Human factors in ship design: An experiential learning thesis

Human factors
in ship design and operation:
Experiential learning
Vincentius Rumawas
Doctoral thesis

2
Introduction
Background:
• Fatal accidents at sea
• Caused by human errors
and/or human-related
factors (mostly)
• Human factors were barely a
consideration when designing
a ship

3
(introductory) Questions:
Several preliminary questions were raised:
• Is «human factors» really neglected in (ship) design?
or
• Is «human factors» actually considered?
• How is it implemented?
• Is there any effect of implementing human factors to
reducing the probability of accident?

4
Some definitions
• “human factors”:
– “Ergonomics (or human factors) is the scientific discipline concerned
with the understanding of interactions among humans and other
elements of a system, and the profession that applies theory, principles,
data, and other methods to design in order to optimize human well-
being and overall system performance” (IEA, 2012)
– “human factors” is concerned with the task people perform and the
environment they do it in – fitting the job to the person. The topic of
human factors is divided into eight considerations: habitability,
maintainability, workability, controllability, manoeuvrability,
survivability, occupational health and safety (OHS) and system safety
(LR, 2008).
NB: “human factors” ≠ “human element” (physiological, psychological),
“human error”, “human performance”, “HSE”, “human reliability”.

5
(formal) Research questions
1. How are HF and different aspects of HF taken into account in ship
design?
2. Is there any significant effect of HF considerations to incidences on
board?
a) Does ship design have any significant effect on HF evaluation?
b) Does ship design have any significant effect on incidences on board?
3. Are the existing standards for HF in ship design effective?
4. What factors strongly influence crew performance at sea?
5. What are the underlying factors of HF in ship design?

6
Research design
• RQ 1:
How are HF and different aspects of HF taken into
account in ship design?
– There are several ways to answer this Q:
• Ask the designer, the shipyard and/or the shipowner, or check the
design specification/contract
 Check and review the ship itself
 Ask the users
 Consult the existing rules, regulations and standards available

7
Research design
RQ 1
RQ 2
RQ 3
RQ 5
RQ 4

8
Study 1. Literature study
 To check if human factors issues are taken into account in the existing
standards, a survey of literature was performed.
 Two questions are to be answered:
 What /which publications contain HF?
 Which aspects of HF are addressed/considered?
 Results:
 “A Content Analysis of Human Factors in the Design of Marine Systems”.
The International Conference on Ship and Offshore Technology,
11-12 Nov 2010, Surabaya
 “A Content Analysis of Human Factors in Ships Design”
The International Journal of Maritime Engineering,
RINA Transactions Part A3, Vol 156, Jul – Sep 2014
RQ1. How are human factors and different aspects of human factors taken into account in ship design?

Study 1. … Literature study
Results
• There are abundant documents cover
HF. HF issues have been sufficiently
addressed. The documents are optional.
• All HF DIMENSIONS are covered
• SYSTEM SAFETY is the most mentioned
• MAINTAINABILITY is covered the least
• HF issues is developing very fast
• HABITABILITY (COMFORT) and
CONTROLLABILITY are covered the most
extensively,
including:
– HAB: Noise, vibration, indoor climate &
lighting/illumination
– CONT: Alarms, control centres,
workstations, control & switches
RQ1. How are human factors and different aspects
of human factors taken into account in ship design?

12
Study 2. Exploratory field study
 To check if the facts in reality is in accordance with the facts on
paper
 Exploratory field surveys were performed using qualitative approach, incl:
• Observation
• Interview & discussion
 Results:
 “Offshore supply vessel design and operation: A human factors exploration”
European Safety Reliability Conference, 18-22 Sept 2011, Troyes France.
 “Exploratory surveys of human factors on offshore supply vessels in the Norwegian Sea”
Naval Engineers Journal, Vol 125, issue 2, June 2013.
RQ1. How are human factors and different aspects of
human factors taken into account in ship design?

13
Study 2. Exploratory …
Some issues on ship design in general were
documented:
 Illumination problems on the bridge
 Ergonomic issues; no leg space, incorrect
height/orientation
 Problem with access & personnel movement, etc.
Previous incidences & accidents on OSV were also
documented:
• Person squeezed between moving containers
• Poor autopilot interface system
• Collision with offshore installations
Hansson 2006, PSA Norway 2011

14
Study 3. Qualitative study
Human factors
framework
derived from:
Lloyd’s Register, 2008,
2009 and developed
in Rumawas &
Asjbjørnslett 2010

Study 2. Exploratory field study.
 Represents one of the most
advanced technologies in the
maritime industry
 The design changes rapidly and
has leapt forward beyond most
conventional vessels
 Many improvements were
made together with the ship
 An OSV is a combination of a
bulk, general cargo, container
and a tanker, plus some extra
functionalities
The object of the study:
OFFSHORE SUPPLY
VESSEL

