@conference {3693, title = {3693. A Random Method for Picking Module Stowage Solutions for Barges}, booktitle = {76th Annual Conference, Montreal, Canada}, year = {2017}, month = {05/2017}, pages = {15}, publisher = {Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc.}, organization = {Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc.}, address = {Montreal, Canada}, abstract = {

In the Oil \& Gas Construction Industry, many onshore projects are using modular construction. This type of construction requires that the modules be transported from the fabrication yard to the project site. The fabrication yard may be distant from the project site, thus requiring ocean transportation. Modules can come in many different sizes, shapes, and weights. Some very large modules require a dedicated barge. However, frequently multiple modules can be placed upon a single barge. Determining module groups for barges can be difficult and time consuming. Figure 1 shows several different types of modules on barges.

Determining the type of barge to use, the number needed, and the length of service time can be a daunting logistical task. Costs involved with securing barges and engineering services from barge companies are in the millions of dollars. To complicate matters, barges typically require long lead times. Determining what type of barge or the appropriate {\textquotedblleft}mix{\textquotedblright} of barges to use can help reduce the cost of the project.
This paper will demonstrate a method to easily solve for a group solution through the use of a random number generator and grading the resultant solutions. This method can easily be applied to other types of problems and industries when it is necessary to pick groups to solve the problem.

}, keywords = {13. Weight Engineering - Marine, 21. Weight Engineering - Statistical Studies, 35. Weight Engineering - Offshore}, url = {https://www.sawe.org/papers/3693/buy}, author = {Robert Hundl} } @conference {3666, title = {3666. Weight Distribution for On-Shore Modules}, booktitle = {75th Annual Conference, Denver, Colorado}, year = {2016}, month = {05/2016}, pages = {12}, publisher = {Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc.}, organization = {Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc.}, address = {Denver, Colorado}, abstract = {Weight Distribution analysis has not been a common practice in the On-Shore Modular Engineering and Construction industry. In the past, most on-shore projects have used {\textquotedblleft}stick built{\textquotedblright} (built on-site) construction methods. Today, however, many on-shore project facilities are being built off-site using modular construction methods and are then transported to the project site. The on-shore modular transportation phases may include: Loadout (loading the module on a barge from the fabricator{\textquoteright}s yard), On-barge (transporting module from one location to another via the barge), Offload (offloading the module from the barge to a pier and/or staging area), Stacking (combining multiple modules, lifting and stacking), Land Transport (transport from pier, staging area, or barge to final setting location {\textendash} may be many kilometers, see Figure 1), and Setting (final setting in place and/or lifting into place). Analysis is required by the barge contractor and SPMT contractor to verify the stability of the load while in their custody. The company provides the contractors with the weights and center of gravities (CoG{\textquoteright}s) of the module for each phase. Offshore projects have used modular construction for many years, but the modules do not have a large land transportation phase (typically Loadout, Offloading, and/or Stacking). I asked our Self Propelled Modular Transporter (SPMT) contractor if they would like me to produce a plot of how the weight is distributed along the major axis (lengthwise) of the module. They had not seen this done before and were interested. This demonstration forms the basis of this paper. The software code that was developed for this analysis used Visual Basic for Applications (VBA) within Microsoft Excel. A simplified approach was made using lower level summary data such as available in the weight report, not the lowest level detail from the CAD model (PDMS). This data includes the weight and CoG{\textquoteright}s of each item in the weights database. }, keywords = {35. Weight Engineering - Offshore}, url = {https://www.sawe.org/papers/3666/buy}, author = {Robert Hundl} } @conference {2232, title = {2232. Determination of the Manager{\textquoteright}s Reserve Guideline for the Space Shuttle Xo Center of Gravity}, booktitle = {53rd Annual Conference, Long Beach, California, May 23-25}, year = {1994}, month = {5/23/94}, pages = {29}, publisher = {Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc.}, organization = {Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc.}, type = {3. CENTER OF GRAVITY}, address = {Long Beach, California}, abstract = {The space shuttle{\textquoteright}s Xo center of gravity (CG) requires a major consideration when designing the descent phase of a mission. The space shuttle{\textquoteright}s forward Xo CG Limit during descent at Mach 3.5 is 1079.0"" (27.4066 m) for Return To Launch Site (RTLS) and 1076.7"" (27.34818 m) for Nominal, Transoceanic Abort Landing (TAL), Abort Once Around (AOA), and Non-Deploy scenarios. Recently, forward Xo CG shifts a few months before launch have required late {\textquoteright}fixes"" to be made. These ""fixes"" often require rework, reverification, and/or overtime which increase costs and may take available resources away from other missions. Current payload manifesting at various milestones have made the flights Xo CG at or very near the forward limit. To aid managers when manifesting additional items on a flight, historical and current flight mass properties data were analyzed to determine if a guideline could be established. This guideline would be based upon potential impacts of unknowns following a particular milestone. The establishment of this guideline should provide managers an adequate tool for minimizing late {\textquoteright}fixes"" while maximizing the space shuttle{\textquoteright}s carrying capabilities. During the latter stages of a mission{\textquoteright}s flow, the Xo CG was usually found to move forward. The last chance to manifest payloads occurs at the Flight Planning and Stowage Review (FPSR). This meeting precedes a critical milestone for flight design. A 0.5"" (0.0127 m) margin at this time was determined to be adequate for most flights while allowing maximum manifesting capability. On the average, primary payload mixes for future flights are projected to have a more forward combined Xo CG than past flights; thus, this guideline will become an important tool for managing a flight and reducing program costs.}, keywords = {03. Center Of Gravity}, url = {https://www.sawe.org/papers/2232/buy}, author = {Robert Hundl} }