pressors, seawater pumps and heat
exchangers, fresh water pumps,
main engine lube oil pumps and
coolers, fuel and lube oil transfer
pumps, refrigeration system and
fuel oil and lube oil tanks. The
major volume drivers were located
in relation to the major connections
to the main engine and generators.
Eight arrangements were devel-
oped, reviewed in a meeting setting
to capitalize on the synergism of
the multi-national composition of
the team and revised according to
recommendations. The modified
arrangements were reviewed using
a QFD analysis tool that rated the
physical "locational" and the 'rela-
tional' aspects of each of the
arrangements against an ideal
matrix for both of those aspects.
The selected arrangement was
then modified to incorporate as
many of the positive aspects of the
other arrangements as possible.
The third phase (a 24-week peri-
od) included trade-off studies to
determine equipment vendors,
detailed development of the sys-
tems and the 3D product model
development
Conclusions
The physical separation of ERAM
core team members from their par-
ent organizations was one of the
elements of the project's success.
Overall, the sources of training for
the team were excellent. However,
the order in which the training was
provided to the team could have
been improved. The teambuilding
training should have preceded the
IPPD, SDM and QFD training.
The team would have gotten much
more out of its subsequent training
if it had been educated on basic
teaming skills at the beginning of
the project.
Shipyard involvement and that of
equipment suppliers from around
the world proved invaluable.
Equipment suppliers were far more
forthcoming about state-of-the-art
equipment technology than first
anticipated. Overall, additional
involvement of commercial ship-
builders would have been helpful.
The team realized that they had
lacked adequate structural design
support and cost engineering input
throughout the course of this
design. The request for a full-time
structural design person was not
fully responded to as only an
increased presence of a part-time
structural engineer was provided.
The team attempted to use a com-
bination of IPPD and SDM as the
basis for its unique design process.
Both methods have strengths and
weaknesses. IPPD as presented
relied heavily on the use of QFD
techniques. QFD is extremely
labor and time consuming and
should be used sparingly. IPPD did
bring a proven discipline to the
team that was used throughout the
project.
The SDM approach, which has
been used successfully by the auto-
motive industry, was also applied
throughout the project. The major
drawback of SDM was the formula-
tion and application of in-process
metrics of performance for the
design team. The concept and use
of in-process design reviews was
realized as an important element of
the IPPD process by the ERAM
design team. The goal was to min-
imize the design review prepara-
tion time and present results taken
from natural breakpoints in the
chosen design process. The concept
of using in-process data as a
progress report to be reviewed for
buy-in at an "In-Process Design
Review" carried very little favor
with the Steering Committee dur-
ing this period of the project.
Preparation for the management
team had to remain open to the In-
Process Design Review process in
order to fully realize the gains
available from the IPPD process.
The IPPD User's Guide was to
the ERAM process what the 3-D
CAD product model was to the
ERAM product. It represented the
best identified approaches tried
and used by the team and can act
as a valuable reference in giving
future teams a head start on what
processes work and which should
be avoided. Upon completion of
this design, the team remained
intact with the exception that the
slow speed diesel engine represen-
tative returned to his parent com-
pany, MAN B&W. The team conse-
quently needed to reorganize the
workload, and also felt the need for
additional teaming improvements,
which was accomplished through a
facilitated peer review process.
The team improved upon the
baseline design of M/V Betelgeuse
by: strategically routing distribu-
tive systems; eliminating systems
and components wherever possible;
consolidating systems and compo-
nents; carefully justifying the use
of redundancy; and minimizing
exotic material types. Most of
these improvements can be traced
to the upfront time spent by the
team developing multiple engine
room arrangements. The process
developed by the team to eliminate,
or amalgamate, these arrange-
ments into the final design proved
to be a distinct advantage over pre-
vious practice and led to significant
improvements over the baseline
ship, in the areas identified above.
The importance of a good vendor
library in developing equipment
product models is essential to a
successful product model develop-
ment. The lack of vendor supplied
3D equipment models required an
extensive expenditure of time to
develop a suitable suite of 3D
equipment models.
Computer software to support an
The ENERSYN range of lubricating oils marketed
by BP Marine are high performance synthetic oils
designed to provide optimum protection against wear for
machinery operating under severe conditions.
All our synthetics have been specifically designed to
meet the exact performance requirements of critical pieces
of machinery operating at extreme temperatures and
where low deposits are an essential operation requirement.
The use of synthetics can be cost effective in the
following applications: Air Compressors, Refrigeration
Compressors, Turbochargers, Gas Compressors and
Centrifuge Gearboxes.
If you would like further information please contact
us - or fill in the coupon.
To: BP Marine Ltd., Synthetics Brochure, Breakspear Park,
Breakspear Way, Hemel Hempstead, Herts HP2 4UL, UK.
Telephone: +44 (0) 1442 224474 Fax: +44 (0) 1442 225934
E-Mail: marinebp@bp.com Internet: www.bp.com/bpmarine
Name
Title
Company
Address
MR 9/97
BP Marine. Where the people make the difference.
Digital Wave Publishing