Problem Statement “Unbudgeted cost growth in shipbuilding programs has reached an untenable level” – ASN (RDA) “U.S. shipbuilders require greater than twice the design labor hours and cycle time” – NSRP Strategic Investment Plan “lack of design maturity when introducing new technologies led to rework, increasing growth in labor hours” - GAO
Report by RAND for UK MoD 69% due to late product definition/technical information
Section 4.2 Priority areas for improvement Section 4.2 Priority areas for improvement: 1.Design for production (F7) 2.Production engineering (F6) 7.Dimensional accuracy an QC (F8) 8.Ship design (F1) 10.Steelwork coding system (F4) 14.Outfit production information (F3) 20.Parts listing procedure (F5) 25.Lofting methods (F9) 26.Steelwork production information (F2) Global Shipbuilding Industrial Base Benchmarking Study Top 2 and 5 of the top 10 recommendations are in Design, Engineering and Production Engineering
Design Capability Elements - Current Status STAFF TOOLS SPECS PROCESS Declining Naval Ship Design Capability
Ship Design Enterprise Collaboration Level I: Capability Planning –Our community must find a way to work together to develop a consensus vision of a national Naval ship design capability –Consistent metrics of current status and a roadmap to future capability –In executable, actionable detail –Use the common vision to build specific elements as opportunity presents Build toward a common vision rather than building incompatible piece parts
STAFF Navy Surface Ship Design Capability TOOLS SPECS PROCESS Capability Planning STAFF Standard KSAs for specific design roles Competency Career tracks Retain specialist capabilities Community metrics similar to NAVSEA’s Human Capital Digital Dashboard (HCDD)
STAFF Navy Surface Ship Design Capability TOOLS SPECS PROCESS Capability Planning TOOLS Interoperability framework Authoritative analysis tools Plug compatible modules Common parts catalog Community metrics similar to NAVSEA’s HCDD
STAFF Navy Surface Ship Design Capability TOOLS SPECS PROCESS Capability Planning SPECS Continue development of ABS Naval Vessel Rules Consensus national ship specification improvement program Panel projects to upgrade specific specs Community metrics similar to NAVSEA’s HCDD
STAFF Navy Surface Ship Design Capability TOOLS SPECS PROCESS Capability Planning PROCESS Consensus definition of design process and products Common design work breakdown structure Standard statements of design maturity and risk reduction Community metrics similar to NAVSEA’s HCDD
Ship Design Enterprise Collaboration Level II: Capability Planning + Capability Development –Our community should consider a collaborative effort to select and/or develop design capability elements identified by the roadmap –Deal with industry issues as an industry –Clearinghouse and quality control agent for sponsors and developers –Successful collaboration models exist (NSRP, National Institute of Aerospace (NIA), Center for Innovation in Ship Design (CISD), etc.)
Ship Design Enterprise Collaboration Level III: Capability Planning + Capability Development + Design Application –Our community should consider a national design team for design prior to detail design –Long intervals between early stage designs at individual yards don’t provide the business case for sustained capability –Adequate design work nationally to keep team and individual skills sharp Challenging times call for radical action
Mission Statement of the Joint SNAME-ASNE Ship Design Committee ship design in the development and construction The mission of the Ship Design Committee is to advance the art, science and practice of ship design in the development and construction of naval ships, commercial ships and advanced ships and craft, and the multi- disciplines allied thereto.
SDC Vision SNAME and ASNE will be the organization of choice for engineers and other professionals in the Ship Design sector of the marine industry, providing valuable and relevant services to all its members. SNAME and ASNE and its members will be recognized by their peers as the technical leaders in the advancement of Ship Design. SNAME and ASNE and its members will be recognized by the public and by governments as responsible technical authorities and valuable contributors to society.
SDC Goals Enable the global exchange of knowledge and ideas of shipbuilders, ship design agents, Government agencies, regulatory and classification bodies, and academia relative to Ship Design. a faster and more effective ship development processFocus on best practices and new technologies, methods and tools for a faster and more effective ship development process: requirements, concepts, design, planning, construction, validation and operations; Enable community connections to become an industry- Government-academia partnership for the creation of a more Collaborative Design Environment; Encourage and sponsor research and development in Weights estimating, Stability analyses, Ship Arrangements, and other Ship Design fields. Work to further education in engineering as it relates to Ship Design.
SDC Objectives Ship Design Committee (SDC) –Entice, educate, and enrich Ship Design engineers to improve their competence in the field of Naval Architecture. –Create Naval Architecture and Ship Design text books. –Improve ties with engineering schools. –Encourage high school student interest/awareness; potentially get high school students to become members of ASNE and SNAME. –Need to improve quality and editing of SNAME/ASNE Ship Design publications. –Foster collaboration with the Product Design & Material Technologies (PD&MT) Panel under the National Shipbuilding Research Program (NSRP) –Provide liaison with the Navy’s Center for Innovation in Ship Design (CISD)
SNAME-ASNE Ship Design Committee Panel Structure Ship Design Committee-R. Keane, Ship Design USA, Vacant, Vice Chair SD-1 Weights-W. Boze, NNS SD-2 Collaborative Design Environment-J. Weingart, G&C SD-3 Stability-R. Sonnenschein, MARAD SD-4 Arrangements-Vacant SD-5 Adv. Ships & Craft-W.Hockberger Consultant SD-9 Com’l. Ships-T.Keyser Corps of Engrs SD-8 Naval Ships F. Sanchez, JHU APL SD-10 Hull Form Design, J. Thomas, G&C
Weights Panel, SD-1 Develop lessons learned from a number of ship designs with unforeseen increases in weights to help Weight Engineers obtain consistent and reliable results Foster a systems engineering approach for developing better weight estimating tools for all design phases. Provide 3-digit weight reports for existing/past ship designs Provide best practices weight estimating methods and techniques from other vehicle-centric industries
Collaborative Design Environment, SD-2 Keep members abreast of other ship design advances such as Knowledge Management (KM), Integrated Digital Environments (IDE), Information Security, Electronic Collaboration, and Expert System Augmented Ship Design Identify the best practices for integration of information technology and electronic collaboration into Ship Design Maintain knowledge base through readily available technical documents. “Harmonize” our databases and put the data on line. Provide database of ship design information.
