Article
Subassembly Partition of Hull Block Based on
Two-Dimensional PSO Algorithm
Bo Liu 1, Rui Li 1,*, Ji Wang 1,2,3, Yujun Liu 1,2 and Sheng Li 1,2
Citation: Liu, B.; Li, R.; Wang, J.; Liu,
Y.; Li, S. Subassembly Partition of
Hull Block Based on
Two-Dimensional PSO Algorithm. J.
Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 1006. https://
doi.org/10.3390/jmse11051006
Academic Editor: Vincenzo Crupi
Received: 22 March 2023
Revised: 4 May 2023
Accepted: 6 May 2023
Published: 8 May 2023
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors. Li-
censee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and con-
ditions of the Creative Commons At-
tribution (CC BY) license (https://cre-
ativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 1006. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse11051006
1 School of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, Dalian University of Technology,
Dalian 116024, China; liubo123@mail.edu.cn
2 State Key Laboratory of Structural Analysis for Industrial Equipment, Dalian University of Technology,
Dalian 116024, China
3 Collaborative Innovation Center for Advanced Ship and Deep-Sea Exploration, Shanghai 220240, China
* Correspondence: lirui@dlut.edu.cn
Abstract: Subassembly partition is an important process in hull block building as it greatly affects
the efficiency and quality of the assembly work. Recently, an experience-based method has been
widely applied to the subassembly partition process, which consumes much design time and man-
power, thus causing more challenges toward a more highly automated and efficient stage in this
process. To shorten the gap, an automated subassembly partition method is presented in this study.
First, the assembly information model is defined with essential attributes and topological relations
of the parts. Second, an optimization model is established with consideration of a trade-off between
the intra-cluster cohesion and cluster number on the premise of satisfying certain constraints. After
that, considering the fuzziness and diversity of the subassembly partition problem, a two-dimen-
sional coding discrete particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm is developed. Finally, two
blocks are demonstrated as instances to verify the proposed method, and the results show that the
proposed method is feasible and applicable to the block with a flat structure.
Keywords: block assembly; subassembly partition; PSO algorithm; assembly sequence planning
1. Introduction
A hull block is an important intermediate product in the process of shipbuilding,
which refers to the assembly of a number of steel plates and sections on the molding bed
or platform through welding operation [1]. The block construction is the most important
process, the hours and costs of which respectively account for 40~60% and 30~50% of the
total hours and costs of hull building [2]. Nowadays, with the development of ship-build-
ing technology, blocks gradually evolve toward larger sizes and more complex structures,
which brings more challenges to the assembly sequence planning (ASP) process [3]. Be-
cause the search space of the assembly sequence increases exponentially with the number
of parts and the assembly relations between the parts, this leads to a large amount of com-
putation time and memory space being consumed [4]. To reduce the complexity of ASP
and simplify the assembly process, subassembly partition needs to be implemented.
Based on generated subassemblies, the difficulty of ASP is effectively simplified, and the
parallelism of the assembly process is improved accordingly.
The subassembly can be regarded as a stable structure composed of two or more
parts, which can be fabricated at the previous assembly process. A reasonable subassem-
bly assignment can ease the operational difficulty, shorten the assembly time, and mini-
mize the whole cost of manufacturing [5]. In most shipyards, such an assignment is still
implemented manually depending on the experiences and know-how of the processing
engineering, which increases the redundant work and prolongs the process planning cy-
www.mdpi.com/journal/jmse
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 1006 2 of 17

