MATE 2016
Calculated Catastrophy
Our first year, we had four members, I was a co-pilot and fabricator. Our first meeting we decided on the team name, Sub Sea Research. I was in favor of “Rookery Robotics,” and I still am. Our documentation was pretty bad and didn’t win us many points, but the presentation went ok.
On the left, you can see the largely ineffective ballast zip-tied onto the wood prototype frame. Below is the hydraulically actuated claw that was automatically deployed upon contact with water. The claw was mounted to a spring-loaded rail and retained by a pice of paper. When the paper got soggy, the claw would spring out. We all thought that was a stroke of genius.
The schematic to the left is out SID (System Integration Diagram) which was drawn in Microsoft Visio. Notably, it shows our claw actuators which barely worked because air kept getting into the system.
Shown left is our surface control system which was entirely built and programmed by my brother. I still don’t know how he did this and he was sixteen years old at the time. It worked surprisingly well, but the robot had some major hardware issues.
The brazed aluminum frame of our first ROV was incredibly ugly and the tether exerted more control over the robot than the thrusters. My brother built the electronics suite and programmed it in C. IMU implementation was attempted and failed. We learned a lot this year and somehow didn’t lose too badly.
Right: The “finished” product
Below: Some early prototypes
Shown right are our first four Blue Robotics T-100 thrusters. These turned out to be very reliable but power-hungry.
