Testing

Introduction

On April 25th, 2009, an underwater remote operated vehicle (UROV) designed by Thomas Ferrara, Nicole Depasquale, and Kevin Iannacone, over the course of nine months, was tested (officially) at the Massachusetts Maritime Academy in Buzzards Bay, Massachusetts. The UROV was expected to be fully functional in a freshly chlorinated pool up to fifteen feet. At the complete depth (fifteen feet) the UROV was expected to: maintain a constant slightly positive buoyancy, hold a watertight seal in its framework, be able to propel itself (using its blower motors) up/down and left/right, have a constant and uninterrupted flow of electricity, and using the arm system complete the tasks outline by the 2009 Marine Advanced Technology Education Competition guidelines.

Testing Procedure

Background: Explanation of Procedures

In order to reach a point where the UROV could be completely tested, a years worth of work was established. By April 25th, 2009, three students, five experts (mentors), and two instructors put time into the 2009 UROV design and construction.
The testing was broken up into different phases over the course of a week. Throughout the testing procedures, the above mentioned people were present. Thomas Ferrara led the test for the arm system, Kevin Iannacone the hull and propulsion, and Nicole Depasquale the electrical and control system. In order to completely asses the UROV, all aspects of the design were tested. This included the safety, structure, electrical, buoyancy, propulsion, and mission tasks.
The final test was completed on April 25th, 2009 during the actual 2009 MATE Northeast Region UROV Competition. Prior to this, the MAST team acquired the usage of a pool to complete the testing of the UROV. Initially, the team made sure that the UROV was safe. A system check was completed to assure that all components (motors, cameras) of the UROV were working. Third, Nicole Depasquale looked over all the wire connections to make sure that they were all closed and secure. The UROV was then placed in the water. Kevin Iannacone evaluated the buoyancy of the system. To check stability, the team placed the UROV in different positions and observed whether or not it reassumed its original position (upwards and facing forwards). The electrical system was then connected and the UROVs motors and cameras were checked. The maneuverability of the UROV was assessed based on the fact that it could move around the pool easily. The cameras were tested to check whether or not the visual aid they provided was sufficient or not.
The arm and claw system was difficult to check during the practice run due to the fact that there was no submarine. However, Thomas Ferrara did check the stability and connection of the arm system. In the pool, the team controlled the UROV to target objects. The UROV than hooked selected objects with the hooks and proceeded to move them. During the competition, the team would finish its test of the claw system (once there was a submarine to test on).
With all aspects (those that could be tested in a practice run) of the UROV tested, the team “played” with the vehicle in order to prepare for the upcoming competition. At the competition the UROV was submerged to fifteen feet to complete the mission tasks. The mission tasks that involved the arm/claw system included Mission Task #2, #3, and #4. The competition was supervised and judge by experts in the field of science, robotics, and engineering.
The following report is based upon the procedures that were used for the abovementioned testing processes. The following document will report the data that was found and will make a conclusion about the overall success of the UROV and arm/claw system.

Testing Procedure

The testing procedure was broken up into different phases in order to test each part sufficiently. The following is a breakdown of how the testing was planned:
• At Home Testing (Phases I-V are not arm/claw specific but are necessary to make sure all other components are in working condition)
o Phase I: Safety
o Phase II: Structure
o Phase III: Electrical
o Phase IV: Buoyancy and Stability
o Phase V: Propulsion
o Phase VI: Arm/Claw
• Part A: Sturdiness
• Part B: Strength
• Part C: Overall Effect
• Pre-Competition Testing (Phases I-V are not arm/claw specific but are necessary to make sure all other components are in working condition)
o Phases I-VI
o Basic Pool Practice; working with movement, tether and cameras
• Competition Testing
o Run-Through of competition; completion of Mission Tasks #1-4
o Assessment of competition and successes/failures
• Post Competition Testing
o Arm/Claw
• Parts A-C

At each of the phase and part, Thomas Ferrara has made observations. These
observations will be compiled in the following document in the form of data.





Testing Procedures

The following is a brief outline discussing what should be checked for the non-claw components of the UROV. The outline is not the formal test for the arm/claw but is necessary in order to confirm that the UROV is in working condition.

