Evaluation of Lookout Performance of Bridge Resource Teams

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Evaluation of Lookout Performance of Bridge Resource Teams"

Mildred Evans
5 years ago
Views:

1 Evaluation of Lookout Performance of Bridge Resource Teams Koji urai, Yuji Hayashi 2, Laurie C.Stone, and Seiji Inokuchi 4 Abstract This paper describes some patterns of a ship s bridge resource team s performance using a worksampling method in onboard smart education. If we can find out performance patterns for attempting safe navigation, excepting knowledgebased shiphandling methods which we can get from textbooks, it is possible to give an outline of the navigators and quartermasters art and skill on a ship. This pattern also guides the practical implementation of onboard smart education. We aimed to find the lookout pattern which is the basic and most important work in navigational watch keeping. The observation of the navigational watch keeping was carried out during twenty navigational situations: three entering/leaving ports; two anchorages; five passage routes including three straits; and five open sea areas. We identified two lookout patterns among bridge teammates from this observation. Index Terms Ship s bridge team, Shiphandling, Skill and Art, Worksampling method. INTRDUCTIN In Japan, education for a merchant ship s navigator is controlled by a university or a maritime technology college, not a navy or a coast guard. Practical onboard education is conducted on a training ship, such as a power vessel or tall ship. Specialists who have a lot of experience educate students on the ship. However, the contents of the practical onboard education are not always clear to the students, because real situations include all things, not just simple linear knowledge. Real life, complex situations are difficult for them to understand. We need some patterns of navigational art which can form the basis of the shiphandling in onboard smart education. The research on ship s bridge teammate behavior/action (performance) is not clear yet. nly research for a duty officer is clear [][4]. We started research on this subject a few years ago [5][0]. In earlier, completed research, we find the results for the performance of airline pilots regarding human error [], [2], but each vessel differs. In particular, the ship s navigator and the quartermaster usually walk around on the bridge. They never sit continuously in a seat the way an airline pilot does. We observe the bridge teammates and analyze the lookout method of the navigator and the quartermaster in order to make a framework for onboard smart education, with the aim to discover the lookout pattern of the bridge teammates. The experiment is conducted in twenty navigational situations: three entering/leaving ports; two anchorages; five passage routes including three straits; and five open sea areas. We analyze the performance of the bridge teammates using a worksampling method. The subjects are crews of the training ship of the Faculty of aritime Sciences at Kobe University. The results show that the lookout pattern for the navigator and the quartermaster differs whether the sea area is open or not. oreover, the stream of the lookout method among bridge teammates has some rules which require nonverbal teamwork in order to achieve safe navigation. SHIP S BRIDGE TEA The bridge teamwork is thought as one of the resources of Bridge Team anagement (BT) []. The BT refers to the management of the human resource available to the navigator, who is the quartermaster, engine room watch, look out and so on. Their teamwork accomplishes the goal of the safe and the efficient navigation. The advantage of the teamwork is expected to obtain the interaction with individual ability and the effect is a multiplication for the work. However, we never forget that the teamwork doesn t always demonstrate the effects. In other words, if one step is mistaken a bit, the effects decrease dramatically. The watch conditions depends on geographical and weather conditions, and its conditions are divided into four conditions including some situations Fog, Heavy traffic, Entering a channel, harbor or restricted area, Heavy weather and Fire, flooding, or other emergency. Each watch condition is as follows [4]. Watch Condition : All clear conditions on maneuverability, weather, traffic and systems. A deck officer and a quartermaster can handle the bridge watch, and sometimes a deck officer does it. Watch Condition 2: Somewhat restricted visibility, constrained geography and congested traffic. A deck officer and a quartermaster can handle the bridge watch. Koji urai, Kobe University, murai@maritime.kobeu.ac.jp 2 Yuji Hayashi, Kobe University, hayashi@maritime.kobeu.ac.jp Laurie Stone, aine aritime Academy, lstone@mma.edu 4 Seiji Inokuchi, Takarazuka University of Art and Design, sinokuchi@takarauniv.ac.jp T4J6

Watch Condition : Serious poor visibility, close quarters in bay and approach channels, and heavy traffic. A captain, a deck officer and a quartermaster can handle the bridge watch.

Watch Condition 4: n Berthing and anchoring, a captain, a deck officer, a quartermaster and a pilot at special ports in the bridge can handle the bridge watch.

