See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/284746483

Conceptual design of optimal thrust system for efficient cable burying of ROV
threncher

Article · January 2015

DOI: 10.1109/OCEANS.2014.7003153

CITATIONS READS

16 743

8 authors, including:

Ji-Hong Li
Korea Institute of Robotics and Technology Convergence
102 PUBLICATIONS 1,266 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Ji-Hong Li on 20 May 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Conceptual Design of Optimal Thrust System for
Efficient Cable Burying of ROV Threncher
J. H. Li1, Member, IEEE, J. T. Kim1, M. J. Lee1, W. S. Lee1, H. J. Kang1, S. C. Han2, J. W. Lee2, H. W. Kwak3
1
Korea Institute of Robot & Convergence (KIRO), Jigok-Ro 39, Nam-Gu, Pohang 790-834, South Korea
{jhli5, postman, mcklee, ws26, hjkang}@kiro.re.kr
2
Daeyang Electric Co. Ltd., Jangpyeong-Ro 245, Saha-Gu, Busan 604-030, South Korea
{hansc, p2life}@daeyang.co.kr
3
KT Submarine Ltd., Songjeonggwangeogol-Ro 42, Haeundae-Gu, Busan 612-040, South Korea
[email protected]

Abstract—ROV trencher is a kind of heavy-duty work class ROV out various underwater heavy-duty construction tasks including
with high pressure water jetting tools cutting the sea floor and up to 3m depth of cable burial, see Fig. 1.
burying the cable. This ROV is mostly used for PLIB (post lay
inspection and burial) operation. For a ROV trencher, usually
there is a pair of jetting legs mounted at the bottom and stowed
in a horizontal position in its rest mode. While burying cable in
the sea floor, they are folded out by hydraulic cylinders, and cut
the sea floor by jetting high pressure water and simultaneously
bury the post laid cable. In this working process, there are
various external forces acting on the vehicle. From control point
of view, obviously there are some of optimal issues that of how we
should construct the thrust system so that can minimize or
maximize kinds of optimal criteria such as minimizing power
consumption, or maximizing some of burial performances (burial
depth, progress rate etc.). All of these conceptual design
considerations for effective thrust system will be considered in
this paper.

Keywords—Cable burying; PLIB(post lay inspection and burial);

ROV trencher; water jet; thrusters arrangement. Fig. 1 Conceptual design of ROV trencher

I. INTRODUCTION For a ROV trencher, usually there is a pair of jetting legs

In the past decades, cable protection against increasing mounted at the bottom. In its rest operation, these two legs are
fishing activities as well as various other hazards has been stowed in a horizontal position, and folded out to the position
strongly required for subsea cables. Armouring and burial are of 70~80o from the horizontal in the working orientation. In the
two of main means of cable protection [1]. In general, the fault burying process, there are various external forces acting on the
risk to a surface laid cable is not reduced with increased vehicle. From control engineering point of view, obviously
armouring to the same extent as the fault risk is reduced by there are some of optimal issues of how we should construct
greater burial depth. Consequently, effective burial is important the thrust system so that can minimize or maximize certain
for cable security. Usually there are two methods used in optimal criteria, such as minimizing power consumption or
subsea cable burial - simultaneous lay and burial, and post lay maximizing burial performances.
burial. For simultaneous lay and burial, towed plough is used
In this paper, firstly we analyze the external forces that act
rather than tracked or swimming vehicle, while the latter is
on the ROV while the vehicle is trenching the sea floor and
preferred in PLIB. The ROV trencher mentioned in this paper
burying the cable. Then, present some of design principles (or
is this kind of swimming vehicle.
optimum considerations) for the construction of vehicle’s
In September 2013, the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries thrust system. Also, introduce some of estimation methods for
(MOF) in the South Korea launched an Underwater the magnitudes of some of these external forces. These
Construction Robotics R&D Center (UCRC), which consists of estimation values can be used to select the thruster’s output
three core R&D projects and one of infrastructure project. The specifications. Also, they can be applied to design the thrusters
second core R&D project is to develop a ROV trencher to carry arrangement in the space. Here, it is notable that all the

