UNOLS Observatory Working Group Meeting

Holiday Inn - Logan Airport Hotel

Embassy IV Room

February 26, 2003

 

MEETING MINUTES

 

To download a pdf copy of these minutes, click here <200302owgmi.pdf>

 

Appendices

 

I.                    Meeting Agenda

II.                 Participant List

III.               Working Group Task Statement

IV.              H2O Observatory (Alan Chave)

V.                 NEPTUNE and Cable Installation Tools (Gene Massion)

VI.              Deck Handling and Mooring Deployment/Recovery Needs (Worcester/Wooding)

VII.            ROV and AUV Requirements (Dana Yoerger)

VIII.         Mapping Requirements (Larry Mayer)

IX.              Coastal Observatory Requirements – West Coast (Mike Kosro)

X.                 Coastal Observatory Requirements – East Coast (Scott Glenn)

 

 

Introductions, charge to the working group and meeting goals – Alan Chave opened the meeting at 0830.  Meeting participants introduced themselves.  The meeting agenda is included as Appendix I and the participant list is included as Appendix II.  Alan provided the group with background information about why the working group had been formed.  There are a variety of major ocean observatory development efforts underway on global, regional and local scales.  Some of these observatories have already been established and are operational.

 

The Ocean Studies Board has established a committee to study “Implementation of a Seafloor Observatory Network for Oceanographic Research.”  Bob Detrick (WHOI) is chair of this committee.  Their study will develop an implementation plan to establish a network of seafloor-based observatories to support multidisciplinary research. This network would include both cabled seafloor nodes and moored buoys, located in both coastal and open-ocean areas. The committee has been tasked to provide advice on the design, construction, management, operation, and maintenance of the network, including the need for scientific oversight and planning, appropriately phased implementation, data management, and education and outreach activities of the observatories.  Additionally, they have been asked to examine the impacts on the UNOLS fleet and current submersible and ROV/AUV assets in the research community.  Bob Detrick, in turn, has asked UNOLS for input regarding observatory facility needs and the impact these needs will have on the UNOLS fleet.  In response, the UNOLS Council recommended the formation of a working group with individuals familiar with the establishment and operation of ocean observatories.  The tasking for the working group is contained in Appendix III.

 

Deep ocean observatory requirements for UNOLS vessels:

 

H2O Experience - Alan Chave provided a report on the H2O experiment.  His viewgraphs are included as Appendix IV.  The viewgraphs include pictures of the installation and cable handling operations.  H2O was the first deep water installation of an observatory by a UNOLS vessel, R/V THOMPSON.  The observatory has been in operation for five years.  ROV Jason was used for the installation and worked well. 

 

A summary of Alan’s comments, observations and recommendations follow:

 

·        The deck gear on UNOLS ships is not adequate for installation and servicing of deep ocean observatories.  Deck equipment with the ability to handle heavier loads than those currently installed on UNOLS vessels is needed for installation and service of observatories like H2O. 

·        Synthetic cable is needed. 

·        Experienced personnel, including a cable handler, are needed.  An experienced cable handler assisted the H2O installation.

·        A well-designed cable grabber tool is needed.

·        A fantail “chute” is needed for cable handling.

·        A cable spicing capability is needed on UNOLS vessels.  This does not currently exist in UNOLS.  There is industry expertise in this area. 

·        There are safety concerns that will need to be addressed.  Heavier gear and work with heavier loads will require experienced support.

·        User-friendly ROVs are needed.

·        Below deck winches (fiber optic) would be beneficial.  The best scenario would be to have two below deck traction winches (not just two spools).

·        The ships will require a large, clear aft deck.

 

Alan described the H2O junction box deployment operations.  The ROV work vehicle (Jason) support was very adequate during these operations.  Jason could do everything that was planned.  Pre-cruise planning and knowing the vehicle’s capabilities were instrumental.  There needs to be a strong interactive relationship between the user and vehicle operator for successful operation.  Prior to the H2O cruise, trial runs with Jason were carried out at the pier.  In the future, as the servicing and installation procedures are well established, these sorts of cable operations might be able to be done with commercially available ROVs.

 

NEPTUNE and Cable Installation Tools - Gene Massion continued with a report on NEPTUNE installation and servicing facility requirements.   His viewgraphs are included as Appendix V.  The NEPTUNE observatory is designed as a regional network of cabled seafloor nodes. There will be 30 nodes.

 

Gene’s observations, comments and recommendations are included below:

 

·        NEPTUNE facility requirements are estimated to require three months of ROV and UNOLS Class I ship time for servicing of nodes.  A typical academic ROV would be adequate.  The three months includes the time needed to service the 30 nodes.

–Node weight - app 2000 lbf, 2.5m x 1.5m x 1m

–Cable weight – 3300 lbf for 4000m

·        UNOLS Class I vessels as they are currently configured are too small to meet the NEPTUNE support requirements.  More deck space is needed.  Much of the required handling equipment can be cross-decked to a UNOLS vessel, but added deck space and deck strengthening would be needed.

·        Procedures for safe handling of the heavy loads associated with observatory work are needed.  This is a major safety concern.

 

Gene reviewed the handling equipment possibilities for NEPTUNE support:

 

-         Aft chute for cable handling

-         20000 lbf safe working load (swl) winch

-         2 capstans (10000 lbf swl each for handling soft line) and stoppers applied on deck.

-         The minimum requirements plus…

-         20000 lbf swl (while rotating) a-frame.

-         All of the above plus…

-         Either 2 LCEs or 2 cable drums (2-3m diameter, 3m required for routine passage of a joint).

-         Capstans/tuggers,

-         Grappling gear,

-         Hard/soft stoppers,

-         Cable splicing gear (several transportainers),

-         Added deck space

 

 

As part of the Neptune process, they will look at various ship support options.  These include:

·        Leasing Commercial vessels

·        Buying a commercial vessel

·        Building a new UNOLS vessel designed for support of observatory.

 

In closing, Gene showed slides of a typical cable repair ship.

 

Deck handling and mooring deployment/recovery needsPeter Worcester reported on the DEOS facility needs.  His viewgraphs are included as Appendix VI.  He reviewed the design constraints for moored-buoy observatories.  There are three types of buoys:

- No power to the seafloor - low bandwidth, acoustically-linked discus buoy

 

- Powered to the seafloor - Low-bandwidth, cable-linked discus buoy

 

- Powered to the seafloor - High-bandwidth, cable-linked spar buoy

 

 

Peter showed a map with locations of moored-buoy locations.  The map provided locations of the sites that are currently operating or funded, as well as those sites to be implemented during the pilot phase of DEOS.

 Some of the sites are in high latitudes where high sea state conditions can be expected.  This map is a good graphic for future reference.

 

UNOLS vessels currently have the capabilities needed to service discus type buoys.  No added handling gear is needed.  In terms of ship time, however, there will be much higher demand.

 

Peter reviewed the DEOS spar buoy conceptual drawing features and service requir