International Robotics Workshop

+
International Workshop on the Use of Robotic Technologies at
Nuclear Facilities
Session1: Demonstration of Databases.
From Problem Definition to Available Robotic Technologies.
February 2 2016.
Ian E Seed, Laurie Judd, John Ritter, Andy Szilagyi, Paula James.

+
Agenda
Robotics Database Demonstration [15’]
Case Study [20’]
Benefits and Summary [5’]
Questions [10’]

+
The need for a database
Speed of innovation in robotics increasing.
 Reports, articles, technical papers etc are out of date
by the time they’re published.
 Database provides almost real-time updates.
Immediate.
Reports are structured from a single
perspective.
 Users access information from multiple perspectives.
 Database has many ways of filtering and searching.

+
Our Approach
Wide Coverage.
 Industry wide
 Domestic and International.
 Look beyond Nuclear into other industries.
 Operational Experience / Maturity (TRL).
Not just a database of technologies.
 Structured around a systematic approach to
problem solving.
 Functional Analysis and Triz.
 Collaborative. Immersive brainstorming.

+
One part of a systematic approach
‘Define’ – Problem Definition.
‘Explore’ – Ideas Generation.
 Immersive brainstorming
‘Select’ – Evaluation of Alternatives.
 Process can be done by anyone, at any level,
formally or informally.
 Best results require training, practice and
experience.

+
Ideas Catalog Overview
Multiple catalogs, similar structure.
 Overview, Categorization, Notes, Operational
Experience, Attachments.
Key Features:
 Filter by Site or Manufacturer.
 Filter by technology and maturity.
 Search on names or use a Wizard.
 Save ideas onto walls. Share with others.
 Create options.

+
Ideas Catalog Content
Public Domain material only.
 Does not include security or commercially sensitive
information.
 Sources of information cited.
 New content and improvements to existing content
added daily.
Totally objective.
 Not a sales pitch for Vendors.
 Unproven superlatives removed.
 No promotion, advertising or influence.

+
Case Study – Waste Retrieval

+
Problem Definition
Facilitated workshop. Multi-disciplinary participants.

+
Problem Definition
“Need a way to retrieve waste from silos”

+
Problem Definition
Actually several problems
 Problem #1: How can we access the top of the
silos?
 Problem #2: Once there, how do we cut a hole?
 Problem #3: How do we attach a riser?
 Problem #4: How do we retrieve the contents?
Focus on one thing at a time.
 How can we access the top of the silos?
 Follow same process for each: 5Ws+H.

+
Idea Generation/Immersive Brainstorming

+
Idea Generation
“What already exists that might be applicable?”

+
Initial Ideas - Problem #1
“Consider long reach manipulators, telescopic
masts, etc.”

+
Problem #1 is challenging
“How can we access the top of the silos?
None of the ideas were convincing.
 Very long way down (>40-50 feet).
 Spaghetti of installed pipework.
 Lots of silos to access (over 40).
Redefine the problem.
 Use Triz to look at the contradictions.

+
Solve the contradiction
Segmentation, Anti-Weight, Dynamics

+
Several potential solutions
Tensile Truss / Flexible crane.
 Create support system underneath floor.
Cantilevers / Temporary supports.
 Bolt a support system to the walls.
Retractable / Movable Floor.
 Make a floor for the top of the silos.

+
Concept Design #1
“Create a new floor”
Create a
new floor.
Grout filled
around
silos.
Create space
(remote cutting of
pipes).
Attach riser and
then drill hole into
top of silo
Remove the waste.

+
Concept Design #1
“Create space”. Problem #2.
Create a new
floor.
Grout filled
around silos.
Create space
(remote cutting of
pipes).
Attach riser and
top of silo
Remove the waste.

+
Concept Design #1
Create a new
floor.
Grout filled
around silos.
Create space
(remote cutting of
pipes).
Attach riser and
top of silo
Remove the waste.

+
Redefining the problem
opens up opportunities
There are multiple technologies available for
solving problems #2, #3 and #4 once there is
effective access.
Secondary problems still need to be solved.
 These are supplementary problems as a result of
choosing a particular solution.
 Important to follow the same process for these.
 Define the problem first, then Explore solutions.

+
Outcome of the Case Study
The process began with a question.
 “How do we retrieve waste from these silos”?
The overall problem was broken down into 4
problems.
 Each of these were taken through the process.
 Alternatives were identified and considered.
 Potential solutions were selected, evaluated and
then a conceptual design report prepared.

+
Outcome of the Case Study
A large scale demonstration of elements of
the selected solution is being conducted in
2016.
Process was ~15 months total duration.
 Time spent on workshops a matter of days.
 They are the catalyst.
Much quicker, cost effective and technically
superior than trying to develop a solution
from a blank sheet of paper.

+
Benefits of the Database
Looking at existing solutions speeds up
process.
 Wide body of knowledge.
 Less random and ‘blue skies’ debate. Fact based.
 What exists and what doesn’t.
It is live and up-to-date.
 Additions and changes essentially real-time.
 Features based on problem solving.
 Functionality and benefits will evolve based on
how it is used.

+
Process Recap
 Challenge. Use the 5Ws+H to define the problem more clearly.
 Ideas Generation. Use the filters, wizard and search to identify potential
solutions.
 Wall. Save those potential solutions to your wall.
 Review. Consider the wall. Do the ideas look convincing?
 If no, redefine the problem.
 Use Triz for solving contradictions. Technical and Physical Contradictions.
 More Ideas. Use Inventive Principles catalog to generate potential solutions.
 Refine the ideas and add to wall.
 Options. For convincing ideas, save to your Options Wall.
 Evaluate. Use Smart Decisions Online to select best option.
 Multi Criteria Analysis. Criteria, Weight, Score, Analysis. Select.

+
Summary
Problem Definition (and redefinition) is vital
at every stage of the process
Database includes a broad range of potential
solutions from multiple industries.
Database is part of a wider systematic
process.
Saves the project time and cost.
 Better quality alternatives.
 Process is quicker with less rework.
 Easier to justify and pass Peer Review.

+
Try It
www.ideacatalog.net
DOE-EM have free access.
Others can trial by invitation.
Any questions?

+
Contacts
 Andy Szilagyi (DOE).
 Andrew.Szilagyi@em.doe.gov
 Ian Seed (Cogentus).
 iseed@cogentus.co.uk
 Laurie Judd (Longenecker & Associates).
 ljudd@longenecker-associates.com
 John Ritter (NuVision).
 ritter@nuvisioneng.com
 Paula James (Cogentus).
 pjames@cogentus.co.uk

+
Catalog Subscription
 The catalogs / databases are only available on subscription.
 Price on Application.
 Three typical payment methods:
 Workshops. We run workshops to solve a problem or problems.
The fee includes the workshop and access to the catalogs for a
given number of users for a given length of time.
 Research Study. We carry out research on the topic of interest and
produce a formal report. The fee includes access to the catalogs for
a given number of users for a given length of time.
 Subscription Only. The fee includes access to the catalogs for a
given number of users for a given length of time.

International Robotics Workshop

More Related Content

Similar to International Robotics Workshop (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

International Robotics Workshop

Editor's Notes