ASTM E2855-12(2021)
(Test Method)Standard Test Method for Evaluating Emergency Response Robot Capabilities: Radio Communication: Non-Line-of-Sight Range
Standard Test Method for Evaluating Emergency Response Robot Capabilities: Radio Communication: Non-Line-of-Sight Range
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 A main purpose of using robots in emergency response operations is to enhance the safety and effectiveness of emergency responders operating in hazardous or inaccessible environments. The testing results of the candidate robot shall describe, in a statistically significant way, how reliably the robot is able to perform the specified types of tasks and thus provide emergency responders sufficiently high levels of confidence to determine the applicability of the robot.
5.2 This test method addresses robot performance requirements expressed by emergency responders and representatives from other interested organizations. The performance data captured within this test method are indicative of the testing robot’s capabilities. Having available a roster of successfully tested robots with associated capabilities data to guide procurement and deployment decisions for emergency responders is consistent with the guideline of “Governments at all levels have a responsibility to develop detailed, robust, all-hazards response plans” as stated in National Response Framework.
5.3 This test method is part of a test suite and is intended to provide a capability baseline for the robotic communications systems based on the identified needs of the emergency response community. Adequate testing performance will not ensure successful operation in all emergency response environments due to possible extreme communications difficulties. Rather, this standard is intended to provide a common comparison that can aid in choosing appropriate systems. This standard is also intended to encourage development of improved and innovative communications systems for use on emergency response robots.
5.4 The standard apparatus is specified to be easily fabricated to facilitate self-evaluation by robot developers and provide practice tasks for emergency responders to exercise robot actuators, sensors, and operator interfaces. The standard apparatus can also be used to support operator training ...
SCOPE
1.1 Purpose:
1.1.1 The purpose of this test method, as a part of a suite of radio communication test methods, is to quantitatively evaluate a teleoperated robot’s (see Terminology E2521) capability to perform maneuvering and inspection tasks in a non-line-of-sight environment.
1.1.2 Robots shall possess a certain set of radio communication capabilities, including performing maneuvering and inspection tasks in a non-line-of-sight environment, to suit critical operations for emergency responses. The capability for a robot to perform these types of tasks in obstructed areas down range is critical for emergency response operations. This test method specifies a standard set of apparatuses, procedures, and metrics to evaluate the robot/operator capabilities for performing these tasks.
1.1.3 Emergency response robots shall be able to operate remotely using the equipped radios in line-of-sight environments, in non-line-of-sight environments, and for signal penetration through such impediments as buildings, rubbles, and tunnels. Additional capabilities include operating in the presence of electromagnetic interference and providing link security and data logging. Standard test methods are required to evaluate whether candidate robots meet these requirements.
1.1.4 ASTM E54.08.01 Task Group on Robotics specifies a radio communication test suite, which consists of a set of test methods for evaluating these communication capabilities. This non-line-of-sight range test method is a part of the radio communication test suite. The apparatuses associated with the test methods challenge specific robot capabilities in repeatable ways to facilitate comparison of different robot models as well as particular configurations of similar robot models.
1.1.5 This test method establishes procedures, apparatuses, and metrics for specifying and testing the capability of radio (wireless) links used between the operator station and the t...
General Information
Relations
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: E2855 − 12 (Reapproved 2021)
Standard Test Method for
Evaluating Emergency Response Robot Capabilities: Radio
Communication: Non-Line-of-Sight Range
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E2855; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope testing robot in a non-line-of-sight environment. These links
include the command and control channel(s) and video, audio,
1.1 Purpose:
and other sensor data telemetry.
1.1.1 The purpose of this test method, as a part of a suite of
radiocommunicationtestmethods,istoquantitativelyevaluate 1.1.6 This test method is intended to apply to ground based
a teleoperated robot’s (see Terminology E2521) capability to robotic systems and small unmanned aerial systems (sUAS)
perform maneuvering and inspection tasks in a non-line-of-
capable of hovering to perform maneuvering and inspection
sight environment.
tasks down range for emergency response applications.
1.1.2 Robots shall possess a certain set of radio communi-
1.1.7 This test method specifies an apparatus that is, first of
cation capabilities, including performing maneuvering and
all, an essentially clear radio frequency channel for testing. In
inspection tasks in a non-line-of-sight environment, to suit
addition, a standard line-of-sight barrier between the testing
critical operations for emergency responses. The capability for
operator control unit (OCU) and the robot is specified. Fig. 1
arobottoperformthesetypesoftasksinobstructedareasdown
provides an illustration.
range is critical for emergency response operations. This test
method specifies a standard set of apparatuses, procedures, and
NOTE1—Frequencycoordinationandinteroperabilityarenotaddressed
metrics to evaluate the robot/operator capabilities for perform- in this standard. These issues should be resolved by the affected agencies
(Fire, Police, and Urban Search and Rescue) and written into Standard
ing these tasks.
