1 / 28

T-AKE UNREP Ship USS Hokie

Virginia Tech Naval Architecture. T-AKE UNREP Ship USS Hokie. Michael Fetsch Jen Sickmund Tobey Coombe Joshua Hammond Conrad Cooper . Design Overview. Optimization Hull design Resistance and Propulsion Arrangements Structures Weights and Stability. Mission Need.

omer
Download Presentation

T-AKE UNREP Ship USS Hokie

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Virginia Tech Naval Architecture T-AKE UNREP Ship USS Hokie Michael Fetsch Jen Sickmund Tobey Coombe Joshua Hammond Conrad Cooper

  2. Design Overview • Optimization • Hull design • Resistance and Propulsion • Arrangements • Structures • Weights and Stability

  3. Mission Need • To replace current Combat Logistics Force • Speed: 20 Kts • Range: 14000 NM • Capacity to carry a combination of: • Dry stores • Refrigerated stores • Ammunition • Cargo fuel

  4. Design Parameters for Optimization • Genetic Optimization of design using regression data analysis • Design variables • Measures of Performance • Values of Performance • Total Ownership Cost

  5. Optimization

  6. Satisfies all Mission need requirements USS Hokie

  7. AE36 Parent Hull Single shaft, similar design speed, Kilauea Class UNREP ship USS Hokie LWL – 680 ft CB - .577 B – 99 ft CP - .592 D – 69 ft T – 38 ft Disp – 42288.7 lton Hull Design

  8. IPS power plant Holtrop-Mennen Resistance calculations Full Electric Load analysis and Fuel consumption done in spreadsheet Fixed Pitch Propeller optimization Resistance and Propulsion

  9. Optimized Propeller Characteristics • 5 Blade, B-Series • EAR = 0.710, P = 25.1 ft, D = 24 ft, eff. = 0.7131 • Design Speed of 20 kts

  10. Arrangements • Cargo flow and efficiency were of the utmost importance throughout this stage of design

  11. Hull Arrangements

  12. Main Machinery Arrangements

  13. Main Engine Arrangements • 2 LM2500 gas turbine marine generator sets • Centerline bulkhead separates gen-sets • Auxiliary engine is a 2000kW diesel generator

  14. Motor Arrangements • 2 21MW propulsion motors w/ converters • Centerline bulkhead also separates motors

  15. Deckhouse Arrangements • MSC Standards – 136 Crew

  16. ABS were used to find initial scantlings Full Ship Maestro Model was used for further structural analysis Structure

  17. Cargo Oil & Midship Sections

  18. Structural Adequacy

  19. Hull Subdivision • Subdivision optimized as a Passive Defense Capability

  20. Weights and Stability • Weight distribution by SWBS designations • Distributions calculated for Lightship, Full Load, and 60% full cargo loading cases • Intact and Damage Stability cases were examined for several loading conditions and damage cases using HECSALV software

  21. Weights Distribution

  22. Hydrostatics

  23. Intact Stability • Stability analysis for Arrival, 60%, and Full Load conditions respectively

  24. Full Load Damaged Stability Using 15% LBP Criteria (Approx: 102 ft.) There were three worst case scenarios a: Starboard Cargo Oil 6, Cargo 1, Cargo 2 b: Forepeak, Foretank, Starboard Cargo Oil 2 and Cargo Oil 4 c: Cargo 4, Starboard Cargo 6 and ER 2

  25. Full Load Damaged Stability • Worst case scenarios a: b:

  26. Full Load Damaged Stability • Worst case scenarios c:

  27. Continuing Analysis • Seakeeping • Structural Improvement

  28. Questions?

More Related