Bridge Equipment

and Layout Guidelines 2I

 Bridge Equipment and Layout
Guidelines
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any material form (including photocopying
or storing it in any medium by electronic means and whether or not transiently or incidentally to some other
use of this publication) without the written permission of INTERTANKO. Applications for INTERTANKO’s written
permission to reproduce any part of this publication should be addressed to the publisher.

© INTERTANKO 2021

While every effort has been made to ensure that the information contained in this publication is correct,
neither the authors nor INTERTANKO can accept any responsibility for any errors or omissions or any
consequences resulting therefrom.

No reliance should be placed on the information or advice contained in this publication

without independent verification.

Vers.1 August 2021

Contents

1 Introduction 3
1.1 Purpose 3
1.2 Applicability 3
2 Terminology 4
2.1 Human-centred design 4
2.2 Usability engineering 4
2.3 Ergonomics 4
2.4 Work system 4
2.5 Usability 5
2.6 Ergonomics and usability for human-centered design 5

3 Bridge equipment and layout 7

3.1 Description of the workstations on the bridge 7
3.2 Design criteria for bridge layout 8
3.3 Equipment for workstations (MSC/Circ.982 Appendix 2) 14
3.4 Bridge general 19

4 Navigational incidents, reporting and lessons learnt 23

5 Definitions 28

6 Structure and references 29

7 Appendix 1: Example testing matrix 33

(Illustrations on pages 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 15 and 16 courtesy of IMO)

 1.2 Applicability

1. Introduction
Driven by demands for safer, more reliable and efficient operations, innovations in information technology
have led to increased use of automation and centralised supervisory control in the design of user-system
interfaces, and their associated operational environments, in bridge control rooms.

Alongside these developments, the bridge team maintains a critical role in the monitoring and supervision of
these complex automated systems. As the scale of automated solutions has grown, so have the consequences
of failures caused by systems, equipment and human error.

The job of the navigator can be very demanding and the consequences of inappropriate operator action in
bridge control rooms, such as acts of risk normalisation, omission, timing and sequence etc, can potentially
be disastrous.

Navigational incidents rank high in risk, particularly due to the potential for catastrophic outcomes. It is
therefore very important to set up a sound framework for applying requirements and recommendations
relating to ergonomic and human factors when designing and evaluating the bridge control room, with a view
to eliminating or minimising the potential for human error and ensuring safe navigation.

This Guidance has been developed to assist Members and the industry in understanding and evaluating
the successful ergonomic design of a ship’s bridge equipment and layout, in order to improve the safety of
navigation.

The Guidelines include ergonomic guidance as well as examples of functionally-oriented bridge layouts
to support watch-keeping personnel in their tasks by a usability and ergonomic-centred design of bridge
equipment and layout.

The Guide has been prepared in line with the provisions of regulation V/15 of the International Convention for
the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS Convention) - Principles relating to bridge design, design and arrangement
of navigational systems and takes into account provisions of the publications in the References section of this
document and the findings and lessons learnt from navigational incidents.

1.1 Purpose
This document consolidates the current International Maritime Organization (IMO) regulatory regime, industry
standards and Members’ experiences in relation to bridge equipment and layout.

The consolidation of ergonomic requirements and recommendations for bridge equipment and layout will
facilitate Members, ship operators, shipyards and designers when designing or evaluating the design of bridge
equipment and layout of new and existing ships, with the ultimate objective to ensure incident-free, effective
and efficient navigation.

1.2 Applicability
The guidelines in this document apply to ships contracted after the date of publication of this Guidance. To this
extent, this document is aimed at:

• Shipyards making standard designs of ships (incorporating the concepts within this Guide)

• Ship designers making designs of ships (incorporating the concepts within this Guide)

• Ship-owners when contracting shipyards and procuring equipment for the bridge

These guidelines might be considered for partly retrofitting the bridge of existing ships.

Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines 3

2. Terminology
2.1 Human-centred design
ISO 9241-210:2010 sets out that human-centred design is an “approach to systems design and development
that aims to make interactive systems more usable by focusing on the use of the system and applying human
factors/ergonomics and usability knowledge and techniques”.

The main principles of human-centred design would be applicable to any design where individuals interact
with equipment or software.

2.2 Usability engineering

ISO 18152:2010 and 9241-11:2018 define usability engineering.

Applying usability engineering methods does not necessarily prescribe the active user involvement that is
the essence of human-centred design. In addition, usability engineering often over-emphasises the role of
evaluation methods. Human-centred design, on the other hand, refers to the process of analysing context of
use, eliciting user requirements, producing design solutions and evaluating the design against the requirements,
all in an iterative fashion.

For this purpose, the term usability is used, but more importantly, the term ergonomics is introduced. With
ergonomics and usability used jointly, the principles of human-centred design would be achieved.

It is recommended that active navigation officers are engaged in the process of defining or evaluating the
design of bridge equipment and layout to ensure that ergonomics and usability to a ship bridge design is
applied successfully.

2.3 Ergonomics
In ISO 26800, ergonomics is described as a “scientific discipline concerned with the understanding of
interactions among human and other elements of a system, and the profession that applies theory, principles,
data and methods to design in order to optimize human well-being and overall system performance”.

If the principles of ergonomics are introduced at an early stage of the design process, this would greatly benefit
the usability of the bridge and thus improve safety and morale when working on the bridge.

ISO 9241:500 specifies ergonomic principles that apply to the user requirements, design, and procurement of
the physical equipment and environment, which contribute to the context of use of interactive systems such
as the bridge.

Ergonomics should be part of an integrated approach to the design of bridges and purchasing/choosing
equipment to make up the system that is the bridge, allowing ergonomists to cooperate with others involved
in the design (with attention to the human, social and technical requirements) in a balanced manner during
the design process.

2.4 Work system

ISO 6385:2016 introduces the term “work system” to indicate a large variety of working situations,
including permanent and flexible work places. Work systems from the perspective of these Guidelines involve
combinations of all crew and pilot and equipment on the bridge and bridge environment, and the interactions
between individuals in the bridge team and all equipment and software on the bridge.

The observance of ergonomic principles applies to all phases throughout the life cycle of the work system from
conception through development, realisation and implementation, utilisation, maintenance and support to
decommissioning. As the shipyard delivers the newbuilding, it is the ship-owner’s responsibility to ensure that
the ergonomic principles applied up until then are maintained.

4 Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines

 2.6 Ergonomics and usability for human-centered design

In short, ergonomic principles should be applied to the design of optimal working conditions with regard to
human wellbeing, safety and health, including the development of existing skills and the acquisition of new
ones, while taking into account technological and economic effectiveness and efficiency.

Although ISO 11064 - Ergonomic design of control centres, is primarily intended for non-mobile control
centres, many of the principles specified could be applicable to ships’ bridges.

2.5 Usability
Usability is defined by ISO as the “extent to which a system, product or service can be used by specified users
to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction in a specified context of use”.

We use usability in how it relates to the outcome of interacting with a system, but it is important to note that
usability is a more comprehensive concept than is commonly understood by the terms “ease-of-use” or “user
friendliness”.

For a successful outcome of interaction with a system (effectiveness), both the objective and perceived success
are typically necessary to be taken into account. The objective of designing and evaluating systems, products
and services for usability is to enable users to achieve goals effectively, efficiently and with satisfaction, taking
account of the context of use.

Usability is relevant to:

• regular ongoing use, to enable users to achieve their goals effectively, efficiently and with satisfaction;

• learning, to enable new users to be become effective, efficient and satisfied when starting to use a
system, product or service;

• infrequent use, to enable users to be effective, efficient and satisfied, with the system on each reuse;

• use by people with the widest range of capabilities;

• minimising the risk and the undesirable consequences of user errors; and

• maintenance, in that it enables maintenance tasks to be completed effectively, efficiently and with
satisfaction.

