May 2005 Bandyopadhyay 1
Underwater Robotics
Promode R Bandyopadhyay, Ph DNaval Undersea Warfare Center
Newport, RI
NDIAJune 14, 2005
Sponsors:ONR 342 (Dr. Thomas McKenna) & NUWC ILIR (Mr. Richard Philips)
May 2005 Bandyopadhyay 2
Team• Dr. Alberico Menozzi (Control)• Mr. Henry Leinhos (Control)• Mr. Jason Gaudette (Control)• Mr. Albert Fredette (EE)• Professor Anuradha Annaswamy (MIT: Theo Control)
• Dr. David Beal (Hydro)• Mr. William Nedderman (Design)
• Dr. Stephen Forsythe (Sonar)• Mr. Thomas Fulton (MARV & Sonar)
• Walter Boober (Noise)
May 2005 Bandyopadhyay 3
Maneuvering in Nature & in Engineering
• In turning radius, nature is still ahead of engineering although the gap is narrowing
gC
r/L 1.E-5
1.E-4
1.E-3
1.E-2
1.E-1
1.E+0
1.E-1 1.E+0 1.E+1 1.E+2 1.E+3 1.E+4
FISH
VEHICLE: B
VEHICLE: A
May 2005 Bandyopadhyay 4
Nature & Man Made
Shark Red Muscle(cold blooded)
y = 2.1163x1.2112
R2 = 0.9833
Torpedoes
Tuna White Muslce
Tuna Red Muscle(warm blooded)
Electric Submarines
Diesel Submarines
Nuclear Submarines
RM and Submarines
0.001
0.010
0.100
1.000
10.000
100.000
1,000.000
10,000.000
100,000.000
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Dislplacement (m3)
Pow
er (k
W)
ElectricDieselNuclearTorpedoesTuna RMTuna WMShark RMBonito/Makerel RMBonito/Makerel WMEmpiricalPower (All)Bonito
Makerel
May 2005 Bandyopadhyay 5
Nature and Man Made
• There is convergence in cruise• But, Nature is still ahead in
Maneuvering
• What science principle is behind nature’s superiority that engineering has not implemented?
May 2005 Bandyopadhyay 6
High-Lift Principle
Angle-of-Attack (deg)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
0 10 20 30 40 50 60Angle of Attack [degrees]
Lift
Coe
ffici
ent
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Lift
Coe
ffici
ent
0
2
4
6
Pitch Bias (deg)0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Mea
n L
ift C
oeffi
cien
t0
2
4
6
May 2005 Bandyopadhyay 7
The Proposed Vehicle
May 2005 Bandyopadhyay 8
Actuator Power Saving OverCross Tunnel Thrusters
• For upward translation, 4 foils do the work of 2 CTT @25lbs each
– Lift-based (12” span): 440W Foils vs. 1078W CTT– Lift-based (8” span): 540W Foils vs. 1078W CTT
25 lbs 25 lbs25 lbs
25 lbs 25 lbs
May 2005 Bandyopadhyay 9
Nektor
CrossTunnelThrusters
NUWC
NUWC Biorobotic Foils Have the Best Power Saving Performance Over CTT & Nektors
May 2005 Bandyopadhyay 10
NUWC Foils are more efficient and more scalable over Nektors
Example for 420 N/m^2 Thrust, the hydro power used by 6” x 6” Nektor is:50% greater compared to NUWC 12” foil 100% greater compared to NUWC 8” foil, and 200% greater compared to NUWC 4” foil
May 2005 Bandyopadhyay 11
Swimming in Acoustic Test Facility
May 2005 Bandyopadhyay 12
Low Speed Maneuvering
May 2005 Bandyopadhyay 13
Low Speed Maneuvering
May 2005 Bandyopadhyay 14
Low Speed Maneuvering
May 2005 Bandyopadhyay 15
Subneuron: A Robust Orbit Generator
[ ]extcaca IIzddw
wzfddz
−−=
−=
ετ
τ)( [ ]
Naca
ca
IIzudtdv
vufdtdu
−−−=
−=
)(
)(1ε
0)( 2 =++ xxxgx ω&&&&0wwx −= caεω =
210)( yyaayg ++=
Frequency, amplitude, bias, and general shape can be varied through a0, a1 and ω
PCB-analog implementation:
Inferior Olive
∫∫
x&&− x& x− x
x2ω
g(.)
May 2005 Bandyopadhyay 16
Local Autonomy of ActuatorsRoll & Lift
May 2005 Bandyopadhyay 17
Sonar: x3 Drop in 10 deg Yaw
May 2005 Bandyopadhyay 18
Interaural Arrival TimesObserve different arrival times between left and right ears, but equal arrival times
between top and bottom ears
May 2005 Bandyopadhyay 19
Noise
May 2005 Bandyopadhyay 20
Linear Actuation of Foils
May 2005 Bandyopadhyay 21
Usefulness
• Hovering• Power Efficiency• Station Keeping• Docking/Recovery• Stealth
