Feature 2 | BRIDGE & COMMUNICATIONS The devil is in the detail


Recent research has taken an analytical and inclusive approach to bridge design that looks to systems users for design features that deliver during vessel operation


of January having successfully created new ways of sharing and displaying information on a ship’s bridge, such as adaptive bridge displays and a novel ‘Shared Display’ touch screen for better cooperation on the bridge. Its core aim was to improve vessel efficiency and develop systems that would lower the number of accidents at sea by utilising the experience of seafarers to synergise human operation and electronic actuation; however, this cooperative and ergonomically-minded bridge project is not the first of its kind. Rolls-Royce used a similar design process


C


in the development of its Unified Bridge concept, explains Dr Frøy Bjørneseth, a principal engineer for Human Factors and Control Centres for the company that grew the concept from a PhD project that ended in 2010. Te company wished to go beyond the simple production of equipment, instead aiming to collaborate on an ergonomic bridge environment that would benefit operators and operations alike through design, fundamentally improving the work environment and experience to improve ship safety. This Unified Bridge project is still developing, adds Bjørneseth, with ongoing data capture from the system’s first installation onboard PSV Stril Luna in 2014, as well as with the implementation of the system on different vessel types and sizes – of which the next is soon to be delivered. The project was conducted with four


design criteria in mind. Te first, simplicity, dictated that the consoles developed should be cleaner and more easily understood, reducing the mental strain for crew members. Tis idea fed into the second criteria, safety, as by reducing the regular cognitive load on individuals using bridge consoles, brain energy levels would be saved for safety-critical operations when crew member awareness is most needed.


30


Proximity, the third criteria, is part of this core drive to increase safety, optimising the distance and location of particular bridge instruments so that the system was easier to use. Te final criteria, to increase performance, would be facilitated by the previous criteria, and lead to more efficient operations by a happier crew. Bjørneseth stresses that what may


seem like luxury problems, such as the minutiae of lever designs and positioning on a console, are important and that an accumulation of these smaller problems can lead to more substantial problems and possibly an incident at sea. For example, lighting needs to be carefully managed from day ‘til dusk to prevent glare as well as to maintain night vision during night operations, she explains, adding that the traditional manual operation of light levels detracts from the operation of the bridge, reducing functionality and efficiency. By automating and defining light settings for particular times of day, especially maintaining night vision for more difficult nocturnal operations with low level light, the crew’s physical and psychological burden can be eased, improving safety and efficiency. Similarly, research found that a vessel’s alert system was raising stress levels for crew members, so Bjørneseth and her


ASCADe, a three-year, EU-funded project to develop new bridge designs came to a close at the end


Dr Frøy Bjørneseth, a principal engineer for


Human Factors and Control Centres at Rolls-Royce


team standardised the mute button in response, simplifying the interface so that all bridge alerts were contained in one display. Standardisation of the consoles was very important in the design of the Unified Bridge, says Bjørneseth, as the intention was to define the Rolls-Royce brand, but, more importantly, to make operators feel familiar with the system when moving between vessels with the same bridge system, improving safety and efficiency. Pinpointing these issues and affecting


positive change requires time and immersion in the operational environment, according to Bjørneseth: “We don’t want to rely on industrial designers only – we want to prove what is right for operators.” Armed with this mentality the


researchers went to sea, implementing a fly-on-the-wall approach in an observational study of bridge operations aboard different vessel types. Part of this involved the deployment of sight tracking technology that could follow and plot where operators have to look – the underpinning idea was that eye tracking and strain could be reduced with the information gathered. Te study also involved interviewing the crew about events and how responses and communications were made in these cases. Following these findings, port interviews,


The Naval Architect March 2016


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