Upload
others
View
16
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
iSMART
ProgressReport
DevelopmentoftheNationalNetworkfor
InnovativeShipbuilding,Marine
ResearchandTraining-iSMART
WeiQiu
DepartmentofOceanandNavalArchitecturalEngineering
MemorialUniversity
September10,2016
2
TableofContents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..........................................................................................................3
Highlights...................................................................................................................................4
1 Introduction......................................................................................................................5
1.1 MotivationandBackground............................................................................................5
1.2 ObjectivesofiSMART.........................................................................................................61.3 Approach...............................................................................................................................7
2 OverviewoftheUBCWorkshop.................................................................................8
2.1 ObjectivesoftheUBCWorkshop...................................................................................82.2 ParticipationattheUBCWorkshop..............................................................................9
3 KeyFindingsFromUBCWorkshop........................................................................10
3.1 SummaryofMorningSessionPresentations...........................................................103.2 SpecificRecommendationsMadeByParticipants................................................11
3.2.1 Technologies..................................................................................................................................12
3.2.2 EducationandTraining.............................................................................................................12
3.2.3 StrategyandRoadmapDevelopment..................................................................................13
3.2.4 ModelsforiSMART......................................................................................................................133.2.5 NextSteps........................................................................................................................................14
4 ProposediSMART–AnOutline...............................................................................15
4.1 AProposedModelforiSMART.....................................................................................154.1.1 OverallGoals..................................................................................................................................15
4.1.2 Membership....................................................................................................................................16
4.1.3 Governance.....................................................................................................................................16
4.1.4 Administration..............................................................................................................................16
4.1.5 FinancialSupport.........................................................................................................................164.1.6 iSMARTProjects...........................................................................................................................17
5 TheWayAhead.............................................................................................................18
5.1 ProposedActionPlan......................................................................................................18
AppendixA AgendaofUBCWorkshop........................................................................19
AppendixB ListofParticipants(UBCWorkshop)...................................................20
AppendixC WorkshopBreakoutSessionQuestionnaire.....................................23
AppendixD BreakoutSessionWorksheets...............................................................27
AppendixE BreakoutTeams.........................................................................................33
AppendixF OverviewofCARIC......................................................................................34
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Theworkshops are financially sponsored byNSERC,MemorialUniversity and the
UniversityofBritishColumbia,andsupportedbytheGovernmentofCanada,VARD
Marine, Defence Research and Development Canada, and Genoa Design
International. The workshop at Memorial University is also supported by the
AtlanticCanadaOpportunitiesAgency(ACOA).
Membersof theworkshoporganizingcommitteeareDr.WeiQiu(Chair),Prof. Jon
Mikkelsen(Co-Chair),Dr.NeilPegg,BrianMcShane,DanMcGreer,LeonardPecore
andDr.RogerBasu.
ThepreliminaryreportwaspreparedbyDr.RogerBasuwhoservesasaconsultant
of Memorial University and assists the development of the iSMART National
Network.
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
4
Highlights
• TheiSMARTNationalNetworkisbeingdevelopedto(1)encouragecollaborativeand innovativemarine research and training among Canadian universities/colleges, researchinstitutions, government agencies andthe private sectorthatreflects the needs of the Canadian marine community and supportsCanadiancompetitiveness on the global stage, and to (2) provide contractorswith potential areas for investment that could generate long-term economicbenefits for thebroadermarine sector inCanadawhilehelping the contractorsmeet their obligations under the Industrial and Technological Benefits (ITB)Policy.
• This progress report outlines the findings of the initial workshop held at theUniversityofBritishColumbia(UBC)inVancouveronJuly6,2016.
• Thecurrentstateofthemarinesectorandtechnologicalneedswerepresentedatthe UBC workshop from the perspective of the three stakeholder groups(government,academiaandindustry).
• Seven technology themes were identified as important to the marine sector:greenshiptechnologies,marinesimulation,advancedshipbuildingtechnologies,ship design issues (systems design and modeling), arctic technology, cybersecurity,andautomation&control.
• Thediscussionaroundeducationand trainingat theUBCworkshop focusedonthe incorporating industry experience into the education framework throughwork terms, internships and mentorship for students and early careerprofessionals.
• The CARIC (Consortium for Aerospace Research and Innovation in Canada)modelappearstohavemanyofthefeaturesthatwouldbedesirable in iSMARTandassuchhasbeenusedasabasisforthedevelopmentoftheproposedmodel.The progress report highlights the proposed model, including overall goals,membership,governance,administrationandfinancialsupport.
• The proposed iMSART model and the way forward will be discussed at theworkshoptobeheldatMemorialUniversityonSeptember26,2016.
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
5
1 IntroductionThe subject of this progress report is the development of aNationalNetwork for
Innovative Shipbuilding, Marine Research and Training (iSMART). A staged
approachisbeingfollowedtoseektheinputofstakeholdersinasystematicway,i.e.,
mainlythroughtwofull-dayworkshops.ThefirstworkshopwasheldatUniversity
ofBritishColumbia(UBC)inVancouveronJuly6,2016.Thereportsummarizesthe
objectives,theproceedings,andthekeyoutcomesoftheUBCworkshop.Afollow-
onworkshoptobuildontheaccomplishmentsofthefirstworkshopwillbeheldat
MemorialUniversityofNewfoundland(MUN)inSt.John’sonSeptember26,2016.
