Handling aspects of complexity in conceptual ship design

A core aspect of temporal complexity in the design of non-transport vessels is the uncertainty related to the future market and contract opportunities, and the corresponding changeability that should be incorporated into the ship design to meet this uncertainty. The development of an appropriate design specification for a new ship represents a core strategic decision for ship owners as part of a fleet renewal or expansion programme, with a high financial risk and a long time horizon of typically 20-30 years. This type of temporal complexity is one out of several complexity aspects to be handled as part of a ship design process. In this paper we model possible realizations of an uncertain future for a vessel using the Epoch-Era Analysis (EEA) method. Here, we use the epochs as the primary instrument for capturing major market developments, such as the opening of new offshore areas, new emission regulatory regimes, or the availability of new, disruptive technologies. From these, more specific epoch variables are derived, for which specific contract opportunities can be generated. The epoch-specific performance of the vessels is found by solving a Ship Design and Deployment Problem (SDDP) of concurrently identifying both a preferable ship design and the corresponding path of consecutive contracts that maximizes total revenue. We present a case study related to the design of an Anchor Handling Tug Supply (AHTS) vessel. The study illustrates the complexity in striking the correct balance between optimizing the vessel for an initial scenario, while at the same time providing addition performance capabilities to be competitive in the context of future market requirements.

[1]  Melanie Mitchell,et al.  Complexity - A Guided Tour , 2009 .

[2]  Alex H. B. Duffy,et al.  Embracing complexity in design , 2007 .

[3]  Stephen Bonsall,et al.  Application of Multiple Attribute Decision-Making (MADM) and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) Methods in the Selection Decisions for a Container Yard Operating System , 2009 .

[4]  Hiroshi Tasaka.  Twenty-first-century Management and the Complexity Paradigm , 1999 .

[5]  Dj Andrews.  AN INTEGRATED APPROACH TO SHIP SYNTHESIS , 1986 .

[6]  Suh Nam-pyo,et al.  Complexity: Theory and Applications , 2005 .

[7]  T. Lamb.  A Ship Design Procedure , 1969 .

[8]  J. Holtrop,et al.  AN APPROXIMATE POWER PREDICTION METHOD , 1982 .

[9]  Arne Fredheim.  Current Forces on Net Structure , 2005 .

[10]  Anthony Finkelstein,et al.  MARINE REQUIREMENTS ELUCIDATION AND THE NATURE OF PRELIMINARY SHIP DESIGN , 2012 .

[11]  Adam M. Ross,et al.  Responsive systems comparison method: Dynamic insights into designing a satellite radar system , 2009 .

[12]  David Chapman,et al.  An Environmental Decision Framework Applied to Marine Engine Control Technologies , 2006, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association.

[13]  Dj Andrews.  Marine Design – Requirement Elucidation rather than Requirement Engineering , 2003 .

[14]  T. McDonald.  A Library Based Approach for Exploring Style in Preliminary Ship Design , 2010 .

[15]  Adam M. Ross,et al.  11.1.1 Using Natural Value-Centric Time Scales for Conceptualizing System Timelines through Epoch-Era Analysis , 2008 .

[16]  Adam M. Ross,et al.  Addressing Complexity Aspects in Conceptual Ship Design - A Systems Engineering Approach , 2012 .

[17]  John S. Gero,et al.  Knowledge-Based Design Systems , 1989 .

[18]  Hugh McManus,et al.  A framework for understanding uncertainty and its mitigation and exploitation in complex systems , 2006, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[19]  James G. March,et al.  A primer on decision making : how decisions happen , 1994 .

[20]  Howard Eisner.  Managing Complex Systems: Thinking outside the Box , 2005 .

[21]  Kjetil Fagerholt,et al.  Planning vessel air emission regulations compliance under uncertainty , 2013 .

[22]  Dj Andrews,et al.  The impact of simulation on preliminary ship design , 2009 .

[23]  Ehsan Mesbahi,et al.  Methodology for sustainability analysis of ships , 2008 .

[24]  R. McClamrock.  Existential Cognition: Computational Minds in the World , 1995 .

[25]  Adam M. Ross,et al.  Five aspects of engineering complex systems emerging constructs and methods , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Systems Conference.

[26]  Adam M. Ross,et al.  Assessing air emissions for uncertain life-cycle scenarios via responsive systems comparison method , 2015 .

[27]  Gene Kliewer.  Hurricane lessons bringh new rules, floating system designs : Change, innovation create hybrid offshore structures , 2007 .

[28]  A. Hagen.  The extension of system boundaries in ship design , 2010 .

[29]  Jack Devanney.  The Impact of EEDI on VLCC Design and CO2 Emissions , 2013 .

[30]  P Nelson,et al.  Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships , 1999 .

[31]  Farrokh Mistree,et al.  DECISION-BASED DESIGN - A CONTEMPORARY PARADIGM FOR SHIP DESIGN , 1990 .

[32]  Kjetil Fagerholt,et al.  A Ship Design and Deployment Model for Non-Cargo Vessels Using Contract Scenarios , 2011 .

