Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
JAPANESE SHIPBUILDING TECHNOLOGY
SURVEY OF JAPANESE SHIPYARDS
FOR
SPONSORED PROJECT
THE TRANSFER OF
.
BATH IRON WORKS CORPORATIONBATH, MAINE
Report Documentation Page Form ApprovedOMB No. 0704-0188
Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering andmaintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, ArlingtonVA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if itdoes not display a currently valid OMB control number.
1. REPORT DATE 1979
2. REPORT TYPE N/A
3. DATES COVERED -
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE Survey of Japanese Shipyards MARAD Sponsored Project for theTransfer of Japanese Shipbuilding Technology
5a. CONTRACT NUMBER
5b. GRANT NUMBER
5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER
5e. TASK NUMBER
5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER
7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) Naval Surface Warfare Center CD Code 2230 - Design Integration ToolsBuilding 192 Room 128-9500 MacArthur Blvd Betheda, MD 20817-5700
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATIONREPORT NUMBER
9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S)
11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT NUMBER(S)
12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release, distribution unlimited
13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
14. ABSTRACT
15. SUBJECT TERMS
16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT
SAR
18. NUMBEROF PAGES
43
19a. NAME OFRESPONSIBLE PERSON
a. REPORT unclassified
b. ABSTRACT unclassified
c. THIS PAGE unclassified
Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98) Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18
SURVEY OF JAPANESE SHIPYARDS
MARAD SPONSORED PROJECT
FOR THE TRANSFER OF
JAPANESE SHIPBUILDING TECHNOLOGY
P. E. JAQUITH----
NOVEMBER 1979’
1 . 0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
Executive Summary
1.1 Background
TABLE OF CONTENTS
. . . ● ✎ ✎ ✎ ✎☛ ● ✎ ● ☛✎ ✎ ✎ ✎ ✎ ✎ ✎ ✎ ✎ ✎ ✎☛ ● ✎✎☛ ● 1-8
. . . . . . . . . . . ......... . .....
1.2 Key Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.3 Conclusions and Recommendations . . . . . . . . .
Schedule and Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Organization of Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ● ● . . . ● ● . . . ●
Design Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Shipbuilding Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..*.... .
Preoutfit Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Steel Construction . . . . . . . . . . . ● ● ● . .- . . . . . . . . . . .
‘Welding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
List of Follow-on Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
APPENDIX:
A. NOtes on Mitsui Shipyards
B. Notes on IHI Shipyards
c . Notes on NKK Shipyards
D. Answers to Questions
E. List of Persons Visited
F. List of Slides
G. List of Reference Documents
9-12
13-19
20-24
25-30
31-32
33-35
36-37
38-39
SURVEY OF JAPANESE SHIPYARDS
References:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
“(e)
(f)
PEJ memo #PPC-754, Outfit Design, Planning andConstruction, dated 9-27-79
Outfit Planning by L. D. Chirillo, Todd PacificShipyards and C. S. Jonson, Science Applications -A manual on the Advanced System of Outfit Design,Planning & Construction used by the IHI Shipyardsin Japan
Improving Shipyard Production with Standard Compon-ents and Modules by Joshinobu Ichinose, IHI Shipyardsof Japan - A SNAME Paper on the use of Design andProduction Standards at IHI
A Survey of Japanese Shipyards, RRR, HDH, WRMTrip Report, dated September 1971
outline of Management, Design and-ProductionTechnology in Mitsui Tamano Works (ShipbuildingDivision), dated 11-2-79
Zone Outfitting in Kure Shipyard of IHI,dated November 1979
Project Team Members:
L. D. Chirillo -P. E. JaquithC. S. Jonson
J. McQuaid
. PetersonJ. R. Vander Schaaf -
Todd Pacific Shipyards, CompanyBath Iron Works CorporationScience Applications, Inc.
National Steel & Shipbuilding Co.(Retired)
Peterson Builders, Inc.IITRI Project Director
SURVEY OF JAPANESE SHIPYARDS
1.0 Executive Summary
1.1 Background
A survey of Japanese Shipyards was conducted from October29 to November 26, 1979 in support of a MarAd sponsoredproject for stimulating the U.S. Shipbuilding Industry toimprove productivity. In brief, the objective of thisproject was for a team of (6) individuals having broadshipbuilding exerience to visit Japanese Shipyards forthe purpose of identifying specific areas and follow-onprojects where Japanese Shipbuilding Technology can betransferred to the U.S. Shipbuilding Industry with MarAdassistance. The emphasis of this project is in the areaof Systems and Procedures, Management and OrganizationTechniques, and Computer Software as opposed to HardwareSystems requiring large capital investment.