Themotivation, thebackground,andtheapproachadoptedinthedevelopmentof
the iSMARTare also discussed. Based on the outcomes of theUBCworkshop, the
proposediSMARTnetworkandthenextstepstobetakentowardsthegoalofafully
functioningnetworkarepresentedinthereport,whichwillbefurtherdiscussedin
theMUNworkshop.
1.1 MotivationandBackgroundCanadaisamaritimenationsurroundedbythreeoceans.Assuchthemarinesector
is particularly important to Canada. This sector comprises several groups of
stakeholders. Among the most important are shipbuilding, ship owners and
operators, suppliers to the marine industry, engineering companies, government
agencies and academia. Examples of sub-sectors of the marine sector include
shipbuilding, offshore structures, industrial marine, in-service support,
specializationsupport,marinemanufacture/fabrication,andoceantechnology.
With the renewal of the Canadian Navy and Coast Guard fleets, expansion of the
northernwater routes of theArctic and emphasis on the environment green ship
technology, the Canadian marine industry is expanding in many directions.
However, at the same time, the sector is fragmented without a common or
collaborativedirection for the futureof the industry as awhole. On the research
front, while high quality research is being conducted at academic and research
institutions across Canada, the research is primarily conducted in isolation not
takingadvantageofthegreatpotentialforpan-Canadiancollaboration.
Themotivation for iSMART stems from thebelief that the relatively smallmarine
sector in Canada, compared to its global competition, would be stronger for the
futurewiththedevelopmentofastrategic allianceto improveactivities including
researchandeducationinCanada.
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
6
iSMART is an attempt toprovide a frameworkwithinwhich collaborative applied
research and development can be conducted with maximum benefit to Canada’s
marine sector. The collaborative effort through iSMART would position the
Canadian marine industry competitively on the global stage. This would be
achievedthroughthefacilitationofhighqualitycoordinatedresearchbyacademia
andindustry,andtheinputintovalueaddededucationandtrainingtoproducehigh
qualityengineersandnavalarchitects.
The National Shipbuilding Strategy (NSS) is of particular interest in the strategic
planofiSMARTbecauseofopportunitiesfortechnologydevelopmentandlong-term
economic benefits for shipbuilding and the broadermarine sectorwithin Canada.
iSMART will make a concerted effort to identify project areas that provide
opportunities for Canadian industry and academia to participate in the supply
chains of multi-national contractors, fulfilling the Industrial and Technological
Benefits (ITB) obligations through technology development and highly qualified
personnel(HQP)training.
WhilethefocusforiSMARTisCanada’smarinesector,asitshouldbe,therewillbe
opportunitiesforCanadianresearchanddevelopmenttofindanaudienceintherest
of theworld. Thiscanbedoneonan informalbasisandalsoamore formalbasis
withcollaborationswithothercountries,orgroupsofcountries.
Similar formalized collaborative ventures have been set up in Canada in other
industriesandhavefoundconsiderablesuccess.Collaborationwiththemandother
international networks are another goal of iSMART. In setting up iSMART the
lessonslearnedfromtheseotherarrangementswillbeapplied.
1.2 ObjectivesofiSMARTInsummary,thelong-termgoaloftheiSMARTNationalNetworkisto:
a. Encourage collaborative and innovativemarine research among Canadianuniversities/colleges,researchinstitutions,governmentagenciesandtheprivate
sectorthat reflects theneedsof theCanadianmarinecommunityandsupports
Canadiancompetitivenessontheglobalstage.
b. To undertake relevant applied research and contribute to the development ofinnovativetechnologies.
c. Improve marine-related educational programs to yield highly-qualifiedgraduatesforemploymentinCanadianindustryandgovernment.
d. Provide contractors with potential areas for investment that could generatelong-term economic benefits for the broader marine sector in Canada while
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
7
helping the contractors meet their obligations under the Industrial and
TechnologicalBenefitsPolicy.
1.3 ApproachInthedevelopmentofiSMART,itwasconsideredimportanttoengagetheCanadian
marine community, seek their input and gain a level of commitment to iSMART.
After discussions with interested parties, the vehicle considered most likely to
succeed was by engaging with the Canadian marine community in a workshop
setting.
Itwas decided to hold twoworkshops for the development of the network. The
primarygoalinthefirstworkshopwastointroducetheconceptwhenmostofthe
audiencehadfewpreconceptionsaboutsuchaninitiative. Afterreceivingthefirst
roundofinput,theproposediSMARTconceptwouldbefurtherrefinedintermsof
identifying themostrelevant technologyareasandproposinganorganizationand
arrangementthatwouldhavethehighestchanceofsuccess.Thefocusofthesecond
workshopwouldbeusedtorefinethesetwoaspectsfurtherandlayoutaplanfor
implementationofiSMART.
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
8
2 OverviewoftheUBCWorkshopThefirstworkshopwasheldatUBCinVancouver,BConJuly6,2016startingat8
amandconcludingat5pm.TheagendafortheworkshopispresentedinAppendix
A.ThesecondworkshopwillbeheldatMUNonSeptember26,2016.
