Offshore and Structural Mechanics

Application of Constrained Multi-Objective Optimization to the Design of Offshore Structure Hulls

[+] Author and Article Information
Lothar Birk

School of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, University of New Orleans, New Orleans, LA 70148lbirk@uno.edu

J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng 131(1), 011301 (Dec 11, 2008) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2957919 History: Received September 07, 2007; Revised May 21, 2008; Published December 11, 2008

The paper reports on the continuous development of an automated optimization procedure for the design of offshore structure hulls. Advanced parametric design algorithms, numerical analysis of wave-body interaction, and formal multi-objective optimization are integrated into a computer aided design system that produces hull shapes with superior seakeeping qualities. By allowing multiple objectives in the procedure naval architects may pursue concurrent design objectives, e.g., minimizing heave motion while simultaneously maximizing deck load. The system develops a Pareto frontier of the best design alternatives for the user to choose from. Constraints are directly considered within the optimization algorithm, thus eliminating infeasible or unfit designs. The paper summarizes the new developments in the shape generation, illustrates the optimization procedure, and presents results of the multi-objective hull shape optimization.

Copyright © 2009 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Pareto frontier, ideal solution, and the ϵ-dominance concept

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Differences in interactive and form parameter based CAD systems

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Form parameters for a semisubmersible

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Parameters available to specify spine curve, sectional area curve, and cross section curve of a single component

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Form parameter based automated hull generation procedure

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Distribution of the 400 designs of the initial population in the solution space and the initial Pareto frontier estimate

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

All 2000 designs in the solution space with initial and final estimates of the Pareto frontier

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

The final Pareto frontier designs; wetted hull surface at working draft

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Development of Pareto frontier estimates




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In