cle [6], thus hindering the progress toward a higher automated and efficient stage. There-
fore, it is urgent to develop an effective method to achieve automatic subassembly gener-
ation for ship block building.
Either ASP or subassembly identification, the digital expression of assembly infor-
mation, is the most critical foundation for obtaining feasible or optimal assembly solutions
[7]. Expression methods can be divided into two basic categories: a graph-based method
and a matrix-based method [8]. The graph-based method is the most intuitive approach
to represent the assembly models, in which the nodes imply the parts or components, and
the lines represent the contact information between the parts. Based on this, the weight
and direction of the lines are introduced into the liaison diagram to enrich the assembly
information. For example, the assembly precedence of the parts can be represented as the
arrow direction of the lines [9], and the contact mode or assembly time can also be rec-
orded as the weight of the lines [10]. The matrix-based method is used to represent the
assembly information in the form of a digital matrix, which generally includes a liaison
matrix, a stability matrix, a priority matrix, an interference matrix, etc. The matrix-based
assembly expression method is widely used for ASP since its simple structure is conven-
ient for storage and computation [8].
From the perspective of engineering, subassembly partition is regarded as a decom-
position of the product into several smaller units according to certain structural features,
functional requirements, production conditions, and assembly constraints for the purpose
of reducing the assembly difficulty, expanding the work areas, and improving the assem-
bly efficiency [11]. Homem [12] first defined the subassembly as a stable part set, which
can be viewed as an integral part of ASP. He developed a cut-set method for detecting
subassemblies and used an And/Or graph to demonstrate the assembly sequence. Theo-
retically, the cut-set method has the ability to detect all the possible subassemblies of the
product, but it is prone to combination explosion with an increase in the parts number,
and it requires further identification to generate optimal subassemblies [13]. Li et al. [14]
proposed a weight network to represent the topological structure, in which the weights of
the edges are brought to illustrate the correlation strengths among the components, and
improved the Girvan–Newman algorithm to establish module detection. Belhadj et al. [15]
developed a base part determination method to generate effective subassemblies by ana-
lyzing the contacts and geometrical feasibilities of the parts. The method greatly reduces
the search space of the subassembly partition process. Gulivindala et al. [16] classified the
contact stabilities between parts and used stability predicates to perform subassembly de-
tection. The method is effective for specific products with irregular contact surfaces.
From the mathematical perspective, subassembly partition can be regarded as the
clustering of parts according to their feature similarities [17]. Zhong et al. [18] introduced
a fuzzy cluster analysis algorithm to discover the proper subassemblies. The algorithm
can easily obtain all the feasible partition schemes by adjusting the threshold of the fuzzy
cut-set matrix. Kou et al. [19] realized subassembly recognition by iterating and updating
the center and fuzzy membership degree matrix of subassemblies. Zhang et al. [20] em-
ployed a Markov clustering algorithm to discover the candidate subassemblies. The algo-
rithm scales well with increasing graph size and has excellent robustness against noise in
graph data. For these clustering-based methods, it is essential and critical to initialize the
distance or similarity matrix of the parts, which may directly affect the rationality of the
clustering results. Therefore, a great challenge exists in formulating an appropriate eval-
uation method for the distance and similarity of parts concerning adequate assembly con-
straints.
In recent years, some researchers have aimed to apply a knowledge-based reasoning
method to generate feasible subassemblies. Qiao et al. [21] proposed an ontology model
for assembly operation and established a reasoning mechanism to infer the assembly se-
quence. Shi et al. [22] constructed an assembly semantic model and deduced the weighted
assembly-directed graph through semantic web rule language. The semantic-based
method has sufficient representation capacity for entitles, relations, and constraints, and
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 1006 3 of 17

it has good performance in subassembly recognition. However, the method is customized

solely according to the manufacturing characteristics of products, thus having limited
generality—the potential of replication in other industries. Moreover, the challenges in
building the semantic model and the huge manpower required in the instantiation of
products also add to its limitation.
Recently, heuristic algorithms have been gradually applied to solve ASP problems.
Typical heuristic algorithms include the genetic algorithm (GA) [23], the particle swarm
optimization algorithm (PSO) [24], the ant colony optimization algorithm (ACO) [25], and
other evolutionary algorithms [26]. Theoretically, heuristic algorithms search for an opti-
mal assembly sequence through iterative computation under determined constraints and
objective functions. Prematurity and slow convergence are the major subjects to be im-
proved in heuristic algorithms. Li et al. [27] introduced the modified evolutionary direc-
tion operator into the PSO algorithm to avoid a local convergence problem in ASP. Yang
et al. [28] introduced bacterial chemotaxis into the PSO algorithm, and the new algorithm
keeps a more rapid convergence while preventing premature convergence. Rashid [25]
incorporated the leadership hierarchy concept from the gray wolf optimizer into the ACO
algorithm to enhance the algorithm's performance. Generally, heuristic algorithms have
good performance in solving the serial ASP problem, while they are rarely applied to sub-
assembly partition. Because subassembly partition is a discrete-nonlinear planning pro-
cess, in which both the group number and member number in each group are fuzzy and
ambiguous.
Up to now, researches on the subassembly partition of mechanical products signifi-
cantly dominate over those dedicated to hulls and marine structures [29]. Adapting the
reported methods used for mechanisms to shipbuilding is not always possible due to their
specificity regarding the product structure and assembly technologies. To fill this gap, a
new subassembly partition method focusing on hull block building is proposed in this
study, and a two-dimensional coding PSO algorithm is designed to search for the optimal
subassemblies.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows: Section 2 demonstrates an assembly
information model based on the essential attributes and topological relations of the parts;
Section 3 shows an optimization model for subassembly generation, with consideration
of a trade-off between intra-cluster cohesion and clusters number on the premise of satis-
fying certain constraints; Section 4 proposes a two-dimensional PSO algorithm to search
for the optimal solutions of the problem; Section 5 explores two cases to verify the pro-
posed method; and, finally, the conclusion and future expectation are provided in Section
6. Figure 1 shows the strategy of the subassembly partition method proposed in this re-
search.

Figure 1. Strategy of the proposed method.

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 1006 4 of 17

2. Assembly Information Modeling

At the beginning of subassembly identification, it is necessary to reconstruct the cor-
responding assembly information through a CAD model [30]. In this study, the assembly
information required by subassembly partition could be classified into two categories:
part information and assembly topology information. The former involves the geometric
and physical attributes of the parts, such as vertices, edges, positions, weights, types, etc.,
while the latter involves the connection relation and interference relation among the parts.

2.1. Data Extraction from CAD Model

The part data extraction aims to explore and make easy the use of the geometrical
data of the part. In the Tribon system, the hull structure information is stored in an
SB_OGDB database in hierarchical form. The Com-Object method is used to extract the
relevant data of the part through multi-level keyword retrieval. According to the require-
ments of block subassembly partition, the data related to the plates, stiffeners, and cutouts
are involved in this study. The data extraction process, as shown in Figure 2, involves
extracting the weight and geometric features of all the panels and their sub-structures of
a given block through traverse panels. Considering that the data of the panels and their
sub-structures were provided in the local coordinate system (2D), it was necessary to com-
plete the transformation of the extracted data based on the global coordinate system.