2.6 Ergonomics and usability for human-centered design

In summary, a designer should apply the principles of ergonomics and usability when designing a ship bridge
and procuring equipment for the bridge.

These Guidelines aim to bring together existing statutory requirements, IMO guidelines, ISO standards and
other best practices and standards. In addition to this, the intention is to add INTERTANKO guidance to bridge
design.

There are several existing standards and guidelines that are applicable for this purpose.

• IMO Statutory
o The IMO has SOLAS Ch. V/15 on Principles relating to bridge design, design and
arrangement of navigational systems and equipment and bridge procedures, which entered
into force on 1 July 2002.
o MSC.1/Circ.1350/Rev.1 - Unified Interpretations of SOLAS Chapter V

Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines 5

2. Terminology

• IMO Guidelines
o SN.1/Circ.288 – Guidelines for Bridge equipment and systems, their arrangements and
integration (June 2010); and
o MSC.1/Circ.982 – Guidelines on ergonomic criteria for bridge equipment and layout,
(December 2000).

• ISO
o ISO 8468 – Ship’s bridge layout and associated equipment – Requirements and guidelines

INTERTANKO recommends the use the IMO Guidelines above when designing ship bridges in addition to using
principles of ergonomics and usability.

The above standards, guidelines and statutory requirements are in part repeated in section 3 below for easy
reference.

The criteria below are divided into four categories (with logos beneath them illustrating where they originate
from), namely:

• IMO Statutory Requirements (SOLAS) IMO

Sta.

• INDUSTRY Guidelines (including IMO) IMO

Gui.

• ISO 8468:2007 ISO

• INTERTANKO Guidelines

6 Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines

 3.1.5 Workstation for planning and documentation

3. Bridge equipment and layout

IMO
3.1 Description of the workstations on the bridge Gui.

Fig.1 Example of function areas – showing a possible location of workstations

3.1.1 Workstation for navigating and manoeuvring

The main workstation for the ship’s handling, designed with optimum visibility and the integration of operating
equipment to control the ship’s movement. It should be possible to operate the ship safely, in particular when a
fast sequence of actions is required. This workstation serves the OOW and the Master to monitor and control
the ship.

3.1.2 Workstation for monitoring

The workstation from which the operating equipment and the surrounding environment can be permanently
observed. When several crew members are working on the bridge, it offers relief to the navigator at the
workstation for navigating and manoeuvring and helps the Master or pilot to carry out control and advisory
functions.

3.1.3 Workstation for manual steering (Helmsman’s workstation)

The workstation from which the ship can be steered by a helmsman as far as required or deemed to be
necessary.

3.1.4 Workstation for docking operations

The workstation for docking operations on the bridge wing should enable the navigator, together with a
pilot (when present), to observe all relevant external and internal information and control the manoeuvring
of the ship. For enclosed bridge wings, the windows should be of proper size and inclination to provide for
satisfactory external view.

3.1.5 Workstation for planning and documentation

The workstation at which the ship’s operations are planned (e.g. route planning, deck log), including fixing and
documenting information about the ship’s operation.

Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines 7

3. Bridge equipment and layout

3.1.6 Workstation for safety

The workstation at which monitoring displays and operating elements or systems serving safety are co-located.

3.1.7 Workstation for communication

The workstation for operation and control of equipment for distress and safety communications (GMDSS) and
general communications.

3.2 Design criteria for bridge layout

3.2.1 Field of vision
General
The view of the sea surface from the navigating and manoeuvring workstation should not be obscured by IMO
more than two ship lengths or 500m, whichever is less, forward of the bow to 10° on either side under Sta.
all conditions of draught, trim and deck cargo. (SOLAS V/22 1.1)

Bow blind sector

For large vessels with a significant blind sector forward of the bow, e.g. an ULCC or LNG vessel, the
installation of a radar scanner or suitable camera in the foremast for detection of small crafts should be
considered.

Field of vision around the ship

There should be a field of vision around the ship of 360° obtained by an observer moving within the IMO
confines of the wheelhouse. (MSC/Circ.982 5.1.1.1.2) Gui.

Fig.2 Field of vision around the ship

Navigating and manoeuvring workstation

The horizontal field of vision from the navigating and manoeuvring workstation should extend over an IMO
arc of not less than 225°, that is from right ahead to not less than 22.5°, abaft the beam on either side of Gui.
the ship. (MSC/Circ.982 5.1.1.1.3)

8 Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines

 Navigating and manoeuvring workstation – astern

IMO
Gui.

Fig.3 Field of vision from the navigating and manoeuvring workstation

Navigating and manoeuvring workstation – astern

The following should be considered for ships of moderate to smaller size with a trade pattern in coastal
areas, to enable the navigator, while located at the workstation, to utilise leading lights and marks astern
of the ship as a visual reference for positioning of the ship in fairways. A field of vision sector astern from
the workstation for navigation and manoeuvring should be available and extend over an arc from dead
astern to at least 5° on each side. No blind sectors should occur within this 10° field of vision sector. Heavy
duty wipers and fresh water window washing should be provided on aft window(s) within the view astern
sector from the navigating and manoeuvring workstation.

Fig.4 Astern view

A camera solution to replace direct view astern is acceptable, provided that the camera solution is
approved by the administration.

Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines 9

3. Bridge equipment and layout

Monitoring workstation
From the monitoring workstation, the field of vision should extend at least over an arc from 90° on the IMO
port bow, through forward, to 22.5° abaft the beam on starboard. (MSC/Circ.982 5.1.1.1.4) Gui.

Fig.5 Field of vision from the monitoring workstation

Bridge wing
From each bridge wing, the horizontal field of vision should extend over an arc at least 225°, that is at
IMO
least 45° on the opposite bow through right ahead and then from right ahead to right astern through
180° on the same side of the ship. (SOLAS V/22 1.4) Sta.

The ship’s side should be visible from the bridge wing. Bridge wings should be provided out to the IMO
maximum beam of the ship. The view over the ship’s side should not be obstructed. (MSC/Circ.982 Gui.
5.1.1.1.8)

Fig.6 Field of vision from the bridge wing

10 Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines

 Blind sectors

Main steering position

From the main steering position (workstation for manual steering) the horizontal field of vision should
IMO
extend over an arc from right ahead to at least 60° on each side of the ship. (MSC/Circ.982 5.1.1.1.6) Gui.

Fig.7 Field of vision from the main steering position

Blind sectors
No blind sector, caused by cargo, cargo gear or other obstructions outside of the wheelhouse forward of
IMO
the beam which obstructs the view of the sea surface as seen from the conning position, shall exceed 10°.
Sta.
The total arc of blind sectors shall not exceed 20°. The clear sectors between blind sectors shall be at least
5°. However, in the view described in .1, each individual blind sector shall not exceed 5°. (SOLAS V/22 1.2)

The safe lookout from the navigating and manoeuvring workstation should not be influenced by blind
IMO
sectors. Blind sectors caused by cargo, cargo gear, divisions between windows and other obstructions
Gui.
appearing within the required field of vision of 225°, shall be as few and as small as possible, and in no
way hamper a safe lookout from the workstations for monitoring and navigating and manoeuvring. The
total arc of blind sectors within this field of vision shall not exceed 30°. (MSC/Circ.982 5.1.1.1.7)

In order to reduce blind sectors within the required field of vision, every effort shall be made to align the
front bulkhead and bridge wings with the line-of-sight from the working positions at the monitoring and
navigating and manoeuvring workstations to port and starboard respectively.

