88 Scientific Journals 26(98)
Scientific Journals
Zeszyty Naukowe
Maritime University of Szczecin
Akademia Morska w Szczecinie
2011, 26(98) pp. 88–91 2011, 26(98) s. 88–91
Impact of automation on ship’s safety
Wpływ automatyzacji na bezpieczeństwo statków
Krzysztof Pleskacz
Maritime University of Szczecin, Faculty of Navigation, Institut of Marine Navigation Akademia Morska w Szczecinie, Wydział Nawigacyjny, Instytut Nawigacji Morskiej 70-500 Szczecin, ul. Wały Chrobrego 1–2, e-mail: k.pleskacz@am.szczecin.pl
Key words: prevention and causes of marine casualties, opinions managers Abstract
The article presents the results of the risk posed by the introduction of automation systems for ships. Included are the opinions of the crews on the proposals for action to counter the negative effects of automation.
Słowa kluczowe: przeciwdziałanie i przyczyny wypadków morskich, opinie kierowników działów Abstrakt
Artykuł przedstawia wyniki badań ryzyka, jakie niesie wprowadzanie na statki systemów automatyzacji. Przedstawione są również opinie załóg na temat propozycji działań przeciwdziałających negatywnym skut-kom automatyzacji.
Introduction
After 1995, there was very rapid, even revolu-tionary change in marine equipment, both asso-ciated with the development of modern navigation systems as well as the broad systems of engine control and supervision of cargo handling opera-tions. In particular, passenger craft, container and tankers are gradually becoming more automated.
This process has encountered two problems. The first is inadequate, outdated system of training for future crews; the second is named in the reports the IMO Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) [1] – “human factor”, because the operators often do not understand all the characteristics and limitations of the systems. Given the increasing prevalence of automated systems, which become very important for the proper functioning of the ship, it is impor-tant to reduce the difficulties were already included in the design, development and implementation of systems.
The development of automation can be very beneficial because of the relief crews and human resources to perform other duties. However, it can also be potentially negative by increasing the risk
of operator error; this error may cause an incident or accident.
IMO measures taken in order to counteract the negative effects of automation
Problems above have been noticed very quickly by the MSC and the actions were taken to counte-ract the negative effects of automation.
In 1998 were compiled and published: “Guide-lines for engine-room layout, design and arrange-ment” [2]. Then, in 2000, “Guidelines on ergonom-ic criteria for bridge equipment and layout” [3], in 2003 – “Guidance for the operational use of inte-grated bridge system (IBS)” [4] and “Issues to be considered when introducing new technology on board ship” [5].
It was carried out analysis of accidents and inci-dents at sea and in ports. The results were presented at meetings of the IMO sub-committees. As a result of research, in 2006, was developed a set of recom-mendations that should be implemented to reduce the negative impact of automation on safety of navigation [1].
Impact of automation on ship’s safety
Zeszyty Naukowe 26(98) 89
The recommendations were directed to: shore-based company managers,
shipboard management,
seafarers using automated systems, training providers.
Have been identified specific issues related to the errors of operators of automated systems in use: there is sometimes over-reliance on automation
of the crews, which leads to a false sense of security, that the automation will always handle the situation safely;
too much confidence in the data presented by the automated control systems and this leads to a lack of additional manual supervision;
lack of understanding of automated control sys-tems and any inherent weaknesses they may have;
improper ergonomic devices that can have a detrimental impact on the performance and increase the incidence of errors;
some data displayed on the screen of automatic control systems, human-computer interface, can be very confusing for the user;
control systems designed to run automatically are not sufficiently obvious, so it is not always possible to quickly obtain error information; the consequences that may arise if a ship crews
are aware that the control system will automati-cally operate in case of operator error;
errors in the maintenance and calibration, deve-lopment of automatic control systems can lead to catastrophic consequences;
overload the crew with information;
lack of standardization by different manufac-turers impossible to understand all the characte-ristics of individual systems.
Analysis of survey results
The author of this study decided to test, to see, if after a few years, with a steady increase in the automation of ships, there are still the same risks or whether there are new and how to counteract them?
For this purpose a survey was carried out among the crews of ships. As the study group was selected only heads of departments: chief officers, captains and chief engineers. Guaranteed to obtain informa-tion from members of the crew who have years of experience on board of various type ships.
107 surveys were conducted at various courses raising the professional qualifications and carried out in the Maritime University of Szczecin in 2010 and 2011.
Analysis of test results
Selected causes of accidents and incidents
The first part of the survey participants were asked to organize on a scale from 1 to 19 (1 is most important) cause or the effect of selected compo-nents of the accidents or incidents at sea.
