2 CONFERENCE ON

nd

CLASSIFICATION REGULATIONS ANDADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES

FOR NAVAL SHIPS AND AUXILIARIES

Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses

New Delhi

27 & 28 June 2023

th th
 Vice Admiral Sandeep Naithani Integrated Headquarters
AVSM, VSM Ministry of Defence (Navy)
New Delhi - 110011
Chief of Materiel

MESSAGE

As the Chief of Materiel, I see a pre-eminent need of imbibing a cohesive

vision for seamless integration of futuristic technologies, which are economically
and environmentally sustainable, in the naval domain. The second edition of the
conference on “Classification Regulations and Advanced Technologies for Naval
Ships and Auxiliaries”, organised by the Directorate of Naval Architecture of
IHQ MoD (N), is a right step towards realisation of this vision of increasing
synergy in the naval shipbuilding environment, between Users, Regulatory bodies,
Technology partners and the Industry.

In the present scenario, adapting to the dynamic environment of sustainable

technology is an inescapable parameter for efficiency for all maritime stakeholders.
Classification Societies have a wide global reach and decades of expertise and
therefore are the ideal agencies to facilitate transformation changes in the field of
shipbuilding and maintenance, without compromising on quality. Hence, I believe
that the issues and challenges highlighted by eminent members of the Class at this
forum, would provide a holistic and unbiased path for adoption of new technology
and processes for the Navy.
 I appreciate the effort of the experts from various Classification Societies
for investing in technology driven topics, such as autonomous vessels,
development of ship and submarine codes, alternate modes of propulsion, which
have assumed paramount importance in the present-day scheme of things. The
topics would enlighten the audience with the current technology trends being
pursued worldwide for maintaining state-of-the-art Naval fleets. The conference
would also unveil the capabilities of Classification Societies to assist Navies in
harnessing advanced technologies in a sustainable and environment friendly
manner.

As I convey my best regards to all organisers and participants for their

painstaking effort for shaping up this conference, I would also encourage all
participants to extract the best out of this unique forum to enhance indigenous
shipbuilding. The interaction with Classification Societies and key stakeholders
will be an invaluable source of inspiration for young minds of the Nation towards
exploring and innovating futuristic technology which aligns with the Navy’s goal
of modernisation.

It is my firm belief that the synergy developed here would increase manifold
in the foreseeable future by means of regular interactions with Classification
Societies.

‘जय हिन्द’
‘शं नो वरुणः’
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Table of Contents

Ser Topic Author Pages

Ambar Roy, Gabriel Yeo,
Using a Condition-Based
Captain Richard Delpizzo,
1 Program to Support Government 1-20
USNR (Retd), (F) SNAME
Ship Maintenance Planning
American Bureau of Shipping
Sharad Dhavalikar,
Ramkumar Joga,
Naval Ship Plume Dispersion and
2 K S Srinivas, 21-29
IR Signature Assessment
Joseph Prabhu
Indian Register of Shipping

Use of the Regulatory Nico Bruni

3 30-31
Framework in the classification Registro Italiano Navale
of Naval Ships
Status of R&D and Hirobumi Kaneko
4 Standardization of AUV/UUV in ClassNK Research Institute, 32-36
Japan Japan
Role of Remote Operations R. Srinivas
5 37-43
Centre for Autonomous Vessels Indian Register of Shipping
Ambar Roy, Gabriel Yeo,
Classification of Unmanned and Captain Richard Delpizzo,
6 44-64
Autonomous Vessels USNR (Retd), (F) SNAME
American Bureau of Shipping
Using the Naval Submarine Code
(NSubC) as Means for
Christian von Oldershausen
7 Submarine Assurance during 65-74
Det-Norske Veritas
Design, Construction and
Operation
ClassNK Activities for
Alistair J Lewin
8 Installation of Wind-Assisted 75-83
Nippon Kaiji Kyokai
Propulsion Systems (WAPS)
Nico Bruni
9 Hull Integrity Management 84-86
Registro Italiano Navale
Olaf Doerk,
Ensuring Future Proof Naval Christian von Oldershausen
10 87-94
Vessels – Verified Readiness Det-Norske Veritas
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Using a Condition-Based Program to Support Government Ship Maintenance Planning

Ambar Roy[1], Gabriel Yeo[2], Captain Richard Delpizzo, USNR (Retd), (F) SNAME[3]

[1]
ABS Business Development Manager for India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka; [2]ABS Business
Development Manager-Singapore Global Government; [3]ABS Director, Global Government
Services

Abstract. Recent advances in technology, such as sensor hardware, data

accumulation/transmission, advanced analytics, and artificial intelligence have enabled new
approaches to vessel health understanding that, when effectively implemented, will support
improved system safety and reliability. Condition-based approaches are being explored to
increase understanding of condition and Class compliance risks associated with a vessel’s
critical hull, machinery and electrical (HM&E) systems in support of maintenance planning
and optimization for Government vessels. As an example, this paper will introduce the ABS
Condition-Based Program (CBP), which leverages both design and operational data by using
a compliance risk model to continually update a vessel-specific CBP Survey Plan. Topics
explored in this paper will include:

- Description of a classification process for a condition-based approach to inspection

and survey.
- How ABS SMART notations may interact with the ABS Condition-Based Program.
- Advanced inspection technologies such as corrosion AI and remote technologies.
- Applicable class notations associated with these processes.

An overview of the applicable ABS Guides and Advisories addressing these technologies will
be included, with an emphasis on a classification approach.

KEY WORDS:
ABS; Advanced Inspection Technologies; Artificial Intelligence (AI); Condition-Based
Program; Classification; Machine Learning (ML); Remote Inspection Technology (RIT)

NOMENCLATURE
ABS: American Bureau of Shipping
AI: Artificial Intelligence
Ao: Operational Availability
ASLP: Achieving Service Life Program
CBP: Condition Based Program
CG: Guided Missile Cruiser
CHT: Collection, Holding and Transfer
1
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

CRMS: Cybersecurity Risk Management System

DDG: Guided Missile Destroyer
EPF: Expeditionary Fast Transport
FFG: Guided Missile Frigate
FEED: Front-End Engineering Design
FEM: Finite Element Model
FMEA: Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
FMECA: Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis
FMI: Functional Mockup Interface
HIMP: Hull Inspection and Maintenance Program
HM&E: Hull, Machinery and Electrical
HVAC: Heating, Ventilation & Air Conditioning
JDP: Joint Development Project
LSD: Landing Ship, Dock
ML: Machine Learning
MoU: Memorandum of Understanding
MSC: Military Sealift Command
NAVSEA: Naval Sea Systems Command
OEM: Original Equipment Manufacturers
PCM: Predictive Compliance Model
PMP: Preventative Maintenance Program
RAM: Reliability, Availability and Maintainability
TCM: Tailshaft Condition Monitoring
UAV: Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
RIT: Remote Inspection Technologies
ROV: Remotely Operated Vehicle

INTRODUCTION

Throughout most of the 20th century, fleets of major powers were generally compared using
two metrics. The first was based on Capability, being principally measured by the number of
‘capital ships’ in their fleet, generally considered to be battleships and battle cruisers. During
the Second World War, aircraft carriers would be added to this category. The second criteria
was the Number of ships overall in a fleet. For a nation to be able to accomplish power
projection over a region, an ocean, or ultimately the globe, a large number of ships was
considered critical to counter the ‘tyranny of distance.’ While the concept was understood for
decades, the phrase ‘tyranny of distance’ was first popularized in 1966 by the author Geoffrey
Blainey in the title of his book The Tyranny of Distance: How Distance Shaped Australia’s
History. In it, Blainey explained how isolation and distance were the two strongest influences
in the development and national culture of this continent and nation. The ‘distance’ to which
2
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

he was referring was not only the vast stretches of ocean between Australia and its neighbors,
but also the isolation imposed by the distances between adjoining cities and towns within this
large, remote continent. Since its publication, the term has been frequently used to show the
challenge of naval command of the seas over great distances, most typically in the Pacific
Ocean theater.

Using the US Navy as an example, during the course of the Second World War, the size of the
Navy swelled from 478 ships in 1940 to 6,768 by the end of the war in August 1945, certainly
the largest armada ever assembled in the history of the world. It was obvious by this point in
history that the US Navy could quite definitively wield power projection to all corners of the
world. Of course, the United States was entirely incapable of maintaining this fleet size during
peacetime and it quickly dropped - in fact, it quite precipitously decreased to 1,248 by June of
1946. The fleet would enter a decades-long period of flux, growing and shrinking, before
dropping to about 521 ships as its post-Vietnam War low in 1981. Well within the era of the
Cold War, there was a fear that the Navy had allowed a key metric, its number, to deplete to
unacceptable levels. In 1978, following over a decade of hostilities in Vietnam, the U.S. Navy
was being outpaced by its Soviet Navy rival by most metrics. Although the US maintained a
capability advantage of 21 to 3 aircraft carriers, the Soviets had the numerical advantage in
surface warships (443 to 196) and submarines (294 to 119). This realization resulted in the
President Reagan administration policy of increased naval construction known today as the
“600 Ship Navy”. E. B. Potter (Seapower; Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 2014)
described the 1980s buildup to counter the Soviet Union as the “most expensive peacetime
military buildup in the nation’s history, to cost $1.5 trillion in five years . . . the Navy would
be built up from 456 to nearly 600 ships (specifically 592 by 1989), including 15 carrier-
centered battle groups.”

But while this was taking place, an evolution of ship and weapon technology was occurring in
fleets around the world. The calculus of fleet strength would pivot from numbers back to
capability. This time, battleships and battle cruisers would give way to complex anti-air warfare
platforms, increasingly stealthy nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers containing some of the
most advanced aircraft in the world. Increasingly complex and expensive mission systems and
weapons would strain the budgets of even the wealthiest nations. To help relieve swelling
defense budgets, navies began to move towards multirole platforms that might succeed in
taking the place of multiple warships having dedicated missions. Destroyers would now have
minesweeping capability, as well as fulfill antiship and antisubmarine warfare roles. Ships
would fulfill collateral roles in ballistic missile defense. Submarines would be fitted with both
torpedoes and antiship cruise and conventional missiles to increase their lethality. And
auxiliaries would fill combined dry stores, ammunition carriage and oiler roles.

3
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Smaller fleets with more complex, multirole, expensive ships are extremely capable. However,
the tyranny of distance still holds its place as a daunting challenge for fleets desiring to maintain
a degree of power projection. As we enter the 21st century, the US Navy’s smaller fleet
(numbering 318 ships by 2000) is challenged in maintaining its traditional role of national
security operations. This will result in mission readiness (also referred to as operational
availability, or Ao) of the ships being the third measure of a nation’s fleet. During periods of
high operational tempo, smaller fleets are relied upon to operate for longer stretches at sea.
Fleet managers must sometimes delay or even cancel traditional time-based maintenance
availability periods to support fleet objectives. Assigning maintenance periods based on
relatively fixed time periods between sailing tours have become too rigid to support the model
of today’s flexible operations. Consequently, condition based alternatives have become the
solution to maintaining operational condition, this being the third critical measure of a strong
naval fleet.

EVOLUTION TOWARDS CONDITION BASED PROCESSES TO SUPPORT

MAINTENANCE PLANNING

The Navy/ABS Service Life Assessment Pilot

At the start of the 21st century, one of the biggest operational challenges of Government fleets
was the proper assessment of their vessels in order to determine how best to use their finite
maintenance resources. How to best fund maintenance to keep the most critical fleet assets
mission ready was a constant concern, especially as these smaller fleets had to increase
operating tempo (remain at sea for longer periods) to maintain the same level of presence. in
addition, to drive the US Navy fleet to the increased numbers envisioned (an approximate fleet
growth of 10-15%), it was estimated that this larger fleet needed about 70% of the existing
ships to operate for their full design lives. In addition, the drive to decrease crews meant less
labor to conduct shipboard maintenance over all the systems and equipment that comprise the
total ship system. As a result, it became an imperative to identify and implement processes
facilitating the ability to focus attention on where it is most needed, and where it will provide
the best return on investment.

To address this challenge, the U.S. Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) and the American
Bureau of Shipping (ABS) partnered in a “Service Life Assessment Pilot” in 2009, introducing
a structured, third-party periodic condition assessment process for selected systems on a
number of classes of Navy ships. The intent is to determine areas where ABS can assist the
Navy and share common knowledge and processes in identifying where maintenance action is
most needed on ships, with recommendations focusing subsequent inspections whereby the
continuing health of these systems may be tracked. The Commander of NAVSEA and his Chief
Engineer approached ABS based on their current support of U.S. Navy classification during
4
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

acquisition and construction to ask the primary question: Where can the U.S. Navy benefit from
existing ABS in-service analysis and survey processes to help achieve expected service life?
The response was to combine the existing Class survey process (the normal ABS procedure for
examination of a Classed vessel) with the following steps:

1) Combine advanced analysis, visual survey, and observed deficiency planning to better
focus maintenance planning and provide improved material readiness.
2) Project the current remaining service life based on material condition.
3) Establish a disciplined risk assessment process to identify and prioritize areas that do
not meet technical requirements.
4) Determine the capability to predict where critical or limiting material conditions may
develop (at risk areas).
5) Provide an analytical basis for targeting investment and repair resources to achieve
expected service life.

In order to determine the effectiveness of this assessment approach, one ship from each of four
different ship classes considered representative of typical maintenance issues were selected for
the initial pilot efforts and included:

• USS GERMANTOWN (LSD-42),

• USS COLE (DDG-67),
• USS UNDERWOOD (FFG-36) and
• USS MOBILE BAY (CG - 53)

Key systems being examined to determine material condition of these ships included:

• Ship structure
• Air conditioning cooling capacity
• Electrical plant health and capacity
• Collection, Holding and Transfer (CHT) system (both piping and components).
• Firemain and chill water systems
• Ballast system

ABS Service Life Assessment Process

The objective of the pilot program was to establish technical insight into the current condition
and life expectancy of key systems of a ship as follows:

1) Prepare the assessment and process model that will be applied to conduct the initial
assessment of each individual ship.
5
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

2) Conduct the initial assessment of each ship.

3) Conduct periodic, continuing assessments of each ship to track the maintenance impact
on the selected systems and provide a tool for targeting future maintenance.
4) Integrate the process so that the assessment work performed on the ship minimizes
intrusiveness and impact, and that the Navy retains Technical Authority over all
decisions.

ABS Process Description

The proposed ABS Service Life Assessment Program included the following steps:

1) Build a finite element model (FEM) for the as-built configuration of the ship (see
Figure 1), and apply the projected operational loadings envisioned for the ship to
identify the following:

• Inherent as-built structural strength margins

• Inherent corrosion allowances
• Identify areas of high stress for specific inspection interest
• Predicted fatigue resistance for primary structural details and components.

Figure 1 – USS Germantown Finite Element Model

6
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

2) Modify the as-built finite element model to represent the current condition of the
structure based on ABS survey and hull thickness measurements, then digitally exercise
the modified model to assess remaining strength and fatigue capability.
3) Develop process check sheets listing the systems, equipment, and components to be
surveyed.
4) Build a hull maintenance computer model facilitating the graphical representation (i.e.,
electronic dashboard) of the structural history of each ship. The hull maintenance model
provided a detailed visual representation of the structure of the ship containing the
information related to the structure in an easily obtainable format. It allowed the user
to track the structural history of the individual ship including member thicknesses,
damage, repair and alteration.

The results of the service life assessment program were encouraging. The program effectively
facilitated an integrated assessment process supporting corporate control, visibility and
decision making. These positive results convinced the Navy to progress to full execution,
renaming it the Achieving Service Life Program (ASLP). It would eventually include over 60
surface ships. Figures 2(a-f) show the different ship types included in the ASLP.

Figure 2a: DDG 51 Class (U.S. Figure 2b: LPD 17 Class (U.S.
Navy photo) Navy photo)

Figure 2c: LHD 1 Class (U.S. Navy Figure 2d: LSD 41 Class (U.S. Navy
photo) photo) 7
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Figure 2e: FFG 7 Class (U.S. Figure 2f: CG 47 Class (U.S. Navy
Navy photo) photo)

CURRENT EFFORTS

The ASLP process (now referred to as the ABS Service Life Evaluation Program) has been
applied to several US and international fleets. The experience gained from these many
experiences helped ABS expand and transform these early efforts into the current Condition
Based Program (CBP).
Government vessel operator goals are to:
1) Increase mission readiness or Ao.
2) Reduce emergent maintenance needs or failures in systems or equipment.
3) Shift from time based to condition based maintenance strategies.
4) Enable accurate risk-informed decision making.

Recent advances in technology, such as sensor hardware, data accumulation/transmission,

advanced analytics, and artificial intelligence have enabled new approaches to vessel health
understanding that, when effectively implemented, will support improved system safety and
reliability. ABS recognizes that operators of Government vessels require improved life-cycle
management approaches to achieve high levels of Ao, and consequently mission readiness,
while reducing total ownership costs.

The ABS Guide for Condition Based Program for Government Vessels has been developed to
increase understanding of condition and Class compliance risks associated with a vessel’s
critical hull, machinery and electrical (HM&E) systems in support of maintenance planning
and optimization for Government vessels. The ABS Condition Based Program provides a tiered
set of notations that span a range of digital capabilities and supporting services. The program
leverages both design and operational data by using a compliance risk model to continually
update a vessel specific CBP Survey Plan.

8
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

The ABS CBP focuses on leveraging data to enable a survey to become informed, targeted,
and predictive supported by a continuous data-driven process aligned with Government
operational and maintenance workflows. Once implemented, the CBP leverages such data
driven capabilities and insights to support a Government technical authority’s in-service
decision-making process.

This Guide applies to any Government acquisition program as guidance to provide support to
system performance specifications during the design and development phase. The Class
requirements during the acquisition phase are covered upon vessel delivery by the optional
notations CBP-Ready (S1, S2 or S3; M1, M2 or M3). In addition, these notations may be
used for sustainment across the operational life-cycle phase. The optional notations CBP (S1,
S2 or S3; M1, M2 or M3) are used for operating vessels that comply with the requirements in
this Guide.

The Guide also incorporates by reference other mandatory or optional CBP supporting
notations such as:

PMP: Preventative Maintenance Program requirements are found in ABS Rules for Survey
After Construction (Part 7). This notation is assigned to vessels where one or more items of all
Classed equipment are subject to Continuous Survey-Machinery (CMS).

SMART: This notation is assigned to vessels possessing a permanently installed Smart

Function complying with the ABS Guide for Smart Functions for Marine Vessels and Offshore
Units. The options include SMART (MHM) for Machinery Health Monitoring, and SMART
(SHM) for vessels possessing a permanently installed Smart Function system for Structural
Health Monitoring.

Figure 3: ABS Class Survey Philosophy Evolution. Source: ABS Guide for CBP for
Government Vessels.

9
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

TCM: Tailshaft Condition Monitoring is assigned to vessels with tailshafts specifically

arranged with oil-lubricated stern tube bearings, complying with the requirements of 4-3-2/13
of the ABS Rules for Building and Classing Marine Vessels.