OSVs in Norwegian Sea:
• Carry goods from base to offshore platforms (and back)
• 12-16 crew on board
• Make 2-3 trips per week, visiting 2-6 platforms per trip

 Sensitive to motion, esp rolling
 Slamming is disturbing
 High pitch noise (bow thrusters, on DP
operations)
 Relatively stable, but sensitive to
pitching
 No slamming effect
 Squeaking noise inside the cabin
Study 2. … Exploratory
• OSV A • OSV B

19
 Other issues were noted,
in terms of Controllability:
 Illumination problem
 Flooding of alarms
 Abundant communication
 Dangerous failures:
 DP system failure
 Blackout

Ergonomics issue
Ladder issue

Lessons learned
 Increased bulwark height, to avoid green water
 Modification of the autopilot system
 Defined 500 m safety zone to avoid collision

22
Study 2. Qualitative study
Conclusions
 In general, HF is already been considered in OSVs design;
 The crews in general are satisfied with their vessel
 There is no such thing as a perfect ship
 There is always room for improvement
 Different problems are experienced by different vessels
 HF problems are unique (noise, motion, controllability, etc.)
 Some issues remain (illumination, layout, space, stairs, access)
 Best satisfying: Habitability & Workability
 OHS & safety-related dimensions were addressed without compromise
 Lowest satisfying: Maintainability
RQ1. How are human factors and different aspects of
human factors taken into account in ship design?

23
Study 3. Quantitative study
To check if the qualitative
findings are valid
 An explanatory study
using quantitative
approach was conducted
Results:
Human Factors on Offshore Supply Vessels
in the Norwegian Sea – An Explanatory
Survey
Accepted in the International Journal
of Maritime Engineering,
RINA Transactions
RQ1. How are HF and different aspects of HF taken into account in ship design?
RQ2. Is there any significant effect of HF consideration to incidences on board?

Study 3. … Quantitative
• Human factors
• Habitability are significantly addressed
• Workability
• Dimensions of human factors are not rated
equally:
• OHS is rated more highly than workability
and maintainability
• Maintainability is rated lower than
habitability, workability and OHS
RQ1. How are human factors and different aspects
of human factors taken into account in ship design?

Study 3. Quantitative
• There is an indication that human
factors rating varies as a result of OSV
design, but the finding is inconclusive
(due to numerical correction)
• And, so are for the habitability and
workability
RQ2a. Does ship design have any significant effect on HF evaluation?

• There is a significant difference in
water on deck incident as the result of
OSV design
• There is a significant difference in
moving cargo on deck incident as the
result of OSV design
RQ2b. Does ship design have any significant effect on
incidences on board?

• Habitability has a positive
effect on the frequency of
personnel becoming seasick,
fatigue and experiencing
sleep disturbance.
• Maintainability has a
negative effect on the
frequency of fire or
explosion on board.
RQ2. Is there any significant effect of HF
consideration to incidences on board?

Study 3. Quantitative …
 Yerkes-Dodson Law
 Or known as the inverted U model
 When there was little pressure, deadline was
flexible, the work wasn’t challenging,
performance is low
 When people were given the right amount of
pressure, they do their best (optimum)
 Too much pressure, then performance can
suffer

29
Study 4. Evaluation study
To check if the existing standards of human factors in ship design and
operation are effective
 An evaluation study was conducted, by performing physical measurements
on board, combined with some observations and daily diaries filled in by the
seafarers after every watch
RQ3. Are the existing standards of HF in ship design effective?

 Methodology
 Data collection:
 July 2011 (summer)
 October 2011 (winter)
 Noise level
measurement:
 Class 2 sound level meter
Bruel & Kjær type 2236
 A-frequency weighting
 Average equivalent
continuous sound level
(dB)
 Ship motion
measurement:
 High-precision tri-axis
inertial sensor: ADIS16364
from Analog Device
Report:
Human Factors Evaluation in Ship Design: A Case Study
on Offshore Supply Vessels in the Norwegian Sea, Part I:
Theoretical Background and Technical Constructs
 Naval Engineers Journal (accepted)

31
Results of noise level measurements:

 NORDFORSK 1987 (RMS):
2.0° Cruise liner
4.0° Heavy manual work
6.0° Light manual work
ROLL MOTION
 Criteria (RMS):
 4° (NATO 2000)
 6° (NORDFORSK 1987)

33
PITCH MOTION
Criteria (RMS):
 1.5°
(NATO 2000)

MSI criteria (NATO 2000):
– 20% of crew at 4 hours
MII criteria (NATO 2000):
– 1/min (=1.0)
• MII risk level (Graham 1990):
0.1 : ‘Possible’
0.5 : ‘Probable’
1.5 : ‘Serious’

35
 Conclusions:
 The existing noise criteria do not reflect comfort
 Disturbing noises [impulsive noise, high pitch noise, squeaking noise
and hammering noise] are not covered nor captured
 Motion criteria need to be revised for OSV operations
 They are not realistic; the criteria are too high (too lenient),
especially MII and roll motion.
 The MSI (McCauley et al, 1976) is extremely conservative for
seafarers population, needs to be adjusted
RQ3. Are the existing standards of HF in ship design
effective?