Figure 2. Data extraction process.

The extracted part data is stored in an Access database as the intermediate data for
assembly relationship identification. Any geometrical handling on the part implies the
processing of information indexed in the database. The form and relationships of the data
table are shown in Figure 3. Level 1 is related to the block, which acts as an initial table for
storing data and does not participate in the subsequent subassembly partition process;
Level 2 is related to the panels, the main function of which is to transform the coordinate
system and determine the subordinate relation of the sub-structures; Level 3 contains the
information of the weight, position, and geometric features of the plates, stiffeners, and
cutouts, according to which the connection and assembly interference between the parts
can be deduced indirectly.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 1006 5 of 17

Figure 3. Intermediate database structure.

2.2. Connection Tightness

The connection relationship, defined as the contact and mating form between a pair
of parts, is considered the main factor in determining the assembly priorities of parts. Dif-
ferent from other mechanical products, the integrity of the hull structure is ensured by
permanent joints—welds [31]. The connection types will directly affect the contact stabil-
ity between parts [32]. For the block structure, the connections can be classified into four
common types: the fillet welding between the plate and stiffener; the fillet welding be-
tween plates where the weld is interrupted by the cutouts (including R-shaped cutouts
and T-shaped cutouts); the fillet welding between plates with a continuous joint; and the
butt welding between strakes [33]. Each welding type has its own technology, character-
istics, and assembly requirements.
Considering that the parts within a flat block are distributed along the axis, the axis-
aligned boundary box is selected to detect the connection relation of the parts, with the
principle to detect the intersection of the projections of two boxes on three axes of X, Y,
and Z. If the projections along any axis are separated, the two boxes are not connected; if
the projections along any two axes are contiguous, then the boxes are in contact. Take the
two plates in Figure 4 as an example. The corresponding boundary boxes can be regarded
as the plates themselves. The contact is detected by comparing the value of the diagonal
vertices coordinates of the boxes. After the contact detection, the connection type can be
directly deduced according to the vertical direction of the plates. The connection detection
between the stiffener and the plate is based on the same principle as above, except that the
boundary box of the stiffener is created according to the insertion point coordinates and
stiffener specifications.

Figure 4. Connected relation identification.

Generally, the fillet welding between the stiffeners and plates has the highest priority
because of the high stability of the structure and the limitation of the automatic welding
conditions [34]. The fillet welding between a pair of plates with T-shaped cutouts has a
higher requirement in the assembly path, as the plate can only be pulled into the target
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 1006 6 of 17

position along the vertical direction of the cutout when the stiffeners have been installed
on the base plate, so the plates connected in this form should be assembled in priority to
ensure the assembly feasibility. The assembly difficulty of fillet welding with a continuous
joint is similar to that of fillet welding with R-shaped cutouts, but the former has higher
welding efficiency and connection stability. The butt welding between strakes is usually
performed at a later stage because the large size and weight of the structure make it diffi-
cult to lift and transport, which may require a higher capacity workstation or facilities to
complete this task.
Through a comprehensive analysis of the part types and welding forms, as well as
the characteristics of the assembly process, the quantitative and evaluation rules of contact
tightness are formulated in this paper, as shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Rules for determining the connection tightness.

Index Contact Mode Tightness Diagram

Rule 1 pi is a plate, pj is a stiffener, and the contact is face-to-edge. cij = 0.9

Both pi and pj are plates, and the contact is face-to-edge and the joint is
Rule 2 cij = 0.8
interrupted with a T-shaped cutout.

Both pi and pj are plates, and the contact is face-to-edge and the joint is
Rule 3 cij = 0.7
straight and continuous.

Both pi and pj are plates, and the contact is face-to-edge and the joint is
Rule 4 cij = 0.6
interrupted with an R-shaped cutout.

Rule 5 Both pi and pj are strakes, and the contact is edge-to-edge. cij = 0.5

2.3. Indirect Association

Generally, the welding relationships in the block are intricate due to the fact that
there may be one-to-many connections among the parts, and such multiple welding rela-
tions will indirectly affect the assembly tightness between the parts. To evaluate this indi-
rect relationship, this study presents the semantics of indirect association as a supplemen-
tary description of assembly tightness. For example, as shown in Figure 5, there is no con-
tact between P4 and P5, but both are connected to P1 and P6, which increases the relation-
ship tightness of them to some extent.

Figure 5. The example of a sample structure diagram.

This relationship tightness described above is defined as the indirect association of

the parts. Inspired by the method of determining the fuzzy similarity relation in fuzzy
cluster analysis, the calculation method of indirect association is designed as follows:
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 1006 7 of 17

( )
n


k = 1, k  i , j
f cik , c jk
aij = , (1)
( )
n
10 cik + c jk
k =1

( )
 (
max cik , c jk ,
f cik , c jk = 
) cik  0, c jk  0
, (2)

 0, else

where aij is the indirect association between part i and j; cij is the connection tightness be-
tween part i and j; and n is the total parts number of the product.
The indirect association is the further supplement for the assembly relation between
parts on the basis of connection tightness, which improves the accuracy of assembly rela-
tion strength expression. In other words, the assembly relation strength between parts can
be compared according to the indirect association when they have the same connected
tightness.

