求高手解答

jawin

The lack of a prototype can result in the development of the design seeming to be conservative to minimize risk given the large-scale integration task


这句是什么意思啊，连贯不起来啊

jawin

请高手帮帮忙啊~~~


Naval ships are extremely diverse, ranging from small coastal craft to massive aircraft carriers.While some naval auxiliary vessels, such as supply ships, seem very similar to merchant ships others, such as nuclear submarines, are quite unique. Given submarine design’s inherent focus on safety, even without nuclear propulsion, its safety regime is quite different from other warships and so is a topic worthy of a separate paper. So, just focusing on the typical surface combatant, one can summarize naval ship design by emphasizing two characteristics.



In considering the specifics of safety in naval ship design, these can be seen to have two distinct facets, i.e. those appropriate to normal peacetime operations and those relevant to operating ‘in harms way’. So the considerations that concern merchant ship designers, such as intact stability, structural integrity, fire safety and manoeuvrability, also have to be addressed in the naval case. However, even here the naval ship designer has to allow for the fact that the warship commanding officer may well deliberately operate his ship in peacetime in a hazardous manner. Thus, for example, replenishing the ship at sea is a test of close ship manoeuvring and, in extremis, of the ship’s watertight integrity. Also, naval ships are expected to go to the assistance of other vessels in distress rather than using modern weather prediction systems to avoid such situations. Even in peacetime warships carry very hazardous munitions and landing large armed aircraft on relatively small ships can endanger those on the ship as well as those onboard the aircraft.


Despite these peacetime hazards, the naval vessel is clearly designed around operating in a war environment.Thus, it has extensive and comprehensive subdivision so that the ship can sustain a substantial extent ofhull rupture and not readily sink due to flooding or structural failure. The structure is also designed to resistunderwater explosions leading to structural features that are too expensive to incorporate in merchant ships. As the warship is expected to ‘fight hurt’ the large, well-trained crew are trained to fight fires. Given that damage in action may render parts of the ship ineffective, the power sources and ship services are designed with extensive redundancy and apparent excess capacity so that the intact parts of the ship can continue to operate in such conditions.




All of the resultant features, incorporated at considerable expense in comparison with merchant ship practice, enable the naval vessel to survive attacks and continue to perform, when damaged, to a significant degree. Thus, for most of the (peacetime) existence of the ship, the warship has considerable margins of safety, which would not be economically justifiable in almost any merchant ship. So, one might ask why, for peacetime operations, does the naval ship design community have to justify the safety features adopted and why has this justification been recently formalized into a Naval Ship Safety Regime.

jawin

Part of determining the requirement is due to performance aspects inherent in marine vessels, not all of which are explicitly expressed and some can be major size and cost determinants

三生石

1# jawin


原型的缺失能够导致保守设计的风行，而这种保守设计似乎是可以将大规模集成化设计的风险降到最低。

三生石

2# jawin


1：军用舰船是极具多样性的，其多样性体现在从小型沿海舰船到巨型的航空母舰不等，而一些海军辅助舰船，诸如补给船，似乎是与商用补给船很相似，而核潜艇则又极其不同。潜艇设计本质就在于安全性，即使不是核动力推动，它的安全体系也是大大不同于其他军舰，当然这是应该独立论述的课题。因此，仅集中致力于典型的水面战舰的设计，通过强调两方面特性能够概括军用船的设计理念。

2：考虑到军用船设计的安全细节，可以看做是两个全然不同的方面，也就是说，一方面是对应于平时常态操作，另一方面是身处危险境况下的操作，因此即要考虑到商用船设计者们所需深思熟虑的诸如完整稳性、结构完整性、消防安全、船舶可操作性，也必须考虑到军用船实际的可处理性。即使这样，军用船设计者们也必须考虑到舰艇指挥官可能在平时以危险方式操作的情形。例如航行中对船进行补给，即是对靠船可操作性的考验，也是船在极其困难的情况下对自身水密完整性的考验。当然还有，军用舰船总是被期望对其他遇难船只加以援助而不能利用现代化的天气预报系统去避免这样的危险情形，甚至在平时，军用舰船也要运载非常危险的军火，或在相对较小的船上起降大型战斗机，而这即危及到舰船的安全，也危及到战斗机的安全。

3：尽管平时就有这么多的危险，但军用舰船显而易见是围绕在战争条件下而设计的。因此它有许多完善的分舱结构，以至于可以承受船体破坏到某种程度而不会轻易下沉而导致浸没或结构损坏。其结构也要设计成抗水下破裂的结构特性，而这种结构特性太过昂贵因此不被商用船采用，作为军用战舰要能“狠狠的打”，受训的士兵也能征善战，因此作战中所加注的损坏可能会引起部分性能失去功效，因此电源及服务系统都要设计成有延伸冗余和超额能力，以至舰船的主体部分在此种情形下仍能继续运转。