HIMP: This notation signifies that the vessel is enrolled in the Hull Inspection and
Maintenance Program in accordance with the ABS Guide for Hull Inspection and Maintenance
Program.

Supporting notations can provide ABS with maintenance program status, condition and health
monitoring, and self-inspection program results, all of which support the vessel specific CBP
Survey Plan.

The CBP defines a data-driven evolution in Class survey planning and execution that is aligned
with the vessel design features and vessel operational data. Traditional Class survey
requirements are typically based on the historical performance of vessels of a certain type and
age but share only a minimal amount of actual vessel data prior to survey commencement.
However, the CBP Survey Plan is kept up to date via data collection and continual re-
assessment to deliver insights about the condition of a vessel’s critical hull structure, machinery
and components. CBP supports a continuous survey process and assists with decision-making
and is aligned with most Government vessel operational and maintenance workflows to support
their maintenance availability planning and strategies. See Figure 3 to see how the ABS Class
survey process has evolved toward CBP.

Each CBP tiered notation expands upon the scope, fidelity, and use of vessel related data, but
all tiers begin with the development of a vessel specific CBP Survey Plan that is based upon
an initial assessment of vessel structures and machinery. The requirements and activities for
structures and machinery to develop the CBP Survey Plan are further described in the Guide
and summarized below:

Structures: Conducted using finite element based strength and fatigue analyses, derived from
the design operational profile and previous route history (if applicable), as well as current or
as-delivered baseline hull condition. The strength assessment is based on ABS Rule
requirements. This information highlights structurally critical areas to be examined with
specific scope and frequency, based on risk categorization.

Machinery: The machinery assessment is conducted via profiling of maintenance and

condition data, equipment and system criticality, along with optional reliability, availability
and maintainability (RAM) maintenance data analysis and risk profiling for higher chosen tiers.

10
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

The RAM assessment also identifies critical equipment that could be targeted for data
analytics-based anomaly detection.

Once these processes are completed and the vessel is enrolled into the program, CBP
sustainment activities involve targeted and focused surveys of hull and machinery items via
collaborative data sharing and a set of services depending on the tiered notation chosen. The
CBP approach is to receive data prior to survey commencement to optimize the on-board
survey effort or to better inform the survey process. Shared data is then processed by a
composite risk profiling approach called the ABS Predictive Compliance Model (PCM) in
order to maintain and update the vessel’s CBP Survey Plan. The notation tiers also define the
tools and services involved in the CBP. Figure 4 illustrates the data sharing process within the
CBP.

Figure 4: CBP Sustainment and Data Sharing Concept. Source:

ABS Guide for CBP for Government Vessels.

Enrollment and sustainment of the CBP not only supports the Class survey and crediting
process, but also assists Government vessel operators with maintenance and availability

11
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

planning to improve the continued readiness of their fleet. Desired outcomes of the CBP
include:

1) Operational availability (Ao) planning, with a focus on planned vessel time out of service
resulting from a better understanding of anomalies and condition of Class prior to a repair
campaign or drydocking.
2) Flexibility in prioritization of closure and dispositioning of anomalies and conditions of
Class while at the same time maintaining vessel mission readiness.
3) Support a shift from schedule driven maintenance strategies to a program that comprises
predictive and condition-based maintenance strategies (less time-based tasks, optimal
spares and consumables).
4) Detection of the initiation of structural and equipment anomalies leading to failure, before
they impact longevity, to minimize unplanned HM&E conditions of Class or statutory
compliance.
5) Targeted and focused survey time on board an asset supported by a data-driven process
covering Annual/Intermediate/Special Survey Requirements for the vessel through a
continuous survey process.
6) Reduced crew and ship superintendent survey preparation burden.
7) Support for Class survey decisions using a predictive risk model.

Notation Tiers

The hull CBP (S1, S2 or S3) or machinery CBP (M1, M2 or M3, by system) notations indicate
that the hull or individual system(s) have achieved CBP enrollment in line with one or more of
the following CBP tiers:

Tier 1 (S1 and/or M1): Entry level requirements for CBP enrollment. Transactional data and
route or exposure-based sea state history will be leveraged for analysis and creation of vessel-
specific CBP Survey Plans. Based on the ABS survey reporting system, ABS annual survey
assessments will include a focused effort on structural critical areas and machinery identified
via the Predictive Compliance Model as high or medium risk primarily through lagging
indicators on the system aspects and including some structural leading indicators via the
continually reassessed hull critical areas and the structural dashboard alert system.

Tier 2 (S2 and/or M2): Involves a higher fidelity of transactional data analysis utilization in
PCM, via the inclusion of structural condition tracking and degradation forecasting, and
increased use of leading indicators for machinery reliability emergent risk identification
(RAM). The higher fidelity 3D condition model is deployed to complement the route or
exposure-based sea state history tracking, and to support anomaly management,
maintenance/repair, and availability planning.
12
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Tier 3 (S3 and/or M3): Introduces the use of time-series sensor data for enhanced PCM use.
Alerts from either hull sensor or anomaly detection for system monitoring serve as added
leading indicator inputs to the PCM, further informing survey planning. In addition, full-scale
hull sensor measurements enable structural digital twin calibration for improved accuracy and
reliability of the continual structural reassessments involved in the sustainability phase. Figure
5 illustrates the tiers and their associated paragraphs in the Guide.

Figure 5: CBP Structural and Machinery Components for each Tier. Source: ABS Guide
for CBP for Government Vessels.

The machinery notations may be applied to one or more of the following systems:

- Propulsion System
- Steering/Maneuvering System
- Power Generation/Distribution
- Firefighting System/Equipment
- Auxiliary Machinery

13
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

- Cargo/Ballast Handling System

- Hotel/Accommodations/HVAC
- Navigation System
- Station Keeping, Anchors, Mooring and Towing Equipment
Predictive Compliance Model

The ABS Predictive Compliance Model (PCM) is used to assess and quantify a vessel’s
compliance risk profile based on various leading and lagging datasets received either

Figure 6: Graphic depiction of the Structural and Machinery Predictive Compliance

Models. Source: ABS Guide for CBP for Government Vessels.

from the client or generated from a CBP component. The model is used to determine
compliance risk with respect to structural and system operational availability and Class
compliance. PCM is not indicative of literal compliance or noncompliance, rather it identifies
those HM&E systems and components determined to be at higher risk of being non-compliant
14
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

with respect to condition degradation, the presence of anomalies, or maintenance status and is
used as the means to inform annual survey scope and prioritization via the CBP Survey Plan.

The PCM is deployed within the CBP to:

- Assess the current condition/readiness of the hull and machinery with respect to
applicable Class and statutory requirements via a set of lagging factors.
- Forecast the degradation of an asset’s condition to evaluate via a set of leading factors and
thus the future risk of the asset non-compliance.

- Identify and prioritize maintenance and survey activity with respect to availability
planning and crediting of items towards special continuous survey of hull and machinery.
- Identify opportunities for aligning Technical Authority maintenance activities with Class
compliance activities to improve vessel readiness and reliability.
The PCM model is deployed within the ABS Survey Reporting system applications and plays
an important role in keeping a vessel’s CBP Survey Plan up to date. It provides a means to
synthesize various client and ABS data sets into an easy-to-use decision-making tool for the
Surveyor. See Figure 6 for a graphic depiction of the Structural and Machinery Predictive
Compliance Models.

Case Study – Military Sealift Command

The US Navy’s Military Sealift Command (MSC) is the leading provider of ocean
transportation for the Navy and the rest of the Department of Defense - operating
approximately 125 ships daily around the globe. ABS has Classed all of the ships in the MSC
fleet for over 40 years.
MSC exists to support the joint warfighter across the full spectrum of military operations,
delivering agile logistics, strategic sealift, as well as specialized missions anywhere in the
world, under any conditions, 24/7, 365 days a year. This challenging mission means that a
traditional time scheduled Class model is difficult to follow. In addition, periodic shipyard
maintenance availabilities leave little room for margin, so any surprises found (such as
excessive corrosion) are difficult to act upon during these tightly scheduled yard periods. For
these reasons, MSC challenged ABS to model their condition based program to their ships. A
pilot program was developed in 2018 named the Condition-Based Class Pilot.
Seakeeping, structural, spectral and fatigue analyses were conducted on finite element models,
determining critical at-risk areas in the structure. Hull sensors and strain gauges were added
along the hull to enable hull condition monitoring. After some time, preliminary results were
determined, showing strong correlation between the model and known damage on the vessel
(see Figure 7). Using an electronic structural health dashboard, enhanced monitoring
recommendations were made, including recommended fatigue inspection periods.
15
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Figure 7: Damage to Model Correlation. Source: RADM Mewbourne,

Commander, MSC.(2019, May 16.

Remote Inspection Technologies

The maritime industry’s interest in advanced inspection technologies is on the rise. Increasing
complexity of marine assets and associated operational activities are prompting a shift in how
Classification services are delivered. These technologies help augment, and even perhaps
supplant, traditional Class-related surveys or inspections. They include unmanned aerial
vehicles (UAV), robotic crawlers, remotely operated vehicles (ROVs), and wearable
technologies. Programmed to capture and share a richer array of information, these
technologies support survey data sharing with crew during the inspection, as well as owner’s
representatives many miles away, in either real-time or near real-time. These technologies can
deliver significant enhancements in the efficacy of surveys while being less intrusive to the
ship, decreasing operational down time and operational expenses while improving safety, as
remote unmanned vehicles are famous for applications which are considered ‘dull, dirty or
dangerous.’ The greatly increased level of data typically resulting from remote operations helps
improve the quality of condition based processes.
The ABS Guidance Notes on The Use of Remote Inspection Technologies addresses the
application of advanced inspection technologies to enable a more predictive and less intrusive
survey process. One of the immediate advantages for Government and marine clients is the
decrease in days off mission. For example, in 2020 the marine operator Harvey Gulf
International Marine (HGIM) was having difficulty scheduling Class surveys without having
to pause operations. While arrangements were made to extend survey windows as much as
possible, it soon became clear operations would be adversely impacted without a new approach.
Using new ABS processes of leveraging digital tools to enable remote surveys and more virtual
operations, transfer of digital documentation such as reports, photos and videos for non-

16
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

attendance verification was possible. Adopting this program improved scheduling efficiencies
and reduced operational disruptions, allowing operators to complete select surveys on time
without physical surveyor attendance. Using ABS Remote Survey, HGIM managed to meet
both charterer and Class requirements while minimizing interruptions to its operations. This
saved the company a 72 hour round trip to port and an additional day performing the surveys,
avoiding a total of 4 days off chartered time.

Machine Learning Augmentation

Visual inspections are essential for life cycle management of marine structures. Using
traditional approaches, industry faces many challenges associated with working in confined
space, at height, and underwater. Using remote inspection technologies can help solve this
challenge, but along with their use comes an additional challenge: the collection of tremendous
amounts of data, including videos and images for assessing the conditions of the structure. The
method of analyzing the data efficiently is an issue. Reviewing the data manually is not an
efficient approach; instead, image recognition tools capable of analyzing the data and
extracting usable information from it can greatly improve the RITs and enable a more efficient
inspection system to be built. For example, for coating inspections, it is important to detect all
coating failures such as coating breakdowns, general corrosion, and hard rust scales and then
grade the coating conditions according to standards. Use of an automatic data analysis tool can
improve the consistency of the grading, which is currently based on subjective determination
of inspectors. Using machine language (ML) algorithms (a branch of Artificial Intelligence, or
AI), historical data of the structure can be analyzed to predict its future conditions which can
be especially useful, especially as part of a condition based program. Using AI for coating
assessment or visual inspections, can build an inspection system that is safer, more efficient
and more accurate.
In partnership with Google, ABS has developed an analysis tool for grading coatings in tanks.
The process uses a category of ML called Artificial Neural Networks (ANN). An ANN is a
network of simple units (neurons) whose function is defined by a set of parameters. A deep
ANN may contain millions of neurons and parameters. These neurons interconnect to simulate
complex intelligent behavior such as the two functions for coating assessment. The ANN can
be trained using visual data already graded. After completing this training process, the ANN
model is evaluated. Once it can be verified that the model is operating accurately, it may be
implemented. See Figure 8.
If images of the same location are taken at different times, the image recognition tool can be
used to analyze them and predict when the coating failures will reach the threshold that
warrants a repair or forecast coating failures at a certain time in the future and be a powerful
tool in the condition based toolset. Although the focus is solely on coating failures here, the
tool can be further developed to detect other defects such as fractures and deformations.

17
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Figure 8: Training of an ML Model. Source: Machine Learning-based Image Recognition

for Visual Inspections. (2019, October)

CONCLUSION

A Condition Based Program permits increased operational flexibility via informed risk-based
decisions; when combined with remote inspection techniques and machine learning tools, the
overall package offers powerful tools to optimize maintenance decisions for the Government
fleet owner.

REFERENCES

American Bureau of Shipping. Guide for Condition Based Program for Government Vessels,
June 2022. https://www.eagle.org
18
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

American Bureau of Shipping. Guidance Notes on The Use of Remote Inspection Technologies,
December 2022. https://www.eagle.org
Delpizzo, Richard D.; Reinhardt, Ethan; Hong, Jacqueline; Valluri, Sharat. (2017, October).
Evolution of Worldwide Naval Design and Standardization. SNAME Maritime
Conference (Houston, TX).
Eccles, RDML T. J.; Delpizzo, R.; Ashe, G.; Albrecht, S. (2010, January). The U.S. Navy/ABS
Service Life Assessment Program. Pacific 2010 (Sydney, Australia)
Gu, H.; Wen, F.; Wang, Bo.; Lee, A-K.; Xu, D. (2019, October). Machine Learning-based
Image Recognition for Visual Inspections. SNAME Maritime Conference (Tacoma,
WA).
Inspection Technologies. (n.d.). https://ww2.eagle.org/en/innovation-and-
technology/technology-advancements/inspection-technologies.html
Potter, E. B. Seapower. Naval Institute Press, 2014. Annapolis, MD.
Lessons from the 600-Ship Navy | Naval History Magazine - August 2022, Volume 36, Number
4. (2022, August 2). U.S. Naval Institute. https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval-
history-magazine/2022/august/lessons-600-ship-navy
Mewbourne, RADM Dee, Commander, MSC. (2019, May 16). Military Sealift Command
Presentation at ASNE (American Society of Naval Engineers) MEGARUST 2019
Conference. (Norfolk, VA).
Military Sealift Command. (n.d.). MSC Mission. https://www.msc.usff.navy.mil/About-
Us/Mission/
Naval History and Heritage Command. (2017, November 17). US Ship Force Levels, 1887 to
Present. https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/us-ship-force-
levels.html

AUTHOR BIOGRAPHIES

Mr. Ambar Roy is presently the Business Development Manager for ABS in India,
Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. He is responsible for executing and driving sales strategies and
business development in the region. He is a sector-versatile and culturally aware Regional
Business Manager with over 25 years’ experience in operations, business development,
regional sales and marketing, route to market strategies, channel management, lean operational
management and improvements in organizations like Shell, Fidelity, MAN Diesel and others.

Ambar is a qualified marine chief engineer and has sailed on merchant vessels-tankers,
container vessels, Bulk Carriers and Ro-Ro vessels in companies like NOL, Bergessen and K-
Line. He is a graduate in marine engineering from Marine Engineering and Research Institute
Kolkata (DMET) and a full time MBA in Marketing & Finance from Indian Institute of
Technology, Delhi. He has also done programs in Introduction to Negotiation: A Strategic

19
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Playbook for Becoming a Principled and Persuasive Negotiator from Yale School of
Management and in Strategy and Sustainability from IESE Business School, Barcelona.

Mr. Gabriel Yeo currently holds the position of Business Development Manager at ABS
Singapore, where he plays an integral role in the contracted research and development team.
His primary responsibilities involve collaborating with government agencies and clients to
drive R&D initiatives and technological advancement. With a career spanning over 20 years in
the Maritime industry, he has held various roles with diverse capacities such as business
development, project management, engineering design, research and teaching. He has held
positions as Project Manager and Senior Surveyor for offshore projects (FPSOs, FSOs, Semi-
submersibles, Jack-ups) and did his post graduate research in underwater acoustics for defense
applications.

Gabriel obtained his master’s and bachelor’s degrees in mechanical engineering from the
National University of Singapore. He actively contributes to the Society of Naval Architects
and Marine Engineers Singapore (SNAMES) as the Honorary Secretary, having been a council
member since 2015. He was a recipient of the ASMI (Association of Singapore Marine
Industries) Scholarship and the Jurong Shipyard Scholarship.

CAPT Richard Delpizzo has over 35 years’ experience working in ship design, construction
and operations, technical review, regulatory requirements application, Navy project
management and defense acquisition. He has worked for the American Bureau of Shipping at
its New York, New Jersey and Washington, DC offices. He worked in ABS Engineering for
25 years, ultimately leading the ABS Washington DC Naval Engineering office from 2004 to
2009. After serving as ABS Government Services Manager from 2010-2016, he became the
ABS Director for International Government Services, serving navies, coast guards and other
government agencies throughout the world. In 2019, the US Navy, US Army and Maritime
Administration were added to his client portfolio.

In addition to chairing both the SNAME (Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers)
Ship’s Machinery Committee and Panel M-45 on Fuel Cells, he also serves as SNAME
Representative to the US ISO Technical Advisory Group (US TAG). He serves on both ASNE
(American Society of Naval Engineers) and SNAME Councils and was honored as a SNAME
Fellow in 2017. He has served as the ASNE Chair of Professional Development since 2015
and was awarded the ASNE Frank G. Law Award for outstanding contribution to the
advancement of the Society in 2021. He currently serves as Chairman of SNAME Chesapeake
Section (Washington, DC area). After serving in the U.S. Navy Reserve for 28 years, he retired
in 2012 at the rank of Captain. Rich is a graduate of the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy.

20
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Naval Ship Plume Dispersion and IR Signature Assessment

Sharad Dhavalikar, Ramkumar Joga, K S Srinivas, Joseph Prabhu

Indian Register of Shipping, Powai, Mumbai-400072

Abstract. The efflux from the ship’s funnel includes harmful emissions such as CO2, CO
and SOx, NOx and particulate matter which cause adverse effects such as interference of these
exhaust gases with halo operations, high-temperature contamination of upper deck electronic
equipment/sensors, and the short circuit of hot exhaust gases into the engine intakes, ships
ventilation and air conditioning systems. These effects are majorly governed by efflux velocity,
operational conditions, stack geometry, and buoyancy of the exhaust efflux. In the present work
investigation of exhaust flow efflux for a naval vessel is performed for various wind over deck
(WOD) conditions using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD). The equations of mass,
momentum, energy, turbulence and species are solved for convergence. Once the species
transport is solved the soot particles are injected in terms of Lagrangian particles and are
tracked in the continuum using the LMP (Lagrangian multiphase) model to investigate the
deposition of soot on communication and electronic equipment/sensitive sensors. Plume height
and deposition of soot particle for various WOD and vessel operation conditions is discussed.
Further the assessment of temperature of funnel and nearby area due to plume action is
investigated for predicting infrared (IR) signature of the vessel. Utilization of various advanced
techniques to investigate plume and its effect on IR signature is discussed with sample case
study.

Key words: CFD, Plume Dispersion, Lagrangian Multiphase, Soot particle, IR

1. Introduction
Smoke and exhaust gas efflux from the funnel gets washed on to the weather deck for low
speeds or for cases when the vessel is at berth, the diesel alternators keep working for electric
power generation. The downwash and plume dispersion leads to effects such as interference of
the exhaust gases with halo operations, soot deposition on fittings and fouling the air even in
the enclosed spaces and in some instances leading to higher temperature on upper deck
electronic equipment/sensors. And there is a likelihood of smoke/efflux being short circuited
into the main diesel engine/GT air intakes, ventilation and air conditioning system.
Understanding of the exhaust smoke behaviour and the interaction between the exhaust gases
and superstructure of the ships is an important aspect that has to be addressed in the initial
design phase. Else the smoke nuisance problem gets detected lately mostly post-construction
or during the trials and in some cases even post-delivery. Any modifications at that stage

21
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

becomes cumbersome and cost intensive. Attention towards the distribution of exhaust gases
and stack design is crucial in terms of minimising the infrared (IR) signature as well.
In the present paper numerical studies are performed using CFD to investigate the effect of
plume from the ship’s funnel. Three-dimensional continuity, momentum, energy, and
turbulence equations are solved using finite volume method (FVM). The deposition of soot is
modelled using Lagrangian multiphase method. The parameters like wind speed, direction and
efflux velocity of smoke are investigated for a generic naval vessel.
The exhaust gas efflux from the funnel are important contributors to the IR signature of the
ship. The heat is transferred to the stack and to parts of the superstructure of the ship by
radiation and convection. These parts become hot spots and contribute significantly to the
signature in both MIR and FIR (3-5µm and 8-12 µm). Another effect of the hot gases is that
they might degrade the performance of infrared sensors and possibly other sensors as well. The
infrared emission of the hull and the superstructure is governed by the temperature and the
emissivity of the surface. For a well-insulated ship, the outside temperature of a ship is
determined to a large extent by the temperature of the ambient air and solar load. The emissivity
(emission coefficient) of the surface determines the ratio between emission and reflection at
the surface. When the emissivity is 100%, the surface emits as a blackbody source. When the
emissivity deviates from unity, radiation from the background is partially reflected at the
surface. This can already be observed for normal paints with emissivity between 0.90 and 0.95,
where two surfaces with the same temperature can look different in the infrared due to different
reflected backgrounds. In the present study the results of plume dispersion (temperature on hull
surface) are used to find the radiance flux with suitable mathematical formulations and the
transmission losses in the atmosphere are calculated using LOWTRAN 7.

2. Methodology for simulating Plume Trajectory and soot particle Dispersion

22
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

3. Plume Trajectory Analysis

A CAD model of the vessel along with major upper deck equipment is prepared. The
funnel and the exhaust openings on the funnel are modelled as velocity exhaust to simulate the
exhaust flow leaving the funnel stack. The air intakes for suction into GT/GTG are modelled
as suction velocity.

Fig. 1 CAD modelling of Funnel Exhausts, Critical Equipment and Deck Intakes

Numerical analysis is performed for various wind speeds and vessel headings ranging from 0
deg to 360 deg. The engine operating conditions are varied for vessel at berth, GTG operating
at full capacity and vessel operating at full speed, GT operating at full capacity. The Steady-
State CFD simulations are initially performed for model scale to fine tune the CFD model with
23
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

model scale results. The equations of mass, momentum, energy, and turbulence are solved
using Finite Volume Method (FVM). Two-equation turbulence models are used to solve for
turbulence. Mesh independence studies are performed for both model and full scale to obtain a
mesh independence solution by comparing the value of drag on the hull. The fine-tuned model
scale CFD model is used for performing the full scale CFD simulations.

Fig. 2 Plume re-entry into deck intakes for vessel full speed ahead condition

The full scale CFD results indicate that exhaust smoke dispersion is affected by the efflux
velocity, different operational conditions, buoyancy, and turbulence, as well as the geometry
of the stack. The rise of exhaust gases from the stack mainly depends on the momentum and
buoyancy effects which occur due to the temperature difference between the temperatures of
the ambient air and exhaust gases. The velocity is the main component of momentum. The
turbulence effects also play an important role in the rise of the exhaust gases. For the cases of
higher relative wind speeds the flow from the funnel exhaust is mostly dominated by free-
stream and a re-entry of plume into the deck intakes is observed (Ref. Fig .2). Whereas for
lower speeds of vessel the velocity of the exhaust plume is governing and for these cases the
plume exits the vessel at higher heights.
For the following sea cases, the plume height increases for slow speeds, however for higher
speeds the plume height decreases as the free-stream wind is dominant and the exhaust from
the funnel flows on to the antennae and higher temperatures are observed on the
communication equipment.

Fig. 3 Trajectory of Exhaust Plume onto Communication Equipment for Following Sea’s

4. Soot particle Dispersion Analysis

24
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

In a naval vessel there are various constraints on placement of communication equipment on

deck and the placement of these equipment is mainly focussed on reducing the electromagnetic
interference and achieving the electromagnetic compliance. Also, this equipment is highly
sensitive to temperature and needs to be shielded from deposition of smoke and dust. From
the presented numerical studies, it is observed that the deposition of the soot was severe for the
following seas (wind) and full speed condition. Advanced numerical methods like LMP can be
made use to quantify the deposition of soot. The species transport equations are solved
additionally to model the transport of various efflux gases in the continuum. LMP method shall
be used once the plume trajectory simulations are complete, where the soot mixture is modelled
as Lagrange particles. The results of the plume trajectory are used as an initial condition for
dispersion analysis. The trajectory of the dispersed soot particles is tracked in terms of
Lagrange particles. The details of mole fraction and flow rate of exhaust gases like NO2, SO2,
CO, CO2 and HC are used in the LMP model to quantify the deposition of soot for various
efflux gases. Form Fig.4 it can be seen for the following sea case the exhaust from the plume
is flowing towards the antenna and the soot particles are seen depositing on the antenna
(highlighted yellow). Along with the location of deposition quantification of each phase of the
exhaust gases can also be estimated using the LMP model. Measures can be taken to alter the
location of any critical equipment if needed.

Fig. 4 Deposition of soot particles on the antenna (highlighted in yellow)

5. Infrared Signature
The thermal load due to hot funnel (Ref. Fig 5) estimated from plume dispersion study is used
for estimating the infrared signature. The solar load is also a major contributing factor for IR
signature and the same is estimated in the CFD model. The surface temperatures estimated
from CFD are exported along with surface normal. This data is post processed to estimate the
zero-range radiance intensity (in-house tool using MATLAB). The term zero range means that
no effects due to the atmosphere, in terms of radiance and transmittance of background. Initial
calculations are performed to estimate the spectral radiant intensity of the black body, 𝑊𝜆𝑏𝑏 .
Methodology for IR signature prediction is depicted in below flow chart.
25
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

The spectral radiant temperature of the black body is computed by Eq. 1.

𝐶 1
𝑊𝜆𝑏𝑏 = 𝜆15 𝑒 𝐶2/𝜆𝑇 −1 (1)
Where 𝐶1 (3.741*10-16 Wm2) and 𝐶2 (1.439*10-2 mK) are coefficients of first and second
radiations.

The spectral radiant intensity, 𝑁𝑍𝑟 of the black body is integrated over a range of wavelengths
𝜆 of 3-5µm (MIR) and 8-12 µm (FIR) using Eq. 2 to obtain the radiance flux per unit solid
angle.
𝜀𝑊𝜆𝑏𝑏 (𝜆)
𝑁𝑍𝑟 = ∫ 𝑑𝜆 (2)
𝜋
The zero-range radiant intensity, 𝐽𝑧𝑟 is computed by integrating the radiance flux over the
entire surface area of the vessel with the cross product of the surface normal and the observer
orientation as given Eq. 3.
𝐽𝑧𝑟 = ∫ 𝑁𝑛̂ . ⃗⃗⃗⃗
𝐴
𝑑(𝜃, 𝜑)𝑑𝐴 (3)

26
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

27
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Fig. 5 Thermal Load due to exhaust gases from the funnel used for IR Signature

Where 𝜃 and 𝜑 are the zenith and azimuth angles of the observer position. ‘ 𝑛̂’ denotes the unit
normal surface vector.

The radiation contrast of the vessel with the sea is computed using LOWTRAN. The sea
radiance is computed using Eq. 4.
𝑏𝑏
𝑁𝑠𝑒𝑎 = 𝑁𝑝𝑎𝑡ℎ + (𝑁𝑠𝑒𝑎 + 𝑁𝑠𝑘𝑦 + 𝑁𝑠𝑢𝑛 )𝜏𝑝𝑎𝑡ℎ (4)

Where 𝑁𝑝𝑎𝑡ℎ - optical path radiance

𝑁𝑠𝑘𝑦 - reflected sky radiance
𝑁𝑠𝑢𝑛 - reflected sun radiance
𝑏𝑏
𝑁𝑠𝑒𝑎 - thermal blackbody emission
𝜏𝑝𝑎𝑡ℎ - atmospheric transmission

The Radiance of the target weighted by the Earth’s atmospheric properties is given by Eq. 5
where the term 𝑁𝑧𝑟 can be substituted from Eq. 2.
𝑁𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒𝑡 = 𝑁𝑧𝑟 𝜏𝑝𝑎𝑡ℎ + 𝑁𝑝𝑎𝑡ℎ (5)

The Net radiance is calculated for several ranges of wavelength and observation directions as
per Eq. 6.
Δ𝑁 = 𝑁𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒𝑡 − 𝑁𝑠𝑒𝑎 (6)

28
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

The radiation contrast of the ship with the sea is estimated for different vessel speeds in the
MIR for the sun’s position at 12 am (Fig. 6). The observer’s position is at an elevation of 10
deg and the range is 1km.

Fig. 6 Polar Plot of IR Signature in MIR for a Range of 1Km for vessel Speeds of 12 Kn and
18Kn

Conclusions
The recent advancements in numerical and computational advancements have enabled the
assessment of plume trajectory followed by the dispersion of exhaust gases and soot particles
on the upper deck and communication equipment. The rise of exhaust gases is mainly
dependent on the momentum of the exhaust gases and the free-stream wind speed. For the case
of higher vessel speed and ahead condition the relative wind speed becomes governing factor
for plume height and Re-entry of plume is observed. For the astern case the plume washes on
to the communication equipment in the case of higher relative wind speeds and elevated
temperatures are observed on the communication equipment. Advanced numerical techniques
like Lagrangian Multi-Phase and Particle Tracking methods are utilised to track the soot
particles and quantify the deposition rate. The temperatures on the funnel obtained from plume
studies along with solar load obtained using CFD is used for estimating Infrared signature.
Application of CFD techniques to investigate plume trajectory, soot particle deposition and
further investigation of IR signature is presented. These advanced techniques can assist
designer in the initial design phase and manage the overall signature of the naval vessels.

29
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Use of the Regulatory Framework in the classification of Naval Ships

Nico Bruni

Registro Italiano Navale (RINA) S.p.A

Abstract. The classification of Naval Ships is a voluntary choice, and the Navies are both
owners and Naval Administrations for their ships. In their role of Naval Administrations, the
Navy may decide to apply its own standards for certain aspects of the ship design and
construction that are within the scope of the classification. In order to avoid overlap and
conflict among class and military Rules, RINA has introduced in its RINAMIL Rules the
concept of the Regulatory Framework which allows the use and harmonization of different
Rules and Regulations in the classification activities. Furthermore, the Regulatory Framework
can be a subset of the Standards Plan required by the Naval Ship Code in the process of the
Naval Ship Safety Certification.

In the shipping industry, the application of Classification Rules is a critical step in

verifying the safety and reliability of ships, and obtaining a class certificate is mandatory for
issuing statutory certifications.

In the navy sector, warships are exempted from the application of international
conventions such as SOLAS (Safety of Life at Sea) and the Load Line Convention, among
others. Consequently, the classification of naval ships, including both warships and
governmental vessels not engaged in commercial service, remains a voluntary choice for naval
administrations. However, in recent years, many navies have started requiring warships to be
classed, at least during the newbuilding phase. For instance, RINA has classed a wide range of
warships, from small fast patrol vessels to aircraft carriers, in the past two decades.

Classifying naval ships necessitates a unique approach in terms of applicable standards

and rules. Safety requirements must be integrated with operational needs, which are of
paramount importance for warships.

To facilitate the effective classification of naval ships, most class societies have
developed specific rules for this purpose. In the case of RINA, the RINAMIL Rules were issued
in 2003 as their classification rules for naval ships.

However, there are instances when navies have specific requirements for certain aspects
of ship design and construction, and they wish for these to be considered in the classification
process. For example, specific requirements regarding intact and damage stability, derived
from the navy's extensive experience or particular survivability requirements, might be applied.
30
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

In order to prevent overlap and conflict between class and military rules, RINA
introduced the concept of the Regulatory Framework in its RINAMIL Rules. This framework
enables the use and harmonization of different rules and regulations in classification activities.

At first glance, this may appear unusual or a departure from the rules. However, several
key factors should be considered:
1. Classification is a voluntary certification process.
2. Classification is not a part of the statutory certification required for SOLAS or ILL
(International Load Line) compliance.
3. The navy serves as both the owner and the Flag Administration (Naval Administration)
for its ships, giving it the authority to determine the most appropriate standards for
ensuring the safety of its vessels.

Through the Regulatory Framework, RINA, the shipyard, and the navy can define the list
of applicable standards for each classification aspect, whether they are RINAMIL standards or
others, as well as establish variable parameters based on the naval administration's evaluation.
The concept of the Regulatory Framework can be applied at a high-level, defining the
applicable standards for main topics such as hull structures, stability, machinery, and systems,
or at a detailed level, specifying the applicable standards for each individual ship drawing.

Once agreed upon by all parties, the Regulatory Framework guides the plan approval and
survey during the construction phase, and the class certificate is issued in compliance with this
document.

In broader terms, the Regulatory Framework serves as a subset of the Standards Plan
outlined in the Naval Ship Code, and classification can be utilized to demonstrate compliance
with the goals of the Code.

RINA has extensively employed the Regulatory Framework in numerous projects,

including the INS Deepak and INS Shakti for the Indian Navy, where stability was approved
based on the NES 109 standard as an alternative to the RINAMIL requirements.

31
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Status of R&D and Standardization of AUV/UUV in Japan

Hirobumi Kaneko

Researcher, ClassNK Research Institute, Japan

Email: icg@classnk.or.jp

Abstract: In Japan, R&D related to Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUVs) has been
progressing since the 2000s, particularly in the fields of undersea cable surveys and maritime
surveys & security, with highly successful results. However, as the scale of the domestic
industry utilizing AUVs is limited, it has not been viable to mass-produce AUVs and majority
of the core components are dependent on overseas suppliers. The Japanese government is
considering formulating an AUV strategy because of the foreseen increase of the use of AUVs
in the field of maintenance and security of offshore wind power generation facilities, which is
expected to grow in the future. ClassNK is keeping abreast of the policies of the Japanese
Government to be able to respond to quickly emerging industry demands and advancement in
technologies.

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

The Deep Sea Cruising AUV “URASHIMA” was developed by Japan Agency for Marine-earth
Science and Technology (JAMSTEC) in the late 1990s and held the long-distance cruising
record of that time. As part of the Strategic Innovative Program (SIP), which is a national
project, the technology in which multiple AUVs cooperate to survey a wide area of the seabed
was demonstrated as shown in Fig.1.

Fig.1. AUV Technology Development by SIP (2014-2018)

32
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Although Japan has a long history of R&D in maritime research and attained an advanced
technological level with regards to AUVs, many of the AUVs in Japan are overseas products,
partly due to the small size of the domestic oil and gas extraction industry and the marine
industry using AUVs.

As the use of AUVs is expected to expand in the fields of maritime security and the
maintenance and management of offshore wind power generation facilities in the future, the
Japanese government decided to formulate a strategy for the domestic production and
industrialization of AUVs.

1.2 MoD’s Projects

As part of the Ministry of Defense (MoD) projects, empirical research on Unmanned

Underwater Vehicles (UUVs) has been continuing since the 2000s. In the 2010s, an
autonomous mine detector, OZZ-5(Fig.2) was developed and deployed. Currently, a prototype
project of a large UUV capable of long-distance and durable operation is underway. As part of
the National Security Strategy and the National Defense Strategy announced in December last
year, a policy was outlined to suitably equip UUVs at an early stage to gain & maintain an
underwater advantage.

Based on the results of R&D at MoD and SIP, projects for early production and deployment of
large UUVs (Fig.3) and for the establishment of a maritime security platform to promote the
conservation and use of the oceans, which are critical for national security, are planned as
shown in Fig.4.

Fig.2. OZZ-5 developed by MoD

33
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Fig.3 Large UUV

Fig.4. MoD and SIP projects

2. FUTURE STRATEGY ON AUVs

The AUV Strategic Project Team was established under the Headquarters for Ocean Policy,
headed by the Prime Minister, and an interim report1) on the strategy was published in April
2023.

The AUV strategy will take the following 7 directions and is planned to be developed during

34
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

fiscal year 2023.

(a) Forming a public-private platform

(b) Creating a vision for the future

(c) Creating a technology map

(d) Building a common base

(e) Improving the institutional environment

(f) Measures to promote corporate activities

(g) Promotion of research and development

In the National Security Strategy2), issued in December 2022, “Enhancing Public-private

Partnerships for Improving Technical Capabilities and Proactively Capitalizing on Outcomes
of Research and Development in the Security Field” and “in order to widely and actively utilize
Japan's advanced technological capabilities in the public and private sectors for security
purposes, Japan will strengthen the system to improve technological capabilities of the public
and private sectors that can be used for security purposes, to utilize, in a whole-of-government
manner, funds and information related to research and development.” is mentioned.

Under these circumstances, ClassNK believes that there are many areas where it can
contribute, with its expertise in both merchant and governmental vessels.

3. GUIDELINE FOR ROV/AUV

With these situations in mind as well as the speed at which Remotely Operated Vehicles
(ROVs) and AUVs technological innovations are being made globally, ClassNK published the
Guidelines3) for ROV / AUV to help promote the wider adoption of such technologies
throughout the maritime industry as shown in Fig.5 on the website. The Guidelines establishes
requirements related to operational precautions and safety measures, procedures for applying
to ship surveys for classed ships as well as other matters.

35
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Fig.5. Guidelines for ROV/AUV

4. CONCLUSION

The status of AUV research and development in Japan and the outline of the future
government's AUV strategy were considered from our perspective.

ClassNK, which has extensive experience in development of rules and various certification
work in the maritime industry so far, believes that there are many potential areas where we can
contribute to the domestic production and industrialization of Japanese AUVs, such as
technical standards, operational standards, inspection guidelines.

