A new rational-based optimal design strategy of ship structure based on multi-level analysis and super-element modeling method

Abstract

A new multi-level analysis method of introducing the super-element modeling method, derived from the multi-level analysis method first proposed by O. F. Hughes, has been proposed in this paper to solve the problem of high time cost in adopting a rational-based optimal design method for ship structural design. Furthermore, the method was verified by its effective application in optimization of the mid-ship section of a container ship. A full 3-D FEM model of a ship, suffering static and quasi-static loads, was used as the analyzing object for evaluating the structural performance of the mid-ship module, including static strength and buckling performance. Research results reveal that this new method could substantially reduce the computational cost of the rational-based optimization problem without decreasing its accuracy, which increases the feasibility and economic efficiency of using a rational-based optimal design method in ship structural design.

Keywords

rational-based optimal design method (RBODM) / multi-level analysis / super-element / ship module / genetic algorithm

References

[1] Andric J., Zanic V. The global structural response model for multi-deck ships in concept design phase. Ocean Engineering, 2010, 37: 688-704

[2] CCS (2005). Guidelines for direct strength analysis of container ship. Guidance Notes, GD 05-2005.

[3] Cui Weicheng, Wu Yousheng (2002). Towards a more rational first-principle-based strength assessment system for ship structures. Proc. 1st Int. ASRANET Colloquium, Glasgow, UK, 8–10.

[4] Desai K.M., Survase S.A., Saudagar P.S., Lele S.S., Singhal R.S. Comparison of artificial neural network (ANN) and response surface methodology (RSM) in fermentation media optimization: case study of fermentative production of scleroglucan. Biochemical Engineering Journal, 2008, 41: 266-273

[5] Goldberg E.G. Genetic algorithms in search, optimization, and machine learning, 1989, Boston: Addison-wesley

[6] Hughes O.F. Ship structural design: a rationally-based, computer-aided, optimization approach, 1983, New York: Wiley

[7] Hughes O.F., Mistree F., Žanić V. A practical method for the rational design of ship structures. Journal of Ship Research, 1980, 24: 101-113

[8] ISSC (2006). Quasi-static response. Proceedings of the 16th International Ship and Offshore Structures Congress, Southampton, UK.

[9] Lewis E.V. Load criteria for ship structural design, 1973, Washington, USA: Ship Structure Committee

[10] Martin J.D., Simpson T.W. On the use of Kriging models to approximate deterministic computer models. AIAA J, 2005, 43(4): 853-863

[11] Naar H., Varsta P., Kujala P. A theory of coupled beams for strength assessment of passenger ships. Marine Structures, 2004, 17: 590-611

[12] Nobukawa H., Zhou G., Kitamura M., Kobayashi S. Structural optimization for small container ship with large hatch opening. J Soc Naval Arch West Japan, 1995, 90: 181-197

[13] Rahman M.K. Multilevel optimization applied to hull girder design using three panel forms. Structural Optimization, 1994, 7: 126-137

[14] Rigo P. A module-oriented tool for optimum design of stiffened structures-Part I. Marine Structures, 2001, 14: 611-629

[15] Rigo P., Fleury C. Scantling optimization based on convex linearizations and a dual approach-Part II. Marine Structures, 2001, 14: 631-649

[16] Satish Kumar Y.V., Mukhopadhyay M. Finite element analysis of ship structures using a new stiffened plate element. Applied Ocean Research, 2000, 22: 361-374

[17] Simpson T.W., Mauery T.M., Korte J.J., Mistree F. Kriging models for global approximation in simulation-based multidisciplinary design optimization. AIAA J, 2001, 39(12): 2233-2241

[18] Simpson T.W., Poplinski J.D., Koch P.N., Allen J.K. Meta models for computer-based engineering design: survey and recommendations. Engineering with Computers, 2001, 17: 129-150

[19] Zanic V., Jancijev T., Andric J. Case studies in structural design and optimization. Journal of Naval Architecture and Shipbuilding Industry, 1999, 47(3): 255-265