Phase I (Safety):
• Check that all members testing are ready for procedures
o Briefed on testing
o Wearing proper clothing
o Wearing eye protection
• Check that all electrical connections are closed
• Check for working fuse/correct sized fuse
• Check that battery is in working condition and in a safe location
o Check that connections to battery is secure
• Check testing area for any unsafe conditions (Wetness, loose wires, tripping hazards, etc.)
Phase II (Structure):
• Check PVC frame for secure connections
o Look at each joint individually
• Check PVC Arm for secure connection
o Look at downward facing prongs and outward facing forks to see if they are glued tightly to PVC frame
• Check to see that PVC frame and arm stay connected once wet
o Place ROV into water and check connections
Phase III (Electrical):
• Visually check all connections of wires (i.e. wire-to-wire, wire-to-motor, wire-to-camera, wire-to-control box)
• Check that all motors are running continuously (consistent flow of electricity with no gaps in power)
o Using control box flip on and off all switches (up and down, forward and backwards)
• Check that all cameras are running continuously (consistent flow of electricity with no gaps in power)
o Using monitors, hook cameras up to the video input and visually check for signs that the cameras are working or not working
• Check that the electrical systems works while submerged
o Place ROV in the water and run all motors and cameras like in previous steps.
Phase IV (Buoyancy):
• Check that the ROV is slightly positively buoyant
o ROV sits beneath the surface without moving up or down
o ROV is stable and sits straight (does not flip forwards/backwards or left/right)
Phase V (Movement/Practice Pool Test):
• Check that the ROV, when in water can move up/down and left and right
• Check that the ROV, when in water can overcome the buoyancy when moving
o Slightly positive buoyancy should be sustained at all depths of the pool (ROV should tend to go upwards at a very slow rate of speed; ROV should be able to stay at chosen depth using downward propulsion)
• Check usage of camera/controls/propulsion
o ROV should be able to work as a unit
o Place ROV in water, control and move ROV using only the cameras/monitors as visual aids
• Using the cameras find targeted object in pool
• Check for any interferences in motion
o Check for tether interference (ROV should be able to move freely in the pool; no entanglement or pulling)
o Electric flow to ROV should be consistent and should not prevent the ROV from performing

Once the testing procedures are completed for the other UROV components, the
formal testing procedures for the arm/claw can be conducted. The following is a numbered guide diagramming the steps that need to be taken for the arm/claw test to be successful.
1. Test sturdiness of claw
a. Place UROV on ground
b. Hold on to one of the forks or prongs
c. Manually push/pull to check for attachment strength
i. Note any weak/loose connections between the forks or prongs and the UROVs frame
d. Place UROV into water
e. Repeat Steps 1b-1c
2. Test strength of claw
a. Place UROV on ground
b. Test outward forks
i. Attach weights (steel shot canisters with premeasured weights: 50 g (1/2 N), 100g (1 N), 150g (1.5 N), 200g (2 N), 300g (3 N), 400g (4 N))
ii. Note at each weight any changes in the sturdiness of the claw
c. Test strength of downward prongs (test torque)
i. Place 2” x 4” wood in between the downward prongs and turn UROV (using hands) clockwise and counter-clockwise
ii. Note any changes in the sturdiness of downward prongs
3. Test overall effect of arm/claw system on UROV
a. Place UROV into water
b. Note the stability of the UROV (whether the UROV turns backwards/forwards or left/right)
c. Alter buoyancy, using steel shot canisters and capped PVC to adjust stability and buoyancy of UROV
4. Test the UROV in the hotel pool
a. Place UROV in the pool
b. Check to see how the buoyancy is working (adjust if needed)
c. Check to see if the UROV is stable in the water
d. Locate target objects under water
e. Using only cameras as visual aids, hook objects with outward facing forks
5. Test UROV at the competition
a. Place UROV into water
b. Go down complete depth of pool (15 ft.)
c. Complete Mission Task # 1: Hatch and ELSS Pods
d. Complete Mission Task # 2: Mating
e. Complete Mission Task # 3: Air valve and airline
f. Bring UROV to surface
g. Assess the performance of the UROV and the arm/claw system

Expectation of Procedures and Product

The testing procedures were expected to check that all aspects of the UROV and arm/claw system were completed and fully functional. The testing procedures were also used to prepare the vehicle and the team for the competition. By testing the UROV in advance, the team was able to resolve any issues that came up. The following is a list of expectations created for the arm/claw system.
• Be able to complete the mission tasks outlined by the 2009 MATE Northeast Region ROV Competition given that all other components of the UROV (motors, cameras, electric, buoyancy, frame, etc.)
• Be able to hold 2 N or more on the front forks without causing a break or weakness in the arm/claw structure
• Be able to endure 2 N of torque on the downward facing prongs without causing a break or weakness in the arm/claw structure
• Be able to submerge under water and not cause any problems for the UROV (i.e. problems with movement, buoyancy, stability)

Testing Results

The following results of the testing will be broken down by stages and phases that they were completed in. The testing that was done on different dates (specifically the Stage #1 (At-Home) Testing) will be compiled into one group.

