Final answer:
Without specific context for OTIS, it is difficult to determine which design concern was not relevant. However, in general, for a robotic system in an industrial setting, making the system appear humanlike is not usually a priority as compared to protective, operational, and maintenance considerations.
Step-by-step explanation:
To determine which of the following was NOT a concern when it came to OTIS' design, we need to understand the context and function of OTIS. OTIS (Operational Telecommunications and Information System) is likely a robotic system or device used in industrial settings, although the specific acronym OTIS could refer to a variety of systems. Without additional context, it's not possible to provide an accurate answer to which option was not a concern.
However, if we consider OTIS in a general sense as a mechanical or robotic device working in an industrial setting (such as an oil tank), we can infer that:
- Protecting OTIS from being damaged by oil would be a legitimate concern given the corrosive nature of oil.
- Moving easily in the tank would also be a likely concern to ensure efficient operation.
- Removing dirty oil might be a primary function of such a device in an oil tank scenario.
Based on these considerations, option B, presenting OTIS as humanlike as possible, would likely be the correct answer, as making OTIS appear humanlike is not usually a functional requirement for industrial robotic systems, which are typically designed for efficiency, durability, and specific tasks rather than aesthetic human resemblance.