Technical Design Report for Via Maris
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Kennesaw State University Autonomous Underwater Vehicle Team 1 Technical Design Report for Via Maris Blair Sailor Charlie McDermitt Alec Graves Cody Meier Mechanical Software Software Electrical Autonomous Underwater Vehicle Autonomous Underwater Vehicle Autonomous Underwater Vehicle Autonomous Underwater Vehicle Team Team Team Team Woodstock, USA Williamson, USA Alpharetta, USA Austell, USA [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Elizabeth Neleski Avery Hagle Logan Spencer Software Electrical Mechanical Autonomous Underwater Vehicle Autonomous Underwater Vehicle Autonomous Underwater Vehicle Team Team Team Saint Marys, USA Cumming, USA Dunwoody, USA [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Abstract— The Kennesaw State University Autonomous competition. Thus, this year`s vehicle features components Underwater Vehicle (AUV) Team built and designed Via Maris used in Leviathan, as well as new additions [1]. with the intent to modify and enhance it over seasons to come. Initially developed over the course of one year, the AUV’s Achieving these ambitious goals requires the team to motor setup and control systems run in parallel with common make vast improvements and additions over a short time technology being used in aerial drones. This vehicle utilizes a frame. Mechanically, Via Maris requires a mechanical claw, PixHawk flight controller, functioning as both a motor a system to dispense markers, and a torpedo launch controller and gyroscopic sensor. The communications mechanism [1]. From a software standpoint, the AUV between both a dual camera system and aforementioned flight controller govern the movement of the AUV. Successfully needed the necessary vision and motor control requirements creating an autonomous underwater vehicle entails to implement these mechanical systems, as well as a communication and cooperation between team members in a functioning hydrophone system to detect the pingers’ multitude of different disciplines, including, but not limited to frequencies and navigate the competition properly. These software and mechanical engineering. changes enable Via Maris to attempt nearly every challenge presented in the 2018 RoboSub competition. Keywords—autonomy, underwater, vision, design, navigation II. DESIGN CREATIVITY I. COMPETITION STRATEGY At the team’s prior appearance at the 2017 RoboSub A. Mechanical Design competition, the former AUV model, Leviathan, failed to 1) Outer Structure: In order to progress in the current qualify for semifinals by passing through the start gate. Due and future competitions, the outer structure redesign must be to a series of failures in manufacturing, procurement, and modular and durable and provide a rigid pressure vessel.The design oversight, the sub was unable to perform at the level eventual design, shown in Fig. 1, features a frame required for the completion of tasks. With this experience in constructed using 80/20 aluminum extrusions and mind, the mechanical team has set out to create a sub that precision-milled aluminum fixture points. This design will be equipped to accomplish the tasks as set by the supports eight BlueRobotics T200 thrusters and a waterproofed acrylic housing. The realization that the sub Kennesaw State University Autonomous Underwater Vehicle Team 2 lacked a necessary degree of freedom, pitch, prompted the 4) Robotic Arm and Deployment Mechanism: This accommodation of two more thrusters in this iteration. This year’s competition makes use of manipulatable tokens in the modification proved to be one of the greater challenges with form of golf balls, so our manipulator must be designed to its design. Another consideration was weight. The materials retrieve, store, and deposit these objects. Several factors chosen, while durable, tend to be quite heavy, so we had to were selected to determine an effective claw and decrease the design’s weight to be within the acceptable containment unit. The largest design challenge was to have weight range and remain positively buoyant. a manageable margin of error for ball retrieval to limit the required robot positioning accuracy. The claw must effectively store and retrieve the token from an onboard storage system. It must also deposit these tokens accurately in the various scoring areas. Figure 1: Via Maris Design Render 2) Housing: The acrylic housing, the most crucial Figure 2: Via Maris Internal Design Render piece of structure on the sub, protects the sub’s onboard electronics from the sub’s aquatic surroundings. This piece is also a new addition, which was changed because the prior waterproof housing was rated waterproof only up to 3 ft. in depth. The clear acrylic cylinder measures 12 in. in diameter and 24 in. in length. Acrylic is an ideal material for this purpose because it is lightweight enough to minimally counteract its buoyancy and transparent enough to contain cameras. In