2.4. Interference Relation

The interference relation indicates the collision situation between parts when they
are assembled or disassembled in a certain direction, which is the key basis to judge the
assembly feasibility of parts in a three-dimensional space. Compared with other products'
typical mechanisms, the hull block is a so-called spares structure because its parts are dis-
tributed in the space in a more dispersed mode, and the block assembly is less sensitive to
geometric constraints. Thus, in this paper, the assembly path is assumed to be confined to
the principal axis.
The principle of assembly interference detection is similar to that of contact detection.
The difference is that assembly interference detection needs to create a new boundary box
by stretching the moving part along the assembly direction for a certain distance, as
shown in Figure 6. The assembly interference can be determined by detecting the inter-
section of the projections of the new box and another fixed part. In the case of the stiffener
through the plate, the boundary boxes are always intersecting, and the assembly interfer-
ence relationship can be determined according to the cutout type at the corresponding
position of the plate.

Figure 6. Assembly interference detection.

Equation (3) shows the interference relation matrix of the parts assembly.

IM=  I ( i , j , k )  , (3)
nn6

where k represents the assembly direction, and it is defined as (+x, +y, +z, −x, −y, −z); I(i,j,k),
which means that if part i collides with part j when it is assembled along direction k, then
I(i,j,k) = 1, or else, I(i,j,k) = 0.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 1006 8 of 17

3. Optimization Model for SP

Varied subassembly partition criteria exist in different industries, each of which en-
compasses a series of unique principles. In this study, with a focus on block construction,
five principles are defined as follows according to the characteristics of the assembly pro-
cess and techniques.
Principle 1: There should be at least one plate in each subassembly as the base part
for assembly.
Principle 2: Each part in the subassembly is connected at least with one of the other
parts in the subassembly.
Principle 3: It is feasible in the assembly direction when the subassembly is assembled
as a whole.
Principle 4: The weight and size of the subassembly should be within the capacity of
the workstation.
Principle 5: Subassemblies should have good stability and rigidity to facilitate trans-
portation and lifting.
The first four principles are the rigid constraints and necessary conditions for the
subassembly. If these principles cannot be met at the same time, the generated subassem-
bly does not agree with the manufacturing reality. Therefore, this research designed these
principles as the corresponding constraints for the optimization, which are as follows:

si  S , p ij  si , p j is a plate ;

 ni

 is  S ,  p i
j
 si
, 
k = 1, k  j
c kj  0;
s.t  , (4)
s , s  S ,
( )
6

 i j 
k =1
I si , s j , k  6;

si  S , Wsi  Wmax ;

where S is the set of subassemblies; si is the set of members in subassembly i; Wsi is the
weight of subassembly I; and Wmax is the maximum allowable weight of the assembly sta-
tion.
For the fifth principle, subassembly stability means that the inner parts cannot devi-
ate and deform from the subassembly when moving and lifting the subassembly as a
whole. Subassembly stability is a relatively flexible but important indicator because of its
significant impact on assembly difficulty and efficiency. In this research, subassembly co-
hesion is used to evaluate the subassembly stability, and it is directly proportional to the
connection compactness of the inner parts. Therefore, the optimization objective in this
paper is to achieve the highest cohesion within subassemblies under the premise of a rea-
sonable cluster number. The objective function is designed as follows:

1 m
F=  COi ,
m i =1
(5)

where F is the fitness value of the solution, and the purpose is to find the solution with the
maximum fitness value; m is the number of subassemblies partitioned in the solution; and
COi is the cohesion within subassembly i, which is used to evaluate the compactness of
the parts within the subassembly. The calculation of COi is designed as follows:

2 ( 1 − α ) ni ni
( ) ( )
ni
α (i) (i)
COi =  + +   c(jk) + a(jk) ,
i i
c a (6)
ni − 1 j =1, j  b jb ni ( ni − 1) j =1 k = j +1
jb

where α is the weight coefficient and b is the index of the basis part in the subassembly.
The first half of the equation represents the assembly cohesion of the base plate with other
parts, while the second half represents the cohesion of all the parts to one other. In block
building, the base plate plays a key role, which is connected to a great number of other
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 1006 9 of 17

parts and supports nearly all the other parts in the subassembly. Compared with the as-
sembly cohesion between parts, the cohesion of the base plate with others has a more
critical influence on the structural stability of the subassembly. Therefore, it is considered
reasonable to choose 0.7 as the weight coefficient for the cohesion calculation of the sub-
assembly.

A(j ) N (j )
i i

q(j ) = +
i
, (7)
(i) (i) (i) (i )
Amax − Amin N max − N min

where Aj(i) is the area of part j from subassembly I, and Nj(i) is the number of elements that
are connected to part j.

