ismart - progress report 1 - v3.0cismart.ca/.../09/ismart-progress-report-1-v3.0.pdf · progress...

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.


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.


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.


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


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.


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.


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.


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.


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.


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.


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


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.


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.


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.


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.


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


20

AppendixB ListofParticipants(UBCWorkshop)

LuisAguiar

[email protected]

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]


21

AndrewGerber

ProfessorandChairDepartmentofMechanicalEngineeringUniversityofNewBrunswick5064534513agerber@unb.ca

RichardGreenwood

RAdmRoyalCanadianNavy–[email protected]

JasonGu

[email protected]

PhilHart(notpresentbutsentwrittencontribution)VicePresidentFleetwayInc.andOceanicConsultingCorp/[email protected]

BillJackson

MarineSectorLeader,CanadaSchneiderElectricCanadaInc.250-661-8444bill.jackson@schneider-electric.com

DarrenLarkins

[email protected]

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


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

[email protected]

RickWarner

[email protected]


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.


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.


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.


26

NextSteps Points

Getbuy-infromindustry

Getbuy-infromacademia

Getbuy-infromgovernment

Establishsourcesoffunding

DevelopmembershipfortheNationalNetwork


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.


28


29


30


31


32


33

AppendixE BreakoutTeams


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.


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


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.

ismart - progress report 1 - v3.0cismart.ca/.../09/ismart-progress-report-1-v3.0.pdf · progress...

Documents