Underwater Vehicle Manipulators References 419
Part B | 17
of workspace optimization. For SAUVIM, a large
effort has been devoted to develop automatic optimization algorithms capable (as seen in phase 5) to
precisely correct the hovering position in order to
maximize the manipulability of the arm during its
operations.
Arm control system. Many problems commonly
encountered in robotics such as kinematic singularities, collisions, and joint limit and motor saturation,
are no longer handled by the robot operator. An autonomous robotic control system must be able to
intelligently assess all the above situations in order
to allow a successful completion of the task when it
is, at least theoretically, possible. This was another
area in which SAUVIM research was devoted for.
Future development in autonomous underwater manipulation should be able to provide robust improvements of all of the above issues. It is important
to increase the general confidence of all the organizations toward such systems, and to initiate
a gradual transition from human-teleoperated ROVs
to a new level of autonomy of intervention AUVs.
17.7 Conclusions
This chapter presented basic materials about underwater vehicle manipulators that are essential for underwater intervention missions, such as underwater sampling,
construction, and recovery. Most commercial underwater vehicle manipulators are hydraulic-driven and used
for ROVs. They are teleoperated by human operators using the master–slave configuration, which often causes
operator fatigue since most underwater manipulator operations are done on a trial-and-error basis due to the
vehicle movement and delayed sensory feedback. In order to minimize the presence of human operators and
maximize the advantage of vehicle autonomy, the coordinated motion control of the vehicle and manipulator
system and autonomous manipulation are key technologies for future underwater vehicle manipulators. The US
Navy funded the underwater vehicle, SAUVIM, which
has experimentally demonstrated autonomous manipulation. Following its success, more underwater vehicles
having the capability of autonomous manipulation are
expected to develop in the near future.
Among some exemplar underwater intervention
tasks are object recovery/rescue, and maintenance/repairing of underwater facilities. Therefore, one may
consider a task like Black box recovery-grasping an object of interest and placing it at a desired location
for benchmarks in future development. One recent development after SAUVIM is the TRIDENT project in
Europe. They performed an autonomous underwater intervention task, Black box recovery in Port de Sóller’s
harbor (Mallorca) in October 2012 [17.91].
References
17.1
J. Yuh: Modeling and control of underwater robotic
vehicles, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man. Cybern. 20(6), 1475–
1483 (1990)
17.2
J. Yuh: Design and control of autonomous underwater robots: A survey, Int. J. Auton. Robots 8, 7–24
(2000)
17.3
J. Yuh, G. Marani, D.R. Blidberg: Applications of
marine robotic vehicles, Intell. Serv. Robotics 4(4),
221–231 (2011)
17.4
eca Robotics: ARM 7H 7 Function HYDRAULIC Manipulator ARM (2011), http://www.eca-robotics.com/
ftp/ecatalogue/486/ARM_7H_GB.pdf
17.5
International Submarine Engineering: Magnum-7
A rugged 7-function subsea manipulator (2012),
http://www.ise.bc.ca/manips/pdf/Magnum-7data-sheet-v2.pdf
17.6
Kraft TeleRobotics: Predator Force Feedback Manipulator (2005), http://krafttelerobotics.com/
products/PDFs/Predator_PDF.pdf
17.7
FMC Technologies: Schilling Robotics TITAN 4
(2012),
http://www.fmctechnologies.com/en/
SchillingRobotics/Technologies/Schilling-TITAN-4.
aspx
17.8
Western Space and Marine (WSM): The ARMStandard Specifications (2012), http://www.
wsminc.com/TheArm/Specifications.html
17.9
N. Kato, D. Lane: Coordinated control of multiple manipulators in underwater robots, Proc. IEEE
ICRA‘96 (1996) pp. 2505–2510
17.10 M.W. Dunningan, D.M. Lane, A.C. Clegg, I. Edwards:
Hybrid position/force control of a hydraulic underwater manipulator, Proc. Control Theory Appl., Vol.
143 (1996) pp. 145–151
17.11 B. L’evesque, M.J. Richard: Dynamic analysis
of a manipulator in a fluid environment, Int.
J. Robotics Res. 13(2), 221–231 (1994)
17.12 H. Mahesh, J. Yuh, R. Lakshmi: A coordinated control of an underwater vehicle and robotic manipulator, J. Robotic Syst. 8(2), 339–370 (1991)
17.13 S. McMillan, D. Orin, R. McGhee: Efficient dynamic
simulation of an underwater vehicle with a robotic
manipulator, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 25(8),
1194–1206 (1995)
17.14 T. McLain, S. Rock, M. Lee: Experiments in the coordinated control of an underwater arm/vehicle
system, Auton. Robots 3, 213–232 (1996)
Part B | 17
of workspace optimization. For SAUVIM, a large
effort has been devoted to develop automatic optimization algorithms capable (as seen in phase 5) to
precisely correct the hovering position in order to
maximize the manipulability of the arm during its
operations.