2 Watch Condition : Serious poor visibility, close quarters in bay and approach channels, and heavy traffic. A captain, a deck officer and a quartermaster can handle the bridge watch. relationship between the sea areas to and the twenty navigational situations. Watch Condition 4: n Berthing and anchoring, a captain, a deck officer, a quartermaster and a pilot at special ports in the bridge can handle the bridge watch. A chief officer and bosun are at the bow station, and a second officer and deckhand are at the stern station. EXPERIENT In the experiment, we observed the performance of the ship s bridge teammates as conducted in twenty navigational situations to determine the lookout patterns of the navigator and the quartermaster using a worksampling method [5]. The subjects are five crews consisting of Captain (Capt), two Duty fficers (D) and two Quartermasters (Q) (see Table ) aboard the training ship Fukae aru belonging to Kobe University. Her length is meters; breadth 0 meters; and gross tonnage tons (see Figure ). TABLE FIVE SUBJECTS, CREWS F TRAINING SHIP FUKAE ARU Subject Gender Experience [year] S S 2 S S 4 S 5 Captain Chief fficer fficer Quartermaster A Quartermaster B FIGURE 2 UTLINE F THE EXPERIENTAL SEA AREAS FR TWENTY NAVIGATINAL SITUATINS (WEST SIDE F JAPAN). TABLE 2 RELATINSHIP BETWEEN EXPERIENTAL SEA AREAS AND TWENTY NAVIGATINAL SITUATINS Sea Area No. Navigational Situation Sea Area No. Navigational Situation EP, LP, A, WA EP, LP PS PS A, WA P, P EP, LP PS In Figure 2, a number from to and a line show the sea area number and an outline of the ship s route. The weather and sea conditions were fine during all navigational situations. In Table 2, EP, LP, A, WA, P, PS and mean Entering Port, Leaving Port, Anchoring, Weighing Anchor, Passage rout, Passage route at Strait, and pen sea respectively. In this study, we define two sea areas, L sea and S sea, to analyze the observed data for geographical features, not traffic density. We show the relationship between L sea, S sea and sea area number in Figure 2 below. FIGURE TRAINING SHIP FUKAE ARU F KBE UNIVERSITY, FACULTY F ARITIE SCIENCES. We observed the bridge teammates performance every second, and specialists totaled up each event after the experiment. oreover, we recorded the bridge teammates voices, the weather and sea conditions, etc. The relationship between the observer and the subject is vs., where the observer never observes multiple subjects at the same time. We show the information from the five subjects designated S to S 5 in Table. The outline of the experimental sea areas is shown from to in Figure 2. Table 2 shows the Large sea area (L sea ): L sea is the open sea. Sea area numbers are 2,, 4, 6, and. Small sea area (S sea ): S sea is every area except the open sea. Sea area numbers are, 5, 7, and 9 to. ANALYSIS We code the bridge teammates performance by using the event table which consists of fifteen categories A to including eightynine events [6], [7] (see Table ). We also show a detail of the lookout events including radar in Table 4. The specialists, who have a lot of onboard experience, made this table. In Table, a code for the event is to 9, and in Table 4, Eye and B of the A) lookout event means T4J7

3 observation using the naked eye and binoculars respectively. In this study, we define three types of lookout methods by Naked eye (Eye), Binoculars (B), Radar, and divide the eight lookout sea areas by the naked eye and binoculars: whole (bow), right side ahead, right, left side ahead, left, right side behind, left side behind, and stern. TABLE EVANT TABLE, 5 CATEGRIES Category Event (code number) A) Lookout B) Instrument C) Steering rder D) Steering E) aneuvering rder F) Engine rder G) Telegraph H) Thruster rder I) Chart / Catalog J) VHF K) Verbal Communication L) Bell Book ) Watch emo N) Taking ver Duty ) thers , , 7 9 TABLE 4 EVENT TABLE F LKUT Code Event, 9 Whole (bow) Eye, B 2, 0 Right side ahead Eye, B, Right Eye, B 4, 2 Left side ahead Eye, B 5, Left Eye, B 6, 4 Right side behind Eye, B 7, 5 Left side behind Eye, B, 6 Stern Eye, B 7 Radar for eleven situations and D and Q for nine situations. RESULTS We show three results: ) the event ratio of the navigator and the quartermaster using Table for investigating the bridge teammates performance; 2) the frequency of the lookout code including the radar to 7 of the navigator and the quartermaster for determining the lookout method; and ) the pattern of the lookout observation of the navigator and the quartermaster for ascertaining the framework of the lookout. As the typical results of L sea and S sea, we select sea area number 6 from L sea and from S sea. I. Performance of Bridge Teammates We show the event ratio of the bridge teammates in Figures (L sea ) and 4 (S sea ). In Figure, about 0% (A+B), the event ratio of D and Q, is based on the lookout including radar observation (B), D 79.2%, Q 7.0%, and 4 to 6% fixed position (I). This tendency also shows in Figure 4, D 2.% (A+B+C), Q 76.6% (A+B). We think the steering order (C) includes the lookout, because what the navigator judges as a ship s course and speed for safe navigation under the navigational information, which he gets from the lookout, is a matter of course. oreover, the fixed position of D and Q is 4.4% and 7.%. We describe the analysis process of the bridge teammates performance below.. The observer records the subject s performance every one second. 2. The observer records the navigational information, such as ship s speed and course, wind speed and direction, weather and sea conditions, target information using radar and other important information, which we need to analyze the bridge teammates performance.. We count the time for each category and calculate the ratio of each category to all. 4. We count frequency of the code numbers to 7 to ascertain the lookout method. 5. We check the stream of the lookout to ascertain the lookout pattern. 6. This process is carried out for twenty navigational situations. The bridge teammates are Capt, D and Q FIGURE EVENT RATI F THE BRIDGE TEAATES (L SEA ). The event ratios of the bridge teammates for all sea areas were about 0% lookout and 4 to 7% fixed position. This result shows one of the guidelines of the ship s bridge teammates performance when performing navigational watch keeping. We also guess that the importance of the lookout, based on the ratio of 0%, is the same for those of other transport systems such as an airline pilot, a train operator and a car driver. Perhaps, we again realize the importance of human ability, even if a lot of navigational systems have been developing toward nonhuman systems. Additionally, we can confirm the bridge teammates do the lookout under the assumption that targets are always around their own ship based on the result of 0% from the lookout patterns. T4J