Sum of blind sectors within

225º to be less than 30º

Fig.8 Alignment of bridge wings with line-of-sight

Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines 11

3. Bridge equipment and layout

Lower edge of the front window IMO

The height of the lower edge of the navigation bridge front windows above the bridge deck shall be kept Sta.
as low as possible. In no case shall the lower edge present an obstruction to the forward view as described
in this regulation. (SOLAS V/22 1.7)

The height of the lower edge of the front windows should allow a forward view over the bow for a
IMO
person in a sitting position at the workstation for navigating and manoeuvring and the workstation for
Gui.
monitoring. Within the required field of vision the height of the lower edge of the windows above the
bridge deck should be kept as low as possible. (MSC/Circ.982 5.1.1.2.1)

If the front workstations are retracted from the front windows, the height of the lower edge of the
windows should be reduced to maintain a good view of the sea surface.

Upper edge of the front window

The upper edge of the front windows should allow a forward view of the horizon for a person in a standing IMO
position with an eye height of 1800 mm above the bridge deck at the navigating and manoeuvring Sta.
workstation, when the ship is pitching in heavy seas. (SOLAS V/22 1.8)

Windows
To help avoid reflections, the bridge front windows shall be inclined from the vertical plane top out, at an IMO
angle of not less than 10° and not more than 25°. Framing between navigation bridge windows shall be Sta.
kept to a minimum and not be installed immediately forward of any workstation. A clear view through
at least two of the bridge windows should be provided at all times, regardless of the weather conditions.
(SOLAS V/22 1.9)

An additional number of windows within the required field of vision should be provided with a clear view IMO
at all times, regardless of the weather conditions. Clear view means a heavy duty wiper of an approved
Gui.
type is fitted. (MSC/Circ.982 5.1.1.2.8)

Heavy duty wipers, fresh water window washing and a de-misting system are to be provided on windows
within the forward view required from the navigating and manoeuvring workstation. Ice classed vessels
shall be provided with heated glass panes, in addition to air blowers, and a hot water window washing
system.

A fixed catwalk or similar arrangement with means to prevent an accidental fall shall be fitted in front of
the bridge windows to enable manual cleaning of windows from the outside and repair work in the event
of failure of window wipers or fresh water washing system.

Removable sunscreens
To ensure a clear view and to avoid reflections in bright sunshine, sunscreens with minimum colour IMO
distortion should be provided at all windows. Such screens should be readily removable and not Gui.
permanently installed. (MSC/Circ.982 5.1.1.2.6)

View of the area in front of the bridge superstructure

It should be possible to watch the area in front of the bridge superstructure from the wheelhouse. (MSC/
IMO
Circ.982 5.1.2.2) Gui.

Position close to the forward centre window

A position should be provided close to the forward centre window. If the view in the centre-line is IMO
obstructed by large masts, cranes, etc., two additional positions giving a clear view ahead should be Gui.
provided, one on the port side and one on the starboard side of the centre-line, no more than 5m apart.
(MSC/Circ.982 5.1.2.2.1)

12 Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines

 Blind sectors

Access to front window IMO

A second close approach access beside the position should be possible or the width of the position should Gui.
be sufficient to accommodate two persons. (MSC/Circ.982 5.1.2.2.2)

Position of the workstation for navigating and manoeuvring IMO

The workstation for navigating and manoeuvring should be laid out if practicable, at the starboard side Gui.
close to the centre-line. (MSC/Circ.982 5.1.2.3)

Position of the workstation for manual steering IMO

The workstation for manual steering should preferably be located on the ship’s centre-line. If the view Gui.
ahead is obstructed by large masts, cranes, etc., the steering station may be located at a distance to either
side of the centre-line, sufficient to obtain a clear view ahead. If the workstation for manual steering is
located off the centre-line, special steering references for use by day and night should be provided, e.g.
sighting marks forward. (MSC/Circ.982 5.1.2.4)

Position of the workstation for monitoring

The workstation for monitoring should be laid out if practicable, at the port side close to the centre-line.
IMO
(MSC/Circ.982 5.1.2.5) Gui.

Bridge wing communication

An internal communication system between the workstation for docking and the workstation for IMO
navigating and manoeuvring should be provided when the distance between the workstations is greater Gui.
than 10m. An internal communication system should always be provided between the workstation for
navigating and manoeuvring and open bridge wings. Where workstations are widely spread, internal
communication systems should be provided so that unhampered communications can be achieved under
all operating conditions. It is important that all order/ action communication systems be two-way. (MSC/
Circ.982 5.1.2.6)

Bridge ceiling panels

These should be of dark colour and with a matt/ non-glossy surface to minimise the reflections from
displays at night.

Portable items
Portable items, such as safety equipment, tools, lights and pencils should be stored at appropriate places, IMO
specially designed wherever necessary. (MSC/Circ.982 5.1.2.8) Gui.

Clear route
A clear route across the wheelhouse from bridge wing to bridge wing should be provided. The width of IMO
the passageway should be at least 1200mm. (MSC/Circ.982 5.1.3.1) Gui.

Adjacent workstation distances

The distance between adjacent workstations should be sufficient to allow unobstructed passage to IMO
persons not working at the stations. The free passage in passageways between different workstation Gui.
areas should be at least 700mm. The workstation operating area should be part of the workstation, not
of the passageway. (MSC/Circ.982 5.1.3.2)

Climate
The bridge shall be equipped with a temperature control and ventilation system that allows regulation of
the temperature and humidity in the wheelhouse enabling bridge personnel to maintain the workplace
thermal environment within the range of the human comfort zone.

The ventilation system shall ensure a sufficient exchange rate and air movement inside the wheelhouse.

Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines 13

3. Bridge equipment and layout

Light dimming IMO

A light-dimming capability should be provided. (MSC/Circ.982 5.2.5.4) Gui.
A light-dimming capability should be provided in the whole wheelhouse. Every equipment/ display/ panel
should have a light-dimming function. Sufficient dimming of consoles should be possible during the night.

Flexible lighting system at workstations

IMO
Place Colour/Illumination Gui.
Bridge, night Red or filtered white, continuously variable from
0 to 20 lux
Adjacent corridors and rooms, day White, continuously variable from 0 to at least
300 lux
Adjacent corridors, staircases and rooms, night Red or filtered white, continuously variable from
0 to 20 lux
Obstacles, night Red spotlights, continuously variable from
0 to 20 lux
Chart table, day White floodlight, continuously variable from
0 to 1000 lux
White spotlights, continuously variable from
0 to 100 lux
Chart table, night Filtered white floodlight or spotlights,
continuously variable from 0 to 20 lux
(MSC/Circ.982 5.2.5.3)

Glare avoidance IMO

Utmost care should be taken to avoid glare and stray image reflections in the bridge environment. (MSC/ Gui.
Circ.982 5.2.5.5)

3.2.2 Equipment carriage requirements

IMO
Carriage requirements for navigation and communications equipment will depend on the ship size, and sea
Sta.
area of operation. (SOLAS IV and V).

Additional equipment functionality recommendations

Equipment installed should be updated to be in compliance with the bridge alert management (BAM) to
IMO
avoid excessive alarms. (IMO MSC.302(87))
Gui.

3.3 Equipment for workstations (MSC/Circ.982 Appendix 2)

3.3.1 Examples
Below are examples of good layout of consoles for navigation and monitoring. Many such examples exist, but
the key element is to collect and group equipment in such a manner that the bridge team can work effectively.
Human-centered design is a very good methodology to use when developing new layouts.

14 Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines

 Console layout examples

Conning Chart Radar

Radar Communication

ECDIS ECDIS
backup

Heading / Speed

Manoeuvring

Conning Chart Radar

Radar Communication
VHF
ECDIS Backup
ECDIS

Heading / Speed
Manoeuvring
VHF

Fig.9 Console layout examples

Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines 15

3. Bridge equipment and layout

3.3.2 Equipment and location

Reach from standing position
The distance that the operator can reach and use a user interface design from a standing position next
to a console. This distance shall be maximum 800mm in a forward direction and 1400mm sideways from
the working position.