978-1-4799-4918-2/14/$31.00 ©2014 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: POSTECH Library. Downloaded on May 20,2022 at 11:08:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
contents presented in this paper are kinds of conceptual ones For our ROV trencher, CFD based design analysis of jet
rather than the final design results. nozzle configuration is now undertaken in KT Submarine Ltd.
The first test is to investigate the relationship between the
II. SYSTEM OVERVIEW nozzle number and jetting performance. Here the jetting
performance is defined as the maximum transmission length
A. General Requirements of 100kPa jetting pressure. In order to guarantee the same flow
rate with different nozzle numbers, in the simulation, nozzle
As a ROV trencher, the system general requirements are as diameter ND are modified as: ND=24mm in the case of nozzle
follows. number NN=8, ND=20mm with NN=12, and ND=18mm with
NN=15. The flow rate is changed as 420m3/h, 630m3/h,
Table. 1 System general requirements. 840m3/h, and 1,260m3/h. Simulation results are shown in Fig.
Item Specifications 3, from which we can see that pressure maximum transmission
ROV power About 600kW length becomes longer with the decrease of nozzle numbers.
However, appropriate overlap of jet flow might be more
Depth rating 2,500msw
effective in the (very) cohesive soil conditions. All of these
Burial depth Max. 3m (≤20kpa soil type) should be carefully considered in the practical design of jet
Burial speed Max. 2km/hr (1m burial depth with ≤20kpa soil type) nozzle configuration.
Forward speed Max. 3knots After this jet nozzle configuration is fixed, we not only can
Payload 500kg evaluate the jetting performance according to the different
flow rates and pressures, but also can roughly estimate the
reaction force of jetting flow. This reaction force estimation
B. Jetting System will be discussed in details in the later.
Twin jet leg is the most common, if not all, configuration
used in the present ROV trenchers. Recently, these two legs
are usually designed to be deployed individually in both of
vertical and lateral directions so as to meet various practical
requirements. However, for jet nozzle configuration, there are
some of different types used in practice, see Fig. 2. In general,
downward nozzle configurations are used in various types of
soil conditions; see Fig. 2(a). And forward type of nozzle
configuration (see Fig. 2(b)) is benefited in the cohesive soil,
while bagpipe type (see Fig. 2(c)) is effective in the soft or
cohesionless soil.

Fig. 3 CFD based nozzle configuration test result.

C. Hydraulic System
Efficient hydraulic circuit system is one of core modules
for the present work class ROV. For our trenching vehicle,
there are two of hydraulic manipulators, multiple thrusters and
Fig. 2 Different jet nozzle configurations used in practice [2]-[4]. cylinders mounted on the vehicle. Also, some of hydraulic
tools (cable gripper, cutter etc.) will be developed to carry out
various underwater construction and maintenance tasks.
1)
ROV was manufactured by Forum Energy Technologies and the jet leg Conceptual block diagram of our hydraulic circuit system is
and its nozzle configurations were modified by KT Submarine Ltd. shown in Fig. 4.

Authorized licensed use limited to: POSTECH Library. Downloaded on May 20,2022 at 11:08:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Fig. 5 The external forces acting on the working ROV trencher.

Now, we consider some of dominant components of these

external forces.
1) Water jet reaction J
For each nozzle, corresponding jet reaction can be
calculated as following [6],[7]

F = 0.157C d D 2 p , (4)
Fig. 4 conceptual block diagram of hydraulic circuit system. where F denotes reaction force (N), Cd is discharge coefficient,
D is nozzle orifice diameter (mm), and p is the water pressure
For hydraulic thrust system, besides the issue of thrusters’ (bar). In some cases, Cd is simply taken as 1 [6].
optimal arrangement which is the main topic of this paper,
Given jet leg nozzle configuration, then we can calculate
how to design the efficient driving methods is also critical to
the jet reaction according to (4). Here, p can be estimated using
the improvement of thrust system performance. proper simulation such as CFD (computational fluid dynamics),
or can be directly measured using offline test, see Fig. 6.
III. OPTIMUM CONSIDERATIONS FOR THRUST SYSTEM

A. External Forces Acting on a Working ROV Trencher

These forces can be expressed as follows [5].
U x + D + S F + J x + Cx = X , (1)

U z + B + W + SR + J z + Cz = Z , (2)

