Technological Perceptions on Human Technology Interaction (HTI) in Navigation Operation of Merchant Ships

S. Sakidin, B.C. Chew, S.R. Hamid, M. Subramaniam

Abstract


This paper highlighted the perception of seafarers on Human Technology Interaction (HTI) in the navigation operation of merchant ships. From the review of the literatures, weaknesses related to HTI in the current practice of navigation were found. Most common errors found were over reliance on technology, misinterpretations of data and careless usage of technology. Due to these weaknesses, a survey titled ‘The Technological Perception on Human Technology Interaction (HTI) for Navigation of Merchant Shipping’ was conducted focusing on the perception of officers in handling the technological equipment during the navigation operation. The survey involved 97 officers of merchant ships from two major shipping companies in Asia. Among the findings were 56% officers agreed that accident happened frequently due to misinterpretation of data provided by the technological equipment. About 67% of officers agreed that logic diagrams should be provided for equipment. Recommendations were made such as to provide logic diagrams showing the relationship between the equipment and the system. A clear policy on the use of technology particularly for navigation operation should be developed especially the trend of future ships are more technologically inclined. Lastly, there is a need to explore the ergonomic compatibility for effectively eliminating the HTI errors.

Full Text:

PDF

References


B.M. Batalden and A.K. Sydnes, “Maritime safety and the ISM code: a study of investigated casualties and incidents,” WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 3-25, 2014.

J. Weng and D. Yang, “Investigation of shipping accident injury severity and mortality,” Accident Analysis and Prevention, vol. 76, pp. 92-101, 2015.

F. Goerlandt and J. Montewka, “Maritime transportation risk analysis: Review and analysis in light of some foundational issues,” Reliability Engineering and System Safety, vol. 138, pp. 115-134, 2015.

C. Chauvin, S. Lardjane, G. Morel, J.P. Clostermann and B. Langard, “Human and organizational factors in maritime accidents: Analysis of collisions at sea using the HFACS,” Accident Analysis and Prevention, vol. 59, pp. 26-37, 2013.

Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty. (2017). Safety and Shipping Review: An annual review of trends and developments in shipping losses and safety [Online]. Available:

http://www.agcs.allianz.com/assets/PDFs/Reports/AGCS_Safety_Shipping_Review_2017.pdf

K. Pleskacz, “Impact of automation on ship’s safety”, Scientific Journal, vol. 26, pp. 88-91, 2011.

E. Bal, O. Arslan and L. Tavacioglu, “Prioritization of the causal factors of fatigue in seafarers and measurement of fatigue with the application of the Lactate Test,” Safety Science, vol. 72, pp. 46-54, 2015.

A.M. Goulielmos, G. Lathouraki and C. Giziakis, “The quest of marine accidents due to human error, 1998 – 2011,” International Journal of Emergency Services, vol. 1, pp. 39-70, 2012.

M.J. Akhtar and I.B. Utne, “Human fatigue’s effect on the risk of maritime groundings – A Bayesian Network modelling approach,” Safety Science, vol. 62, pp. 427-440, 2014.

A. Harati-Mokhtari, A. Wall, P. Brooks and J. Wang, “Automatic Identification System (AIS): Data reliability and human error implications,” Journal of Navigation, vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 373-384, 2007.

International Maritime Organization (IMO). (1995). Performance Standards for Automatic Radar Plotting Aids (ARPAs) [Online]. Available: http://www.sjofartsverket.se/upload/5121/823.pdf

M.C. Tsou and C.K. Hsueh, “The study of ship collision avoidance route planning by ant colony algorithm,” Journal of Marine Science and Technology, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 746-756, 2009.

American Bureau of Shipping (ABS). (2014). Guidance notes on The Application of Ergonomics to Marine Systems [Online]. Available:

https://ww2.eagle.org/content/dam/eagle/rules-and-guides/current/other/86_applicationsofergonomicstomarinesystems/ergo_gn_e-feb14.pdf

A. Maldonado, J.L. Garcia, A. Alvarado and C.O. Balderrama, “A hierarchical fuzzy axiomatic design methodology for ergonomics compatibility evaluation of advance manufacturing technology,” International Journal of Advance Manufacturing Technology, vol. 66, no. 1-4, pp. 171-186, 2012.

U. Meck, S. Stroschneider and U. Bruggemann, “Interaction design in shipbuilding: An investigation into the integration of the users’ perspective into ship bridge design,” Journal of Maritime Research, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 15-32, 2014.

A. Maldonado, J. Sanchez, S. Noriega, J.J. Diaz, J.L. Garcia and L. Vidal, “A hierarchical fuzzy axiomatic design survey for ergonomic compatibility evaluation of advanced manufacturing technology – AMT,” in XXIst Annual International Occupational Ergonomics and Safety Conference, Dallas, Texas, 2009, pp. 270- 277.

S.T. Chen, A. Wall, P. Davies, J. Yang and Y.H. Chou, “A Human and Organizational Factors (HOFs) analysis method for marine casualties using HFACS – Maritime Accidents (HFACS – MA),” Safety Science, vol. 60, pp. 105-114, Dec. 2013.

S. Shappell. (2005). The Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS) [Online]. Available: http://www.flighttestsafety.org/images/stories/workshop/2009Apr/Shappell-HFACS-HFIX.pdf.

Akademi Laut Malaysia (ALAM) (2017). Akademi Laut Malaysia Course Calendar 2017 [Online]. Available: http://www.alam.edu.my/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Course-Calendar-2017.pdf.




© Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology