检索结果-内蒙古大学图书馆

WHY ENGINEERS DONT UNDERSTAND LOGISTICS

NAVAL ENGINEERS JOURNAL 1992年第5期104卷 57-63页

作者： LIGHT, SP The Authoris currently the director Logistics and Material Division Security Assistance Program Management Office (PMS 380) in the Surface Combatants Directorate (SEA 91) Naval Sea Systems Command. He received his BS degree in mechanical engineering from West Virginia Institute of Technology his MS degree in systems management from the University of Southern California and he is a graduate of the Defense Systems Management College. He is also certified as a member of the NavSea's Civilian Material Professional Career Program. Among his previous employments Mr. Light has held engineering and logistics management positions with the U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters in the Naval Engineering Division the Naval Ship Systems Command Engineering Interface Management Office and the Naval Ship Engineering Center where he served as manager of integrated logistics support for the FFG-7 Ship Design Project Office. He also served as the ILS manager for the CG-47 and DDG-51 ship programs during the design phases of these programs. Mr. Light was also the director of the Acquisition and Logistics Office for Surface Combatants (SEA 91) between 1984 to 1991. Mr. Light has twenty-eight years of experience in surface ship design acquisition maintenance and logistics.

The author describes his observations during twenty-eight years of naval ship design, acquisition and logistics support experience that engineers do not understand logistics or even consider logistics as part of their engineering responsibilities. This paper will explore the reasons why. The paper will also provide reasons why the engineer should understand logistics and why it should become a part of the engineer's responsibilities and lexicon. The paper presents the position that an engineer armed with a knowledge of logistics can do the best job in producing a good supportability design. Recommendations are provided to the naval engineering and logistics communities to increase the logistics knowledge of engineers. Also, the author advocates the development of design techniques to be used by the engineer to produce good supportability designs. The increased role of the engineer in applying supportability design techniques will be required in the future if we are to do more with the planned reductions in the acquisition workforce.

关键词： engineering

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

A COMPUTER-MODEL FOR DAMAGE TOLERANCE ANALYSIS

引用

NAVAL ENGINEERS JOURNAL 1988年第5期100卷 59-68页

作者： FAIRHEAD, DL COHEN, SL Steven L. Cohen:heads the Survivability and Damage Control Office at the David Taylor Research Center. His career has addressed a wide range of technical and management responsibilities in the areas of HM&E systems design magnetic signatures system safety of surface ships and submarines shipboard energy conservation RDT&E (future fleet) life cycle costing survivability damage control CBR defense and management information systems. He has participated in all phases of the ship design process from conceptual design through ship construction operational evaluation and overhaul/modernization. Mr. Cohen is a graduate of Drexel University where he majored in electrical engineering and has more recently taken courses in the fields of systems engineering program management costing and microcomputer-based information and decision support systems.

A computer model is being developed by the David Taylor Research Center (DTRC) to analyze the tolerance of surface ship combat systems to combat-induced and self-inflicted damage. The work is being done in support of the Navy's hull, mechanical and electrical design effort to improve the survivability of surface ship combat systems. The DDG-51 Detailed Design Specifications (Section 072f) and the General Specifications for Ships of the U.S. Navy (1986 Section 072e) both require that damage tolerance analyses be performed. A damage tolerance analysis shows the effect of damage on vital auxiliary and electrical systems and relates these damage effects to the capability of the ship to continue performing its combat mission at a prescribed level. Designated the Computer Aided Design of Survivable Distributed Systems (CADSDiS) model, DTRC's deterministic analytical tool consists of portable software to be used by personnel at the activity responsible for the ship design. The model's graphics electrical module is now operating on Digital Equipment Corporation VAX computers at several Navy and commercial activities. Because CADSDiS is highly interactive, it becomes an integral part of the design cycle; this is its major benefit. Thus, damage tolerance analysis information is available to personnel designing the ship within hours or days rather than weeks or months. This computer model will help ensure that the survivability principles of separation and redundancy are incorporated into ship design and are realized in the ship as built.

关键词： Warships

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

SEA LANCE WEAPON DEVELOPMENT - SYSTEM AND NAVAL engineering ASPECTS OF THE CAPSULE

引用

NAVAL ENGINEERS JOURNAL 1988年第3期100卷 204-214页

作者： BOOTH, RJ The authoris a senior specialist system engineer in the Sea Lance Program Defense Systems Division Boeing Aerospace Company Seattle Washington. He received his B.S. in 1960 from the U.S. Naval Academy and later a naval engineer degree and a M.S.M.E. degree from Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1967. Prior to graduate school he was trained in nuclear power and served on USSSargo(SSN-583). After graduate school he served in various engineering duty officer billets at Supervisor of Shipbuilding Groton Conn. Mare Island Naval Shipyard Ship Repair Facility Yokosuka Japan and Puget Sound Naval Shipyard. Upon retirement from the Navy in 1980 he consulted for Tracor Inc. and prior to joining Boeing Aerospace Company was with John J. McMullen Associates Inc. from 1981 to 1985. He is a registered professional engineer in the state of Washington and besides ASNE he is a member of SNAME and ASME. He presented a paper on 3-M systems at ASNE day 1980.

The developmental Sea Lance Weapon System is an encapsulated supersonic standoff antisubmarine warfare missile, launched from an attack submarine torpedo tube. The buoyant capsule rises to the surface, broaches, the forward closure separates, and the rocket motor ignites, powering the missile and payload from the capsule to the target coordinates. This paper emphasizes the system engineering and naval engineering aspects of the Sea Lance capsule, a lightweight high strength composite material pressure hull. Performance, environmental and interface requirements were identified to which analyses and comparisons were made. Concept development tradeoff studies comparing different methods of launch, materials, and structural geometry led to reasons that drove selection of a composite material for the capsule. Encapsulation, buoyancy, and underwater propulsion concepts with advantages and disadvantages of each concept are compared. Determination of expected shock loads and the derivation of requirements this placed on the capsule to protect the missile are covered. Capsule requirements imposed by transportation and handling, submarine weapon shipping, and torpedo tube launch are explained. The capsule cylinder material is a layered composite material with a pressure vessel sandwich layer consisting of filament wound graphite-epoxy skins with phenolic honeycomb in between, overlaid with a damage resistant layer of filament wound Kevlar over a crushable honeycomb. Future marine possibilities of composite capsule applications are presented. The paper concludes with the naval engineering advantages of composites capsules.

关键词： ORDNANCE

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

NAVAL SHIP DESIGN - EVOLUTION OR REVOLUTION

引用

NAVAL ENGINEERS JOURNAL 1988年第3期100卷 40-52页

作者： TIBBITTS, BF KEANE, RG RIGGINS, RJ Captain Barry Tibbitts USN: was graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1956 and subsequently served as a gunnery division officer in an attack aircraft carrier and as gunnery officer operations officer and chief engineer in two diesel submarines. He attended MIT from 1962–1965 earning a master of science in mechanical engineering and a naval engineers degree. Early assignments as an engineering duty officer included SRF Yokosuka CINCPACFLT staff and SupShip Pascagoula. From 1976 to 1987 he served in a variety of senior ship design assignments: CVV ship design manager director NAVSEC Hull and Ship Design Divisions director NavSea Ship Design Management and Integration Office commander David Taylor Naval Ship R&D Center and director NavSea Ship Design Group. Recently retired but recalled to active duty he is the professor of naval construction and engineering at MIT. He has received seven personal decorations including two Legion of Merit awards. Robert G. Keane Jr.:is currently the deputy director of the NavSea Ship Design Group. He has been employed by NavSea and its predecessor organizations for over twenty years. He is a graduate of The Johns Hopkins University from which he received his B.E.S. degree in mechanical engineering in 1962. He received his M.E. degree in mechanical engineering in 1967 from Stevens Institute of Technology and in 1970 his M.S.E. degree in naval architecture and marine engineering from the University of Michigan. Mr. Keane held increasingly responsible design positions involving ship arrangements hull equipment hull form and hydrodynamic performance before being selected in 1981 for the Senior Executive Service to be director of the Naval Architecture Subgroup. Following an assignment at the David Taylor Research Center as assistant for transition of ship engineering technology he served as director of the Ship Survivability Subgroup until assuming his current position in 1985. He is an active member of ASNE SNAME and ASE. Robert Riggins:received a B.S. in mechanical

Some fairly radical changes to the naval ship design process occurred during the 1970s. The decade of the 80s has also witnessed a steady stream of changes. One of the most significant was the establishment of the Ship Characteristics Improvement Board (SCIB) in the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations (OpNav), and the resulting influence on the dialog between the military requirements decision makers and the Navy's ship designers. Other changes have occurred for which the impacts are less clear. These include establishment of the chief engineer of the Navy (ChEng) position, creation of the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command (SpaWar) and OpNav's “Revolution at Sea” initiative. This paper will describe and discuss these and other changes, and comment on the resultant impact. The authors will attempt to present a global view of the total pattern of changes and try to discern if we are on a path of revolution, or merely normal evolution.

