No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
AN SE BASED MARITIME VESSEL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK FOR CHANGEABLE PROPULSION SYSTEMS
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 June 2023
Abstract
Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from vessels is one of the greatest challenges the maritime industry is currently facing. International Maritime Organization has set the goal of reducing CO2 emissions from international shipping by at least 40% by 2030, compared to 2008. Emissions regulations are also leading to a progressive reduction of ships life span, together with a decrease in economic value. To cope with these challenges, the preferred strategy suggested by IMO for new vessels -Energy Efficiency Design Index- aims at increasing the energy efficiency over time by stimulating innovation and continuous development of technical elements. In this context, ship builders are indirectly led to develop vessels that will be “changeable” in terms of propulsion systems over time. This paper presents a conceptual framework to maritime vessels for propulsion system changeability, which integrates contributions from literature review with the knowledge of design thinking experts and precious insights of maritime industry professionals. The aim of this framework is support the integration of renewable fuel sources for vessel propulsion systems through an extended value approach, while improving propulsion efficiency over time.
Keywords
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Creative Commons
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.- Copyright
- The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Altenhofen, JA, Oyama, KF, Jacques, DR (2015) A methodology to determine the influence of requirements change to support system design. IIE Annu Conf Expo 2015 2181–2190Google Scholar
Beesemyer, JC, Ross, AM, Rhodes, DH (2012) An empirical investigation of system changes to frame links between design decisions and ilities. Procedia Comput Sci 8:31–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2012.01.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brahma, A, Wynn, DC, Isaksson, O (2022) Use of Margin to Absorb Variation in Design Specifications: An Analysis Using the Margin Value Method. Proc Des Soc 2:323–332. https://doi.org/10.1017/pds.2022.34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chhabra, JK, Parashar, A (2014) Prediction of changeability for object oriented classes and packages by mining change history. Can Conf Electr Comput Eng 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/CCECE.2014.6901146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colombo, EF, Cascini, G, De Weck, OL (2016) Classification of Change-Related Ilities Based on a Literature Review of Engineering Changes. J Integr Des Process Sci 20:1–21. https://doi.org/10.3233/jid-2016-0019Google Scholar
Eckert, C, Isaksson, O, Earl, C (2019) Design margins: a hidden issue in industry. Des Sci 5:1–24. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2019.7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fricke, E, Gebhard, B, Negele, H, Igenbergs, E (2000) Coping with Changes: Causes, Findings and Strategies. Syst Eng 3:169–179. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6858(2000)3:4<169::AID-SYS1>3.0.CO;2-W3.0.CO;2-W>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaspar, HM, Erikstad, SO, Ross, AM (2012) Handling temporal complexity in the design of non-transport ships using Epoch-Era Analysis. Trans. R. Inst. Nav. Archit. Part A Int. J. Marit. Eng.Google Scholar
Giffin, M, De Weck, OL, Bounova, G, Keller, R, Eckert, CM, Clarkson, PJ (2009) Change Propagation Analysis in Complex Technical Systems. J Mech Des 131:0810011–08100114. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3149847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, EJ, Evans, J (1959) Basic Design Concepts. J Am Soc Nav Eng 71:671–678. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-3584.1959.tb01836.xGoogle Scholar
Jarratt, TAW, Eckert, CM, Caldwell, NHM, Clarkson, PJ (2011) Engineering change: An overview and perspective on the literature. Res Eng Des 22:103–124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-010-0097-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mcmahon, CA (1994) Observations on Modes of Incremental Change in Design Design. J Eng Des 5. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544829408907883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McManus, H, Richards, MG, Ross, AM, Hastings, DE (2007) A Framework for Incorporating “ilities” in Tradespace Studies. Am Inst Aeronaut Astronaut 1–14. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2007-6100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mekdeci, B (2013) Managing the impact of change through survivability and pliability to achieve variable systems of systemsGoogle Scholar
Mekdeci, B, Ross, AM, Rhodes, DH, Hastings, DE (2015) Pliability and Viable Systems: Maintaining Value under Changing Conditions. IEEE Syst J 9:1173–1184. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSYST.2014.2314316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rehn, CF, Garcia Agis, JJ, Erikstad, SO, de Neufville, R (2018a) Versatility vs. retrofittability tradeoff in design of non-transport vessels. Ocean Eng.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rehn, CF, Pettersen, SS, Erikstad, SO, Asbjørnslett, BE (2018b) Investigating tradeoffs between performance, cost and flexibility for reconfigurable offshore ships. Ocean Eng.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rehn, CF, Pettersen, SS, Garcia, JJ, Brett, PO, Erikstad, SO, Asbjørnslett, BE, Ross, AM, Rhodes, DH (2019) Quantification of changeability level for engineering systems. Syst Eng 22:80–94. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, AM, Rhodes, DH (2008) Using attribute classes to uncover latent value during conceptual systems design. 2008 IEEE Int Syst Conf Proceedings, SysCon 2008 7–14. https://doi.org/10.1109/SYSTEMS.2008.4518981CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sahoo, PK (2021) Principles of Marine Vessel Design: Concepts and Design Fundamentals of Sea Going Vessels. World Scientific PublishingCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulz, AP, Fricke, E (1999) Incorporating Flexibility, Agility, Robustness, and Adaptability Within the Design of Integrated Systems - Key to Success? Design 1/17 pp. v:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/DASC.1999.863677Google Scholar
Sullivan, B, Rossi, M, Ramundo, L, Terzi, S (2019) Characteristics for the implementation of changeability in complex systems. In: XXIII Summer School Francesco Turco 2019. Brescia, Italy, pp 1–7Google Scholar
Sullivan, BP, Ansaloni, GMM, Bionda, A, Rossi, M (2022) A life cycle perspective to sustainable hydrogen powered maritime systems - functional and technical requirements. Int J Prod Lifecycle Manag 14:282–301. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijplm.2022.125822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sullivan, BP, Rossi, M, Terzi, S (2018) A Review of Changeability in Complex Engineering Systems. In: IFAC-PapersOnLine. Elsevier B.V., pp 1567–1572Google Scholar
Uckun, S, Mackey, R, Do, M, Zhou, R, Huang, E, Shah, JJ (2014) Measures of product design adaptability for changing requirements. Artif Intell Eng Des Anal Manuf AIEDAM 28:353–368. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060414000523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valerdi, R, Sullivan, BP (2020) Chapter 3 - Engineering systems integration, testing and validation. In: Handbook of Engineering Systems Design. Springer, p 27Google Scholar
Vossen, C, Kleppe, R, Randi, S (2013) Ship Design and System Integration. In: DMK 2013Google Scholar
You have
Access
Open access