ClassNK is keeping abreast of the policies of the Japanese Government to be able to respond
to quickly emerging industry demands and advancement in technologies.

5. REFERENCES

1) The AUV Strategic Project Team, 2023, “Interim Report”,

https://www.kantei.go.jp/jp/singi/kaiyou/sanyo/20230329/AUV_PT_InterimSummary_all.pdf

2) Japan, 2023, “National Security Strategy”,

https://www.cas.go.jp/jp/siryou/221216anzenhoshou/nss-e.pdf

3) ClassNK, 2021, “Guidelines for ROV/AUV”,

https://www.classnk.or.jp/account/ja/Rules_Guidance/ssl/download.aspx?type=pdf&path=gui
delines/&file_name=gl_rov_auv_j202012

36
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Role of Remote Operations Centre for Autonomous Vessels

R. Srinivas

Vice President & Senior Principal Surveyor, Indian Register of Shipping

Abstract. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) took steps to address

regulatory aspects of “Maritime Autonomous Surface Ship (MASS)” and initiated development
of a non-mandatory MASS code. The regulatory scoping exercise carried out by IMO prior to
initiating work on non-mandatory MASS code identified remote control centres and remote-
control operators as one of high -priority issues. Remote control centre form an essential part
of autonomous vessel system required for monitoring and control of autonomous vessels.
The remote control centres play a crucial role in successful demonstration of autonomous
vessels which could lead to autonomous ship operations to become a commercial reality. The
ROC may be located on a separate vessel or at shore and may also interface with other ROCs
that are separately located. The Centre may control and monitor single or multiple ASVs.

The paper intends to bring out critical aspects which are to be considered in design installation
and subsequent operation of ROC . The importance of looking at Functional requirements ,
manning and risk analysis are some of the critical issues which need to be considered during
design phase. The remote control centre shall be designed and installed to a level appropriate
for the mission, considering the risk assessment. The paper also briefly highlights the projects
being undertaken in India in this new emerging field, where IRS is actively involved .

Introduction

Remote Control Centre or Remote Operations Centre (ROC) is an essential part of autonomous
vessel system required for monitoring and control of autonomous vessels. The Centre may
control and monitor single or multiple ASVs. The ROC plays a crucial role in successful
demonstration of autonomous vessels which could lead to autonomous ship operations to
become a commercial reality. The ROC may also interface with other ROCs that are separately
located. The ROC architecture could vary from system to system and could be location
specific.

In spite of the above variance in the final design of ROC, the remote-control centre shall be
designed and installed to a level appropriate for the mission while considering the risk
assessment. The paper intends to bring out critical aspects which are to be considered in design
installation and subsequent operation of ROC and briefly discusses the projects being
undertaken in India in this new emerging field.

Functional requirements of ROCs

37
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

The role of ROC could be performing two modes of operation. Monitoring or monitoring and
control

In the first mode, all vessel parameters will be monitored and analysed from ROC and it will
provide necessary support to vessel operator for decision making (as required) during vessel
operation. In the second mode, all vessel parameters will be monitored from ROC and the ROC
also has the capability to control the vessel operation.

In order to perform the above mentioned roles functional requirements for the ROC are as
follows

- It shall be possible to observe real-time operational status, readiness and capacity of

the vessel, which would help to realise real time situation awareness of the vessel and
provide decision support.
- All the abnormal conditions and situations are to initiate an alert and depending on
the criticality of the situation which they represent , the alerts can be further classified.

Towards this Principles of IMO Resolution MSC. 302(87) Performance Standards for Bridge
Alert Management and IMO Resolution A.1021(26) Code on Alerts and Indicators can be
taken as guidance for reference. Alerts due to loss of communication, local power supply
,changes from desired environmental conditions at ROC need monitoring .

- The operator response to given situation could vary with vessel autonomy type . An
operational manual for the control centre providing clear instructions on how to
handle a particular situation, shall be provided.
- The ROC is to be provided with necessary hardware and application software for
carrying out its intended operations.
- It shall be possible to control the vessel only from one location at a given point of time
therefore the transfer of control from ship to centre is be defined for both normal
and emergency situations. Such procedures shall consider various scenarios
depending on the vessel autonomy level and presence of crew on board .
- The ROC shall provide support during emergency situation handling
- The control centre shall have established Connectivity with the vessel being
monitored, PORT VTMS and rescue coordinating centres.
- Various risks including operational risks are to be identified at design stage and
mitigation measures are to be implemented .

Presently the ROC are shore based . However in future there could be ROC’s located on
floating assets. A particular need for such a requirement could be for defence applications
where an unmanned vessel while performing its mission , is required to be controlled from a

38
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

mother ship. The functional requirements of ROC for such operations are to be provided by
the mother ship..

Risk Assessment of ROCs

Risks to the ROC are to be suitably addressed during the design stage and documented in
design philosophy document

Following possible risks are to be considered during ROC design, as a minimum. The list is
only indicative and the risk assessment is to be specific to each project and location:

i. Situation awareness in the ROC: Errors due to not understanding the true situation of

the vessel.

ii. Misunderstandings in interaction: latency in VHF communication, bad

communication

links, and language issues same as for manned systems, but worsened by lack of

situation awareness.

iii. Delays in decision making due to lengthy time for operator to get into the loop
(human out-of the-loop syndrome).

iv. Location: Location of ROC is to be analysed in view of availability of network

connectivity and communication links 24hrs in a day without disturbance

v. Corrupted backup data

vi. Human error in proper formatting of the backup medium or overwriting backup data

vii. Delayed recovery process due to backup tapes or disks being stored off site

viii. Failure of monitoring , control systems, fire in ROC

ix. Cyber risks

Design Philosophy of ROCs

The ROC design is to be based on key aspects of redundancy , survivability, modularity ,

reliability and maintainability .

39
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Redundancy – A single failure in the system shall not interrupt the control and monitoring
function of ROC.

Survivability – Vital monitoring and control functions remain operational and operating at
ROC when the vessel system is exposed to adverse conditions

Modularity -Hardware and software of ROC is to be modular by design for scalability, best
maintainability, and operational flexibility.

Reliability – Hardware and software components of the ROC systems are to be proven for
applications under different operating conditions, noting that malfunctioning of hardware and/
or software may lead to accidents.

Maintainability- Systems in ROC are to be easy to maintain without disturbing operation of

vessel at sea. Data backup is to be considered for restoring systems after maintenance risks as
identified in risk analysis are tbe suitably mitigated and documented clearly indicating the
mitigation measures.

Remote Operations Centre Layout

The ROC can be visualised as an extended bridge , therefore in effect the design shall consider
the operational convenience of the operator. The number of operator stations would depend on
the number of vessels required to be controlled and /or monitored from the Centre. The layout
of the ROC is to be such that all the tools/ displays and indicators necessary for smooth control
of the vessel from that position should be available to the operators.

Workstations in the ROC therefore are to be ergonomically designed and are to be provided
with high resolution colour monitors that display graphical pages of the machinery and
systems, as appropriate.

Each work station is to be provided with appropriate password authorization and the control
transfer protocols are to be complied with. Display and controller redundancy are to be
provided for each function. Special care is to be taken to address the Internal environmental
conditions such as, illumination, temperature, noise, ventilation etc which could affect
performance of the system.

Data Back Up and Recovery

Arrangements are to be provided at the ROC to continuously record the changes in sensor data
and the control commands together with the date and time stamps for each value. Data backup
system at ROC is to be suitable for storing all collected data in a well defined format. Data is

40
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

to be classified into engine data, bridge data, cargo data, video, images etc. and stored with
time tag, function, data type for ease in recovery.

The centre should be designed for continuous data backup for minimum period of two weeks
and facility should be provided for archiving and replay of backup data.

Manning and Operational aspects

In comparison to a conventional ship, the processes for all remote-controlled ships are basically
the same. However, the way how they are operated will be different. Examples are:

> Situational perception will take place via a variety of sensors;

> Communication between ROC and MASS ( Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships) , as well
as with other maritime participants, will be characterized by a very high level of data exchange;

> The automation will be operated by modified human-machine interfaces;

> The equipment and machinery will feature new technologies.

The challenges for the ROC are in the technical area as well as in shaping human’s relationships
with automation. Qualification , training and competency of the operator plays an important
part in autonomous vessel operation.

This is also one of the important aspects of ROC and is being deliberated at IMO during
formulation of MASS code. It has been generally opined that remote operator shall have
qualification like a bridge operator as per STCW convention. Additionally training specific
to ROC including alertness of the operator to quickly move to” person in Loop “ is an
important aspect under discussion.

The operator shall be trained to quickly assimilate various types of information presented at
ROC which includes ship machinery parameters, information from situational awareness
sensors, analyse and take action as appropriate. The operator shall have understanding of the
effect of latency while receiving the information and its effect while executing a control
command. The operator shall keep a constant watch on developing weather information near
the vessel under observation vessel route and take /provide guidance as appropriate.

The operator shall have knowledge of vessel communication systems and will be responsible
for carrying out communication with ship and Port during normal situations and with rescue ,
emergency centres during emergency situations. The competency of the remote operator will
be required to meet the qualification criterion as per STCW convention.

Work at IMO
41
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

A non-mandatory, goal-based code for MASS is being developed at IMO, potentially entering
into force as a mandatory code upon experience with its application. The non-mandatory
MASS Code is planned to be ready by 2025, with the mandatory code expected to enter into
force by 1 January 2028.

In the recently concluded IMO MSC 107, progress on the development of the new MASS Code
was reviewed and agreed in principle that the code would apply to SOLAS cargo ships.

MSC 107 further agreed that the code should contain a risk-analysis-based approach following
the structure of MSC.1/Circ.1455 and should utilize suitable risk assessment methods.

A definition of “modes of operation” was agreed in principle to determine the conditions of the
various functions that, together, safely operate a ship for its intended purpose, noting that the
various functions may vary between multiple modes of operation.

It was also observed that while developing risk mitigating measures MSC.1/ Circ. 1638 –
Outcome of RSE, should be used for a more a closer look at the HAZARDs.

MSC 107 noted that the joint working group (MSC/FAL/LEG) agreed in principle that there
shall be a human master responsible for MASS regardless of its modes of operation, and that
the term “Remote Operations Centre” (ROC) will be used to designate the place where the
remote master and remote operator(s) are located. Importantly, MSC 107 further noted that
requirements of COLREGs would be relevant and applicable regardless of how a ship is
operated (conventional or MASS), and that there was no need to amend COLREGs to
accommodate MASS at this stage.

IRS initiatives in Autonomous Vessels

IRS is carrying out following projects aimed towards technology demonstration of Remote
controlled and autonomous vessels

• Remote controlled vessel – USV with L&T defence

• Autonomous vessel – with two leading Indian shipyards

IRS is working with L&T Défense IC ( vertical) on development and testing of remote
controlled ship. The technology demonstration will be carried out on a 4 m vessel, which can
be controlled remotely using wireless , satellite systems.

The primary objective of the trial is to showcase the diverse range of capabilities possessed by
the Unmanned Surface Vehicle (USV). The vessel is being outfitted with state-of-the-art
42
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

components, including a high-definition camera, navigation radar, and side scan sonar. These
advanced features enable remote operators to diligently monitor designated areas of interest,
carry out real-time surveillance, and conduct thorough seabed scans to identify various
anomalies.

All the data is encrypted to prevent interception. All the sensor data (Camera, Radar and Sonar)
on board the LT VEGA is transmitted in real-time with minimum latency to the operator at the
control station.

The USV is equipped with devices and sensors for navigation and situational awareness.
Various additional payloads may be integrated to cater to specific mission requirements. The
side scan sonar system on is capable of real-time scanning to detect various submerged objects..
Furthermore, The vessel is equipped with a camera featuring pan, tilt, and zoom functionalities,
along with a navigation radar, the sensor data obtained from these systems will be utilized to
facilitate obstacle avoidance and to provide situational awareness to the operator at the control
station.

The USV is designed to provide the user with four control modes. Remote control mode, Semi-
auto mode, Autonomous waypoint navigation mode and collision avoidance mode. These
modes offer varying levels of autonomy – additional capabilities such as return-to-home and
Go-to mode.

Conclusion

Fast paced developments are underway at various forums to demonstrate autonomous vessel
and IMO is working on the non -mandatory MASS code . In India under the Make in India
ambit Indian shipyards and major defence system suppliers have taken up the initiative to
demonstrate the new technology. Further work on operational aspects , how autonomous
vessels can co-exist with other vessels , rescue and coordination etc are the some of the critical
aspects which are being studied under various forums and are in the process of finding solution
to such issues before the mandatory MASS code is implemented.

References

• IMO MSC papers on MASS

• IRS Guidelines on Remotely Operated Vessels and Autonomous Surface Vessels
• IMO MSC.1/ Circ. 1604: Interim Guidelines for MASS Trials
• A pre analysis of autonomous ships by Danish Maritime Authority and Technical
University of Denmark (DTU)
• Definitions of Autonomous ships -Norwegian forum for Autonomous ships

43
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Classification of Unmanned and Autonomous Vessels

Ambar Roy[1], Gabriel Yeo[2], Captain Richard Delpizzo, USNR (Retd), (F) SNAME[3]

[1]
ABS Business Development Manager for India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka; [2]ABS Business
Development Manager-Singapore Global Government; [3]ABS Director, Global Government
Services

Abstract. The world marine industry has entered a period of evolving technologies and
innovation not seen since perhaps the introduction of steam propulsion in the early nineteenth
century, or the widespread standardization of intermodalism seen in the middle of the twentieth
century. One of the most prominent technologies to be introduced to both civilian and military
maritime applications is that of unmanned and autonomous surface and subsurface operations.

This paper will introduce the concepts of maritime applications for both unmanned and
autonomous marine concepts, with a focus on a Classification Society’s approach to
certification of the overall marine facility and autonomous functionalities used within it. Topics
explored in this paper will include:

- Some current worldwide examples

- A Class Society’s approach to novel concepts and new technology
- Applicable class notations associated with these platforms
- The critical role of cybersecurity
- Additional challenges to the use of autonomous operations in a military environment
- Challenges for the use of AI for autonomous operations (such as the black box
conundrum, and the growing call for a software bill of materials (SBOM)

An overview of the applicable ABS Guides and Advisories addressing these technologies will
be included, with an emphasis on a classification approach. As many of these processes include
goal-based techniques, a short discussion of goal-based standards will be included. Note: This
paper will limit its scope to surface vessel applications.

KEY WORDS:
ABS; Artificial Intelligence (AI); Autonomous; Classification; Cybersecurity; Unmanned:
Unmanned Surface Vessel (USV)

NOMENCLATURE
ABS: American Bureau of Shipping
AI: Artificial Intelligence
ASuW Anti-Surface Warfare
CONOPS: Concept of Operations Statement
CRMS: Cybersecurity Risk Management System
DMO: Distributed Maritime Operations

44
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

EPF: Expeditionary Fast Transport

EW: Electronic Warfare
FEED: Front-End Engineering Design
FMEA: Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
FMECA: Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis
FMI: Functional Mockup Interface
GBS: Goal Based Standard
HiCAMS: Artificial Intelligence-based Autonomous Safety Management Function
HiCBM: Artificial Intelligence-based Autonomous Machinery Health Management
Function
Hi-GAS+ SMART FGSS: Artificial Intelligence-based Autonomous LNG Fuel Gas Supply
System
Hi-GAS+ AI CHS: Artificial Intelligence-based Smart LNG Boil-off Gas Management
System
IMO: International Maritime Organization
IO: Information Operations
ISQM: Integrated Software Quality Management
ISR: Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance
ISR&T: Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance and Targeting
IT: Informational Technology
JDP: Joint Development Project
LNG: Liquified Natural Gas
LUSV: Large Unmanned Surface Vehicle
ML: Machine Learning
MUSV: Medium Unmanned Surface Vehicles
MASS: Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships
MDUSV: Medium Displacement Unmanned Surface Vehicle
MoU: Memorandum of Understanding
OEM: Original Equipment Manufacturers
OT: Operational Technology
RBD: Reliability Block Diagram
RIMPAC: Rim of the Pacific Exercise
SBOM: Software Bill of Materials
UAV/USV: Unmanned Aerial Vehicle/Surface Vessel
V&V: Verification and Validation techniques
VLS: Vertical Launch System

45
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, the world maritime community has seen a sharp increase in investment in
unmanned and autonomous technologies. For example, in January 2023 ABS and HD
Hyundai signed a comprehensive memorandum of understanding (MoU) to continue working
together on industry-leading autonomous projects. The agreement builds on the two
organizations’ shared efforts to expand the development of autonomous navigation technology
into critical vessel machinery and safety systems and covers four areas:

1. Artificial Intelligence-based Autonomous Machinery Health Management Function

(HiCBM).
2. Artificial Intelligence-based Autonomous Safety Management Function (HiCAMS).
3. Artificial Intelligence-based Autonomous LNG Fuel Gas Supply System (Hi-GAS+
SMART FGSS); and,
4. Artificial Intelligence-based Smart LNG Boil-off Gas Management System (Hi-GAS+ AI
CHS).

Previously, ABS worked with HD Hyundai subsidiaries, Avikus and Korea Shipbuilding and
Offshore Engineering (KSOE), resulting in the demonstration of technology developed by
Avikus. This enabled the 180,000 cubic meter liquified natural gas (LNG) carrier, Prism
Courage, to sail in autonomous mode, under direct supervision, for roughly half of its
voyage across the Pacific Ocean.
In the years before this announcement, ABS participated in several studies and approvals in
principle for a number of potential designs. This culminated in the publishing of the “ABS
White Paper on Autonomous Vessels” (February 2022) and “ABS Guide on Requirements for
Autonomous and Remote Control Functions” (August 2022).1 By 2022, ABS and SpaceX
signed a joint development project (JDP) to review the remotely controlled functions of
autonomous rocket recovery droneships used for booster rocket recovery at sea. The rocket
recovery droneships are modified to include an expanded deck to increase the size of the
landing platform, four thruster engines for propulsion and to hold on station, and blast shielding
to protect electrical and engine equipment on deck. The droneships are entirely unmanned
during landings, with a robot deployed on board to secure the rocket booster to the droneship
before the vessel returns to port.

The project will review the design of one of SpaceX’s three rocket recovery droneships for
compliance with the ABS Guide for Autonomous and Remote-Control Functions. Due to the
unique and challenging operating requirements, ABS will apply a risk-based approach to the

1
Note: For the purposes of this paper, when referring to generic unmanned or autonomous surface ship technologies, the term ‘USV’ –
Unmanned Surface Vessel’ – will be used.
46
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

evaluation of the autonomous functions. In addition, ABS will use the newly published ABS
Guide for Requirements for Building and Classing Offshore Spaceports (May 2023) for
additional direction.

Figure – 1 Ukrainian Explosive USV (Source: U.S. Naval Institute)

“I think what you’re going to see in unmanned surface is a phasing where you’ll have
minimally manned and then an unmanned. We want to make sure we get it right. One ship
will not necessarily solve the command and control problems, the engineering reliability
problems and so we’re going to want to make sure that we have it right before we move
too fast – operationally and in terms of building more of them.”

