Showing papers by "Scott MacKinnon published in 2009"

Effects of human anthropometry and personal protective equipment on space requirements.

Abstract: Representative samples of offshore workers engaged in the use of totally enclosed lifeboats were recruited in two different regions of Atlantic Canada for this study. Body mass, height and three selected anthropometric dimensions were measured with and without the presence of an immersion suit. Statistical comparisons were made between the two groups and to the main criteria values for body weight and space allocation used international standards for lifeboat capacity rating. There was no difference in the height, body mass and BMI values between the two groups. Both groups were found to be considerably heavier than the IMO Life Saving Code standard of 75 kg. Not surprisingly, the shoulder breadths measurements were always greater than the hip breadth measurements. The seat pan allocation of 430 mm was found to be inadequate for this population and needs to be increased. Finally, the wearing of an immersion suit increases the physical size of each subject by substantial amounts. The magnitude of increase is related to the type of suit and whether there was external compression applied during the measurement. It was recommended that the international standard should be altered by reducing the lifeboat capacity ratings by 20%

Knowledge transfer between two geographically distant action research teams

Abstract: Purpose – The objective of this study is to observe and document the transfer of a train the trainers program in knife sharpening and steeling. This knowledge transfer involved two groups of researchers: the experts and the learners. These groups are from geographically dispersed regions and evolve in distinct contexts by their language and culture.Design/methodology/approach – The paper favors the learning history (LH) technique, a methodology that enabled the different participants to share their experience through reiterate interviews.Findings – Based on the dynamic knowledge transfer capacity model, the absorptive capacity of the train the trainers process appears to have been mobilized. Although there were a number of hitches, people are confident that the project will be successful and that they will put what they have learned to good use in upcoming phases to transfer this program to other organizations.Research limitations/implications – The conclusions apply solely to a context of interprovincial...

Comparison of Traditional and Integrated Bridge Design with SAGAT

Abstract: Modern ship bridges are highly-automated manmachine systems. Safety and efficiency of the ship operations are dependent upon the ability of a watchkeeper to perceive, interpret, and make decisions upon information acquired from the surrounding environment. In the last years a strong increase of modern information systems on ship bridges could be observed. Simple displays and control systems were supplemented or replaced by complex computer-based information systems. In order to support the mariner effectively onboard, a taskand situation-dependent representation of the information is a compelling need. Modular Integrated Navigation Systems (INS) according to the revised IMO performance standards on INS (IMO 2007) combine and integrate the validated information of different sensors and functions and allow the presentation on the various displays according to the tasks.

Thermal Protection in Inflatable Liferafts – Human and Thermal Manikin Testing to Quantify:Training Issues, Assess Occupant Heat Balance and Develop Performance Criteria

Abstract: Inflatable liferafts are used worldwide as a means of evacuation and survival from almost all ocean‐going vessels, regardless of their size, purpose or region of operation. Vessel size ranges from fishing and other commercial vessels with small crews to offshore oil installations and passenger ships with thousands of persons onboard. While International Maritime Organisation (IMO) standards currently require inflatable liferaft components to “provide insulation” or “be sufficiently insulated”, no performance criteria accompany these requirements. This paper will outline the methodology and results from a three year research project involving a multidisciplinary team which utilised human subjects and a thermally instrumented manikin to investigate the gaps in knowledge for the thermal performance of inflatable liferafts in cold environments. Tests were conducted in a controlled laboratory environment with a 16 person SOLAS‐approved liferaft and air and water temperatures as cold as 5°C. The main variables investigated were clothing wetness (wet and dry) and liferaft floor insulation (insulated and uninsulated). The project’s four main objectives were to: 1) develop thermal protection criteria for inflatable liferafts assuming otherwise unprotected occupants, 2) propose an objective methodology for testing inflatable liferaft thermal protection performance, 3) develop tools for search and rescue planners to predict survival times of liferaft occupants and 4) provide guidance to training authorities and manufacturers. The study found that: 1) the thermal insulation of a combined system of clothing and liferaft using a thermal manikin gave good agreement with measurements using humans, as long as proper corrections for differences between manikin and humans are appropriately applied, 2) system insulation values coupled with a cold exposure survival model can be expected to give search and rescue planners reasonable predictions of survival time in liferafts where hypothermia is the main risk factor and 3) the factors substantially affecting the survival time of liferaft occupants are: whether any type of thermal protective aid (TPA) is worn,clothing wetness, liferaft floor insulation and liferaft ventilation rate.

Experimental Study and Modelling of Thermal Protection in Liferafts Using a Thermal Manikin and Human Subjects

Abstract: Experiments were conducted in cold conditions (5°C water temperature and 5°C air temperature) to assess the thermal protection of a 16-person, SOLAS approved, commercially available liferaft using a thermal manikin and human subjects. The comparison tests included four cases — 1. Inflated raft floor; dry clothing (Idry ); 2. Inflated raft floor; wet clothing (Iwet ); 3. Uninflated raft floor; dry clothing (Udry ); 4. Uninflated raft floor; wet clothing (Uwet ). The results demonstrated equivalence in insulation between human subjects and a thermal manikin for all cases of comparison (Idry: Manikin 0.236 (m2 °C)/W versus Human 0.224 (m2 °C)/W; Iwet: Manikin 0.146 (m2 °C)/W versus Human 0.145 (m2 °C)/W; Udry: Manikin 0.174 (m2 °C)/W versus Human 0.185 (m2 °C)/W; Uwet: Manikin 0.101 (m2 °C)/W versus Human 0.116 (m2 °C)/W). The results also showed the repeatability of the thermal manikin tests (0.177 (m2 °C)/W versus 0.171 (m2 °C)/W in Udry baseline case; and 0.101 (m2 °C)/W versus 0.104 (m2 °C)/W in Uwet baseline case). The results indicated that the insulation of a closed cell foam floor is comparable to an inflated floor (0.236 (m2 °C)/W compared to 0.221 (m2 °C)/W and 0.236 (m2 °C)/W for closed foam floor from manufacturer A and B respectively). TPA provided considerable additional insulation than all baseline cases. A test with a human subject wearing a TPA in the Uwet case showed an improved insulation of 48% over the baseline case. TPA provided more additional insulation than a wet suit in all test cases except Udry case. In Uwet case, the worst test condition, the insulation obtained by sitting on a lifejacket (0.149 (m2 °C)/W) is less than wearing a TPA (0.158 (m2 °C)/W). Both of these are better than sitting directly on an uninflated floor (0.104 (m2 °C)/W) or a closed cell foam floor (0.129 (m2 °C)/W). There is a significant decrease in insulation value sitting in 10 cm of water (0.05 (m2 °C)/W). Two human subject tests show an insulation value of 0.079 (m2 °C)/W and 0.081 (m2 °C)/W respectively. A liferaft occupant heat loss model was developed and integrated with Defense R&D Canada’s Cold Exposure Survival Model to predict survival time. For Uwet case, the worst test condition, the survival time is 32 hours and functional time is 24 hours for the experimental conditions.© 2009 ASME