关键词： NAVAL VESSELS

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

THE IMPACT OF ELECTROMAGNETIC engineering ON WARSHIP DESIGN

引用

NAVAL ENGINEERS JOURNAL 1987年第3期99卷 210-217页

作者： OREM, JB The authoris currently group technical director at Advanced Technology Inc. where he is engaged in system engineering and ship design programs. A graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy in 1951 he served in various surface assignments until attending MIT in 1955. Subsequent to becoming an engineering duty officer he served in naval shipyards afloat engineering ship design and fleet ship salvage billets. He directed the preliminary design of FFG-7 and later served as project technical director. Subsequent tours included duty as project manager nuclear cruiser acquisitions and assistant to the deputy under secretary of defense (acquisition). Upon retirement he joined Sun Shipbuilding and Dry dock Company serving as V. P. program management and V. P. engineering. His education includes a B. S. from the U.S. Naval Academy and an M. S. in naval architecture and marine engineering and a naval engineer's degree from MIT in 1958.

In recent years, the expanding use of electromagnetic systems in warships has created significant problems. Mutually antagonistic systems degrade intended performance and serious safety problems have been created. The environmental effects produced by these systems must be considered in the mainstream of the warship design process. Systems engineering considerations using specific examples will show the potential impact on warship design considerations not normally considered. In addition, electromagnetic engineering considerations are proposed for impact on specific ship specification sections.

关键词：

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

ARCTIC TRAFFICABILITY program - A REVIEW

引用

NAVAL ENGINEERS JOURNAL 1984年第3期96卷 169-175页

作者： VOELKER, R GLEN, IF SEIBOLD, F BAYLY, I Richard Voelker:is Vice President of ARCTEC Incorporated a firm specializing in cold regions technology. He has been responsible for the management of thePolarClass Traffic-ability Program since its inception and annually participates in the field data collection in the Arctic. His prior experience includes positions with the U.S. Coast Guard in the icebreaker design project the Military Sealift Command and at Newport News Shipbuilding. He is a graduate of N. Y.S. Maritime College and has a MS degree from the University of Michigan. I.F. Glen:received his professional degrees in naval architecture from the Royal Naval Engineering College Manadon Plymouth and RN College Greenwich London entering the Royal Corps of Naval Constructors in 1967. After serving as a Constructor Lieutenant in the Royal Navy's Far East Fleet for a short period he joined the Polaris submarine project team in Bath England in 1968. In 1971 he was seconded to the Canadian Department of National Defense in Ottawa as a Constructor Lieutenant Commander under NATO exchange arrangements where he had responsibilities initially for conventional submarines and latterly for computer aided conceptual design. He ventured to Bath England in 1974 and joined Forward Design Group. In 1975 he took a position as a civilian engineer in the Canadian Defense Department and was Head of Hull Systems Engineering from 1977 to 1979. He joined ARCTEC CANADA LIMITED in 1980 and in addition to managing ice model testing projects and full scale trials has specialized in structural response of ships to ice impact. He headed ARCTEC's Kanata Laboratory from 1981 to 1983 when he was promoted to president. Frederick Seibold:is a research program manager with the Maritime Administration's Office of Advanced Ship Development and Technology. He is responsible for the marine science program which includes research in the areas of ship powering structures and propeller performance and Arctic technology. Mr. Seibold has been employed by Mar Ad since 1961 having hel

This paper describes a multiyear program to make an operational assessment on the feasibility of a year-round Arctic marine transportation system to serve Alaska. Specifically, the three objectives were to: collect meteorological and ice data along potential marine routes; instrument the hull and propulsion machinery to improve design critera for ice-worthy ships; and demonstrate that ships can operate in midwinter Alaskan Arctic ice conditions. The U.S. Coast Guard's Polar class icebreakers were used to make the operational assessment by annually extending the route northward and by operating throughout the winter season. This paper reviews some of the operational and technical achievements to date, as well as plans for future Arctic deployments.

关键词：

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

COMBAT SYSTEMS-engineering AND THE TOP LEVEL REQUIREMENT

引用

NAVAL ENGINEERS JOURNAL 1981年第2期93卷 97-100页

作者： TRUXALL, CW is a Senior Program Engineer with Systems Consultants Inc. Washington D.C. serving as Project Manager for the DD 963 Combat System Engineering Program. Prior to his retirement from the U.S. Navy in 1978 he served in the AEGIS Project Office Naval Sea Systems Command as ASW Systems Manager and Combat Systems/Ship Design Coordinator. His previous assignments involved service in ten ships including engineering duty in Carriers and Submarines and two Destroyer commands. He is a 1957 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy holds Master's degrees in Business Administration and Systems Management and attended the Program Managers Course at the Defense System Management College Fort Belvoir Va. He is a member of the American Defense Preparedness Association and has been a member of ASNE since 1958 having previously served on the ASNE Audit Committee and presently as the Chairman of the ASNE Membership Committee.