The shipyards visited were selected based upon IITRIcontacts with the leading shipbuilding companies in Japan.The shipyards and organizations visited are listed below:
Mitsui Head Office -Mitsui Shipyard -Mitsui Shipyard -IHI ShipyardIHI ShipyardIHI ShipyardNKK Shipyard
With the exception of the Mitsui
Tokyo, JapanChiba, JapanTamano, JapanKure, JapanAioi, JapanTokyo, JapanShimizu, Japan
Chi22a Shipvard, all ofthe shipyards”visited were old yards that had beenmodernized. In all cases, the shipyards were buildingorders of (1-4) vessels of non-standard design-so a goodcomparison with the U.S. Industry exists.
- 1 -
Production thruput, even at the reduced levels dictatedby world shipbuilding demand, was high by U.S. Standards.Direct labor manhours and construction schedules wereapproximately one half or less of U.S. practice. Basedupon observations made in the six Japanese Shipyardsvisited, I believe the primary reason for this performanceis a high degree of rationalization* in the areas of workorganization, design, planning material control, facili-ties and tooling. These observations will be furtherdescribed in this section and in sections 2.0 thru 6.0 ofthis report.
(A) Scheduling and Control
● A typical Japanese Milestone Schedule for theconstruction of a new design non-standard cargo,bulk, container or RO/RO Ship is as follows:
Contract Award to Start Fab - 6 MonthsStart Fab to Keel - 2 ”Keel to Launch - 3 ”Launch to Delivery -3 “
= Months
● Scheduling and control of both the Front End andProduction Phases are simplified by the commonzone or area orientation of the design, planning,scheduling, labor/material control and production.
● Although schedules are simpler and in less detailthan BIW, control appears excellent in all areas.
(See Section 2.0 for further details.)
(B) Organization of Work
● The organization of work has been further simpli-fied by the product or zone orientation of boththe design and production organizations. A.tYPical product or zone breakdown used with minormodifications im both design and production is asinollows:
*Modernized based upon the principals of Hull Block Constructionand Zone Outfitting.
- 2 -
(c)
- Hull Construction (Hull Fabrication,Assembly and Erection)
Accommodation Outfitting (Outfitting ofAccommodation Spaces)
- Deck Outfitting (Outfitting of Cargo “and Deck Areas)
- Machinery Outfitting (Outfitting ofMachinery Spaces)
Electrical Outfitting (All ElectricalOutfitting)
● Outfit parts, other than piping, are sub-contracted locally thus simplifying internalcontrol.
● All production work in the fabrication,assembly/preoutfit, and on board outfitphases has been organized by zone or areathrough the use of working plans and materiallists ‘(Pallet Lists). Systems take precedenceover zones at the time of Shipboard’ Testing.
● A similar approach has been taken by IHITokyo in their construction of the DDH, a5200 Ton Twin Screw Destroyer.
(See Section 3.0 for further details. )
Desiqn Approach
●
The basic or contract design is more completethan U.S. practice and is accomplished by theTokyo Head Office.
The completion of functional design, key plansand calculations, and the development of work-ing plans is normally accomplished in the yarddesign office.
Outfitting working plan development has beenstreamlined thru the use of “Composit OutfitArrangement Drawings”. The use of the Com-posit Outfit Arrangement Plan is a key elementin the reduced working plan development timeachieved by Japanese Yards vs U.S. practice.
- 3 -
●
●
●
Both functional and working plan developmentare greatly assisted thru the use of compre-hensive standards* and extensive experienceon previous vessels.
The design is developed based upon extensiveplanning and production input early in thedesign process. This again is assisted bystandards.
The working plans and material lists (PalletLists), provide a common documentation fordesign, planning, scheduling, labor/materialcontrol and production.
(See Section 4.0 for further details.)
(D) Shipbuildinq Standards
Both IHI and Mitsui have developed extensivestandards for use in functional design, de-tail design, planning, production, and qualitycontrol.
Design and material standards start at thelevel of individual components and piecesof raw material (such as BIW is developing)and include progressive tiers to the levelof standard machinery arrangements and systemdiagrams for various standard “ships and vari-ous sizes of standard steam or diesel powerplants.
This approach has provided the yards aformalized way of documenting theirexperience and of developing new designor production processes documented in amanner that they can be modified as re-quired to suit new owner or servicerequirements.
The use of standards is a key element inthe significantly reduced design and pro-duction costs and schedules achieved byJapanese Yards vs U.S. practice.
(See Section 5.0 for further details.)
*Documented Standards or Guidance Data for use in the areasof functional design, detail design, planning, productionand quality control.
- 4 -
(E) Preoutfit Approach
●
●
●
●
●
Outfit installation as developed by JapaneseShipyards is broken into three stages:
On Unit (called packaging by BIW) -package or module outfitting ofcomponents, piping, grating~ etc.Packages are often multi-system andinclude multiple disciplines.
On Block (called unit preoutfitby BIW) structural block preoutfitsimilar to that accomplished by BIW.
On Board (called outfitting by BIW) -installation of the remaining materialon board ship. The work is packagedby logical area vs conventional system.
On block preoutfit levels observed in JapaneseYards were very similar to BIW practice on theMatson/FLI contracts where comparable blockswere observed.
On unit preoutfit provides Japanese Yards asignificant advantage-in areas not subjectto on block preoutfit (i.e. engine room andweather decks) vs current BIW practice.
IHI stated the following savings for on unitand on block preoutfit:
on unit vs. on board = 70% savingson block VS, on board = 30% savings
pictures of the DDH construction viewed inIHI Tokyo indicated limited use of on unitpreoutfit and extensive on block preoutfit.AS BIW uses larger blocks on the FFG, ouT_ _______preoutfit levels exceeded theirs---”- ‘-”—”-
. . . . .-
(See Section 6.0 for further details)
- 5 -
(F) Dimensional Control
● Structural dimensional control was very advancedin the yards visited. Midship units were fabri-cated neat with no stock, and most bow and sternblocks were cut neat at assembly.
● The dimensional control approach was describedas the monitoring and control of each fabri-cation, sub-assembly and assembly operationbased upon worker, supervision and qualitycontrol inspection and documentation.
● Dimensional control standards were stated tobe based upon experience and statisticalprojections of cumulative errors.
● This system is considered key in their lowassembly and erection costs and time as fitup was excellent and rework was minimal.
(G) Computer Aided Desiqn
Computer aided pipe detailing was in use inall yards although in many yards pipe fab-rication was not automated. System capabilitiesappear similar to RAPID which will become avail-able from IITRI this year.
Computer aided structural design and lofting wasin use in all yards although plate cutting inmany yards was still by “Electro-Photo-Marking”using optical projection. System capabilitiesappear similar .to AUTOKON ’76 or ’79 plus PartsDefinition, a new AUTOKON compatible systembeing developed under IITRI. ‘“ ‘-
Computerized control of both raw and fabricatedmaterial was in use in all yards. Computer aidedgeneration of material lists (Pallet Lists) wasused in Engineering to assist this.
Seabird, an advanced interactive commter aideddesign system using a data base concept, hadbeen developed by IHI. This system is no longerin use due to an excess of experienced designersand the cost to update it to new computer tech-nology. This system, when in use, resulted ina 30% savings in design cost and time and IHIstates they will use it in the future whenbusiness improves.
- 6 -
1.3
● The advantage stated for the above computerapplications was reduced design time andcosts .
Conclusions and Recommendations
Although many of the observations were similar to thosealready described in references (a-d): I feel the tripwas most informative as a greater understanding of theprincipals was achieved. Based upon these observations,I am convinced that BIW has been moving in the rightdirection during the last ten years and particularlyduring the last four years. Although several key U.S.Shipyards (National Steel, Avondale, Livingston andSun Ship) have already initiated studies of IHI’s orother leading shipbuilders’ methods, I feel that BIWmay be in an unique position to properly evaluate andimplement this advanced technology.
Assuming a high probability of BIW being involved innew ship design and construction in the early 1980:s,I feel the adoption of selected Japanese approachesoffers significant schedule and cost advantages toBIW. In light of the above, the following recommen-dations are made:
(A) BIw should establish a project team to carefullyreviewJapanese procedures and to recommend im-plementation where found appropriate. In thisregard, particular emphasis should be placed inthe following areas:
Schedule and Control- Organization of Work
Design Approach- Shipbuilding Standards- Preoutfit Approach
(B) BIW, as manager of the MARAD ShipbuildingStandards Program, should push aggressivelyfor an expanded standards program. Specificemphasis should be placed on a long rangeprogram for standards development and thedevelopment of functional design standardsfor low speed diesel power plants.
- 7 -
(C) In reviewing Japanese procedures and developingan expanded U.S. Shipbuilding Standards Program,BIW should closely observe the Livingston Programand other existing and follow-on MARAD fundedprojects that are already planned in these areas.
(D) BIW should send a follow-on team of Key ManagementPersonnel to Japan to gain further familiarizationand understanding of Japanese design, planning andproduction procedures.
(E) If required at a later date to assist in imple-menting new approaches, BIW should consider theuse of Key Consultants from Japanese Firms suchas IHI and Mitsui.
- 8 -
2.0 Schedule and Control
2.1 A typical Japanese Milestone Schedule for commercialconstruction is shown in Exhibit 2-I, page 11. Amore detail milestone schedule for a Mitsui buikcarrier is shown in Reference (e), page 2-4.
2.2 A typical IHI Schedule for a 5200 Ton Destroyershown in Exhibit 2-2, page 12. ---
2.3 In order to support the very short shipbuildingperiods illustrated in Exhibit 2-1 and 2-2,
is
Japanese shipbuilders have found it necessary toparallel the design, material procurement andproduction phases as illustrated below:
Conventional Outfitting
Delivery
Mat’1 ProcurementProduction
Zone Outfitting
I Design I Delivery
Mat’1 Procurement
[ Production f
NOTE : Parallel design material procurement and productionis more readily scheduled-and controlled with aproduct oriented detailed design.
. . . . . . . . ---------- --- . . .— . ..-. -- -
-. ———... .-— ------—.-— _ - — - — ---. .-—
- 9 -
2.4 Japanese Shipbuilding Schedules are normally GanttCharts or simple lists. IHI, Kure personnel, indi-cated that they had tried PERT/CPM Networks andfound them too inflexible for the shipbuilding environ-ment. They did, however, indicate that they had used acomputer network analyses system (PMS) for the designand production of a floating power and pulp plant forthe Amazon River. The reason given for using networkanalyses on the latter project is the fact that theirprevious shipbuilding experience did not directly relateand they needed a more detailed analysis to identifycritical paths and establish schedules.
2.5 Scheduling and control of both the Front End andProduction Phases are simplified by the common zoneor area orientation of the design, planning, scheduling,labor/material control and production.
2.6 Although schedules are simpler and in less detail thanBIW, control appears excellent in all areas.
2.7 Additional explanations and examples of Japanese Ship-building Schedules can be found in Reference (e), pages5-4 to 5-11, and in Reference (f), pages 30-33.
- 1 o -
3.0 Organization of Work
3.1 The organization of a typical Japanese Design orOutfitting Production Division is product or zoneoriented. This is shown for commercial shipbuildingby Exhibit 3-1 and 3-2, pages 15 and 15. A modifi-cation of this production outfitting division organi-zation is shown for IHI’s Tokyo Yard construction ofa 5200 Ton Destroyer by Exhibit 3-3, page 17.
3.2 The Pallet (workpackage) is zone or area oriented inorder to simplify scheduling and control of labor andmaterial. This is illustrated by Exhibit 3-4, page 18.
3.3 The following guidelines have been developed by ZHIto assist in defining Pallet breakdowns:
a. On block outfitting for material pre-assembled into a unit.
b. On block outfitting after a steel blockis turned over for material.preassembledinto a unit.
c. On board outfitting for material pre-assembled into a unit.
d. On block outfitting for material tobe installed piece by piece.
e. On block outfitting after a steelblock is turned over for materialto be installed piece by piece.
f. On board outfitting prior to an areabeing closed in by an overhead block.
5* On board outfitting by zone or areaprior to system tests (or other keyevents such as launch, trials, etc.) .
h. On board outfitting general categoryfor items such as spare parts andtouch Up.
- 1 3 -
3.4 The organization of outfit in the engine room lowerlevel of a typical diesel machinery space is illu-strated as follows:
5 Structural Blocks
- 3 to 4 Pipe Units
10-12 Machinery Units
3.5 The number of Pallets or MLPs (Pallet Material Lists)for typical IHI standard vessels are shown in Exhibit3-5, page 19.
3.6 The transition from zone or area construction tosystem completion in the piping area takes placeat testing. The testing of commercial ship pipingsystems is normally done by zone as a result of thezone orientation of the outfitting crafts and tosupport schedule completion of individual zones.
3.7 Outfit parts, other than piping, are subcontractedlocally thus simplifying internal control.
EXHIBIT 3-3IHI TOKYO
ORGANIZATION OF OUTFITTING DIVISION
FOR NAVAL VESSELS
I FITTING WORK SHOP I
I IPRODUCTION PLANNING& ENGINEERING GROUP
r
ELECTRICAL FITTING SHOP
/ ORDNANCE/WEAPONi
MACHINER= FITTING SHOP“ MACHINERY OPERATING SHOP
NOTES : (1)
(2)
ALL AREAS NOTMACH ., ELEC . ORORD . ARE MANAGEDBY HUIL FITTINGSHOPPAINTING & ELEC.FITTING SHOPS COVERAIL ZONES
PIPE FABRICATION I
HULL (DEcK)FITTING SHOP
.MACHINERY FITTING SHOP
MACHINERYOPERATING SHOP
- i
ELECTRICALFITTING SHOP
- - i
ORDNANCE/WEAPONSSHOP
I PAINTING SHOP
- 1 7 -
.