A rudimentary concept for theNationalNetworkwasdevelopedprior to theUBC
workshop and presented at the workshop. The overall objective of the one-day
workshopwastoestablish the technologyareas that theNationalNetworkshould
focus on and also solicit input on how the network should be organized. The
workshopparticipantswere carefully selected tobebroadly representativeof the
Canadian marine community and were drawn, in approximately equal numbers,
fromindustry,academiaandgovernment.
In broad terms, the morning session was devoted to providing a context for the
discussions and ranged from a general overview of current trends in the world
marine industry, how marine technology is developed in different countries, an
overviewofcurrentcapabilitiesinmarinetechnologyofCanadianuniversities,and
finally presentations from industry and government on how the presenters’
organizations currently satisfy their research and training needs. They also
providedinputonhowtheNationalNetworkcouldbeorganized.
The afternoon was divided into two sessions. The first half was devoted to
identifying which marine research themes were considered most relevant for
Canada, and the second half focused on establishing which organizational model
would be most suitable for the National Network and also which was the best
strategytoadoptforsettinguptheNetwork.Ineachcase,breakoutsessionswere
held inwhich groups of five or six participants brainstormed the issues and then
presentedtheirfindingstotheentiremeeting.
2.1 ObjectivesoftheUBCWorkshopTheultimateobjectiveofthetwoworkshopsistodevelopastrategicplantoguide
thegrouptowardstheformationofiSMART.TheobjectivesfortheUBCworkshop
weretwofold:
1. Identifyandprioritize themarine technologyareas thatshouldbe the focusofiSMART
2. EstablishinapreliminarywayhowiSMARTshouldbeorganizedandwhatstepsneedtobefollowedinimplementingiSMART.
ThefocusofthesubsequentMUNworkshopwillberefinetherecommendationsof
theUBCworkshopandtodevelopanimplementationplan.
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
9
2.2 ParticipationattheUBCWorkshopTheparticipantsarelistedinAppendixB.Asignificantmajorityoftheparticipants
plan to be present at the MUN workshop providing a great deal of continuity.
However, there will be some new participants in the MUN workshop who will
providetheirperspectivesoniSMART.
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
10
3 KeyFindingsFromUBCWorkshopThis section summarizes the key findings of the UBC workshop based on the
recommendations, suggestions and thoughts expressed by the participants of the
workshop. Noattempthasbeenmadetobecomprehensivebuttofocusonareas
whereageneralconsensusemergedinthediscussions,principallyinthebreakout
sessions, and the subsequent discussions that occurred in the afternoon sessions.
Similarly key thoughts expressed by presenters in the morning session are also
summarized.
Theprimarymethodforsystematicallyelicitingtheopinionsoftheparticipantswas
byposinga seriesofquestions to theparticipantsof thebreakout sessions; these
questions are reproduced inAppendixC. Thequestionswerepresented in forms
togetherwithpossibleanswers.Thepurposeofthelatterwastoactasacatalystfor
thebrainstormingsessions.Participantswerefreetoaddtheirownanswerstothe
questions.Usingaquantitativescheme,theanswerswererankedintermsoftheir
perceived importance. This approach provided a flexible structure for the
discussions that followed in the open session when each group presented their
recommendations. The results from each breakout session are presented in
Appendices D. Please note the responses that are bolded are items that were
providedwiththeformstoeachoftheteams.Allotherresponseswerecontributed
bytheparticipants.
InSection3.1thekeythoughtsthatweregatheredduringthemorningsessionare
summarized.ThemainresultsofthebreakoutsessionsarepresentedinSection3.2.
3.1 SummaryofMorningSessionPresentationsThe concept of iSMART was introduced. This included an explanation of why
iSMART was needed and how the two workshops were going to help in further
developingtheconcept.
An overview of the marine and offshore industries was provided, and the key
messagewas that themarine industry currently faces challenges associatedwith
general low economic growth in the world economy and also low energy prices.
However,severalothersectorssuchas theoffshorerenewableenergy,cruiseship
and ferry sectors are relatively healthy. Many opportunities exist for performing
researchofvaluetotheCanadianmarineindustryandindeedtotheworldmarine
industry. Some are associatedwith regulatory changeswhile others concern the
effort to make the design, construction and operation of ships and offshore
installationsmoreefficient.
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
11
A presentationwas given focusing on relevant lessons for iSMART gathered from
around the world. Particularly relevant were countries where the countries
concernedwereable tobuildandmaintaina significantmarine technology sector
withworld-classmarineresearch,despiteashrinkingshipbuildingsector. Similar
examples fromCanadawerealso identified. Thiswas followedbyseveralspecific
examplesof initiativesrelevantto iSMART. Theactivitiesoforganizationssuchas
Canada’sNRC,C-CORE,andCanadianAcademyofEngineeringwereoutlined. The
viewofCanadians inregard toCanada’splace in themarineworldwasdiscussed.
ExamplesofinitiativesbroadlywithsimilarintentofiSMARTwerepresented.
A summary of the capability of Canadian universities in marine technology was
presented includingundergraduate and graduate training, researchprograms and
the infrastructure available for conducting marine research. This indicates that
considerableexpertiseresidesinCanadainthissectoralthoughtheneedforbetter
collaborationbetweeninstitutionswasnoted.
