View non-flash version
April 2012www.sname.org/sname/mt of the galley, it was decided to redesign the distribution of lights to address the issues encountered. e data obtained was used to review the materials and colors used on the di erent working surfaces and consoles to minimize eye strain. It was found that, in the majority of the cases, this requirement was satised and therefore the crew work- ing in this area was not at ergonomic risk. SOUND QUALITY ENVIRONMENT NOISE ). After analyzing the results, it was determined that the spaces with the highest level of noise were the mess room, the laundry, and the engineering control room (ECR). e case of the ECR was the biggest concern due to the fact that it is continuously manned. To minimize the high ergonomic risk associated with this space, it was recommended the acoustic insulation be modied, thereby bringing the noise down to an acceptable level. e noise in the laundry room comes directly from the equipment installed there. Because it is frequently unoccupied, it was decided that no corrective action was required. e mess room is not an enclosed space, located just across the kitchen/pan- try and shared by all the crewmembers, so a noise level slightly above the criteria was acceptable for this space. ermal environment. In the majority of cases, relative humidity and air speed were within the acceptable limits. e gal- ley showed high temperature levels, which were immediately corrected by adding forced air extraction; the air speed and the noise were measured again to verify that the levels were still within acceptable limits in this compartment. e spaces in which electronic equipment was installed presented temperature and relative humid- ity levels below the comfort level criteria. is was the result of the environmental requirements of the specialized equipment installed in these spaces and was contrac- tually agreed upon with the owner, so no actions were taken. The measurements were sup- plemented with interviews with crewmembers to verify that the thermal environment was acceptable to at least 80% of the occupants. In the spaces where problems were identified by the measure- ments, there was also consensus among the crewmembers that confirmed the value of the approach taken to assess the thermal environment. A WAY FORWARD e use of di erent criteria for the design and assessment of the three ambient envi- ronment aspects evaluated in the RPSV was challenging in the sense that, in most cases, the criteria do not correspond to the size and the type of vessel. However, they were used with the sole purpose of going over the pro- cess of measuring, collecting, analyzing, and reporting the data. Because the source guidance is gener- ally intended for commercial vessels?and the RPSV is a military vessel?the clas- sication of some spaces was not always straightforward. In fact, in some cases a reclassication of the spaces was required after reflecting on the results obtained together with the design philosophy. e interviews with the crew, particu- larly with regards to lighting and indoor climate, proved interesting because it showed the subjective character associated with the assessment of these two aspects. However, the fact that at least 80% of the crew associated with a particular space were inclined towards one opinion or the other served to resolve controversies. Preventive actions, as defined in the Quality Assurance Management System of COTECMAR, were implemented to ensure a correct integration during the design process among the di erent departments. Specically, the responsibility for the light- ing distribution (position, power, and quantity) was moved to the department in charge of habitability. e measure of ergonomic risk for the case study was somewhat arbitrary. At this time, the research team is working on the development of an overall mea- sure of ergonomic risk (OMER) that can be used in the early stages of design and can be incorporated into an already devel- oped methodology to evaluate ship design alternatives . e OMER should enable com- parison between competing designs and help identify spaces with high ergonomic risk levels in vessels already built. MTAngela Liliana Lossa Chamorro is department head of accommodations in the Shipbuilding Business Unit at COTECMAR. She thanks research assistant Diana Baha- mon for her help during the development of the proj- ect and for preparing the images used in this article. The physical environment in a wheelhouse encompasses such factors as light, noise, temperature, and vibration.