This paper discusses findings and challenges faced when implementing system modelling as a part of MBSE in a naval ship design process. The design, production, and life-cycle support of complex military vessels is accompanied by large sets of requirements. These sets are created, maintained, and processed by various stakeholders and face an increase in interrelations due to extended automation and electrification of ships. These challenges are addressed by advancing the design process to a model-based system engineering (MBSE) process. The current V-model based design process serves as the framework within which MBSE is pursued. MBSE greatly improves traceability of requirements, consistency between system solutions and requirements, and product verification. Concretely, a MBSE implementation into the current design practice based on the Arcadia methodology and the Capella tooling is pursued. The main advantages are a well published methodology, wider application within the supply chain, and a community supported, open-source toolset. The initial results include a successful integration into the existing design process. Hereby both the connection with the design disciplines such mechanical design, automation, and electrical design, and connection with the design aspect analysis such as vulnerability, safety, and ILS has been established. Within this transition the usual challenges were faced, including but not limited to setting up a new team, establishing the work processes, and the culture change that comes along with MBSE. These were addressed by training, information, and a robust work process. However various challenges remain, especially with the support functionality that results from selecting specific physical solutions. The developed work process starts with evaluating the desired missions that the design should be able to execute. For each of these missions the required capabilities are modelled. Subsequently, for all capabilities a functional chain is modelled which links all required functions and their dependencies. However not all capabilities are directly linked to the missions as some capabilities are required to support other capabilities and often these support capabilities are only identified when specific physical solutions are chosen. Therefore, to develop a consistent set of capabilities, the design needs to be developed simultaneously at both capabilities level and the physical solution. This simultaneous development causes an iterative process which is insufficiently supported in the tools and a challenging control process as the design develops in a non-linear fashion. Nevertheless, a method was found to circumvent some of these challenges by pre-allocating certain support capabilities and their functionality in a logical distribution network. This allows for a more gradual development and thereby overcomes aforementioned challenges. But it predefines part of the physical solution already in the capability design. Al
{"title":"Support Functionality in System Modelling: The Chicken or the Egg","authors":"K. Droste, Marijn Hage","doi":"10.5957/imdc-2022-272","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5957/imdc-2022-272","url":null,"abstract":"This paper discusses findings and challenges faced when implementing system modelling as a part of MBSE in a naval ship design process. The design, production, and life-cycle support of complex military vessels is accompanied by large sets of requirements. These sets are created, maintained, and processed by various stakeholders and face an increase in interrelations due to extended automation and electrification of ships. These challenges are addressed by advancing the design process to a model-based system engineering (MBSE) process. The current V-model based design process serves as the framework within which MBSE is pursued.\u0000 MBSE greatly improves traceability of requirements, consistency between system solutions and requirements, and product verification. Concretely, a MBSE implementation into the current design practice based on the Arcadia methodology and the Capella tooling is pursued. The main advantages are a well published methodology, wider application within the supply chain, and a community supported, open-source toolset.\u0000 The initial results include a successful integration into the existing design process. Hereby both the connection with the design disciplines such mechanical design, automation, and electrical design, and connection with the design aspect analysis such as vulnerability, safety, and ILS has been established. Within this transition the usual challenges were faced, including but not limited to setting up a new team, establishing the work processes, and the culture change that comes along with MBSE. These were addressed by training, information, and a robust work process.\u0000 However various challenges remain, especially with the support functionality that results from selecting specific physical solutions. The developed work process starts with evaluating the desired missions that the design should be able to execute. For each of these missions the required capabilities are modelled. Subsequently, for all capabilities a functional chain is modelled which links all required functions and their dependencies. However not all capabilities are directly linked to the missions as some capabilities are required to support other capabilities and often these support capabilities are only identified when specific physical solutions are chosen. Therefore, to develop a consistent set of capabilities, the design needs to be developed simultaneously at both capabilities level and the physical solution. This simultaneous development causes an iterative process which is insufficiently supported in the tools and a challenging control process as the design develops in a non-linear fashion. Nevertheless, a method was found to circumvent some of these challenges by pre-allocating certain support capabilities and their functionality in a logical distribution network. This allows for a more gradual development and thereby overcomes aforementioned challenges. But it predefines part of the physical solution already in the capability design. Al","PeriodicalId":314110,"journal":{"name":"Day 2 Mon, June 27, 2022","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126672384","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Astrid V. Solheim, P. O. Brett, Jose Jorge Garcia Agis, S. O. Erikstad, B. Asbjørnslett
Designing new ships for new purposes, in this case deep seabed mining, without using proper selected reference vessels, if available, is challenging. In this paper, we show that the vessel features of a future deep seabed mining vessel have many similarities to offshore vessels in the deep-sea offshore oil and gas industry and can be used as such. We evaluate and discuss the technical, operational, and commercial performance of three possible vessel design solutions developed based on such a case ship.
{"title":"Technology Transfer in Novel Ship Design: A Deep Seabed Mining Study","authors":"Astrid V. Solheim, P. O. Brett, Jose Jorge Garcia Agis, S. O. Erikstad, B. Asbjørnslett","doi":"10.5957/imdc-2022-240","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5957/imdc-2022-240","url":null,"abstract":"Designing new ships for new purposes, in this case deep seabed mining, without using proper selected reference vessels, if available, is challenging. In this paper, we show that the vessel features of a future deep seabed mining vessel have many similarities to offshore vessels in the deep-sea offshore oil and gas industry and can be used as such. We evaluate and discuss the technical, operational, and commercial performance of three possible vessel design solutions developed based on such a case ship.","PeriodicalId":314110,"journal":{"name":"Day 2 Mon, June 27, 2022","volume":"393 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115992824","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：