See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/276958126

System Based Design of Offshore Support Vessels

Conference Paper · January 2012

CITATIONS READS
17 9,697

2 authors:

Stein Ove Erikstad Kai Levander

Norwegian University of Science and Technology SeaKey Naval Architecture
75 PUBLICATIONS   700 CITATIONS    2 PUBLICATIONS   32 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Simosys View project

Holistic risk-based design for sustainable arctic sea transport (RISKAT) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Stein Ove Erikstad on 20 May 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

System Based Design of Offshore Support Vessels
Stein Ove Erikstad1 and Kai Levander2

ABSTRACT
In this paper, we will present how the System Based Design (SBD) method can be applied in the design of offshore support
vessels (OSV’s). The SBD method was first presented at IMDC in Kobe in 1991, and has since been successfully applied in
the development of a large number of ship designs, in particular cruise ships and ferries. The adaptation towards OSV’s
includes the development of appropriate breakdown structures for vessel main functions, weights, areas and volumes.
Further, a number of existing designs have been analyzed to provide experience-based data on a detailed functional level.
Using SBD, the functional design of the vessel can be developed to a high degree of detail without premature commitment to
specific overall dimensions, layout and arrangements. SBD can also provide a foundation for modular design. Combined
with a 3D visual sketching tool, this method can support the generation of several alternative vessel configurations fast and
with a much reduced design effort.

KEY WORDS
Offshore Support Vessel; Design;

INTRODUCTION
The System Based Design method was first presented at IMDC in Kobe in 1991. In the 20 years following, this method has
been successfully applied in the development of a large number of ship designs, in particular cruise ships and ferries. At
NTNU we have included SBD for cargo vessels in the teaching of Marine Design since 1995.

In Norway ship design and shipbuilding are mainly related to offshore vessels and a government funded R&D project called
SHIP-4C was established 2010 between NTNU, DNV and STX OSV. System based design should be based on an
appropriate functional breakdown structure that captures the nature of service type vessels, at the same time is valid across
different types of OSV’s. Correspondingly, breakdown structures for weights, areas and volumes have been defined. Further,
a number of existing designs have been analyzed to provide experience-based data on a detailed functional level.

In this paper, we will present the main results from the research work and the experiences we have made so far in applying
the System Based Design for offshore vessels. In particular, we will focus on how this methodology supports a process where
the functional design of the vessel can be developed to a relatively high degree of detail, while at the same time avoiding a
premature commitment to specific overall dimensions, layout and arrangements. Further, we will discuss how this may
provide a foundation for a modular design platform. Combined with a 3D visual sketching tool, this method can support the
efficient generation of alternative vessel configurations in the conceptual design stage.

This project includes the development of a SBD-model for offshore vessels and collection of area, volume and weight data
from existing vessels.

1
Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Norway
2
SeaKey Naval Architecture, Finland

1
SHIP DESIGN PROCESS

The most common way to describe the ship design has been by a spiral model, capturing the sequential and iterative nature of
the process. The task structure is “select dimensions - evaluate capacity and performance - redesign”. This model easily locks
the naval architect to his first assumption, and the focus in the design process will be to patch and repair this single design
concept rather than to generate and evaluate alternative designs. An approach that better supports innovation and creativity is
needed.

The design should start from the mission specified for the ship. The mission statement settles tasks, capacity and performance
expected by the owner or operator. As a consequence, the design task structure changes to “define systems and functions –
estimate size and weight- select dimensions –check performance”. This approach “straightens” the design spiral and reduces
the number of loops needed to find a technically feasible and economically preferable solution.

The step-by-step process of the SBD process can be summarized as follows:

 Customer requirements - Mission statement

o Task, capacity, performance demands, range and endurance
o Rules, regulations and preferences
o Operating conditions, like wind, waves, currents, ice
 Functional requirements - Initial sizing of the ship
o Based on capacity, where the areas and volumes needed for cargo spaces and task related equipment defines
the size of the vessel
o Based on weight, where the cargo weight and the weight of task related equipment and of the ship itself
defines the size of the vessel
 Form - Parametric exploration
o Variation of main dimensions, hull form and lay out of spaces on board to satisfy the demands for both
capacity and weight
 Engineering synthesis
o Calculating and optimising ship performance, speed, endurance and safety
 Evaluation of the design
o Calculating building cost and operation economics

