Proceedings magazine is a communication tool for the Coast Guard's Marine Safety & Security Council. Each quarterly magazine focuses on a specific theme of interest to the marine industry.
Issue link: http://uscgproceedings.epubxp.com/i/264352
www.uscg.mil/proceedings 62 Proceedings Winter 2013–2014 control. There was no physical manifestation that the vessel technical team could see, and the control system did not have the ability to identify the error. A test scope prepared in accor- dance with system verifcation g uide requirements would have considered the occur- rence of mutually exclusive events and included verifca- tion tests for this potential situ- ation. Logic that would not rec- ognize this occurrence would have been identifed, and the logic could have been updated to address this error. Enhancing System Reliability The nature of system develop- ment, installation, and deploy- ment makes it highly unlikely that a single verifcation tech- nique will be appropriate at each stage of the system life cycle. System verification lets the user identify and remediate defects prior to system deployment and manage change throughout the system life cycle using a variety of techniques that, when imple- mented in a coordinated fashion with an appropriate test scope, offer the opportunity to enhance system reliabil- ity in a timely and cost-effective manner. About the author: Mr. Milton Korn is a managing senior principal engineer at ABS. He is also an assistant professor of electrical engineering at the United States Merchant Marine Academy, in Kings Point, N.Y. He holds a chief engi‑ neer's license with Standards of Training, Certifcation, and Watchkeep‑ ing endorsement and is a registered professional engineer in New York and New Jersey. decouple the control system from the operating equip- ment to perform verifcation testing, while maintaining effective equipment operation and supervision. An instance of a control system failure illustrates the potential system verifcation application. For example, imagine that, upon the conclusion of a port stay, a ves- sel was making preparations to get underway. It was not able to transfer propulsion remote control to the bridge, because two mechanical contacts from adjacent mechanical indicator pushbuttons were simultaneously closed. One button was for port wing control, the other for central console control. This occurrence of mutually exclusive events prevented the use of propulsion remote Guidance to identify and remediate as many defects as possible prior to system deployment. Winter �2013_45.indd 62 2/10/14 9:32 AM