Fig.10 Within reach distance

Equipment to be available at workstations for navigation and manoeuvring IMO

• Radar/ARPA (easy reach) Gui.
• ECDIS* (**)
• Propulsion control (incl. override facility and protected against accidental operation)
• Thruster control
• Controls for manual steering
• Adjustment of heading control/track control
• Steering mode switch
• Steering position switch
• Whistle P/B
• VHF
• Internal communication system
• Alarm Management System UID (CAM) (incl. watch alarm reset device, workstations to be covered
by motion sensor for reset of watch alarm)
• Emergency stop P/Bs
• Compass selector switch
• Steering gear panel
• Steering UID(s)
• Propulsion control
• Controls for windscreen wiper, washer, heater
• Night vision equipment ***
The following equipment to be available at the forward-facing part of the aft bridge workstations:
• AIS
• VDR
• Cargo related panels (IG + COT basics)

* ECDIS to be located close to radar

** ECDIS screen size to be minimum 26 inches
*** The night vision equipment to be of thermal vision type

16 Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines

 Equipment available at workstation for docking (bridge wing)

Equipment to be accessible from workstation for monitoring IMO

• Radar/ARPA Gui.
• ECDIS* (**)
• VHF
• Internal communication
• Whistle push button
• Watch alarm reset device (workstation to be covered by motion sensor)
* ECDIS to be located close to radar
** ECDIS screen size to be minimum 26 inches (larger size is preferred)

Indications to be available at both workstations for navigation/manoeuvring and monitoring IMO

• Propeller revolution indicator, RPM Gui.
• Thrust indicator (if provided)
• Pitch indicator (if provided)
• Speed indicator(s)
• Wind speed/direction
• Rudder angle indicator, RAI
• Rudder order indicator (FU only)
• Rate-of-turn, ROT-indicator
• Heading indicator
• Steering mode indicator
• Steering position in command (if relevant)
• Depth indicator
• Clock
• Conning Information Display (if provided)
• AMS display
• BNWAS pre-warning lamp
• GNSS display

Equipment available at workstation for docking (bridge wing) IMO

• Controls for main engine(s) Gui.
• Controls for thruster
• Controls for rudder
• Controls for whistle
• Internal communication system to the workstations navigating and manoeuvring, monitoring, manual
steering, and to manoeuvring stations, except muster stations
• System for external communication with tugs, pilot boat (portable VHF point)
• Controls for morse lamp and search lights mounted on bridge wings should be located below conning
position eye level to reduce disturbance during heavy snowfall
• Acknowledgement of watch alarm
• Gyro compass bearing repeater. Bridge wing repeaters, and a centre window bearing repeater if
provided, shall be installed at a height suitable for taking bearings.

Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines 17

3. Bridge equipment and layout

Indications available at workstation for docking (bridge wing) IMO

• Gyro compass heading Gui.
• Propeller revolutions
• Main engine revolution in the case of reduction geared engine
• Propeller pitch in the case of controllable pitch propeller
• Lateral thrust
• Rate-of-turn
• Rudder angle
• Wind direction and velocity
• Longitudinal and lateral movement of ship

Equipment available for workstation for safety IMO

• Fire alarm for areas machinery, superstructure/ accommodations, cargo Gui.
• Remote control and monitoring of fire-extinguishing system
• Remote control and monitoring of watertight doors/fire doors (open/closed)
• Emergency stop for air condition, ventilation and refrigerating installations
• Keys and control-elements for lights and signals (navigation lights, signal lamps, bridge lighting, deck
lighting searchlights, as well as all fuses)
• Internal communication system, in particular to muster stations
• Adjustment of watch alarm system (BNWAS) and acknowledgement button
• Controls for ballast water handling
• Tools for documentation
• Main station for VHF
• For ice class vessels, remote operated search light located on compass deck

Indications available for workstation for safety IMO

• Indicator for bilge monitor Gui.
• Indicator for further safety systems
• Indications for ballast water handling
• Clinometer
• Indicator for cargo tank pressure, including audio/visual alarm
• Indicator for cargo temperature (where applicable)
• Cameras and external microphones against pirate attack (when provided)

Workstation for communications – the following to be provided IMO

• VHF-DSC, radiotelephone Gui.
• MF-DSC, radiotelephone
• MF/HF-DSC, NBDP, radiotelephone
• Inmarsat-SES or equivalent from Iridium
• NAVTEX/EGC/HF direct printing telegraph
• EPIRB trigger (if applicable)
• Station for two-way VHF

18 Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines

 3.4.1 Equipment

Workstation for planning and documentation – the following to be provided IMO

• ECDIS planning station Gui.
• Position fixing receiver *
• A redundant position fixing device, interfaced to ECDIS and Radar at least
• Retaining device for drawing triangles, dividers, magnifying lens, pencils, etc.
• Weather information system (indication for air and water temperature)
• Main clock
• Echo sounder printer/ depth recorder
• Manoeuvring printer/ course recorder
• Chart table and facility for storing charts **

* A multi GNSS system receiver to be provided including at least two of the four large GNSS systems (GPS,
GLONASS, GALILEO and BEIDOU) integrated into relevant bridge equipment.

** Carrying both ECDIS and paper charts has proved to be very time consuming for the crew and costly. Use of
paper charts as a backup for ECDIS (although legally allowed) may introduce risks of quick transition in case of
sudden ECDIS failure and deficiencies in regular navigation routines due to substantial difference of those on
ECDIS and paper charts. If a vessel is equipped with main and back-up ECDIS, carrying paper charts corrected
to the latest Notices to Mariners (NM) is only needed when ENC data is not available.
As ENC coverage is progressing very rapidly the problem is likely to disappear in future. On top of that, it
is expected that hydrographic offices may need to reduce paper charts production for commercial reasons.
Hence the necessity of a regular chart table and the facility for storing charts needs to be considered, especially
if the bridge space is tight. A table/ desktop of suitable size for security charts, magnetic variation charts and
mariners routing guide charts should however be provided.

3.4 Bridge general

3.4.1 Equipment
• AIS should be interfaced with radar and ECDIS.
• Ships shall be fitted with a wind speed and direction indicator in the wheelhouse1.
• The ship shall be fitted with a course recorder2.
• VHF units should be provided with automatic volume turn up function with timer.
• Radars and ECDIS stations should have interlay functions. That is to enable radar/ENC overlay/underlay.
• ECDIS and radar should be interfaced with BNWAS for reset of the watch alarm timer. This is however
only acceptable for equipment located in positions providing sufficient view for look-out, i.e. not for the
ECDIS planning station at the workstation for route planning.
• The ship should be fitted with a second gyro compass or a transmitting heading device (THD) in addition
to the primary gyro. For vessels to comply with Polar Code requirements for navigation beyond 80 deg IMO
North latitude, a GNSS based THD shall be provided. Sta.
• The vessel shall be fitted with a dual ECDIS installation enabling navigation without nautical paper
charts in all areas with ENC coverage.
• The ship should be fitted with two separate and independent global navigation satellite system (GNSS)
receivers.
• A central alarm management (CAM) system centralising the alerts from all navigation equipment shall
be provided at the workstation for navigation and manoeuvring.

