Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Structural Design Optimization—Tools and Methodologies

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover A Holistic Approach to Ship Design

  • 1885 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter focuses on methodologies to perform ship structure optimization, decreasing steel weight and keeping the production cost at an acceptable level. Ship performance is always an important concern when a design is started, and should always be considered for new designs. This is in line with the evolution of ship classes and size. For this reason, several aspects are important to be taken into account within the optimization procedure, and therefore, multi-objective optimization is the common route. This chapter outlines actual trends in optimization methodologies, comments on the quality assessment of the obtained Pareto solutions and describes modern tools used in/by the maritime industry (with focus on the LBR-5, BESST and HOLISHIP projects). The importance of consideration of risk assessment in the structural design optimization procedure (e.g. of a ship collision with an offshore structure) is also elaborated with a highlight on the response surface method and its use in combination with optimization algorithms for ship and offshore structures in early design stages.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    By structural dimensioning of ship structure, we refer to the process of determining loads and loads combination on a structure, the material properties, scantling of structural components and their effects on structure, with the goal of ensuring a safe ship structure.

  2. 2.

    Classical scalar algorithms with random weighting coefficients are also used.

  3. 3.

    http://www.besst.it.

  4. 4.

    http://www.aveva.com.

  5. 5.

    https://www.ansys.com.

  6. 6.

    http://www.esteco.com.

  7. 7.

    https://www.veristar.com/portal/veristarinfo/detail/generalinfo/giRulesRegulations/bvRules/bvRules.

  8. 8.

    http://www.holiship.eu.

References

  • Arai M, Suzuki T, Shimizu T (2000) On the application of response surface methodology to the optimization of ship structural design. J Soc Naval Archit Jpn 2000(188):545–552. https://doi.org/10.2534/jjasnaoe1968.2000.188_545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayatfar A, Amrane A, Rigo Ph (2013) Towards a ship structural optimization methodology at early design stage. Int J Eng Res Dev 9(6):76–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Bela A, Le Sourne H, Buldgen L, Rigo Ph (2017) Ship collision analysis on offshore wind turbine monopile foundations. Mar Struct 51:220–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bosman PAN, Thierens D (2003) The balance between proximity and diversity in multiobjective evolutionary algorithms. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 7(2):174–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buldgen L, Le Sourne H, Pire T (2014) Extension of the super-elements method to the analysis of a jacket impacted by a ship. Mar Struct 38:44–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caprace J-D, Bair F, Rigo Ph (2010) Scantling multi-objective optimization of a LNG carrier. Mar Struct 23(3):288–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collette M, Bronsart R, Chen Y, Erikstad SO, Georgiev P, Giuglea V, Jeong HK, Lazakis I, Moro L, Sekulski Z, Sicchiero M, Toyoda M, Ventura M, Zanic V (2015) Design methods. In: GuedesSoares C, Garbatov Y (eds) Proceedings of the ISSC2015, 19th international ship and offshore structures congress, 7–10 Sept, Cascais, Portugal, vol 1, pp 459–518

    Google Scholar 

  • Cui J-J, Wang D-Y (2013) Application of knowledge-based engineering in ship structural design and optimization. Ocean Eng 72:124–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cui H, Turan O, Sayer P (2012) Learning-based ship design optimization approach. Comput Aided Des 44(3):186–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehlers S, Kujala P (2013) Cost optimization for ice-loaded structures, analysis and design of marine structures. In: Proceedings of the MARSTRUCT 2013, 4th international conference on marine structures 25–27th Mar, Espoo, Finland, pp 111–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Fu S-Y, Huang H-Y, Lin Z-X (2012) Collaborative optimization of container ship on static and dynamic responses. Procedia Eng 31:613–621

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorshy H, Chu X, Gao L, Li P (2009) An approach combined response surface method and particle swarm optimization to ship multidisciplinary design and optimization. In: 2009 IEEE international conference on industrial engineering and engineering management. https://doi.org/10.1109/ieem.2009.5373175

