fbpx Why the US Navy has chosen CNR | Scienza in rete

Why the US Navy has chosen CNR

Primary tabs

Read time: 3 mins

The US Navy has been funding for many years a collaboration with CNR scientific research in the field of marine industry. On July 23, at the Marine Technology Research Institute (INSEAN) in Rome, the Admiral Matthew L. Klunder of the US Navy delegation has visited the Italian Institute in order to further strengthen this scientific collaboration.

To understand the reasons behind such cooperation, we have talked with Emilio Campana, the INSEAN director.

"CNR is in a very unique situation compared to other institutions in the world that deal with scientific research in the marine field because – and this concept must be highlighted – the collaboration between the Navy and INSEAN just relates to the field of scientific research. Which means studying how to build better ships that go faster, consume less and are able to better cope with the difficulties," explains Campana.

"In other countries, there are two types of institutions dealing with marine research: on the one hand those that are under the complete control of military forces, as it happens in Spain and France, and on the other hand the commercial institutions, such those operating in Netherlands and Germany. Instead, CNR belongs to a third class: since we are a research institution, we do not obey neither to the dictates of the Italian Navy nor to the will of the market."

“Most of all,” says Campana, “it is the Italian innovation that interests the American Navy. Using a metaphor, the research market is a bit like the meat market, your research must 'smell fresh' to attract customers. If the US Navy funds us, is because CNR is working on the forefront of this field." The Italian research is an excellence in the field of marine industry and there are two main areas where CNR is providing its contribution.

The first area concerns the creation of accurate databases to be used for the experimental evaluation of simulation codes (also used in the so-called "simulation based design") to predict and improve the performance of a vehicle at sea. In other words, the aim is building models that more accurately describe the actual sea conditions, in order to simulate the behavior of a vehicle and to evaluate its strengths and weakness, and consequently improve the initial design. A new project regarding this topic will start in 2015.

The second area concerns the link between the ship structure and the fluid that surrounds it. "Ships are not rigid objects, but are closely related to how they stay in the water: motions, impacts, and the characteristics of the materials and of the structure have to be considered" explains Campana. 

"A new focus in our studies for the CNR, adds Campana “is the fact that the sea is a chaotic environment, and this environment does not follow a deterministic trend, but a stochastic one. We are therefore developing a stochastic approach to the Simulation-Based-Design, both in the evaluation of the performance of the ships and in their own design."

Passenger ships simulations at this level of detail are less relevant to their design, when compared to cargo ships or military ones. "If a passenger ship realizes that weather condition and sea state are not good to sail, she can decide not to sail, in order to avoid ending up in trouble: a military ship cannot choose, since it is more exposed to the chaos of the sea."

Not to mention ships carrying dangerous cargo. "Today there are no precise guidelines if an accident occurs involving a ship carrying toxic substances. CNR is also working on this direction," says Campana. Building better ships is therefore not trivial, and it is not a coincidence that the US Navy wants the best.


Scienza in rete è un giornale senza pubblicità e aperto a tutti per garantire l’indipendenza dell’informazione e il diritto universale alla cittadinanza scientifica. Contribuisci a dar voce alla ricerca sostenendo Scienza in rete. In questo modo, potrai entrare a far parte della nostra comunità e condividere il nostro percorso. Clicca sul pulsante e scegli liberamente quanto donare! Anche una piccola somma è importante. Se vuoi fare una donazione ricorrente, ci consenti di programmare meglio il nostro lavoro e resti comunque libero di interromperla quando credi.


prossimo articolo

Dieci anni dall'Accordo di Parigi, si può fare di più

A 10 anni di distanza dall’Accordo di Parigi, il bicchiere è mezzo pieno o mezzo vuoto? Nell’ultimo decennio sono stati compiuti progressi sostanziali: diversi Paesi hanno avviato una graduale decarbonizzazione, mentre Stati e aziende hanno moltiplicato gli impegni Net Zero. L’Unione Europea ha lanciato il pacchetto “Fit for 55” e fino a tempi recenti procedeva in linea con gli obiettivi fissati. È cresciuta anche l’attenzione agli effetti della crisi climatica sulla salute, riconosciuta come tema centrale già a partire dalla COP27, insieme alla necessità di collegare l’azione per il clima ai benefici locali. Ma le politiche attuali sono ancora insufficienti a raggiungere l’obiettivo di mitigazione dell’Accordo di Parigi, anche volendo tener conto di impegni futuri espressi spesso in modo vago e poco trasparente. In questo articolo gli autori analizzano le principali lacune nell’azione climatica internazionale e le questioni ancora aperte sulla priorità e la fattibilità delle diverse strategie di mitigazione, con un’attenzione specifica ai loro impatti sulla salute. 

Con l’Accordo di Parigi (dicembre 2015), i Paesi si sono impegnati a elaborare i propri piani di riduzione delle emissioni di gas serra, noti come Contributi determinati a livello nazionale (NDC). Nel loro insieme, questi impegni  non bastano a garantire nemmeno l’obiettivo minimo dell’Accordo di Parigi: avere una probabilità del 66% di restare sotto i 2 °C di riscaldamento entro la fine del secolo.