Rationale

The idea matrix shows that Solution 1 is the best suited for the job based on the specifications. Using these guidelines, it should be the best solution for the parameters of the competition, including environment and use.

One con of solution 1 is its size and shape. A box is not very hydrodynamic, and it is the largest solution. As a result, it lost points in the idea matrix in the area of propulsion, as drag provides more resistance. It also lost points in the easy to operate category, as it is clunky and somewhat burdensome to use. Its bright spots were its neutral buoyancy and its ability to accommodate the robotic appendage.

Solution 2 also had some trouble because of its shape. While it was designed to make smooth landings on the floor of the pool, it did provide for excellent maneuverability. The fact that it is heavier than neutrally buoyant may play to its advantage in landing, but it makes the ROV harder to control. While this solution did not receive the worst grade on any one specification, it never received the best grade.

The main disadvantage of solution 3 is its size. While its power to size ratio is excellent, it is small and may provide trouble when trying to fit it with a robotic appendage. Additionally, it may have trouble handling all the competition materials that must be picked up along the way. The positive to this solution is its relative power and maneuverability. It would be easily operated by the control expert, although the fact that it is lighter than neutrally buoyant may not facilitate smooth movement through the water column.

Solution 1 is the solution that will be implemented. It is best suited for completing the competition tasks. The factors that were considered in the idea matrix were the specifications, and they included propulsion, buoyancy, maneuverability, size, and accommodation of the robotic appendage.