1
Charterer requirement
2
Charterer requirement

Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines 19

3. Bridge equipment and layout

• Central Alert Management System shall meet the requirement of Res. MSC.302(87) and IEC 62923-1/2
and as far as practical shall be interfaced with all navigation equipment on the bridge that supports alert
management functions according to that standard.
• Integrated Navigation System (INS) provides comprehensive functions and added value that goes beyond
capabilities of individual navigation aids. Abovementioned specific equipment may form an INS. In this
case, such a combination shall be done in a safe and proper way to provide the expected added value
to further enhance the safety of navigation. INS, if installed, should meet the requirements of Res.
MSC.252(83) and IEC 61924.
• ECDIS planning station should allow the bridge team to perform tasks relevant to voyage planning
without distracting the OOW who may use the main and back-up ECDIS located within the
wheelhouse. Besides route planning tasks supported by access to ENCs and Nautical Publications, the
ECDIS planning station may provide for additional tasks such as on-board inventory control tools for
charts and nautical publication, weather routing and optimisation tools etc.

There is no “ECDIS planning station” category defined by the IMO by means of a Performance Standard
and hence this is not a part of any type approval regime. That may leave a gap where e.g. a tool used
for routing/fuel optimisation does not necessarily address all aspects of grounding avoidance as required
for ECDIS. Hence these possible gaps need to be addressed at a stage of bridge design by considering
the following:
• Unless a type approved ECDIS is used as part of the ECDIS planning station, it is necessary to
make sure that any alternative implementation (e.g. route planning software) follows as close as
possible the requirements of Res. MSC.191(79) and Res. MSC.232(82) with regards to correct ENC
presentation, route planning and route safety checks.
• A route that is planned on the ECDIS planning station with tools other than a type approved ECDIS
and automatically or manually transferred to the main and back-up ECDIS can NOT be accepted for
route monitoring without a prior safety check performed within the main or back-up ECDIS.
• Computers that are used to support tasks of the ECDIS planning station shall at least meet EMC
requirements of IEC 60945 unless they already belong to a configuration of a type approved
equipment on board (e.g. INS). (SOLAS V/18)

Additionally, the following points shall be taken into account for the ECDIS planning station:
• Most Flag Administrations introduce redundancy requirements for Nautical Publications whenever
those are used in electronic form. Practically, it would mean installation and maintaining of e.g. ADP/
eNP tools/viewers on two different PCs.
• Where a regular computer is used for various tools, it may have open access to its operating system
and other critical settings and hence be more exposed to cybersecurity risks. In this case, data
exchange with navigational equipment shall be ensured in a safe manner in order to mitigate this
risk (see below section on Cybersecurity).

3.4.2 Other
• Pilot plug and PPU charging station at a convenient position for a pilot working on board.
• General alarm shall be interfaced to the ship’s horn/ whistle in order to be heard by crewmembers on IMO
deck (LSA Code). Sta.
• Bridge computer should be accessible in standing position only.
• VDR should only give a caution at power supply failure or recording integrity error.

20 Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines

 Environment

Alarms ** (MSC/Circ.982 5.4) IMO

• The presentation of alarms should be clear, distinctive, unambiguous and consistent. Gui.
• No unnecessary alarms. A central alarm management system shall be provided.
• Alarm philosophy based on good practice.
• Accepting/cancelling alarms do not cause distraction/excessive workload.
• Alarms prioritised/grouped to reflect urgency.
• Captions/alarm list messages easily understood.
• Different audible alarms are easy to distinguish.
• Sufficient alerting when user is busy with other items of equipment.

** The above is supposed to be taken care of by the manufacturer during design of the equipment. It
should however also be considered when purchasing equipment.

Panel layout
• All panel layouts are logical.
• Items grouped and sequenced in a manner that supports correct use and helps to prevent errors.
• Controls and displays positioned according to frequency, urgency and criticality.
• Controls and displays grouped according to sequence of use.
• Keyboards (where required) divided logically into functional areas.
• Panels operation shall be possible to use under any condition. For example, with gloves, with wet
hands, with dry hands, under any lighting condition, with no requirement for visual verification
(identify correct switch by hand/touch without looking), identify correct switch/button under high
stress.

Controls, displays and labelling

• Controls, displays and labelling clear and easy to access.
• Purpose of each control clearly indicated.
• Controls and indicators easily distinguishable.
• Functions supported by display clearly indicated.
• Information related to safe operation of machinery and equipment continuously available to operator.
• Failure indications clear and unambiguous.
• Display visibility satisfactory in conditions of daylight, darkness or no natural light.

Environment ISO
• The environment on the bridge meets criteria for heating, ventilation, air conditioning, airflow, humidity,
heat sources; noise; vibration; ship movement.
• Heating, ventilation & air conditioning systems maintain temperature between 18°C and 27°C.
Dedicated bridge air conditioning units should be considered.
• Airflow from heating/air conditioning systems not guided directly to operator.
• Ice-classed vessels should be provided with bridge wings of enclosed type. Bridge wings enclosure should
be in one part with the navigation bridge compartment. Partial superstructures on bridge wings should
be avoided due to creation of blind spots and refraction created looking through multiple windows.
• Non-reflective or matt finish on surfaces.
• Transparent cover fitted over a control, display or indicator designed to minimise reflections.

Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines 21

3. Bridge equipment and layout

• Physical hazards, e.g., sharp edges, protuberances and trip hazards should be avoided.
• Sufficient handrails fitted to enable operators to move and stand safely in rough seas.
• Easy-to-clean work surfaces capable of withstanding oils and solvents common to ships.
• Anti-slip material to be provided on flat surfaces such as tables and base frame of windows.
• A toilet to be located in the wheelhouse. Lighting arrangement inside the toilet should prevent any light
disturbances in the wheelhouse while opening/closing door to the toilet. A toilet door with a window
should be provided to allow continuous contact with bridge.

3.4.3 Cybersecurity IMO

The IMO adopted resolution MSC.428(98) on Maritime Cyber Risk Management in Safety Management Sta.
System (SMS). It imposes the requirement to apply cyber risk management in accordance with the objectives
and functional requirements of the ISM Code.

It further encourages administrations to ensure that cyber risks are appropriately addressed in safety
management systems no later than the first annual verification of the company’s Document of Compliance
after 1 January 2021.

Navigation equipment is a vital part of safety related equipment on board and it may be particularly vulnerable
to cyber risks. These risks are associated with increasing use of digital networks onboard and interfaces to
shoreside networks for update and provision of services for any digital data transfer.

The IACS Recommendation on Cyber Resilience (current version is from April 2020, No 166) and The Guidelines
on Cyber Security Onboard Ships (current version 4, 2020) from BIMCO give a good basis and reference for
both technical and organisational measures. To support this from a bridge design prospective, the following
is recommended:

• Network segments used by navigational equipment (ECDIS, radar etc) within the bridge shall be
separated from other network segments on board.
• A special standardised 460-Gateway (IEC 61162-460) shall be used to provide sufficient protection to
the network segment with navigation equipment when providing interfaces to shoreside networks or/
and other ship´s networks for update and provision of services for any digital data transfer as utilised
by navigational equipment. Third-party remote access systems shall be securely controlled by the ship’s
crew, e.g. by a physical switching device.
• All devices within the network segment with navigation equipment should have access to the
operating system and other critical system settings protected from unauthorised use (as defined by the
manufacturer/supplier).
• Handling of mass storage devices (e.g. USB sticks) within the network segment with navigation
equipment shall not be allowed unless a secure process is in place in accordance with IEC 61162-460.*
• Where interface to shoreside networks (e.g. via ship´s SatCom) for provision of services for safety related
data such as ENC and their updates is the only method to provide this data, a proper back up method
shall be arranged. This will imply that in case of communication system failure, data can still be loaded
from a mass storage device (e.g. AVCS DVDs) directly to the system.
• Sufficient arrangements shall be provided to charge portable devices used by the bridge team and pilots
on the bridge to eliminate the use of temporary (e.g. USB) connections of any (private) portable devices
to navigation equipment and associated devices for that purpose.

