Prior to the introduction of computers into Early Stage Ship Design of complex vessels, such as naval ships, the approach to synthesising a new design had been via weight equations. When it was realised that modern naval vessels (and some sophisticated service vessels) were essentially space driven initial (numerical) sizing needed to balance weight and space, together with simple checks on resistance & powering, plus sufficient intact stability (i.e. simple metacentric height assurance). All this was quickly computerised and subsequently put on a spread-sheet to iteratively achieve weight and space balance, while meeting those simple stability and R&P checks. Thus suddenly it became possible to produce very many variants, for both trade-off of certain requirements (against initial acquisition cost) as well (apparently) optimal solutions. However as this paper argues this speeding up of a very crude synthesis approach, before rapidly proceeding into feasibility investigations of the “selected design”, has not led to a quicker overall design process, nor have new ship designs been brought earlier into service, in timeframes remotely comparable to most merchant ships. It is the argument of this paper that such a speeding up of an essentially simplified approach to design synthesis is not sensible. Firstly, there is the need to conduct a more sophisticated approach in order to proceed in a less risky manner into the main design process for such complex vessels. Secondly, further advances in computer techniques, particularly those that CAD has adopted from computer graphics advances, now enable ship concept designers to synthesise more comprehensively and thereby address from the start many more of the likely design drivers. The paper addresses the argument for a more sophisticated approach to ESSD by first expanding on the above outline, before considering important design related issues that are considered to have arisen from major R.N. warship programmes over the last half century. This has been done by highlighting those UK naval vessel designs with which the author has had a notable involvement. The next section re-iterates an assertion that the concept phase (for complex vessels) is unlike the rest of ship design with a distinctly different primary purpose. This enables the structure of a properly organised concept phase to be outlined. Following this the issue of the extent of novelty in the design of a new design option is spelt out in more detail for the seven categories already identified. The next section consists of outlining the architecturally driven approach to ship synthesis with two sets of design examples, produced by the author’s team at UCL. All this then enables a generalised concept design process for complex vessels to be outlined, before more unconventional vessels than the naval combatant are briefly considered. The concluding main section addresses how a range of new techniques might further alter the way in which ESSD is addressed, in order to provide an even better output from concept to accomplish the downstream design and build process. The paper ends with a summary of the main conclusions.
This paper takes as its starting point the paper published in the Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A in 1972 entitled 'A design methodology for ships and other complex systems'. It was written before computers had made much impact on the design, as opposed to the analysis, of ships and similarly large complex constructions. Not only have computers become synonymous with design practice, but there has also been a burgeoning of literature on all aspects of design, with it often being treated as a discipline in its own right. Taking ships in general, and the specific example of naval ship design in particular, a comprehensive design methodology is proposed. While giving due regard to the importance of management oriented design procedures, the methodology also draws on both engineering and architecture based versions of the design process. Particular attention is given to initial design since it is the most crucial phase in determining the overall configuration and because of its added importance with the current emphasis on concurrent engineering. The methodology proposed is considered to be flexible not only in the scope of its potential for application across a wide range of innovative solutions but also because of its basis in an architecturally derived synthesis. This methodology is contrasted with an alternative systems-engineering-based design approach, applicable to complex software oriented design but crucially lacking the capability to readily cater for the human element within the entity, which is always a significant concern in the design of physically large as well as complex systems.
Designs of physically large and complex (PL&C) systems, nowadays, are achieved through the use of evermore capable digital computer-based techniques. Thus, the process of such designs might be characterized as the practice of science rather than that of an art. The article commences with a consideration of art and science in design. It then addresses the particular nature of the design of such systems and how this is not just an issue of complexity, but also a consequence of large physical size. How computer-aided design is applied early in the designing of such systems, the crucial aspect of the choice of style by the initial designer and the advent of computer-based simulation techniques, applied early in design, are all considered pertinent to the role of art and science in design. A series of high-level fundamental issues are discussed in the belief that they are changing the nature of the design of PL&C systems and ought to be considered by practitioners of such designs. In this way, the power of computer-based techniques, both numerical and graphical, can then enhance the scope of design innovation, given designers' increasing dependency on digitally based practice.Keywords: design of physically large and complex systems; art and science; design building block approach
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.