Information on ENC Generalization, Over-Scaling and Safety
Checking Functions in ECDIS.
Executive summary
This information paper focuses on the importance of understanding ENC compilation scale
and the safety implications of using ENC data beyond its intended usage, during both the
Electronic Chart Display and Information Systems (ECDIS) route planning and checking and
route monitoring phases of navigation.
The paper provides ECDIS users with information regarding the process Hydrographic Offices
employ to transform the physical world into a 2D Electronic Navigational Chart (ENC) that can
be used in an ECDIS. Within the paper the following topics are covered:
Cartographic generalization practices
ENC Compilation Scale
ECDIS safety checking functions
ENC over-scaling
Conclusions and recommendations
Cartographic generalization practices
For centuries marine cartographers have been using generalization techniques to transform
our view of the world from a true three-dimensional reality to a scaled, two-dimensional
abstract view. Many aspects to generalization are used by Hydrographic Offices when creating
navigational products: classification, simplification, exaggeration, and symbolization.
Classification: Groups features into classes having identical or similar attributes. Organizing
features into fewer classes helps to simplify and clarify the message of the navigational chart.
Simplification: Features are simplified by either smoothing or compacting. Smoothing is
generally used for linear features such as depth contours and coastlines where each curve
cannot be depicted because of scale or because the detail would clutter the chart.
IHO Chart Specification S-4 states ‘Contours should be smoothed only where it is necessary
to remove intricacies which would confuse mariners. Where necessary, smoothing will include
deeper water within shoaler contours (that is: it must be shoal-biased), but an attempt to retain
a reasonable representation of the seabed should be made’.
In compacting, if there are many features in a small area, such as isolated rocks which will
just be dots at chart scale; those features may be grouped (compacted) within a single
obstruction area.
Exaggeration: Due to scale, certain features must be shown larger than their actual relative
size. Dangerous features such as rocks, wrecks and obstructions would at certain scales be
unreadable if shown at their correct size, so they are exaggerated enough to be recognized
and to show their relationship to other similar features.
Symbolization: Symbols are used on charts to inform the Mariner what features are. Nautical
chart symbols use shape and colour to help the Mariner quickly understand the importance of
certain features. For example, the colour magenta is generally reserved for drawing attention
to symbols for features which have a significance extending beyond their immediate location;
or are not themselves a physical feature (such as administrative and restricted areas; or
routeing measures).
Globally accepted cartographic practices include the use of point symbols to represent real-
world area features when the scale of the product is reduced but the importance of the feature
is such that the cartographer wants to retain that information.
Version 1.0.0 November 2020
ENC Compilation Scale
The viewing scale of a paper chart is determined and fixed by the cartographer at the chart
compilation stage, so symbols are typically larger than the extent of the real-world feature they
represent and do not change. The situation is different when ENCs are used in ECDIS as the
Mariner can zoom in and out beyond the ENC compilation scale. Zooming in to a larger scale
introduces the risk that any positional errors that may exist in the ENC data are magnified to
a point where the data becomes unsafe to use – and this fact will not be immediately apparent
as the ECDIS will continue to display the text and symbols at a fixed size.
ENC producers use a variety of methods to define the compilation scale of their ENC data,
but for safety reasons these will always take into account the scale at which the source
information was captured.
To ensure consistency, and thus contribute to improved display, most ENCs are assigned to
one of the IHO’s recommended standard compilation scales. These are defined within the
IHO’s S-65 publication, together with an example of the navigational purpose to which each
ENC scale may be assigned.
The various compilation scales define the level of detail that can be included, and how that
detail is depicted. While a feature may be depicted as an area or line feature at a large
compilation scale, it may be depicted as a point feature at a smaller scale. Some object
classes within an ENC, such as wrecks, rocks and obstructions including reefs, may therefore
be defined by the cartographer as points, lines or areas depending on the compilation scale
of the ENC and other factors. One major factor is whether the symbol for a feature will be
larger than its true (real-world) extent, if known, at the chosen compilation scale.
Charted point features only indicate that a certain feature object exists in a given point location.
While a light beacon may be charted as a point feature, a point feature may also define the
approximate centre of a feature that actually has an ‘area’, such as a small reef. This means
that, unlike charted area features, the only positional information available for a point feature
is its geographical position (a point represented by latitude and longitude coordinates), and
not its true extent (such as the distance from the charted point centre of a reef to its edge).
