LIGHTWEIGHT STRUCTURE DESIGN FOR COMPOSITE

YACHT WITH OPTIMUM FIBER MASS CONTENT

Jee-Hun Song1, Daekyun Oh2,†

1
Dept. of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, Chonnam National University
50 Daehak-ro, Yeosu, South Korea, 550749
2
Dept. of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, Mokpo National Maritime University
91 Haeyangdaehak-ro, Mokpo, South Korea, 58628

ABSTRACT
In this study, we attempt to reduce the weight of a composite-yacht hull (without material changes),
while retaining structural safety, by developing design processes to determine the optimum fiber
mass content. These design processes can be used to design multi-layered composite-yacht
structures, based on the International Standard of Small Craft-Hull Construction and Scantlings
(ISO 12215). First, glass content (GC) optimization processes for three universal composite-yacht
structures are defined. Next, a case study concerning an existing 52 ft yacht is considered, to which
the optimization process is applied, and the effects of the resultant hull-structure weight reduction
are analyzed and compared to the original designed hull-weight performance. Finally, a prototype
structure comprised of a single-skin hull plate is designed using the optimized GC and fabricated.
Mechanical tests of the tensile and flexural strengths are conducted in accordance with ASTM
D5083 and D790. The results indicate that the hull weight of the redesigned yacht with the
optimized GC is reduced by 10.01% compared to the original design. Further, the prototype’s
structural safety is verified via mechanical tests, which indicate that the mechanical properties
remain in accordance with the ISO 12215 safety standard.

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
In accordance with the recent trend toward environmental friendliness and high efficiency in ship
design, ship weight reduction is now being emphasized as a highly important design element. Thus,
the selection of light-weight materials such as aluminum and carbon-fiber-reinforced plastics
(CFRP) for ship building is becoming more frequent. However, the use of such materials
contributes to a high material cost, and relatively difficult manufacturing processes are also
involved. Meanwhile, fiber-reinforced plastics (FRP) are relatively affordable and exhibit
excellent strength-to-weight ratios and low corrosion. Moreover, as a vast amount of knowledge
has been accumulated regarding ship-structure manufacturing using FRP, these materials are very
commonly used for structural components in small ships.

Whereas research on composite-ship design has progressed over a long a period of time and with
contributions from various fields, previous studies have primarily focused on verifying the
mechanical properties of composites as structural materials for ships, or on structural analysis
techniques such as the finite element method (FEM), rather than the effective design of overall
ship structures. As composite materials are generally used in small ships, direct applications of
these results are practically inefficient, because of the problems of additional cost and time.
Moreover, difficulties exist in applying these results to actual design problems, as much of the
previous research has primarily focused on theoretical proposals and the verification of hypotheses.

Following the recent revitalization of the marine industry, however, studies pertinent to composite-
ship design have also addressed more practical and realistic topics. Research to optimize
composite-structure design in terms of cost reduction is in progress, as exemplified by the work of
Sobey et al. [1,2], along with efforts to develop effective composite-ship structural design
techniques with regard to cycle assessment [3]. Moreover, research has been conducted on the
development of a system to evaluate the overall hull-structure design of manufactured boats, such
as the study by Kang & Park [4]. A common aspect of all of the abovementioned studies is that
they are based on International Organization for Standardization (ISO) or international ship
classification rules. This commonality is due to the fact that these rules have not only been verified
theoretically, but also empirically, through practical applications over a long period of time.
Further, such rules are widely used internationally as standards for the design and production
quality verification of actual products. In fact, numerous international ship classification rules are
based on ISO rules. Indeed, one of the present authors has conducted research based on ISO
12215:2008 [5] over a continuous period and in the field of small-ship design, particularly with
regard to composite-structure design [68]. In this paper, we develop a method of reducing the
hull-structure weight of a composite small ship, such as a composite yacht, while satisfying the
ISO 12215 rule.