  • Hansen MP, Jaszkiewicz A (1998) Evaluating the quality of approximations of the non-dominated set. IMM Technical Report IMM-REP-1998-7, Lyngby, Institute of Mathematical Modeling, Technical University of Denmark

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes EJ (2003) Multiple single objective sampling. In: Proceeding of the 2003 congress on evolutionary computation, pp 2678–2684

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes EJ (2005) Evolutionary many-objective optimization: many once or one many? In: Proceedings of the 2005 congress on evolutionary computation, pp 222–227

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchinson KW, Sen P, Buxton IL, Hills W (1998) Multiple criteria design optimization of Ro-Ro passenger ferries with consideration of recently proposed probabilistic stability standards. In: Proceedings of the PRADS 1998, seventh international symposium on practical design of ships and mobile, The Netherlands, 20–25 Sept, pp 303–312

    Google Scholar 

  • Jang CD, Shin SH (1997) A study on the optimal structural design for oil tankers using multi objective optimization. In: Proceedings of the international marine design conference IMDC, Newcastle, United Kingdom, vol 1, pp 217–231

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaszkiewicz A (2004) On the computational efficiency of multiple objective metaheuristics: the Knapsack Problem case study. Eur J Oper Res 158:418–433

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Jelovica J, Klanac A (2009) Multi-objective optimization of ship structures: using quided search vs. conventional concurrent optimization. In: Proceedings of the MARSTRUCT, 2nd international conference on marine structures, Lisboa, 16–18 Mar, London, UK, Taylor & Francis Group, pp 447–457

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones N (1997) Structural impact. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitamura M, Nobukawa H, Yang F (2000) Application of a genetic algorithm to the optimal structural design of a ship’s engine room taking dynamic constraints into consideration. J Mar Sci Technol 5(3):131–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klanac A, Kujala P (2004) Optimal design of steel sandwich panel applications in ships. In: Proceedings of the PRADS 2004, 9th symposium on practical design of ships and other floating structures, Lubeck-Travemuende, Germany, 12–17 Sept, vol 2, pp 907–914

    Google Scholar 

  • Klanac A, Jelovica J (2007) Vectorization in the structural optimization of a fast ferry. Brodogradnja-Shipbuilding 58(1):11–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Klanac A, Niemeläinen M, Jelovica J, Remes H, Domagallo S (2008) Structural omni-optimization of a tanker. In: Proceedings of the COMPIT’2008, 7th international conference on computer applications and information technology in the maritime industries, Bedford Hotel, Liege, Belgium, 21–23 Apr, pp 537–550

    Google Scholar 

  • Klanac A, Ehlers S, Jelovica J (2009) Optimization of crashworthy marine structures. Mar Struct 22:670–690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knowles JD, Corne DW (2002) On metrics for comparing nondominated sets. In: Proceedings of the 2002 congress on evolutionary computation conference, pp 711–716

    Google Scholar 

  • Kong YM, Choi SH, Song JD, Yang BS, Choi BK (2006) Development of the Rsm-based hybrid evolutionary algorithm for low vibration of ship structure. In: Mathew J, Kennedy J, Ma L, Tan A, Anderson D (eds) Engineering asset management. Springer, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Le Sourne H, Barrera A, Maliakel JB (2015) Numerical crashworthiness analysis of an offshore wind turbine jacket impacted by a ship. J Mar Sci Technol 23(5):694–704

    Google Scholar 

  • Le Sourne H, Pire T, Hsieh JR, Rigo Ph (2016) New analytical developments to study local and global deformations of an offshore wind turbine jacket impacted by a ship. In: Proceedings of the ICCGS. University of Ulsan, Korea

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee J-C, Shin S-C, Kim S-Y (2015) An optimal design of wind turbine and ship structure based on neuro-response surface method. Int J Naval Archit Ocean Eng 5(7):750–769. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijnaoe-2015-0053