36
Study 5. Multivariate analysis
• To find out which factor(s) influence seafarers’
performance at sea, a multivariate analysis was
performed.
• Report:
Human Factors Evaluation in Ship Design: A Case Study on Offshore Supply Vessels in the Norwegian
Sea, Part II: Multivariate Analyses and Structural Modelling
Naval Engineers Journal (accepted)
Daily diaries
(questionnaires)
• Anonymous
• Based on NATO
questionnaires
• Completed by the
seafarers after every
watch
RQ4. What factors considerably influence crews’
performance at sea?

Study 5. Multivariate analyses …
Time of watch

40
Study 5. Multivariate …
RQ4. What factors considerably influence crews’ performance at sea?

41
Study 6. Theoretical evaluation
Some issues were found when developing HF check lists and
questionnaires, indicating that the concept of HF is still developing
 A theoretical evaluation was performed to evaluate or
to confirm the concept of HF in ship design & operation,
using factor analysis
Report:
Human Factors in Ship Design and Operations: A Preliminary Survey of the Theoretical
Construct
The International Journal of Maritime Engineering, RINA Transactions (accepted)
RQ5. What are the underlying factors of HF in ship design (and operation)?

42
Controllability
Workability
Habitability
Cargo facilities
Reliability, Automation and Maintainability

43
Reliability, operability
and maintainability
Interfacing complexity
Ship handling and
manoeuvrability
System & procedure
Deck working condition
ER & ECR
Habitability

44
A model showing
human factors
considerations in
ship design and
operation is
presented as a
result of the
theoretical study

45
Conclusion
HF have been sufficiently addressed, developing
very fast, optional. Hab & Contr covered the most,
Maint the least
HF are considered in OSV design, lessons learnt, no
perfect ship, room for improvement. HF problems
are unique, some problems remain. Hab & Work
best satisfying, OHS no compromise, Maint least
Noise ≠ comfort, disturbing noises not covered,
motion criteria (incl. roll, pitch, MII, slamming) are
not realistic, need to be revised, MSI is extremely
conservative for OSV crew
HF are significantly addressed (incl Hab & Work), HF
aspects are rated differently (OHS>Work>Maint).
Deck incidences [grwater & cargo] = f(OSV design),
Seasick, Sleep = f(Hab); Fire & expl = f(Maint)
Crews’ prfrmnc = f(roll, work shift, sleep amount,
symptoms). Symptoms = f(sleep amount & quality,
non-ship relt’d sleep problems). Sleep = f (ship-rlt’d
sleep problem), Ship-rlt’d sleep problem = f(pitch)
CONTr, WORK, HAB, CARGO, RAM (reliability,
automation & maintainability)
A model of interconnectivity of HF

46
Discussion
• Very limited data, generalisation is then limited:
– OSV, 93-94 m. LOA, relatively newly built (2-3 years old)
– Qualified, well-trained personnel, characterised by Nordic
population, Norwegian shipbuilding and petroleum industries
– Only one researcher, two OSVs, 42 crew members
• The scope of the study is very broad ⤇
– the investigations seem too brief
– lack of detailed analysis
• Shows that HF can be assessed and their effectiveness can be
measured

47
Recommendations
 Standards and criteria be re-examined within a reasonable
period of time, especially in case an incident occurs
 Human factors considerations should be inserted as one of the
criteria in ship design spiral; that include:
 A human factors engineer/expert
 User opinions
 Design specification
 For designers:
 Establish a direct and conducive communication with the users
 Understand the way the users operate the vessel in their natural
environment
 Step-by-step improvement is advised, radical change of design should
be avoided

48
Recommended Future Works
• Extend the study by involving designers and shipbuilders
• A fewer topic should be selected for human factors investigation
– Controllability
– Comfort
• More accurate methods should be used for quantitative and
evaluation studies:
– Continuous data recording on board
– Incident record
– Actiwatch
• Developing human factors standards which related to crews’
performance and comfort, not only health & safety

Thank you for your kind attention
The end of the presentation

Human factors in ship design: An experiential learning thesis

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (14)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (15)

Similar to Human factors in ship design: An experiential learning thesis

Similar to Human factors in ship design: An experiential learning thesis (20)

Human factors in ship design: An experiential learning thesis

Editor's Notes