hans h. k. andersen and steen weber risø national laboratory
DESCRIPTION
Evaluation of cooperation and communication during training using a distributed simulation system in the maritime domain. Hans H. K. Andersen and Steen Weber Risø National Laboratory. Training effects of a long distance learning s hip handling c ourse. Project objectives and partners. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
NORDUnet 2003, Iceland
Evaluation of cooperation and communication during training using a
distributed simulation system in the maritime domain
Hans H. K. Andersen and Steen Weber
Risø National Laboratory
NORDUnet 2003, Iceland
-5,0
0,0
5,0
10,0
15,0
20,0
25,0
30,0
Before After
Ship-Hdl.Course
C
Control Group
Student Trainee Group
Officer Trainee Group
Training effects of a long distance learning ship handling course
NORDUnet 2003, Iceland
Project objectives and partners
• Objective• Enabling education and training in ship-handling,
communication and co-operation using distributed networked simulators
• Partners• Åland Maritime Institute (ÅM, FI)
www.asl.aland.fi
• RISØ National Laboratory (Risø, DK)www.risoe.dk
• Danish Maritime Institute (DMI, DK)www.dmi-online.dk
NORDUnet 2003, Iceland
Distance learning
• Lack of direct face-to- face contact does not necessarily affect the quality of the learning process
• There is no evidence that face-to-face instruction is the best method of giving instruction
• Learning at a distance can be as effective as learning in a face to face situation
NORDUnet 2003, Iceland
Learning of cognitive, manual and complex skills
Cognition
Perception
Rule-Based Learning
Skill-Based Learning
Thinking Knowledge-Based Learning
NORDUnet 2003, Iceland
Experimental set-up
• Preparation of detailed schedule
• Briefing of trainees
• Execution of training session
(net based)
• Documentation and description
• Self evaluation by trainees
• Instructor controlled debriefing
(net based)
NORDUnet 2003, Iceland
Experimental scenario
MayDay from capsized boat
MayDay received Marine Rescue Center
Ship 1 (Risø) Ship 2 (DMI) Ship 3, ÅM
On-scene commander (DMI)
Ship 1 (Risø) Ship 2 (DMI) Ship 3, ÅM
All other boats in the area
Task
NORDUnet 2003, Iceland
Single Display ”Bridge”
NORDUnet 2003, Iceland
Assesment
TEAM A
Writte n Intro d uc tio n
Instrum e nts
M a no e uvring
C o m m unic a tio n
Ship ha nd ling a nd C o m m unic a tio nSAR A
SAR B
NORDUnet 2003, Iceland
Video from experiment
NORDUnet 2003, Iceland
Multiple Own Ships - net requirements
• During SAR excersise guarantied bandwidth• Communication of ship
• Positions
• Speed
• Visual appearance (lights, signals)
• Sound
• After SAR excersise high bandwidth
• Debriefing based on instructor and student radio communication simultaniously with real-time simulation replay of scenario through the net
NORDUnet 2003, Iceland
VHF Radio Communication
• Half duplex• Medium bandwidth requirement
< 64 kBit/sec) per bridge
NORDUnet 2003, Iceland
Instructor station (OCC – Operators Control Center)
NORDUnet 2003, Iceland
Net based simulation achievments
• Multiple Own Ships through the Internet• DirectPlay (Microsoft, COM)
• HLA (DMSO, CORBA)
• Instructor Control through the Internet
• VHF radio communication through the Internet• DirectPlay/DirectVoice
• Debriefing/Replay through the Internet
NORDUnet 2003, Iceland
Results - performance of equipment
Very Poor 0 0% Poor 1 6% Average 5 28% Good 11 60% Very Good 1 6%
NORDUnet 2003, Iceland
Results - the execution of the exercise
Very Unimportant 0 0% Unimportant 1 17% Neutral 0 0% Important 2 33% Very Important 3 50%
NORDUnet 2003, Iceland
Results - physical presence of instructor during and after exercise, question
Very Unimportant 1 8% Unimportant 7 60% Neutral 1 8% Important 1 8% Very Important 2 16%
NORDUnet 2003, Iceland
Results - quality of debriefing, question
Very Poor 0 0% Poor 0 0% Average 6 50% Good 6 50% Very Good 0 0%
NORDUnet 2003, Iceland
Results - learning experience
No Improvement 2 11% Little Improvement 3 17% Some Improvement 9 50% Much Improvement 3 17% A Lot of Improvement 1 5%
NORDUnet 2003, Iceland
Results - expected outcome using simulator based training
No Improvement 0 0% Little Improvement 0 0% Some Improvement 2 33% Much Improvement 2 33% A Lot of Improvement 2 33%