Arm control system. Many problems commonly
encountered in robotics such as kinematic singularities, collisions, and joint limit and motor saturation,
are no longer handled by the robot operator. An autonomous robotic control system must be able to
intelligently assess all the above situations in order
to allow a successful completion of the task when it
is, at least theoretically, possible. This was another
area in which SAUVIM research was devoted for.
Future development in autonomous underwater manipulation should be able to provide robust improvements of all of the above issues. It is important
to increase the general confidence of all the organizations toward such systems, and to initiate
a gradual transition from human-teleoperated ROVs
to a new level of autonomy of intervention AUVs.
17.7 Conclusions
This chapter presented basic materials about underwater vehicle manipulators that are essential for underwater intervention missions, such as underwater sampling,
construction, and recovery. Most commercial underwater vehicle manipulators are hydraulic-driven and used
for ROVs. They are teleoperated by human operators using the master–slave configuration, which often causes
operator fatigue since most underwater manipulator operations are done on a trial-and-error basis due to the
vehicle movement and delayed sensory feedback. In order to minimize the presence of human operators and
maximize the advantage of vehicle autonomy, the coordinated motion control of the vehicle and manipulator
system and autonomous manipulation are key technologies for future underwater vehicle manipulators. The US
Navy funded the underwater vehicle, SAUVIM, which
has experimentally demonstrated autonomous manipulation. Following its success, more underwater vehicles
having the capability of autonomous manipulation are
expected to develop in the near future.
Among some exemplar underwater intervention
tasks are object recovery/rescue, and maintenance/repairing of underwater facilities. Therefore, one may
consider a task like Black box recovery-grasping an object of interest and placing it at a desired location
for benchmarks in future development. One recent development after SAUVIM is the TRIDENT project in
Europe. They performed an autonomous underwater intervention task, Black box recovery in Port de Sóller’s
harbor (Mallorca) in October 2012 [17.91].
References
17.1
J. Yuh: Modeling and control of underwater robotic
vehicles, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man. Cybern. 20(6), 1475–
1483 (1990)
17.2
J. Yuh: Design and control of autonomous underwater robots: A survey, Int. J. Auton. Robots 8, 7–24
(2000)
17.3
J. Yuh, G. Marani, D.R. Blidberg: Applications of
marine robotic vehicles, Intell. Serv. Robotics 4(4),
221–231 (2011)
17.4
eca Robotics: ARM 7H 7 Function HYDRAULIC Manipulator ARM (2011), http://www.eca-robotics.com/
ftp/ecatalogue/486/ARM_7H_GB.pdf
17.5
International Submarine Engineering: Magnum-7
A rugged 7-function subsea manipulator (2012),
http://www.ise.bc.ca/manips/pdf/Magnum-7data-sheet-v2.pdf
17.6
Kraft TeleRobotics: Predator Force Feedback Manipulator (2005), http://krafttelerobotics.com/
products/PDFs/Predator_PDF.pdf
17.7
FMC Technologies: Schilling Robotics TITAN 4
(2012),
http://www.fmctechnologies.com/en/
SchillingRobotics/Technologies/Schilling-TITAN-4.
aspx
17.8
Western Space and Marine (WSM): The ARMStandard Specifications (2012), http://www.
wsminc.com/TheArm/Specifications.html
17.9
N. Kato, D. Lane: Coordinated control of multiple manipulators in underwater robots, Proc. IEEE
ICRA‘96 (1996) pp. 2505–2510
17.10 M.W. Dunningan, D.M. Lane, A.C. Clegg, I. Edwards:
Hybrid position/force control of a hydraulic underwater manipulator, Proc. Control Theory Appl., Vol.
143 (1996) pp. 145–151
17.11 B. L’evesque, M.J. Richard: Dynamic analysis
of a manipulator in a fluid environment, Int.
J. Robotics Res. 13(2), 221–231 (1994)
17.12 H. Mahesh, J. Yuh, R. Lakshmi: A coordinated control of an underwater vehicle and robotic manipulator, J. Robotic Syst. 8(2), 339–370 (1991)
17.13 S. McMillan, D. Orin, R. McGhee: Efficient dynamic
simulation of an underwater vehicle with a robotic
manipulator, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 25(8),
1194–1206 (1995)
17.14 T. McLain, S. Rock, M. Lee: Experiments in the coordinated control of an underwater arm/vehicle
system, Auton. Robots 3, 213–232 (1996)