MU + M D + M S + M J + M C = M ,
F
(3)

where X and Z denote the acting forces in each of x and z

axes, and M is pitch moment; for U , B, D, W , S R , S F , J ,
and C , refer to Fig. 5; (⋅) x and (⋅) z denote the components of
(⋅) in each of x and z axes; M (⋅) is the component of M Fig. 6 Jet leg trial product offline test.
dedicated to the force (⋅) .
2) Hydraulic drag D
It is notable that here we only consider the jet legs and Drag force acting on the ROV in its steady translation can
cable depressor. In fact, some of additional tools also can be be expressed as following [8]
equipped, such as jet pump eductor and backfill system. In
general, similar to jet leg, eductor is also designed to have twin 1
D= ρ ⋅ C D ( R) ⋅ S ⋅ V 2 , (5)
leg configuration. These two legs are usually symmetric to the 2
XZ plane and their outlets are parallel to y axis with opposite
direction. Therefore, this kind of eductor’s reaction can be where ρ is fluid density, C D is drag coefficient with Reynolds
ignored. For backfill system, this is not a very common tool for number R, S is vehicle’s forward section area, and V denotes
cable burying. forward speed.

Authorized licensed use limited to: POSTECH Library. Downloaded on May 20,2022 at 11:08:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 In fact, it is difficult to exactly estimate the Reynolds IV. THRUSTERS ARRANGEMENT
number R for a given ROV body, and so is the drag coefficient
For most of work-class ROVs, their thrust systems can be
C D . However, this value of C D can be roughly estimated using
divided into two groups, vertical and horizontal thrusters. The
CFD or some other simulation tools with vehicle’s mechanical vehicles’ 6 degree of freedom underwater motions, therefore,
design information. Drag force estimation is, in particular,
usually consist of vertical and horizontal motions and series of
important to the selection of the vehicle’s horizontal thrusters
and their arrangement. This will be discussed more in the later. combination of these two types. From control point of view,
these two motions can be controlled individually (decoupled
B. Optimum Considerations system), and therefore, various matured simple control
methods can be directly applicable for the vehicle’s depth and
The basic idea for thrust system design is to provide proper horizontal motion control. This is one of advantages for this
(vectored) thrust T to overcome previously mentioned external kind of structured ROV system.
forces so as to satisfy the various system requirements.
Principle 1. Thrust T should be satisfying the following A. Horizontal Thrusters
inequalities Consider the two types of horizontal thruster configurations,
Tx _ max + X max , Tz _ max + Z max , M T _ max + M max ≥ 0 , (6) see Fig. 6. In Fig. 6(a), forward vectored thrust force Tx and
lateral vectored thrust force Ty can be calculated as following
where Tx _ max and Tz _ max denote the maximum of horizontal and
vertical thrust forces, and M T _ max is the maximum value of Tx = 4 F ⋅ cos α, Ty = 4 F ⋅ sin α , (8)
moment caused by T; (⋅) max denotes the maximum value of (⋅) . where F is the thrust force of one thruster. Compare to the case
Here the maximum values of X max , Z max and M max of Fig. 6(b) where Tx = Ty = 2 F , configuration in Fig. 6(a)
correspond to the practical worst case, but not to the extreme might be more efficient. For example, if we take α = 45 deg ,
case.
then Tx = T y = 2 2 F . Also, according to different practical
Now consider the skid reaction S R and corresponding skid requirements, we can adjust the parameter α to maximize the
friction S F . If S R = 0 , then S F also takes zero value. This performance. This is why so many ROV products persist in
benefits to minimize the necessary Tx . In the case of S R = 0 , this kind of horizontal thruster configuration as in Fig. 6(a).
(2) becomes U z + B + W + J z + C z = Z . In practice, it is
difficult to properly handle the umbilical pull U so that to
minimize it. However, if we have B + W + J z + C z = 0 , then
can minimize the necessary Tz .
Principle 2. ROV is designed to have negative buoyancy so
that to satisfy the following condition
B + W + J z + Cz = 0 . (7)
In fact, J z and C z vary with the different soil conditions
and different burying requirements. Here, J z and C z in (7) can
be estimated under the consideration of most common soil
condition and burying requirement in practice. Fig. 7 Two case of horizontal thruster configurations.
It is a common recognition that minimize the pitch moment
M so that to increase the vehicle’s motion stability. Consider Being a ROV trencher, the vehicle’s main purpose is to
the Eq. (3). As aforementioned, umbilical pull U is difficult to trenching the sea floor and burying the cable. Under this
be properly handled, and so is M U . And for minimizing M D , consideration, forward thrust might be more critical to the
system performance than the lateral one. On the other hand, in
this is a kind of design index for the vehicle’s mechanical
practice, there are few options for the customers to freely
system. Usually, hydraulic drag D and the horizontal vectored
choice the desired thruster products. Consequently, thrusters’
thrust Tx are designed to be on the same line (or as close as arrangement in the space should be carefully considered in the
possible) so that can maximize the vehicle’s forward motion system conceptual design phase.
stability. If S R = 0 , then M S F = 0 . Consequently, to minimize
M effectively, we have to minimize M J and M C . B. Vertical Thrusters
For ROV trencher, besides providing proper vertical thrust
Principle 3. Design the jetting system so that the direction for the vehicle to up/down in the water, the vertical thrust
of J and C are both as close as possible to the vehicle’s weight system is also in charge of balancing the pitch moment caused
center. by water jetting. Consider Eq. (3). Even if Principle 2 and 3
were perfectly embodied during the system manufacturing, in

Authorized licensed use limited to: POSTECH Library. Downloaded on May 20,2022 at 11:08:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
practice, it is hard to guarantee the vehicle to always keep [4] http://www.ktsubmarine.co.kr/.
M = 0 in its cable burying process. For example, during the [5] M. Jones and M. Hirai, “A novel ROV developed for the future
jet leg deployment or burial depth changing, there are always requirements of cable installation and mainenance,” in Proc. of
additional moment acting on the vehicle’s pitch motion. From SubOptic 2001, Kyoto, Japan, T6.3.4.
this kind of pitch motion balancing point of view, the more
vertical thrusters keep away from the center line, the more [6] Guidance Notes on Fire-fighting Systems. ABS Plaza, Houston,
TX 77060 USA, 2005.
easily we can complement the pitch motion.
[7] P. Grimwood, Euro Firefigher. Jeremy Mills Publishing, 2008.
In [5], two vertical thrusters and two of horizontal thrusters
are designed such that their orientations in the xz plane can be [8] J. N. Newman, Marine Hydrodynamics. The MIT Press,
adjustable through proper mechanisms. Obviously, this kind of Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, 1977.
flexible design benefits to the easy complementation of water
jet reaction. Moreover, the entire buoyancy block is designed
to be movable in the forward and backward directions. And
this kind of structure is used to complement the vehicle’s pitch
moment caused by water jetting. Undoubtly, these kinds of
flexible mechanical structures might work to improve the
system performance. However, they also need additional
driving mechanisms and corresponding complicated control
methodologies. All of these not only increase the system
power consumption and maintenance load, but also increase
the risk of system failure. To the authors best knowledge,
simple is the best still works in most of underwater technology
areas.

V. CONCLUSION
In this paper, we present some of conceptual design
considerations for effective thrust system of a ROV trencher.
First, we analyze the external forces that act on the vehicle in
its cable burying orientation. Then, some of the optimum
considerations for the construction of vehicle’s thrust system
is presented. Also, we introduce the estimation methods for
the magnitudes of dominant ones of these external forces.
These estimation values can be used to select the (hydraulic)
thruster specification, and also used to design the thrusters
arrangement in the space.
As previously mentioned, our ROV trencher is still in its
conceptual design phase. More detailed analysis of those of
external forces acting on the vehicle and their estimation
methods should be carried out in the upcoming months. Also,
various practical cable burying scenarios should be carefully
considered so as to complete the final design of our thrust
system.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research was supported by the project titled “R&D
Center for Underwater Construction Robotics,” funded by the
Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries (MOF) and Korea Institute
of Marine Science & Technology Promotion (KIMST), Korea
(PJT200539).

REFERENCES
[1] P. Mole, J. Featherstone, S. Winter, "Cable protection –
solutions through new installation and burial approaches," in
Proc. of SubOptic 1997, San Francisco, CA, 1997, pp. 34-39.
[2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRqKdClfG0I.
[3] http://smd.co.uk/products/trenchers-self-propelled/qtrencher-
600.htm.

Authorized licensed use limited to: POSTECH Library. Downloaded on May 20,2022 at 11:08:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
View publication stats