ASTM E3132/E3132M-17

Standard Practice for Evaluating Response Robot Logistics: System Configuration

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 These basic requirements for response robots that help enhance the safety and effectiveness of responders or soldiers include: the robots are designed to be 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.  
5.2 This practice aligns user expectations with actual capabilities to understand the inherent trade-offs in deployable systems at any given cost. For example, a design issue of the number of batteries to be packed on a robot could affect the desired weight, endurance, or cost. Appropriate levels of understanding can help ensure that requirement specifications are articulated within the limit of current capabilities.  
5.3 This practice provides a tangible representation of essential robot capabilities with quantifiable measures of performance. It facilitates communication among communities of robot users and manufacturers. As such, this practice can be used to help:  
5.3.1 Inspire technical innovation and guide developers toward implementing the combinations of capabilities necessary to perform essential mission tasks.  
5.3.2 Measure and compare essential robot capabilities. This practice can help establish the reliability of the system to perform specified tasks, highlight break-through capabilities, and encourage hardening of developmental systems.  
5.3.3 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.  
5.3.4 Focus operator training and measure proficiency as a repeatable practice task that exercises actuators, sensors, and operator interfaces. The practice can help capture and compare quantitative scores even within uncontrolled environmen...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice, as a part of the response robot logistics test suite, specifies the requirements of identifying and documenting the configuration of a robot system under test as well as the associated processes for doing it. The aspects to be included in such a configuration practice are the key dimensions and weights, the existent subsystems and key components, as well as the key timing requirements for setting up and maintaining the system.  
1.2 This practice applies to ground, aerial, and aquatic response robot systems controlled remotely by an operator from a standoff distance appropriate for the intended missions. Such robot systems may further possess certain assistive features or autonomous behaviors.  
1.3 Performing Location—This practice may be performed anywhere the specific apparatuses are implemented and environmental conditions are met.  
1.4 Units—The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in nonconformance with the standard. Both units are referenced to facilitate acquisition of materials internationally and minimize fabrication costs.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

General Information

• Status: Published
• Publication Date: 30-Sep-2017
• ICS: 25.040.30 - Industrial robots. Manipulators
• Technical Committee: E54 - Homeland Security Applications
• Drafting Committee: E54.09 - Response Robots

Relations

• Refers: ASTM E2830-11(2020) - Standard Test Method for Evaluating the Mobility Capabilities of Emergency Response Robots Using Towing Tasks: Grasped Sleds
• Effective Date: 01-Jan-2020
• Refers: ASTM E2592-16 - Standard Practice for Evaluating Response Robot Capabilities: Logistics: Packaging for Urban Search and Rescue Task Force Equipment Caches
• Effective Date: 01-Jan-2016
• Refers: ASTM E2830-11 - Standard Test Method for Evaluating the Mobility Capabilities of Emergency Response Robots Using Towing Tasks: Grasped Sleds
• Effective Date: 01-Jul-2011
• Refers: ASTM E2592-07 - Standard Practice for Evaluating Cache Packaged Weight and Volume of Robots for Urban Search and Rescue
• Effective Date: 01-Oct-2007
• Refers: ASTM E2521-07a - Standard Terminology for Urban Search and Rescue Robotic Operations
• Effective Date: 01-Aug-2007
• Refers: ASTM E2521-07 - Standard Terminology for Urban Search and Rescue Robotic Operations
• Effective Date: 01-Feb-2007

Overview

ASTM E3132/E3132M-17, Standard Practice for Evaluating Response Robot Logistics: System Configuration, provides a structured approach for identifying and documenting the configuration of ground, aerial, and aquatic response robots. Developed by ASTM International Committee E54 on Homeland Security Applications, this practice ensures that operators, manufacturers, and evaluators can consistently capture essential data on robot dimensions, subsystems, components, and performance characteristics. Adhering to this international standard supports improved safety, reliability, and communication among all stakeholders in the emergency response community.

Key Topics

Core Elements of System Configuration Evaluation:

• Identification and Documentation: The standard outlines methods to accurately identify and record the make, model, and unique configuration of response robots, including subsystems and components.
• Measurements and Timings: It specifies accurate procedures for measuring and documenting dimensions, weights, and setup time required to prepare the system for operation.
• Photographic and Video Documentation: The practice requires comprehensive visual records-including photographs and videos-of the robot and all key components, to aid clear communication and repeatability.
• Subsystem Verification: Each major subsystem (such as mobility, power, communications, and manipulators) is verified for functionality, with details about configuration, capabilities, and maintenance needs.
• Safety Features: Documentation includes capturing the presence and locations of critical safety elements such as emergency stop controls or pinch hazard warnings.
• International Units Compatibility: The standard accommodates both SI and inch-pound units, facilitating international adoption and minimizing fabrication costs.

Applications

Practical Uses of ASTM E3132/E3132M-17:

• Procurement and Deployment: Provides critical information for responders, law enforcement, and defense organizations to make informed purchasing and fielding decisions based on clear, quantifiable data.
• Operator Training: Standardized configuration data and repeatable practices help trainers and operators measure proficiency, maintain skills, and align expectations with true system capabilities.
• System Comparison and Testing: Enables direct comparison between robot models and configurations, highlighting strengths, weaknesses, and trade-offs-such as endurance, weight, or subsystem integration-across different platforms.
• Innovation and Development: Guides makers and developers in aligning new feature development with operational needs and emerging mission requirements.
• Maintenance and Serviceability: Details the tools, procedures, and times required for routine service, helping organizations prepare for field repairs and system upkeep.
• Acceptance and Performance Testing: Supports objective acceptance criteria and operational testing through consistent documentation and measurement of setup, functionality, and component integration.

Related Standards

Supporting and Referenced ASTM Standards:

• ASTM E2521: Terminology for Evaluating Response Robot Capabilities
• ASTM E2592: Practice for Evaluating Response Robot Capabilities: Logistics: Packaging for Urban Search and Rescue Task Force Equipment Caches
• ASTM E2830: Test Method for Evaluating the Mobility Capabilities of Emergency Response Robots Using Towing Tasks: Grasped Sleds
• ASTM E2854: Test Method for Evaluating Emergency Response Robot Capabilities: Radio Communication: Line-of-Sight Range
• ASTM E2855: Test Method for Radio Communication: Non-Line-of-Sight Range

Conclusion

Adoption of ASTM E3132/E3132M-17 standardizes the way emergency response robots are configured, documented, and tested. By providing a common language and repeatable procedures, this standard delivers significant practical value to robot developers, manufacturers, and user organizations. It supports reliable operation, consistent training, informed procurement, and robust system comparisons-thereby enhancing mission effectiveness and responder safety in complex and hazardous environments.

Keywords: response robot logistics, system configuration, emergency response, robot standard, ASTM E3132/E3132M, robot documentation, homeland security, robot evaluation, robot testing, operator training, robot safety.

Standards Content (Sample)

