devices. On the other hand, for a smaller, more straightforward project, we selected FactoryTalk View SE for its ease of use and quick deployment time.

My experience encompasses a diverse range of HMI hardware platforms, from industrial PCs (IPCs) and panel PCs to industrial tablets and ruggedized mobile devices. Each platform presents its own considerations regarding processing power, display capabilities, connectivity options, and environmental robustness. For example, IPCs provide robust processing power for complex applications, while panel PCs offer a compact, integrated solution. Industrial tablets offer flexibility and mobility, while ruggedized mobile devices are ideal for harsh environments. Understanding these distinctions is crucial for selecting the optimal hardware for specific applications, considering factors like the complexity of the application, the environmental conditions, and user requirements. Careful consideration of the hardware platform is fundamental to ensuring a reliable and user-friendly HMI system.

In one project, we used ruggedized industrial tablets for operators working in a harsh manufacturing environment, ensuring that the HMI remained functional despite exposure to dust, moisture, and vibration. In another project, where significant processing power was required, we opted for a high-performance IPC.

Handling real-time constraints in HMI development requires careful attention to both software and hardware aspects. On the software side, this includes using efficient algorithms, minimizing latency in data processing, and employing asynchronous programming techniques to prevent blocking operations. Data caching mechanisms can significantly reduce the frequency of communication with the plant floor, optimizing responsiveness. On the hardware side, the choice of appropriate hardware with sufficient processing power and fast data transfer capabilities is critical. Furthermore, careful design of the HMI application itself, avoiding complex or resource-intensive graphics or animations when real-time responsiveness is paramount, is essential. Regular performance testing is crucial to identify and address any bottlenecks and ensure the system meets the necessary real-time requirements.

In a project involving a high-speed production line, we used a combination of techniques to meet the stringent real-time requirements. This included using high-performance hardware, efficient data caching, and a streamlined HMI design that minimized unnecessary animations and graphics. We also utilized an event-driven architecture to ensure prompt processing of critical events, optimizing real-time responsiveness and minimizing latency.

Designing an HMI for a specific target audience requires deep understanding of their needs, skills, and context. It’s not a one-size-fits-all approach. We start with thorough user research, employing methods like user interviews, surveys, and task analysis. This helps us create user personas – representative profiles of our target users – guiding our design choices. For example, designing an HMI for experienced industrial technicians differs greatly from designing for a consumer using a smart appliance. Technicians need detailed information and complex control options, while consumers require simplicity and intuitive interactions. We consider factors like:

• Cognitive Load: Simplifying information and interaction for novice users, while providing advanced features for experts.
• Physical Abilities: Ensuring accessibility for users with visual or motor impairments through features like larger buttons, clear text, and voice control.
• Cultural Differences: Understanding cultural norms and preferences to ensure symbols and terminology are universally understood (addressed further in question 3).
• Technical Proficiency: Tailoring the complexity of information and interactions to match user expertise. Think of the difference between a beginner’s tutorial and an advanced settings menu.

This research informs every design decision, from the layout and color scheme to the choice of icons and terminology. We constantly iterate and test designs with our target audience, using usability testing to identify areas for improvement.

Designing HMIs for industrial applications demands a higher level of robustness, safety, and reliability compared to consumer applications. Key considerations include:

• Safety and Reliability: Industrial HMIs often control critical processes. We need to minimize the risk of errors with clear visual cues, fail-safes, and redundancy measures. For instance, clear visual indicators for critical system parameters (like temperature or pressure) with distinct warning levels is critical.
• Durability and Robustness: Industrial environments can be harsh. The HMI must withstand extreme temperatures, vibrations, and potential impacts. Material choice and construction are vital.
• Ergonomics and Usability: Operators might be working long hours and under pressure. The HMI must be easy to read and use, even in challenging conditions. This includes factors like screen brightness, readability in various light conditions, and intuitive controls.
• Security: Industrial HMIs often manage sensitive data and control access to critical systems. Security protocols must be robust to prevent unauthorized access and cyber threats.
• Standards Compliance: Adherence to relevant industry standards (e.g., IEC 61508 for functional safety) is crucial for safety and legal reasons.
• Maintainability: The HMI should be designed for easy maintenance and updates, minimizing downtime.

We often use specialized hardware and software designed for industrial applications to meet these stringent requirements.