- ADM Mike Gilday, Chief of Naval Operations, US Navy

These are merely a few of many, many efforts being made by innovators around the world to
bring unmanned and autonomous operations to the commercial maritime industry. To respond
to these global efforts, the IMO (International Maritime Organization) released its first report
on “Development of a Goal-Based Instrument for Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships
(MASS)” on 27 February 2023 through a Correspondence Group comprising over 40 nations.
While this technology will have wide-ranging implications for the commercial sector, perhaps
an even greater technological disruptor will be the use of autonomous technology in military
applications. This is already self-evident in the employment of unmanned aerial vehicles
(UAVs) by both nations in the current Russian-Ukrainian War. The Ukrainians attempted a
47
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

third attack on the Russian fleet using high speed, low visibility, armed unmanned boats on 24
April 2023. While only 2 boats, and damage to the target is unknown (1 boat appeared to get
alongside the target ship), an attack in October 2022 involved nine aerial and seven autonomous
sea drones (all of which were destroyed). The USVs employed in the October 2022 strike were
5.5 meters long with a range of 400 kilometers, a 60-hour endurance, a gross weight of 1,000
kilograms, a warhead of up to 200 kilograms, and a maximum speed of 80 km/h. See Figure 1.

In the United States, the US Navy has progressed quickly in the deployment of unmanned
technology. Beginning in 2016 with the experimental trimaran Sea Hunter (more specifically
a central hull with two outriggers), designated as a Medium Displacement Unmanned Surface
Vehicle (MDUSV), its near sister vessel Seahawk was delivered in 2021. Seahawk is an
upgraded design reflecting an evaluation of over 300 lessons learned from Sea Hunter. These
were soon joined by the creation of the US Navy ‘Ghost Fleet,’ currently comprising USV
Ranger, USV Nomad and USV Mariner. USV Vanguard is currently under construction at
Austal USA in Mobile, AL, and will be classed to ABS rule requirements. The latest addition,
USV Mariner, was built by Gulf Craft (Franklin, LA), and will help the Navy in its advanced
testing for the autonomous technology needed for USVs. It will also add to the wide array of
commercial systems – like sensors, satellite links, radars and communications suites – that the
Navy is experimenting with across its fleet of USVs. The basic design of Mariner is similar to
other craft on the Gulf Coast used to support oil rigs; at 59m long, it is equipped with datalinks
and systems to function as a mothership for other USVs, making it easier for the Navy to now
experiment with multiple unmanned craft at the same time. Mariner also features the command
and control portions of the Aegis combat system and can link to other Aegis ships in the fleet.
Vanguard’s design builds on Mariner, being 62.5m, as well as being deeper and wider. This
will allow it to carry more fuel and heavier payloads. Together, these vessels form US Navy
Unmanned Surface Vessel Division One based in San Diego, CA.

48
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Figure 2: USVs Ranger and Nomad unmanned vessels (both ABS Classed) underway in the
Pacific Ocean. US Navy Photo.

LUSV and MUSV Programs

The LUSV and MUSV programs were built on earlier USV platforms and other development
work done by the US Navy. The Navy envisions LUSVs as being 60m to 90m in length and
having full load displacements of 1,000 tons to 2,000 tons, which many fleets may associate
with a corvette sized ship. The Navy foresees LUSVs to be low-cost, high-endurance,
reconfigurable ships with ample capacity for carrying various modular payloads—particularly
anti-surface warfare (ASuW) and strike payloads, meaning principally anti-ship and land-
attack missiles. Each LUSV could be equipped with a vertical launch system (VLS) with 16
to 32 missile-launching tubes. Although referred to as USVs, LUSVs might be more accurately
described as optionally crewed ships, because they may at times have a few service personnel
onboard, particularly in the nearer term as the Navy works out LUSV enabling technologies
and operational concepts. The Navy currently plans to procure about 9 vessels over its 5 year
plan (2024-2028). LUSVs will be capable of semiautonomous operation, with operators in the
loop. USV command and control will be maintained via an afloat element (i.e., embarked on
a Navy afloat asset) or via an ashore element. LUSV is planned to be a key enabler of the
Navy's Distributed Maritime Operations (DMO) concept, which includes being able to
forward deploy and team with individual crewed combatants or augment battle groups. LUSV
will complement the Navy's crewed combatant force by delivering increased readiness,
capability and needed capacity at lower procurement and sustainment costs and reduced risk
to sailors. In 2020, the US Department of Defense announced six contract awards for industry
studies on the LUSV. These contracts were established in order to refine specifications and
requirements for an LUSV. These contracts were extended into 2024 to support further study.
49
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

The Navy defines MUSVs as being anywhere from 14m to 58m long, with displacements of
roughly 500 tons, which would make them the size of a typical patrol craft. The Navy desires
the MUSVs to be low-cost, high-endurance, reconfigurable ships that can accommodate
various payloads. Initial payloads for MUSVs are to be intelligence, surveillance and
reconnaissance (ISR) payloads and electronic warfare (EW) systems. The Navy defines their
MUSV program as having a reconfigurable mission capability which is accomplished via
modular payloads with an initial capability to support battlespace awareness through
supporting Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance, and Targeting (ISR&T), Counter-
ISR&T, and Information Operations (IO) mission areas. Like the LUSV, MUSVs will be
capable of semi-autonomous operation, with operators in the loop. The Navy envisions that
MUSVs will be capable of weeks-long deployments and trans-oceanic transits and operate
aggregated with Carrier Strike Groups and Surface Action Groups, as well as have the ability
to deploy independently. The MUSV will also be a key enabler of the Navy's Distributed
Maritime Operations (DMO) concept. In July 2020, the Navy announced they had awarded a
contract to L3 Harris for the delivery of the first MUSV prototype. The contract has options
for up to 8 additional MUSVs (9 total) should funding become available. Swiftships Shipyard,
located along the Louisiana Gulf Coast, will produce the vessel. Delivery of the first vessel is
planned for mid to late 2024. See Figure 3.

Figure 3. Rendering of L3Harris Design Concept for MUSV (Source: L3Harris

Technologies)

EPF 13
Another US Navy program of note is the ABS classed vessel USNS Apalachicola, the 13th
Spearhead-class expeditionary fast transport (EPF). One of the largest surface vessels in the
Navy to feature autonomous capabilities, the new high-speed, shallow draft EPF can transport
600t of military cargo at an average speed of 35k. EPF 13 is a non-combatant transport ship
that can support various disaster relief, humanitarian assistance, support special operations
forces and overseas contingency operations.
50
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

USNS Apalachicola successfully concluded acceptance and uncrewed logistics prototype trials
in summer of 2022, undergoing a stress test in high-traffic coastal areas while transiting from
Mobile, AL to Miami, FL. Appropriate handling procedures were taken while it operated with
other ships, craft, boats and sailboats. The vessel proved its capabilities to perform as a self-
driving platform, staying in autonomous mode for around 85% of the total time spent at sea.
EPF 13 was delivered to the Navy by Austal USA in 2023.

ADDRESSING THE CHALLENGE OF CERTIFICATION OF AUTONOMOUS AND

UNMANNED APPLICATIONS

Most of the standards used in technical fields are prescriptive in nature; for example, they may
cite specific materials to be used or arrangement plans and specific design criteria to follow. In
addition, they typically employ fixed test and evaluation techniques. Among the many
thousands of industry, governmental, national and international standards that exist worldwide,
prescriptive standards are by far the most prevalent. Prescriptive standards list exactly what to
do to achieve compliance.

However, in our current environment of increasing computational speeds, many complex

analytical methods are now available to ship designers resulting in innovative and novel
approaches for many aspects of ship design. In this dynamic environment, it is proving
increasingly challenging to apply the traditional approach of prescriptive based standards. This
is especially valid for shipboard unmanned and autonomous applications. As a result, attention
has focused on the increased use of a goal based philosophy over the detailed technical
standards more typically incorporated in rules and regulations.

Goal Based Standards

A goal based standard (GBS) differs from a prescriptive standard in its approach to compliance,
by describing what goals and objectives must be achieved, rather than what specific steps must
be followed to successfully achieve them. They do not specify the means of achieving
compliance but set tiered layers of goals that allow alternative and creative means to be
compliant. While it can be argued that prescriptive standards offer a more predictable result,
they also tend to restrict the possible use of alternatives that may prove superior to the
prescribed result, as the prescribed approach is typically based on past experience. This past
experience may prove less relevant as technology advances. GBS balances the necessary need
for compliance to requirements, safety and oversight, with the advantages of allowing
employment of innovation and advanced technological application.

Goal based standards are generally high-level standards and procedures and may be described
as a ‘standard of standards’ since these high level requirements are met through regulations,
rules and standards. GBS are typically made up of at least one goal; functional requirements
51
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

associated with that goal; and verification of conformity that rules/regulations/standards meet
the functional requirements, as well as the goal or goals. These detailed requirements
eventually become a part of the overall GBS framework. This approach is particularly useful
when considering USV designs.

ABS Requirements for Autonomous and Remote Control Functions (2022)

When approaching certification, it is important to first understand the difference between
automation and autonomous operations. Automation is the automatic control and operation of
a process, system, or equipment by mechanical or electronic devices that take the place of
human labor. These are normally routine or repetitious tasks under predefined scenarios and
conditions. “Automatic control” is defined as the means to control via predetermined orders
without intervention by the operator. Autonomy differs from automation in that it requires self-
governance and freedom from external control or influence. “Autonomous Functions” are
functions where machines perform each of the four steps in the operational decision loop i.e.,
Monitoring, Analysis, Decision and Action, without the need for human intervention to achieve
the system mission and perform tasks. Autonomous functions do not follow predefined routines
and operational scenarios, but rather have the ability to execute the most appropriate actions
based on their programming, assigned mission and tasks, operational environment, and the
system status.

The autonomous functions covered in the ABS Requirements for Autonomous and Remote
Control Functions focus on the functional capabilities which enable the operations of marine
vessels and do not imply unmanned operations. Besides the autonomous functions, unmanned
operations consider other activities and factors, such as system maintenance, incidence
handling and crewing requirements, which are out of the scope of this Guide. Fully autonomous
and unmanned marine vessels are considered on a case-by-case basis. By contrast, ‘remote
control functions’ are functions which allow the system and operation being monitored to be
controlled remotely by a human operator who is physically located in a location other than
onboard a marine vessel where the operations take place. ABS developed the Guide to provide
the industry with technical and survey requirements for marine vessels fitted with autonomous
or remote control functions. Marine vessels installed with autonomous or remote control
functions are eligible for either of the class notations AUTONOMOUS or REMOTE-CON.

Using the chart shown in Figure 4, goal based tiers can be defined as follows:

Goals are high-level objectives to be met. They should address the issues of concern and reflect
the required level of safety. In the implementation process during the development of
autonomous or remote control functions, a typical over-arching goal would be that the function
is to be designed, constructed, operated and maintained for its planned mission safely, reliably
and predictably.
52
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Figure 4: Autonomous Goal Based Approach.

Functional Requirements provide the criteria to be satisfied in order to meet the goals.
Functions being implemented to meet the goals can be categorized into smart (typically
associated with enhanced automation), semi-autonomous or autonomous. Functional
requirements support the stated goals.
Verification of Conformity establishes the method and criteria to demonstrate and verify that
the function’s specifications and implementation conforms to the goals and functional
requirements and addresses the safety of the operation of the vessel.
Foundational Requirements underpin the framework of the goal based approach, The
technologies used for autonomous and remote control functions will be highly reliant on
connectivity, data and software. Therefore, foundational requirements will be found in such
places as the ABS Rules, ABS Guide for Smart Functions for Marine Vessels and Offshore
Units, ABS Guide for Integrated Software Quality Management (ISQM), and the CyberSafety,
Data Integrity and Software series of ABS publications.

As it is clear that ship functions will rely heavily on software and digital tools, the functions
and systems must be designed with reliability, robustness and interoperability in mind, and
with consideration for minimal on-board human observation, supervision and intervention.
Important foundational requirements include:

53
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Data: Data will be a core ingredient powering the move to a digital future; consequently, the
availability and integrity of high quality data is essential. Criteria addressing data quality may
be found in the ABS Advisory on Data Quality for Marine and Offshore Application.

Cybersafety: Cybersecurity is a key safety concern in the implementation of autonomous and

remote control functions. Established cyber security requirements tailored to the marine
industry may be found in the ABS Guide for Cybersecurity Implementation for the Marine and
Offshore
Industries.

Software: Verification of software used in the systems, their integration and management
throughout the life cycle of the functions is an important element.

Reliability: ISO 14224 defines reliability as the “ability of an item to perform a required
function under given conditions for a given time interval”. Increased levels of reliability of the
systems and equipment will be necessary to address the lack of human involvement in the
operation and maintenance of the vessel. Properties such as redundancy, software reliability
and simplicity, and system modularity will be critical.

Robustness: ISO/IEC/IEEE 24765 defines robustness as the “degree to which a system or

component can function correctly in the presence of invalid inputs or stressful environmental
conditions” It refers to the state or condition where the technology, product or process
performance is minimally sensitive to factors that cause variability. Design for robustness will
be revisited several times over the many phases of design and construction.

Inter-operability: ISO/IEC/IEEE 24765 defines interoperability as the “capability of objects

to collaborate, that is, the capability mutually to communicate information in order to
exchange events, proposals, requests, results, commitments and flows”. With the increased
inter-connectivity and dependency between multiple constituent systems, it is crucial that
interoperability between these systems are thoroughly understood and evaluated. It is also
crucial that emergent behavior of these systems working in-concert as a system-of-systems be
understood.

The Function Categories addressed as part of the ABS notations are to be selected from the
following:

• Navigation (NAV)
• Maneuvering (MNV)
• Mooring / Unmooring (MOR)
• Docking / Undocking (DOC)
54
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

• Propulsion (PRP)
• Auxiliary (AUX)
• Environmental Protection (ENV)
• Cargo Handling (CGH)
• Ballast and Trim (BAL)
• Industrial Processes (IND)

Figure 5: Operations Supervision Levels

“You can become utterly dependent on a new glamorous technology, be it cyber-space,

artificial intelligence. . . It’ll enable you. It’ll move you forward. But does it create a
potential Achilles heel? Often it does.”

- ADM James Stavridis, NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe (2009 to 2013)

Other categories may be considered on a case-by-case basis. Associated with each of the above
functional categories will be Operations Supervision Levels ranging from either onboard the
vessel (OP1 through OP3) to remote locations (RO1 through RO3). See Figure 5 for an
explanation of each.

Notation Submittal Requirements

The following documents related to the notation are to be submitted for review (the following
is not all-inclusive):

1) Overall Function
a. Description of the function
b. Concept of Operations document (CONOPS)
c. Risk category level assignment
d. Risk assessment plan and associated risk assessment report(s)

55
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

e. Test Program
f. Survey Program
g. Management of Change program

2) Constituent Systems
- Cybersecurity:
a. OT/IT digital architecture description
b. Cybersecurity risk assessment
c. Cybersecurity risk management system (CRMS)
d. For functions assigned with medium or high risk level, documents required for
compliance with the ABS cybersecurity notations ‘CS-System,’ ‘CS-1’ or ‘CS-
2’, are to be submitted for review.

- Software:
a. Software test plan
b. For functions assigned with low risk level, documents annotated as ‘S,’ ‘M’ and
‘W’ for Computer Based System as found in the Marine Vessel Rules.
c. For Functions assigned with medium or high risk level, documents required for
compliance with the ISQM or SQM notations are to be submitted for review.
- Data analytics:
a. Brief summary of hybrid or data-driven applications – physical principle,
assumption and limitation
b. Data sources and data collection steps – sensor configuration and mapping
specification
c. Data quality assessment and control plan – describe the method/procedure
applied for data quality assessment, assurance and control (e.g., data quality
validation and correction rules, measurable data quality metrics and dimensions,
and data quality acceptance criteria)
d. Data modeling development procedures – overview of the analytics approaches
(e.g., a flow chart), method for key model parameters selection, method for data
partitioning, and assumption/limitation prior to model training
e. Model evaluation results – model evaluation methods, processes, model
acceptance criteria and results
f. Record of the data model version – procedure for model upgrade and
deployment
g. Data model application performance monitoring plan – model re-training
criteria and procedures to better capture equipment maintenance events or
change-outs, alarms for model application performance in operation.
h. Risk assessment of data model application
i. Model operation envelope
56
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Note: Where the function is composed of systems or equipment which use conventional
technologies, engineering and design documents as required by the applicable Rules in the ABS
Marine Vessel Rules are to be sent for review and approval.

3) Modeling and Computer Simulation Tests

a. Modeling and computer simulation test plan
b. Model that has been developed in a computer simulation test space that supports
the functional mockup interface (FMI) standard, or equivalent, is to be sent for
review upon request.
c. Computer simulation test results report

Implementation, verification, and associated surveys (such as for tests, installation and
commissioning) are described in the ABS Requirement for Autonomous and Remote Control
Functions.

Additional Challenges

Reliability

Traditionally, when equipment requires attention, preventive or corrective maintenance, the

focus is on maintenance planning to ensure all resources are available upon request to minimize
downtime. In the transition to unmanned operations, this will no longer apply, as there are no
humans onboard the vessel. Therefore, the focus has shifted to addressing all required
reliability functions without a human onboard at a reasonable cost. A structured approach to
address reliability issues throughout the full project lifecycle provides a roadmap to a higher
level of technology readiness.

Best practice techniques for reliability of unmanned operations can be best supported via
process review of the integrated system in development of a long-range reliability plan. The
plan must address reliability concerns in a strategic approach that seeks to prevent repeat
failures or high-cost solutions (for example, those not commercially viable). The long-range
reliability plan integrates with other departments and considers staff resources, technical
competencies, and corporate budgeting, all of which addresses the reliability concerns and
leads the organization to meet reliability requirements/company scorecards. In addition, from
a process perspective, ABS has developed a three-part process on a platform level. For
designers and original equipment manufacturers (OEM), ABS has published a Guide providing
a reliability endorsement focusing on equipment capability. Both a long-term plan and
reliability endorsements for equipment are crucial to the journey to reliable unmanned
operations. The assurance process can work hand in hand with the specific reliability tasks and

57
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

assessment methodologies, together fostering the foundation for reliable unmanned operations.
In the front-end engineering design (FEED) phase, a typical reliability approach includes
reviewing failure mode scenarios and proposed potential mitigation, using a FMECA (Failure
Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis). Another approach is to develop an RBD (Reliability
Block Diagram) model to supply insights in decision making of redundancy design requirement
for an unmanned vessel. Prior to construction, prototype testing (either through simulation or
physical system) is typically commissioned to evaluate vessel capability and demonstrate
reliability in response to owner/operator. requirements.