This was followed by a series of presentations from the marine community
(engineering companies, a Classification Society, and the Canadian Navy) who
providedtheirperspectives. Themethodsusedbytherespectiveorganizationsto
meettheirresearchneedswereoutlined.Morespecifictopicswerealsodiscussed
including a recent history of the Canadian Navy and their current challenges in
recruiting engineers to meet modern challenges such as cyber safety, and the
problems associated with modern shipbuilding processes. Many of the
presentations also provided their general view of the kinds of arrangement that
performcollaborative research thatmay serve asmodels for iSMART. A rangeof
existing initiativesweredescribed includingCooperativeResearch in Ships (CRS),
Ship Structure Committee (SSC), Naval Ship Research Program (NSRP), NSERC
NationalCentresofExcellence,andJointIndustryProjects(JIPs).
3.2 SpecificRecommendationsMadeByParticipantsAsoutlinedearlier, theafternoonsessionof theworkshopwasdevotedtoseeking
inputintwospecificareas:1)whichtechnologyareasshouldiSMARTfocuson,and
2)howshouldiSMARTbeorganizedtoyieldmaximumresearchbenefit.Thisinput
wassoughtfromtheworkshopviabreakoutsessions.Worksheetsweredeveloped
asameansfororganizinginputfromparticipants.Theseworksheetsandfivemain
questionsarepresentedinAppendixC.Theresponsetoeachquestionispresented
infivechartsinAppendixD.ThebreakoutteamsarepresentedinAppendixE.The
keyresultsandconclusionsfromwhichareprovidedbelow.
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
12
3.2.1 TechnologiesThefirstseventechnologythemesidentifiedinorderofimportanceare(somehave
equalimportancewithotherthemes):
1. Greenshiptechnologies
2. Marinesimulation
3. Advancedshipbuildingtechnologies
4. Shipdesignissuesconcernedwithsystemsdesignandmodeling
5. Arctictechnology
6. Cybersecurity
7. Automationandcontrol
The importance of the themes listed above is consistentwith the opinions of the
broadglobalmarinecommunity.TheappearanceofArctictechnologyisofcoursea
reflectionofCanada’smajorinterestintheArctic.
3.2.2 EducationandTrainingIn order of importance, the following features of education were considered
important
1. Greateruseofworkterms2. Curriculumimprovements3. Mid-careertraining4. Preparing high school students (especially skills inmath, physics and science)
andmiddleschoolawareness/attraction
5. Practicalshipyardexperience
Severalrelatedissueswerecapturedundereachofthefiveitemslistedaboveand
summarizedintheparagraphsbelow:
The first item, greater use of work terms, included interest in fostering
apprenticeships, formal internships and schemes formentoring students and also
earlycareernavalarchitectsandengineers.
Curriculum improvements included a number of related issues such as seeking
innovations ineducationandexperimentingwith the curriculum. Alsounder this
categoryweresubjectssuchasacallforgreaterindustryinvolvement,crossschool
collaboration,andgreateremphasisonbusinessaspectsofthemarineindustrysuch
asincludingsubjectslikeprojectmanagementinthecurriculum.
Mid-career training is considered important particularly in view of rapid
developmentsinmanyaspectsofthemarineindustry.
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
13
An important issue raised was the topic of preparing high school students (in
STEMsubjects).Anassociatedneedisraisingawarenessinevenyoungerstudents
ofengineeringandnavalarchitectureasameansforattractingmorestudentstothe
profession.
Practical shipyard experience was mentioned as an important aspect in the
educationofnavalarchitectsandengineers. Thiscouldberegardedasasubsetof
thefirstiteminthelist.
3.2.3 StrategyandRoadmapDevelopmentThe features considered as key factors in developing a strategy for the
implementationofiSMARTwerelistedbelowinorderofimportance:
1. EmphasizeresearchneedsofCanadianmarineindustry2. Formmulti-universitypartnershipsinCanada3. Create/stateaclearpurposeandtermsofreference4. Technologicalbusinessopportunities5. Actasaclearinghouseforcurrentfundingsources
Thefirsttwoitemswereconsideredbyfarthemostimportant.Betweenthemthey
wereawardedmorethanhalfthepoints.
Emphasize research needs of Canadian marine industry - indicates the
importanceoffocusingontheresearchrequirementsofCanadabeforeconsidering
other broader markets. Under this heading, the point was also made that the
priorityshouldbeappliedresearchanddevelopment.
Form multi-university partnerships in Canada – shows the importance in
partnershipsinmulti-universitysetting/workingcloselywithindustry.
Themeetingalsoconsideredthatorganizersshouldcreate/stateaclearpurpose
andtermsofreference for iSMART. Thiswouldhelp focuseffortsandprovidea
directiontotheactivityneedstosetupandimplementiSMART.
3.2.4 ModelsforiSMARTDuring the morning presentations a number of existing models for collaborative
researchweredescribed.AmongthesearetheCooperativeResearchinShips,Ship
Structure Committee, Naval Ship Research Program, NSERC National Centres of
Excellence, and Joint IndustryProjects, etc.Akey input to thisdiscussionwas the
recommendation to look into existing Canadian collaborative research
arrangementsemployedinotherindustries. Principalamongthosementionedare
CARICandAUTO21.Thelatter,whilesuccessful,hasrecentlywoundupoperations.