This is particularly important in ECDIS where the Mariner chooses to over-scale the chart
display (see Figure 8)
Reef as per source
data Isolated danger point Point symbol against
symbol on ECDIS source data extents
Figure 1: Comparison of small reef within source data at ENC compilation scale, point symbol
depiction on ENC, and source data overlaid on ENC
Images show survey data (left), section of ENC (centre) and ENC superimposed on survey data at
compilation scale (right).
Source: Australian Hydrographic Office (AHO) and ATSB1.
1 Australian Transport Safety Bureau
Page 2
Version 1.0.0 November 2020
Area features
Point features
Figure 2: Comparison of area features and point features at different scales
These images show the same ENC displayed at two differing scales. The two images demonstrate
a key difference between point and area features – area features change size in proportion to the
ENC display scale, however the point features remain the same size regardless of display scale.
Source: Electrotech, annotations by the AHO.
ECDIS safety checking function
Since July 2018 all SOLAS vessels of 500GT and upwards are required to be using ENCs
created by Hydrographic Offices in type-approved ECDIS equipment. The use of ENCs within
ECDIS provides a wide range of advantages; it simplifies voyage planning, allowing easy
modification of routes and offers many safety benefits. Routes can be checked for potential
dangers based on the safety parameters input by the Mariner. The safety contour defines the
safe water the vessel can navigate in based on the depth areas and contours included in the
ENC; and the safety depth defines isolated dangers that are located in otherwise “safe” water.
During route monitoring it is also possible for the ECDIS to be configured to alarm and indicate
on features set by the Mariner, alerting navigators to impending dangerous situations.
IMO Resolution A.893(21) adopted on 25 November 1999 Guidelines for Voyage Planning
states that;
‘(2.1) All information relevant to the contemplated voyage or passage should be
considered. The following items should be taken into account in voyage and passage
planning: appropriate scale, accurate and up-to-date charts to be used for the intended
voyage or passage, as well as any relevant permanent or temporary notices to
mariners and existing radio navigational warnings.’
This clause requires vessels to carry all appropriate scale ENCs for their intended voyage,
thus minimizing any effects of generalization and ensuring the ECDIS can alert the Mariner to
dangers by using the largest scale data available.
Page 3
Version 1.0.0 November 2020
IMO Performance Standard for ECDIS (11.4.6) requires;
‘An indication should be given to the mariner if, continuing on its present course
and speed, over a specified time or distance set by the mariner, own ship will pass
closer than a user-specified distance from a danger (e.g. obstruction, wreck, rock)
that is shallower than the mariner’s safety contour or an aid to navigation.’
The route checking functions built into ECDIS to check and monitor a route for dangers is a
fundamental safety benefit for Mariners. Where passage planning is conducted on ECDIS,
use of the route checking function is a key component of the overall process of checking the
suitability of a planned route and complements the visual check of that route.
The route checking function is dependent upon a number of parameters set by the Mariner as
part of setting up the ship’s ECDIS for the voyage. These parameters include a vertical
accuracy component, resulting in a safety depth setting; and a horizontal accuracy component,
which includes both an allowance for the accuracy of the ship’s navigation system and a
minimum permissible planned distance from dangers. These settings may be changed for
different voyages, and even different phases of a voyage, based on the bathymetric data
quality information included in the ENC (such as the Category of Zone of Confidence in Data
(CATZOC) attribute on the mandatory Quality of Data (M_QUAL) feature). The settings
combine to create a route safety region around a vessel’s planned track.
Figure 3: The component parts of determining an appropriate route safety region around a
vessel’s planned track
Figure 3 shows the minimum considerations when determining what allowance should be made for
charted dangers on or near a planned route. These include allowances for the accuracy of the ship’s
positioning system, and for the accuracy of the chart. The dashed lines indicate the possible worst-
case scenario for the Mariner.
Source: AHO.
The ECDIS safety checking function verifies the user-defined safety corridor against the entire
chart database in the ECDIS for dangers, not just against the extent of visual point symbols
displayed on screen. The ECDIS will graphically identify points along the proposed route that
are a danger to the vessel and return a textual list of the same hazards.
ECDIS safety check only verifies data along the user-defined corridor; the width of the corridor
is set by the Cross Track Distance (XTD). The safety check will be performed against the
largest scale information within the ECDIS system irrespective of the ECDIS display scale.
