12.07.2015 Views

CUVX Design Report - the AOE home page - Virginia Tech

CUVX Design Report - the AOE home page - Virginia Tech

CUVX Design Report - the AOE home page - Virginia Tech

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

<strong>CUVX</strong> <strong>Design</strong> – VT Team 2 Page 14optimized for this particular use. The structural characteristics are well known. Conventional monohulls have alarge residuary resistance at high speeds. The radar cross-section for a ship with bow flare and vertical or flaredsides may be significant. Compared to multi-hulls <strong>the</strong>re is less usable deck area.• Wave Piercing Tumble<strong>home</strong> MonohullThe Wave Piercing Tumble<strong>home</strong> Hull form (WPTH) has negative flare for all sections of <strong>the</strong> hull above <strong>the</strong>waterline. It is designed to penetrate waves, reducing <strong>the</strong> potential for slamming and extreme bow and sternaccelerations, and decreasing resistance in waves. The tumble<strong>home</strong> hull form offers an inward-sloping ruledfreeboard to potential threats, minimizing RCS. Since <strong>the</strong> WPTH hullform is a monohull, <strong>the</strong> construction costwould be lower than multi-hulls of <strong>the</strong> same displacement. There is more large-object space than in multi-hulls of<strong>the</strong> same displacement.The negative flare reduces arrangeable volume and area high in <strong>the</strong> ship. Deck area is a particular concern forflight operations where <strong>the</strong> recovery and launch decks must be of sufficient size. Flare also provides an increasingrighting moment with heel; tumble<strong>home</strong> exhibits <strong>the</strong> opposite, limiting <strong>the</strong> acceptable operational envelope toprevent capsize. Damage stability also suffers. The risk associated with this hull form is significant, since no largenaval WPTH has been built.Table 7. Hullform Advantages (+) / Disadvantages (-)LowRCSEndurance @Low SpeedLowCostResistanceat SustainedSpeedGood Large-ObjectSpacesRecoveryDeckGoodSeakeepingCatamaran - - ++ - ++ ++SWATH - - -- - - ++ +++SurvivabilityTrimaran - - ++ - ++ ++ +ConventionalMonohull+ ++ ++ + -WPTH +++ + + + + - + ?Modified-RepeatLPD-17+ + +++ ++ + +Table 7 summarizes <strong>the</strong> preliminary assessment of hull forms for <strong>CUVX</strong>. Based on this preliminaryassessment of hull forms, <strong>the</strong> conventional monohull, WPTH and LPD-17 mod-repeat hull forms were selected forfur<strong>the</strong>r investigation and trade-off in Concept Exploration and optimization.3.2.2 Sustainability AlternativesSustainability characteristics for <strong>CUVX</strong> include endurance range, endurance stores duration, aircraft weaponsstorage, and aircraft fuel storage. A threshold value of 4000 nm is a typical minimum for surface-combatantendurance range. Auxiliary and amphibious ships typically have values closer to 12000 nm. These values are usedas <strong>the</strong> threshold and goal values, respectively. In <strong>the</strong> <strong>CUVX</strong> trade-off study, <strong>the</strong> values of 4000 nm, 8000 nm, and12000 nm are considered.Endurance stores duration is typically 60-120 days for naval ships. Values of 60, 90 and 120 days areconsidered for <strong>CUVX</strong>. CV 67 data is used to specify goals and thresholds for <strong>CUVX</strong> space required for aircraftammo and fuel. CV 67 is non-nuclear and more similar to <strong>CUVX</strong> than CVNs. CV 67 carries 49 aircraft, 609.6MT of ammo, and 3353 MT of fuel. CV 67 aircraft ammo and fuel weights per aircraft are: 12.4 MT for ammo and68.4 MT for fuel. The <strong>CUVX</strong> threshold value for ammo storage was determined to be 5 MT/UCAV and <strong>the</strong> goalvalue 15 MT/UCAV. The threshold value for fuel was determined to be 30 MT/UCAV and <strong>the</strong> goal value 60MT/UCAV.3.2.3 Propulsion and Electrical Machinery Alternatives3.2.3.1 Machinery RequirementsBased on <strong>the</strong> ADM and Program Manager guidance, pertinent propulsion plant design requirements aresummarized as follows:General Requirements - The propulsion engines must be non-nuclear, grade A shock certified, and Navy qualified.The machinery system alternatives must span a total power range of 40000–80000 SHP with total ship service++++

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!