We can determine the lookout method. In the L sea, D and Q sometimes use radar and sometimes use binoculars for detecting targets. The frequency is more than the situations of the S sea.

4 We can determine the lookout method. In the L sea, D and Q sometimes use radar and sometimes use binoculars for detecting targets. The frequency is more than the situations of the S sea. The navigators detect targets by moving eye points to a wide range in the direction of the ship s movement. Their observation area becomes smaller when they find targets. FIGURE 4 EVENT RATI F THE BRIDGE TEAATES (S SEA ). III. Lookout Pattern We show the lookout patterns in Figures 7 and that are part of Figures 5 and 6. D to D and Q to Q of Figures 7 and are typical streams of the lookout of D and Q. Also, D to D is an order of the lookout performance for the D and Q to Q for Q. II. Lookout ethod We counted the frequency of codes to 7 by dividing three lookout methods: Radar (), Binoculars (2), Naked eye (), ther (0); and show the relationship between the time [second] and the incidence of the lookout methods 0 to in Figures 5 and 6. In Figures 5 and 6, a square represents the results of D and a diamond represents the results of Q. FIGURE 7 LKUT PATTERN (L SEA ). FIGURE 5 FREQUENCY F THE LKUT ETHD (L SEA ). FIGURE LKUT PATTERN (S SEA ). FIGURE 6 FREQUENCY F THE LKUT ETHD (S SEA ). In Figure 7, D to D which is the stream of D is, and Q have the same stream. Its timing is D first and Q second. This tendency shows that Q confirms the performance of D, and constitutes a double check of the bridge teamwork. n the other hand, in Figure, the stream is different between D and Q. The pattern of D is 2 and Q 0. However, the timing shows T4J9