Point features will only be identified as hazards if they fall within the safety zone being checked
regardless of the size of the symbol displayed on screen and regardless of the actual extent
of the physical feature it represents. Due to the compilation scale of the ENC there could be
Page 4
Version 1.0.0 November 2020
occasions where the charted point feature may not represent the full extent of the real-world
feature. The Mariner must therefore ensure his safety corridor XTD is sufficiently wide enough
to identify all navigational dangers along the intended route. Mariners are also required to
conduct a thorough visual check of the intended route to complement the automated safety
check.
The two following fictitious examples show how a hazardous point feature could be missed if
the correct ENC scale charts are not loaded in the ECDIS and route XTD is not adequately
set.
Example 1
In the first example (Figure 4), the charted position of the ‘isolated danger’ point feature
representing the reef lies about 55m to the east of the planned route and falls within the route
safety region. As this point lies within the route safety region set by the Mariner, the ECDIS
will detect the reef as a danger close to the planned route and include it in the list of dangers
for that leg of the route.
Reef edge
105 m route safety region
based on 100 m XTD
Charted position of a point feature
object representing the reef on an
ENC
Figure 4: Planned route covers the position of the point symbol 2
Figure 4 shows the planned route and the ECDIS route safety region based on a 100m Cross Track
Distance (XTD) near the point position used to represent the reef within the ENC. Note that the
charted point position lies within the route safety region and will result in an ECDIS alert.
Source: DigitalGlobe, Esri, modified and annotated by the ATSB and the AHO.
Example 2:
In the second example (Figure 5), the planned route lies 55m further to the west. The charted
position of the point feature now lies outside the ECDIS route safety zone set by the Mariner.
In this case, the ECDIS will not detect the reef as a danger on or close to the planned route.
However, the reef still clearly presents a danger to the ship.
2
Scale of Figure is approximately 1:6000; scale of ENC containing the point symbol is 1:90000.
Page 5
Version 1.0.0 November 2020
In this situation, if the vessel has not taken into account the possibility of isolated reefs within
the region, and resultantly extended the XTD to at least account for the horizontal accuracy
component of the underlying quality information (CATZOC), there is a possibility the danger
could be missed during the visual inspection and the vessel could potentially run aground
without the ECDIS indicating the danger on the planned route.
105 m route safety region
based on 100 m XTD
Charted position of a point feature
object representing the reef on an
ENC
Figure 5: Planned route misses the position of the point symbol
Figure 5 shows a similar planned route and route safety region, 55m further west, near the same
point position used to represent the reef within the ENC. The charted point position now lies outside
the route safety region and therefore no longer results in an ECDIS alert. However the route still
passes over the true reef extent.
Source: DigitalGlobe, Esri, modified and annotated by the ATSB and the AHO.
Given the size of the reef in the examples, it must be stressed that it would typically warrant
capture by the cartographer as an area feature within an ENC compiled at the scale of the
examples; and only at significantly smaller compilation scales would it be captured as a point
feature.
A similar scenario and associated safety implications equally applies to the ECDIS look-ahead
function and XTD once the ship is underway and monitoring along the planned route.
ENC over-scaling
A key difference to note between charted area features and point features on an ECDIS
display is that area features change size in proportion to the scale at which the ENC is being
viewed, whereas point feature size remains constant irrespective of display scale (see Figure
2); in other words they are not enlarged as viewing scale is increased.
Additionally, the size and shape of the point symbol does not necessarily represent the size
or shape of the physical, real-world feature it is depicting.
Traditionally, nautical cartographers have sought to ensure that the symbol on the chart is
larger than the real-world feature it represents when seen at the chart’s compilation scale.
Navigational purpose is also taken into consideration; a chart that is intended for coastal
navigation, where it is not intended that the chart is to be used for close approach to isolated
Page 6
Version 1.0.0 November 2020
features, may also factor into the decision of the cartographer as to whether to depict a feature
as an area or a point symbol on the chart. This practice remains true in the preparation of
ENC, where the compilation scale defines the maximum intended viewing scale for that ENC
in ECDIS.