Testing Stage #1 (At-Home Testing): Description

The Stage #1 Testing, which occurred at home took place over a course of two days. The testing focused on safety components, the buoyancy of the UROV, the electrical circuitry, and the arm/claw. The non-arm/claw components were only tested briefly to insure that they were in working condition. This report is not made to focus on the results of those pieces, rather to look on the results of the arm/claw. In order to test these four factors, Thomas Ferrara and Kevin Iannacone placed the UROV in a small water container. Before the UROV hit the water, the team members checked that the 25 amp fuse was in working condition. Also the team made sure that all wire-to-wire, wire-to-UROV connections were secure and closed. These procedures were completed to check the safety of the UROV. Once the UROV was placed in the water, the team members checked the entire framework for secure connections of PVC and elbows. The team also completed a sturdiness test for the arm/claw system. The arm/claw system was very sturdy and did not move upon manual test. The team concluded that the PVC primer and the PVC cement were strong enough, even underwater, to hold the pieces together. The UROV also was initially very stable and slightly positively buoyant, as designed. The UROV did not tilt to the front/back or the left/right. This observation meant that the arm/claw system did not effect the stability of the UROV. The team, however, observed that the water was very cold. The temperature of the water is important to note because it made the water denser, therefore making the UROV more buoyant.


Testing Stage #1 (At-Home Testing): Arm/Claw Results

• The arm/claw system passed the sturdiness test. When pushed and pulled, each pair of forks and prongs did not become weaker or loose. The arm/claw system was successful in the sturdiness test both on dry ground and in the water. Due to the testing done in the primary stage (at-home) the arm/claw system was deemed sturdy enough for the competition.
• The arm/claw system passed the overall effect test. When placed inside of the water the UROV had great buoyancy and stability. Because the UROV was not affected by the arm/claw system in a negative way it passed the test. The temperature, and therefore, the density of the water were noted. Due to the testing done in the primary stage (at-home) the arm/claw system was considered to have a positive effect on the UROV and ready for competition.

Testing Stage #2 (Pre-Competition Testing): Description

The second stage testing took place the night prior to the competition in the Knights Inn, where the UROV team stayed. The testing done that the pre-competition stage focused on all parts of the UROV. Nicole Depasquale and Kevin Iannacone performed their own formal tests on their respective parts. Thomas Ferrara, used the results from the other team members tests to confirm that all other components were in working condition. Knowing that the UROV was working in all facets, Thomas Ferrara was able to test the arm/claw once again. The UROV was checked for safety issues before being placed in the water. While on dry ground the UROVs framework and the arm/claw system was checked to make sure that all pieces were securely fitted. All electrical components were switch on and off. Once the UROV was placed in the water (the water had a high temperature, therefore the buoyancy of the UROV was not on target), the team made sure that the UROV was stable and buoyant. The UROV was then driven around the surface and base of the pool, using the cameras as the only visual aides to the pilot. While in the water, the team performed similar sturdiness tests on the UROV and arm/claw system. While underwater the UROV was used to target an object. Once the UROV found the object it was controlled towards it, and the pilot attempted to hook it (using the arm/claw system). For the remainder of the night, the MAST UROV team practiced with all aspects of the UROV in order to prepare for the competition.

Testing Stage #2 (Pre-Competition Testing): Arm/Claw Results

• The arm/claw system passed the sturdiness test. When pushed and pulled, each pair of forks and prongs did not become weaker or loose. The arm/claw system was successful in the sturdiness test both on dry ground and in the water. Due to the testing done in the secondary stage (Pre-Competition Testing) the arm/claw system was deemed sturdy enough for the competition.
• The arm/claw system passed a partial strength test. When propelled under water to find the target object, the UROVs arm/claw system was able to hook the object. Due to the weight of the object underwater in addition to some buoyancy issues, the UROV did not lift the object off of the base of the pool. Due to the testing done in the secondary stage (Pre-Competition Testing) it was decided that further testing on the strength would have to be performed to consider the arm/claw successful in that area.
• The arm/claw system passed the overall effect test. Although the UROV was initially not stable and inconsistently buoyant, the team understood that this was partially due to the change in water density. After corrected the buoyancy, the arm/claw system had only a positive effect on the UROV. Due to the testing done in the secondary stage (Pre-Competition Testing) the arm/claw system was considered to have a positive effect on the UROV and therefore ready for the competition.

Testing Stage #3 (Competition Testing): Description

On April 25th, 2009 the Team MAST UROV competed at the 2009 Marine Advanced Technology Education Northeast Region UROV Competition. The event took place at the Massachusetts Maritime Academy in Buzzards Bay, Massachusetts. At the competition all Phase I-IV checks were made. These were informal tests to confirm that the UROV was ready for the competition. When put into the pool, the UROV propelled downward to a depth of 15 ft. At this depth the UROV completed the first task, check for damage points (this task required the use of the electrical system and the cameras). The UROV then used its downward facing prongs to rotate the hatch open. Once the hatch was rotated to an open position, it had hooked and then flipped open. During this process, a camera (the claw camera) leaked and went completely black. This prevented the team’s pilot from being able to see where the UROV arm/claw system was. The team tried to blindly complete tasks 2-4. According to the Kevin Iannacone, the UROV was very close to hooking an ELSS pod and mating, despite the lack of camera. Once the UROV arm/claw system was rendered useless without the camera, the pilot propelled the UROV to the surface and placed the air hose into the forks. The UROV was able to propel downwards with the air hose, therefore completing part of the third mission.