[33]  Stian Erichsen.  Management of marine design , 1989 .

[34]  David J. Singer,et al.  What Is Set-Based Design? , 2009 .

[35]  Kjetil Fagerholt,et al.  Optimized selection of air emission controls for vessels , 2012 .

[36]  S. Haver.  FREAK WAVE EVENT AT DRAUPNER JACKET JANUAR 1 1995 , 2004 .

[37]  A. N. Kolmogorov.  Combinatorial foundations of information theory and the calculus of probabilities , 1983 .

[38]  P. Thompson.  How Much Did the Liberty Shipbuilders Learn? New Evidence for an Old Case Study , 2001, Journal of Political Economy.

[39]  I L Buxton,et al.  Engineering economics and ship design , 1971 .

[40]  Volker Bertram,et al.  Quantifying external costs of emissions due to ship operation , 2004 .

[41]  David J. Singer,et al.  Impacts of Fuzzy Logic Modeling for Constraints Optimization , 2010 .

[42]  HERBERT A. SIMON,et al.  The Architecture of Complexity , 1991 .

[43]  Steve Caplin,et al.  Principles Of Design , 2011 .

[44]  Adam M. Ross,et al.  Shaping Socio-technical System Innovation Strategies using a Five Aspects Taxonomy , 2010 .

[45]  Dj Andrews,et al.  A comprehensive methodology for the design of ships (and other complex systems) , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[46]  D.H. Rhodes,et al.  Architecting Systems for Value Robustness: Research Motivations and Progress , 2008, 2008 2nd Annual IEEE Systems Conference.

[47]  Ø. Endresen,et al.  Cost-effectiveness assessment of CO2 reducing measures in shipping , 2009 .

[48]  N. Suh,et al.  Complex Engineered Systems , 2006 .

[49]  Stein Ove Erikstad.  Efficient Exploitation of Existing Corporate Knowledge in Conceptual Ship Design , 2007 .

[50]  D. J. Andrews,et al.  Art and science in the design of physically large and complex systems , 2012, Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[51]  Adam M. Ross,et al.  Handling Complexity Aspects in Conceptual Ship Design , 2012 .

[52]  Adam M. Ross,et al.  HANDLING TEMPORAL COMPLEXITY IN THE DESIGN OF NON-TRANSPORT SHIPS USING EPOCH-ERA ANALYSIS , 2012 .

[53]  Dracos Vassalos,et al.  Risk evaluation for RoPax vessels , 2008 .

[54]  Christopher L. Magee,et al.  Complex System Classification , 2004 .

[55]  Robert Ian Whitfield,et al.  The application of multi-objective robust design methods in ship design , 1999 .

[56]  V. Bertram,et al.  Simulation-based ship design , 2005, Europe Oceans 2005.

[57]  Øyvind Vestbøstad,et al.  System Based Ship Design for Offshore Vessels , 2011 .

[58]  Dj Andrews.  Simulation and the design building block approach in the design of ships and other complex systems , 2006, Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[59]  Harry Benford.  ON THE RATIONAL SELECTION OF SHIP SIZE , 1967 .

[60]  Anders Ulfvarson,et al.  Environmental Improvements in Ship Design by the Use of Scoring Functions , 2006 .

[61]  H. Schneekluth,et al.  Ship Design for Efficiency and Economy , 1987 .

[62]  A. Tversky,et al.  Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty , 1992 .

[63]  Dj Andrews.  PRELIMINARY WARSHIP DESIGN , 1994 .

[64]  Dj Andrews.  A creative approach to ship architecture , 2003 .

[65]  Philippe Rigo,et al.  Ship complexity assessment at the concept design stage , 2011 .

[66]  J B Caldwell,et al.  DESIGN FOR PRODUCTION , 1978 .

[67]  Hans Hopman,et al.  Challenges in computer applications for ship and floating structure design and analysis , 2012, Comput. Aided Des..

[68]  Erez Lieberman Aiden,et al.  Quantitative Analysis of Culture Using Millions of Digitized Books , 2010, Science.

[69]  W. E. Eder,et al.  Theory of Technical Systems: A Total Concept Theory for Engineering Design , 1988 .

[70]  P Gualeni,et al.  Naval Architecture and System Engineering: A Deal for Naval Ship Design Evolution , 2009 .

[71]  Timothy P. Kelliher,et al.  Engineering Complex Systems With Models and Objects , 1997 .

[72]  Lui Sha,et al.  Using Simplicity to Control Complexity , 2001, IEEE Softw..

[73]  J. March.  Bounded rationality, ambiguity, and the engineering of choice , 1978 .

[74]  Alan Brown,et al.  Assessing the impact of management and organizational factors on the risk of tanker grounding , 1998 .

[75]  Jean-David Caprace,et al.  Cost Effectiveness and Complexity Assessment in Ship Design within a Concurrent Engineering and "Design for X" Framework , 2010 .

[76]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  The Structure of Ill Structured Problems , 1973, Artif. Intell..