However, when the ENC is viewed at scales progressively larger than the compilation scale,
the intended relationship between the point symbol and the area feature it represents is
broken; as the ENC is progressively ‘over-scaled’ on screen, the symbol represents a
progressively smaller proportion of the real-world feature, such as a reef area, on the ECDIS
display. This can lead to an incorrect assumption by the Mariner that they may go closer to
the edge of the point symbol when the display is ‘over-scaled’; this would be a dangerous
assumption.
As a point feature, a reef is charted in a specific latitude/longitude position on the ENC,
typically representing the centre of the area of the reef. Visually, this means that the symbol
representing the reef will always be centred on this position (see Figure 1); and when viewed
at the ENC compilation scale, or smaller, the symbol will typically cover the true extent of that
reef. On the ECDIS display, the symbol always maintains an absolute size of 7mm in diameter
regardless of the scale at which the ENC is viewed (see Figure 6). However, if the display
scale has been over-scaled to twice the ENC compilation scale, a considerable extent of the
reef (previously covered by the symbol), may now extend well beyond the symbol, without any
indication of such in the ECDIS (see Figure 8).
Figure 6: Isolated danger (point) symbol in ECDIS
Source: IHO.
The ECDIS has the functionality to allow ENCs to be displayed at scales larger than the
original compilation scale. However, the ability to zoom in beyond the compilation scale (the
maximum intended viewing scale) has introduced an inherent risk that is not present in paper
charts. To minimize these risks, ECDIS includes indicators to alert when an ENC is being
viewed beyond the maximum intended viewing scale.
1. Over-scale indication shown within the graphical user interface
2. Over-scale (jail bar) pattern
Page 7
Version 1.0.0 November 2020
Figure 7: Over-scale indication and over-scale pattern on ECDIS
Source: AHO.
Figure 8: Over-scale indication and over-scale pattern on ECDIS
In the image on the left, shown at maximum intended viewing scale, a Mariner can immediately see
that passing close to the charted isolated danger would be unwise. In contrast, in the image on the
right, shown over-scaled, passing the same distance from the same isolated danger appears safe.
Unfortunately, as the symbol has not been enlarged in proportion to the display scale, it no longer
fully covers the reef, resulting in a hazardous navigation situation.
Source: AHO.
It is important to also note that the ECDIS will provide an indication if the ship’s position is
covered by an ENC at a larger scale than the current ENC being used in the ECDIS display.
Conclusions and recommendations
With many additional ENC tools capable of planning routes the Mariner must still be aware
that only the ECDIS is certified for carrying out route planning and monitoring. To ensure safety
and compliance it is imperative that all the appropriate scale ENCs are used in the ECDIS for
adequate route planning and monitoring. The route must be automatically safety checked and
a visual inspection performed at the largest scale possible, based on the available portfolio of
ENCs, before the voyage commences. To ensure all dangers are identified by the ECDIS auto
safety check function the Cross Track Distance must be appropriately set, taking into account
factors such as the accuracy of the ship’s positioning and navigation system; the bathymetric
Page 8
Version 1.0.0 November 2020
data quality information included in the ENCs (such as CATZOC); and the intended
navigational purpose of the ENCs loaded into the ECDIS.
There is a common misconception by some Mariners that zooming in beyond the compilation
scale of the ENC allows for greater accuracy – however, this is not the case. In reality zooming
in beyond the intended maximum display scale of ENCs may be misleading and dangerous,
particularly for ‘isolated dangers of depth less than the safety depth’.
The risks associated with over-scaling the ENC within ECDIS are two-fold:
Firstly, the symbol selected by the cartographer to represent a real-world feature may no
longer fully cover that feature.
Secondly, but most importantly, because the text and point symbols stay the same size
within the over-scaled ENC, any sense of appropriate distance from a potential danger is
no longer intuitive and can result in a false sense of safety that does not reflect reality.
Mariners are strongly advised not to zoom in ECDIS beyond the compilation scale to a point
where the ECDIS over-scale indication or pattern are triggered.
Some ECDIS allow the operator to turn off over-scale warnings. This is not recommended
under normal circumstances.
Familiarization with all the core functions of the ECDIS are mandatory requirements within
STCW and are essential for safe navigation. Mariners must be familiar with the properties of
the ECDIS; and develop a sufficient understanding of how and when the ECDIS indicates that
ENC data is being displayed at an unsafe scale, so that the display settings can be adjusted
accordingly.
Page 9
Version 1.0.0 November 2020
Page intentionally left blank
Page 10
