Volume 6, Issue 1 - Naval Sea Systems Command - The US Navy

SEAFRAME
18
Core equities
RELIABILITy MODELING (Continued from page 17)
generate logistics and manning impacts, and we won’t really
know how much money is saved until all those resultant costs
are rolled together into a final sum.”
This summation of outputs of individual modeling
and simulation tools is viewed by Klingensmith and his team as
unique method of synthesizing tool outputs. It’s unique because
it’s a technique not being used anywhere else in the Navy design
community at present. “They’re basically doing point designs,”
says Rick Sheppard, the team lead in reliability modeling. “They
generate a single design and carry it through to determine the
viability of the design based on a small set of parameters. It’s
more cost-effective from a design standpoint to run a design
through these different models together.” Flexibility is greatly
enhanced using the modeling and simulation approach and has
been known to save money in the concept design process.
SEAQUEST
Scope Problem
�
Model �
Sensitivity Analysis and
Trade Space Exploration
�
Optimization
Top: Diagram of the Systems Engineering Application
(SEA) process. The line diagram shows the steps taken
by the software to quantify reliability in a ship system.
Diagram provided by William R. Sheppard, NSWC Carderock Division.
Above: An example of the Full SEAQUEST model. This particular example depicts the cascading steps used in an
alternative propulsion study. This method is more cost-effective from a design standpoint to process a design
through different models together. Image provided by William R. Sheppard, NSWC Carderock Division.