order to sufficiently waterproof the inside, the team Figure 3: Robotic Arm Design designed two aluminum flanges, each containing two rubber O-rings. The irremovable back end flange contains fourteen Several claw versions were considered with a funnel-like holes cut with a waterjet. These holes will contain design similar to Fig. 3 for their margin of error in retrieving waterproof connectors, as detailed under “External balls from the “Buy Gold Chip” objective. This design was Electronics”. The front flange, conversely, can be removed originally planned with the requirement of catching the balls to access, modify, or remove the inner electronics. Its as they are released from the dispenser, with the attached acrylic component permits a front-facing camera to view the tray now making this obsolete. This design is still effective competition field. The manufacturing for such important, at retrieving balls from the edges of this tray and needs no detailed pieces proved difficult for our regular resources. further modifications. The next requirement is that the arm assembly must have a storage system for the tokens, as 3) Inner Structure: Within the acrylic housing lies the preloaded tokens make this necessary. The most effective inner structure. Its design must accommodate all of the device is a 1.75 in. ID PVC pipe with a very weak spring, sub’s electronic components, allow for ease of access to the which is used to push the balls to the front of the tube. electronics and the onboard computer, act as a sufficient Attached just in front of this tube is a weak spring latch heat sink, keep components from shifting with movement, (Fig. 3) used for keeping the balls in the PVC tube, but and be modular enough to change with any future upgrades. allowing their retrieval. Attached to the front edge of the Partially manufactured from ABS 3D-printed plastic and claw is a pointed arch, which allows the claw to slide past water-jet 6062-T6 aluminum sheet, it balances heat sink the latch on the ball storage tube, both effectively storing capability and durability with a slightly decreased weight. and retrieving balls from it. The biggest challenge that presented itself was the cylindrical shape of the submarine, as seen in Fig. 2, which The arm itself makes use of a heavy duty drawer slide, a is notably more difficult to design than our prior rectangular 300 mm lead screw, and a T-100 motor for rotation of this housing. lead screw. The claw is attached to the end of the drawer Kennesaw State University Autonomous Underwater Vehicle Team 3 slide and is pushed forward by the lead screw assembly as back to our original criteria for the torpedo, we thought the T-100 motor turns. This gives the arm an effective about how finning would best increase stability and travel of 254 mm or 10 in. in front of the submarine. This accuracy. The torpedo needs to consistently reach the allows for camera visibility of the claw in operation, and for intended target, and with experimentation, we arrived at the depositing the tokens into the surface for points. The claw conclusion that the best way to increase accuracy was to has two servos attached; one for rotation of the wrist for ball induce a spin in the torpedo. Much like rifling in firearms, storage, and one for opening and closing the claw itself. the spin keeps the torpedo from straying off course, and as it The 3D printed claw also has gears attached at its pivot is traveling through a much more dense fluid than a bullet, points to allow symmetric movement of the claws and the effect is magnified. With this in mind, the next step was control with a single servo. performing a parametric “what-if” simulation in SolidWorks to find the dimensions that would give us the most torque 5) Torpedo System: For this year’s competition, it was and least drag. Using geometry from the initial design, the decided that torpedoes (Fig. 4) without onboard propulsion radii of the body, nose, and tail, as well as the angle of the would be the most feasible. Unpowered torpedoes can be fin and radius of the top and bottom of the fin, were adjusted smaller, and we can fit more on to the submarine. In and run iteratively through SolidWorks Flow Simulation addition, we can store the compressed air tanks elsewhere Add-on with results shown in Fig. 5 and Fig. 6. This on the submarine which allows for a more space-conscious information was used to determine the most recent design. layout. The primary manufacturing method used for the torpedoes was 3D printing. This has allowed us to design more intricate and aerodynamic systems, allowing for rapid manufacturing, redesigning, and testing, while staying within the allotted budget. The first design for propulsion Figure 5: Flow Simulation Results for Attack Angle Figure 4: Current Torpedo Design involved one 10 oz. paintball tank that would be pressurized to 300 psi, then four tubes move the air through flow restrictors which bring the pressure to 120 psi.