N251-D07 TITLE: DIRECT TO PHASE II: Next-generation Design Tools for Accelerated Navy Shipbuilding

OUSD (R&E) CRITICAL TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Advanced Computing and Software

OBJECTIVE: Develop next-generation software design tools for Navy vessels, with a focus on medium or large autonomous surface vessels, that will enable dramatically faster design, construction, and outfitting times.

DESCRIPTION: The U.S. commercial shipbuilding industry is not competitive in the world market and has become a key vulnerability in the U.S. defense industrial base [Ref 1]. U.S. shipbuilding capacity has contracted drastically over the past decades; however, the Navy’s shipbuilding budget has increased over the past several years, creating significant challenges in the U.S.’s capacity to meet that demand [Ref 2]. Increasing output quickly and efficiently involves addressing several areas such as shipyard modernization, rebuilding the workforce, and strategic economic development [Ref 2]. In addition, and the focus of this SBIR topic, is the development of new design tools for Navy ships or combatant craft (defined for the purposes of this topic as smaller vessels up to 200 ft long).

The intent of this topic is a substantial increase in the capability of design tools over today’s state-of-the-art, directed toward dramatically faster design and construction (including fabrication, outfitting, and testing) times, with a focus on medium or large autonomous surface vessels. It is anticipated that the starting TRL of this effort will be TRL 2-3. The Navy today uses several tools, such as CREATE-SHIPS, which is a set of physics-based engineering tools developed by DoD [Refs 3,4,5] and includes, for example, Rapid Ship Design Environment (RSDE) for concept design, Integrated Hydrodynamics Design Environment (IHDE), and Integrated Structural Design Environment (ISDE). The Navy also uses Leading Edge Architecture for Prototyping Systems (LEAPS) [Ref 6] for a common database, Smart Ship Systems Design (S3D) [Ref 7], etc. Great progress has been made over the past few years in the development of new design tools, such as tools for simulation and virtual testing, digital twins, tools that help understand the cost and schedule impacts of requirements, visualization tools such as virtual reality, etc. Today, we are seeing tremendous advances in artificial intelligence/machine learning (AI/ML) approaches and increasing availability of large datasets. Ship requirements evolve rapidly and increasing complexity requires greater design space exploration. AI/ML approaches have potential to enable this design space exploration. Further, multi-domain optimization techniques continue to be developed, providing additional ability to explore design space [Ref 8].

Questions to consider include (1) Can a ship design be optimized for producibility, using a much larger number of parameters than possible today? And (2) Furthermore, might the entire construction be optimized, early in the design phase, including fabrication, outfitting, and testing, rather than just optimizing the structure? Moreover, quantum computing is maturing rapidly, which might allow huge numbers of possible alternatives to be examined quickly and efficiently. Computational fluid dynamic (CFD) capability has also progressed substantially [Ref 9] so can CFD and other methods be used to enable simulation capability for virtual testing of the hydrodynamic performance of early-stage designs? Virtual testing may also be beneficial for structure, control systems, topside signatures, shock damage, underwater explosion, and chemical/biological/radiation/nuclear (CBRN) defense. Digital twins of shipboard systems or subsystems might be used to optimize producibility so could a digital twin of the entire manufacturing process (construction, outfitting, testing) be used to optimize the process and foresee bottlenecks or rate-limiting steps?

Capabilities for design space exploration, design optimization, understanding cost and schedule earlier in the design process and understanding cost and schedule impact of changed requirements will all play a role in increasing the U.S. shipbuilding capacity.

SEA AIR SPACE EXPOSITION SMALL BUSINESS SHOWCASE: Small business concerns that are selected to submit a Full DP2 Proposal to topic N251-D07 will be invited to present their capabilities with leadership and attendees during the Navy Sea Air Space Exposition Small Business Showcase (SBS). As Sea Air Space occurs after the selections for consideration of award for Full DP2 Proposals, no information presented by the small business concerns at Sea Air Space will be considered evaluative. Small business concerns that submit a proposal to topic N251-D07 will be invited to attend the Small Business Showcase. Information on registration for the Small Business Showcase will be sent via email to the contacts listed on the proposal coversheet after the close of this BAA. Sea Air Space will be held April 6-9, 2025 in the Washington, DC area. Though there is no registration fee to participate in the Small Business Showcase activity at Sea Air Space, all travel, lodging, and other related costs for Sea Air Space are the responsibility of the small business concern.

PHASE I: For a Direct to Phase II topic, the Government expects that the small business will have accomplished the following in a Phase I-type effort and developed a concept for a workable prototype or design to address, at a minimum, the basic requirements of the stated objective above. The below actions would be required in order to satisfy the requirements of Phase I:

• Proposals must show that the Offeror understands the current state of the art in ship design tools including the ones mentioned above, explain how the proposed approach will advance the state of the art and explain the return on investment.
• Proposals must describe in detail the Offeror’s concept for next-generation ship/craft design tools. The proposal should clearly explain the rationale for the selection of the proposed concept for next-generation ship or craft design tools and how it will enable faster design and construction times. This rationale must be clearly supported by, for example, analysis, testing in simulation, and/or small scale-model testing. The rationale must include a discussion of how the proposed approach addresses and significantly accelerates a rate-limiting step in the design process.
• Proposal must clearly define the scope of the proposed effort, which is anticipated to be a subset of that discussed in the Description section, and show that the proposed scope is commensurate with the available resources and project duration.
• Approaches to next-generation ship/craft design tools that are adapted from non-maritime systems are of interest. In this case, the proposal would need to demonstrate understanding of the differences between design of the non-maritime system and a ship and how these differences will be addressed in the SBIR Phase II.
• Approaches that leverage previous lower-TRL research in this area are of interest and partnering with a university engaged in this research will be beneficial.
• The proposal must describe the approach to testing and validation of the next-generation design tool(s). The proposal must provide a clear explanation of the feasibility of the proposed testing methodology.

