Alternate Solutions

Introduction

This section has been dedicated to the outlining and description of my alternate solutions. Attached are three distinct alternate solutions along with a description providing the specificaitons and capabilities. Furthermore, each solution has elementary criticisms to show which system works best, because no design will be able to attain maximum points in each category, due to the trade-offs that each component of the vehicle structure system has. Nevertheless, each and every design is viable and is able to perform the tasks. Whether each design can perform each task at a high level is another question.

Solution #1 (Catamaran)

The following design's dimensions is: 18 inches long, 12 inches wide, and 10 inches tall. The general structure of the ROV takes the shape of a catamaran that one might find in a sailboat design. The basic design consists of two riggers that are connected by a flat platform on top. The plan is to use alumunim sheeting for the riggers and place a polyethylene board on top. Metal brackets would be used to attach cameras, the manipulator, and thrusters. The concept of the design is one that is compact and allows the ROV to slide over object, which would allow it to hover over objects, especially in the sensor task where the ROV might need to hover over the sounding devices in order for the hydrophone to pick up readings. The small size would be ideal for manuevering in the tunnel. Ultimately, this first solution fits the specifications that could solve the problems.

The following design's dimesion is: 18 inches long, 10 inches wide, and 10 inches high. The generally shape of the design is a snowmobile/skid. It involves a stable platform that is derived from the skid design. Additionally, the skid platform allows the vehicle to manuever over objects. This capability allows the vehicle to position itself in various positions in order to manipulate objects in awkward areas. The slanted front side creates a hydrodynamic approach as it plows through the water. Along with the ballast area, the cameras would be able to be housed on the wall of the front panel. The hydrophone can be attached on the underside of the tank. And to provide maximum thrust, the thruster may be attacked to the sides of the ballast tank as well as the back. Lastly, the design would take on the use of two materials. The skid would either be constructed using PVC piping or polyethylene cut outs. The tank would be constructed of a aluminum body that would be Tig welded to secure the adjoing edges.


Solution #2 (Snow Mobile/Skid)

Solution #3 (Box)

This simple design is reminiscent of many larger ROVs. With a structure that takes on the shape of a rectangular prism, the vehicle is one that is very stable. Additionally, the design is flexible, meaning that it allows for many layouts. In general, it is understood that the manipulator will be placed in the front. Also, thrusters may be placed along the sides, in the back, and placed in a vertical orientation on top. Furthermore, a permanent fixture of the structure is the ballast system. In front of the tank, the camera and hydrophone may be positioned facing the manipulator. Offering key specifications such as stability and flexibility, this design is optimal as a basic design. However, due to its size and layout, this vehicle would have to drive like a car, and therefore take special caution when removing the pins, as well as removing the crustaceans. Again, the inability to "truck" over objects in order to hover over makes it difficult to complete some tasks such as the hyrdophone testing. However, it does offer a design that has had luck in the industry. Regarding luck in the industry, the ROV would be constructed out of a PVC frame using similar to many past designs that have been used at the MATES ROV Competition.

Ultimatlely, the following designs are viable solutions that help solve the situation of completeing tasks, such as retrieving crustaceans, removing pins, and taking hyrdophone readings. Additionally, the designs meet the specifications that have been outlined, which is crucial considering that the specifications are define the crucial elements that are needed to perform at maxiumum performance. In the end, the following designs, although all are viable, need to be reevaluated to determine which is the optimal design. The process of deciding will involve reviewing the specifications, as well as incorporating the systems of my partners (claw and electrical and propulsion). Along with those pieces of input, the design will be sent for evaluation by a professional in the field of marine technology and as well as a packaging engineer. Eventually, with further conclusive research, my team and I will be able to make the right decision with the right knowledge as we weigh out each design against multiple specifications using a specification grid.