A Cost Estimation Tool Integrated into FIPER

Koonce, David A.; Judd, Robert P.; Keyser, Thomas K.

doi:10.1007/978-0-387-35412-5_46

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 6 publications

(5 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To this point the emphasis has been on the engineering design domain). For example, Ohio University has developed a Cost Modeling component to provide a cost estimation service within the environment 5 Again, the independence of components from the framework must be emphasized. It is critical that engineers have the freedom to incorporate their own preferred tools not only for the analysis aspects of the process, but also for the design improvement functionality.…”

Section: A) "No Single Entry Point To These Tools or A Common Way To mentioning

confidence: 99%

Multidisciplinary Optimization of Naval Ship Design and Mission Effectiveness

Vianese¹

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. REPORT DATE FEB 20042. REPORT TYPE ABSTRACTThe Engineous Software STTR Team, including team members from Northrop Grumman, Naval Undersea Warfare Center (NUWC), Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), and Elon University; proposed at the outset of the project that it could develop an integrated Multi-disciplinary Optimization (MDO) system of naval ship design and mission effectiveness. Specifically, the team intended to use a ship model of interest to the Navy in an effort to demonstrate that disparate ship analysis tools could be integrated under a single framework and automated. This integrated, automated system would allow its users to measure ship performance and effectiveness, as well as accounting for uncertainty in those measurements, through design exploration techniques, such as optimization, design of experiments (DOE), and quality engineering analysis (e.g. Monte Carlo analysis). The primary struggle on the project was acquiring analysis models to use in the MDO system. The time required to obtain the models, unfortunately, limited the amount of analysis the team was able to perform. However, once the models were obtained, the team was able to quickly integrate them and show the power and flexibility of the MDO system. The results showed that the system was able to quickly apply numerous exploration techniques, including the Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm specifically developed for the STTR, to the integrated models. Hundreds of ship designs were evaluated in the pursuit of an optimum design; while taking into account uncertainty. A measured improvement of 6% in lifecycle cost was calculated for an optimization analysis. It was also found that while introducing uncertainty in the analysis that the lifecycle cost was perturbed by only a maximum variation of 1%. While these results are only first order analyses used to demonstrate the feasibility of developing such a system, they offer a compelling case for further exploration. The next phase of this project could bring enormous advances in the MDO ship system. By developing more robust models, tightly integrating the design integration components, including new analysis tools, and possibly pushing the integration capabilities across the...

show abstract

Section: A) "No Single Entry Point To These Tools or A Common Way To mentioning

confidence: 99%