Figure 1: The System Based Design process

2
MAIN TYPES OF OFFSHORE SUPPORT VESSELS
Though we consider the SBD approach presented in this paper to be generally applicable across most common types of
offshore support vessels, the actual implementation of the method has been for the three main OSV types, namely Platform
Support Vessels (PSV), Anchor Handling, Tug, Supply vessels (AHTS) and Offshore Construction Vessels (OCV). In the
following, we will shortly describe each of these three types:

PSV
Platform Support Vessel
PSV´s operate from a shore base carrying supplies to drill-
ships, offshore construction vessels and production
platforms. The vessels normally have an open cargo deck
aft, with storage tanks for liquid and dry bulk cargo below
the deck. Good manoeuvrability and dynamic positioning is
needed for keeping the vessel close to the platforms during
the unloading of the supplies.

Figure 2: Platform Supply Vessel

AHTS
Anchor Handling, Tug, Supply
These vessels are used for placing platform anchors in the
right positions, recovering anchors and relocating them if
needed. In deep water the weight of long chains demand
high bollard pull capacity from the vessel, but also
increasing pulling force from the anchor handling winches.
Towing of platforms and drilling rigs also demand a power-
ful machinery and high pulling force.

Figure 3: Anchor Handling, Tug, Supply Vessel

OSCV
Offshore Construction Vessel
Offshore construction vessels are used for building and
maintaining platforms, well heads, under-water pumping
units, pipelines and power cables. They have a large open
work deck with heavy cranes, moon pools, pipe storage and
cable carousels. Often they also have diving equipment and
remote operated underwater vehicles (ROV).
Accommodation facilities are needed not only for the ship
crew but also for the construction work force. The OSCV:s
often have a helicopter landing platform for the exchange of
personel onboard.

Figure 4: Offshore Construction Vessel

3
OSV SIZE AND CAPACITY
Compared with many cargo ships offshore support vessels are rather small in size and have low cargo capacity. But these
vessels normally operate close to their shore base and frequent trips are more important than high cargo capacity. The
capability to perform their mission in heavy weather is also very important and the vessels must have good sea keeping and
manoeuvring performance. In fig 4.1 and 2 deadweight and installed machinery power are shown for the three main types of
OSV’s. In PSV’s the main power demand is for propulsion, but also for thrusters in station keeping during off-loading at the
platforms. AH&T’s need propulsion power to generate high bollard pull, but also auxiliary power for the winches. Also
OSCV’s have high auxiliary power demand for cranes and other construction equipment.

Offshore Vessels
12 000

10 000

OSCV
DWT at max draught [ton]

8 000

6 000
PSV

4 000

AHTS
2 000

0
0 2 000 4 000 6 000 8 000 10 000 12 000 14 000 16 000 18 000 20 000
GT

Figure 5: OSV vessel deadweight

Offshore Vessels
30 000

25 000 AHTS

OSCV

20 000
Installed Power [kW]

15 000

PSV
10 000

5 000

0
0 2 000 4 000 6 000 8 000 10 000 12 000 14 000 16 000 18 000 20 000
GT

Figure 6: Installed power

4
GENERIC FUNCTION BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE FOR OFFSHORE SUPPORT VESSELS
In SBD the functions of the vessel is divided into two main categories, payload systems and ship systems. Payload systems
are directly related to the “money making potential” and consist of cargo spaces, cargo handling equipment and spaces
needed for cargo treatment onboard. The ship functions include the systems needed to carrying the payload safely from port
to port.

In OSV we have renamed the payload systems to “Task Related Systems” describing the major offshore support tasks of
cargo transport, anchor handling & towing and offshore construction (Figure 7). In the Norwegian offshore business the SFI
group system is used for specifications, weight calculation and cost estimation (see Appendix 1). To facilitate data collection
and also the use of the SBD-model we wanted to stay as close as possible to the SFI-grouping. But like many other
shipbuilding group systems SFI does not distinguish between tasks related systems and ship systems, which we consider a
benefit in the SBD-design theory. There is a separate sub-group “Equipment for cargo”, but anchor handling & towing must
be picked out from sub-group “Ship equipment” and offshore construction systems are included in both “Equipment for
cargo” and in “Ship equipment”. There are some other minor differences, like wood covering of cargo decks, helicopter
platforms and lifesaving.