4：所有的综合特性，相比于商用船，以可观的价位而被采用，能使军用舰船在被很大程度损坏时得以幸存下来并继续执行任务。因此对于大多数平时操作的军用船舶有相当大的安全裕度，这种安全裕度对于基乎所有商用船来讲不经济合理。所以有人可能会问，为何对于平时操作的军用舰船，设计团体必须调整所采用的安全特性。为何这种调整近来已被舰船安全体系正式确立。

三生石

3# jawin

决定需求的部分原因取决于海船的内在性能，所有的性能没有明确陈述。一些原因可能是主尺度和成本。

jawin

4# 三生石


能不能把其他的也帮我翻译下啊~~有劳了~

三生石

jawin

8# 三生石

Each of the Key Hazards for surface vessels of Structural Strength, Stability, Magazine Construction (for stowage of ordnance), Escape and Evacuation, and Fire Prevention and Control require appropriate safety certification, which is produced by established procedures to meet specific standards. The ship’s Post Holder is responsible for their production and ensures they are independently audited and signed at an appropriate senior level in the responsible organization. Thus, a clear audit trail can be demonstrated.

Two recent papers, each with one author from the U.K. MoD’s Sea Technology Group, which is headed up主管，领导 by the Chief Naval Architect设计师, have outlined概括 how the U.K.’s internal国内的，内部的 ship safety management organization组织团体 appreciated, with the process of passing evermore始终，永久 responsibility for the through在
之中 life material management of the Royal Navy’s ships to industry, that naval ship classification needed to be adopted. It was realized, not just with procurement but also the through life maintenance of naval ships being undertaken increasingly by industry and with the reducing size of the Royal Navy, albeit still the U.K.’s largest ship operator, that the ability of the MoD to have a wholly separate regime of technical standards was becoming unsustainable. This was coupled with the move to keep the cost of naval ships down through increasingly adopting commercial standards for more and more of the elements of ship design and thus a more commercially based approach to many standards for naval ships seemed a logical step. Gibbons and James list a process of introducing specific Naval Ship Rules commencing in 1993 with the ordering of HMS Ocean, an amphibious helicopter carrier, to largely commercial ship rules (i.e. Lloyd’s Register (LR) (Merchant) Class). This was followed in 1997 by the MoD contracting LR to develop Naval Ship Rules and the process could be said to have culminated in LR Naval Ship Rules being selected in 2000 for the Royal Navy’s latest major ship design (i.e. the Type 45 Destroyer) due in service in 2006.

Naval classification had to fit in with the process by which naval ships are certified as safe, which is based on the ‘Circle of Certification’ in the U.K. MoD Naval Authority Regulations
and reproduced at Figure . Naval classification is seen as required to reflect the particular needs of naval operations, where there has to be a balance of legitimate safety issues common to seafaring, the needs to continue to operate a naval vessel ‘in harm’s way’ and the exercise of legitimate government policy. Gibbons and James summarize the manner in which naval classification must function by providing the following.

Thus, the classification society will maintain these provisions through life in the same manner as for merchant ships by design appraisal, survey during construction and periodical in-service inspections to assure maintenance of compliance with rules appropriate to naval practice. Naval ship classification has also evolved to provide assurance of propulsion, steering and other essential ship systems such as lifting gear. However, unlike a merchant ship, a naval ship is not bound by international legislation, so its navy can choose to adopt as much or as little of the classification regime as it deems appropriate. So LR has provided for a range of operating conditions, features and systems not in (merchant) ship rules. For example:

Gibbons and James provide a comprehensive set of examples of the notation provided for in the LR Naval Ship Rules. This notation is extensive and is used to address areas not normally covered by merchant ship classification, such as MARPOL (Maritime Pollution) and SOLAS (Safety of Life at Sea). In summary these consist of, first, ‘Mandatory Notation’ covering ship type (i.e. large warships, ocean going combatants, smaller specialist naval vessels) and service area to distinguish those vessels operating worldwide from those with particular restrictions. The second set of notation is optional and, together with typical classification hull strength and machinery notation, also includes ‘Military Distinction’, ‘Military Operations’ and ‘Others’ (the latter being a miscellaneous general ship performance-related category). Examples of the military distinction notation all relate to the need, in a naval ship’s structure, to resist to an appropriate level certain weapon effects, such as air blast, underwater explosions, fragmentation and small arms induced damage. In this respect the rules are restricted to aspects of survivability appropriate to the expertise of the classification society, such as structural performance post damage, while the other elements of warship survivability are, properly, expected to be covered by those military standards still maintained by the Navy/MoD. This was part of the process of moving to naval ship rules so that the limited resources, retained by the MoD ‘in-house’, could focus on the warship specific areas and continue to be used to maintain those standards by drawing on military practice, experience and sensitivities. Nevertheless LR has indicated its intention to extend consideration of survivability to cover such issues
as:

内容大致能看得懂，但是要翻译过来就感觉不知道前后了，很多船舶专业方面的词汇还是很不了解...向你学习~~

longitudinal

高手啊

三生石

显然是拿我当牛使唤了。。。。

jawin

11# 三生石

你千万别这么想啊，纯粹是你太强了，向你学习。学习...