The Top Level Requirement (TLR) is a document that is required by the Chief of Naval Operations to be developed for new ship designs. This document describes in some detail the requirements levied on the ship designers for characteristics of the ship and its combat system. The Combat System engineering program has been developed in the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) to provide a disciplined approach to the engineering of upgrades and modernizations to current surface ship complex combat systems. One of the axioms of this systemized approach is that “top down” engineering must take place. That is, the rationale for the upgrade for the new elements being included in the system, and for the way the integration of those elements takes place, must be based upon a set of operational requirements. In order to systems engineer the developments of modernizations properly, the Author proposes that TLRs be developed for each combatant ship class without a TLR that is a candidate for a major modernization or upgrade. The primary focus would be on the combat system requirements, but also there is concern for the other ship operational characteristics as well. The TLR should be contained in a document of about twenty-five pages. As with the current TLRs, a Working Group of representatives from the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations (OPNAV), Naval Material Command (NAVMAT)/Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA), and other activities would be the developers of the new TLR. Because of the numbers of individuals with some responsibility in current Fleet ships, closer coordination between NAVMAT/NAVSEA and OPNAV is required. The process which this paper describes may well support significant cost savings in future-year combat system upgrades, and the Combat System engineering Community will have a basis for combat system design.

关键词：

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

U.S. SHIPBUILDING: THE SEVENTIES IN RETROSPECT —THE PROSPECTS FOR THE EIGHTIES

引用

Naval Engineers Journal 1980年第4期92卷 25-38页

作者： FISHER, JAMES R. COADY, PHILIP USN Capt. James Ronald Fisher USN is a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy. Class of 1958. has his M.A. degree in Management and is an Engineering Duty Officer (ED). He has served in a Destroyer and four Attack and Fleet Ballistic Missile Submarines as Training Officer of the Nuclear Propulsion Unit. West Milton N. Y. and at the Charleston Naval Shipyard where he also was the Chairman of the ASNE Charleston Section. He was ordered to the National Defense University from duty in the Industrial Management Directorate Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA). and has just recently been reassigned to the Submarine Platform Directorate at NA VSEA. Cdr. Philip Coady USN is a graduate of Tufts University from which he received his A.B. degree in 1963 and also the Naval Postgraduate School. Monterey. Calif. from which he received his M.S. degree in 1972. His sea experience has been predominently in Destroyers. most recently as Executive Officer of the USS Claude V. Ricketts (DDG-S) and has had two tours in the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations (OP-090) his latest being that of Special Assistant for Financial Management to the Director of Navy Program Planning (OP-090). Currently he is under orders to assume command of the USS Conolly (DD-979).

This paper reviews the recent turbulent history of the U.S. Shipbuilding Industry, its present status, and its prospects for the decade ahead. The Authors suggest that current maritime policy and the trend of market f...

关键词：

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES IN AIRCRAFT CARRIER DESIGN

引用

NAVAL ENGINEERS JOURNAL 1980年第5期92卷 71-85页

作者： REIN, RJ RYAN, JC USN (RET.) Cdr. Robert J. Rein USN (Ret.)currently is the Director of Naval Support Systems for the Columbia Research Corporation Washington D. C. At the time this paper was presented he was on active duty in the U.S. Navy serving as the Ship Design Manager for the CVV Naval Sea Systems Command. Prior to that his duty assignments included Deputy Program Manager for the Sea Control Ship Assistant Ship Material Officer. Staff of Commander Naval Air Force U.S. Pacific Fleet and Type Desk Officer for Cruisers/Destroyers and New Construction (CG 30) at the former Hunter's Point Naval Shipyard. He is a graduate of General Motors Institute an accredited private college sponsored by the General Motors Corporation: the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School Monterey. Calif.: and the Defense Systems Management College. Fort Belvoir. Va. Additionally. he has had extensive postgraduate study in Systems Management at The George Washington University. Cdr. Rein is extremely active in his support of professional engineering societies and as a member of ASNE since 1964 has been responsible for the founding of ASNE Local Sections on the west coast and presently is serving as the Society's National Assistant Secretary-Treasurer. In addition he also was the creator and coordinator for the highly successful. Society sponsored Symposium “Aircraft Carriers — Present and Future.”which was held in October 1976 at the U.S. Grant Hotel. San Diego. Calif. and was the first such Symposium jointly sponsored by an Operating Fleet command and a professional society. Mr. J. Christopher Ryanreceived his B.S. degree in Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering from Webb Institute of Naval Architecture in 1967 and his M.S. degree in Naval Architecture from Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1969. His initial work experience was at Litton Ship Systems where he was associated primarily with the general arrangements development of the DD 963 Class design. Subsequently. he was employed at the former Naval Ship Engineering Center with work as