4. PSO-Based Method Design

The PSO algorithm is one of the intelligent swarm algorithms, inspired by the preda-
tion behavior of birds. The PSO algorithm is one of the intelligent swarm algorithms, in-
spired by the predation behavior of birds. The basic principle of the PSO algorithm is to
search the optimal particle position through the movement of particles using the infor-
mation-sharing mechanism between individuals. Basically, with a strong local and global
search ability and high convergence efficiency, the PSO algorithm is considered simple-
structured, easily implemented, and executable, with fewer parameters to be adjusted,
compared with other bionic algorithms. In addition, the discrete PSO algorithm has the
ability to deal with combinatorial optimization problems. In terms of the above ad-
vantages, the PSO algorithm has been widely used in solving ASP problems [35], and its
efficiency in tackling ASP has been improved to some extent. However, traditional PSO
algorithms, confined to solving serial ASP—a one-by-one task to finish the assembly pro-
cess, bear great difficulty in solving the subassembly detection problem due to its fuzzy
and parallel nature [29]. Upon consideration of the identified research gaps, a two-dimen-
sional PSO algorithm is proposed, and the coding and iteration methods are introduced
in the following sections.

4.1. Position and Velocity of the Particle

The particle position is defined as a scheme of subassembly partition. Considering
that a one-dimensional vector is insufficient to describe the problem, an example of a Bool-
ean matrix is designed as follows:

 x11 x12 x1n 

 
x x22 x2 n 
Xi =  21 , (8)
 
 
 xn1 xn 2 xnn 

where the row of the matrix represents a subassembly unit, and the column is the index
of the part; xjk means that if part k belongs to subassembly j then xjk = 1, or else xjk = 0. For a
column, only one element is 1, and the rest are 0.
As shown in Figure 7, the example particle indicates that the product is divided into
three subassemblies, which are SuA1: {P1, P2}, SuA2: {P3, P6}, and SuA3: {P4, P5}.

P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6
Sub1 1 1 0 0 0 0
 
Sub2 0 0 1 0 0 1
Sub3 0 0 0 1 1 0
 
Null  0 0 0 0 0 0 

Figure 7. Example of the particle position.

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 1006 10 of 17

Similarly, particle velocity is defined as the change in the particle position, which
means an adjustment to the SP scheme. Equation (9) shows the encoding of the particle
velocity.

 v11 v12 v1n 

 
v v22 v2 n 
Vi =  21 , (9)
 
 
 vn1 vn 2 vnn 

where the row of the matrix has the same meaning as the position matrix, while the col-
umn is the grouping adjustment of the corresponding part. For each column of the matrix,
at most one element has a value of 1, and the rest are 0.

4.2. Addition Operator of PSO

Suppose that X = [x1,x2,...xk,...xn] and V = [v1,v2,...vk,...vn] are the position and velocity
of the particle, then the addition operator is defined as shown in Equations (10) and (11),
and the operation example is shown in Figure 8a.
X = X + V , (10)


v j , vj  0
x =  , (11)
x j ,
 vj = 0

where X′ is a new position of the particle; xj and vj are the j-th column vector of the position
matrix and velocity matrix, respectively. If vj is the zero vector or the same as xj, then the
vector x′j inherits from xj. Otherwise, x′j is replaced by vj.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figure 8. The example of the designed operators of PSO algorithm: (a) The example of position
update; (b) The example of velocity addition; (c) The example of position subtraction; (d) The exam-
ple of multiplication.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 1006 11 of 17

The velocity addition is used to obtain the superposed effect of velocities. Suppose
there are two velocities: V1 = [v11,v12,...v1k,...v1n] and V2 = [v21,v22,...v2k,...v2n]. Then, the addi-
tion of velocities is defined as shown in Equations (12) and (13).
V1 = V2 + V3 , (12)

v1 j , v1 j = v 2 j

v 3 j = v1 j , v1 j  v 2 j , r  0.5 , (13)

v 2 j , v1 j  v 2 j , r  0.5

where V3 is the new velocity, v3j is the j-th column vector of V3, and r is the random number
between 0 and 1. Normally, the more random numbers, r, between 0 and 0.5, the more
elements in the velocity matrix, V3, are inherited from V2, or else, the more elements are
inherited from V1. The example is shown in Figure 8b, where r1 and r3 represent the gen-
erated random number during the operations of the first and third column vectors, re-
spectively.

4.3. Subtraction Operator of PSO

The subtraction between two particle positions will generate a new particle velocity.
Suppose the two positions are X1 = [x11,x12,...x1k,...x1n] and X2 = [x21,x22,...x2k,...x2n], the subtrac-
tion of the two particles is defined as follows, and the example is shown in Figure 8c.
V = X2 − X1 , (14)


0, x1 j = x 2 j
vj =  , (15)
x 2 j ,
 x1 j  x 2 j

4.4. Multiplication Operator of PSO

Equations (16) and (17) show the designed multiplication operator of PSO.
V2 = cV1 , (16)

v1 j , r  c
v2 j =  , (17)
0, rc

where c is the control parameter, which controls the degree of the column vector inherited
from V1, and r is a random number evenly distributed between 0 and 1. It can be inferred
from the above formula that the bigger the value of c, the more column vectors will be
inherited from V1. The example is shown in Figure 8d, where r1, r2, and r3 represent the
random number generated during the multiplicative operations through 1 to 3 column
vectors, respectively.