Every cause has been assigned a value directly proportional to the position on the list, which iden-tified respondents. Then, pooled the results and determined the percentage, which is according to respondents, the cause of the total number of acci-dents and inciacci-dents.
Received the following sequence:
1. Inherent system latency interfering with
error recovery efforts 66.36%
2. Subsequent changes made to original
automated system designs 62.76% 3. Lack of cross-checking of data 59.69% 4. Inappropriate/Sub-optimal ergonomic
design 59.37%
5. Display inconsistencies between
different manufacturers 58.53% 6. Inappropriate/Sub-optimal Human-
-Computer Interface design 56.32% 7. Poor support to development and
maintenance of situation awareness 56.07% 8. Deficiencies of training 52.58% 9. Automation not designed around
operators’ abilities and limitations 49.88% 10. Lack of standardization 46.58% 11. Lack of in-depth understanding
of automation weakness 46.24%
12. Lack of in-depth understanding
of automated control 45.99%
13. Information overload issues 45.30% 14. Maintenance and calibration errors 45.11% 15. Poor appreciation of automation
charac-teristics and limitations by operators 44.12% 16. Working with automated systems and
forgetting about manual operation 44.02% 17. Lack of awareness of automation
failsafe modes/processes 39.30% 18. Human Factors (fatigue and under
manning due to automation) 30.10% 19. Over-reliance on automation 25.82%
Selected actions against the risk of accidents
The second part of the survey asked participants about steps that should be taken to reduce the risk of the use of automated systems in maritime navigation. Selected thirty-six, possible action, the validity respondents rated its.
Krzysztof Pleskacz
90 Scientific Journals 26(98)
All the respondents agreed, that the following actions are absolutely necessary:
Regarding the Instrumentation and Automation System Shipyard apply the Engineering Stan-dards and Principles referenced to the technical regulations, codes and documents;
Regarding the Instrumentation and Automation disciplines, Education and Training Authorities to specify the minimum requirements and stan-dards.
Over 95% of respondents stated that:
Regarding the Instrumentation and Automation Systems, shipyard tests and trails the equipment must comply with the technical instructions which overrides strictly the design parameters of the Automation System supplier (99.07%); Regarding the Instrumentation and Automation
disciplines, Education and Training Authorities shall to provide appropriate, effective and appli-cable Lessons and Courses (99.07%);
The above standards should be consistent with international requirements (99.07%);
Regarding the Automation Systems on board ships Supplier to provide the soft ware free of bugs, protocol conflicts and missed editing (99.07%);
Regarding the Instrumentation and Automation disciplines, Education and Training Authorities to provide Instructors experienced and familiar with Marine Engineering operations (99.07%); Regarding the Automation system on board ship
Staff to get familiar with the Automation system before joining the ship (97.2%);
Regarding the Automation System on board ships Supplier to provide Instruments in Qualita-tive Sufficiency according to the bidding docu-ments (97.2%);
Regarding Instrumentation and Automation systems on board ships, international maritime laws, regulations and procedures need to be re-viewed and updated by the International Mari-time Authorities (96.26%);
According to the international laws, regulations and procedures; design, production and installa-tion works of hard and soft ware regarding the Ship Instrumentation and Automation Systems need to be reviewed and followed by the Classi-fication Authorities (96.26%);
Regarding the Automation Systems on board ships Supplier to provide hard ware to fit all sea states and indicate the basic data flow errors (96.26%);
Regarding the Automation Systems on board ships Supplier to provide soft ware to satisfy all
Interactions specified with the bidding docu-ments (96.26%);
Regarding the Instrumentation and Automation disciplines, Education and Training Authorities to provide Laboratory Work shop and Simula-tors Sufficient (96.2%);
Regarding the Instrumentation and Automation system on board ship Staffs to be certificated on ability and capability for a perfect trend analysis on operating values consequently decision mak-ing (97,2%); Regarding to the Instruments and Automation System, ship owner have to arrange a time pe-riod acceptable for the ship officers to be trained properly, examined and certificated (95.33%); Regarding the Instrumentation on board ship
Staff to get familiar with the Instrumentation be-fore joining the ship (95.33%).