Dry cargo decks

Task Related Systems

Cargo Spaces Liquid and dry bulk cargo

Cargo handling equipment

Anchor Handling Winches and reels

and Rope and chain storage
Towing Handling equipment

Lifting equipment
Offshore Construction equipment
Construction Diving equipment
Spaces in accommodation
OSV Systems

Hull
Ship Structure Forecastle
Deckhouse

Offshore operation support

Ship Outfitting Ship equipment
Ship Systems

Rescue and Fire fighting

Crew and client spaces

Accommodation Service spaces
Technical spaces in accom.

Machinery main components

Machinery Machinery systems
Ship systems

Fuel and Lube Oil

Tanks and Voids Water and Sewage
Ballast and Void

Figure 7: The function structure for OSV’s is divided into task related systems and ship systems

In SBD areas and volumes demanded in the vessel to accommodate all systems are first calculated, independent of pre-
selected main dimensions, hull lines or standard layouts. Thus, SBD is like a checklist that reminds the designer of all the
factors that affect the design and record his choices. It gives the possibility to compare the selections with statistical data
derived from existing, successful designs. The result is a complete system description for the new ship, including the volumes
and areas needed onboard to fulfill the mission. This gives the total volume of the vessel and the Gross Tonnage can be
calculated. Based on these data a first estimate of weight and building cost can be made. The next step in the design process
is to select main dimensions and define the form. By variation of the main dimensions the space and weight in the selected
design is matched to the system description.

5
SHIP SYSTEMS

Ship outfitting
In ship outfitting space are located for tunnel and retractable thrusters, steering gear and mooring equipment. In the SFI –grouping also
garbage handling, incinerator plant and deck stores are listed here. SBD adds life boats and other outdoor deck equipment to this sub-
group.

Accommodation
Facilities for crew and clients, like cabins, common spaces, stairs and corridors are outlined here. The areas needed are calculated from
cabin sizes and square meters per person. Service spaces are based on area per persons. Technical spaces include AC rooms, lifts and
electrical substations. Most of the accommodation spaces are located in the deckhouse.

Machinery
Machinery covers the SFI groups “Machinery main components”, “Machinery systems” and “Ship systems”. The size of
machinery spaces are estimated based on the total installed power.

Tanks for ship consumable

Storage tank capacity for fuel and lubrication oil for the machinery is calculated based on the specified range in the mission statement.
The SBD-model can estimate additional space needed if LNG is used as fuel. Fresh water and sewage storage capacity is based on
endurance days. Ballast water tanks can be used also for transporting drill water to the platforms. Many OSV’s have passive anti-roll
tanks to reduce roll motion when operating in rough seas. Offshore construction vessels with big cranes need extra ballast tanks to
reduce heeling when handling heavy loads.

Figure 8: Machinery proposal (www.wartsila.com)

6
USING EXPERIENCE-BASED DATA IN SBD
Using the functional breakdown structure as a backbone, the adaptation of SBD towards offshore support vessels require the
collection of data from existing vessels to serve as a link between the individual functional requirements and the required
space and area for each function. For some functions, data from various OSV types can be used interchangeably, while for
other functions there are substantial differences among vessel types.

In the SBD OSV project, we gathered detailed design data for a number of STX vessels, both from platform supply vessels,
anchor handlers and offshore construction vessels. The data collection process comprised the following main steps:

1. Gathering vessel main characteristics, including deadweight, installed power, number of crew and passenger, major
equipment specs (anchor handling winches, offshore crane, cargo handling equipment etc.).
2. Collecting tonnages and volumes from the tonnage measurement book. This provided information about gross
tonnage (GT), hull volume and superstructure volume of the vessel. For confirming the gross tonnage, these data
were checked towards vessel classification data in DNV Exchange. When there is discrepancy about GT between the
tonnage calculation book and DNV published values, the numbers are taken from DNV Exchange. These numbers
are used as benchmarks for checking the level of error of space calculation.
3. Inspecting the general arrangement drawings to find the deck heights which will be used for volume calculation. The
tank plan of the vessel was used for generating data for tank capacities.
4. Measuring the areas for different rooms/spaces/equipment using the AutoCAD drawings (Figure 8). These are
subsequently tabulated into specific groups in the spread sheet according to their deck level. The area measurement
is done on deck-by-deck basis, making it possible to know how much space is occupied by a certain
equipment/cabin on different deck levels. For instance, machinery rooms are usually extended over two deck levels
and from the spread sheet, it is easy to find out the area or volume on each deck level occupied by the machinery
room.
5. For rooms/equipment spaces whose volume cannot be directly measured from the area occupied by it (e.g. various
equipment, machinery space); the volume needs to be manually calculated by looking into profile plans as well as
deck plans. Information from specification booklet can also be used for this purpose.
Offshore vessels are outfitting intensive, making it difficult to measure the exact size and shape of the various equipment
modules from the general arrangement drawings. Thus, measurement of equipment spaces will typically be approximate, and
do require substantial knowledge of offshore vessel design and arrangements.
In this project, the spaces were measured from general arrangement drawings in AutoCAD. In a 2D drawing, areas can be
easily detected, but when it comes to volumes, 2D information becomes difficult to interpret correctly. This is especially true
for equipment spaces, enclosed hull spaces where the walls/hull plating are curved, as well as for volumes for propeller,
shafts, and thrusters.
Also, making a distinction between tank capacities for ship operation versus task related operation is in some cases difficult.
Tank capacities are usually given as a whole in tank capacity charts. If task related capacities are not separately specified in
the vessel specification book, all tank capacities are categorized in ship operation.

7
Figure 9: Measuring areas and volumes for the OSV database from an AutoCAD drawing

8
SYSTEM SUMMARY
The system summary summarizes the total space demand for the vessel. The gross volume is calculated in cubic meters [SI units] and
converted to Gross Tonnage (Figure 9). Also deck areas are important in OSV design with task related equipment located both on
indoor and outdoor decks. For technical spaces located outside the engine room, like machinery shops and stores or AC rooms the deck
area demand is needed. The system summary also shows the distribution of space on board for all specified tasks and for the required
ship systems (Figure 10).

SPACE ALLOCATION
Area Volume
m²/DWT m³/DWT m² m³
Cargo Spaces 0,22 0,36 930 1 530
Anchor Handling & Towing 0,25 1,24 1 030 5 210
Offshore Construction 0 0
TOTAL TASK RELATED SPACES 0,47 1,60 1 960 6 740

m2/GA m3/GV
Offshore Operation Support 0 0
Ship Equipment 0,12 0,08 622 1 840
Rescue and Fire Fighting 0,011 0,009 58 223
TOTAL SHIP OUTFITTING 680 2 060

m²/person m³/person
Crew and Client Cabins 20,1 58,2 602 1 746
Common Spaces 9,8 28,0 293 840
Stairs 3,5 10,4 106 311
Ship Service 9,9 30,0 296 901
Catering 4,9 14,6 147 437
Hotel Service 4,6 13,8 138 414
Construction related spaces in accommodation 0,7 1,9 20 58
FURNISHED SPACES 53,3 156,7 1 600 4 700

Technical spaces in the accommodation 8,2 32,6 246 977

TOTAL ACCOMMODATION 62 189 1 850 5 680

m²/kW m³/kW
Machinery Main Components 0,03 0,16 464 2 627
Machinery and Ship Systems 160 566
Engine casing, air intakes and funnel - 0,06 285 881
TOTAL MACHINERY 0,06 0,25 909 4 070

m³/kW
TANKS AND VOID 0,32 - 5 100

GROSS AREA & VOLUME 5 400 23 700

GROSS TONNAGE GT
6 800

Figure 9: System summary for an AHTS vessel

9
 Figure 10: Space distribution for an AHTS vessel

WEIGHT ESTIMATION AND BUILDING COST

The first weight and building cost estimate can be done based on the system summary. In the concept design phase it is
sufficient to use only the 6 main groups for the lightweight estimate (Figure 11). The main dimensions have not been selected
at this stage in the SBD process and cannot be used for the estimates. Task related items are best calculated “piece by piece”
because they differ from each OSV type. Structure weight of the hull is calculated based on the hull volume and separately
for the deckhouse including the forecastle. Ship Equipment is based on gross volume and Accommodation outfitting based on
the accommodation area. For Machinery the installed power is used and for Ship Systems the gross volume. To give the
necessary accuracy weight data from built OSV’s has been tabulated following the SBD-grouping.