EXHIBIT 3-4
CONCEPT OF PALLETING
OR ZONE OUTFITTING
J
N0 OF PALLETS OR .MFL'S (1) EXHIBIT 3-5
I I II TOTAL I 714 I
4.0 Desiqn Approach
4.1 In Japanese Shipyards the design effort is dividedinto four stages:
● Basic Design - Preliminary design calculations,general arrangement, machineryarrangement, midship section,scantling plans, and systemdiagrams. (Performed in theTokyo Head Office.)
● Function Design - The completion of key draw-
. Detail Design
ings such as arrangements,system diagrams, structuralscantling plans, etc.
- The conversion of functionaldesign information into zoneor area oriented structuraland outfit working drawings.
e Work Instruction Resign - Structural lofting,pipe sketching, and the develop-ment of other detail fabricationsketches required to fabricateor purchase small subassemblies.
4.2 The basic or contract design is more complete thanU.S. practice and is accomplished by the Tokyo HeadOffice.
4.3 The completion of functional design, key plans andcalculations, and the development of working plansis normally accomplished in the yard design office.
4.4 Piping and other system diagrams are developed inschematic form by deck level similar to U.S.practice. Piping diagrams are complete in allrespects and along with the machinery arrangementsare the only piping drawings submitted for agencyapproval. The piping diagrams are used in conjunc-tion with machinery arrangements to determine thepipes system lengths for the purpose of sizing andmatesial calculations.
- 2 0 -
4.5 Outfitting working plan development has beenstreamlined thru the use of “Composite OutfitArrangement Drawings”. The use of the CompositeOutfit Arrangement Plan is a key element in thereduced working plan development time achievedby Japanese Yards vs. U.S. practice. This isillustrated by a Flow Chart of Outfitting Work-ing Plan Development, Exhibit 4-1, page 23.
4.6 A description of Outfitting Working Drawings orComposite Outfit Arrangement Drawings is asfollows: ,
Enqine Room Lower Level - Drawingsinclude foundations; piping; gratingframework, plating, and handrails; piping supports; and ladders.
Deck Piping - Drawings include piping; “grating framework, plating, and hand-rails; ladders; deck fittings; pipingsupports; and foundation installation..
Forecastle Deck - Rrawings.includedeck fittings; equipment and found-ation installation; grating framework,plating and handrails; piping: andpiping supports.
Accommodations - Three drawings wereused; a) piping, ventilation, ladders,equipment and foundation installation;b) joiner installation and c) electrical”installation.
4.7 The outfitting composite drawings reviewed at allthe shipyards were not sophisticated drawings.The piping was shown as one line although theflanges appeared to be shown full size. The com-posite drawings did include elevations, sectionsand details and the drawings were coded withsymbols or by shading to indicate the installationstage, i.e. on unit, on. block, or on board.
4.8 Typical structural working plans include deck, sideshell, web frames, etc. for the complete block orfor a group of similar blocks. Structural workingplans do not include foundations which are issuedon a separate book plan by area or zone.
4.9 Material is ordered in progressive stages throughoutthe functional design, detail design, and work in-struction desiqn phases in order to suit materiallead times. Long-lead material is ordered by theTokyo office during the basic design phase. Thisis illustrated by Exhibit 4-2, Outline Process ofPallet Design, page 24.
4.10 The design is developed based upon intensive planningand production input early in the design process.This is illustrated by the Outline Process of PalletDesign, Exhibit 4-2, page 24.
4.11 Both functional and working plan development aregreatly assisted thru the use of comprehensivestandards and extensive experience-on previousvessels.
4.12 The working plans and material lists (Pallet Lists)provide a common documentation for design, planning,scheduling, labor/material control and production.
4.13 The Japanese approach to design, described in theabove paragraphs, is slightly different from thatdescribed in Reference (d). The primary differenceis the use of multi-block structural drawings andarea outfitting composite drawings that do not re-flect a single stage of construction or a singlestructural block or outfitting unit. This changein approach took place during the middle 70’s,either due to lack of design staff to prepare themore costly unit or block oriented drawings or asa result of economy measures taken’after the declinein shipbuilding. The working drawings viewed ap-peared fully adequate for the purpose of supportingproduction installation.