Stability Panel, SD-3 Serve as focal point for improved understanding of evolving ship types & hull forms in a dynamic seaway Keep members involved in, and informed of, stability- related issues and events Promote improved understanding of adequate stability on the part of ship designers Provide, or arrange for providing, expert input on stability matters to industry and government Identify critical gaps in existing body of knowledge, or need to ensure improved application of existing knowledge
Ship Arrangements Panel, SD-4 Develop educational material for Ship Design engineers and students on the principles of Ship Arrangements Design Facilitate getting to practicing professionals the latest advances in Multi-objective Design Optimization (MDO) methods applied to new Ship Arrangements Design tools Identify best practices for including “systems architecting” topics of requirements & missions analysis, functional analysis & allocation, and similar topics in Ship Arrangements Design
Advanced Ships and Craft Panel, SD-5 Collect, preserve and disseminate information pertaining to advanced marine vehicles (AMVs), including their technologies, designs, construction, operation and support Provide a preeminent resource of expertise on AMV technology Regularly hold meetings to share information on significant AMV developments Maintain connections and hold joint technical programs with other groups involved with AMVs Initiate Panel involvement when member expertise can contribute significantly to developing policies and programs regarding AMVs Identify nonmembers with significant AMV knowledge and expertise and encourage them to join
Forensics Panel, SD-7 Advance the art and science of marine forensics and enhance the understanding of recent and historical loss of life and ships at sea Establish the new field of marine forensics as a credible process for the application of engineering and scientific principles to the study of shipwrecks to determine the causes of the loss of the ship Participate in scientific research and exploration to determine the modes of failure of vessels lost at sea and to gain new insights in how ships sink and the forces involved Develop an overall survey guide of the wreck investigation process and available case studies and investigation-process papers to introduce the scientific process for identifying and gathering facts and evidence relating to an incident or casualty aboard a marine platform Identify remedial means to mitigate the likelihood of similar casualty occurrences Publish investigative guidelines for assessing a marine incident or casualty as an aid to the private investigator, the various international classification societies, the International Maritime Organization (IMO), and the various authorities having jurisdiction, including the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), the Mineral Management Service (MMS), the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), Transport Canada, and other interested parties
Naval Ships Panel, SD-8 Advance development of a more effective standard Naval Ship Design process from requirements determination through delivery of the lead ship Foster continuous improvements through more investment in and implementation of ship design and engineering technologies Provide a forum to discuss community issues and challenges in order to develop a shared perspective between Government - Industry - Academia Offer a forum for the transfer of "best practices" and "lessons learned" between generations of naval ship designers Encourage networking amongst Government - Industry - Academia ship design engineers and other stakeholders in the Naval Ship development process Promote technical papers and other forms of knowledge exchange on Naval Ship Design
Commercial Ships Panel, SD-9 Identify the cost and schedule drivers in ship design Determine best practice methods for identifying cost impact of design changes throughout the design and construction process Foster participation from second-tier shipyards Establish an annual Ships of the Year Design Awards (commercial cargo, passenger, inland vessels, offshore structures and others) Emphasize ship design education as a key issue Identify accelerated knowledge transfer to provide a jump start to graduates and to cover the experience gap at a faster pace than would occur through normal work practices Participate actively in undergraduate senior engineering design courses, both teaching and mentoring Compare project processes followed for the design and construction of marine assets, including how front-end design is done, and how to best pass through the various "decision gates" as design progresses from concept to realization
Metrics Government-Industry-Academia proceeding with recommendations of SNAME-ASNE SDC Number of SNAME Journals publishing Ship Design papers Number of Ship Design standards updated / developed by SNAME-ASNE Panels Shipbuilders better supporting NAVSEA and SNAME-ASNE and collaborating in developing Ship Design tools
Obstacles Invested interests Resistance/reluctance to change Lack of resources Lack of volunteers Lack of appreciation of importance of ship design Shipyards guarding their design advantages/results Fuzzy interface with ASNE (resolved by Joint Charter) Ability of NAVSEA technical authorities to participate Difficulty in clearing naval ship design papers for public
THE WAY AHEAD Kick-off the reconstituted, reinvigorated SDC by organizing and conducting a community-wide Ship Design Workshop and Conference: –To develop a state-of-the-art assessment of our national capabilities and a needs document for a strategic investment plan –Co-sponsored by SNAME, ASNE, NAVSEA, ONR, NSRP –Involve SNAME technical committees allied to Ship Design –Hosted by CISD at NSWC Carderock’s new Conferencing Center –Prepare business plan to get approval and advance funding SDC to serve as multi-disciplinary liaison for increased collaboration between SNAME’s technical Committees like STOC, Ship Production (NSRP), Structures, Hydrodynamics, Machinery, etc.
WHERE WE NEED TO GO According to an old proverb, if we do not change our direction, we might end up where we are headed.