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu Y, Colette MD (2015) Efficient optimization framework for robust and reliable structural design considering interval uncertainty. In: Proceedings of the MARSTRUCT 2015, 5th international conference on marine structures, Southampton, UK, 25–27 Mar, pp 555–563

    Google Scholar 

  • Moe J, Lund S (1968) Cost and weight minimization of structures with special emphasis on longitudinal strength members of tankers. Trans R Inst Naval Archit (RINA) 110(1):43–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Na S-S, Karr DG (2016) Development of Pareto strategy multi-objective function method for the optimum design of ship structures. Int J Naval Archit Ocean Eng 8:602–614

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okada T, Neki I (1992) Utilization of genetic algorithm for optimizing the design of ship hull structure. J Soc Naval Archit Jpn 171:71–83

    Google Scholar 

  • Paik JK, Thayamballi AK (2003) A concise introduction to the idealized structural unit method for nonlinear analysis of large plated structures and its application. Thin-Walled Struct 41:329–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pareto V (1896) Cours D’Economie Politique, vol 1. Lausanne, F. Rouge (ed)

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons MG, Scott RL (2004) Formulation of multicriterion design optimization problems for solution with scalar numerical methods. J Ship Res 48(1):61–76

    Google Scholar 

  • Pedersen RA, Molnes DA, Stokkeland LS (2014) Structural optimization for ice-strengthened vessels. In: Proceedings of the MARTECH 2014, 2nd international conference on maritime technology and engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, 15–17 Oct, pp 449–454

    Google Scholar 

  • Pire T, Le Sourne H, Echeverry S, Rigo Ph (2017) Analytical formulations to assess the energy dissipated at the base of an offshore wind turbine jacket impacted by a ship. Mar Struct 59:192–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Purshouse RC, Fleming PJ (2003) Evolutionary many-objective optimization: an exploratory analysis. In: Proceedings of the 2003 congress on evolutionary computation, pp 2066–2073

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahman MK (1992) Structural design of a midship Cargo hold: rule-based and rational procedures. In: Proceedings of the PRADS’92, 5th international symposium on the practical design of ships and mobile units, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, May, pp 966–980

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahman MK, Caldwell JB (1995) Ship structures: improvement by rational design optimization. Int Shipbuilding Prog 429:61–102

    Google Scholar 

  • Richir T, Caprace J-D, Losseau N, Bay M, Parsons MG, Patay S, Rigo P (2007) Multicriterion scantling optimization of the midship section of a passenger vessel considering IACS requirements. In: Proceedings of the 10th international symposium on practical design of ships and other floating structures (PRADS), October, Houston, Texas, USA, vol 1, pp 339–345

    Google Scholar 

  • Rigo Ph, Fleury C (2001) Scantling optimization based on convex linearizations and a dual approach—Part II. Mar Struct 14:631–649

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rigo Ph (2001a) A module-oriented tool for optimum design of stiffened structures—part I. Mar Struct 14:611–629

    Google Scholar 

  • Rigo Ph (2001b) Least-cost structural optimization oriented preliminary design. J Ship Prod 17(4):202–215

    Google Scholar 

  • Rigo Ph (2003) An integrated software for scantling optimization and least production cost. Schiffstechnik, Bd. 50/Ship Technology Research, vol 50, pp 126–141

    Google Scholar 

  • Rigo Ph, Caprace J-D (2011) Optimization of ship structures. In: Proceedings of the MARTECH 2011, 1st international conference on maritime technology and engineering, 11–12 May, Lisbon, Portugal, pp 925–944

    Google Scholar 

  • Rigo Ph, Bayatfar A, Buldgen L, Pire T, Echeverry S, Caprace J-D (2017) Optimization of ship and offshore structures and effective waterway infrastructures to support the global economic growth of a country/region. Ship Sci Technol 11:9–27. https://doi.org/10.25043/19098642.155

  • Sayin S (2000) Measuring the quality of discrete representations of efficient sets in multiple objective mathematical programming. Math Program Ser A 87:543–560

