Tools for Multi-Objective and Multi-Disciplinary Optimization in Naval Ship Design

Abstract

This thesis focuses on practical and quantitative methods for measuring effectiveness in naval ship design. An Overall Measure of Effectiveness (OMOE) model or function is an essential prerequisite for optimization and design trade-off. This effectiveness can be limited to individual ship missions or extend to missions within a task group or larger context. A method is presented that uses the Analytic Hierarchy Process combined with Multi-Attribute Value Theory to build an Overall Measure of Effectiveness and Overall Measure of Risk function to properly rank and approximately measure the relative mission effectiveness and risk of design alternatives, using trained expert opinion to replace complex analysis tools. A validation of this method is achieved through experimentation comparing ships ranked by the method with direct ranking of the ships through war gaming scenarios. The second part of this thesis presents a mathematical ship synthesis model to be used in early concept development stages of the ship design process. Tools to simplify and introduce greater accuracy are described and developed. Response Surface Models and Design of Experiments simplify and speed up the process. Finite element codes such as MAESTRO improve the accuracy of the ship synthesis models which in turn lower costs later in the design process. A case study of an Advanced Logistics Delivery Ship (ALDV) is performed to asses the use of RSM and DOE methods to minimize computation time when using high-fidelity codes early in the naval ship design process.