TheCARIC (Consortium forAerospaceResearchand Innovation inCanada)model
appears to havemany of the features thatwould be desirable in iSMART. It is a
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
14
collaborative venturewithpartners fromuniversities, the aerospace industry and
governmentmuchlikethearrangementenvisagedforiSMART.
3.2.5 NextStepsThe final set of questions concerned the issues that should be given priority in
initiating the process of setting up iSMART. The actions recommended by the
participantsinorderofpriorityare:
1. Getbuy-infromindustry2. Establishsourcesoffunding3. DevelopmembershipfortheNationalNetwork4. Getbuy-infromgovernment
Ninetypercentofthepointswereawardedtothefouritemslistedabove.
Togetbuy-in fromindustrywas clearly considered themost importantbecause
thereisastronginterestinresearchofmostvaluetoindustry.Identifyingsources
of funds was considered the next most important. In regard to the third item,
developmembership fortheNationalNetwork, is in somesenses restating the
firstobjective.
4 ProposediSMART–AnOutlineAn important issue discussed at the workshop was how the iSMART Network
shouldbeorganized.AsdiscussedunderSection3.4.2,theCARICmodelseemsthe
mostpromising. Studieshavebeen carriedouton theCARICmodel after theUBC
workshop.
TheoverallobjectivesofCARICarebroadlysimilartothoseofiSMART.Theobvious
difference is that CARIC and iSMART serve different industries. Clearly, there are
significantdifferencesbetweenCanada’s aerospaceandmarine industries, and, as
such, it is necessary to take full account of these if CARIC is to be a model for
iSMART. The principal difference is sheer size – Canada is ranked third in the
world’s global civil aircraft production activity, but has a very small presence in
worldshipbuilding.Partlyrelatedtosize,theaerospaceindustryinCanadaappears
to have well developed active trade associations at both national and provincial
levels.
Technology development in the Canadian aerospace sector is older and better
developedthaninitsmarineequivalent.WhileCARIChasonlybeeninoperationfor
littleovertwoyears,ithasawell-establishedantecedentinCRIAQ(Consortiumde
rechercheetd'innovationenaérospatialeauQuébec)whichhasa14-yearhistory.
GiventheyouthofCARIC,itisreasonabletoexpectfurtherevolution.
Itwouldbedesirable todevelop the iSMARTstructurebasedonsuccessfulCARIC
experiences.AsummaryoftheCARICstructureisincludedinAppendixFintermsof
itsorigins,structureandoperations.AnoutlineofaproposedstructureforiSMART
is presented below based loosely on the CARIC model. Note that the proposed
iSMARTstructurewillbeafocusofdiscussionsattheMUNWorkshop.
4.1 AProposedModelforiSMARTThepaththedevelopmentofiSMARTmaytakeisdescribedbelow.
4.1.1 OverallGoalsAnobservationmade at theUBCWorkshopwas that a clear purpose for iSMART
wasrequired.Tentatively,thefollowingmissionissuggested.
The purpose of iSMART is to provide a framework within which to conductcollaborativeandinnovativeresearch,developmentandeducationrelevanttoCanada’smarineindustry.
Amore formalstatementof theabove,bydraftingMissionandVisionStatements,
willbefinalizedattheMUNworkshop.
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
16
4.1.2 MembershipThe membership will need to be structured taking account of the wide range of
organizations that are likely to become members of iSMART. One possible
categorizationsystemcouldbe:
1. Shipyards2. Supplierstothemarineindustry3. Engineering companies (consultants, designers, software companies and
similar)
4. Universitiesandcolleges5. Researchorganizations6. Government7. Associatedcompanies(tradeorganizations,professionalsocieties,etc.)
It isdesirable thatamembership feewillnotberequiredtobecomeamemberof
iSMART.However,thiswillbediscussedattheMUNworkshop.
4.1.3 GovernanceABoardofDirectors,comprisingdirectorsrepresentingthekeystakeholdergroups
(industry, academia and government), will provide leadership of iSMART. Other
committees, such as Technical Committee and Finance Committee, will be set up
when,andif,theyarenecessary.
GeneralgovernanceaspectswillbediscussedattheMUNworkshop.
4.1.4 AdministrationAdministrativeneedswillbemodestinitially,butwillincreaseasiSMARTbeginsto
take shape. The management and administration structure including regional
representativeswillbediscussedattheMUNworkshop.
4.1.5 FinancialSupportA core budget, roughly $5M/year for six years, will be requested from federal
government agencies to support the iSMART network, its activities and projects.
Majorityofthecorebudgetwillbeusedtoleverageindustrialsupportforprojects
important to the marine industry. Additional funding will be sought to support
short-term projects through traditional programs such as NSERC. A plan for
securing financial support for iSMART will be another focus of discussion at the
MUNworkshop.
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
17
4.1.6 iSMARTProjectsIntermsofprojects,at least initiallyamodelsimilartothatusedbyCARICcanbe
used but thiswill likely bemodified to reflect the particular needs of themarine
industry.ItdoesappeartheCARICpracticeofcategorizingprojectsbyTechnology
ReadinessLevel (TRL) (seeAppendixF)mightbeuseful for iSMARTprojects.The
principle for project selection and implementation will be discussed at the MUN
workshop.
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
18
5 TheWayAheadBased on the material presented in Section 4, the primary objective of the MUN
workshop will be to further refine the proposed iSMART model in an effort to
establishiSMARTasafunctioningentity.Thesecondobjectiveistheidentification
of the immediatestepstostart theprocessofsettingup iSMART. Thiswillbethe
basis of a plan and assignment of roles and responsibilities for those who will
implementtheplan.
5.1 ProposedActionPlanIntheimmediateshortterm,corefundingwillbesoughtfromgovernmenttolaunchthe initiative supporting the operational costs and match funding for research
endeavours.Aproposalwillbepreparedwithinthenextthreemonths toseekcorefinancialsupportfromthefederalgovernment.
Strategies forshort,midand long termsareproposedutilizing traditional funding
structures (national and regional funding agencies, large scale funding programs
andindustrymatchingcontributions).
In theshortterm, iSMARTwillpursueresearchprojects, ledbyuniversitiesand incollaboration with industry and government agencies, through various NSERC
programs, such asNSERCEngage,NSERCCREATE,NSERCCollaborativeResearch
Development (CRD). An NSERC CREATE application on research
training/internship, led by universities and in collaboration with interested
industrialpartners,willbesubmittedin2017.
Inthe longterm, iSMARTwillsupportcollaborativeprojectswithitscorefunding,leveragedfundsfromindustry,NSERC,provincialandregionalfundingsources.
Chooseanitem.
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
19
AppendixA AgendaofUBCWorkshop
NationalNetworkforShipbuilding/MarineResearchandTraining
StrategicPreliminaryMeeting
WednesdayJuly6,2016Location:RobertHLeeFamilyBoardroom(secondfloor),RobertH.LeeAlumniCentre
6163UniversityBoulevard,Vancouver,BC
Agenda
8:00-9:15 RegistrationBreakfastMeeting
• Welcomeandroundtableintroductions
• Overviewoftwoworkshopsandtheirobjectives
• IntroductiontotheNationalNetworkConcept
• High-level review of current trends in marine and offshoreindustries
Ledby:JonMikkelsenWeiQiuRogerBasu
9:15-9:45Technology Development in the Marine and Offshore Industries -LessonsLearnedFromAroundtheWorld
Speaker:PeterNoble
9:45-10:00CanadianResearchExperienceandCapacity
• Overviewoftheintellectualandphysicalresearchexperience
• Currentcapabilitiesoftheproposedcollaboratinguniversities
Speaker:WeiQiu
10:00-10.20NetworkingBreak
10:20-11:40Current Industry and Government Marine Research and TrainingNeeds
• Currentmethodsformeetingresearchandtrainingneeds
• Presentandfuturetechnologygaps
• CommentsontheNationalNetworkconcept
Speakers:Several(Several seniorrepresentatives fromindustry and governmenthaveagreedtospeak)
11:50-1:05Lunch with presentation on experience with the US NSRP (NationalShipbuildingResearchProgram)
Speaker:LeonardPecore
1:15-1:45IdentificationofResearch&TrainingPriorities,ChallengesandGapsintheCanadianMarineIndustry
• PrioritizetechnologyandtrainingthatCanadashouldfocuson
- Working session (5minoverview/30 minbreakout groupbrainstorming)
- Breakoutgroups(5or6people/group)
1:45-3:05IdentificationofResearch&TrainingPriorities,ChallengesandGapsintheCanadianMarineIndustry
• Consolidateinputfromgroups
• Summarizeoverallfindings
GroupFacilitator- Presentation by each
breakoutgroup- Large group facilitated
discussion
3:05-3:25NetworkingBreak
3:25-4:00StrategyandRoadmapDevelopment
• Each group to identify the best way to implement the NationalNetwork
• Recommendationsforthenextsteps
GroupFacilitatorWorking session (10-minuteoverview/25-minutegroup)- Breakout groups (5 or
6people/group)
4:00-5:00StrategyandRoadmapDevelopment
• Largegroupfacilitateddiscussion
• Refinetheproposedfollow-upmeetingagenda
• Assignmentofactionitems
GroupFacilitator- Presentation by each
breakoutgroup- Large group facilitated
discussion
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
20
AppendixB ListofParticipants(UBCWorkshop)
LuisAguiar
RogerBasu
RogerBasu&[email protected]
DavidBenoit
ChiefofStaffMaritimeEquipmentProgramManagementRoyalCanadianNavy819-939-3400David.Benoit@forces.gc.ca
RichelleBoit
SeniorAnalyst,StrategicPolicySectorInnovation,Science&[email protected]
JamesBondVP,[email protected]
BradBuckham
AssociateProfessorUniversityofVictoria250-721-6035bbuckham@uvic.ca
ClaudeDaley
OceanandNavalArchitecturalEngineeringMemorialUniversity709-864-8805cdaley@mun.ca
DerekDavis
PrincipalNavalArchitectBMTFleetTechnologyLimited778-679-0075davisinc@telus.net
ZuominDong
Professor/ResearchTeamLeaderHybridElectricMarinePropulsionUniversityofVictoria250-721-8693zdong@uvic.ca
CatherineDutton
Head,SchoolofMarineStudiesMarineInstitute709-778-0361catherine.dutton@mi.mun.ca
MikeFitzpatrick
