Trans RINA, Vol 156, Part C1, Intl J Marine Design, Jan –Dec 2014
Human Factors risk areas. The EHFA identifies areas for improvement in current designs, the deficiencies which reduce performance, current risks, and priority areas in the various groups of people involved in the design. The analysis then lists the issues and risks to be addressed and forms a risk-based approach to support the design phase. The value of the EHFA should not be understated as it functions as a very effective initial risk mitigation strategy. The EHFA is then used together with the contract requirements and the HSI domains to structure an achievable and systematic programme of work defined in the HSIP to address the ‘human element’ within the project. Key elements of this are the HSI Considerations Register (HSI CR) where all HSI issues are logged and tracked to closure, and the HSI working group which acts as a mechanism for client and stakeholder
engagement in the design and issue
management. In describing the process there is a danger that it will sound expensive and unwieldy. In reality this is not the case – the HSI approach is scalable to the programme and simply provides a cost-effective and structured risk mitigation approach to the activity.
There is no reason why the marine industry should not be at the forefront
However, at this moment
of Human Factors in time, it
best practice. still lags behind
other transport and safety critical industries. In order to maximise the efficiency of the industry and to actively reduce the overall loss rate, there is an advantage for Human Factors
specialists. Other industries such as
aviation and rail have been instrumental in establishing the current best practices which incorporate Human Factors within not only programmes of work, but also the design culture which recognises Human Factors as being a natural element within the approach to design.
In recognising that the marine industry lags behind other industries it should be noted that this is not due to a lack of applicable standards or guidance material. Suitable material is available (e.g. ASTM F1166-07). However, the common ship Human Factors issues still tend to read like the index of a typical Human Factors standard - and that is before the more detailed consideration of the complex system weaknesses. Even comparatively simple concepts like considering body size (anthropometry) in design is often overlooked,
leading to valves which
cannot be reached by some seafarers, consoles with controls beyond arm’s length or equipment which cannot be easily maintained. The problem is that in isolation these types of concerns can sound small and are often accepted by the users. However, they do lead to real world
problems and even these simple shortfalls
contribute to human error potential. Although a single design
deficiency alone could directly lead to an
accident, it is more normally a sequence of things that together form a human error path. This path is opened up with a single weakness and through a number of other weaknesses it eventually reaches a critical event such as a casualty, an incident or an accident. A structured HSI approach identifies these weaknesses in the system and
Unless the Human Factors specialist is able to really understand the physical constraints that have driven the design they will find it increasingly difficult to achieve design influence. Allied to this is the need to think widely around the problem – under what circumstances might there be an issue? What if it is dark? What if there is high workload? What if the user is disorientated? There is therefore a clear need to understand the user and
develops mitigation strategies as appropriate at the design level. It is clearly not possible to mitigate all of the weaknesses, but by systematically identifying those which can be foreseen during design will allow more significant strides in reducing the risk and associated consequence of error. This approach has the advantage of not
only making structured rationale
design but
change possible within also provides a record a of
influence that supports both the audit trail and perhaps more importantly client confidence and engagement in the process.
6. PERCEPTIONS OF HSI BY DESIGN TEAM A further practical advantage
but of a transversal HSI
approach is that it allows opportunities to share work between the team where there is a common goal. For example the principles of Task Analysis are a core part of Human Factors activity,
underpin Training Needs Analysis and some elements of systems engineering. Taking a
the same principles proactive transversal
approach therefore leads to opportunities to not only increase collaboration in the team and better HSI design influence, but it also helps reduce internal design cost and risk.
However, the most fundamental principle for HSI to influence design successfully is pragmatism.
Reciting
textbook answers and theory (or blindly following standards) is easy but will not drive meaningful change within the team. It is important to understand what is physically (or
technologically) possible and what is
possible within the real-world commercial constraints. What works best to achieve design influence is the more difficult appreciation of what the issue is from the human perspective, and what the implications are mixed with the creativity to identify
either a way of modifying the design, or an alternative means to address the issue.
There are times when a credible Human Factors issue is identified during the design process which cannot be resolved with a design change for either practical or commercial reasons. At that point there is no value in throwing hands in the air and walking off. The ability to understand the ‘so what’ angle is vital; what is the hazard, how likely is it and when is it likely to occur. Not everything can be fixed so this is yet another link with the safety community in the team. Human Factors is therefore actively involved in the identification of hazards, and the proposal of mitigations to reduce the risk and consequence of the identified hazards occurring.
C-174
©2014: The Royal Institution of Naval Architects
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 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188