Assignment 2.5 - Blog Activity:
Unmanned Systems Maritime Search and Rescue
Don Moore
UNSY 601 Unmanned
Systems Sensing, Perception, and Processing
Embry Riddle
Aeronautical University
ThunderFish
Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV)
On June 26, 2017, Kraken Sonar Incorporated announced that
they have been awarded their first Robotics Service contract (Rees, 2017). The
contract was issued to conduct underwater search operations for nine (one-eighth
scale replicas) CF-105 Arrow free flight models (Rees,
2017). The final flight design models
were a part of a series of test launched over Lake Ontario from 1954 to 1957 (Rees, 2017). The ThunderFish AUV has the following
specifications (Kraken).
Dimensions (L x W x H)
|
3.50 m x 0.95 m x 0.50 m
|
Hull Design
|
Wet Flood, Syntactic Foam Fairing
|
Hull Frame
|
Titanium
|
Dry Weight
|
675 kg Vehicle / Batteries 750 kg
w/Sensors
|
Wet Weight
|
+5 kg – Positively Boyant
(including 10 kg emergency drop weights)
|
Depth Rating
|
1,000 or 6,000 meters
|
Self Righting
|
Yes
|
Payload Capacity
|
75 kg
|
Motors
|
Twin Brushless DC Thruster Motors
|
External Connections
|
Power, Ethernet, Wi-Fi
|
Data Storage
|
4 TB hot swappable Data Pod
|
The Thunderfish Sea Vision
sensor can connect to AUVs and ROVs and uses optical imaging and laser scanning
to produce highly detailed data. The sensor’s unique colorized laser imagery characterizes
and detects marine growth, cracks, corrosion and other defects. The SeaVision
sensor has the following Specifications (Kraken).
Color
camera
|
Quad VGA (1280 x 960)
|
Field
of view – camera / twin tube system
|
65° x 50° / 80° x 50°
|
Steerable
line lasers
|
Class 3R – Red / Green /
Blue
|
Integrated
light
|
1300 lm LED
|
3D
scan rate (80° x 50°)
|
0.1 Hz – 1 Hz
|
3D
scan performance
|
300 K points / sec
|
Scan
resolution @ 2 m
|
0.1 – 3.0 mm
|
Scan
resolution @ 5 m
|
1.0 – 10.0 mm
|
Working
Range
|
0.5 – 8 m
|
Values
per point
|
X/Y/Z, RGB – Color,
Quality est.
|
Operational
modes
|
Single scan / Continuous
profiling
|
Mounting
Baseline
|
20 – 60 cm
|
Ethernet
|
(2) GB / Daisy Chain
|
Serial
|
(1) RS 485
|
Onboard
storage
|
Up to 2 TB
|
Processing
|
Onboard, real time
|
Real
time capability
|
Live 3D scan preview /
Live video
|
Output
formats
|
xyz, png, jpeg, mp4
|
User
Interfaces
|
Web based, Control / Data
export
|
Proprioceptive and
exteroceptive sensors specifically designed for the maritime
Proprioceptive (no specifics found but may
include the following)
Wet Flood sensor
Propulsion Sensors
Optical
Detector Array
Exteroceptive
AquaPix
MINSAS sonar
Multi-beam
echo sounder
SeaVision 3D underwater laser imaging system
Suggested modification
more successful in maritime search and rescue operations
1.
Optical
detector array, which estimates UUVs orientation, position, and forward
velocity.
2.
Duel
frequency side scan sonar which is used for seabed mapping
3.
An
Arm which could help perform required tasks to include self fixes
4.
Return
to base capability in case of system errors.
5.
Forward
looking sonar which is basically like taking a second as the vessel moves
closer
Maritime unmanned
systems used in conjunction with UAS
Although
Unmanned Surface Vehicles (USV) could act as command and control; I believe
that using a UAS would give a broader view from above. In addition to a broader
view; the UAS could help the UUS by covering a larger distance ant a faster
rate and relay those new positions to the UUV.
Advantages of unmanned
maritime systems over their manned counterparts
1.
Cost-
they do not require life support systems
2.
Depth-
UUVs can dive much lower
3.
Safety-
human life isn’t in danger
More effective sensor
suites on unmanned systems
I believe
that there is not much of a difference when comparing the sensor suites of man
and unmanned systems. I do however believe that the effectiveness when it
concerns the use of the sensor suites is better due to the unmanned system
being able to conduct hours upon hours search operations. That being said; the
manned counterpart would not be able to go as deep and search because humans
need food, rest, and environmental conditioning equipment which cost money and
consumes time and space.
References:
Kraken. (n.d.). KRAKEN ROBOTIK GMBH. Retrieved from
https://krakenrobotik.de/
Rees, C. (2017, July 18). Kraken AUV to Search for Lost
Canadian Test Aircraft. Retrieved fromhttp://www.unmannedsystemstechnology.com/2017/07/kraken-auv-search-lost-canadian-test-aircraft/


Don, very comprehensive blog post. Another advantage that unmanned maritime vehicles have over their manned counterparts is size. A manned vessel would need to be several at least 5-6 feet in width to accommodate humans on board. The unmanned vessel I researched (Bluefin-21) was cylindrical and only 21 inches in width.
ReplyDeleteDon,
ReplyDeleteInteresting post about the Thunderfish and the search for the test models of the CF-105 Arrow. I agree that there is little difference in the sensors carried by manned and unmanned vehicles. However, I think the smaller size of unmanned vehicles enables the vehicle (and its onboard sensors) to access areas that would be too small or shallow for a larger manned vehicle.
Nice blog!
John