4.5. Iterative Update of PSO

Based on the special definition of the position, velocity, and operations of the particle,
the iterative update operator of the particles is designed as shown in Equations (18) and
(19) according to the standard PSO algorithm [24].

Vi ( t + 1) = ωVi ( t ) + c1  Pi − Xi ( t )  + c2  Pg − Xi ( t )  , (18)

Xi ( t + 1) = Xi ( t ) + Vi ( t + 1) , (19)
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 1006 12 of 17

where t is the current iteration number of the algorithm; Pi represents the personal histor-
ical best position of the particle i and Pg is the global historical best position of the particle
swarm; ω is inertia weight, which holds the motion inertia of the particle swarm and pro-
vides the particle swarm with the tendency to expand the search space; and c1 and c2 are
learning factors that adjust the effect of the individual position and swarm position on the
particle motion. The coefficients of the inertia weight and learning factors are defined as
variables and are calculated as follows [27]:
ωmax − ωmin
ω = ωmin + t , (20)
Gmax

c1max − c1min
c1 = c1min + t , (21)
Gmax

c2 max − c2 min
c2 = c2 max − t , (22)
Gmax

where Gmax is the maximum iteration number, while t denotes the current iteration num-
ber, and ωmax, ωmin, c1max, c1min, c2max, and c2min are the maximum and minimum values of
each coefficient, respectively. The purpose of the above formula is to ensure the diversity
of the population in the early stage and accelerate the convergence of the population in
the last stage of the algorithm. After repeated tests, the relevant constant parameters in
this study are preset as ωmax = 0.9, ωmin = 0.1, c1max = 0.8, c1min = 0.2, c2max = 0.8, and c2min = 0.2.

5. Cases Study and Discussion

5.1. Case 1
Case 1 is a hopper unit block of a bulk carrier from the literature [18], and the model
is shown in Figure 9. To compress the size of the solution matrix, the same link can be
simplified using the synthetic expression method, and the connection tightness matrix is
shown in Figure 10.

Figure 9. Structure diagram of the block.

Figure 10. Connection tightness of the block.

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 1006 13 of 17

The proposed two-dimensional PSO algorithm is applied in this case, and the initial
parameters are set as follows: the maximum iterations Gmax = 500, the population size P =
50, and the maximum number of subassemblies mmax = 5. The convergence curve of the
objective function obtained is illustrated in Figure 11, from which the maximum value of
the evaluation function reaches 6.176. Correspondingly, the obtained optimal solution is
{SuA1: DP1, FZ1}; {SuA2: DP2, FZ2, TB4}; {SuA3: TB1, FZ3}; {SuA4: TB2, FZ4}; and {SuA5:
TB3, FZ5}. The outcome is confirmed to be consistent with that reported in the literature,
which proves that the proposed method is feasible for the block assembly.

0.7

0.6

0.5
Fitness value

0.4

0.3 Best fitness value

Average fitness value
0.2

0.1
0 100 200 300 400 500
Iteration

Figure 11. Convergence curve of the optimization.

5.2. Case 2
To verify the applicability of the method to a complex product, a double-bottom
block of an ocean engineering vehicle, as shown in Figure 12, is selected in Case 2. Figure
13 introduces the block structure and the distribution of the parts. To compress the size of
the solution matrix, the similar parts are uniformly pre-combined and numbered. The
connection details of the parts are shown in Figure 14.

Figure 12. CAD model of the block.

Figure 13. Structure and parts number of the block.

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 1006 14 of 17

Figure 14. Connected relations of the block.

On this basis, the proposed PSO algorithm is applied in the case and the initial pa-
rameters are set as the maximum iterations Gmax = 2000, the population size P = 50, and the
maximum number of subassemblies mmax = 7. The calculation process is illustrated in Fig-
ure 15, from which the maximum value of the objective function reaches 0.563. The opti-
mal solution is as follows:
SuA1: {P1~P8, P11, P13, P15, P17}; SuA2: {P6, P9, P10, P12, P14, P16, P18, P19}; SuA3:
{P22, P23}; SuA4: {P20, P21, P24~P36}; and SuA5: {P37, P38}. Moreover, P1, P18, P22, P20,
and P37 serve as the base plate in the corresponding subassemblies. The diagram of the
obtained solution is shown in Figure 16. After confirmation, the obtained solution is in
agreement with that designed by the shipyard engineers.

0.6

0.5

0.4
Fitness v alue

0.3

0.2 Best fitness value

Average fitness value
0.1

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000
Iteration

Figure 15. Convergence curve of the algorithm.

Figure 16. The diagram of the optimal solution.

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 1006 15 of 17

For the obtained solution, the generated subassemblies can be assembled conven-
iently in the smaller building stations to reduce the spatial difficulty of the parts assembly
and increase the area of the assembly operation. Then, all the built subassemblies are
transferred to a larger platform for further assembly, in which the turnover rate of the
large capacity assembly station is improved. In addition, the generated solution changes
most welding work from over-head to down-head to simplify the welding work and min-
imize the work period.