5 the same tendency: D first and Q second. Q assists D to fix the position and to get accurate information about the targets from the radar in the small sea area. We show the relationship between the sea area number, including the navigational situations of Table 2, and the main patterns which we found in this study, in Table 5. The parts with an underline show the results of L sea and others are S sea. In Table 5, there are two kinds of lookout pattern for the geographical conditions (L sea and S sea ): ) L sea is for D and Q; 2) S sea is 2 for Capt and D. oreover, radar observation time is different between L sea (see Figure 7) and S sea (see Figure ). We show the relationship between the sea area number, including the navigational situations and the radar observation time, in Table 6. The parts which are underlined show the results of L sea like Table 5. In Table 6, the radar observation time of L sea is more than S sea for D and Q. This tendency shows the difference in how to use the radar on navigational information, because the targets are close in S sea for the navigator who just gets the aimed target s information. However, he searches whether the target is or is not in L sea. TABLE 5 LKUT PATTERN Sea Area No. Capt D Q L 2 4 5E 5L 6 7PS 9PS 0A 0WA S, S 2E 2L PS A WA, E , TABLE 6 RADAR BSERVATIN TIE [SEC] Sea Area No. Capt D Q L 2 4 5E 5L 6 7PS 9PS 0A 0WA S, S 2E 2L PS A WA, E CNCLUSIN We observed ship s bridge teams composed of a captain, a duty officer and a quartermaster in order to find out their performance patterns; and specifically aimed at the lookout pattern in two kinds of geographical conditions divided by the sea area size. The experiment is carried out for thirteen kinds of sea area and twenty navigational situations in Japan. According to the results, we confirmed the importance of the lookout for safe navigation, and identified two types of the lookout pattern. In large sea area: the duty officer and the quartermaster have the lookout pattern: Naked eye Radar Naked eye. The quartermaster confirms the performance of the duty officer. In the small sea area, the duty officer and the captain have the lookout pattern: Naked eye Binoculars Naked eye. The quartermaster supports the performance of the duty officer and the captain. ur future aims are ) to find the performance patterns of everyone except the lookout; 2) to develop a framework of the ship s navigator performance; and ) to find a hybrid evaluation method using physiological indices. ACKNWLEDGENT This research was supported by the crews of the training ship Fukae aru of Kobe University, Faculty of aritime Sciences. We also thank the editor of ICEE2006 and all anonymous referees. REFERENCES [] Kobayashi, H. and Senda, S., A Study on the easurement of Human ental Workload in Ship Handling Using SNS Value, Journal of Japan Institute of Navigation, Vol.9, 99, pp [2] urai, K., Hayashi, Y. and Inokuchi, S., A Basic Study on the Body and Physiological Response to Visual Simulation of Ship Rolling, Transaction on. Institute of Electrical Engineers of Japan, Vol.22C, No.2, 2002, pp [] urai, K., Hayashi, Y., Sei Y. and Inokuchi, S., n the Relationship between Horizontal Angle of Visual Field and it s Reality by Ship Handling Simulator, Journal of Japan Institute of Navigation (JIN), Vol.06, 2002, pp.. [4] Naitoh, H., urai K. and Hayashi, Y., A Basic Study on Characteristics of Sequential RR IntervalII. Fluctuation of the Heart Beat Frequency Components for Each Human Behavior, Review of Kobe University of ercantile arine, No. 5, 200, pp.946. [5] urai, K. and Hayashi, Y., Evaluation of Ship s Navigator s Performance by Event Sampling ethod, Abstract of 70 th Japan Association of Applied Psychology Annual Conference, 200, p.5. [6] urai, K., Hayashi, Y. and Inokuchi, S., A Basic Study on Teammates ental Workload among Ship s Bridge Team, Transaction on Information and Systems, Institute of Electronics, Information and Communication Engineers, Vol.E7D, No.6, 2004, pp T4J0

6 [7] urai, K. and Inokuchi, S., New Concept of Navigational Information Including Human Navigator s KANSEI, Journal of Japan Society of Kansei Engineering, Vol.4, No., 2004, pp.776. [] Takehara, T., urai, K., C. Stone, L. and Hayashi, Y., D.Nielsen (Ed.), Proposal of An Evaluation ethod Using a Physiological Index in NavigatorCentered Education, aritime Security and ET (Proceedings of the International Association of aritime Universities(IAU), 6 th Annual General Assembly and Conference), WIT press, 2005, pp [9] urai, K., Hayashi, Y., Basic Study on Evaluation of BT Effects with Heart Rate Variability, Proceedings of th International Association of Institute of Navigation World Congress, CDR, 200. [0] urai, K., Hayashi, Y. and Wakabayashi, N., A Basic Study on Navigator s ental Workload by Wavelet Transform, Proceedings of 200 IEEEPacific Rim Conference, 200, pp [] Campbell, R.D. and Bagshaw,., Human Performance and Limitations in Aviation, Blackwell Science [2] Reason, J., Human Error, Cambridge University Press 990. [] A.J. Swift NI, Bridge Team anagement A Practical Guide, The Nautical Institute, 99. [4] National GeospatialIntelligence Agency, The American Practical Navigator, Chapt.25, pp.67, 995. [5] urai, K. and Hayashi, Y., A Few Comments on Lookout ethod of Ship s Bridge Teammates by Work Sampling ethod, Abstract of 7 st Japan Association of Applied Psychology Annual Conference, 2004, p.. [6] Japan Institute of Navigation, Basic Navigation Glossary, Japan: KaibunDo Ltd., 99. [7] inistry of Transport I Standard arine Communication Phrase, Japan: SeizanDo Ltd., T4J

A Method Quantitatively Evaluating on Technical Progress of Students in Ship Handling Simulator Training ABSTRACT

A Method Quantitatively Evaluating on Technical Progress of Students in Ship Handling Simulator Training Kinzo INOUE, Hideo USUI, Rong MA and Cemil YURTOREN Kobe University of Mercantile Marine 5-1-1 Fukae-minami