Feature 2 | CAD/CAM


CAD and production in the shipyard: what lies beneath?


A completely integrated shipbuilding process, driven and supported by technologies that combine traditional CAD/CAM with much wider information management benefits, is a stirring proposition - but how do shipyards actually achieve it? Aveva Solutions Stéphane Neuveglise, explains how this can be done.


T


he answer to this question is in two distinct parts. Te first part concerns the closeness of the fit


between the design technology itself (the CAD/CAM and production information elements) and the shipyard’s activities. In other words, the technology must offer features, functions and benefits that support every key process in the shipyard, and in a way that reflects how engineers, designers, managers and other specialists naturally work. Separate processes cannot be integrated if the constituent parts of each process are hindered or incomplete because the technology simply does not support them! We will explore a few examples of this later on. Te second part of the answer to the


question is rather more fundamental and has to do with the underpinnings of the technology, rather than how users actually engage with individual applications.


It is


these underpinnings that will determine whether critical applications in the shipbuilding process will actually be able to communicate with each other or not – and whether any effective degree of process integration can therefore take place.


Integrate or interlock? Broadly speaking, industry thinking has focused on three possible approaches to the integration challenge. The first approach is to use specific adaptors, gateways, and the like, to effectively interlock (or “close couple”) certain applications in the shipbuilding process, creating very controlled processes of communication between the applications, on a prescribed “point to point” basis. In this scenario, the applications are usually supplied by one vendor.


The Naval Architect April 2011


3D is not just about design information – it can be used to link together every other relevant piece of shipyard information as well. A design component like this valve can be used to generate comprehensive reports on all the engineering and business processes in which it plays any part.


The second alternative is the


diametrical opposite, where there is no close coupling and the only means of communication between the applications is through a centralised point into which all the applications – regardless of vendor - in some way connect. Lastly, there is a combined approach, which enables some applications to communicate on a close-coupled basis, while linking others together through a centralised resource. It is fair to say that each approach has


its merits. Te close-coupled approach certainly has its champions in some of the detailed, engineering-rich design disciplines, such as Process, Instruments, Mechanical and Piping, Electrical, and HVAC, for example, where information


has to be exchanged in very specific form between applications. But, there are also massive issues with this approach. The task of manually engineering effective information flow between these disparate systems – and training users to understand how the coupling works - consumes specialist resources, which could be deployed more constructively. The complicated nature of the various interfaces and interdependencies also affects the ease with which applications can be replaced or upgraded. In addition, the high level of


interdependence


between these disciplines means that a configuration change in one application can have an unknown and immeasurable consequence in another.


37


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80