4.14 Additional explanations and illustrations of theJapanese design process can be found in Reference(e) pages 3-1 to 3-8 and in Reference (f) pages7 thru 11.
- 2 2 -
5.0 Shipbuilding Standards
5.1 Both IHI and Mitsui have developed extensivestandards for use in functional design, detaildesign, planning, production and quality control.This is illustrated by Exhibit 5-1, Table of IHIStandards, page 28.
5.2 IHI’s design approach appears heavily oriented tothe use of design standards which have been developedbased on standard ship designs. See Exhibit 3-5,page 19for examples of standard IHI designs. Althoughthese design standards are based on standard ship de-signs, they have been developed with the idea ofsolving a range of problems versus solving the speci-fic design problems presented by the ship beingdesigned. Mitsui, on the other hand, bases theirdesigns on previous ships having similar engine typesand power ranges. Neither IHI nor Mitsui appear tohave a totally comprehensive documented set ofstandards covering all ship types. Standards fortanker and bulk ships appear to be very thoroughlydeveloped, while standards for liner ships are lesscompletely developed.
5.3 Both IHI and Mitsui have single main engine vendorsfor both low speed and medium speed diesel. IHImanufactures the low speed Sulzer and medium speedPielstik engines while Mitsui manufactures the lowspeed B&W and a medium speed Mitsui engines.
5.4 Design and material standards start at the level ofindividual components and pieces of zaw material(such as BIW is developing) and include progressivetiers to the level of standard machinery arrangementsand system diagrams for various standard ships andvarious sizes of standard steam or diesel power plants
5.5 The design of system modules using IHI functionaldesign standards is illustrated in Exhibit 5-2,page 29. In this case, the design standards haveallowed for alternative system capabilities andthe designer selects from these alternatives tocreate the functional and working drawings for anew ship design.
5.6 An example of machinery component standards isillustrated by Exhibit 5-3, page 30. These standardsappear to have been developed to a range of require-ments instead of being designed axound a specificship type.
5.7 According to IHI, Kure personnel, standards have beendeveloped to reflect the highest quality based on newrequirements and reflecting the experience of the past.The use of standards is sold to the owner, duringtechnical negotiations prior to contract award, basedon the principals of proven service experience, reduceddelivery time and reduced cost.
5.8 Functional design standards for a 60,000 ton bulkcarzier engine room design included the following:
Engine Room arrangement based on a singleengine type with alternative number ofcylinders.
- Machineryelevation
A list ofalternate
arrangement including plan,and section.
key equipment includingvendors except for the
main engine.
All system diagrams..
An arrangement of machinery unitsor outfit packages:
Machinery module designs.
Parts lists for individual systemsand machinery modules.
NOTE : The majority of machinery units oroutfit packages shown for this de-sign were based on standard machin-ery modules which are system oriented.Example, lube oil purification, fueloil treatment, jacket water heatexchanges, etc.
5.9 IHI personnel indicated that they have previouslyforwarded-to BIW, as the MARAD Standards ProgramManager, a proposal for technical assistance inthe area of standards development. This proposalshould be carefully reviewed, although, at thispoint, Mr. Harnada of IHI, indicates that thequestion of selling IHI’s Standards or Assistancein Standards Development is a question that requirescomplete review by IHI Top Management.
- 2 6 -
5.10 Mitsui design standards, in the form of designmanuals and design check lists, were reviewed.These design standards provides substantialguidance to designers in the form of partialsystem diagrams, tables or graphs simplifyingengineering calculations, check lists of itemsrequired to properly complete functional or work-ing drawings, check lists of items required toensure reduced costs in the production area andcheck lists, based on experience, of items causingeither production problems or problems in theguarantee area.
5.11 This approach to standards has provided JapaneseShipyards a formalized way of documenting theirexperience and of developing new design or pro-duction procedures documentated in a manner thatthey can be modified as required to suit new owneror service requirements.
5.12 The use of standards is a key element in thesignificantly reduced design and productioncosts and schedules achieved by JapaneseShipyards vs. U.S. practice.
5.23 Additional explanation and examples Of Japanesepractice in the area of shipbuilding standardscan be found in Reference (c), Reference (e)pages 3-7 to 3-16, and Reference (f) pages14 thru 19.
5.14 Although IHI appears to have moved further indeveloping comprehensive shipbuilding standards,I believe that both Mitsui and IHI should beconsidered as potential subcontractors to BIWand the U.S. Shipbuilding Industry for thedevelopment of a comprehensive standards program.
_ 2 7 -
EXHIBIT 5-1
TABLE OF NUMBERS OF IHI STANDARDS
Classification of Standards Nos.