Task related equipment

Cargo storage & handling
Anchor handling & towing
Offshore construction
Diving and ROV
Lightweight LWT

Structure Main hull

Deckhouse, forecastle
Offshore Support Vessels

Ship Equipment

Accommodation

Machinery main-components
Machinery Machinery system

Ship Systems

Dry & liquid cargo

Task related Ropes & chains
Deadweight DWT

Construction supplies

Supplies Crew
Provision and stores

Heavy fuel oil

Bunker Marine diesel oil
Lube oil

Fresh water
Water Sewage in holding tanks
Ballast & heeling water

Figure 11: Lightweight and deadweight main groups

10
 Figure 12: Weight distribution Figure 13: Cost distribution

GEOMETRIC DEFINITION AND WEIGHT BALANCE

Statistics for OSV help selecting suitable main dimensions for the first iteration of the geometric definition for the vessel.
The displacement from the weight calculation is used to calculate hull form parameters. In this way the weight balance will
always be correct. The height of double bottom and the location of decks are selected and areas and volumes calculated.
Decks in the hull can have large openings around engines in the machinery spaces or for dry bulk tanks, chain lockers and
moon pools. The actual areas left for the specified systems are estimated as percentage of the total area for each deck. Above
the main deck both open decks and enclosed or covered spaces must be calculated. Volumes of enclosed and covered spaces
are included in the Gross Tonnage. The available deck areas and volumes in the hull and deckhouse are compared with the
space demand in the system summary and if needed the geometry can be adjusted (Figure 14).

11
 Figure 14: Geometric definition for an AHTS vessel
35,0

30,0

25,0

20,0

15,0

10,0

5,0

0,0
-10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Figure 15: Geometric long-ship chart from Excel

Main Dimensions for OSV

Statistics from previously built vessels is a good starting point for selecting suitable main dimensions for the OSV (Fig 16).
The naval architect must consider any special features planned for this ship. The charts for the main dimensions do not show
much difference between PSV, AHTS or OCV, except for draught. The demand for high bollard pull for anchor handling or
towing is best achieved by large propellers and therefor more draught than in other OSV’s.

12
 Figure 16: Main dimensions for OSVs

40,0
STABILITY CHECK
35,0
34,20
The intact stability is calculated for the max draught
condition using the same weight groups for the lightweight
30,0
and the deadweight as in the weight calculation. The center 29,20
of gravity for each group is estimated in relation to the depth 26,10
of the hull to main deck to facilitate easy comparison with 25,0
24,10
statistical data from built vessels. A simple geometric mid-
21,20
ship chart of the vessel is of great help in estimating the 20,0
center of gravity for the different weight items (Fig 29). This 18,30
chart is automatically generated in the Excel spreadsheet
15,0 15,40
when the geometric definition is performed. Hydrostatic
properties, like KB and BM are based on data from typical 12,50

OSV hull forms 10,0 KM

9,50
KG
Tmax

5,0 5,60

1,50
0,0
-20,0 -15,0 -10,0 -5,0 0,0 5,0 10,0 15,0 20,0

Figure 17: Geometric mid-ship chart from Excel

13
DEVELOPING A MODULAR CONCEPT SKETCH IN 3-D
The functional breakdown structure represents a product architecture for the vessel, which can be used as a backbone for a
modular design platform. For most of the functions, one or a set of corresponding module may be defined. Each module can
be scaled according to the area and space requirements being developed as part of the SBD model. The modules can then be
arranged by using templates, defining how these modules connect. This will support a quick, automated sketching of the
design solution (Vestbøstad, 2011).

The template states where a module should be positioned, while the breadth and height is automatically scaled based on the
main characteristics of the vessel. Then the length is scaled to satisfy the volume demand. As an example, the winch module
be placed in front of the deck module and made as wide and high as possible within the constraints and then scaled by length.

