Submarine platform automation enabler of an optimized crew concept - - PDF document

UDT 2020 UDT Extended Abstract Template Presentation/Panel

Submarine platform automation – enabler of an optimized crew concept

• H. Wehner1, Dr. M. Mohr2

1Head of Product Architecture Submarines, thyssenkrupp Marine Systems, Kiel, Germany 2 Produkt architect submarines, thyssenkrupp Marine Systems, Kiel, Germany

Abstract — Automation and mechanization are implemented in submarines in many ways and relieve its crew from tediously monotonous and maybe dangerous work. It leads to a reduced workload of the crew as well as to permanently, evenly, and consistently performed tasks without interruption and with more precision than a human being may be capable of. Automation also provides the possibility to arrange unmanned rooms containing automated equipment only. Side effects include that automation brings additional equipment on board that needs to be operated and maintained by the crew. Since the additional automation equipment is of a different style than the automated systems – particularly it contains more electronics and less mechanics – the operators need a different kind of education and training, which shows the strong dependencies between automation and crew qualification. Today‘s philosophy of platform automation is based on an operating degradation that allows the crew to operate the systems manually in case that the automation

• fails. This consequently prohibits to reduce the crew size substantially, since everybody may be needed. For the combat

systems, the evolution from human observation and evaluation towards electronically supported sensing and data assessment is already well advanced. However, it is still an aim to provide the operators with information that is focused

• n the decisions that need to be made. This presentation discusses motivation, challenges, and thyssenkrupp Marine

Systems‘ approach to automation. It includes the respective question about how to achieve a sufficiently trusted reliability of automation, thus allowing to remove manual operation possibilities with its consequences on the crew

• concept. The answers to this question and relevant automation solutions are particularly essential on the way to lean

manning and unmanned submarines.

1 Introduction

A submarine is a very complex platform system with a large number of integrated subsystems: Navigation, depth control, AIP control, diesel control, power generation and distribution, etc. A tremendous amount of information has to be processed for control in real time. Current submarines use a high degree of automation systems on several system levels to relieve its crew from tediously monotonous and maybe dangerous work. Felstead [1] approached the topic of automation with respect to crew size on UDT2019 mainly from crew concept perspective. He describes requirements and thoughts to automated systems on an abstracted level: Trust, Reliability and Experience are amongst others factors for implementing highly automated systems with the aim to reduce crew size. This paper focusses more on a technical view on the platform automation system of submarines and its subsystems. For a common understanding the term “automation” will be defined from submarines perspective, taking automotive and industrial standards into consideration. Section 3 shows the general automation architecture of Thyssenkrupp marine systems’ submarines and gives some examples of automated systems and how they are integrated.

2 Automation – definition & goals

Cambridge dictionary (dictionary.cambridge.org) defines automation as “use of machines and computers that can

• perate without needing human control”. In seafaring the

term “automation” will be normally used also in a inconsistent way: We are facing an operation level what we colloquially also classify as automation: Remote control which we use e.g. for achieving ergonomic goals

• r avoiding crew in noisy or hazardous zones.

In the context of automation / crew concepts we would define the following three levels of operation:

Table 2. Definition of submarine operation levels. Operation level Name Local control 1 Remote control 2 SubSystem Automation guided by operators

The automation pyramid is a common visualization of automated systems in industry. Its layers describe different process level of automation processes but could also be defined to the automation structure of submarines as follows (Fig. 1). The lower layers describe the technical levels from automated systems like sensors/actors (lowest level), process control level (2nd level, submarine subsystems), Advance Control level (3rd level, submarine platform management system, PMS). Level 4 is the ship information system, SIS where status information of the whole submarine including combat system, communication & navigation system will be displayed. The 5th layer describes the non-technical crew managing

UDT 2020 UDT Extended Abstract Template Presentation/Panel and strategic decision level of the submarine’s commander and officers.

• Fig. 1. Layers of the automation pyramid

As a short summary: automation supports the submarine and its crew in a wide range: from pure visualization to remote control of systems up to autonomous closed loop control of complex subsystems. 2.1 Goals & opportunities Submarines with automated systems give multiple values to the customer:  Increasing of operational reliability, e.g.:

• Software based interlocking of systems /

components during operation mode transition sequences.  Optimization of operation modes, e.g.

• Subsystems will get information about submarine
• perating modes (like silent mode) and will act

accordingly.  Optimize overall costs

• Operating expense for the crew versus investment

& operating cost of automated systems.

• Automation

degree according to system architecture – automation where it gives benefit.  Fulfilment of customer’s crew-requirements, e.g.

• Compensate lack of personnel using higher degree
• f automation.
• Enable flexible use of crews in different

submarines types.

• Fulfilment of customer’s training concept – higher

degree of automation require additional more intensive trainings. In addition automated systems in submarines enables:  safe working environment – rooms with bad environmental conditions can be unmanned with high degree of automation or non-ergonomic tasks can be taken from the crew  supports the crew during different stress situations by means of e.g. automatic running tasks sequences or alarm prioritization  automated fast and safe detection of deviations from normal conditions (monitoring and alarm functionality) High degree of automation gives the opportunity of system

• ptimization using data from field experience. It is

comprehensible to submarine industry that their customers are quite shy sharing this kind of information with the industry.

3 Solutions

This section describes the general automation architecture and shows examples how it is implemented in thyssenkrupp Marine System submarines. 3.1 Control architecture Figure 1 shows the architecture of the Thyssenkrupp MS submarine automation systems. Main characteristics are:

• Intelligence/subsystem control functionalities are

located (physically and function-wise) as close as possible to the individual systems

• High degree of automation where applicable
• Subsystems could be operated independently

from platform management system

• Sensor and Actor information will be collected

from the PMS via

• hard wire connection
• Bus-connection
• Connection via subsystem
• Some of the subsystem functionality/control is

directly implemented in the PMS e.g. bilge monitoring

• Fig. 2. Thyssenkrupp MS submarine platform automation

architecture (following BV3700-1 [2]).