This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the
Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
Designation:E3132/E3132M −17
Standard Practice for
Evaluating Response Robot Logistics: System
Configuration
ThisstandardisissuedunderthefixeddesignationE3132/E3132M;thenumberimmediatelyfollowingthedesignationindicatestheyear
of original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision.Anumber in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval.
A superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
INTRODUCTION
The robotics community needs ways to measure whether a particular robot system is capable of
performing specific missions in unstructured and often hazardous environments. These missions
decompose into elemental robot tasks that can be represented individually as standard test methods
andpractices.Theassociatedtestapparatusesandperformancemetricsprovideatangiblelanguageto
communicate various mission requirements. They also enable repeatable testing to establish the
reliability of robot capabilities.
ASTM International Committee E54 on Homeland Security Applications specifies standard test
methods and practices for evaluating such robot capabilities. These standards facilitate comparisons
across robot models or various configurations of a particular robot model. They support robot
researchers, manufacturers, and user organizations in different ways. Researchers use the standards to
understand mission requirements, encourage innovations, and demonstrate breakthrough capabilities.
Manufacturers use the standards to evaluate design decisions, integrate emerging technologies, and
harden systems. User organizations leverage the resulting robot capabilities data to guide purchasing
decisions, align deployment objectives, and focus training with standard measures of operator
proficiency. Associated usage guides describe how such standards can be applied to support these
various objectives.
The overall suite of the standards addresses robotic critical subsystems, including maneuvering,
mobility, dexterity, sensing, energy, communications, durability, proficiency, autonomy, logistics,
safety, and terminology. This practice is part of the logistics test suite and addresses the issue of
identifying robot system configuration.
1. Scope 1.3 Performing Location—This practice may be performed
anywhere the specific apparatuses are implemented and envi-
1.1 This practice, as a part of the response robot logistics
ronmental conditions are met.
test suite, specifies the requirements of identifying and docu-
menting the configuration of a robot system under test as well
1.4 Units—The values stated in either SI units or inch-
as the associated processes for doing it. The aspects to be
pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The
included in such a configuration practice are the key dimen-
values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents;
sions and weights, the existent subsystems and key
therefore,eachsystemshallbeusedindependentlyoftheother.
components, as well as the key timing requirements for setting
Combiningvaluesfromthetwosystemsmayresultinnoncon-
up and maintaining the system.
formance with the standard. Both units are referenced to
facilitate acquisition of materials internationally and minimize
1.2 This practice applies to ground, aerial, and aquatic
fabrication costs.
response robot systems controlled remotely by an operator
from a standoff distance appropriate for the intended missions.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the
Such robot systems may further possess certain assistive
safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the
features or autonomous behaviors.
responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-
priate safety, health, and environmental practices and deter-
This practice is under the jurisdiction ofASTM Committee E54 on Homeland mine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
Security Applications and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee E54.09 on
1.6 This international standard was developed in accor-
Response Robots.
dance with internationally recognized principles on standard-
Current edition approved Oct. 1, 2017. Published November 2017. DOI:
10.1520/E3132_E3132M-17. ization established in the Decision on Principles for the
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
E3132/E3132M−17
Development of International Standards, Guides and Recom- consumableitemssuchasducttape,cableties,andotheritems.
mendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Documentationshallalsoincludedetailedphotographsofallof
Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee. the above as well as videos of routine maintenance tasks (for
example, battery change). The system configuration shall
2. Referenced Documents
remain the same for all relevant tests to enable direct compari-
son of performance and to identify capability trade-offs be-
2.1 ASTM Standards:
tween different configurations. Any number of identified sys-
E2521Terminology for Evaluating Response Robot Capa-
tem configurations can be subjected to testing.
bilities
E2592Practice for Evaluating Response Robot Capabilities:
5. Significance and Use
Logistics: Packaging for Urban Search and Rescue Task
5.1 These basic requirements for response robots that help
Force Equipment Caches
enhance the safety and effectiveness of responders or soldiers
E2830Test Method for Evaluating the Mobility Capabilities
include: the robots are designed to be remotely operated from
