International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering

The Society of Naval Architects of Korea (대한조선학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Exploring market uncertainty in early ship design

  • Zwaginga, Jesper (Department of Maritime and Transport Technology, Delft University of Technology) ;
  • Stroo, Ko (Ulstein Design and Solutions BV) ;
  • Kana, Austin (Department of Maritime and Transport Technology, Delft University of Technology)
  • Received : 2020.09.23
  • Accepted : 2021.04.12
  • Published : 2021.11.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

To decrease Europe's harmful emissions, the European Union aims to substantially increase its offshore wind energy capacity. To further develop offshore wind energy, investment in ever-larger construction vessels is necessary. However, this market is characterised by seemingly unpredictable growth of market demand, turbine capacity and distance from shore. Currently it is difficult to deal with such market uncertainty within the ship design process. This research aims to develop a method that is able to deal with market uncertainty in early ship design by increasing knowledge when design freedom is still high. The method uses uncertainty modelling prior to the requirement definition stage by performing global research into the market, and during the concept design stage by iteratively co-evolving the vessel design and business case in parallel. The method consists of three parts; simulating an expected market from data, modelling multiple vessel designs, and an uncertainty model that evaluates the performance of the vessels in the market. The case study into offshore wind foundation installation vessels showed that the method can provide valuable insight into the effect of ship parameters like main dimensions, crane size and ship speed on the performance in an uncertain market. These results were used to create a value robust design, which is capable of handling uncertainty without changes to the vessel. The developed method thus provides a way to deal with market uncertainty in the early ship design process.