Reliability is comprehensively addressed in the ABS Guide for Assessment of the Process for
Product Reliability and ABS Guide for Surveys Based on Machinery Reliability and
Maintenance Techniques. In addition, a further reference is the technical paper “The Reliability
Journey in Transition to Unmanned Operations” (Jiang, Delpizzo, Carlucci, and Choudhury)
presented at the American Society of Naval Engineers (ASNE) Conference on Technology,
Ships and Systems (TSS) held January 2023.

Cybersecurity

Further defensive measures for navies to consider is their ability to preserve their networks and
protect them from cyber-attacks. Cyber protection, both from an operational technology (OT)
and informational technology (IT) perspective, has already become one of the preeminent
properties for a superior naval ship, and this will continue for the near future. In some cases,
class societies are working with government agencies to provide guidance to help improve
cybersecurity and mitigate related risk, such as through the ABS Guide for Cybersecurity
Implementation for the Marine and Offshore Industries (Volume 2 of the ABS CyberSafety©
series of publications).
Like autonomous notations, cybersecurity rule requirements for unmanned and autonomous
control also has moved toward performance and goal based processes, relying more on failure
mode and effects analyses (FMEA) and verification and validation techniques (V&V). In
addition to cybersecurity related notations, ABS certifications include Integrated Software
Quality Management (ISQM) services. Rather than the previous traditional focus on individual
equipment and system components, this notation helps to deliver efficient, uninterrupted
operation by providing a framework for coordinating and controlling the way software
development, integration and maintenance are managed throughout the life of the asset. The
software provider participates in a rigorous review of its software quality engineering process
and procedures as documented; the program also includes an onsite assessment of execution of
those processes by the development staff to verify integrity and compatibility with other
software systems installed on board. Further information may be found in the ABS Guide for
Integrated Software Quality Management.

58
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

USV Physical Tampering

Besides protection of the data and electronic circuits, there’s also the problem of physical
security or USV tampering. An aggressor nation could simply tow a USV, preventing it from
performing its mission. It’s possible to employ some analogous measures previously used for
anti-piracy, such as through the employment of electric fencing (non-lethal system consisting
of an electric fence which surrounds the ship and prevents pirates from climbing) or razor wire
canisters (fastened outside of the ship’s rail or bulwark on both port and starboard sides, when
activated the canisters each jettison about 20m of razor wires stretching from the main deck to
the waterline). However, more typical measures such as water cannons and small arms need
people to operate.

A possible solution might be to focus on protecting the technology through the use of tamper-
resistant features that would disable hardware or erase software to ensure no one could use
important parts. However, the person probably would still be able to get at the basic drone
functions like its engine. Another might be to provide UAV surveillance for the USV, which
can alert nearby crewed vessels of an impending hostile boarding of the USV.

Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning

Certainly, one of the most significant technological breakthroughs of the 21st century is the
widespread use of artificial intelligence (AI). AI involves the development of computer systems
able to perform tasks that normally require human intelligence, such as visual perception,
speech recognition, decision-making, and translation between languages. While AI is an
umbrella term for computer software that mimics human cognition in order to perform complex
tasks and learn from them, machine learning (ML) is a subfield of AI that uses algorithms
trained on data to produce adaptable models that can perform a variety of complex tasks. Both
of these are used to support USV technology.

While AI and ML are powerful tools, making tasks such as navigation and collision avoidance
possible, they have challenges and limitations. For example, ML is only as good as the data set
it uses as the foundation of its learning. For example, in 2021, it was reported that an AI neural
network had reached a level of accuracy comparable to human dermatologists at diagnosing
malignant skin lesions. However, a closer examination of the model’s methods revealed that
the single most influential thing this model was looking for in a picture of a lesion was the
presence of a ruler. As medical images of cancerous lesions typically include a ruler for scale,
the model’s ML algorithm trained itself to identify the presence of a ruler as a marker of
malignancy. This resulted in the network performing at high accuracy in a test setting, but rather
poorly in the real world.

59
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

The Black Box. This example illustrates the ‘black box problem;’ specifically, it is extremely
difficult to understand how machine learning models process data and generate predictions
because the algorithms are intricate and difficult to understand. AI thrives on a large data set.
But developers are caught between the conundrum of wanting to control data input to the
algorithm (which could limit knowledge gained by the AI and possibly miss important aspects
needed for comprehensive learning) and allowing data with no controls or boundaries into the
algorithm which might unfavorably affect the decision making capability of the computer
(similar to the cancerous lesions issue above).

Because of this unpredictability, the U.S. Army has recently considered asking companies to
give them some insight into their artificial intelligence algorithms to gain a better understanding
of the ‘provenance’ of their decisions. This would resemble a “software bill of materials”
(SBOM), a sort of nested inventory or list of ingredients that make up software building blocks.
This is being seen as a possible solution to address potential digital weaknesses in AI. As noted
by Mr. Young Bang, the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition,
Logistics and Technology, “We’re toying with the notion of an AI BOM. And that’s because,
really, we’re looking at things from a risk perspective. Just like we’re securing our supply chain
— semiconductors, components, subcomponents — we’re also thinking about that from a
digital perspective. So we’re looking at software, data and AI.” (Source: Technical Exchange
Meeting X, May 24-25, 2023, Philadelphia, PA). To understand the magnitude of this
endeavor, it is important to note that more than 685 AI-related projects are underway at the US
Department of Defense, with at least 232 being managed by the Army. To better understand
the enormous amounts of data one of these programs could hold, one needs simply to look back
at the Navy’s Ghost Fleet. After wrapping up fleet-wide experimentation with USVs during
the Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) 2022 Exercise, Brian Fitzpatrick (then the Principal Assistant
Program Manager for USV’s at the Navy’s unmanned maritime systems program office), said
the RIMPAC experimentation yielded 400 terabytes of data that the Navy will comb through
to filter what data it needs. “We’ve been standing up pipelines to bring that data in to be able
to do automated processing of that,” he said. “Right now, it’s collect everything we can. Collect
everything we can. There’s a certain amount from a [Convention on the International
Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea] side and [hull, mechanical and electrical] side
that we know we want to collect.” (Source: USNI News, 22 August 2022). Of course, this does
not even address the challenge of adversarial impacts. If an adversary can craft the data that
AI-enabled technologies see, they can profoundly impact how that technology works. This
form of digital disinformation is known as ‘data poisoning,’ and is a form of adversarial AI.

Technical advances always come with substantial risk: automation—including AI—has

persistent, critical vulnerabilities that must be thoroughly understood and adequately addressed
if defense applications are to remain resilient and effective. Many feel the current AI systems
are surprisingly fragile and susceptible to fundamental errors resulting in potentially
60
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

catastrophic flaws in warfighting systems. Attempts at solutions are being considered, such as
a system that fuses many types of sensors rather than relying on solely one sensor source (such
as visual only). Cross-cueing inputs from different domains (e.g., visual and electronic
signatures) is analogous to human multisensory perception. For example, when what a human
hears does not match associated visual stimuli, it raises suspicions and draws scrutiny that may
uncover the deception.

CONCLUSION

Governments throughout the world are experimenting with unmanned and autonomous
vehicles for both peaceful and military applications. As we continue to venture into an
autonomous future, regulatory oversight and certification tools will be increasingly relied upon
to verify the fitness of these vehicles for the services envisioned. In this field of evolving
technology, Class Societies will continue to be a trusted partner to government agencies as part
of the overall maritime safety infrastructure.

REFERENCES

ABS and SpaceX Sign JDP on Remotely Controlled Rocket Recovery Droneships. (2022, June
15). News Powered by Cision. https://news.cision.com/american-bureau-of-
shipping/r/abs-and-spacex-sign-jdp-on-remotely-controlled-rocket-recovery-
droneships,c3585409
ADM James Stavridis, USN (Ret.), and John Arquilla, “Weapons of Mass Disruption: A
Conversation on the Future Force, Geopolitics and Leadership,” The Naval
Postgraduate School’s Secretary of the Navy Guest Lecture (As quoted is U.S. Naval
Institute, February 2022 – “Artificial Intelligence: Too Fragile to Fight?”), 12 October
2021.
American Bureau of Shipping. Requirements for Autonomous and Remote Control Functions,
August 2022. https://www.eagle.org
American Bureau of Shipping. ABS Guide for Requirements for Building and Classing
Offshore Spaceports, May 2023.
https://www.eagle.org
American Bureau of Shipping. White Paper on Autonomous Vessels, February 2022.
https://www.eagle.org
American Bureau of Shipping. Guide for Cybersecurity Implementation for the Marine and
Offshore Industries, (Volume 2 of the ABS CyberSafety© series of publications), 2021.
https://www.eagle.org
C4ISRNet. (2023, May 29). ‘Adversarial AI’ a threat to military systems, Shift5′s Lospinoso
says. C4ISRNet. https://www.c4isrnet.com/artificial-
intelligence/2023/05/29/adversarial-ai-a-threat-to-military-systems-shift5s-lospinoso-
says/?utm_source=sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=dfn-dnr

61
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Delpizzo, Richard D. and Valluri, Sharat. (2017, March). An Introduction to NATO Standard
ANEP (Allied Naval Engineering Publication) 77 and Its Application to Naval Ships.
Colombia Mar.
Demarest, C. (2023, May 31). US Army may ask defense industry to disclose AI algorithms.
C4ISRNet.
https://www.c4isrnet.com/artificial-intelligence/2023/05/31/us-army-may-ask-
defense-industry-to-disclose-ai-
algorithms/?utm_source=sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=dfn-dnr
Jiang, Suzy; Delpizzo, Richard; Carlucci, Domenic: Choudhury, Quaim. (2023, January). The
Reliability Journey in Transition to Unmanned Operations. ASNE TSS.
LaGrone, S. (2023, February 17). Crew-Optional USNS Apalachicola Delivers to the Navy,
Ship’s Unmanned Future Unclear - USNI News. USNI News.
https://news.usni.org/2023/02/16/crew-optional-usns-apalachicola-delivers-to-the-
navy-ships-unmanned-future-unclear
Navy Large Unmanned Surface and Undersea Vehicles: Background and Issues for Congress.
(2023). Congressional Research Service, R45757.
Raunek. (2022). 18 Anti-Piracy Weapons for Ships to Fight Pirates. Marine Insight.
https://www.marineinsight.com/marine-piracy-marine/18-anti-piracy-weapons-for-
ships-to-fight-pirates/
Satam, P. (2023, April 25). Ukraine’s ‘Killer’ Sea Drones With Low Visibility, High
Maneuverability Pose Permanent Threat To Russian Navy. Latest Asian, Middle East,
EurAsian, Indian News.
https://eurasiantimes.com/ukraines-killer-sea-drones-with-low-visibility-high/
Sharma, S., & Sharma, S. (2022). US Navy’s EPF 13 ship concludes acceptance and uncrewed
logistics trials. Naval Technology.
https://www.naval-technology.com/news/us-navys-epf13-acceptance-trials/
Shelbourne, M. (2022, August 24). Unmanned Surface Vehicle Mariner Next Ghost Fleet
Vessel to Join the Navy - USNI News. USNI News.
https://news.usni.org/2022/08/23/unmanned-surface-vehicle-mariner-next-ghost-fleet-
vessel-to-join-the-navy
Software Bill of Materials (SBOM) | CISA. (n.d.). Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security
Agency CISA. https://www.cisa.gov/sbom
Staff, M. L. (2023, January 10). ABS and HD Hyundai to continue cooperation on autonomous
projects. Marine Log. https://www.marinelog.com/news/abs-and-hd-hyundai-to-
continue-cooperation-on-autonomous-
projects/#:~:text=ABS%20and%20HD%20Hyundai%20to%20continue%20cooperati
on%20on%20autonomous%20projects,-
Written%20by%20Marine&text=ABS%20and%20HD%20Hyundai%20have,on%20i
ndustry%2Dleading%20autonomous%20projects

62
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Staff, V. (2021, March 31). When AI flags the ruler, not the tumor — and other arguments for
abolishing the black box (VB Live). VentureBeat.
https://venturebeat.com/business/when-ai-flags-the-ruler-not-the-tumor-and-other-
arguments-for-abolishing-the-black-box-vb-live/
Sutton, H. I. (2022, October 11). Suspected Ukrainian Explosive Sea Drone Made From
Recreational Watercraft Parts. USNI News.
https://news.usni.org/2022/10/11/suspected-ukrainian-explosive-sea-drone-made-
from-jet-ski-parts

AUTHOR BIOGRAPHIES

Mr. Ambar Roy is presently the Business Development Manager for ABS in India,
Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. He is responsible for executing and driving sales strategies and
business development in the region. He is a sector-versatile and culturally aware Regional
Business Manager with over 25 years’ experience in operations, business development,
regional sales and marketing, route to market strategies, channel management, lean operational
management and improvements in organizations like Shell, Fidelity, MAN Diesel and others.

Ambar is a qualified marine chief engineer and has sailed on merchant vessels-tankers,
container vessels, Bulk Carriers and Ro-Ro vessels in companies like NOL, Bergessen and K-
Line. He is a graduate in marine engineering from Marine Engineering and Research Institute
Kolkata(DMET) and a full time MBA in Marketing & Finance from Indian Institute of
Technology, Delhi. He has also done programs in Introduction to Negotiation: A Strategic
Playbook for Becoming a Principled and Persuasive Negotiator from Yale School of
Management and in Strategy and Sustainability from IESE Business School, Barcelona.

Mr. Gabriel Yeo currently holds the position of Business Development Manager at ABS
Singapore, where he plays an integral role in the contracted research and development team.
His primary responsibilities involve collaborating with government agencies and clients to
drive R&D initiatives and technological advancement. With a career spanning over 20 years in
the Maritime industry, he has held various roles with diverse capacities such as business
development, project management, engineering design, research and teaching. He has held
positions

63
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

as Project Manager and Senior Surveyor for offshore projects (FPSOs, FSOs, Semi-
submersibles, Jack-ups) and did his post graduate research in underwater acoustics for defense
applications.

Gabriel obtained his master’s and bachelor’s degrees in mechanical engineering from the
National University of Singapore. He actively contributes to the Society of Naval Architects
and Marine Engineers Singapore (SNAMES) as the Honorary Secretary, having been a council
member since 2015. He was a recipient of the ASMI (Association of Singapore Marine
Industries) Scholarship and the Jurong Shipyard Scholarship.

CAPT Richard Delpizzo has over 35 years’ experience working in ship design, construction
and operations, technical review, regulatory requirements application, Navy project
management and defense acquisition. He has worked for the American Bureau of Shipping at
its New York, New Jersey and Washington, DC offices. He worked in ABS Engineering for
25 years, ultimately leading the ABS Washington DC Naval Engineering office from 2004 to
2009. After serving as ABS Government Services Manager from 2010-2016, he became the
ABS Director for International Government Services, serving navies, coast guards and other
government agencies throughout the world. In 2019, the US Navy, US Army and Maritime
Administration were added to his client portfolio.

In addition to chairing both the SNAME (Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers)
Ship’s Machinery Committee and Panel M-45 on Fuel Cells, he also serves as SNAME
Representative to the US ISO Technical Advisory Group (US TAG). He serves on both ASNE
(American Society of Naval Engineers) and SNAME Councils and was honored as a SNAME
Fellow in 2017. He has served as the ASNE Chair of Professional Development since 2015
and was awarded the ASNE Frank G. Law Award for outstanding contribution to the
advancement of the Society in 2021. He currently serves as Chairman of SNAME Chesapeake
Section (Washington, DC area). After serving in the U.S. Navy Reserve for 28 years, he retired
in 2012 at the rank of Captain. Rich is a graduate of the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy.

64
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

USING THE NAVAL SUBMARINE CODE (NSUBC) AS MEANS FOR SUBMARINE

ASSURANCE DURING DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION

Ch. von Oldershausen

DNV, Germany

Abstract. Submarine Safety is a complex, multi-dimensional task covering all technical

areas of the submarine platform. The importance of managing safety is therefore imperative
at every major phase throughout the lifecycle of the submarine. Ensuring that this objective is
achieved requires a robust and well-proven assurance process. Consequently, the Naval
Submarine Code (NSubC) often in conjunction with classification society rules, is increasingly
being used by navies as a powerful process and assurance tool, bearing in mind however, this
is a process depending on the requirements of the respective Naval Flag Administrations. The
NSubC is a goal-based standard, which sets a minimum level of safety for submarines and
provides a framework for further work and development in this field. It considers the ultimate
safety objectives and allows for the consideration of alternative designs and technical
solutions that meet the objective. The NSubC has been recently published by NATO as new
ANEP-102.

1. INTRODUCTION

The so-called Naval Submarine Code (NSubC), as a process of assurance has specifically been
developed for submarines by the International Naval Safety Association (INSA) - an
association of navies and classification societies that has the objective of establishing uniform
verification codes for the design and construction of warships and submarines. These codes
provide a goal-based safety assurance framework for naval ships. Using these codes navies
have a sound mechanism to demonstrate that they have implemented an effective safety
management system that, whilst based on international conventions such as SOLAS, has
recognised the very different operating philosophy that naval vessels adopt dealing with the
portfolio of risks that they are exposed to. The codes, i.e., the Naval Ship Code (NSC) and
NSubC are published through NATO as ANEP 77 and ANEP 102 respectively.

2. SAFETY ASSURANCE

In terms of naval applications, shipbuilders and navies find themselves faced with many
challenges throughout the whole project lifecycle from the conceptual phase of a navy vessel
or submarine until the end of an often-extended operational lifetime. Apart from typical
constraints, which include budget limitations, a critical dilution of in-house expertise for
shipbuilding and design, a shrinking pool of qualified personnel and finally, increasing
demands from the public for safety and environmental protection the project is often faced
65
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

with specific requirements. Sufficient range of capabilities and reliable function of the naval
vessel and its systems, an expanded and flexible operational profile, exploitation of latest
technology, high safety levels for the crew on board and compliance with future environmental
standards, must be met. Ensuring that these objectives are achieved requires a robust and well-
proven assurance process. Consequently, safety assurance based on proven Classification
processes and rules is increasingly being used by navies as a powerful tool, bearing in mind
however, that unlike in commercial shipping this is an optional process depending on the
requirements of the respective Naval Administrations. In some cases, additional technical
standards need to be considered to achieve a broader level of assurance. This might be
enhanced through the application of a barrier management risk-based safety case assessment
approach to the platform and/or its systems.

Some recent submarine accidents like the disappearance of the ARA San Juan in the South
Atlantic on 15 November 2017 or the sinking of the KRI Nangala, which went missing during
a routine exercise in the Bali Sea on 21 April 2021, in both cases with a substantial number of
lives lost, highlight the importance of having a high safety culture applied to submarines not
only during operation but already during design and construction. The importance of managing
safety is therefore imperative at every major phase throughout the lifecycle of the submarine -
from design to construction, through to testing, commissioning for service, and the operation
of the submarine. The objective must be to always assure a safety critical environment on
board of a submarine.

A key player in this respect is the navy’s Naval Flag Administration administering the overall
Safety Management Process. The role to fulfil is similar to that of a national Flag State:
- Ensuring compliance of vessels under their regulatory remit for compliance with Naval
Safety Policy.

