Standard Test Method for Evaluating Response Robot Sensing: Visual Acuity

Importancia y uso:

5.1 Various levels of visual acuity are essential when remotely operating robots in unstructured and often hazardous environments. Missions typically include establishing situational awareness, finding available paths, maneuvering through obstacles, identifying objects of interest, and performing detailed inspections. This test method measures robot system far-field and near-field visual acuity which are applicable to virtually every mission. These quantitative measures of performance provide a common language that allows robot users to better understand and express their own requirements and improve the way visual sensing capabilities are specified.

5.2 Multiple cameras could be incorporated into remotely operated robotic systems since a single camera is unlikely to be effective for all aspects of a mission. For example, cameras with zoom lenses are often used for far-field tasks. Cameras with close focus capabilities are often used for near-field tasks. Wide-angle lenses are often used for driving and obstacle avoidance. This test method characterizes each onboard camera to understand overall system capabilities.

5.3 This test method provides a way to unambiguously specify robot requirements in terms of the related measures of visual acuity and field of view. This helps quantify the trade-offs and general usefulness of optical vs. digital zoom cameras and fixed vs. variable focus lenses. The visual acuity charts can also help provide quantitative measures of performance within other test methods and training scenarios. See Figs. 2-4 for illustrations.

The top row shows the field of view is unchanged while the bottom row shows both resolution and acuity increasing (features become clearer).

5.4 This test method helps evaluate the effect of illumination on visual acuity. In dark environments, robots typically need to illuminate the scene to be effective. Far-field objects downrange require much greater light intensity than near-field objects close to the robot. Variable illumination helps ensure the scene is neither too dark nor overwhelmingly lighted so as to thwart the camera’s ability to discern visual details (so-called “washout” of the image). Variable illumination is especially important when quickly transitioning from far-field to near-field and back again.

5.5 Key features of response robots are that they are remotely operated from safe standoff distances, deployable at operational tempos, capable of operating in complex environments, sufficiently hardened against harsh environments, reliable and field serviceable, durable or cost-effectively disposable, and equipped with operational safeguards. As such, a major advantage of using robots in response operations is to enhance the safety and effectiveness of responders or soldiers.

5.6 This test method aligns user expectations with actual capabilities to understand the inherent trade-offs in deployable systems at any given cost. For example, an increase in image resolution typically results in improved field of view or acuity, but not necessarily both. An increase in both may not be possible for robots of a desired weight, endurance, or cost. Appropriate levels of understanding can help ensure that requirement specifications are articulated within the limit of current capabilities.

5.7 This test method provides a tangible representation of essential robot capabilities with quantifiable measures of performance. When considered with other related test methods in the suite, it facilitates communication among communities of robot users and manufacturers. As such, this test method can be used to:

5.7.1 Inspire technical innovation and guide manufacturers toward implementing combinations of capabilities necessary to perform essential mission tasks.

5.7.2 Measure and compare essential robot capabilities. This test method can establish the reliability of the system to perform specified tasks, highlight break-through capabilities, and encourage hardening of developmental systems.

5.7.3 Inform purchasing decisions, conduct acceptance testing, and align deployment objectives with statistically significant robot capabilities data captured through repeated testing and comparison of quantitative results.

5.7.4 Focus operator training and measure proficiency as a repeatable practice task that exercises actuators, sensors, and operator interfaces. The test method can be embedded into training scenarios to capture and compare quantitative scores even within uncontrolled environmental variables. This can help develop, maintain, measure, and track very perishable skills over time and enable comparisons across squads, regions, or national averages.

5.8 Although this test method was developed as part of a suite of sensing tests for response robots, it may be applicable to other domains. Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within the test method for various mission requirements.

5.9 It is recommended that users of this test method consider their particular robot requirements when interpreting the test results. The capability evaluated in this test method alone shall be interpreted according to the scope of this test method and shall not be considered as an overall indication of the capability of the robot’s mobility subsystem nor of the entire robotic system. A single test method only captures the specified single aspect of a robot’s capabilities. A more complete characterization of a robot’s capabilities requires test results from a wider set of test methods.

Subcomité:

E54.09

Volúmen:

15.08

Número ICS:

13.200 (Accident and disaster control)

Palabras clave:

abstain; autonomy; emergency responder; emergency response; mobility; OCU; operator control unit; operator station; oriented strand board; OSB; repetition; responder; response; robot; teleoperation; test suite; urban search and rescue; US&R; USAR;