Keywords

References

  1. IEA, 2019. Offshore Wind Outlook.
  2. Allen, M., Allen, M., Cumming, D., Johan, S., 2019. Comparative capitalisms and energy transitions: renewable energy in the European Union. Br. J. Manag. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12352.
  3. Andrews, D., 1998. A comprehensive methodology for the design of ships (and other complex systems). Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A: Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 454, 187-211. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1998.0154
  4. Andrews, D., 2003. Marine design-requirement elucidation rather than requirement engineering. Proceedings of the 8th International Maritime Design Conference (IMDC).
  5. Andrews, D., Kana, A., Hopman, J., Romanoff, J., 2018. State of the art report on design methodology. In: Marine Design XIII, vol. 1. CRC Press, pp. 3-16.
  6. Birk, L., 2019. Fundamentals of Ship Hydrodynamics: Fluid Mechanics, Ship Resistance and Propulsion. John Wiley & Sons.
  7. Brett, P., Gaspar, H., Ebrahimi, A., Garcia, J., 2018. Disruptive market conditions require new direction for vessel design practices and tools application. In: Marine Design XIII, vol. 1. CRC Press, pp. 31-47.
  8. Bulten, N., Suijkerbuijk, R., 2013. Full scale thruster performance and load determination based on numerical simulations. In: International Symposium on Marine Propellers Smp'13. Launceston, Tasmania, Australia.
  9. Burton, T., Jenkins, N., Sharpe, D., Bossanyi, E., 2011. Wind Energy Handbook. John Wiley & Sons.
  10. COffshore, 2019. Wind farm data. Data retrieved from 4C Offshore Ltd. www.4coffshore.com/subscribers/dashboard/owf.
  11. Dedecca, J.G., Hakvoort, R.A., Ortt, J.R., 2016. Market strategies for offshore wind in europe: a development and diffusion perspective. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 66, 286-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.08.007
  12. Erikstad, S.O., Rehn, C.F., 2015. Handling uncertainty in marine systems design-state-of-the-art and need for research. In: 12th International Marine Design Conference 2015 Proceedings, pp. 324-342.
  13. SIF-group, 2019. Skybox: Slip Joint Verbinding Voor Secundair Staal. Information Retreived from Sif-Group. https://sif-group.com/nl/nieuws/project-updates/735-skybox-slip-joint-verbinding-voor-secundair-staalU.
  14. Garcia, J., 2020. Effectiveness in Decision-Making in Ship Design under Uncertainty. Norwegian University of Science and Technology. Ph.D. thesis.
  15. Garrad, A., Matthies, H., Aktiengesellschaft, G.L., 1993. Study of Offshore Wind Energy in the Ec: Joule 1 (Jour 0072).. Offshore Wind Energy Potential in the EC. V. 1. Germanischer Lloyd. https://books.google.nl/books?id=pCegmAEACAAJ.
  16. Gaspar, H.M., Erikstad, S.O., Ross, A.M., 2012. Handling temporal complexity in the design of non-transport ships using epoch-era analysis. Trans. R. Inst. Naval Architects Part A: Int. J. Marit. Eng. 154, 109-120.
  17. Gautheir, T.D., 2001. Detecting trends using spearman's rank correlation coefficient. Environ. Forensics 2, 359-362. https://doi.org/10.1006/enfo.2001.0061
  18. Harenberg, P., 2016. Developing the Optimal Design Solution for Jumbo to Increase the Offshore Stability of a Heavy Crane Lift Vessel. Delft University of Technology, Delft. Master's thesis.
  19. Hatchuel, A., Weil, B., 2009. Ck design theory: an advanced formulation. Res. Eng. Des. 19, 181-192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-008-0043-4
  20. Holtrop, J., 1984. A statistical re-analysis of resistance and propulsion data. Int. Shipbuild. Prog. 272-276. https://doi.org/10.3233/isp-1976-2326402
  21. Holtrop, J., Mennen, G., 1982. An approximate power prediction method. International Shipbuilding Progress 7, 166-170. https://doi.org/10.3233/ISP-1982-2933501
  22. API, 2000. Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing and Constructing Fixed Offshore Platforms-Working Stress Design, twenty-first ed. Washington DC.
  23. IMO, I.M.O., 1988. International Convention on Load Lines, as Amended by the Protocol of 1988.
  24. Jensen, G., 1994. Moderne schiffslinien handbuch der werften. Schiffahrts Verlag Hansa 22, 93.
  25. Kana, A., Shields, C., Singer, D., 2016. Why Is Naval Design Decision-Making So Difficult? Warship 2016: Advanced Technologies in Naval Design. Construction, & Operation, Bath, UK.
  26. Karlsen, A., Pivano, L., Ruth, E., 2016. Dnv gl dp capability-a new standard for assessment of the station-keeping capability of dp vessels. In: Proceedings of Marine Technology Society (MTS) DP Conference, pp. 1-15. Houston, USA.
  27. Katsoulis, P., 1975. Optimising block coefficient by an exponential formula. Shipp. World Shipbuild. 168, 217-219.
  28. Klein Woud, H.J., Stapersma, D., 2003. Design of Propulsion and Electric Power Generations Systems. Published by IMarEST, The Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology, ISBN 1-902536-47-9.
  29. Knijn, R.J., Boon, T.W., Heessen, H.J., Hislop, J.R., 1993. Atlas of north sea fishes. ICES Coop. Res. Rep. 194, 268.
  30. Kristensen, H.O., Lutzen, M., 2012. Prediction of resistance and propulsion power of ships. Clean Shipping Curr. 1, 1-52.
  31. McKenney, T.A., 2013. An Early-Stage Set-Based Design Reduction Decision Support Framework Utilizing Design Space Mapping and a Graph Theoretic Markov Decision Process Formulation. Ph.D. thesis. University of Michigan.
  32. McNamee, P., Celona, J., 1990. Decision Analysis with Supertree. Scientific Press.
  33. Nam, T., Mavris, D., 2008. Multi-stage reliability-based design optimization for aerospace system conceptual design. In: 49th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, p. 2073.
  34. Negro, V., Lopez-Gutierrez, J.S., Esteban, M.D., Alberdi, P., Imaz, M., Serraclara, J.M., 2017. Monopiles in offshore wind: preliminary estimate of main dimensions. Ocean Eng. 133, 253-261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2017.02.011
  35. Niese, N.D., Kana, A.A., Singer, D.J., 2015. Ship design evaluation subject to carbon emission policymaking using a markov decision process framework. Ocean Eng. 106, 371-385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.06.042
  36. Oosterveld, M.W.C., van Oossanen, P., 1975. Further computer-analyzed data of the wageningen b-screw series. Int. Shipbuild. Prog. 22, 251-262. https://doi.org/10.3233/isp-1975-2225102
  37. Papanikolaou, A., 2014. Ship Design: Methodologies of Preliminary Design. Springer.
  38. Pedersen, K., Emblemsvag, J., Bailey, R., Allen, J.K., Mistree, F., 2000. Validating design methods and research: the validation square. In: ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences, pp. 1-12.
  39. Pettersen, S.S., Rehn, C.F., Garcia, J.J., Erikstad, S.O., Brett, P.O., Asbjornslett, B.E., Ross, A.M., Rhodes, D.H., 2018. Ill-structured commercial ship design problems: the responsive system comparison method on an offshore vessel case. J. Ship Prod. Des. 34, 72-83. https://doi.org/10.5957/jspd.170012
  40. Pruyn, J., 2017. Are the new fuel-efficient bulkers a threat to the old fleet? Maritime Business Review 2 (3), 224-246. https://doi.org/10.1108/mabr-01-2017-0002
  41. Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S., Chan, K.S., 1999. A quantitative model-independent method for global sensitivity analysis of model output. Technometrics 41, 39-56. https://doi.org/10.1080/00401706.1999.10485594
  42. Sheskin, T.J., 2016. Markov Chains and Decision Processes for Engineers and Managers. CRC Press.
  43. Shields, C.P., Singer, D.J., 2017. Naval design, knowledge-based complexity, and emergent design failures. Nav. Eng. J. 129, 75-86.
  44. Simon, H.A., 1977. The structure of ill-structured problems. In: Models of Discovery. Springer, pp. 304-325.
  45. Stopford, M., 2009. Maritime economics 3e. Routledge.
  46. Thissen, W., Agusdinata, D., 2008. Handling Deep Uncertainties in Impact Assessment. IAIA08-The Art and Science of Impact Assessment.
  47. van Bruinessen, T., 2016. Towards Controlled Innovation of Complex Objects. A Sociotechnical Approach to Describing Ship Design. Delft University of Technology. Ph.D. thesis.
  48. Vieira, M., Snyder, B., Henriques, E., Reis, L., 2019. European offshore wind capital cost trends up to 2020. Energy Pol. 129, 1364-1371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.03.036
  49. Ye, M., Hill, M., 2017. Global sensitivity analysis for uncertain parameters, models, and scenarios. In: Sensitivity Analysis in Earth Observation Modelling. Elsevier, pp. 177-210.
  50. Zhang, J., Fowai, I., Sun, K., 2016. A glance at offshore wind turbine foundation structures. Brodogradnja 67, 101-113. https://doi.org/10.21278/brod67207.