- Maintaining understanding of relevant technical standards against which naval vessels

may be assessed, including:

o Legislation (e.g. UN, IMO)

o Other NATO documents (ANEPs, STANAGs)

o International Standards (e.g. ISO, EN)

o Classification Societies rules and regulations

66
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

o IACS Unified Requirements

o National legislative requirements (e.g. EC, Baltic Ice)

o National Navy standards (e.g. MilSpec, Def Stan)

- Advising on changes to international criteria that may impact a navy

The tasks of the Naval Flag Administration can be delegated to a Recognised Oganisation to
act on behalf of the Naval Flag Administration, e.g., Classification Societies. (NSubC: PT.3
CH.0 ANNEX C). The classification societies are considered qualified to act as a Recognized
Organisation, for other organisations there is a qualification scheme (procedures to appoint
and audit) available. Through the use of an independent process of verification outside the
responsibility of the asset owner (Navy), the Naval Flag Authorities are able to show a robust
and transparent safety management process.

3. DNV’S NAVAL ASSURANCE APPROACH

DNV’s assurance processes for naval surface vessels and submarines provide two options. In
addition to the conventional Naval Classification scheme, which is based on the application of
DNV’s Naval Rules, there is the alternative to apply DNV’s Naval Technical Assurance
approach. As the name of this service indicates, it comprises of a more generic approach to the
complete assurance process with respect to Material Safety, not limited to the established
understanding of Classification. The scope can vary but the process is similar to conventional
Classification.

Apart from addressing technical needs DNV Naval Technical Assurance has also been
developed to support a wide range of regulatory approaches, which amongst others include the
International Naval Safety Association codes (ANEP-77 Naval Ship Code, ANEP-102 Naval
Submarine Code) as the main control of safety performance requirements.

4. THE NAVAL SUBMARINE CODE (NSUBC)

The complex nature of designing, building, and testing a submarine requires a robust
platform and safety framework to:

a) identify any safety issues during the concept phase

b) ensure that safety can be ascertained at the design phase

c) assure that the manufacturing work carried out meets the high-quality standard required
67
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

d)ensure the safety requirements and emergency systems are vigorously tested to provide
maximum assurance.

All of the above can be achieved by applying the process of the safety assurance framework
NSubC.

Like the NSC the NsubC is a goal-based standard or rather a process, which as outcome when
implemented, sets a minimum level of safety for submarines, and provides a framework for
further work and development in this field. The benefits of this goal-based standard are that it
considers the ultimate safety objectives and allows for the consideration of alternative designs
and technical solutions that meet these objectives. The Naval Submarine Code is currently
gaining acceptance in a similar way as the Naval Ship Code (NSC), which has now reached a
level of maturity through the support of several countries who have implemented the NSC on
their existing naval fleets and new vessels.

The Spanish Navy is considering ANEP-102 as means of safety assurance for the through life
support of their S-80 submarines. The Royal Netherlands Navy is similarly looking to apply
the NsubC as assurance process for the replacement of their Walrus Class submarines. For the
Norwegian/German U212CD project, the NsubC will be used as a process of assurance, as
requested by Norway.

Structured in the same way as the other two naval codes the NSubC has three parts (Figure 1
below). Part 1 comprises the Regulations, with the content of the chapters stipulating
submarine specific safety provisions and requirements. Part 2 is designated for Solutions but
is not populated but instead is relying on the user selecting appropriate standards and Part 3
contains the Code Justification and Guidance. It is only Part 1 which is published as ANEP-
102 and classified as NATO RESTRICTED. Part 3 is made available to INSA members only,
who contribute to its development. It is foreseen that those nations may publish the Naval
Submarine Code under their own cover for use on their specific projects and thus in doing so,
they may choose to populate Part 2 with their own solutions.

68
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

DNV Approach: Triangle of NSubC, ConOpS and Standards Plan

Proposal of topics and
definition of format ConOpS

Definition of
format
Definition of goals
Applicationof performance Validation of solutions
requirements in Standards Plan and applicability of
functional objectives

Standards Plan*
Overall and Special
Solutions can be technical
Tier 4 standards
, class rules
, performance data
processes or data specifications

Design & Test &

Manufacturing
V
Guidance
Inspection

• The standards plan is

developed specific to the
ConOpS.
• Part 2 of the NSubC is only a
placeholder for the standards
plan .
19 DNV © 11 MAY 2023
19

Figure 1. NSubC / Dependency of ConOpS, Standards Plan and Solutions

4.1 DEPENDENCY OF CONOPS, STANDARDS PLAN AND SOLUTIONS

The NSubC is not a “stand-alone” document as it requires project specific documents as

prerequisites accompanying and/or initiating the safety assurance process.

4.1 (a) Concept of Operations Statement (ConOpS)

At the top level the Concept of Operations Statement (ConOpS) defines the submarine’s
function, operational characteristics, and areas. Typical aspects such submarine attributes,
which include design life, dimensions, diving depths, speeds, range, endurance, operational
area, payloads, Replenishment at Sea (RAS), anchoring and mooring, role specific operations
(diver lock in/out), embarked persons and accommodation requirements but also survivability
definitions, stipulating reserve of buoyancy, shock & hostile weapon impact, maneuvering
envelope (speed and depth), collision, fire & flooding and last but not least the definition of
the environment with requirements concerning meteorology and climatology (above surface),
sea surface (interface), bathymetry and oceanography (below surface), geotechnical (bottom
and bank conditions), human caused environment (berthing, bottoming, towing & salvage,
signature, launching, noise & vibration) and many more aspects should be defined in the
ConOpS.

69
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

The definition of the ConOpS should also include an appraisal process of the limitations so as
to avoid any issues surfacing during the design and build phase of the submarine. Full
awareness of any limitations or restrictions associated with the submarines use and modes of
operation is a crucial criterion before embarking on the design and engineering phase.

Last but not least the ConOpS should also stipulate the envisaged survey and maintenance
philosophy with the associated schedules. This includes completeness and efficiency of the
inspection and survey regime during the operational lifetime of the submarine.

As such the ConOpS is the formal basis for the assurance process against the NSubC. The
document may, however, be a sub-set of a more detailed military CONOPS and for practical
reasons shall be split in two parts, i.e., a classified and a nonclassified part.

4.1 (b) Standards Plan

Following the ConOpS and to be regarded as the foundation of the NSubC implementation is
the Standards Plan. This document is usually developed or issued by the Naval Flag
Administration and is specifically tied to the ConOpS. The Standards Plan is specific to the
ConOpS and changes when the ConOpS is modified. It provides a Solution to every safety
Performance Requirement of the NSubC, which can range from “vessel level” down to
“component level”.

4.1 (c) Solutions

Each Solution addressing a Performance Requirement is defined by a set of specific Standards.

These Solutions are no longer goal based as they specifically define a technical solution and
the measure of verification. The NSubC stipulates that the submarine, its systems, and
equipment are to comply with, and be approved in accordance with justified classification
society’s rules or other suitable justified standards to facilitate verification of the Performance
Requirements. The submarine builder should to a great extent be involved in the stipulation of
the technical solution and provide information regarding the impact on the design and
construction of the submarine.

DNV’s Submarine Classification Rules, as part of DNV ’s RU-NAV Rule Set, are structured
in such a way that they provide Solutions to the requirements of the NSubC as defined in Part
1.

Once the Standards Plan with its respective Solutions is established a thorough process of
Verification and Validation is needed to ensure each Performance Requirement is met. By
translating the Performance Requirements of the NSubC into a set of Verification Plans every
70
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Solution to a Performance Requirement is split up to address three levels, i.e., submarine level,
system level and component level. Any deviations from the NSubC or noncompliance will
require an Acceptance by the Naval Flag Authority and must be justified and documented in
the Standards Plan.

5. VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION

Following the Systems Engineering V-Modell the Assurance Process applied by DNV trails
the V down during the various steps of the design phase and the upwards again during the
integration through a verification phase with the objective of understanding the state of the
platform design and construction, determining whether it is meeting its requirements (Figure
2).

In accordance with ISO/IEC 15288 (Systems and software engineering — System life cycle
Processes) Validation is an activity of checking that requirements defined for development,
define the system that the customer really wants. Verification is a test of a system to prove that
it meets all its specified requirements at a particular stage of its development.

Figure 2. Verification and Validation following Systems Engineering V-Modell

71
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

5.1 CONCEPT PHASE

During the concept phase the functional/capability requirements of a submarine are

determined, taking account of technological, commercial and market parameters. The concept
phase will typically include the selection of the regulatory regimes, class rules, standards,
codes, and certifications, e.g., the NSubC, to be used in the design and construction of the
submarine, resulting in a binding schedule of certificates (Standards Plan) listing all
performance and quality records to be provided. DNV usually supports the project during this
phase by advising on submarine safety considerations through the provision of a robust safety
assurance process in line with the functional/capability requirements of the navy.

5.2 SYSTEMS AND DETAILED DESIGN PHASE

The subsequent design phase requires that a determined number of plans and documents are
submitted for technical appraisal against the agreed standards and class rules (Standards Plan).
Typical aspects to be considered when assessing submarine safety include the structural
integrity of the platform, machinery, electrical equipment, and safety systems. The objective
of these design reviews and the plan approval is to ensure that the platform and systems design
meet the contractually agreed standards for safety and quality. The design assessment covers
many aspects including: ensuring that the material selected is suitable, a review of risk
assessments (e.g., FMEA), and an appraisal of emergency procedures.

5.3 CONSTRUCTION PHASE, MATERIAL AND COMPONENT VERIFICATION

The involvement of classification includes not only the survey of construction at the shipyard
but also the inspection of material, equipment, and systems at the suppliers’ premises. It might
also involve a welding certification by DNV prior to the commencement of manufacturing
with a mandatory workshop approval at the shipyard and of sub-contractors. This includes
certification of welders, approval of materials and welding consumables, and the
implementation of a Welding Procedure Specification (WPS) and a Welding Procedure
Qualification Record (WPQR).

The assurance process ensures the material and components used meet the technical
specification and classification requirements, and furthermore a confirmation that the
construction is in accordance with the design.

5.4 SYSTEMS VERIFICATION AND TESTING PHASE

During the testing phase, which includes Factory Acceptance Tests (FATs), Shore Base
Integration Tests (SBITs), Platform Integration Tests (PITs), Harbour Acceptance Test (HAT)
72
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

and Sea Trials with diving tests, DNV witnesses the functioning of all safety relevant systems,
assuring that the mitigating measures for safety risks identified during the design and
construction phase have been implemented. DNV submarine experts will also participate in
the deep diving tests of the submarine.

5.5 OPERATIONAL PHASE

Through the submarine’s life, periodic inspections are conducted by DNV’s experienced
submarine surveyors, assuring that compliance with the standards agreed during the previous
phases (NSubC and its safety goals) are maintained. The inspections vary according to the
position of the submarine within the classification cycle, which typically is five years. The
length of the classification cycle can also be adjusted to match overhaul and/or maintenance
periods, for example the three South African HDW-Class 209/1400mod submarines follow a
three-year classification cycle.

There are different types of periodical inspections:

- Annual Surveys
- Intermediate survey after the 2nd year
- Renewal survey after completion of the “classification cycle”, which includes a dry
docking to inspect the hull and appendices
- Special survey, for example due to a damage repair, and which requires the engagement
of the classification society to assess the situation and provide advice on the repair to
maintain classification requirements.

The results of the inspections are documented in survey reports, which detail any defects
and/or conditions of class which must be rectified within a certain period.

6. CONCLUSION

The NSubC contributes to the Naval Flag Administrations overall Safety Management System.
The NSubC is a tool for the Naval Flag Administration to demonstrate that the submarine is
materially safe to operate and to establish procedures for maintaining this condition.
Competence of crew, workplace health & safety, environmental protection etc. are separate
items but are supported by operational procedures, training, and documentation requirements.

Applying the goal-based safety assurance framework NSubC and using the naval classification
services of DNV as a robust and well-proven assurance process provides:

- an efficient way of ensuring a safe, reliable and ready for duty naval platform in
compliance with all relevant standards and regulation
73
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

- transparency evidence of an adequate process for control and the achieved level of
safety

- the application of continuously maintained and updated assurance rule set

- a safe and reliable design in compliance with all relevant national & international
standards

- assurance of high quality of materials and components and a high fabrication quality
incl. welding procedure etc.

- enhances the ability of naval authorities and/or procurement organisations to focus on

the military aspects of the naval platform

- the benefit of an organisation used to make decisions on acceptance limits and the
proper interpretation of formal requirements as an independent and impartial
Recognised Organisation

- a cost-effective approach to safety and quality through clearly agreed standards,

procedures, requirements, and specifications and thus demonstrates the
implementation of an effective safety management system of a submarine.

74
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

ClassNK Activities for Installation of Wind-Assisted Propulsion Systems (WAPS)

Alistair J Lewin

Surveyor, ClassNK Mumbai Office

email: aj-lewin@classnk.or.jp

Abstract: IMO’s “Strategy on Reduction of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions from ships” is
targeted at 100% phase-out GHG emissions by the end of this century. Ratification of this
strategy by IMO members has resulted in measures, such as, optimization of ship operations,
use of alternative fuels, and the research, development and installation of innovative
technology. As wind power is the cleanest source of marine propulsion energy, there has been
a renewed interest to harness this source and develop suitable systems to be installed on board
ships. ClassNK has been associated with the R&D and successful installation of such systems
since the 1st ever installation of automated hard-sails on a tanker, the “Shin Aitoku Maru” in
1980. Based on extensive experience in the field, ClassNK released edition 1.0 of “Guidelines
for Wind-assisted propulsion systems for Ships” in 2019, this was followed by the delivery of
the 1st bulk carrier equipped with the “Wind Challenger” hard-sails in 2022. ClassNK has
released edition 2.0 of the guidelines in 2023. The Guidelines provide a comprehensive
overview of the points to be considered towards the design of WAPS & Base Ships, and for
maintenance surveys.

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background
The worldwide shift towards environmental protection and a zero-emission society has
accelerated Research & Development (R&D) in a variety of fields. International organisations
and individual governments have set ambitious targets for the control of GHG emissions. In
business sectors, sustainable business models that incorporate environmentally friendly
concepts aligned with international and governmental regulations & statutory targets are
becoming more & more attractive. Likewise, the time has come for the international maritime
industry to systematically manage GHG emissions from shipping, as represented by the
introduction of the International Maritime Organisation’s (IMO) Initial Strategy on Reduction
of GHG Emissions from Ships. The strategy sets out targets for the reduction of CO2 emissions,
defines a common framework for evaluation of GHG emissions across international shipping
(Fig.1) and targets a complete phase out of GHG emissions by the end of this century (Fig.2).

75
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Fig.1. IMO framework for evaluation of GHG emissions

Fig.2. IMO strategy on reduction of GHG emissions

1.2 Wind Power

Wind power and Sails, the mainstream of shipping for centuries, was replaced by engine
power and has been the dominating method of propulsion for Cargo vessels. However, as the
world has now begun moving towards carbon neutrality, wind power is once again attracting a
lot of attention. This does not mean reverting back to wind-sail cargo vessels, but by using
wind power to supplement or augment and thereby reduce fuel consumption in a bid to achieve
emission targets set by the international community. The systems that have been designed to
assist conventional or hybrid propulsion systems are collectively called Wind Assisted
Propulsion Systems (WAPS).

1.3 WAPS in Japan & ClassNK’s contribution

76
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Japan and ClassNK’s involvement with WAPS and the modern-day engine-powered
sailing ships began in the aftermath of the oil shock or crisis of the 1970s. The Society was
associated with the Japan Maritime Machinery Development Association (JAMDA) for
development of the JAMDA-NKK sails, followed by the construction of the revolutionary sail-
assisted tanker, ‘Shin Aitoku Maru’ (Fig. 3). A total of 9 such vessels were built and classed
with ClassNK.

Fig.3. ‘Shin Aitoku Maru’ with JAMDA-NKK sails

The requirement of such vessels faded out very quickly as oil prices stabilized, however
ClassNK has continued to be associated with the R&D and successful installation of WAPS.
The most recent of these associations being the ‘Wind Challenger’ project and the 1st ever
installation of a hard-sail system on the bulk carrier ‘Shofu Maru’, a project that was
spearheaded by Mitsui O.S.K. Lines Ltd.(MOL) and Oshima Shipbuilding Co. Ltd. entered
service in October 2022 and is classed with ClassNK (Fig.4).

77
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Fig.4. ‘Shofu Maru’ with telescopic hard sail

2. CLASSNK GUIDELINES FOR WAPS & BASE SHIPS

2.1 Composition of NK Guidelines
Safety of WAPS, Safety of the Base Ship on which the system is installed, Safety of the
environment and the resulting reduction of GHG emissions are covered by ClassNK in the
Guidelines for Wind-assisted Propulsion Systems for Ships. Edition 1.0 of the guidelines was
published in 2019, followed by Edition 2.0 in 2023. The guidelines cover the design,
construction, operation and maintenance of WAPS, the requirements for Base ships and Survey
requirements (as shown in Fig.5). The Guidelines for Base Ships are to be read in conjunction
with Rules for Construction of Steel Ships.

78
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Fig.5. Guidelines for WAPS Edition 2.0 and chapters

The guidelines address the following requirements:

(a) Design, testing & inspection of WAPS
(b) Design, testing & inspection of base ships affected by the installation of WAPS

2.2 Flow for WAPS installations and Base Ship design

The guidelines define the process-flow for design and product certification of WAPS, Base
ship design, design reviews, installation of WAPS, surveys, Class Notations and Periodical
surveys as shown in Fig.6.
Product Certification may be requested by the WAPS manufacturer after system has been
designed, fabricated and tested IAW NK Guidelines and is issued for individual products.

79
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Fig.6. Flow for WAPS and Base ship iaw Guidelines

2.3 Functional requirement for WAPS design

The guidelines define 6 functional requirements to be ensured during WAPS design to
mitigate risks that could arise (due to the installation of WAPS) and affect personnel, the
environment and the base ship as follows:

(a) Safety and reliability of the system

(b) Safety & reliability for operation
(c) Resistance to failures
(d) Protection of personnel and environment
(e) Interference with ship functions
(f) Assessment of compatibility

The Guidelines take into consideration various cases of loading (in-service conditions,
standby conditions and abnormal conditions) and combinations of loads (Aerodynamic loads,
Ship motions, green sea loads, etc.) that could possibly affect the installed WAPS and the
vessel, and therefore influence structural design evaluations, material selection and joining
procedures.