of Emergency Response Robots Using Towing Tasks:
safe standoff distances, deployable at operational tempos,
Grasped Sleds
capable of operating in complex environments, sufficiently
E2854Test Method for Evaluating Emergency Response
hardened against harsh environments, reliable and field
Robot Capabilities: Radio Communication: Line-of-Sight
serviceable, durable or cost-effectively disposable, and
Range
equipped with operational safeguards.
E2855Test Method for Evaluating Emergency Response
Robot Capabilities: Radio Communication: Non-Line-of-
5.2 This practice aligns user expectations with actual capa-
Sight Range bilities to understand the inherent trade-offs in deployable
systems at any given cost. For example, a design issue of the
3. Terminology
number of batteries to be packed on a robot could affect the
desired weight, endurance, or cost. Appropriate levels of
3.1 The following terms are used in this practice and are
understanding can help ensure that requirement specifications
defined in Terminology E2521: administrator or test
are articulated within the limit of current capabilities.
administrator, operator, operator station, response robot or
emergency response robot, teleoperation, test event or event,
5.3 This practice provides a tangible representation of
test form, test sponsor, test suite, and trial.
essential robot capabilities with quantifiable measures of per-
formance. It facilitates communication among communities of
3.2 The following terms are used in this practice and are
robot users and manufacturers. As such, this practice can be
defined in the ALFUS Framework Volume I: autonomous,
used to help:
autonomy,levelsofautonomy,human-robotinteraction,opera-
5.3.1 Inspire technical innovation and guide developers
tor control unit (OCU), and semi-autonomous.
toward implementing the combinations of capabilities neces-
4. Summary of Practice sary to perform essential mission tasks.
5.3.2 Measure and compare essential robot capabilities.
4.1 This practice specifies a way in which a robot system’s
This practice can help establish the reliability of the system to
configuration shall be identified and documented.
perform specified tasks, highlight break-through capabilities,
NOTE 1—The resulting information is intended to provide the users,
and encourage hardening of developmental systems.
who could be responders, law enforcement officials, and soldiers, a quick
5.3.3 Inform purchasing decisions, conduct acceptance
and overall perspective of their response robot systems and help them
testing, and align deployment objectives with statistically
make decisions on procurement, deployment, or operator training.
significant robot capabilities data captured through repeated
4.2 The particular system configuration to be tested shall be
testing and comparison of quantitative results.
comprehensively identified and uniquely named by using the
5.3.4 Focus operator training and measure proficiency as a
make, model, and applicable configuration name as provided
repeatable practice task that exercises actuators, sensors, and
by the manufacturer. This identification process includes mea-
operator interfaces.The practice can help capture and compare
suringthetimerequiredtobringthesystemtotheoperationally
quantitative scores even within uncontrolled environmental
ready state, called setup time. The process, then, involves
variables and, in turn, help develop, maintain, measure, and
measuring and documenting the dimensions and weights of all
track very perishable skills over time and enable comparisons
the subsystem, components, and as-shipped packaging. These
across squads, regions, or national averages.
include the robot, OCU, and other sustainment and mainte-
5.4 Although this practice is scoped for homeland security
nance items such as power sources and spare parts. This
applications, it could be much more wildly applicable.
identification process also lists subsystems, payloads, and
However, it shall be the responsibilities of the respective
items in the field-maintenance kit. These include tools and
practitioners to verify the extents of applicability of this
practice to their domains.
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
6. Apparatus
contact ASTM Customer Service at [e-mail]. For Annual Book of ASTM
Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on
6.1 AsillustratedinFig.1,twowallsandafloorofaneutral
the ASTM website.
color and entirely marked with a 20 cm [8 in.] grid shall be
NIST Special Publication 1011-I-2.0, Autonomy Levels for Unmanned Systems
(ALFUS), Framework Volume I: Terminology, Version 2.0. used to provide a full and consistent background scale for
E3132/E3132M−17
NOTE 1—The robot just fits within this booth; a larger booth would be necessary for any larger robot.
FIG. 1Example of a Standard Environment in which a Robot May be Photographed for Documentation
photographing the robot system under test. Such walls are peratures and excessive moisture may also be stressful and
typicallymadeofcommerciallyavailableorientedstrandboard cause damages to robot components or unexpected robot
(OSB) or perforated hardboards. behaviors.
6.1.1 The walls shall be large enough such that all parts of
7.2 Identify all the emergency stop button(s) on the robot
the object being photographed are covered.
chassis and the OCU before operating or interacting with the
6.1.2 Photographs shall be taken with a good quality digital
robot.
still camera. A digital single-lens reflex or mirrorless large
7.3 While the robot is active and the emergency stop button