In general, the entire vessel shall be considered with regards to cyber risks, not just equipment on the bridge.

22 Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines

4. Navigational incidents, reporting and lessons
learnt
There are limited statistics on the nature of the marine incidents and particularly the navigational incidents.

IMO reports on annual marine casualties and accidents.

IMO GISIS: Marine Casualties and Incidents modules contain data on incidents of piracy, marine
casualties and incidents, IMO numbers and ship company particulars, Global SAR (search and rescue)
availability, etc.

The Safety and Shipping Review 2020 identifies loss trends and highlights coronavirus, climate, security
and technology-related challenges for the maritime sector.

The Review from Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty (AGCS) is an annual report, which also contains
shipping loss and incident statistics from the past 10 years – see example below.

Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines 23

4. Navigational incidents, reporting and lessons learnt

The European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) has published statistics annually since 2014 including the
Annual Overview of Marine Casualties and Incidents 2020.

This publication contains statistics on marine casualties and incidents that involve ships flying a Flag of one
of the EU Member States, occur within EU Member States’ territorial sea or internal waters as defined in
the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), or involve other substantial interests of EU
Member States.

Extract: fig 2.9 of the report

Japan Transport Safety Board (JTSB) issues annual reports on marine incidents.

JTSB Annual Report 2020, issued in December 2020 provides introductions in relation to the JTSB’s activities
in general.

The intention of JTSB is for the Annual Report to provide the industry with a better understanding of the JTSB
and also contribute to improving the safety of international transport – opposite there are some exapmples
extracted from the report.

24 Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines

 Number of investigated marine accidents and incidents by type in 2019

Number of Marine Incidents in 2020 as of 31 December 2020

Loss of control (Machinery/Propulsion failure)

1 8
11 Loss of control (Listing)
14 Loss of control (Insufficient fuel/lube oil/cooling water)
1 155
Stranded
cases
Safety obstruction
120
Navigation obstruction

Other

1 Passenger ship Work vessel

5 9
Cargo ship Barge, Lighter
20
3 Tanker Public-service vessel
155
cases Fishing vessel Pleasure boat
86 25
Tug boat, push boat Personal water craft
4 2 Recreational fishing vessel Others
1
Fishing ferry

1
Collision Fire
136
186 Contact Explosion

2 13 Grounding Vessel missing

29 687
cases Sinking Facility damage
51
16 96 Flooding Fatality/Injury
9 148 Capsizing Others

Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines 25

4. Navigational incidents, reporting and lessons learnt

UK Marine Accident Investigation Branch (MAIB) keeps a database with marine accidents involving UK-
Flagged ships worldwide and all ships in UK territorial waters. To date, there are 972 reports, out of which 103
directly related to navigation.

The Nautical Institute published Navigation Accidents and their Causes in 2015, with extended references
to organisations and sites related to navigational incidents investigation reports.

This book tackles the important question – why do navigation accidents keep happening?

About 40 case studies are referenced and the book also focuses on the human element as a basic error-making
factor, with human error leading to the incidents and the disasters, particularly as far as navigational incidents
are concerned.

Multiple inter-related key causes contributing to

navigational incidents (most of them applying to any Extract from the book:
type of incident) have been quoted in the book, including …Despite the advanced techniques in
fatigue, alcohol and substances, manning, illness, poor navigation, the Safety Management System
bridge teamworking (communication, allocation of duties, and so many other guidelines and regulations,
leadership, risk normalisation and situation awareness), ships still get involved in collisions and run
overload and distraction, communication with pilot and aground, or at worst, sink.
third parties, inadequate means of navigation or use of
Unfortunately, human error remains a prime
navigational means, alarms overridden or ignored or
cause of these types of accidents…
misinterpreted, bridge design, poor weather conditions,
heavy traffic and external pressure.

It highlights the importance of the investigator properly considering the chain of events and prioritising the
multiple interrelated causes.

As an example, fatigue leads to distraction, overload and risk normalisation, but the book advises that one
should consider the manning level (systemic error) as a cause of fatigue (human error).

It is worth mentioning that bridge design is already identified as a key contributing factor to navigational
incidents.

The book suggests measures to increase the situation awareness of the bridge officers and the bridge team
bonding, pilot included.

Other Industry associations occasionally report statistics on maritime accidents and causes.

Despite the different samples and investigation resources (human and methods) of the various incident
databases, as presented above, it is a common conclusion of incident and investigation reports that:

 Navigation is in the top-three high risk operations. Navigational incidents (including collision, contact
and grounding/stranding) are ranked high in terms of severity and frequency.

 Human error is the most frequently quoted root cause, with very frequent instances of one or a
combination of the following causes:

• Lack of familiarisation with bridge equipment and/or procedures.

• Risk normalisation in operation of equipment and or compliance with procedures.

• Lack of situation awareness.

• Ineffective bridge team, lack of communication within the team and or with the pilot, duties
allocation and familiarisation.

26 Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines

Technological improvements mean that the safety of maritime navigation continues to improve, but despite
effective rule making and implementation and the effective education and training of ships’ officers, accidents
do still frequently occur.

The industry recently introduced the soft competence of the teams on board and ashore and the related
human performance principles.

Human error and the desire to do a good job are principles of human performance, which are now broadly
accepted within the industry. And when human error is taken for granted then the investigation and the
causation analysis must go one step further, to why the system is not tolerant to the specific human error and
what should be done for the system to ‘fail safe’ in such or similar circumstances.

When applying the shift from human error to system error, the causes quoted in the investigations so far may
be managed in a different way. The lack of familiarisation with bridge equipment may be the trigger to design
the equipment and systems in a simpler, more reliable and more user-friendly way, with the same applying to
the interface software, the emergency or override interface and the signals processed in the default display etc.

The lack of familiarisation with procedures may also be the trigger to design simpler and more user-friendly
regulations and procedures.

Overriding or ignoring or misinterpreting an alarm may be the trigger for simplifying the scope of alarms and
their positioning on the consoles.
Lack of situation awareness, lack of communication and an ineffective bridge and pilot team can be improved
by addressing the soft competence. In this regard, the industry has issued the following guidelines:

 INTERTANKO/OCIMF Behavioral Competency for Assessment and Verification of Vessel Operators and
 The OCIMF Human Factors Approach - A framework to materially reduce marine risk

All of the above measures will improve the system tolerance to the detected specific human error to ensure
the system’s fail safe.

With bridge design already identified as a key factor contributing to navigational incidents, this publication
focuses on the ergonomy of the bridge layout, consolidating the existing regulatory regime on ergonomy and
supplementing it with the experiences of the collective INTERTANKO membership.

Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines 27

5. Definitions
Ergonomics Scientific discipline concerned with the understanding of interactions among human and
Human factors other elements of a system, and the profession that applies theory, principles, data and
methods to design in order to optimise human wellbeing and overall system performance.
[SOURCE: ISO 26800:2011, 2.2]
Human-centred Approach to systems design and development that aims to make interactive
design systems more usable by focusing on the use of the system and applying
human factors/ergonomics and usability knowledge and techniques.
[SOURCE: ISO 9241-210:2010, 2.7]
Note: to entry: Usability engineering is often used as a substitute for human-centred
design. However, applying usability engineering methods does not necessarily prescribe
the active user involvement that is the essence of human-centred design. In addition,
usability engineering often over-emphasises the role of evaluation methods. Human-
centred design, on the other hand, refers to the process of analysing context of use,
eliciting user requirements, producing design solutions and evaluating the design against
the requirements, all in an iterative fashion.
[SOURCE: ISO 18152:2010, 4.8]
Interactive system Combination of hardware, software and/or services that receives input from, and
communicates output to, users.
[SOURCE: ISO 9241:2018, 3.7]
Task Activity or set of activities required of the crew to achieve an intended outcome.
Derived from Work Task in:
[SOURCE: ISO 6385:2016, 2.17]
Usability Extent to which a system, product or service can be used by specified users to achieve
specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction in a specified context of use.
[SOURCE: ISO 9241-210:2009, 2.13]
Wellbeing Sustainable internal state resulting from satisfaction of the physical and cognitive needs
of the worker during his/her activity.Note 1 to entry: Wellbeing can contribute to the
quality of working life.
[SOURCE: ISO 6385:2016, 2.1]
Work Physical, chemical, biological, organisational, social and cultural factors surrounding a crew.
environment [SOURCE: ISO 6385:2016, 2.8]
Worker Person performing one or more activities to achieve a goal within a work system.Note:
Crew Slightly modified from the original wording, operator in …
Officers [SOURCE: ISO 6385:2016, 2.4]
Workstation Combination and spatial arrangement of work equipment, surrounded by the work
environment under the conditions imposed by the tasks.
[SOURCE: ISO 6385:2016, 2.18]
Note: Workstations in the context of this document involve an interactive system (see
above).
Work system System comprising one or more crew and equipment acting together to perform the
function, in the workspace, in the work environment, under the conditions imposed by
the tasks.
[SOURCE: ISO 6385:2016, 2.2]

28 Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines

 6.1.5 ISO 9241-210:2019 Ergonomics of human-system interaction part 210:
Human-centred design for interactive systems.

6. Structure and references

6.1.1 The structure of this document is intended to align with the structure of Guidelines on ergonomic criteria
for bridge equipment and layout, MSC/Circ.982. Within this structure, International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) standards recommendations, INTERTANKO Members’ experiences and lessons
learnt from navigational incidents have been incorporated.

6.1.2 Guidelines on ergonomic criteria for bridge equipment and layout, MSC/Circ.982.
These Guidelines have been developed to realise a successful ergonomic design of the bridge and
the equipment on the bridge and improve the reliability and efficiency of navigation. They contain
ergonomic requirements as well as a functionally-oriented bridge layout to support watch-keeping
personnel in their tasks by a user-centred design of the bridge equipment and layout.

6.1.3 ISO 6385:2016(E) Ergonomics principles in the design of work systems.

This provides a basic ergonomic framework for:
• professionals and other people who deal with the issues of ergonomics, work systems and working
situations;
• the designers of products for use in work systems.

Technological, economic, organisational and human factors affect the work behaviour and wellbeing
of people as part of a work system. Applying ergonomic knowledge in the light of practical experience
in the design of a work system is intended to satisfy human requirements.

ISO 26800 provides a general starting point for thought on ergonomics and determines the essential
general principles and concepts. This ISO standard presents these in the context of the design and
evaluation of work systems.

This ISO standard is also valuable in

• the application of management systems such as OHSAS 18001;
• offering guidance for achieving good human performance.

6.1.4 ISO 8468:2007 Ships and marine technology – Ship’s bridge layout and associated equipment
– Requirements and guidelines. This specifies the functional requirements for bridge
configuration, bridge arrangement, bridge workstations and the bridge environment. Guidelines
have been drawn up for the methods and solutions to meet the functional requirements.
The requirements in this ISO standard apply to all bridge functions.
The main use of this ISO Standard will be for designing ships’ bridges with the purpose of assisting
the operator(s) and pilot by providing a workplace that is conducive to safe and effective operation.
It also aims to specify bridge requirements, which will secure safe and efficient operation of the ship
berth-to-berth, regardless of the watchkeeping arrangement in place at a particular time.
This ISO Standard should be used in support of SOLAS Chapter V Regulation 15.

6.1.5 ISO 9241-210:2019 Ergonomics of human-system interaction part 210: Human-centred design for
interactive systems. This provides requirements and recommendations for human-centred design
principles and activities throughout the life cycle of computer-based interactive systems.

Human-centred design is an approach to interactive systems development that aims to make systems
usable and useful by focusing on the users, their needs and requirements, and by applying human
factors/ergonomics, and usability knowledge and techniques. This approach enhances effectiveness and
efficiency, improves human wellbeing, user satisfaction, accessibility and sustainability; and counteracts
possible adverse effects of use on human health, safety and performance.

There is a substantial body of human factors/ergonomics and usability knowledge about how human-
centred design can be organised and used effectively. This document aims to make this information

Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines 29

6. Structure and references

available to help those responsible for managing hardware and software design and re-design processes
to identify and plan effective and timely human-centred design activities.

The human-centred approach to design described in this document complements existing systems
design approaches. It can be incorporated into approaches as diverse as object-oriented, waterfall and
rapid application development.

6.1.6 ISO 9241-11:2018 Ergonomics of human-system interaction part 11: usability: definitions and concepts.
This provides a framework for understanding the concept of usability and applying it to situations
where people use interactive systems, and other types of systems (including built environments), and
products (including industrial and consumer products) and services (including technical and personal
services.
This document:
• explains that usability is an outcome of use;
• defines key terms and concepts;
• identifies the fundamentals of usability; and
• explains the application of the concept of usability.

It does not describe specific processes or methods for taking account of usability in design development
or evaluation.

The most common applications of this document are in design and evaluation.

ISO 9241-11 explains how usability can be interpreted in terms of user performance and satisfaction -
and emphasises that usability is dependent on the specific circumstances in which a system or service
is used. It explains how to interpret each component in the definition of usability provided at the
beginning of section 2.3.

6.1.7 ISO 9241-500:2018 Ergonomics of human-system interaction part 500: Ergonomic principles for the
design and evaluation of environments of interactive systems. This specifies ergonomic principles that
apply to the user requirements, design, and procurement of the physical equipment and environment,
which contribute to the context of use of interactive systems such as the bridge. It provides requirements,
recommendations and explanations related to these principles. Relevant physical attributes of the
environment include issues such as furniture, spatial layout, equipment, air quality, thermal conditions,
lighting and noise.

The principles also utilise ergonomic knowledge (from the discipline’s anthropometry, acoustics,
vision, thermal environments, indoor air quality, mechanical vibrations, etc.) to design and evaluate
environments that enhance usability (effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction), accessibility, performance
and wellbeing for organised and non-organised use of interactive systems.

