Survey on ROV usability

Member Joined: Nov 30, 2010

Hello,

i'm conducting a survey on the usability of ROVs for pilots, operators and supervisors, for a class in my university.

My question is:

What is the most difficult things that you encounter during an ROV operation?
(example: low visibilty, ROV controls, recording systems, unconfortable chairs Wink

, not knowing the exact position of the ROV, etc.)

If technology existed what are the things you would like to have?

You would help me a lot if you answer these questions. THANK YOU.

Member Joined: Dec 17, 2003 Location: Thailand

1. Ergonomically poor designed control rooms or vans

2. Long hours on some jobs Eg.: 12 hour ops. and no maintenance time allotted - ergo - working after shift on PMS, logs, and any repairs needed. Along with this getting chided by the client or threatened getting run off (fired) for not working more than 12 hours (should have more crew offshore if they want more time...)

3. On occasion, only one person knowing that particular system and it's foibles

4. 3 man shift for 2 work class systems (should have at least 6 per shift)

5. some really poor logistics getting to / from the jobsite

...and I'll stop here to let more folks put their input..... Folks????

Member Joined: May 06, 2008 Location: Granite City

The most difficult thing for myself whilst on ops is stuck in a control van for 12hr plus with a complete dickhead and then having to share a cabin with the snoring bastard...................thankfully this has been few and far between Laughing

Love and man hugs on St Andrews day Smile

Member Joined: Nov 30, 2010

I was thinking more in terms of the control of ROV.

Like the system thats shows you the position of the ROV, sonar system usability, how fast the system responds, does it have all the features you need?

What features would you like to have on a ROV Control System while operating?

Member Joined: Jun 05, 2004

Eh

Member Joined: Apr 04, 2006

I guess you are thinking about designing or at least looking into the theory behind control van lay outs user interface and that kind of thing.

The problem is every pilot has there own ideas about what is good and what is bad.

Cramped control vans, Poorly thoughtout control desks are the obvious problems however there is only a limited of space available and a lot of equipment to fit in. I would suggest if you are looking at this from a user interface perspective you should ask very specific questions and limit the responses in the form of a survey as there are a lot of different opinions on a lot of the various ROV systems. Classic example Are the verts better on a stick or a slider? If on a slider should sliding it away from you be up or down?

Member Joined: Dec 17, 2003 Location: Thailand

Lost,

What about really, really bad monitors that make the ops. eyes go funny because of either the refresh rate or strobing...

Member Joined: Jun 05, 2004

Aargh , yes Smile

That was your excuse on Q5 Very Happy

That look ........almost zombified Laughing

I personnally like the "Pack 'o Sardine" Builds Smile

More cosey Very Happy

And easier to keep warm !

Member Joined: Aug 09, 2007 Location: Thailand etc

Control ergonomics , unlike on cars or aircraft seem to have taken a backseat by ROV designers ,
access to certain parts of systems seem very difficult as if no thought was put into maintenance access although to be fair space is often at a premium and design is often a compromise.

Member Joined: Jun 05, 2004

Yes but design engineers think that ROV systems don't break down once they leave their .....................dry........................warm......................... Airconditioned......................All the tools needed for the job workshop Very Happy

Member Joined: Nov 13, 2009 Location: Western Australia

Some thoughts below:

Insufficient space in the CV for 3 crew plus every field engineer, client rep and (Tom, Dick and Harry) even when you are supplying video and two way comms to all interested parties.

Personally, although I haven't worked on one myself, I liked the Quest concept where the clients could sit well out of the way (in front ) of the operators.

Inadequate air-con for the climactic conditions e.g. CVs made in US or UK end up in tropical / sub-tropical zones and may have heating suited to Arctic conditions but very poor habitability in the warmer climes when it's 45+ C outside.

Monitors are definitely a bugbear; CRT monitors should not be required now that LCD/plasma flat panels are available with high refresh rates and also run cooler.

Inadequate lighting for older eyes...

Member Joined: Dec 17, 2003 Location: Thailand

Re: Liddle's ergonomics - even the simple things such as (for the most part) useless-one-function-at-a-time-touch screens. Designers, and I use that term very loosely - nary take in any field personnel's suggestions. You'll usually find - when the upper management approves it - extra switches here and there on the ROV control panel. Then there's some controls that are just wrong in direction (been on a few threads here in ROV World) or the absolute mis-placement of switches or controls.

The vehicles themselves as far as design is concerned...... hmmmmm, someone with extremely small, dexterous hands can do well on some of the compact vehicles designed / built nowadays. There are some systems that one would have to remove some foam blocks to get at the bits requiring attention....

This is just the tip of the iceberg..... What about the required PMS???? How in the hell can it be done efficiently when you may have to disassemble half the vehicle???? And perhaps inadvertently damage another item along the way ???? These designers have a lot to answer for!!!

Member Joined: Mar 28, 2007 Location: T-Shack

ROV control sytems, Sonar, recording systems are at the basic end of the electrical spectrum, but for their use, acceptable.

The technology exists for all the following Wink

A seat that has integral fans to cool your butt in hot climates

A massage system for ones back

Foot spa

Jimmy Saville chair style cup of tea delivery system

Wing mirrors so that I can see both Port and STBD sides of the ROV

Auto launch and recovery A-Frame so that I can steer the sub from home via sat link

No oily bits

On a more serious note...let's bin the umbilical/tether, it's sooo yesterday. We should be flying around stuff at ultra deep levels without having a lead round our necks. Next generation designers will hopefully think a little more out of the box (or be out of their box).
I was involved heavily with governmental AUV's/ROV's back in the 80's/90's where money is no object and beleive me there IS the technology there even back then, it's just not employed in this arena....yet.

Member Joined: Jun 05, 2004

Errm , I see your point Cool

But unfortunately due to the low standard of flying types and lack of apprenticeship plus expensive machines to some but not exactly expensive to others in our industry ( IE Oil companies that don't give a damm and change the goal posts when it suits them ) ......... Having that "Lead" around your neck is a very good way of knowing where and recovering said machine when it breaks down or........................ Divers being able to trace it if they have to recover it Very Happy

Losing it costs still outway practicality I'm afraid Cool

Member Joined: Jul 24, 2010 Location: InTheTrench!

Since querying on sonars and to add to the brainstorming here, an instrument that could operate in the middle of the trencher inferno ,combining the durability and quality of Kongsberg with the resolution of Didson plus integrated TSS capabilities would make my life a lot easier..
Also a manipulator that would slap me in the face when I m about to fall asleep on the joysticks Very Happy

Whats the purpose of your survey anyway? Which Uni?