1.2 Governing Rules and Approach

ISO 12215-5 [9] addresses the structural stability of small ships and, for the main international
shipping classes, rules for small-ship hull design and stability have been developed and
implemented based on this standard. Therefore, the present paper considers the Pleasure Yachts
Rule [10] of Registro Italiano Navale (RINA); “Pleasure Yachts” is an Italian ship classification
that is the most widely known of all the small-ship registers, and which applies to vessels such as
yachts. RINA Rules for Pleasure Yachts Part B is based on ISO 12215-5 [9] and addresses the
estimation of design pressure on a hull structure, along with the scantling of primary structures
and stiffeners. This rule also addresses scantling determination for composite structures. Note that
composites used for ship structures are fabricated through lamination, which yields multi-layered
materials. In the ISO and RINA rules, the glass content (GC) acts as an important design factor for
the determination of the required design thickness of composite materials.

This paper proposes a design process to achieve hull-structure weight reduction, first by defining
an optimization process for the GC of laminated composites that are designed in accordance with
the various geometric characteristics of a given ship. Different lamination types are considered.
Then, the GC optimization process is applied to a previously designed 52 ft power boat. The
optimized design is compared with the original structure, for which a typical GC value is applied,
in order to compare and verify the effect of the proposed light-weight design process. Finally, the
ability of the proposed GC optimization process to guarantee structural stability is examined, based
on a case study conducted to verify the structural stability of a ship structure designed using the
optimized GC. Specifically, the longitudinal strengths of the ships from the previous case study are
investigated, and mechanical testing of a prototype structure is conducted.
 2. GLASS-CONTENT OPTIMIZATION PROCESS
2.1 Laminated Composite Design Process
By considering the hull-form design and the structural design, the design pressure acting on a given
ship structure can be estimated. This is followed by determination of the structural dimensions,
using the ship structure scantling appropriate to the pressure acting on the design area. Ship
structures can generally be categorized into primary structures, such as bottom, side, and deck
structures, and stiffeners that support the primary structures. Moreover, composite-ship structures
can be classified in terms of lamination type, as single-skin or sandwich laminate, or as top-hat
type, which is frequently used for stiffeners. Although the scantling process differs for each
lamination type, the mechanical properties of a laminated composite typically play a significant
role in the determination of the corresponding structure’s thickness. Thus, using rules based on the
scantling process, the minimum required thickness of the laminate can be determined.

Figure 1 is a flowchart showing the required thickness estimation process for a laminated
composite structure based on ship design results. The mechanical properties of the laminated
composite are determined by GC during the laminate-property estimation process shown on the
left-hand side of the chart; the result of this process then affects the thickness of the structure,
which is also based on the ship design results.

Property of Laminated Composite Ship Design

Content of Reinforcement Principal Dimension Design Area

GCC
G Lwl, Δ, V, CB, T... S, s, βx, x, h0...

Mechanical Properties Design Pressure

Ultimate Tensile Strength Slamming Pressure
Ultimate Compressive Strength Hydrostatic Head
Ultimate Flexural Strength Design Head

Coefficient Relative Mechanical

Single Skin : Required Thickness
Properties
Stiffener : Section Modulus
Single Skin Kof Sandwich : Section Modulus,
Stiffener Ko Moment of Inertia

Required Thickness

Figure 1. Laminated-composite design process based on RINA rule.

Assuming that there is no change in design pressure due to the changes in the hull-form geometry
and, also, that the structural arrangement remains constant, it can be concluded that variations in
the laminate mechanical properties in response to changes in GC most significantly determine any
structural thickness variations, or, equivalently, any changes in weight.

2.2 Glass Content (GC) and Laminate Weight Reduction

2.2.1 Change in Thickness with GC
The mechanical properties of a laminated composite, determined by GC, can be converted to
coefficient form. We label this coefficient K, and use Kof and Ko for single-skin laminate and
stiffeners, respectively, as shown in Figure 1. These properties affect the laminate thickness. K is
determined by the ultimate flexural strength Rmf or the ultimate tensile strength Rm of the laminated
composite. During the proposed optimization process, the laminate mechanical properties are
estimated in accordance with the laminate (single-skin or sandwich laminate) and reinforcement
(glass fiber, carbon fiber, etc.) types. Table 1 provides an overview of the related equations.

Table 1. Mechanical properties of laminates comprised of glass or carbon fiber reinforcements

[10].

Glass fibre High strength Carbon fibre

Symbols Mechanical properties CSM Woven Roving & Unidirectional Reinforcement

Combined mat/roving Crossplied 0/90
Woven roving reinforcement Parallel to the fibres Perpendic to the fibres

E Tensile modulus of elasticity (N/mm2 ) (37GC-4.75)103 75,000G C - 6730 151,500G C – 15,750 8,025G C2 – 3,150GC – 3,300

Ec Compressive modulus of elasticity (N/mm2) (40GC-6)103 - - -

Et Flexural modulus of elasticity (N/mm2) (33.4GC+2.2)103 - - -

G Shear modulus of elasticity (N/mm2) (1.7GC+2.24)103 - - -
Rm Ultimate tensile strength (N/mm2) 1,278G C2-510GC+123 740GC - 65 1,500GC - 150 38GC2 - 15GC + 15
Rmc Ultimate compressive strength (N/mm2) 150GC+72 460GC - 40 820GC - 82 1126GC2 - 45GC + 45

Rmf Ultimate flexural strength (N/mm2) (502GC2+107) [2.5Rm /(1+Rm /Rmc )] [2.5Rm /(1+Rm /Rmc )] [2.5Rm /(1+Rm /Rmc )]

Rmt Ultimate shear strength (N/mm2) 80GC+38 - - -

Ultimate interlaminar shear

Rmti (N/mm2) 22.5-17.5GC Rmtc = 35M pa 230GC2 - 180GC + 60 230GC2 - 180GC + 60
strength

Figure 2 shows the result of an Rmf estimation for a range of GC values commonly applied for
laminated composites used in ship-structure manufacturing, i.e., 0.30.9.
 700

Mechanical Properties(N/mm^2)
Ultimate Tensile Strength - ISO 12215
600 Ultimate Tensile Strength - RINA Part B
Ultimate Compressive Strength
Ultimate Flexural Strength
500

400

300

200

100
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Reinforcement Content

Figure 2. Estimated ultimate flexural strength with respect to GC in glass-fiber chopped strand
mat (CSM).

As shown in Figure 2, the required thickness can decrease as the flexural strength increases with
increasing GC. In order to prevent a continuous decrease in the required thickness with increased
Rmf, K is considered, as this term is defined differently for different laminate and reinforcement
types. For example, when a single-skin laminate for use in hull plating (the most widely used
laminate in ship structures) is to be manufactured from glass fiber, the required coefficient can be
obtained as
152
𝐾𝑜𝑓 = (𝐺 2 +107 )0.5 . [1]
𝐶

By considering the geometric conditions of the design area and K (for the required thickness
determined by the design pressure acting on the design area), the scantling thickness can finally
be obtained. For example, the scantling thickness of single-skin laminate for use in hull plating t
can be obtained in the form

𝑡 = [coefficient of pressure] ∗ [coefficient of design area] ∗ [stiffener spacing] ∗ [2]

[𝐾 ] ∗ [𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒 0.5 ].

Thus, t is the required thickness for bottom plating in a certain design area [10] .

In other words, considering Figure 1 in light of the relationship between K and the required
thickness, a certain reduction in thickness can be expected with increased GC. Unless there is a
change in the ship design, such as to the hull-form geometry or structural arrangement, the mass
per unit area of the laminate can be minimized while satisfying the thickness criteria of the
scantling rule. Alternatively, it can be stated that GC can be adjusted so that the value of K is
minimized, while ensuring structural safety.
2.2.2 Estimation of Laminate Weight
In order to estimate the mass per unit area (kg/m2), it is necessary to incorporate the glass fiber and
resin densities, which are defined as 2.56 and 1.2 g/cm3, respectively, in the design rules. Hence,
the thickness of a single layer of the laminate (mm/m2) can be derived as
2.56
𝑡𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑒 𝑝𝑙𝑦 = 0.33p( 𝐺𝐶 − 1.36), [3]

where p is the mass per unit area of the reinforcement of a single layer, in kg/m2 [10]. Here, the
total thickness of the laminate can be obtained as ∑ 𝑡𝑖 , and W, the total mass per unit area of
reinforcements in the laminate (g/m2), can be derived as

𝐶𝐺 [4]
𝑊𝑙𝑎𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑒 = 3.072 𝑡𝑙𝑎𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑒 (2.56−1.36𝐺 ).
𝐶

In other words, the possible thickness values are obtained from the ship design results, and the
total mass per unit area of the reinforcements in the laminate can be obtained based on the change
in GC.

2.3 Light-weight Design Process for Laminated Composites Using GC Optimization

Based on the above discussion, the light-weight design process for laminated composites based on
GC optimization requires determination of the value of GC that minimizes the scantling thickness
of the laminate. Thus, this process determines the GC corresponding to the K value that minimizes
the thickness for given ship design conditions.

Thus far, the discussion has focused on single-skin-type laminates. Sandwich-type laminates,
which are used for primary structures such as bulkheads and decks, or stiffeners such as girders
and frames, require a different estimation process for K to that described in Section 2.1. For single-
skin type laminates, GC is optimized to within the range that yields the required thickness, whereas
for sandwich-type laminates, GC must be optimized depending on the section modulus determined
from the section geometry of the structure (Figure 1). However, the proposed optimization concept
and process are identical. As the conditions and equations used for optimization can be obtained
from the applicable rules, a detailed explanation is omitted here because of the applicable length
restrictions. However, in this paper, single-skin laminate, sandwich laminate, and top-hat stiffener
are selected as the target structures for optimization, as they are most widely used in composite-
ship structures. To determine the final thickness in the subsequent case study, which is used as a
sample application of the optimization process, the minimum thickness of the final laminate is
obtained by adding a margin of ~10% to the rule-based scantling thickness criteria obtained from
the ship design results. A summary of the design process for the laminate optimization of the three
materials (single-skin laminate, sandwich laminate, and top-hat stiffener) is given in Figure 3.
 Reinforcement Content (Gc)

Single-Skin Laminate Top-Hat Stiffener Sandwich Laminate

Ultimate Tensile Strength Ultimate Tensile Strength

Ultimate Flexural Strength
Ultimate Compressive Strength Ultimate Compressive Strength
Gc Optimization

Core Material Size (50 t x 60 t)

Core Material Height (40 t)
Attached Plating Thickness (14.8 t)
Ship Design

Optimal Mechanical Properties

Coefficient
Optimal Mechanical Properties
Coefficient (Section Modulus)
Optimal Mechanical Properties
Coefficient
(Section Modulus Zinner, Zoute r)

Rule Scantling

Inner/Outer Skin
Single-Skin Required Thickness Top-Hat Required Thickness
Required Thickness

10% Margin Thickness

Weight Estimation

(Weight per Area)

E-Glass Fabric

Single Ply Thickness Lamination Schedule

Lamination Thickness

Laminate Weight

Figure 3. GC optimization processes for single-skin laminate, top-hat stiffener, and sandwich
laminate.

3. APPLICATION TO 52 FT POWER BOAT

In order to verify the GC optimization process for hull-structure weight reduction, a case study was
performed for a previously designed 52 ft power boat. The specific target of the study was MMU-
G52, which is a pleasure yacht with a hull length of 15.9 m and displacement of 25.47 t. This
vessel has received Conformité Européenne (CE) design certification from RINA. In this case
study, the hull structure of MMU-G52 was redesigned by determining the optimal GC of each
structure using the method proposed in this paper, and the resultant weight reduction of the ship
structure was examined. The geometry and structural arrangement of MMU-G52 are illustrated in
Figure 4, and the principal specifications are provided in Table 2.
 Figure 4. Overview of MMU-G52 geometry and structural design.

Table 2. Principal MMU-G52 design specifications.

Item Value Unit

Hull Length 15.90 m
Waterline Length 13.15 m
Breadth (Max) 4.64 m
Breadth (Waterline) 4.29 m
Depth (Midship) 2.50 m
Displacement 25.47 ton
Block Coefficient 0.46 -
Deadrise Angle (at LCG) 17.36 
Speed 32.00 Knot
Design Category A -

3.1 Approach to MMU-G52 Redesign

MMU-G52 is constructed from 450 g/m2 E-glass chopped strand mat (CSM), which is most
popularly used in actual shipbuilding yard, and the structural design is generally based on a GC of
0.4. For single-skin laminate structures, the specifications shown in Table 2 are applied, and for
sandwich-type laminate core materials, end grain balsa (density: 104 t/m3) is used. For the core
materials, a height of 40 mm is used for primary structures such as the deck, whereas a section
geometry with 50 mm width and 60 mm length is used for the stiffeners. In this case study, the E-
glass and resin densities used for weight re-estimation were set to 2.56 and 1.2 g/cm3, respectively,
which are consistent with the design rules.

The design information used for scantling the hull structure following estimation of the optimum
GC was identical to the MMU-G52 fabric and core-material specifications. Note that the design
pressure decreases in response to the decrease in displacement caused by a structural weight
reduction; however, this decrease in design pressure was not considered here. To simplify the
application of the GC optimization process, the hull structure components were categorized into
single-skin and sandwich laminate items, and the overall hull structure was redesigned by applying
the optimum GC derived based on the categorization of each structural component.

3.2 Determination of GC for Laminate Weight Minimization

In order to apply the light-weight design process for laminated composite based on GC
optimization proposed in Section 2.3, the design pressure acting on the design area of the MMU-
G52 hull structure was calculated. The maximum design pressure points were found for three
structure groups, i.e., the hull plating, main deck, and stiffeners, and the GC values that minimize
the laminate weights of each individual structure were then derived. It was assumed that the hull
plating, deck, bulkhead, and stiffener were manufactured with the minimum thickness necessary
to withstand the maximum design pressure. As mentioned above, the minimum thickness was
determined by adding a 10% thickness margin to the rule scantling thickness. Figure 5 shows the
optimum GC values obtained for the single-skin laminate, top-hat stiffener, and sandwich laminate
structures using the described process.
 30

Laminate Weight

Weight per Area(kg/m^2)

25

20
18.19

15

10
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.64 0.7 0.8 0.9
Reinforcement Content

Single Skin Laminate

(Bottom Plating)

Weight_MIN at GC = 64%

16
25
Weight per Area(kg/m^2)

14 Laminate Weight
Weight per Area(kg/m^2)

Laminate Weight
20
12

10 15
12.70
8.42
8
10

6 0.780.8 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.70.72 0.8 0.9

0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.9
Reinforcement Content Reinforcement Content

Top-Hat Stiffener Sandwich Laminate

(Bottom Plating) (Main Deck)

Weight_MIN at GC = 78% Weight_MIN at GC = 72%

Figure 5. Results of GC estimation for laminate weight minimization for structures comprised of
single-skin laminate, sandwich laminate, and top-hat stiffener. (Weight_MIN indicates the
minimum weight.)
The MMU-G52 structure was scantled based on the optimum GC, and a 3D computer-aided-design
(CAD) model of the redesigned MMU-G52 was drawn to facilitate easy estimation of the
optimized weight.

3.3 Evaluation of Effect of Light-Weight Design through Weight-Reduction Estimation

The weight-reduction effect was analyzed by comparing the weight estimation logs from the CAD
models of the original (GC = 0.4) and redesigned (with optimum GC) MMU-G52. The CAD model
data structure was divided into hull plating, canopy, stiffener, deck, and bulkhead components,
which were then categorized as being comprised of single-skin laminate, sandwich laminate, or
top-hat stiffeners, as required by the optimization algorithm. The result of the comparison of the
estimated weights of each group for the two models is summarized in Table 3.

Table 3. Comparison of estimated weight and weight-reduction effects for original and optimized
(light-weight) MMU-G52.

Weight (kg) Weight

Structures Reduction
Original Case Light-Weight Case (%)
Bottom 1502.06 1364.98 9.13
Hull Single Skin
Side 864.98 807.16 6.68
Plating
Sub Total 2367.04 2172.14 8.23
Single Skin Shell Plating 735.75 614.88 13.71
Cover 249.89 185.10 25.93
Canopy Sandwich
Fly-bridge 109.94 82.97 24.53
Sub Total 1095.58 882.95 19.40
Bottom 1084.18 1009.74 6.87
Top-hat
Stiffener Side 582.09 528.96 9.13
Sub Total 1665.86 1538.69 7.63
Deck 946.28 765.51 17.73
Deck, Sandwich
Bulkhead 225.23 195.38 13.25
Bulkhead
Sub Total 1171.51 960.89 17.98

Total 7119.72 6407.00 10.01

In Table 3, the “original case” and the “light-weight case” indicate the grouped weight estimates
for the original and the redesigned MMU-G52 with the optimum GC, respectively. Overall, it was
observed that the application of the proposed light-weight design process with optimum GC yields
a 10.01% reduction in the total structural weight. As an additional 10% margin was added to the
minimum required thickness to account for fabrication conditions, and as it is likely that the design
pressure will decrease owing to the displacement reduction induced by the reduced weight, it is
believed that further weight reduction is possible.

4. STRUCTURAL SAFETY EVALUATION

In order to verify the structural safety of the MMU-G52 design with optimum GC obtained using
the proposed light-weight design process, two structural-safety evaluation tests were performed.
The first evaluated the longitudinal strength in accordance with the RINA rule [10]. The second
test was mechanical, and was conducted using a partial prototype of a single-skin laminate
structure redesigned to incorporate the optimum GC.

4.1 Evaluation of Longitudinal Strength

The longitudinal strength of the redesigned MMU-G52 was evaluated in accordance with the
longitudinal strength evaluation standard suggested by the RINA rule [10]. From the ship design
conditions, the total vertical bending moment applied to the hull was estimated to be 610 KNm,
and the maximum bending stress was calculated to be 8.328 N/mm2 at the main deck point of the
midship section. The allowable stress value was calculated to be 55.44 N/mm2 by considering the
safety factor of 0.33 required for planing yachts, along with the mechanical properties of the
laminate obtained from the ultimate tensile and ultimate compressive strengths of the laminates of
the bottom and deck. Hence, it was found that sufficient longitudinal strength is ensured, as the
maximum bending stress is only approximately 15% of the allowable stress value. Table 4 presents
a comparative evaluation of the longitudinal strengths of the redesigned and original MMU-G52.

Table 4. Comparison of longitudinal strength evaluation results.

Item Original Case Light-Weight Case

2
Allowable Stress (N/mm ) 40.59 55.44
Maximum Bending Stress (N/mm2) 5.70 8.33
Bending Stress/Allowable Stress (%) 14.06 15.02

4.2 Mechanical Test of Hull-Plating Prototype

In order to verify the structural stability of the redesigned MMU-G52, a prototype of part of the
hull plating was manufactured. In general, the hull plating experiences the greatest impact pressure
of all the structures, and this plating is typically composed of single-skin-type laminate. Figure 6
shows the geometry, location, and dimensions of the hull-plating prototype.
 Figure 6. Prototype location, geometry, and dimensions.

The design process to obtain light-weight laminates was employed in order to produce treatment
group specimens, and the optimum GC obtained for the previously defined prototype was applied.
Table 5 presents the manufacturing specifications for two specimen types, the prototype (light-
weight) and a control group (original).

Table 5. Test specimen manufacturing specifications.

Original Case Light-Weight Case

Fiber Type E-Glass E-Glass
Composite Type Chopped Strand Mat (450 g/m2) Chopped Strand Mat (450 g/m2)
Reinforcement Content 40% 64%
Resin Polyester Polyester
Thickness 11.84 mm 9.36 mm
Ply No. 16 24

Tensile and flexural testing was performed on the test specimens in accordance with ASTM D5083
[11] and D790 [12]. Figure 7 shows a comparison between the results from the mechanical tests
conducted on the specimens and the mechanical property estimates based on the RINA rule [10].
From the test results, it can be observed that there are no significant differences in the mechanical
properties of the specimens and those estimated based on the RINA rule. In particular, this finding
indicates a strong agreement because the prototype is on a 1:1 scale with the 52 ft hull. This, the
light-weight structures can satisfy the requirements of the RINA rule.
 400 400 Rule-based Estimation – Flexural
Rule-based Estimation
Rule Estimate – Tensile
- Tensile Rule Estimate - Flexural
Test Average –Average
Specimen Flexural - Flexural

Ultimate Flexural Strength(MPa)

Ultimate Tensile Strength(MPa)
350 Specimen
Test – Tensile - Tenslin
Average Average 350

288.00
300 277.00 300 271.98
261.00
250 250 211.20
187.00
Specimens after Tensile tests 200 200

131.68
150 123.00 150

100 100

50 50

0 0
0.25 0.5 0.75 0.25 0.5 0.75
Area Area
Original
Regular Case Light-Weight
Light Weight Case Original
Regular Case LightLight-Weight
Weight Case
Specimens after Flexural tests

Figure 7. Comparison of mechanical properties obtained from mechanical tests and from
estimates based on the RINA rule [10]. The average values of five measurements are given for
both the tensile and flexural tests.

5. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, we have developed a light-weight design technique for the weight minimization of
FRF laminates for ship structures, which are very commonly used as hull materials for small ships.
This design method is based on a glass-content optimization process that incorporates the structural
design results and the lamination type. In order to verify the applicability of the proposed light-
weight design method, a case study was performed on a previously designed ship and, as a result,
a reduction of 10% in the total weight of the ship structure was observed compared to the original
design. The structural stability of the lighter ship was confirmed by evaluating the longitudinal
strength of the redesigned ship in accordance with the applicable RINA rule. Moreover,
mechanical testing was performed by manufacturing a partial prototype based on the hull design
results. Hence, the mechanical properties of the laminates manufactured based on the proposed
method were determined and their suitability was verified. Through such structural stability tests,
the reliability of the proposed light-weight design method was ascertained.

The application of the light-weight design technique proposed in this paper will yield a composite-
ship design with reduced structural weight and guaranteed structural stability. Moreover, it is
expected that the increase in payload and energy efficiency provided by the light-weight design
will conform to the current trend toward environmental friendliness in ship design. Environmental
considerations are currently being emphasized as a significant issue. Furthermore, such improved
efficiency will contribute to enhancing the market competitiveness of ships optimized using this
approach.

6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This research was supported by the Basic Science Research Program through the National
Research Foundation of Korea (NRF, Korea), funded by the Ministry of Education (No.
2014056245), and by the Technology Innovation Program (10053831, Development of Foam Core
Material and Composite for Shipbuilding), funded by the Ministry of Trade, Industry, & Energy
(MOTIE, Korea).

7. REFERENCES
1. Sobey, A., Blake, J. & Shenoi, A. “Optimisation Approaches to Design Synthesis of Marine
Composite Structures.” Ship Technology Research 56(1) (2009): 24-30.
2. Sobey, A. J., Blake, J. I. R. & Shenoi, R. A., “Optimisation of composite boat hull using first
principles and design rules.” Ocean Engineering 65 (2013):62-70.
3. Umair, S., “Environmental Impacts of Fiber Composite Materials: Study on Life Cycle
Assessment of Materials used for Ship Structure.” Master Thesis of KTH Royale Institute of
Technology 2006.
4. Kang, N.-S. & Park, C.-H. “The Fundamental Study on the Development of Leisure Boat’s
Drop Test Management System based on ISO 12215-5.” Journal of the Korean Society of
Marine Environment & Safety 18(4) (2012): 365-370.
5. ISO Standard ISO 12215, 2008a, “Small craft - Hull construction and scantlings” ISO,
Switzerland, www.iso.org.
6. Lee, J. C., Oh, D. K. & Mun, D. H., “Analysis of ISO 10303 AP209 for the exchange of design
data for a product made of composite material.” Proceedings of KSMTE Spring Conference.
Busan, Korea, April 24-26, 2013. Korean Society of Manufacturing Technology Engineers.
7. Oh, D. K., Lee, D. K., Kang, K. M., Ryu, C. H. & Noh, J. K., “Comparative Study of Rules of
ISO 12215 and International Classification Society for Structural Design of CFRP Cruise Boat.”
Journal of Ocean Engineering and Technology 28(1) (2014): 77-84.
8. Kim, D. Y., Lee, C. W., Lee, D. K. & Oh, D. K., “Characteristics of a CFRP Cruiser’s Windage
Area by Stability Assessment.” Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment and
Safety 20(6) (2014): 774-780.
9. ISO Standard ISO 12215-5, 2008b, “Small craft - Hull construction and scantlings - Part 5:
Design Pressures for Monohulls, Design Stresses, Scantlings Determination” ISO, Switzerland,
www.iso.org.
10. RINA (Registro Italiano Navale), 2009, “Rules for the Classification of Pleasure Yacht Part B
Hull and Stability.” RINA & Imago Media, Italy, www.rina.org
11. ASTM D5083, 2010, "Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Reinforced
Thermosetting Plastics Using Straight-Sided Specimens" ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA, 2010, www.astm.org
12. ASTM D790, 2003, "Standard Test Methods for Flexural Properties of Unreinforced and
Reinforced Plastics and Electrical Insulating Materials" ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA, 2015, www.astm.org