FEASIBILITY DOCUMENTATION: Offerors interested in participating in Direct to Phase II must include in their response to this topic Phase I feasibility documentation that substantiates the scientific and technical merit and Phase I feasibility described in Phase I above has been met (i.e., the small business must have performed Phase I-type research and development related to the topic NOT solely based on work performed under prior or ongoing federally funded SBIR/STTR work) and describe the potential commercialization applications. The documentation provided must validate that the proposer has completed development of technology as stated in Phase I above. Documentation should include all relevant information including, but not limited to technical reports, test data, prototype designs/models, and performance goals/results. Work submitted within the feasibility documentation must have been substantially performed by the offeror and/or the principal investigator (PI). Read and follow all of the DON SBIR 25.1 Direct to Phase II Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) Instructions. Phase I proposals will NOT be accepted for this topic.

PHASE II: Using results from the Phase I-type effort, develop, demonstrate, and validate prototype next-generation ship design tool(s) that develop next-generation design tools for Navy ships that will enable faster ship design and construction (including fabrication, outfitting, and testing) times.

Address, at a minimum:

1) Development of the algorithm, process, etc. that the next-generation design tool will be based on.

2) Testing to support development of the next-generation design tools(s).

3) Testing to confirm and validate the function of the next-generation design tools(s). This testing will confirm the ability of the design tool(s) to reduce ship design and construction time. The validation phase will elucidate the exit TRL of the next-generation design tool(s) resulting from this project.

4) Clearly define the scope of the proposed effort, which is anticipated to be a subset of that described in the Description above and show that the proposed scope is commensurate with the available resources and project duration.

5) Description of how the software is architected to address cyber security issues and the approach for doing so.

Provide deliverables that include the next-generation design tool software, a report containing robust documentation of the software data acquired during this project (including algorithms, architecture, interfaces, build instructions, necessary software components and environment to build the next-generation design tool software, and a software user manual); and test methodology, metrics, and results.

Note: Teams that are structured to facilitate knowledge transfer of previous research results to this project, for example a small business-university team, are strongly encouraged.

The Phase II period of performance is anticipated to be four years; 24 month Base, 24 month Option, if exercised.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Given successful completion of the Phase II project and subject to availability of funding, the expected transition of next-generation ship design tools resulting from this Phase II SBIR is expected to be into the acquisition program. To enable successful commercialization, Phase III is expected to address integration, via interfaces defined by the Navy, of the next-generation ship design tool(s) product resulting from this Phase II SBIR into a larger architecture, cyber security compliant next-generation ship design tool, as well as additional rigorous testing in higher fidelity environments. Such a set of design tools might also be used to design commercial or civilian ships.

REFERENCES:

1. "U.S. Commercial Shipbuilding in a Global Context." Congressional Research Service, November 15, 2023. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF12534

2. "Charting a new course: The untapped potential of American shipyards." McKinsey & Company, June 5, 2024. https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/aerospace-and-defense/our-insights/charting-a-new-course-the-untapped-potential-of-american-shipyards

3. Post, Douglass E. and Kendall, Richard P. "Creating and Using Virtual Prototyping Software - Principles and Practices." Addison-Wesley, 2022. https://www.amazon.com/Creating-Using-Virtual-Prototyping-Software-ebook/dp/B09HK5V97V

4. "CREATE." Department of Defense High Performance Computing Modernization Program, 22 June 2023. https://centers.hpc.mil/CREATE/CREATE-SH.html#:~:text=The%20objective%20of%20the%20ISDE%20suite%20of%20tools%20as%20part

5. Hurwitz, Myles. CREATE-Ships. "Plans and Status of the CREATE-SHIPS Project: Enabling Required Naval Warship Performance Throughout the Acquisition Lifecycle." NDIA 13th Annual Systems Engineering Conference, San Diego, CA, 27 October 2010. https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/ndia/2010/systemengr/WednesdayTrack5_11436HurwitzGoldfarb.pdf#:~:text=CREATE-Ships%20Project%20Objective.%20develop%20the%20engineering%20software%20required%20to%20support

6. "Leading Edge Architecture for Prototyping Systems (LEAPS)." 31 MAY 2017. https://www.dau.edu/tools/leading-edge-architecture-prototyping-systems-leaps#:~:text=The%20Leading%20Edge%20Architecture%20for%20Prototyping%20Systems%20(LEAPS)%20tool%20is

7. Chalfant, Julie S. "Smart Ship Systems Design (S3D)." https://web.mit.edu/chalfant/www/Papers/Chalfant2022IMDC.pdf#:~:text=This%20paper%20provides%20an%20overview%20of%20templating,%20describes%20a%20methodology

8. Pelligrini, Riccardo et al. "Multi-Fidelity Fluid-Structure Interaction Optimization for Weight Reduction of High-Speed Small Craft." SNAME Power Boat Symposium 2024, Norfolk VA, 14 October 2024. https://onepetro.org/snamecpbs/proceedings-abstract/CPBS24/CPBS24/D011S002R002/570537

9. Park, S. et al. "6DoF CFD Analysis for High-Speed Small Craft in Free Running Conditions, Ships and Offshore Structures." Ships and Offshore Structures, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/17445302.2024.2393478

KEYWORDS: ship design tools; shipbuilding; multi-objective optimization; digital twin; computational fluid dynamics; autonomous surface vessels

TPOC 1: Bob Brizzolara
Email: [email protected]

TPOC 2: Richard Blank
Email: [email protected]

TPOC 3: Woei-Min Lin
Email: [email protected]

---