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Sekulski Z (2010) Multi-objective topology and size optimization of high speed vehicle-passenger catamaran structure by genetic algorithm. Mar Struct 23(4):405–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sekulski Z (2014) Ship hull structural multiobjective optimization by evolutionary algorithm. J Ship Res 58(2):45–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shin SH, Song HC, Jang CD (2006) Optimum structural design of tankers using multi-objective optimization technique. Ships Offshore Struct 1(3):213–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soreide T, Amdahl J, Eberg E, Homas T, Hellan O (1993) USFOS: a computer program for progressive collapse analysis of steel offshore structures. SINTEF

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone K, McNatt T (2017) Ship hull structural scantling optimization. In: Proceedings of the MARSTRUCT 2017, 6th international conference on marine structures, progress in the analysis and design of marine structures, 8–10 May, Lisbon, Portugal

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang JM, Hwang CN (2002) Optimization of corrugated bulkhead forms by genetic algorithm. J Mar Sci Technol 10(2):146–153

    Google Scholar 

  • Zanic V, Preberg P (2004) Primary response assessment method for concept design of monotonous thin-walled structures. In: Proceedings of the AED 2004, 4th international conference on advanced engineering design, Glasgow, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Zanic V, Rogulij A, Jancijev T, Bralić S, Hozmec J (2002) Methodology for evaluation of ship structural safety. In: Proceedings of the IMAM 2002, 10th international congress of international maritime association of mediterranean, Crete, Greece, 13–17 May

    Google Scholar 

  • Zanic V, Piric K, Kitarovic S (2013a) Reliability and robustness based design attributes for multi-criteria decision making. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2013, 32nd international conference on ocean, offshore and arctic engineering, 6th Sept, Nantes, France

    Google Scholar 

  • Zanic V, Prebeg P, Andric J (2013b) Method for structural concept design of ‘Open’ ships. In: Proceedings of the PRADS 2013, 12th international symposium practical design of ships and other floating structures, Changwon, Korea, 20–25 Oct, pp 280–289

    Google Scholar 

  • Zitzler E, Deb K, Thiele L (2000) Comparison of multi-objective evolutionary algorithms: empirical results. Evol Comput 8(2):173–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zitzler E, Laumanns M, Thiele L, Fonseca CM, Grunert da Fonseca V (2002) Why quality assessment of multiobjective optimizers is difficult. In: Proceedings of the GECCO’2002, genetic and evolutionary computation conference, San Francisco, California, July 2002, pp 666–673

    Google Scholar 

  • Zitzler E, Thiele L, Laumanns M, Fonseca CM, Grunert Da Fonseca V (2003) Performance assessment of multiobjective optimizers: an analysis and review. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 7(2):117–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zitzler E, Knowles J, Thiele L (2008) Quality assessment of Pareto set approximations. In: Branke J, Deb K, Miettinen K, Słowiński R (eds) Multiobjective optimization. LNCS 5252. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 373–404

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the support given by European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007–2013) under grant agreement n° 233980 which was led to the results presented—for BESST project—in this chapter.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ANAST, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium

    Philippe Rigo, Abbas Bayatfar & Sara Echeverry

  2. Ocean Engineering Department, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

    Jean-David Caprace

  3. West Pomeranian University of Technology, Szczecin, Poland

    Zbigniew Sekulski

Authors
  1. Philippe Rigo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jean-David Caprace
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zbigniew Sekulski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Abbas Bayatfar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sara Echeverry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Philippe Rigo .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. National Technical University of Athens, Athens, Greece

    Apostolos Papanikolaou

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Rigo, P., Caprace, JD., Sekulski, Z., Bayatfar, A., Echeverry, S. (2019). Structural Design Optimization—Tools and Methodologies. In: Papanikolaou, A. (eds) A Holistic Approach to Ship Design. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02810-7_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02810-7_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-02809-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-02810-7

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation