This seems like a perfect use case for a robot partner when you consider the danger factor related to the underwater mines coupled with the difficulties humans could have navigating under water. Sounds like a lot of complex thinking went into the design, especially around the computer graphics algorithms and use of sensors.
Actually,this is a lot like those robots you can buy that autonomously sweep your floor. They are just much more sophisticated. Of course, they might want to look at other sensors, like vision. Since the robot can, on the second pass, get close to the hull, that could work.
What the Navy calls HULS resemble some of the existing autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs) and remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) we included in the nautical robots slideshow, especially the Bluefin Robotics hovering autonomous underwater vehicle (HAUV): http://www.designnews.com/author.asp?section_id=1386&doc_id=246206&image_number=13 Since this basic technology has been used by the military for some time, including for mine detection, I wonder why the Navy has decided to invent its own versions?
@Ann- From what I'm reading, the function is the same but the operation is different. The HAUV requires human interaction and the HULS moves underwater and around ships on its own.
I know the Navy struggles with keeping EOD (Explosive Ordnance Disposal) units fully staffed with highly qualified candidates. Mechanizing underwater mine sweeping would require less manpower. And, the Navy could focus more training on the skilled EOD techs for other operations.
Maybe I'm being too literal, but the HAUVs in our nautical robot slideshow http://www.designnews.com/author.asp?section_id=1386&doc_id=246206 are by definition autonomous vehicles (the "A" in HAUV), which means they don 't require human interaction. So I still don't get why the Navy wants to reinvent their own version (and, of course, call it by a different name). Unless it's to have their own algorithm?
I get that this new algorithm takes a pass-by-pass approach (like cutting the lawn) over the old methods of big-image & zoom-in. But I'm not sure I understand the Navy's interest in locating explosive devices on ships which have already sunk. These impose Risk to someone-? And they've been 10 years in development on this-? I think I'm missing the value-added point of this project ,,,,,(?)
@JimT-The Navy's not concerned with previously sunken ships--they worry about currently deployed assets at anchor. Consider Fleet Week in Ft. Lauderdale, FL. A carrier group comes in fairly close to shore. A terrorist with rebreather equipment (no bubbles) could deploy a small limpet mine amongst the propellor/rudder structure. These autonomous robots hopefully can detect this if all other security measures have failed. I imagine that the detection algorithm in typically limited visibility and complex structure is what took 10 years to develop and test.
That makes sense. Thanks for the explanation. I guess I have a hard time "getting" the thought-process of deviant activity. My mind tends to direct thoughts toward constructive, vs. destructive activities. Guess I'd make a poor CIA counter-terrorist!
You make a good point. Some years back we were looking at some sensitivity of mines to metalic objects and some navigation devices to direct divers to mines. The biggest problem was the fact that many mines sence approaching metal as a threat or a target and detonate, so we needed to find one that has a very small or no metal signature. I do not know haw these robots can approach a magnetic mine.
Possibly adding an inductive sensing coil similar to a proximity sensor or a metal detector could possibly be used with crab seeking underwater robots to detect the mines. Sounds like a good Capstone project for an undergraduate engineeering team to research and implement.
Your quite welcome. There's a group of students at ITT Tech buidling a mobile robot using a metal detector kit to locate metal objects for their Capstone Project. Sounds interesting and I look forward to their finish product and results.
I was just thinking about these types of applications this week. It's not as elegant and sexy as underwater mine detection, but how soon before someone designs an autonomous crab trap?
After several seasons of Deadliest Catch, each time I see it on TV I think of the opportunity to design either a self-navigating underwater crab trap, or a self-navigating underwater crab trap deployment/collector. Now that the fishermen of Deadliest Catch can live off of their residuals from the Discovery Channel, I would assume that we have all of the technology required to design a system that:
1) Propels itself along the sea floor
2) Uses sensors to detect high populations of crab
3) Deploys a baited crab trap or simply parks its integrated trap on the sea floor
4) Detects when a predetermined number of crab have entered the trap
5) Collects the filled trap or launches off of the sea floor
6) Navigates back to port autonomously
Not only would it be lucrative, it would also reduce the fatalities in the #1 deadliest job in the US, commercial fishing.
I'll get the drawn butter ready if anyone would like to join me on this project.
Robotics have been used in space exploration, wood manufacturing, and composites defect inspection applications to alleviate endangerment to humans. Why not the last frontier, oceans. Since crabs scour the ocean floors looking for food, making robot replicas to find mines make perfect since.
I think that is good idea william, although i have never watched the deadliest catch i know how dangerous it is. I would help you but i am not an engineer and also i dont know much about how to make projects that require sensers, robots ect.
The company says it anticipates high-definition video for home security and other uses will be the next mature technology integrated into the IoT domain, hence the introduction of its MatrixCam devkit.
Siemens and Georgia Institute of Technology are partnering to address limitations in the current additive manufacturing design-to-production chain in an applied research project as part of the federally backed America Makes program.
Most of the new 3D printers and 3D printing technologies in this crop are breaking some boundaries, whether it's build volume-per-dollar ratios, multimaterials printing techniques, or new materials types.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.