The overall automation System, the PMS performs different tasks:

• Organizes the hierarchy the control levels (System,

subsystem)

• Organizes the hierarchy of operation modes (local
• peration, remote control, subsystem automation)
• Distribution of information within the subsystems
• Controls (open loop/closed loop) on system level
• controls submarine operation states
• controls

transition phases switching between

• peration states
• shows states, warnings, alarms of the platform

system. 3.2 Redundancy concepts / modularity Customer-specific technical solutions depend on customer experience and resulting customer requirements. Specific automation solutions depend on technical possibilities and user’s experiences. A redundancy and modular concept of automation systems cannot be formed without taking the systems concept itself into consideration. The e.g. specific system’s

UDT 2020 UDT Extended Abstract Template Presentation/Panel sensor and actor redundancy concept or requirements of systems’ simplicity have to match the automation concept. Within the used automation structure at thyssenkrupp Marine System’s submarines it is possible to get an

• ptimal fit between system design and automation design.

3.3 System examples Examples of autonomous subsystems: Fuel cell system, Diesel gensets, Propulsion system

• Separate control on subsystem level
• PMS acts as SCADAa-System, for operation modes:

remote control/subsystem automation

• Local operation acc. to redundancy concept

Example of system control integrated in the PMS: Bilge bailing system

• sensors / actors connected directly or via Bus to the

PMS

• open/closed loop control is integrated in the PMS (for
• peration

modes: remote control/subsystem automation)

• local operation acc. to redundancy concept

Example for interaction between subsystems, controlled via PMS:

• Detection of the Fire Alarm System automatically

enables the fire extinguishing system and controls air supply 3.4 Trust & Reliability Technically, it should be possible to reduce the crew significantly: Every crew member, who is not needed to take a human decision, can be replaced by an automat. However: Automation requires trusted reliability on the operator’s side, otherwise automation will not be accepted. Trust is generated by experience, so that automation needs to be available in order that it can be tested. Thus, automation is increasingly included in the submarines – however, with fall-back solutions for operation without (or with reduced) automation. Another aspect for acceptance is getting the right automation support level for the crew: motivational tasks in normal operation but not overburden in extreme situations. The reliability of automation systems is achieved by using well-proven equipment (e.g. proven COTS/MOTS, potentially widely used in other industry branches). The submarine industry benefits from industrial industry with high availability requirements like big chemical plants or power generation plants where blackouts result in huge financial loss. Reliability will also be achieved by designing redundant architectures, by providing degradation modes

• f operation and by a high level of verification and testing.

All these topics are part of an evolutionary design that learns with every step of HDW Class submarines. Automation systems in submarines need to take into account

a SCADA : Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition

(1) that they are used on a military vessel, which includes a possibly hostile environment with unexpected damages, and (2) these submarines need to be able to operate independently of others even in emergency situations – e.g. in case of unexpected damage. By means of the shown automation architecture thyssenkrupp Marine System submarines will be operated with a total crew of <30 people in a dual watch system, where 2 crew members of each watch are able to control all platform systems.

• Fig. 3. Unmanned zones (grey) of a HDW class 214 submarine.

Figure 3 shows demonstrative how crew size has been

• reduced. It shows the usually unmanned zones of a current

submarine during operation.

4 Conclusion and future aspects

Systems with suitable degree of automation will lead to benefit for the crew and for the submarine itself: It leads to a reduced workload of the crew and reduces evenly tasks but with high accuracy. Automation also provides the possibility to arrange unmanned rooms containing automated equipment only. Side effects include that automation brings additional equipment on board that needs to be operated and maintained by the crew. The term “automation” is often used also for simple remote control of systems, nevertheless the remote control of systems helps to simplify the submarine operation tasks and hence reducing the crew size. Thyssenkrupp Marine Systems has long experience designing and building submarines with different level of automation systems, following an evolutionary approach

• f integrating new but reliable and well proven

technology. Solutions for automation systems will be continuously improved based on customer needs and depending on the complexity of future submarine design. Future growth based on future technologies of platform systems is also one part of current automation concepts. Next evolutionary step is the integration of platform systems, navigation system, communication system and combat system in one common Ship information System,

• SIS. Customers ask for this information level mainly with

the goal for visualization of the ship’s subsystem status as a whole. Main challenges for the engineers are the definition of IT structure, handling of data security levels and interface definition. Implementing more and more automated systems does not automatically result in reduced crew size. From

UDT 2020 UDT Extended Abstract Template Presentation/Panel automation system perspective it could be possible to put more tasks on an automat, but customers are often very experienced submariners and they are careful by further reducing their crew size: As submarines need to operate independently of others over a long period and might be faced with unexpected damages crew members are needed e.g. for unforeseen maintenance or emergency situations. Concepts of autonomous underwater vehicles are different, e.g. redundancy concepts, life support systems. Thyssenkrupp Marine Systems is developing both: manned submarines and autonomous underwater vehicles. Also in near future both are seen as separate products in the portfolio. Both systems will benefit from common engineering expertise gained during development and field

• peration.

References

[1] A. Felstead, How low can we go? Lessons learned from attempting to reduce submarine manning. Proc.

• f UDT2019, (2019)

[2] Standard, BV 3700-1 Führungssystem Automation Schiffstechnik (German navy’s design specification: engineering

• f

ships’ automation systems), BAAINBw (2017)