Material Common components 600standards
Hull fittings 600
so Machinery fittings 200
Is Electric fittings 200
Sub-total 1,600
Design standards 1,100
Production eng. standards 2.00SOT
Inspection standards 200
Sub-total 1,400
Machinery drawings (SDI(l]) 1,200
Component and fitting standard dwgs 350
Other guidance drawings 350SD(’)
Sub-total 1,900
Grand total 4,900
NOTE : (1) SDI Standards are standards wherea change must be the result of amutual agreement between IHI anda Vendor or Sub-Contractor.
- 2 8 -
6.0 Preoutfit Approach
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5
Outfit installation, as developed by JapaneseShipyards, is broken into three stages:
- On Unit (called packaging by BIW) -package or module outfitting ofcomponents, piping, grating, etc.Packages are often multi-system andinclude multiple discipl-ines.
On Block (called unit preoutfit byructural block preoutfitBIW) - st .
similar to that accomplished by BIW.
On Board (called outfitting by BIW) -installation of the remaining materialon board ship. The work is packagedby logical area vs. conventional system.
On block preoutfit levels observed in Japanese Yardswere very similar to BIW practice on the Matson/FLIcontracts where comparable blocks were observed.
On unit preoutfit provides Japanese Yards a signifi-cant advantage in areas not subject to a block pre-outfit (i.e. engine room and weather decks) versuscusrent BIW practice.
IHZ stated the following savings for on unit andon block preoutfit:
onon
unit vs. on boardblock vs. on board
= 70%= 30%
savingssavings
The primary emphasis of Japanese Shipbuilders isbased on maximizing the on unit preoutfit functionVs . the on block preoutfit function emphasized atBIW. The key advantages of this approach are asfollows:
increased preoutfit levels(8.0% piping vs. 55% at BIW)
- 3 1 -
6.6
reduced construction timedue to parallel constructionof structure and outfit.
reduced interface of pre-outfit and structural tradesduring steel assembly.
improved sequencing and controlof work.
earlier application of laborand material than presentlyexperienced at BIW.
In discussing the preoutfit of engine room lowerlevel blocks (at IHI, Kure) that were similar tothose structural blocks preoutfitted by BIW onthe Matson and Farrell programs, the IHI, Kurepersonnel indicated preoutfit times of approximately8-12 working days or roughly half at what BIW’S ex-perience has been. The IHI personnel credited theirpreoutfitting of these very complex structural blocksto the extensive preassembly of piping, gratings,foundationsin the form
6.7 Pictures of
and components that had been accomplishedof outfit units.
the DDH construction viewed in IHI,Tokyo indicated limited use of on unit preoutfitand extensive on block preoutfit. As BIW useslarger blocks on the FFG, our preoutfit levelsexceeded theirs.
- 3 2 -
7.0 Steel Construction
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.’4
7.5
7.6
7.7
The block breakdown is defined very early in thecontract and is a key input into the developmentof functional and detail design.
The steel plate and shape storage yards are verysmall compared to U.S. practice. Steel is normallydelivered only one or two days prior to fabrication.
Steel fabrication and assembly shops are large andvery well laid out. The area of steel assemblyshops to ship erection area is greater than U.S.practice.
.
Steel plates were typically laid out using opticalprojection in the electro-photo marking process.After layout, the plates were transferred to a cut-ting conveyor where they were cut to shape manually.Limited use of Numerical Control Cutting Machineswas observed.
Steel shapes were laid out and burned to shapemanually while moving on conveyors. The burningconveyors for plates and shapes were similar tothose used at BIW. The use of conveyors in theseapplications eliminated crane and handling time.
Limited use of plate rolls and presses wasobserved. Heat lined bending of plates wasobserved in all shipyards visited.
Subassembly areas were large and well laid out.The subassembly of small floors and web frameswas typically accomplished on a moving conveyoror on raised post mocks. The subassemblies fortanker web frames included staging clips, smalllifting pads for use in assembly, and handgrabsor ladders for use during assembly and erection.
- 3 3 -
7.8
7.9
7.10
7.11
7.12
7.13
7.14
7.15
7.16
Directly after the flame planing or cutting oflarge plates to size, they were joined togetherand automatic welded with one side welding toform plate blankets.
Directly after the fabrication of deck, shelland bulkhead longitudinal, the longitudinalwere assembled in jigs with the transversebulkheads and web frames to foxm three dimen-sional grid assemblies.
After welding of the grid assembly, it was joinedto the flat plate blanket to form a complete flatpanel block.
Pin jigs were extensively usedof curved bilge and side shellshipyards visited.
for the assemblyunits in all
A1l structural blocks were mechanically cleanedand painted prior to erection. Only limitedcapability for reblasting completed blocks was
observed.