Localization and internationalization are crucial for global reach. Internationalization (i18n) focuses on designing the HMI to easily adapt to different languages and cultures without requiring redesign. Localization (l10n) involves adapting the HMI to a specific language and region. Key steps include:

• Separate Content from Code: Store text strings, images, and other locale-specific elements separately from the core HMI code. This allows for easy translation and adaptation.
• Right-to-Left Support: Handle languages that read from right to left (e.g., Arabic, Hebrew) by ensuring the layout and text flow adapt accordingly.
• Date, Time, and Number Formats: Use locale-aware formatting for dates, times, numbers, and currency. We utilize libraries and APIs that automatically handle different regional formats.
• Cultural Considerations: Adapt icons, colors, and symbols that might have different meanings across cultures. For instance, certain colors are associated with different meanings in different cultures.
• Translation Management: Use professional translation services and review processes to ensure accuracy and consistency. Translation Memory tools also help manage this process more efficiently.

For example, using a translation management system such as SDL Trados allows efficient management and tracking of translations. Properly implementing i18n/l10n requires planning from the initial design stages. Ignoring this can lead to costly and time-consuming rework.

Designing for error prevention and recovery is paramount, especially in critical applications. Our approach involves:

• Clear and Consistent Design: Use intuitive layouts, clear labels, and consistent visual cues to minimize user errors. Consistent use of colors and icons for similar functions is important.
• Input Validation: Validate user input to prevent invalid data from entering the system. For example, range checking for numerical inputs.
• Constraints and Feedback: Restrict user actions that could lead to errors, and provide immediate feedback to confirm actions or alert users of potential issues.
• Error Messages: Design clear, concise, and helpful error messages that guide users on how to correct errors. Avoid jargon and technical terms whenever possible.
• Undo/Redo Functionality: Allow users to undo actions if they make a mistake. This adds a safety net for potentially damaging actions.
• Auditing and Logging: Track user actions and system events to identify patterns of errors and improve future designs.

A good example is using color-coded warnings, where yellow indicates a caution and red indicates a critical error. This immediately alerts operators to the severity of a situation.

Scalability in HMI design refers to the ability of the system to handle increasing amounts of data, users, and devices without compromising performance or stability. We achieve this by:

• Modular Design: Breaking down the HMI into independent modules that can be easily scaled and updated independently. This allows for adding new features or adapting to new hardware without impacting the entire system.
• Client-Server Architecture: Utilizing a client-server architecture allows for distributing the processing load across multiple servers, handling a greater number of users and devices. This also facilitates remote access and monitoring.
• Database Design: Choosing efficient database solutions for data storage and retrieval, optimizing data structures and queries.
• Technology Choices: Selecting scalable technologies, such as cloud-based platforms, for data storage and processing. This improves scalability and accessibility.
• Performance Optimization: Continuously optimizing code and database performance to ensure responsiveness, even with a large amount of data and users.

For instance, using a cloud-based HMI platform allows for easy scaling of resources as the needs of the system grow.

Several emerging trends are shaping the future of HMI design and development:

• Artificial Intelligence (AI): AI is being integrated into HMIs to provide predictive maintenance, automated task management, and personalized user experiences. For instance, AI can detect anomalies in sensor data and alert operators before a failure occurs.
• Augmented Reality (AR) and Virtual Reality (VR): AR and VR are creating more immersive and interactive HMI experiences, enhancing operator training and troubleshooting. AR overlays digital information onto the real-world view, while VR simulates real-world environments for training.
• Internet of Things (IoT) Integration: HMIs are increasingly connected to a wider network of IoT devices, providing access to real-time data and remote control capabilities. This allows centralized monitoring and control of multiple devices and systems.
• Voice Control and Natural Language Processing (NLP): Voice-activated commands are becoming more common, allowing for hands-free operation in certain contexts. NLP allows for more natural and intuitive interaction with the HMI.
• Advanced Visualization Techniques: Improved data visualization techniques, such as interactive dashboards and 3D modeling, help users understand complex data more easily.

These trends are changing the way we interact with machines and systems, creating more efficient and intuitive HMI experiences.

One challenging project involved designing the HMI for a complex industrial robotic arm used in a high-precision manufacturing process. The initial challenge was integrating data from multiple sensors and actuators into a cohesive and easily understandable interface. The sheer volume of data, combined with the critical nature of the application (any error could cause costly production downtime or even damage), presented a significant hurdle.

We overcame this by adopting a layered approach. We developed a modular architecture that allowed us to break down the complex system into smaller, manageable parts, each with its own dedicated display section. This significantly reduced cognitive load on the operator. We also implemented a sophisticated alarm system with varying severity levels, using color-coding and audio alerts to communicate critical information effectively. Additionally, we employed extensive simulation and virtual testing to validate the design and catch potential issues before deployment. This iterative design process, incorporating regular feedback from the engineers and end-users, allowed us to create an HMI that was both efficient and safe, minimizing the risk of errors and maximizing productivity.