@conference {3676, title = {3676. Weight Control: Idealistic vs. Realistic}, booktitle = {76th Annual Conference, Montreal, Canada}, year = {2017}, month = {05/2017}, pages = {14}, publisher = {Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc.}, organization = {Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc.}, address = {Montreal, Canada}, abstract = {

Often, the requirements for determining the mass properties of a ship are contractually establishedbythecustomerand/orthedesignagent. Inreallifethough,withintheshipyard, many of those requirements physically can{\textquoteright}t be done, are in themselves not accurate, or fall by thewaysideduetocostand/orschedulefactors. EveninsomeoftheRecommendedPractices, there are {\textquotedblleft}requirements{\textquotedblright} that are misconceived. This paper discusses several examples that can (and will) deter from what would be an {\textquotedblleft}idealistic{\textquotedblright} weight control program.

}, keywords = {13. Weight Engineering - Marine}, url = {https://www.sawe.org/papers/3676/buy}, author = {R. Alan Bird} } @conference {3632, title = {3632. Challenges Encountered Doing Weight Reports on Multiple Ship Contracts}, booktitle = {74th Annual Conference, Alexandria, Virginia}, year = {2015}, month = {05/2015}, pages = {13}, publisher = {Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc.}, organization = {Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc.}, address = {Alexandria, Virginia}, abstract = {Some multi-hull Contracts require that a detailed weight report be generated for only the lead ship in a class, while other contracts require detailed weight reports for each hull in the program. There are many aspects that have to be dealt with for multiple hull contracts primarily, handling hull specific contract modifications. Done incorrectly, dealing with multiple spreadsheets or databases to do weight reports can easily lead to an administrative {\textquotedblleft}nightmare{\textquotedblright} and create a great source of errors. This paper discusses an approach used to mitigate duplicate entries and potential errors. It does not go into the details of the revisions made by BAS Engineering to the ShipWeight computer program which added the Phase Code feature, but instead, explains how and why the Phase Codes are used. Proper Database Management is required to ensure consistency, and a time savings (cost) approach to developing weight reports for follow-on ships under multi-hull contracts.}, keywords = {13. Weight Engineering - Marine}, url = {https://www.sawe.org/papers/3632/buy}, author = {R. Alan Bird} } @conference {3633, title = {3633. Methods Used for Tracking, Validating, and Reporting the Weight of Operating Space Items (OSI) and Storeroom Items (SRI)}, booktitle = {74th Annual Conference, Alexandria, Virginia}, year = {2015}, month = {05/2015}, pages = {19}, publisher = {Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc.}, organization = {Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc.}, address = {Alexandria, Virginia}, abstract = {Many times, items are listed as {\textquotedblleft}Items to Deduct{\textquotedblright} during the Deadweight Survey, which, according to the Expanded Ship Work Breakdown Structure (ESWBS), are actually part of Lightship. Due to misconceptions and/or errors, the Deadweight Survey is not accurate when compared to the Mass Properties Reports. The largest confusion is with the definition of Operating Space Items (OSI), Storeroom Items (SRI), and General Use Consumable List (GUCL) items. Another issue is that OSI is most often completely missed in the early stages of a weight estimate and those items are also among the most challenging to get accurate weight values for. Weighing of these items is difficult as these are generally small items and have a high risk of being pilfered or 0damaged, and are therefore not loaded out until delivery. Although arriving late in the weight estimating schedule, getting accurate weights for the {\textquotedblleft}little things{\textquotedblright} that make the ship work will benefit the Deadweight Survey / Inclining Experiment, and will also yield valuable data for future parametrically generated weight estimates. This paper shows one method used to accurately capture the weight and the locations on the ships where these items will be.}, keywords = {13. Weight Engineering - Marine}, url = {https://www.sawe.org/papers/3633/buy}, author = {R. Alan Bird} } @conference {3350, title = {3350. Combining Bulb Shapes and Metric Plate Thickness With ""Standard"" Shapes and Plate Sizes To Obtain Lightweight Structure}, booktitle = {64th Annual Conference, Annapolis, Maryland}, year = {2005}, month = {5/14/05}, pages = {9}, publisher = {Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc.}, organization = {Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc.}, type = {13. WEIGHT ENGINEERING - MARINE}, address = {Annapolis, Maryland}, abstract = {Think ?outside the box? for Weight Reduction candidates In many instances, unique or challenging design processes are crippled by inadvertent comments and/or close-minded opinions. How many times has it been heard, ?We?ve always done it this way? or, ?It?ll never work?? Far too often, answers to design challenges are overlooked, or simply stifled by comments similar to these. A design team must step back, regroup, and look at the problem(s) from anew. Note the word ?team?. No matter how difficult a problem, others (and possibly even less skilled) may surprisingly have the answers. Team players can help here. As a team of diversified members, they are acquainted with the design nature, and can focus on the situation knowing the desired end result. Thinking ?Outside of the Box? is a great statement that allows design creativity. Once the smoke clears from the starting of the program, it?s time to seriously focus on the end result: delivery of the product to the customer. It is here, in the beginning, when the Weight Engineer truly makes a difference. Being part of the design team from the start will enable the Weight Engineer to enlighten the other team members about the weight status, which will minimize cost/schedule effects design changes may bring. Further, the Weight Engineer can give insight from a different approach, which can aid in proper decision making bringing success to the project. It was because of this team environment that Marinette Marine was able to successfully complete the structural design for the Improved Naval Lighterage System (INLS), which is currently under construction for the United States Navy.}, keywords = {13. Weight Engineering - Marine}, url = {https://www.sawe.org/papers/3350/buy}, author = {R. Alan Bird} } @conference {3351, title = {3351. Scale Weighing The Improved Navy Lighterage System Modules}, booktitle = {64th Annual Conference, Annapolis, Maryland}, year = {2005}, month = {5/14/05}, pages = {51}, publisher = {Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc.}, organization = {Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc.}, type = {13. WEIGHT ENGINEERING - MARINE}, address = {Annapolis, Maryland}, abstract = {Marinette Marine is one of four shipyards owned by the Manitowoc Corporation, all of which are located on the Great Lakes in the United States. One of the contracts currently under construction at MMC is the ?Improved Navy Lighterage System? (INLS) built for the United States Navy. This program consists of a total of twenty-nine modules, of seven similar but different designs. Future options on the contract would add 270 more. These modules are roughly 80 feet [24,4m] long, 24 feet [7,3m] wide and 8 feet [2,4m] deep, and when linked together, will form a platform for deeper draft vessels to offload to a beachhead. All of the new modules are required to be scale weighed using at least a two point lifting arrangement to obtain not only the weight, but the Longitudinal Center of Gravity (LCG) about the vessels? midperpendicular. This information is critical for the deployment of the modules from prepositioning ships. Due to the variances in the designs of the different modules, the calculated weights range from 154600 Lbs. [70125 Kg] to 257600 Lbs. [116845 Kg]. In principal, weighing these units and calculating their LCG?s sounds easy. Initially, it was envisioned to utilize crane mounted ?scales?; ones the operators use to determine safe crane loading to weigh the INLS modules. In order to calculate the LCS for each module, at least a two point lifting arrangement would have to be used. Fortunately, these modules are designed to be off-loaded by larger ships, and have lift fittings incorporated in their structure. With the variety of module designs, each had to be looked at to see how they would be weighed. }, keywords = {13. Weight Engineering - Marine}, url = {https://www.sawe.org/papers/3351/buy}, author = {R. Alan Bird} } @conference {2240, title = {2240. Weight Control in the Manufacturing Environment at Erda, Inc.}, booktitle = {54th Annual Conference, Huntsville, Alabama, May 22-24}, year = {1995}, month = {5/22/95}, pages = {9}, publisher = {Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc.}, organization = {Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc.}, type = {26. WEIGHT GROWTH}, address = {Huntsville, Alabama}, abstract = {The aspect of weight control, to many individuals, seems to end with the completion of the design cycle. The potential for uncontrolled weight growth in an atmosphere where this thought pattern exists is unbelievably high. As a subcontractor to aircraft manufacturers and completion centers, we are very often given weight constraints for seating designs. It is our responsibility to manage our programs so that the not to exceed (NTE) weight values are indeed not exceeded. This paper shows several examples of how the weight of delivered chairs grew, and how process checks were utilized to control the weight growth. Starting with the Weight Engineer, probably the greatest contribution that can be made to a program, is to simply follow it. It does not take a great deal of time and/or effort to manage a weight control program compared to the extreme cost and aggravation associated with a weight reduction program. At ERDA, we are constantly faced with a variety of ?opportunities? that, if left unchecked, will result in unauthorized weight growth. With the average structural weight of our seats coming in at around 29.0 pounds, the addition of any weight is a large percentage of the total. Topics or areas that have been targeted are drawing/design revisions, cost saving procedures, assembly techniques, attitudes in manufacturing, and the lack of training and/or communications within the project team. In this paper, these topics are not listed in any particular order of priority.}, keywords = {26. Weight Growth}, url = {https://www.sawe.org/papers/2240/buy}, author = {R. Alan Bird} } @conference {2188, title = {2188. The Development of a Light Weight, Dynamically Certifed Chair for Cessna Citation Jets}, booktitle = {53rd Annual Conference, Long Beach, California, May 23-25}, year = {1994}, month = {5/23/94}, pages = {11}, publisher = {Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc.}, organization = {Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc.}, type = {26. WEIGHT GROWTH}, address = {Long Beach, California}, abstract = {ERDA, inc., located in Peshtigo, Wisconsin, is a manufacturer of custom seating for business and executive aircraft, with worldwide markets. Although relatively small in size, (in the neighborhood of 150 people), weight control and weight reduction activities are very much a prime concern. My responsibilities involve the determination of structural weight during design and then concurrently with production. Every chair that leaves ERDA is weighed. The weight is then recorded along with the chairs{\textquoteright} serial number for reference. In April of 1993, ERDA received a contract from Cessna Aircraft Corporation to design and construct an executive seat for their Citation Jet, model 525. (For ease of discussion, I will refer to the aircraft from this point on as the Cessna 525.) This was one of the most challenging programs that I have worked on. The requirements for this design were dictated by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), by invoking the Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) part 23.562. This is a new regulation for aircraft interiors that go in new airframes. In general, all components are to be able to withstand 21g{\textquoteright}s of force in the forward direction, and 16g{\textquoteright}s in the down direction. It is an extremely demanding design challenge; so much that it took over 2000 engineering hours to complete the chair design. Cessna required that the seat structures weigh not more than 20 pounds each in order to keep the Cessna 525 within their weight allowance. This, as a starting point, was already eight pounds lighter than a typical ERDA chair that isn{\textquoteright}t dynamically certified. With the award of the contract ERDA management assembled a team of engineers and designers to focus completely on the design. The initial direction was to modify an existing seat design, making components as light as possible and then beef up the parts as they failed testing. This sounds great from a weight engineering standpoint, but for a stress engineer, the thought of chasing load paths around was unfathomable. Within the first day of the project it was obvious that this was not the correct approach. A full fledged effort began designing radically different, light weight components using a variety of glass/graphite composites, high strength aircraft aluminum alloys, and honeycomb panels. From a simple design stand point the typical base, or pedestal, is engineered to be a functional, structural platform for a seat to operate on. Up to this point, a pedestal did not need to absorb energy, but only transfer the energy into the aircraft{\textquoteright}s airframe. After several brainstorming sessions the decision was made to pursue a concept that would allow the pedestal to deform non-elastically, but not fail. The methodology was to utilize a ""legged"" pedestal that would lay over and deform as the energy shock went through the chair.}, keywords = {26. Weight Growth}, url = {https://www.sawe.org/papers/2188/buy}, author = {R. Alan Bird} }