6.1.8 ISO 11064 Ergonomic design of control centres

- Part 1: Principles for the design of control centres

- Part 2: Principles for the arrangement of control suites

- Part 3: Control room layout

- Part 4: Layout and dimensions of workstations

- Part 5: Displays and controls

- Part 6: Environmental requirements for control rooms

- Part 7: Principles for the evaluation of control centres

- Part 8: Ergonomic requirements for specific applications

30 Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines

 6.1.8 ISO 11064 Ergonomic design of control centres

ISO 11064-1 presents the overall strategy for dealing with the user requirements as strategy to be
adopted for control room design.
ISO 11064-2 provides guidance on the design and planning of the control room in relation to its
supporting areas.
Requirements for the design of workstations, displays and controls and the physical working environment
are presented in ISO 11064-4 to ISO 11064-6.
Evaluation principles are dealt with in ISO 11064-7.
ISO 11064-1 to ISO 11064-7 cover general principles of ergonomic design appropriate to a range
of industries and service providers. The specific requirements appropriate to particular sectors or
applications areas are covered in ISO 11064-8. The requirements presented in ISO 11064-8 are to be
read in conjunction with ISO 11064-1 to ISO 11064-7.
The terms “human factors” and “ergonomics” are used interchangeably in ISO 11064 and are
considered as synonyms.
ISO 11064-1:2000 specifies ergonomic principles, recommendations and requirements to be applied
in the design of control centres, as well as in the expansion, refurbishment and technological upgrades
of control centres.
It covers all types of control centres typically employed for process industries, transportation and logistic
control systems and people deployment services.
Although this part of ISO 11064 is primarily intended for non-mobile control centres, many of the
principles specified in this document could be applicable to mobile control centres, such as those found
on ships and aircraft.
ISO 11064-2:2000 reviewed and confirmed 2020 considers ergonomic principles, recommendations
and guidelines for the layout of control suites and on the design and planning of the control suite in
relation to its supporting areas.
ISO 11064-3:1999 reviewed and confirmed 2020 establishes ergonomic requirements, recommendations
and guidelines for control room lay-out. User requirements are a central theme of this part of ISO 11064
and the processes described are designed to take account of needs of users at all stages.
ISO 11064-4:2013 reviewed and confirmed 2019 specifies ergonomic principles, recommendations
and requirements for the design of workstations found in control centres. It covers control workstation
design with particular emphasis on layout and dimensions. It is applicable primarily to seated, visual-
display-based workstations, although control workstations at which operators stand are also addressed.
These different types of control workstations are to be found in applications such as transportation
control, process control and security installations. Most of these workstations now incorporate flat-
display screens for the presentation of information.
ISO 11064-5:2008 reviewed and confirmed 2017:
• presents principles and processes to be adopted when designing the human-system interface of a
control centre;
• focuses on the main principles for the selection, design and implementation of controls, displays
and human-system interactions for control room operation and supervision with the purpose to
maximise the safe, reliable, efficient and comfortable use of displays and controls in control centre
applications.
To this end, rules and recommendations based upon ergonomic findings are established for:
• selecting the appropriate display and control types,
• structuring and presenting information on screens and shared off-workstation displays,
• establishing control and dialogue procedures.

Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines 31

6. Structure and references

ISO 11064-6:2005 elaborates on environmental requirements, which optimise work conditions in such a way
that safety is ensured, health is not impaired and the efficiency of control room operators is promoted. The
environmental aspects associated with the design of man–machine systems need to be addressed, since poor
environments can seriously affect operator performance.

In control rooms, these environmental factors include lighting, humidity, temperature, vibration and noise.
These factors also need to take account of shift work, real-time operations under time pressure and the
specialised equipment used in control rooms. The degree of specificity of this standard does not extend to
national and local requirements. For specific values on environmental variables, see Annex A and/or consult
local and/or national standards for the relevant country or region.

ISO 11064-7:2006 establishes ergonomic requirements, recommendations and guidelines for the evaluation
of control centres, user requirements being a central theme thus the processes described are designed to take
account of the needs of users at all stages. https://www.iso.org/obp/ui#iso:std:iso:11064:-7:ed-1:v1:en

6.1.9 ISO 18152:2010 reviewed and confirmed 2018: Ergonomics of human-system interaction —
Specification for the process assessment of human-system issues.

This defines processes that address human-system issues and the outcomes of these processes. It details
the practices and work products associated with achieving the outcomes of each process.

6.1.10 ISO 26800:2011 Ergonomics: General approach, principles and concepts. This has been developed
in order to provide an integrated framework, bringing together the basic principles and concepts of
ergonomics in one document, and thus providing a high-level view of the way in which ergonomics is
applied.

Human, technological, economic, environmental and organisational factors all affect the behaviour,
activities and wellbeing of people in work, domestic and leisure contexts. The science of ergonomics
has evolved from its origins in the context of work to embrace many other fields of application, such
as home and leisure.

However, whatever the context, the underlying principles of ergonomics remain the same, although
the relative emphasis placed on them will vary. These principles are fundamental to the design process
wherever human involvement is expected, in order to ensure the optimum integration of human
requirements and characteristics into a design.
This ISO standard considers systems, users, workers, tasks, activities, equipment and the environment
as the basis for optimising the match between them. These principles and concepts serve to improve
safety, performance and usability (effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction), while safeguarding and
enhancing human health and well-being, and improving accessibility (e.g. for elderly persons and
persons with disabilities).

Ergonomics covers a wide range of issues, including physical, cognitive, social and organisational. These
are ideally addressed within an integrated framework. A substantial number of ergonomics standards
have been developed to cover specific issues and different application domains. All depend upon the
basic principles and concepts that are fundamental to the ergonomics approach to design.

A complete list of current published ergonomics ISO standards can be accessed via the following link:

https://bit.ly/3jrpOpd

32 Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines

7. Appendix 1: Example testing matrix
The matrix below is based on the Human Factors Analysis and Layout Guideline Development for the Canadian
Surface Combatant (CSC) Project by McKay et al.

Layout Guidelines Guideline Criteria

Topic

References Were appropriate reference documents used to support the layout design?
Operating Were normal operating conditions considered?
Conditions Were irregular operating conditions considered?
Were abnormal operating conditions considered?
Were emergency operating conditions considered?
Intended Were the appropriate references used in identifying the intended functions of the
Functions bridge?
Were operational functions considered?
Were maintenance functions considered?
Manning Concept Were all operational conditions considered for all persons working on the bridge in
all usual situations?
Were workstations included in the analysis?
Equipment Were shared displays included in the analysis (e.g., large screen displays)?
Was communication equipment included in the analysis?
Was navigation equipment included in the analysis?
Was control equipment included in the analysis?
Were indications and indicators included in the analysis?
Was any specific ancillary equipment included in the analysis?
Was the physical size/shape recorded for each piece of equipment?
Were the maintenance requirements recorded for each piece of equipment?
Work Analysis Were all intended functions of the workstation considered in the work analysis?
Was frequency data collected for functions/ tasks?
Was importance data collected for functions/ tasks?
Were operational links between functions identified?
Were information flow and communications requirements identified?
Was support equipment identified as required for each function/ task?
Were storage space requirements identified?
Communication Were appropriate communication types identified for use in the communications
Analysis analysis?
Was an appropriate measure of communication importance identified for use in the
communications analysis?
Was a communication type identified for each communication required in the space?
Accessibility Were accurate equipment sizes used in designing for accessibility?
Did accessibility considerations include maintenance access?
Was the location of maintenance action considered in the layout development?
Was consideration given to workplace hazards?

Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines 33

7. Appendix 1: Example testing matrix

Safety Was consideration given to noise?

Was consideration given to vibration?
Was consideration given to climate?
Was consideration given to lighting?
Was consideration given to ship's motion?
Communication Was a sensitivity analysis performed on the communication metrics for each layout
Validation during validation?
Were structured walkthroughs (virtual or physical mock-up), conducted using
scenarios, or vignettes, during layout validation?
Layout Validation Were design trade-offs identified, assessed, and recorded for each layout during
validation?

34 Bridge Equipment and Layout Guidelines

INTERTANKO London
St Clare House
30-33 Minories
London EC3N 1DD
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 20 7977 7010
Fax: +44 20 7977 7011
[email protected]

INTERTANKO Oslo
Nedre Vollgate 4
5th floor
PO Box 761 Sentrum
N-0106 Oslo
Norway
Tel: +47 22 12 26 40
[email protected]

INTERTANKO Asia
70 Shenton Way
#20-04 Eon Shenton
079118
Singapore
Tel: +65 6333 4007
Fax: +65 6333 5004
[email protected]

INTERTANKO North America

801 North Quincy Street – Suite 500
Arlington, VA 22203
USA
Tel: +1 703 373 2269
Fax: +1 703 841 0389
[email protected]

INTERTANKO Athens
Karagiorgi Servias 2
Syntagma
Athens 10 562
Greece
Tel: +30 210 373 1772/1775
[email protected]

www.intertanko.com