Rigger73
 First Officer
Flight distance : 378478 ft
United Kingdom
Offline
|
Pedro Castelani Posted at 5-9 12:52
Actually, I doubt you would seriously need a gimbal underwater. The water makes movements much slower than in the air, and kind of stabilizes by itself. Think the difference between a vibrating, airborne drone and a camera in a relatively dense liquid. Nevertheless, as they use brushless motors, there are no exposed contacts: you could simply coat all the motor with a thin resin wash and that should just about solve the problem.
Wrong on so many levels.
When you get close to the surface - any wave motion will throw the ROV about quite a lot. If you have a fixed camera - this will give you really really shaky images.
We have fixed cameras on our ROVs - and we spend as little time as possible at the surface. We only go there to inspect structural components of an oil-rig platform at the 'splash', LAT or surface.
It can also very dangerous - as the wave motion can throw the ROV against hard surfaces such as structural members.
If you have a recreational ROV and you go near rocks - then you won't have a recreational ROV for long.
You will get smoother water at 5-10 metres depending on surface conditions - but if this new 'ROV' can only go a few feet or a couple of metres under water - you'll never get smooth imagery like you do at the moment with aerial drones that have gimbals.
|
|