Building docks or berths were equipped withmultiple erection cranes due to the rapid rateof erection. Many structual blocks were ob-served in storage waiting for erection.
Midship blocks were fabricated neat with nostock, and most bow and stern blocks were cutneat at final assembly.
Extensive use was made of jigs throughout theassembly and erection process.
Permanent access was designed into non-tightstructural members to facilitate access duringassembly and erection.
- 3 4 -
7.17 Heat line fairing, to correct”weld distortion,was observed at all subassembly and assemblystages.
7.18 Large capital intensive jigs or work fixtureshad been developed for tanker and bulk carrierconstruction. These include the following:
a.
b.
c.
At the Mitsui Chiba Shipyard, the RotasSystem was used for the construction oflarge 60’ long by 1400 ton wing tanks.These large.blocks were assembled on end,the vertical joints were welded using theelectro-slag process, and then the com-plete block was rotated mechanically forwelding in various positions. After thecompletion of welding, the block wastransferred mechanically to the edge ofthe dock, lowered into the dock, and .transferred mechanically to the erectionposition.
At IHI Kure Shipyard, a mechanical devisefor rotahing large flat panels on end andproviding mechanical staging was observed.This system was used to allow completedownhand welding of the web”frame to panelconnections.
At the IHI Kure and Aioi Shipyards,mechanized work units had been developedto provide staging and services as wellas mechanical assistance in the erection,fairing, and welding of shell, longitudinalbulkhead, and deck panels on large tankerand bulk carriers.
- 3 5 -
8.0 Weldinq
8.1 The welding process is definedcontract and is a key input tofunctional and detail design.
very early in thethe development of
8.2 Subassembly welding was accomplished using gravityrods. The quality of gravity rod welding appearedexcellent.
8.3 Flat panel seams were welded using one side sub-merged arc welding. The one side welding processwas used for thicknesses of 9-30 MM (3/8”- 11/4”) .The welding of theflat plate blanketrods.
8.4 Curved panel seams
8.5
8.6
three dimensional grids to thewas accomplished using gravity
were welded using submergedarc welding against a temporary backing material.The welding of stiffeners and web frames to curvedpanels was accomplished using gravity rods.
It appeared that all fitting was accomplishedprioz to releasing the blocks for welding. Insome yards the assembly and welding of flatpanel blocks was accomplished on a slowlymoving floor conveyor.
Erection welding was based on the maximum useof automatic and semi-automatic welding processes.Typical processes are as follows:
a. Deck plating was welded with sub-merged arc using temporary backing.
b. Vertical shell and bulllhead buttswere welded using the electro-slagprocess.
- 3 6 -
c. Sloping or overhead surfaces werewelded using oscillating fluxcoreor solid wire MIG against temporarybacking.
d. Vertical deck longitudinal werewelded using the electro-slagprocess. Deck longitudinalwere flat bar to facilitatethis process.
e. Bottom shell, side shell andlongitudinal bulkhead stiffenerswere welded using the electro-slag process for vertical sur-faces and the submerged arcprocess for horizontal surfaces.
- 3 7 -
9.O List of Follow-on Projects
The following iS a liSt of fOllOW-On projects identifiedin our November 151 1979 meeting held in Tokyo, Japan:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(Ll)
(5)
(6)
Zone Planning - A second edition ofThe Outfit Planning Manual, cover-ing hull structure and painting. (Priority A)
Zone Planning Exandes - Apamphlet giving lists and sketchesof block arrangements, outfit unitarrangements, pallet lists, draw-ing lists, etc. for a typical IHIship. (Priority A)
Zone Planning Educational Aids -Implementation aids in writtenand audio visual form for the useof design and shipyard middlemanagement. . (Priority B)
Handbook for Production ProcessPlanninq and Engineering -A manual on the function andaccomplishment of productionengineering.
Manaqing the Plannina PhaseA manual on scheduling_andcontrol of the front-endengineering, material controland planning phase.
Shipbuilding Standards, LonqTerm Objectives - The develop-ment of a long range set ofobjectives and program for thedevelopment of an expanded andcomprehensive U.S. Shipbuildingstandards program.
(Priority A)
(Priority B)
(Priority A)
- 3 8 -
(7) Functional Desiun Standards forDiesel Machinery Plants -The development of functionaldesign standards covering lowspeed diesel power plants. (Priority B
(9) Jigs and Fixtures for Assemblyand Erection - A manual onfitting jigs and fixtures forassembly and erection.
(Pxiority B
(Priority 3
- 3 9 -