President&[email protected]
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
21
AndrewGerber
ProfessorandChairDepartmentofMechanicalEngineeringUniversityofNewBrunswick5064534513agerber@unb.ca
RichardGreenwood
RAdmRoyalCanadianNavy–[email protected]
JasonGu
PhilHart(notpresentbutsentwrittencontribution)VicePresidentFleetwayInc.andOceanicConsultingCorp/[email protected]
BillJackson
MarineSectorLeader,CanadaSchneiderElectricCanadaInc.250-661-8444bill.jackson@schneider-electric.com
DarrenLarkins
LawrenceMak
TeamLeader,MarineStructuresNationalResearchCouncilCanada709-772-5350Lawrence.Mak@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca
PaulR.McClelland
BusinessandTechnicalManagerLloyd'[email protected]
DanMcGreer
PrincipalNavalArchitectVardMarineInc.6042163362Dan.McGreer@vard.com
RandallMcGregor
PresidentR.J.McGregor&[email protected]
ChrisMcKesson
DepartmentofMechanicalEngineeringUniversityofBritishColumbia604-827-0622mckesson@mech.ubc.ca
JonMikkelsen
DepartmentofMechanicalEngineeringUniversityofBritishColumbia604-822-2709mikk@mech.ubc.ca
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
22
CharlieNisbet
EngineeringDirectorBMTFleetTechnologyLimited613-85-5433CNisbet@fleetech.com
PeterNoble
PresidentNobleAssociatesInc832-560-1216nobleassociatesllc@gmail.com
LeonardPecore
President&CEOGenoaDesignInternationalLtd.709-368-0669lpecore@genoadesign.com
NeilPegg
ProgramManagerNavalPlatformsDRDC902-426-3100(ext165)[email protected]
WeiQiu
ProfessorandDepartmentHeadOceanandNavalArchitecturalEngineeringMemorialUniversity709-864-4303qiuw@mun.ca
JeffRafuse
Director,EconomicDevelopmentDivisionMinistryofJobs,Tourism,andSkillTraining;[email protected]
JeromeRodriquez
IndustryRelationsManagerIndustryTrainingAuthority778-833-5890jrodriguez@itabc.ca
JoeRousseau
RegionalVicePresident–[email protected]
SherryScully
Director,Learning&OrganizationalDevelopment;LeadResearcher&Chair,MarinePeoplePartnershipInstituteforOceanResearchEnterprise902-880-6587sescully@iore.ca
LynetteSnelgrove
OceanandNavalArchitecturalEngineeringMemorialUniversity709-864-6720lsnelgrove@mun.ca
JonVieth
RickWarner
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
23
AppendixC WorkshopBreakoutSessionQuestionnaire
VancouverWorkshop-July6,2016
BreakoutSession(1:15-1:45pm):
Identification of Research & Training Priorities, Challenges and
GapsintheCanadianMarineIndustry
Thebroadobjectivesofthissessionareto:
a. IdentifythetypesofresearchandtrainingthattheNetworkshouldfocuson.b. IdentifytraininggapsandneedsinCanada1. Whichbroadtechnologiesarethemost importantandwhichalsopresentthebest opportunities for research? Add technologies you consider important. Pleasedistribute25pointsbetweenthelistedtechnologiestoindicatepriority.
Technology Points
AdvancedShipbuildingTechnologies
GreenShipTechnologies
MarineSafety
MarineSimulation
OceanEnergy
AutomationandControl(unmannedships,AUV,etc)
AdvancedMaterials
Please bring the completed table to the open discussion following the breakout
session.Alsonotekeypointsmadeduringthebreakoutsessiondiscussions.
2. What canbe done to improve the education and training of naval architectsand engineers in Canada? Add items you consider important. Please distribute 25points.
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
24
Proposals Points
Formalinternships
Greateruseofworkterms
Earlycareertraining
Mid-careertraining
Curriculumimprovements
Notekeypointsmadeduringthediscussion.
BreakoutSession(3:25-4:00pm):
Strategy&RoadmapDevelopment
Theobjectivesofthissessionareto
a. Identify the National Network organization that is most likely to deliver thedesiredoutcomesinregardtomarineresearchandtraining
b. Outlinethenecessarystepsthatneedtobetakentoattainthepreviousobjective
1. Whatfeatures inanoverallstrategyaredesirable inmeetingthegoalsoftheNationalNetwork? Pleaseaddtothe listofStrategicApproaches. Distribute25pointsbetweenthedifferentapproachesaccordingtopriority.
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
25
StrategicApproaches Point
sFocusonneedsofCanadianshipbuilding
Formmulti-universitypartnershipsinCanada
Formmulti-universitypartnershipsinternationally
EmphasizeresearchneedsofCanadianindustry
Setprioritiesbasedoninternationaltechnologypriorities
2. What models for the National Network would work best in your opinion?Propose an entirely new model as necessary. Please distribute 25 pointsbetweenthemodelstoindicatepriority.
National Network
Models
ProposedModification Point
sJIPs
CRS
SSC
ProposedNNmodel
ModifiedCRS
ModifiedSSC
ModifiedNNModel
3. What are themost important next steps in setting up theNationalNetwork.Propose other steps you consider important. Please distribute 25 pointsbetweenthestepstoindicatepriority.