Testing Stage #3 (Competition Testing): Arm/Claw Results

• The arm/claw system was able to rotate the hatch open. This execution required the arm/claw system to handle 2 N of torque. Due to the testing done in the tertiary stage (Competition Testing) the arm/claw system was deemed successful in the torque part of the strength test.
• The arm/claw system was able to carry the air hose from the surface of the pool to the bottom of the pool (15 ft.) Due to the testing done in the tertiary stage (Competition Testing) the arm/claw system was deemed successful in this part of the competition.
• The arm/claw system was not able to open the hatch, pick up an ELSS pod, turn the air valve, open the door, or mate. Due to the testing done in the tertiary stage (Competition Testing) the arm/claw system was deemed unsuccessful in the mission tasks.


Testing Stage #4 (Post-Competition Testing): Description

The final testing stage was completed in the first week of May after the competition was completed. This stage was done so that the arm/claw in its entirety could be tested (especially in the strength test). Due to the fact that the UROV lost its ability to see underwater during the mission, this post test would serve as a check for the requirements and expectations of the claw.
The final test began with a sturdiness test. Thomas Ferrara, using his own strength, pried at all connections between the UROV and the arm/claw system. He then checked for any new weaknesses. After the sturdiness test, none of the connections were compromised. After the sturdiness test was completed, a strength test was performed. Thomas Ferrara tied a string around each of the front-facing claws. Each string had a loop at the end of it. Thomas Ferrara then placed weights on the loops. The weights were: 50 g (1/2 N), 100g (1 N), 150g (1.5 N), 200g (2 N), 300g (3 N), 400g (4 N)). The UROV arm/claw system was able to hold 4 N on each claw. This weight is twice the weight of the MATE specifications. Thomas Ferrara then took a two foot length of 2” x 4” piece of wood. It was placed in the front of the left downward facing prong and behind the right downward facing prong. The piece of wood was pushed and pulled, with an unknown amount of force (greater than 4 N; .899 pounds). The UROV was able to sustain this without any new weaknesses. The two tests concluded the final stage of testing.

Testing Stage #4 (Post-Competition Testing): Arm/Claw Results
• The arm/claw system was able to sustain its structure and strength throughout the sturdiness test. Due to the testing done in the quandary stage (Post-Competition Testing), the arm/claw system was deemed to be sturdy enough.
• The arm/claw system was able to hold a weight of 400 grams. This weight is twice the required weight. There were no weaknesses found after the test was completed. Due to the testing done in the quandary stage (Post-Competition Stage), the arm/claw system was deemed strong enough.
• The arm/claw system was able to sustain a torque of at least 4 N. This torque was greater than that received in the competition. Due to the testing done in the quandary stage (Post-Competition Stage), the arm/claw system was deemed strong enough.

*Testing Note: During one of the tests, the left-side forward-facing fork was accidentally kicked and broken. The broken claw was temporarily repaired. In no way was this claw broken as a part of testing procedures.*
Summary

Since the beginning of June, Thomas Ferrara, Kevin Iannacone, and Nicole Depasquale have worked, with the help of mentors and instructors, in school and at home on a UROV that would be ready to compete at the 2009 MATE Competition on April 25th, 2009. Once the UROV was design, constructed and tweaked, the team went ahead and tested it to see if it would be ready for the competition in addition to meet the expectations.
To test the arm/claw system, Thomas Ferrara went through several stages, before, during, and after the competition to check whether or not the arm/claw was successful. During all stages, all components of the UROV were check. The arm/claw system was checked for sturdiness, strength and an overall effect on the UROV. In all non-competition tests, the arm/claw passed. During the competition, an unexpected error occurred (a manufactured camera leaked and then went out) this made the testing during the competition impossible to complete.
Overall, the arm/claw system of the UROV was tested four times over the course of two weeks. All aspects of the design were checked. The arm/claw system met all of expectations.
The score sheet from the 2209 MATE Northeast Region UROV Competition is attached. The score sheet will provide one with raw numbers. The score sheet is from the missions.


Conclusion

The Team MAST UROV succeeded overall; all components of the UROV were also very successful. Throughout all of the testing the UROV passed. The UROV was better prepared than expected for the competition. At the 2009 MATE Competition the UROV placed in 8th place, a very respectable place considering the competition. The UROV team learned a lot about the topic and understands all the areas which they excelled as well as the places where they failed.