5.3. Discussion
The subassembly recognition approach based on the PSO algorithm first requires the
initialization of main factor parameters, thereby imposing a significant impact on the
recognition method in achieving the objective function optimization and generating rea-
sonable recognition results. The main factors involved in the recognition process are the
population size, the maximum iterations, and the quantity range of the subassemblies. As
the parts number increases, the convergence rate of the algorithm decreases, which re-
quires more iterations to search for the optimal solution. Therefore, the pre-combination
of parts with the same properties before the subassembly partition can greatly improve
the computational efficiency of the algorithm.
Theoretically, the heuristic algorithm-based subassembly partition method proves to
be applicable in obtaining the optimal solution, but the difficulty lies in setting a reasona-
ble evaluation function and relevant constraints. Products from different industries are
subjected to different standards, objectives, and constraints in generating subassemblies.
In shipbuilding, weight restrictions, stability requirements, and the feasibility of the as-
sembly path are the major considerations for subassembly partition technology.

6. Conclusions and Future Work

In terms of the subassembly partition for the ship block structure, an automated ap-
proach is proposed based on a two-dimensional PSO algorithm. The advantages of the
developed approach can be revealed as follows: first, the application interface program
can be used to extract the required product assembly information from the CAD system,
which reduces human participation and improves the automatic degree in the subassem-
bly partition process; second, the connection tightness and indirect association, which are
newly raised concepts in the approach, improve the expression rationality of the assembly
relation between the parts; and third, the designed two-dimensional coding method can
enable the PSO algorithm to be more applicable in solving discrete fuzzy clustering opti-
mization problems, especially in realizing subassembly partition.
However, some limitations still exist in the proposed approach. First, the proposed
approach is based on the assumption that parts can only be assembled along the axis. For
blocks with large curvature and an irregular structure, assembly directions outside the
axis need to be considered. Second, as the part number increases, the convergence rate of
the method slows down, and more iterations and computing time to search for the optimal
solution are required.
In fact, it proves unrealistic to have a single subassembly partition scheme due to
several reasons. First, there is no uniform standard and criteria among various methods
to evaluate the generated subassemblies. Second, for complex products, subassembly di-
vision may contain several levels assimilating a tree structure, so subassemblies generated
at various levels are different. Third, different assembly constraints are considered for
products in various industries or of different structure types. Fourth, the evaluation of the
assembly relation between parts has a great influence on the computing results. Fifth, the
production conditions and the assembly capacity impose a great impact on the subassem-
bly partition process.
Consequently, our future work will focus on the study of the assembly constraints of
block building and the evaluation criteria of subassembly division based on the actual
construction conditions and the assembly capacity of the shipyard and the improvement
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 1006 16 of 17

of the proposed algorithm with a combination of other heuristic algorithms or theories,

such as a tabu search, neighborhood search, genetic algorithm, immune algorithm, etc., to
improve the convergence speed of the algorithm and its ability to search for optimal solu-
tions.

Author Contributions: Methodology, B.L.; investigation, Y.L. and J.W.; software, B.L. and R.L.; data
support, R.L.; supervision, S.L.; writing—original draft preparation, B.L; resources, Y.L. and J.W. All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This study was financially supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation
of China (Grant No. 51979034) and in part by the Science and Technology Innovation Foundation of
Dalian (Grant No. 2021JJ12GX025).
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: All the data are contained within the article.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References
1. Jeong, D.; Kim, D.; Choi, T.; Seo, Y. A Process-Based Modeling Method for Describing Production Processes of Ship Block As-
sembly Planning. Processes 2020, 8, 880.
2. Qu, S.; Jiang, Z.; Tao, N. An integrated method for block assembly sequence planning in shipbuilding. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol.
2013, 69, 1123–1135.
3. Kang, M.; Seo, J.; Chung, H. Ship block assembly sequence planning considering productivity and welding deformation. Int. J.
Nav. Archit. Ocean. Eng. 2018, 10, 450–457.
4. Wang, W.; Chen, G.; Lin, Z.; Lai, X. Automated Hierarchical Assembly System Construction in Automobile Body Assembly
Planning. J. Mech. Des. 2005, 127, 347–351.
5. Cao, H.; Mo, R.; Wan, N.; Shang, F.; Li, C.; Zhang, D. A subassembly identification method for truss structures manufacturing
based on community detection. Assem. Autom. 2015, 35, 249–258.
6. Seo, Y.; Sheen, D.; Kim, T. Block assembly planning in shipbuilding using case-based reasoning. Expert Syst. Appl. 2007, 32, 245–
253.
7. Li, C.; Hou, W.; Jafari Navimipour, N. Assembly Sequence Planning Based on Hierarchical Model. Wirel. Commun. Mob. Comput.
2022, 2022, 9461794.
8. Bahubalendruni, M.V.A.R.; Biswal, B.B. A review on assembly sequence generation and its automation. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng.
Part C J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 2015, 230, 824–838.
9. Xing, Y.; Karjalainen, I.; Chen, G.; Lai, X.; Jin, S.; Zhou, J. Assembly sequence planning of automobile body components based
on liaison graph. Assem. Autom. 2007, 27, 157–164.
10. Wang, Y.; Tian, D. A weighted assembly precedence graph for assembly sequence planning. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2015,
83, 99–115.
11. Wang, Y.; Liu, J. Subassembly identification for assembly sequence planning. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2013, 68, 781–793.
12. Homem de Mello, L.S.; Sanderson, A.C. A correct and complete algorithm for the generation of mechanical assembly sequences.
IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 1991, 7, 228–240.
13. Fan, J.; Ye, Y.; Cai, J.M. Multi-level intelligent assembly sequence planning algorithm supporting virtual assembly. In Proceed-
ings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), Hague, The Netherlands 10–13 October
2004; pp. 3494–3499.
14. Li, Y.; Chu, X.; Chu, D.; Liu, Q. An integrated module partition approach for complex products and systems based on weighted
complex networks. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2014, 52, 4608–4622.
15. Trigui, M.; Belhadj, I.; Benamara, A. Disassembly plan approach based on subassembly concept. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2016,
90, 219–231.
16. Gulivindala, A.K.; Bahubalendruni, M.R.; Varupala, S.V.P. A heuristic method with a novel stability concept to perform parallel
assembly sequence planning by subassembly detection. Assem. Autom. 2020, 40, 779–787.
17. Liu, B.; Li, R.; Wang, J.; Liu, Y.; Li, S. Assembly Unit Partition Method for Ship Block based on Assembly Relationship. J.
Huazhong Univ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 47, 118–123.
18. Zhong, Y.; Xue, K.; Shi, D. Assembly unit partitioning for hull structure in shipbuilding. Comput.-Aided Des. 2013, 45, 1630–1638.
19. Kou, X.; Cao, Y.; Wang, Q.; Qiao, H. Sub-assembly recognition algorithm and performance analysis in assembly sequence plan-
ning. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2019, 107, 971–981.
20. Zhang, C.; Zhou, G.; Lu, Q.; Chang, F. Generating significant subassemblies from 3D assembly models for design reuse. Int. J.
Prod. Res. 2018, 56, 4744–4761.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 1006 17 of 17