80
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Fig.7. Representation of aspects considered in Guidelines

2.4 Other unique aspects considered for WAPS ships

In addition to design aspects for conventional cargo vessels, certain unique aspects are
required to be taken into consideration for ships installed with WAPS. The following are also
covered by the Guidelines:

(a) Effects on Intact and Damage stability

(b) Lightship weight distribution changes due to WAPS
(c) Wind affected heeling due to aerodynamic loads
(d) Leeway angle during manoeuvring
(e) Navigation bridge visibility
(f) Electrical systems
(g) Operation & maintenance
(h) Risk Assessment

Fig.8. ‘Wind Challenger’ navigation simulator

81
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

3. GHG REDUCTION
The outcome, of WAPS and other such measures, being sought by the marine industry
and the International maritime community is the effect on GHG emission targets, specifically
the calculation of attained EEDI (Energy Efficiency Design Index) or EEXI (Energy Efficiency
Existing Index) and the CII (Carbon Intensity Indicator). EEDI / EEXI are according to IMO
MEPS circular MEPC.1/Circ.896 “2021 Guidance on treatment of Innovative Energy
Efficiency Technology for calculation & verification of the attained EEDI & EEXI”. The
framework allows for the effects of WAPS to be included in the calculations as shown in Fig.9.

Fig.9. Effect of WAPS on EEXI/EEDI

4. CONCLUSION
The foreseen increase in use of Wind Assisted Propulsion and the resulting impacts on marine
propulsion and ship design have raised concerns with regards to safety. The probable adverse
impacts on the safety of hull structure, personnel onboard and the marine environment are the
primary causes of concern. It is of prime importance that methods be developed to accurately
assess the safety of such systems, to ensure safety of the vessels on which they are installed.
ClassNK Guidelines are a compendium of accumulated experiences from a journey of being
associated with similar projects since the late 1970s, along with ongoing associations with
advanced WAPS projects. The Guidelines have been published with the intention that it may
serve as a Safety Guideline for the design of WAPS equipment & Base ships and for their safe
operation. The contents of the guidelines would be revised concurrently with technological
advancements and live project experiences.

REFERENCES
1) ClassNK - Guidelines for Wind-assisted propulsion systems for Ships Edition 2.0
2) MOL – Wind Challenger: Forward to the future, the wind at our backs,
https://www.mol.co.jp/en/bam/001/
3) IMO strategy on reduction of GHG emissions from ships,
https://wwwcdn.imo.org/localresources/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Documents/EEXI%2

82
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

0and%20CII%20Sheets/Infographic%2001_general.pdf,
https://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Pages/EEXI-CII-FAQ.aspx
4) UNTCAD - Roadmap to decarbonize the shipping sector: Technology development,
consistent policies and investment in research, development and innovation,
https://unctad.org/news/transport-newsletter-article-no-99-fourth-quarter-2022#_ftn1
5) IMO MEPC circular MEPC.1/Circ.896 “2021 Guidance on treatment of Innovative Energy
Efficiency Technology for calculation & verification of the attained EEDI & EEXI”.

***

83
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Hull Integrity Management

Nico Bruni

Registro Italiano Navale (RINA) S.p.A

Abstract. RINA Hull Integrity Management service provides a thorough assessment of

actual ship condition in addition to a powerful digital tool to enable reduction of costs and
time for maintenance with “well-planned” repairs.

Navies will be able to manage the structural integrity of the vessel, as well as identify critical
areas, plan and minimize necessary repairs of the structure during extended operational life
of the ship.

RINA has already successfully carried out this service upon request of Brazilian Navy on three
naval ships: one frigate, one corvette and one training ship. In next future other two ships will
be assessed.

It is not uncommon for a warship to be required to operate beyond its original

expectations or to plan maintenance and repairs effectively in order to minimize costs and
maximize vessel availability. Hull Integrity Management is an approach that goes beyond the
requirements of classification and can be applied to both new and existing ships.
RINA has developed its Hull Integrity Management service as a tool to assist the Navy in
achieving the following objectives:
- Enhancing hull integrity and maintenance programs by evaluating the ship's
residual operational life.
- Defining the necessary repair work to extend the ship's life in accordance with
Navy expectations.
- Efficiently managing inspections, as well as future maintenance and repair
plans.

Hull Integrity Management combines advanced engineering calculations for structural

strength and hydrodynamic behavior with accurate inspections, reporting, and ultrasonic
thickness measurements. All the gathered data can be digitized and integrated into a 3D model
of the ship.

The initial step in Hull Integrity Management involves performing a structural

assessment to identify critical areas where probable damages and wear-down may occur. This
assessment is conducted using RINA's proprietary software, Leonardo Hull 2D, which
simplifies the modeling and calculation of different transverse sections of the vessel.
84
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Based on the results of the preliminary structural calculations, a detailed Inspection

Plan is developed, and an extensive condition survey is carried out to identify defects, pitting,
localized corrosion, and coating conditions. In addition to visual inspections, non-destructive
thickness measurements (NDT) are performed to determine the actual wear-down of the hull
and structures.

The findings of this assessment are summarized in a comprehensive inspection report,

which includes photographs and NDT results.

The subsequent step of the process involves translating the acquired field data into a
structural model of the ship. A complete 3D model of the vessel is created, utilizing the actual
thickness measurements, to verify the structural integrity of the ship.

To account for the effects of fatigue life, including both accumulated fatigue from past
operations and expected additional fatigue resulting from the extended operational life, a
hydrodynamic model of the ship is generated. Long-term fatigue assessment is conducted by
combining past activities, future requirements, and statistical wave data from operational areas.

The data obtained from hydrodynamic studies are then employed as loads for the
structural verification of the ship, determining the immediate repairs necessary to ensure the
ship's extended operational life.

Furthermore, the study may consider the impact of corrosion on the structures by
applying a corrosion model based on the construction material used in the vessel. If the steel
material is well-documented, corrosion prediction models from literature can be directly
applied to the model. However, if the corrosion model for the specific material is unavailable,
a direct test of corrosion behavior may be conducted to assess structural wear trends.

By utilizing the corrosion model, future inspections and relevant maintenance/repairs

required to ensure ship operability can be planned effectively. This proactive approach allows
for optimized planning and maximized uptime of the ship.

By consolidating all previous reports and assessments, a Digital Database can be

created, containing 2D and 3D views, inspection records, early corrosion detection, year-by-
year predictions, maintenance plans, and areas that require attention or renewal. This represents
a significant step towards the digitalization of the ship, often referred to as the "Digital Twin"
concept.

85
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Beyond Hull Integrity Management, RINA's modular digital solutions enable real-time
monitoring of ship performance and, on a larger scale, fleet performance monitoring.

86
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Ensuring Future Proof Naval Vessels – Verified Readiness

Olaf Doerk and Christian von Oldershausen
DNV Maritime, Hamburg
Introduction
The requirements concerning the capabilities of naval vessels are getting more and more
complex. Most importantly, they show a significant increased need for agility and rate
regarding mission adaptability. Safe and reliable high-performance platforms, providing the
flexibility and ability to adapt to both rapidly changing functions and tasks as well as future
demands is a key feature in this respect. A sound and modern assurance and verification
framework covering a wide range of stateof-the-art simulations, assessments and supporting
design Rules is key to meet the goal of a versatile naval platform with a long service life. The
seamless interaction of simulations, calculations and Rule checks is decisive for the desired
and to be achieved quality and performance of a project or the platform respectively.
Platform performance
Several main design areas are being involved when it come to the definition of the performance
of a modern naval platform, as illustrated in Fig. 1. The seamless interaction but at the same
time the individual considerations of specific aspects is of highest importance for the
achievement of the aspired platform performance and capability respectively.

Fig. 1: Illustration of the main design areas to be considered for a naval platform

87
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Basic design principles

Today the basic design process of a new naval vessel is centered around electronic 3D models
for assessing the energy efficiency (hull, propulsor) in calm water and in a seaway and the
compliance with the specified operational requirements and duties. Special attention should be
paid to the margin assessment of a basic design to address its life cycle performance e.g., in
respect to vessels speed, fuel consumption, operational range, space and weight (displacement),
intact- and damage stability, seakeeping performance and operability.
The results of a margin assessment are intended to provide a sound basis for the further overall
assessment under consideration of several other subject areas than margins. Some key
requirements of this margin assessment can be summarized as follows:
- Assess the suitability of the inherent margins of each proposed design
- Perform a base-lining exercise against established Navy or industry standards
- Advise on each platform’s ability to accommodate capability growth both through
operational life and for batch-based upgrades/re-designs
- Provide mitigation recommendations on the associated risks to a specific Navy
newbuilding program.
If different designs are to be compared and benchmarked it is recommended to base the ranking
on the results of a value benefit analysis (VBA). The aim of a VBA is on the one hand, to
include all relevant subject areas but on the other hand, to consider the different importance of
those. In this respect, importance is always linked to the risks, mitigation efforts and
possibilities of a certain margin subject area.
Structural performance
As a key part of the overall design process also a modern hull structural design process is
centered around electronic 3D models, ideally by reusing the already existing models from the
basic design phase. Modern structural simulation procedures following the “one model for all”
concept, as for example DNV's Advanced Whole Ship Analysis for Navy Ships (AWSA-N)
approach, directly link into and support this by seamlessly integrating the strength assessment
into the 3D model-based hull design process, see Fig. 2, Doerk 2022. Consequently, both, the
modelling as well as the analysis time and effort are significantly reduced due to a combined
global and localized strength analysis based on a single fine mesh FE model of the entire vessel.
Furthermore, this FE model can also be employed in parallel for a whole ship vibration study.
Because of the model’s refined mesh not only the fundamental but also the local deck panel
and girder vibrations can be assessed. It even allows to integrate the propulsion train in the
simulation model having the advantage to assess the structural and machinery vibrations in an
integrated way.
88
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Fig. 2: AWSA-N approach as an example for a “one model fits all” concept
However, the structural performance of a naval platform is related to the entire life cycle and
not limited to newbuild conditions at delivery. Consequently, a proper target definition and
consideration of structural margins in terms of corrosion as well as fatigue becomes key in this
respect. A common understanding between all involved stakeholders on the to be achieved
targets is a prerequisite to ensure a successful implementation throughout the operational
lifetime.
When it comes to noise and vibration, it is essential that distinct acceptance criteria customized
for navy ships are applied and referred to e.g., as in the DNV COMF and SILENT class
notation. Propellers and machinery are the most common noise and vibration sources, but other
less common sources such as rudders, ventilation, and flow-induced phenomena may also be a
root cause of elevated noise and vibration levels. Complex excitation mechanism that can be
handled by advanced tools but also experienced engineers only. However, controlling the noise
and vibration sources to ensure crew comfort and machinery reliability is like killing two birds
with one stone because the same sources also determine the underwater signature of the vessel.
Underwater noise radiation is an important design property for naval vessels for several reasons
e.g., to avoid detection by other vessels, triggering of mines, proper use of own acoustic
transducers, etc. In this context it is important to evaluate the operational need for a low noise
level as extreme noise control may require specialized machinery, noise-controlled propellers,
additional noise reducing measures and may as such increase building costs and require
compromises with other design features.

89
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

System performance
Today system performance is not limited to the pure functionality, physical robustness and
maintainability of systems anymore but includes also cyber security, physical as well as digital
compatibility and future upgradability.
System integration
A seamless interaction and function of interacting systems as intended is essential to meet the
target capabilities of a platform, but this is neither given nor self-evident without active
management. Therefore, an early and systematic identification of critical interfaces and
consequence routes as well as the subsequent mitigation of detected gaps is a core element
within a modern design process. Methods as FMEA are well established in this respect and
have proven their suitability in many applications. However, for the selection of specific tools
and approaches, the applicability for small batch naval platform production needs to be
considered.
Changing and ever-increasing demands in navy shipbuilding are promoting new technologies,
new systems, new requirements, or requirements not covered in existing frameworks. With the
Technology Qualification (TQ) process as shown in Fig. 3 a risk-based procedure is established
to provide evidence that the technology will function within the specified limits and with an
acceptable level of confidence, DNV 2021a. Independent experts are key to support on defining
requirements exceeding the traditional and well-established frameworks and regulations e.g.,
ANEP and agree on tailored success factors. Third party support often reveal additional
benefits not only by offering subject matter expertise but also by providing a diverse and not
preoccupied view on identifying threats, defining mitigation measures and establishing a
verification plan. Eventually, after an independent verification has been accomplished the level
of achievement can be certified.

90
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Fig. 3: Schematic illustration of a technology qualification process (TQ)

The increasing importance of digital systems i.e., control and automation software their
seamless interaction and functionality becomes a key element of successful system integration.
Hardware in the loop (HIL) testing for example, provides a cost and time efficient procedure
to ensure fully integrated and functional systems already in the early design phase (Ref. HIL
Rune, Odd Charles).
Digitalization has triggered cyber security to become one of the top important topics to be
addressed across industries. The maritime industry is making an increasing effort to ramp up
their cyber security resilience over the last few years. Significant incidents have played a role
in driving this forward, but the key change has been the 2021 IMO cyber risk management
requirements on Shipping Managers/Owners and lately the 2024 IACS cyber security
requirements pushing shipyards and vendors to act.
As time and cost-efficient development of platforms as well as agile and digital designs become
a necessity, it will be key for navies to leverage the foundation of secure control and navigation
systems and vessel design from merchant vessels and add their additional layers of defense on
top. Dedicated class notations e.g., DNV Cyber Secure serving the particular needs in respect
of cyber security for naval platforms appear as an easy, proven and inclusive way amongst all
stakeholders to get the goal, DNV 2021c.
Shock

91
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

Vessels chartering unsafe waters need to be prepared for unexpected challenges. Ever more
tight regulations require designers, shipyards and system suppliers to prove the shock resistance
of structures and equipment. To avoid over-dimensioning, the shock loads should be threat and
design specific for the individual project. This means potentially more effort in the initial
definition phase for the specification of an adequate shock policy incl. the definition of loads
e.g., derived from a global shock analysis, but will certainly pay-off during the design phase
by avoiding unnecessary weight increase when applying non-suitable shock standards out of
the shelf.
Fire safety
Fire and explosion are one of the most relevant threads onboard and may differ in peacetime
and in wartime scenarios. Fire and explosion have various effects and consequences on a naval
vessel, depending on the origin, location and size. Following main aspects are to be considered:
- Prevention of Fire and Explosion
- Detection, Containment and Suppression/Extinction - Safe Evacuation
- Maintain of Essential Functions during and after a Fire or Explosion
Naval administrations have basically a large flexibility on defining the fire safety requirements
for naval ships. Beside national requirements they may choose the application of SOLAS
regulations, Special Purpose Ship Code (SPS Code), Naval Ship Code (NSC) Part 1 or 2, or
dedicated rules from Classification Societies depending on the design and use of the naval ship
code (NSC).
Following the general aspects, standards and challenges of fire safety for naval vessels it is
obvious that a clear view of fire safety issues along the design, construction and operation is
needed for naval ships. Due to the challenges regarding applied standards and materials as well
as the specific operations of the naval vessels, fire safety is even more relevant than for other
ship types which follow standard IMO regulations. For naval vessels the performance-based
design for fire safety or equivalence analysis are useful and indicated for some applications
due to the specific design requirements and operations.
Addressing fire safety already in the early design phase, definition of subsequent goals and the
selection of the to be applied Rules and standards is of upmost importance to avoid time and
cost consuming retrospective actions to close the gaps at a later stage and often in firefighting
mode. The involvement of all stakeholders and of independent 3rd party expertise has been
proven its effectivity and various projects.
Verification framework
Although classification is not a mandatory statutory requirement for naval vessels the demand
for assurance and verification, by means of classic classification or through dedicated technical
92
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

assurance approaches, has significantly gained importance during the last decade, Doerk
(2022). Increasing platform complexity, changed expectations of modern societies as well as
limited capacities and capabilities at naval authorities can be named as the main drivers behind
this development. The main characteristics of a modern naval classification or naval technical
assurance framework is the provision of both clear safety and reliability requirements as well
as assured flexibility, DNV 2021c and DNV 2021d. The latter being essential to utilize the
whole potential of state-of-the art simulations and to be able to adopt new technical
developments throughout the entire life cycle of the vessel. A good example for this flexibility
are DNV’s Rules Naval, that allow for a direct consideration of the stress levels obtained from
a global strength analysis according to the RSD class notation for the subsequent Rule check.
The application of composite materials ins another one in this respect. It goes without saying
that any flexibility shall be without any compromise on safety and reliability i.e., the higher-
ranking objective of any classification or assurance approach.
Model database
If a life cycle view on the performance of a naval platform is taken the consideration of the
operational phase already during the initial and detail design phase is of highest importance.
This also includes the establishment of a smart and future ready simulation and verification
model data base, including a proper regulation of the appertaining IP rights as well as an
efficient maintainability. Digital twin technologies in combination with so-called “one-model-
for-all” strategies as applied can be named in this respect, Doerk (2022).
The key benefits of a smart and maintained simulation and verification data base on the
performance during the operational phase are related to an eased and most efficient condition
assessment, lifetime extension, upgrade analysis and individual margin re-assessment, Doerk
(2017).
Total cost of ownership
An essential element that is not always appropriately considered during the design phase is the
cost of operating the new naval platform. If the cost of operating the vessel is too high the navy
will risk prolonged yard stay, excessive fuel consumption, and budget issues on sailing and
crew training. In the design specification it is therefore essential to also consider the complexity
of the system integration particularly with respect to cyber physical systems, sensors and
control systems. Key questions to ask are:
- Will the sum of the individual system components work effectively together?
- What will the system complexity mean in terms of crew training and total manning?
- What is the power consumption for the total platform?
- How does system complexity impact maintenance requirements?

93
 2nd Conference on Classification Regulations and
Advanced Technologies for Naval Ships and Auxiliaries
June 2023

By ensuring that the systems do not become too complex or diverse will reduce the negative
impact on the cost of maintenance, operational downtime, and ability to achieve operational
readiness within given budget flexibility.
Conclusions
For the design of high performing, future ready naval platforms the consequent application and
implementation of state-of-the-art simulations i.e., first principal methods are more and more
important. However, it is the smart combination of simulations with a modern, flexible and
praxis proven verification framework being vital to the success for a project or design
respectively. Compared to former times topics as fire safety, system integration, qualification
of new technologies and cyber security have significantly gained importance. But also, the
more traditional engineering areas, of course in modern shape, as strength, fatigue, noise and
vibration as well as hydrodynamic maintained their high relevance for the performance of a
naval platform design. Finally, expert experience and know how remain irreplaceable even in
digital and artificial intelligent times.
References
DNV 2021a; Technology Qualification, Recommended Practice, DNV-RP-A203, DNV AS,
Oslo, Norway.
DNV 2021b; Cyber Secure, Class guideline, DNV-CG-0325, DNV AS, Oslo, Norway.
DNV 2021c; RU-NAV, Rules for Classification, Naval Vessels, DNV AS, Oslo, Norway.
DNV 2021d; Naval Technical Assurance, Service Specification SE0555, DNV AS, Oslo,
Norway.
Doerk 2017; LOTE for MEKO Type Naval Vessels – Procedure and Experience, MECON
Conference, Proceedings, Hamburg.
Doerk and Spiliotis 2017; Lessons from LOTE for Naval Fleet and New Build, IMC
Conference, Proceedings, Sydney.
Doerk 2022; Naval Technical Assurance – A Way to Excel the Life Cycle Performance of
Naval Platforms, MECON Conference, Proceedings, Hamburg.

94