The following principles necessary for safe op-eration found more than 90% of study participants: Regarding the Instrumentation and Automation
systems, ship owner requirements has to be properly tested by the Classification Authority to avoid possible conflicts with the minimum requirements specified by the Maritime Authori-ties (94.39%);
Regarding the Automation system on board ship Staff to be certificated on ability and capability for full operation at all conditions (94.39%); International Maritime Inspections on
Applica-tions and OperaApplica-tions of Instrumentation and Automation Systems on board ships need to be reviewed and updated by the International Mari-time Authorities (92.52%);
Regarding the Automation Systems on board ships Supplier to provide algorithm to cover all normal and emergency conditions may happen (92.52%);
Ship owner have to put a clear paragraph in the contract for a facility continuously to check the computer print outs regarding the Instruments and Automation system condition and operating vital dates (90.65%);
Regarding the Instrumentation and Automation System on board ship Classification Authority has to provide acceptable test procedures enough to be sure 100% of the system perfor-mance unless other vise specified in other regu-latory document (90.65%).
Less than 90% of respondents stated that: Regarding the Automation Systems on board
ships Supplier to provide a logic diagram to show the operational relations and interactions between the equipment and systems (89.72%);
Impact of automation on ship’s safety
Zeszyty Naukowe 26(98) 91
Regarding the Instrumentation and Automation system on board ship Staff to be certificated on ability and capability for perfect watches stand-ing (88.79%);
Ship owners have to provide and establish vari-ous basic procedures in order to view the inte-ractions of the ship’s automated components (85.98%);
Regarding the Instrumentation and Automation System on board ship Classification Authority has to ask the Supplier to provide a full coverage of maintenance and calibration process (84.11%);
Regarding the Instrumentation on board ship Staff to be certificated on ability and capability for full operation of the Instrumentation (83.18%);
Regarding the Instrumentation and Automation Systems, a maintenance plan including a calibra-tion program have to be placed in the bidding document, contract and after sales service agreement (82.24%);
According to the International Laws, Regula-tions and Procedures; ApplicaRegula-tions and Opera-tions of Instrumentation and Automation Sys-tems on board ships need to be reviewed and followed by the ship owners (77.57%);
Regarding Instrumentation and Automation Disciplines and systems on board ships, Interna-tional Maritime Certification of Education and Training need to be reviewed and updated by the International Maritime Authorities (76.64%); Regarding the Instrumentation and Automation
System, Shipyard to investigate the latest regula-tory and technical developments to satisfy the owner’s requirements (68.22%);
Ship owners do not respect to the Unmanned Machinery Space watch standing application on board ships due to not fit to ship safety prin-ciples and management philosophy (60.75%); Unmanned Machinery Space application does
not provide enough time to the watch standing Officer for a trend analysis and take actions on time (57.94%);
Regarding the Instrumentation and Automation systems, Ship yards do not take into account the owner requirements unless other vise accepted by the Automation System supplier and ap-proved by the Classification Authority (52.34%);
Regarding the Instrumentation and Automation disciplines, Education and Training Authorities to rearrange the class hours to assign additional
300 hours for Simulator training in total (45.79%).
Conclusions
This survey was not intended as a complete list of factors, that can lead to risks resulting from the use of automation systems on ships.
Analyzing the results, clearly outlines the em-phasis placed by respondents on the standardization of systems. Standardization leads to a fuller under-standing of particular importance in the operation phase, but must be taken into account already in the design, configuration and installation of new sys-tems or modify existing ones.
Respondents believe that the crews are suffi-ciently educated in general. Officers on watch gen-erally can interpret and take appropriate action in case of problems.
Increasing the number of hours on the simula-tors can only to a limited extent, improve the situa-tion. During periods of low workload and benign operating conditions, consider reverting automated functions, some or all, to manual control and moni-toring, to provide the crew with the opportunity to practice their skills and familiarize them with the procedures for reverting from automatic to manual control.
Respondents points to the need for and benefits that may result from consultation with practitioners and the need for studies to identify a number of problems that could arise from improper or incor-rect design, selection, installation and use of auto-mated systems.
Pay attention to the ergonomics of products, which should result from the proper development of the interface ”human-computer” and the proper configuration and installation of the systems.
References
1. IMO MSC 82\15\2. Research into interaction with auto-mated systems. IMO 2006.
2. IMO MSC/Circ. 834. Guidelines for engine-room layout, design and arrangement. IMO 1998.
3. IMO MSC/Circ. 982. Guidelines on ergonomic criteria for bridge equipment and layout. IMO 2000.
4. IMO MSC/Circ. 1061. Guidance for the operational use of integrated bridge system (IBS). IMO 2003.
5. IMO MSC/Circ. 1091. Issues to be considered when intro-ducing new technology on board ship. IMO 2003.
Recenzent: dr inż. Ryszard Wawruch, prof. AM Akademia Morska w Gdyni