sensor camera is highly recommended.
is disengaged, avoid:
6.1.3 To reduce perspective and optical distortion, photo-
7.3.1 the areas directly in front of and behind the robot,
graphsshouldbetakenwithaslongalens(oras“zoomed-in”)
7.3.2 the reachable radius of the robot’s manipulator, as
as is practical within the confines of the available space.
equipped, and
6.1.4 Itisrecommendedthatstudiostrobe(flash)equipment
7.3.3 touchingtherobototherthantoengagetheemergency
be used to allow smaller apertures (increasing depth of field to
stop button.
ensure that the whole robot is in focus), reduce image noise,
and provide better image clarity. Lighting should be soft
8. Procedure
(diffuse) rather than direct. This may be achieved by placing
white sheeting across the ceiling and two open sides and
8.1 Identification Scope:
positioning the strobes so that their light is reflected off the
8.1.1 The comprehensive configuration of a robot system
sheets rather than directed at the equipment being photo-
that shall be identified and documented includes the robot, its
graphed.
OCU, and all the applicable subsystems or major components,
6.1.5 As many video cameras as needed shall be used to
accessories, and payload.
document the entireties of the required operations, as specified
8.1.1.1 Keywords are recommended to be used for the
in Section 8.
documentation purposes. Such a practice facilitates identifica-
tion of common characteristics among different robot systems
6.2 Commercially made weight scales and tape measures
and helps maintain consistent terminology.
that are accurate to at least the tenth digit shall be used for the
measurements as specified in Section 8.
NOTE 2—For example, the keywords “wheels” and “tracks” should be
used as much as applicable to specify the locomotion mechanism.
6.3 Timing devices, such as stopwatches, shall be available
to measure the lengths of time of required operations. The
8.1.2 All the manual adjustments and settings available to
documentedtimemaybeverifiedbyobservingthecorrespond-
onboardsubsystemsorcomponentsshallbedeterminedandset
ing video(s).
as such and shall remain the same throughout the entire set of
the identified tests. Any further such adjustment(s) during
7. Hazards
testing constitutes a new testing configuration for the robot
system.
7.1 Besides 1.5, which addresses common safety and health
concerns, users of this practice shall also address equipment 8.1.2.1 Such specific settings and manual adjustment(s) and
preservation as well as additional, specific safety concerns. In the processes of making them shall be documented in text,
addition, environmental conditions, such as high or low tem- photos, or videos, or combinations thereof.
E3132/E3132M−17
8.1.3 For US&R types of deployments, Practice E2592 8.2.2 Packaging—Identify and list all the packaging cases
standardizes procedures for identifying the volume and weight for the robot system:
of cache packaging, robot system setup time, as well as tool
8.2.2.1 Includeapictureforeachoftheidentifiedcases.See
requirements.Therefore, Practice E2592 shall be followed and Fig. 3 for an example.
the applicable, covered aspects shall not be repeated in this
8.2.2.2 The documentation table shall include the informa-
configuration process.
tion of the type, model, dimensions, and weight of each of the
identified cases. See Table 1 for an example.
8.2 System Configuration Identification and Setup Pro-
8.2.3 Setup Time—Measure the elapsed time—the time
cesses:
needed between when the robot system, while in its transpor-
NOTE 3—The purpose of this step is only to identify and document an
tation packaging, is completely unloaded on the ground to
overall perspective of a robot subsystem. When required, specific subsys-
when the system has been fully assembled and all the subsys-
tem or component test methods are either available or being specified for
tem functions have been verified as functional.
testing their respective capabilities.
8.2.3.1 Robot systems might arrive with various levels of
8.2.1 All the applicable subsystems shall be identified,
readiness, from needing to be unpacked and assembled to
documented, and verified to be functional. The associated
being fully functional.Any application of 8.1.3 also affects the
setting up and maintenance procedures shall be identified,
setup time. Any comparison of such setup time lengths shall
videotaped, photographs, and their respective lengths of time
take these differences into consideration.
measured.
8.2.3.2 The time spent on required manual adjustment(s)
NOTE 4—Video recording and photographs help robot users understand
shall be included as a part of the setup time.
and follow the processes.
8.2.3.3 When errors occur during the process, correct them
8.2.1.1 Tables and pictures shall be used, in sufficient
while leaving the timer running, note the errors, time of
amounts, for every step within this process. Each picture shall
occurrences, and actions taken. Continue the setup process
have a descriptive caption that enables identification(s) of the
whenpossibleuntilwheneithertherobotsystemisreadyorthe
subject subsystem or component(s), or both. The associated
process can no longer continue.
key characteristics shall also be marked on the respective
8.2.3.4 The test sponsor may choose to average the setup
pictures. Pictures shall also be used to enable identifications of
time among multiple test trials or among multiple operators’
the locations of the subsystems or components, or both, on the
time results. Such choices shall be noted. The
...