Some examples of the graphical user interface are given in Figure 18. Here, the design information has been taken directly
from the SBD process to generate the 3D-sketches to the right based on a library of modules, scaled and positioned in three
dimensions. The prototype model is implemented in the tool Google SketchUp. The 3D model plays a complementary role to
the SBD model, providing a visual feedback to the designer on the design decisions made. The rendering of the model has by
purpose been made sketchy, avoiding attention to modeling details, and instead drawing the attention towards the overall
conceptual solution.

Figure 18: 3-D model in Google SketchUp, showing alternative vessel configurations based on different templates, all having
the same areas and volumes (Vestbøstad, 2011)

14
CONCLUSIONS
In this paper we have presented the adaptation of the System Based Design method to support the design of offshore support
vessels. This development has taken place in close collaboration with STX OSV, who has provided most of the detail design
data from existing vessels that is required for the function-to-form mapping, mainly in terms of required areas and volumes.
In addition, STX OSV has provided a real testing context for the validation of the model.

In addition to the collection and processing of OSV-specific design statistics data, the adaption has mainly been concerned
with developing a correct and useful functional breakdown structure. This structure should address the specific characteristics
of service vessels, where the division between ship functions and “payload” functions is different, and to some extent less
evident, than what is the case for more traditional transport vessels. In addition, the functional breakdown structure should be
valid across most common types of OSVs, thus supporting the reuse of design experience data and system solutions for
shared functions. The proposed functional breakdown structure inherits core aspects both from the SBD functional structure
used for transport vessels and from the SFI structure commonly used across the Norwegian shipbuilding community.

The resulting design model provides a sound platform for the efficient development of the conceptual design solutions for
main types of OSVs. The method reuse design data from existing designs in a structured and controlled way. Not by using an
existing design as a starting point, as is a common practice today, but rather exploiting existing design data indirectly in terms
of providing area and space requirements for core vessel functions. The methodology presented here can also be used to
develop a set of vessel designs with different equipment configuration and capabilities. These vessels can then be evaluated
towards alternative contract scenarios to find the capability level that maximizes lifecycle revenue (Erikstad, et al., 2011).

The functional breakdown structure also provides a sound foundation for modular product architecture, serving to identify
and scale a set of geometric properties that corresponds to the vessel’s key functions. The subsequent arrangement of these
“system space” reservations into a complete design may either be on a free form basis, or by using one or several templates
that encapsulates both spatial and logical design configuration rules. This approach has much in common with both the
design building block approach (Andrews et al, 2003), as well as the arrangement generation approach advocated by (van
Oers et al, 2011). At the same time, at least in its present state, it is a simpler and less formal approach, where the main
purpose is to visualize the conceptual solution both to the designer and the prospective customer. The “sketchiness” of the 3D
model is in itself a feature rather than a limitation, helping to focus attention towards the conceptual design solution as such
(also referred to as “style”) rather than technical engineering details.

The work presented here will also be adapted towards forming the foundation for the teaching related to OSV design at the
Department of Marine Technology at NTNU, serving as an extension to the existing learning material related to using SBD
for transport vessels, cruise vessels and ferries.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to thank the Ship4C project for financing this work, Kjetil Øverås and Henning Borgen for valuable
discussions and input during the development of the model, and Øyvind Vestbøstad for the contribution related to the 3D
model.

REFERENCES
LEVANDER, K., “System Based Passenger Ship Design”, Proceedings/IMSDC 91, Kobe 1991

LEVANDER, K., “Innovative Ship Design – Can innovative ships be designed in a methodological way”,
Proceedings/IMSDC 03, Athens 2003

ERIKSTAD, S.O., S. SOLEM and K. FAGERHOLT, 2011, "A Ship Design and Deployment Model for Non-Transport
Vessels", Ship Technology Research, vol 58, no 3, september 2011, pp 132-141

ANDREWS, D. J. (2003). "A Creative Approach to Ship Architecture." International Journal of Maritime Engineering

15
OERS, B. v. (2011). A Packing Approach for the Early Stage Design of Service Vessels. Department of Marine & Transport
Technology. Delft, TU Delft. PhD: 305

VESTBØSTAD, Ø. (2011) – “System Based Ship Design for Offshore Vessels”, MSc Thesis, NTNU

16
 Appendix: Norwegian SFI grouping system

17

View publication stats