passenger response times collected were therefore divided into two main groups – passengers who were in their cabins and those who were in public areas. Comparing the RTDs for each of
these groups shows that the results were quite different, which would suggest that different RTDs should be used to represent passengers in cabins and those in public spaces on cruise ships. Clearly, passengers in cabins take considerably longer to respond than those who are in public areas – they may have been asleep for example. As Jewel of the Seas is a different class
of vessel to SS1, it was vital to determine if
there were any similarities
Dr Philipp Lohrmann, research scientist at BMT Group Ltd
the trials was carried out with different people. This would suggest that if the trial were to be repeated again within the same environment with a different group of similar people, we would expect to generate the same RTD – certainly a powerful result. As there were no significant differences between the two RTDs for SS1, the results from both days can be combined to form a single data set that is representative of ro-pax ferries without cabins. When considering the results of
the assembly trial that took place during breakfast on Jewel of the Seas, it is important to note that a number of passengers were still located in their cabins when the alarm sounded. The
in the
resulting RTD. Te data showed that the distributions are statistically different – a significant outcome further proving that an RTD generated for one class of vessel cannot necessarily be applied to another type of
ship. Furthermore, the data
revealed that passengers in public spaces on a cruise ship take considerably longer to respond to the alarm than passengers on a ro-pax vessel. Te implication of this finding is that
the current RTD used in IMO MSC Circ. 1238, which is derived from the assembly trials on a ro-pax vessel is not appropriate for all ship classes and different RTDs should be used for cruise and ro-pax vessels. It is further noted that all the trials took place at approximately the same time of day - therefore this is not considered to be a contributory factor in the differences observed. In addition to determining response and assembly time distributions,
Brude launches latest MES Brude has developed its BHR 225 person liferaſt
T
he latest MES system from Brude has been designed based on the same principles as the Brude
BHR 150 system. Te system also allows a configuration option of the Brude MES 900, which will consist of two Brude MES chutes and four Brude BHR 225 liferaſts. Te MES 900 will be able to evacuate 900 passengers in 30 minutes, claims Brude.
The Naval Architect October 2012 The system has been developed in
response to demand in the market as passenger vessels get larger and the need for quick and efficient system to be installed onboard. Te system operates by two chutes being deployed from the side of the vessel and then the liferaſts, which are stored separately, are launched and inflated and then attached to the chutes.
A configuration of four BHR 225 liferaſts can evacuate 900 passengers. Te Brude BHR 225 has an approved
drop height of up to 26m. Te system can be launched from a higher but the company recommends that the system would then have to be lowered by a davit system because of the impact on the water surface. NA
47
SAFEGUARD will also enhance the existing benchmark scenarios for evacuation analysis by introducing new scenarios which will include the effects of heel and trim angles, as well as fire on board a ship. Both of these aspects can have significant consequences on the evacuation process. In particular, any heel of the vessel can reduce the walking speed of the passengers and crew and thus delay the mustering process. Fire, on the other hand, can block off
important escape routes and assembly stations. In spite of their importance, both of these scenarios are currently missing from the international regulations. Te development of these new scenarios is based on an in-depth analysis of previous maritime accidents (as performed by Bureau Veritas) and on extensive soſtware simulations, undertaken by Safety at Sea, Principia and the University of Greenwich. In summary, the SAFEGUARD project
will provide three results to the maritime community:
1. A robust set of response time distributions based on real-life passenger trials for more realistic evacuation simulations.
2. Two validation data sets for the calibration and testing of evacuation simulation soſtware.
3. Enhanced benchmark scenarios, taking into account the effects of heel, trim and fire.
Tese results will shortly be presented
to the IMO in the form of information papers. NA
Feature 2
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72