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
26
NextSteps Points
Getbuy-infromindustry
Getbuy-infromacademia
Getbuy-infromgovernment
Establishsourcesoffunding
DevelopmembershipfortheNationalNetwork
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
27
AppendixD BreakoutSessionWorksheets
The spreadsheets presented in the following pages correspond to the questions
showninthequestionnairesinAppendixB.
Thereare twoquestionsunder theheading “IdentificationofResearch&Training
Priorities, Challenges and Gaps in the Canadian Marine Industry” and three
questionsundertheheading“Strategy&RoadmapDevelopment”
Thefivespreadsheetssummarizetheresponsefromthefivebreakoutgroups.The
resultshavebeenaddedandtheitemsprioritized.Inseveralinstancesthebreakout
groups have identified issues that were not prepopulated in the spreadsheets.
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
28
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
29
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
30
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
31
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
32
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
33
AppendixE BreakoutTeams
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
34
AppendixF OverviewofCARICCARIC(ConsortiumforAerospaceResearchandInnovationinCanada)isrelatively
newandstartedoperationinApril2014.ItwasajointinitiativeoftheConsortium
for Research and Innovation in Aerospace in Québec (CRIAQ) and the Aerospace
IndustriesAssociationofCanada (AIAC). CARIC ismodeledonCRIAQwhichwas
foundedin2002.CARICisintendedtobeanationalorganizationwhereasCRIAQis
a provincial organization. CRIAQ’s partner in the CARIQ initiative is AIAC, a very
activetradeorganizationrepresentingtheCanadianaerospaceindustry.
The key features of the organizational and operational structure of CARIC are
summarizedbelowintermsof:
1. Overallgoals2. Membership3. Governance4. Administration5. Finances6. Initiationandexecutionofprojects
Eachaspectlistedabovelistisbrieflydescribedbelow:
F.1 OverallgoalsAsstatedon theCARICwebsite themission,visionandvaluesof theorganization
areasfollows:
Mission
• Generateandfosterdialogueandcollaborationbetweenplayersintheaerospace
industry.
• Provide financial support to launch R&D projects in partnership with these
players.
VisionStrategic, financial and administrative support encourages the industry and
researchcommunitytoworktogethertoachieveexcellenceandcompeteonaglobal
scale.
CARIC, provincial associations and member need to collaborate to give the
aerospace industry a regional reputation, a strong Canada-wide presence and
internationalmarketprominence.
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
35
ValuesCARIC has chosen to focus its governance, growth and funded projects on the
followingsixvalues:
• Collaboration
• Innovation
• Creativity
• Credibility
• Agility
• Result-oriented
F.2 MembershipThemembershipofCARICisdividedintoanumberofcategories:
OriginalEquipmentManufacturers(OEMs)Thesearemajorplayersandareinmostcasesexclusivelyintheaerospacebusiness.
Therearefourcompaniesunderthiscategory:BellHelicopter,Bombardier,CAEand
Pratt&WhitneyCanada.
IntermediateCompaniesAmixoflargecompaniesinwhichaerospaceisjustpartoftheirbusinessactivity,
andsmallerorganizationswhereaerospaceistheirprimarybusiness
SmallandMediumEnterprises(SMEs)Arangeofsmallercompaniesmostlyserviceproviderstoaerospace.Currently
thereare58membersunderthiscategory.
Universities&CollegesVirtuallyallCanadianuniversitiesandcollegeswithaerospaceoralliedprograms
aremembers.
ResearchOrganizationsMostlygovernmentresearchagenciesandquasi-governmentorganizations
AssociatedMembersMostlyindustrytradeorganizations
F.3 GovernanceThe highest governing body of CARIC is the Board of Directors drawn from the
membership. Thesenior-mostpositionsarethePresident, theVice-ChairIndustry
andaVice-ChairUniversity.Thereareseveralothercommittees:
• ExecutiveCommittee
• ScientificCommittee
ProgressReportonDevelopmentofiSMART September2016
36
• FinanceCommittee
• CodeofConductCommittee
• ConflictsofInterestPolicyCommittee.
F.4 AdministrationA President/CEO supported by a Vice-President, four Regional Directors and two
otherDirectorsheadsthemanagementteamofCARIC.Therearesixadministrative
staffwholookafter,amongthings,finances,projectsandcommunications.
F.5 FinancesInregardtofinancetheinitialoperatingbudgetforCARICwasreportedtobe$3.75
million per year. Once fully operational it was anticipated that the budget for
collaborativeresearchprojectscouldreachmorethan$20millionperyear.
F.6 InitiationandexecutionofprojectsThe initiation and execution of projects appears to follow standard practice for
typicalresearchandtechnologydevelopmentprojects. Akeyconceptemployedin
evaluating and financing CARIC projects is thematurity of the technology that is
beingdevelopedintheprojectconcerned.Thematuritylevelisoftenexpressedin
termsoftheso-calledTechnologyReadinessLevel(TRL)1.
CARIC appears to divide projects in two categories – low TRL and medium TRL
projects.Fundingarrangementsdifferasdoprojectapprovalprocedures.
1A TRL score is used to represent the level of maturity of a particular technology
development. There are several scales for assigningmaturity but a common one ranges
from“0”to“9”,thefirstrepresentingtechnologydevelopmentattheearlieststages.Atthe
otherendofthescaleascoreof“9”representstechnologiesthatarereadyforincorporation
inproduction.