+
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 Reports, articles, technical papers etc are out of date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.
+
Technical 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
then drill hole into
top of silo
Remove the waste.
+
Concept Design #1
“Create space”. Problem #3.
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 #4.
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.
+
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

  • 1.
    + International Workshop onthe 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.
  • 2.
    + Agenda Robotics Database Demonstration[15’] Case Study [20’] Benefits and Summary [5’] Questions [10’]
  • 3.
    + The need fora 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.
  • 4.
    + 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.
  • 5.
    + One part ofa 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.
  • 6.
    + Ideas Catalog Overview Multiplecatalogs, 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.
  • 7.
    + Ideas Catalog Content PublicDomain 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.
  • 8.
    + Case Study –Waste Retrieval
  • 9.
    + Problem Definition Facilitated workshop.Multi-disciplinary participants.
  • 10.
    + Problem Definition “Need away to retrieve waste from silos”
  • 11.
    + Problem Definition Actually severalproblems  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.
  • 12.
  • 13.
    + Idea Generation “What alreadyexists that might be applicable?”
  • 14.
    + Initial Ideas -Problem #1 “Consider long reach manipulators, telescopic masts, etc.”
  • 15.
    + Problem #1 ischallenging “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.
  • 16.
  • 17.
  • 18.
    + Several potential solutions TensileTruss / 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.
  • 19.
    + Concept Design #1 “Createa 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.
  • 20.
    + Concept Design #1 “Createspace”. Problem #2. 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.
  • 21.
    + Concept Design #1 “Createspace”. Problem #3. 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.
  • 22.
    + Concept Design #1 “Createspace”. Problem #4. 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.
  • 23.
    + Redefining the problem opensup 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.
  • 24.
    + Outcome of theCase 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.
  • 25.
    + Outcome of theCase 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.
  • 26.
    + Benefits of theDatabase 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.
  • 27.
    + 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.
  • 28.
    + Summary Problem Definition (andredefinition) 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.
  • 29.
    + Try It www.ideacatalog.net DOE-EM havefree access. Others can trial by invitation. Any questions?
  • 30.
    + 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
  • 31.
    + Catalog Subscription  Thecatalogs / 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.

Editor's Notes

  • #6 Although the process is straightforward it takes expertise and practice to get the most out of it. Consider learning a musical instrument like a piano. At first you will be lucky to get a tune out of it even though it has all the functionality required. With training and practice, you can become a musician. Not easy to be really good. Takes a long time and commitment. Cannot expect to learn to play a piano from a two day course.
  • #13 Set up workshop. Covered walls with images of interesting technologies. Produce cards as well. Three groups. Small to allow for interaction.
  • #17 Triz is outside of scope of presentation. Very powerful tool.