Shipbuilding meets digitalization: two years in the SEUS research project

Two intense years in the European research project SEUS are now behind me. Our shared goal: to drive the digitalization of European shipbuilding forward. The need for this remains as pressing as ever. The EU continuously funds research and development projects in the maritime sector to strengthen Europe’s position in global competition – which is vital for survival given the low-wage countries and extensive subsidies in markets outside of Europe.

Although European quality is highly valued in the maritime industry, cost pressures are forcing even this traditional sector to achieve massive efficiency gains and optimize its processes. This is exactly where we at CONTACT came in: as an integral partner in this research and a driving force behind the transformation, our goal was to provide the crucial data backbone required for successful digitalization.

A floating city – and what it has to do with PLM

First, we had to dive deep into the complex requirements and processes of shipbuilding to truly understand them. Through intensive discussions with shipyards, in-depth analyses, and a thorough review of the current state of research, we were able to build a comprehensive foundation of knowledge.

What really impressed us was the meticulous care with which the shipyards in this project process enormous volumes of information, collaborate securely across disciplines, and confidently navigate strict classification requirements. This involves tens of thousands of pages of test reports, calculations, manuals, and technical specifications.

What is being built here is nothing less than a small, self-sustaining city floating across the oceans – a construction process that never fails to fascinate. This is just as true for classic cargo and container vessels as it is for highly specialized cable-laying vessels, complex research ships, or military vessels.

The data backbone: connecting the maritime world

The greatest challenge lies in efficiently managing and transparently controlling the diverse information generated across all disciplines, engineering phases, and construction stages. To address this, we developed a data model specifically tailored to shipbuilding that connects all types of information, including project schedules, CAD models, simulation results, engineering designs, and supplier contracts.

Viewing the ship as a “physically massive and complex system” is crucial here. This means that instead of a few individuals keeping track of the entire vessel, a large number of engineers divide the work into smaller areas of responsibility. Depending on the engineering task and phase, they look at the ship from different angles. For example, while designing the propulsion unit focuses primarily on the architecture of that specific system, designing the ship’s hull centers on spatial layout.

A traditional product structure, which hierarchically organizes parts and assemblies based on how they fit together, cannot meet these demands. There is not one “true” product structure; instead, there are multiple viewpoints: systemic, spatial, production-centric, and module-oriented.
Many shipyards and engineering offices use a centralized system structure, as a large portion of the work involves designing, engineering, and integrating systems of all kinds. In Europe, the “SFI Group System” has established itself as the de facto standard for this purpose. This three-level standard catalog contains 4,080 entries for systems and subsystems that can be found in any type of vessel.

Schematic Diagram of Shipbuilding
CONTACT’s data model expands the standard catalog with additional perspectives.

Our IT architects designed a data model that systematically maps these other perspectives around this standard (for details, see our paper on Zenodo). In early-stage ship design, systems are first roughly dimensioned using placeholders. For example, you might specify that an engine is needed, but not yet which particular model. These placeholders – referred to below as “items” – are organized according to the SFI Group System catalogs.

As development progresses, we link these items to additional structures that form the basis of the other perspectives. Using the previous propulsion example, this could mean selecting a specific engine for that item. In addition to relevant documents, requirements, specifications, and project tasks, a CAD model can also be linked. Our partner Cadmatic enables this through a deep integration of CAD tools.

Although the project is not yet complete, a shipbuilding-specific PLM backbone, the flexible and modular CONTACT Elements platform, and the deep integration with marine CAD software already form a solid foundation for further application-level development. The sheer scale of these projects highlights why this is so critical: if even ten documents, such as specifications, CAD files, analyses, manuals, and test reports, are associated with each of the up to 4,000 possible subsystems, you quickly end up with massive amounts of data that would be uncontrollable without structured management.

On top of that, each of these documents goes through its own lifecycles, reviews, and approvals that must be coordinated both internally and with external partners. Seamless, traceable document management across corporate boundaries is therefore absolutely vital, and thanks to an extension in CONTACT Elements for shipbuilding, it is fully achievable.

To learn more about the background and the partners involved, check out the SEUS Annual Report 2025.

What is Material Data Management?

When someone asks me something about Material Data Management, I always counter by asking what exactly is meant by “material”. This may not be the answer the other person expects at that moment, but it saves us both long minutes of confusion and talking past each other. The reason: not all materials are the same.

About the ambiguity of language

As a Frenchman in Germany, I am used to the fact that ambiguity leads to misunderstandings. Some expressions cannot be translated one-to-one from one language to another – at least not in such a way that it is immediately clear to everyone what is meant. A well-known example is the word “Gemütlichkeit”. The term only exists in German. More insidious, however, are the so-called false friends: word pairs such as “gift” in English and “Gift” in German. They look the same, but the meaning is fundamentally different. Even as an experienced polyglot, one is not protected from this. For example, my French interlocutors may seem irritated when I say that something has “irrité” me, meaning that something has surprised me. However, they understand this to mean that I have got some kind of skin rash out of sheer annoyance.

What can lead to funny and even sometimes slightly embarrassing situations in everyday life often causes inefficiency in the working world. To find examples, we don’t even have to look in an international context: Even within a German-speaking organization, not everyone necessarily speaks the same language. This is not due to the strong dialects in many places, but to the disciplinary nature of the language: Different people with different qualifications or expertise can understand different things by the same word.

And that brings me to the topic of this article. More precisely, to the multilingual mesh and the interdisciplinary ambiguity of the word “material”, whose galactic confusion around the terminology I would like to resolve.

Material is not equal to material

Enterprise software is a lot about managing materials and their data. There are great solutions for this. They are called Materials Management or Materials Data Management or even Master Material Data Management. The names sound very similar and are often used synonymously in practice. Yet they refer to completely different things. Freely following the motto “material is equal to material”, it is overlooked that the word can have a different meaning for different disciplines and things are lumped together that have little to do with each other. Confusion and misunderstanding are guaranteed.

Differences within the disciplines

In production logistics or material requirements planning, a material is a logistical unit, a resource that is needed for some value-adding process. Goods that can be purchased, such as a screw, a flange, a spindle, a tire, and so on. The art of sensibly procuring, moving and storing materials is called “Materialwirtschaft” in German and Materials Management in English.

In the context of product development, materials in this sense do not play a role. Development is not interested in the hood and where it is stored, but only in its description. To put it in the language of information technology: Development defines classes, production logistics manages instances of these classes. However, the concept of material reappears here as well, because in linguistic usage, items, parts, and assemblies are readily called materials. The reason for this is that they become materials in the sense of production logistics at the interface between PLM and ERP. This gives rise to misleading terms such as Material Management or Material Data Management. It would be more correct to speak of Master Data Management in the sense of parts master management.

In engineering (including design and simulation), the word material describes the physical composition of an object in the sense of materials science or materials technology: i.e., whether an object is made of wood, PA66, Inconel, or GFRP, for example. This is obvious. The management of all information about materials and their properties is called Material Data Management. Confusingly, the acronym MDM also stands for Master Data Management, which is not particularly conducive to sharpening the terms.

Different disciplines, different meanings of the word material

Conclusion

The confusion is great. PLM solutions that are tailored to the respective disciplines provide a remedy. They serve the different requirements optimally and thus ensure better collaboration overall. With Master Data Management as a core PDM function, all parts master data can be kept consistent and managed efficiently. Modern Material Data Management stores all information on materials and serves as a reference for the entire product development process. Material Compliance helps document the quality-checked delivery of regulated materials and precursors and ensures that only approved substances are processed. With interfaces to ERP systems, digital materials (in the sense of development) then also easily make the step into the physical world and become materials in the sense of production logistics.

PLM ist mehr als Produktdatenmanagement

Nein, ich habe das Schießpulver nicht erfunden. Ich weiß auch, dass die Überschrift eine Binsenweisheit ist, die eigentlich jeder kennen sollte. Und doch kann man sie nicht oft genug wiederholen, weil viele PLM-Implementierungen nie oder erst mit jahrelanger Verzögerung die Hürde des Produktdatenmanagements (PDM) nehmen und damit ihrem Anspruch, ein PLM-Projekt zu sein, eigentlich nicht gerecht werden. Continue reading “PLM ist mehr als Produktdatenmanagement”