Since the signing of the Contract Design Plane for the CVN 68 (the U.S. Navy's latest Class of Aircraft Carriers) In 1963, considerable technological advances have been made in Naval Ship Design. This paper provides specific examples of how new technology has affected traditional Carrier design practices and techniques, and also indicates areas where future advanced technology will be needed. It is divided into four sections: 1) Computer Design Application; 2) Total Ship Energy Conservation Analysis; 3) Advances in Structural Design; and 4) Impact of V/STOL Aircraft. The increased use of the computer to define ship characteristics in the initial stage of ship design is discussed, followed by a report on efforts to include energy conservation as an integral part of the design process. The energy conservation approach uses traditional analytical techniques to develop innovative design configurations that will achieve energy savings. Of the many advances in Carrier structural design, two specific examples are given: 1) Elimination of the infamous “knee-knockers” (high sills in passageway openings) common to Gallery Deck structure, and 2) Successful attempts at reducing the thickness of aircraft elevator platforms. The paper concludes by pointing out some possible challenges facing the ship designer and some of the technology already created by the expected introduction of advanced design Vertical/Short Takeoff and Landing (V/STOL) aircraft.

关键词：

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

DESIGN ASPECTS OF NEW SERD CATAPULT

引用

NAVAL ENGINEERS JOURNAL 1977年第1期89卷 55-67页

作者： BRACE, RL MCWADE, JE USN Capt. R.L. Brace: USN reported for active duty in the U.S. Naval Reserve in June 1945 and upon his release from active duty in 1948 entered Chaffey Junior College Ontario Calif. from which he received his Associate Degree in Engineering in June 1949. Subsequently he attended Purdue University from which he received his BS degree in Chemical Engineering in 1951 and while on a Westinghouse Research Fellowship his MS degree in Engineering in 1952. He joined Phillips Petroleum Co. in Oklahoma as a research engineer with the Jet Fuel Research Group upon receiving the latter degree and while so serving obtained 12 patents. In January 1955 he was recalled to active duty and reported to Officers Candidate School. Newport R.I. Upon being commissioned in the U.S. Naval Reserve in May of that year he began his flight training at the Naval Air Training Command ultimately being designated a Naval Aviator and augumented into the regular Navy in 1956. He served with four carrier-based attack squadrons including three combat tours and in 1962 completed a duty assignment with the U.S. Army in South Vietnam. Other assignments include Catapult and Arresting Gear Officer USS Enterprise (CVN-65) duty on the Staff. Commander Naval Air Force. U.S. Atlantic Fleet: Assistant Chief of Staff for Material Task Force 78 during the mine countermeasure operations in North Vietnam Officer-in-Charge. Fleet Air Western Pacific Repair Activity Cubi Point P.I.: and Head. Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipments Branch Ship Installations Division. Naval Air Systems Command from 1974 to 1976 during which he had full responsibility for all shore-based and shipboard aircraft launching and recovery systems and was Acquisition Manager for the SERD Catapult Program. Capt. Brace who was designated an Aeronautical Engineering Duty Officer in 1964. is a graduate of the U.S. Navy Test Pilot School the Naval War College and the Defense Systems Management School and his military decorations include the Meritorious Service Award the Air Me

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

建议与咨询留下您的常用邮箱和电话号码，以便我们向您反馈解决方案和替代方法

时间限定

文献类型

馆藏选择

核心期刊

语言

文献类型

帮助

文字说明：

检索规则说明：

检索范例：

分类表

所选分类

限定检索结果

文献类型

馆藏范围

日期分布

学科分类号

主题

机构

作者

语言

请选择保存的检索档案：

请选择收藏分类：

通借通还

建议与咨询 留下您的常用邮箱和电话号码，以便我们向您反馈解决方案和替代方法

时间限定

文献类型

馆藏选择

核心期刊

语言

文献类型

帮助

文字说明：

检索规则说明：

检索范例：

分类表

所选分类

限定检索结果

文献类型

馆藏范围

日期分布

学科分类号

主题

机构

作者

语言

请选择保存的检索档案： 新增检索档案 确定 取消

请选择收藏分类： 新增自定义分类 确定 取消

通借通还

建议与咨询留下您的常用邮箱和电话号码，以便我们向您反馈解决方案和替代方法

请选择保存的检索档案：

请选择收藏分类：