21. Qiao, L.; Qie, Y.; Zhu, Z.; Zhu, Y.; Zaman, U.K.U.; Anwer, N. An ontology-based modelling and reasoning framework for as-
sembly sequence planning. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2018, 94, 4187–4197.
22. Shi, X.; Tian, X.; Wang, G.; Zhao, D.; Zhang, M. Semantic-based subassembly identification considering non-geometric structure
attributes and assembly process factors. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2020, 110, 439–455.
23. Zhang, L.; Lv, H.; Tan, D.; Xu, F.; Chen, J.; Bao, G.; Cai, S. Adaptive quantum genetic algorithm for task sequence planning of
complex assembly systems. Electron. Lett. 2018, 54, 870–871.
24. Li, M.; Wu, B.; Hu, Y.; Jin, C.; Shi, T. A hybrid assembly sequence planning approach based on discrete particle swarm optimi-
zation and evolutionary direction operation. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2013, 68, 617–630.
25. Ab Rashid, M.F.F. A hybrid Ant-Wolf Algorithm to optimize assembly sequence planning problem. Assem. Autom. 2017, 37,
238–248.
26. Li, X.; Qin, K.; Zeng, B.; Gao, L.; Su, J. Assembly sequence planning based on an improved harmony search algorithm. Int. J.
Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2015, 84, 2367–2380.
27. Li, M.; Wu, B.; Yi, P.; Jin, C.; Hu, Y.; Shi, T. An improved discrete particle swarm optimization algorithm for high-speed trains
assembly sequence planning. Assem. Autom. 2013, 33, 360–373.
28. Yang, Y.; Yang, M.; Shu, L.; Li, S.; Liu, Z. A Novel Parallel Assembly Sequence Planning Method for Complex Products Based
on PSOBC. Math. Probl. Eng. 2020, 2020, 7848329.
29. Taraska, M.; Iwankowicz, R.; Urbanski, T.; Graczyk, T. Review of Assembly Sequence Planning Methods in terms of Their
Applicability in Shipbuilding Processes. Pol. Marit. Res. 2018, 25, 124–133.
30. Tang, J.; Tian, X.; Geng, J. Integrated precision information model of model-based definition. Comput. Integr. Manuf. Syst. 2014,
20, 1827–1833.
31. Li, S.; Tang, D.; Xue, D.; Wang, Q.; Zhu, H. Assembly sequence planning based on structure cells in open design. Adv. Eng.
Inform. 2022, 53, 101685.
32. Zhao-hui, W.; Ji-wang, D.; Ming-hua, Z.; Xiu-min, F. Survey on Flexible Shipbuilding Technologies for Curved Ship-Blocks.
Procedia Eng. 2017, 174, 800–807.
33. Iwankowicz, R.R. An efficient evolutionary method of assembly sequence planning for shipbuilding industry. Assem. Autom.
2016, 36, 60–71.
34. Lei, L.; Di, L.; Pengyu, W.; Honggen, Z. Research on Hull Assembly Process Planning Based on Rule Reasoning. In Proceedings
of the 5th International Conference on Mechanical and Aeronautical Engineering (ICMAE), Sanya, China 12–15 December 2019;
p. 012084.
35. Wang, Y.; Liu, J.H. Chaotic particle swarm optimization for assembly sequence planning. Robot. Comput.-Integr. Manuf. 2010, 26,
212–222.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual au-
thor(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.