Operating Procedures (SOPs) that guide the responses to emergency
1.1.3 Emergency response robots shall be able to operate
situations.
remotely using the equipped radios in line-of-sight
environments, in non-line-of-sight environments, and for sig-
1.1.8 The radio communication test suite quantifies elemen-
nal penetration through such impediments as buildings,
tal radio communication capabilities necessary for robots
rubbles, and tunnels. Additional capabilities include operating
intended for emergency response applications. As such, based
in the presence of electromagnetic interference and providing
on their particular capability requirements, users of this test
link security and data logging. Standard test methods are
suite can select only the applicable test methods and can
required to evaluate whether candidate robots meet these
individually weight particular test methods or particular met-
requirements.
rics within a test method. The testing results should collec-
1.1.4 ASTM E54.08.01 Task Group on Robotics specifies a
tively represent an emergency response robot’s overall radio
radio communication test suite, which consists of a set of test
communication capability. These test results can be used to
methods for evaluating these communication capabilities. This
guide procurement specifications and acceptance testing for
non-line-of-sight range test method is a part of the radio
robots intended for emergency response applications.
communication test suite. The apparatuses associated with the
test methods challenge specific robot capabilities in repeatable
NOTE 2—As robotic systems are more widely applied, emergency
ways to facilitate comparison of different robot models as well responders might identify additional or advanced robotic radio commu-
nication capability requirements to help them respond to emergency
as particular configurations of similar robot models.
situations. They might also desire to use robots with higher levels of
1.1.5 This test method establishes procedures, apparatuses,
autonomy,beyondteleoperateontohelpreducetheirworkload—seeNIST
and metrics for specifying and testing the capability of radio
Special Publication 1011-II-1.0. Further, emergency responders in ex-
(wireless) links used between the operator station and the
panded emergency response domains might also desire to apply robotic
technologies to their situations, a source for new sets of requirements.As
a result, additional standards within the suite would be developed. This
This test method is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E54 on
standard is, nevertheless, standalone and complete.
Homeland Security Applications and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee
E54.09 on Response Robots.
1.2 Performing Location—This test method shall be per-
Current edition approved Jan. 1, 2021. Published January 2021. Originally
formed in a testing laboratory or the field where the specified
approved in 2012. Last previous edition approved in 2012 as E2855 – 12. DOI:
10.1520/E2855-12R21. apparatus and environmental conditions are implemented.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
E2855 − 12 (2021)
Left: The non-line-of-sight range test method uses an airstrip or flat, paved road with robot test stations placed in front of and behind a wall constructed of stacked 12
m (40 ft) International Standards Organization (ISO) shipping containers. Right: Robot test stations are prototyped behind the wall with targets on the barrels for visual
inspection tasks and circular paths for maneuvering tasks.
FIG. 1 Test Fabrication at An Air Strip
1.3 Units—The values stated in SI units shall be the stan- Terminology, Version 2.0
dard. The values given in parentheses are not precise math- NIST Special Publication 1011-II-1.0 Autonomy Levels for
ematical conversions to inch-pound units. They are close Unmanned Systems (ALFUS) Framework Volume II:
approximate equivalents for the purpose of specifying material Framework Models, Version 1.0
dimensions or quantities that are readily available to avoid
3. Terminology
excessive fabrication costs of test apparatuses while maintain-
ing repeatability and reproducibility of the test method results.
3.1 Definitions:
These values given in parentheses facilitate testing but are not
3.1.1 abstain, v—the action of the manufacturer or desig-
considered standard.
nated operator of the testing robot choosing not to enter the
test. Any decision to take such an action shall be conveyed to
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the
the administrator before the test begins. The test form shall be
safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the
clearly marked as such, indicating that the manufacturer
responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-
acknowledges the omission of the performance data while the
priate safety, health, and environmental practices and deter-
test method was available at the test time.
mine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
3.1.1.1 Discussion—Abstentions may occur when the robot
1.5 This international standard was developed in accor-
configuration is neither designed nor equipped to perform the
dance with internationally recognized principles on standard-
tasks as specified in the test method. Practices within the test
ization established in the Decision on Principles for the
apparatus prior to testing should allow for establishing the
Development of International Standards, Guides and Recom-
applicability of the test method for the given robot.
mendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical
Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee. 3.1.2 administrator, n—person who conducts the test—The
administrator shall ensure the readiness of the apparatus, the
2. Referenced Documents
test form, and any required measuring devices such as stop-
watch and light meter; the administrator shall ensure that the
2.1 ASTM Standards:
specified or required environmental conditions are met; the
E2521 Terminology for Evaluating Response Robot Capa-
administrator shall notify the operator when the safety belay is
bilities
available and ensure that the operator has either decided not to
E2592 Practice for Evaluating Response Robot Capabilities:
use it or assigned a person to handle it properly; and the
Logistics: Packaging for Urban Search and Rescue Task
administrator shall call the operator to start the test and record
Force Equipment Caches
the performance data and any notable observations during the
2.2 Additional Documents:
test.
National Response Framework U.S. Department of Home-
3.1.3 emergency response robot, or response robot, n—a
land Security
remotely deployed device intended to perform operational
NIST Special Publication 1011-I-2.0 Autonomy Levels for
tasks at operational tempos to assist the operators to handle a
Unmanned Systems (ALFUS) Framework Volume I:
disaster.
3.1.3.1 Discussion—A response robot is designed to serve
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or as an extension of the operator for gaining improved remote
contact ASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM
Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on
the ASTM website. Available from National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 100
Available from Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), P.O. Box Bureau Dr., Stop 1070, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-1070, http://www.nist.gov/el/isd/
10055, Hyattsville, MD 20782-8055, http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nrf/. ks/autonomy_levels.cfm.
E2855 − 12 (2021)
situational awareness and for accomplishing the tasks remotely 3.1.9 operator station, n—apparatusforhostingtheoperator
through the equipped capabilities. The use of a robot is and her/his operator control unit (OCU, see NIST Special
designed to reduce risk to the equipped capabilities. It is Publication 1011-I-2.0) to teleoperate (see Terminology
designed to reduce risk to the operator while improving E2521) the robot. The operator station shall be positioned in
effectiveness and efficiency of the mission. The desired fea- such a manner as to insulate the operator from the sights and
tures of a response robot include: rapid deployment; remote sounds generated at the test apparatuses.
operation from an appropriate standoff distance; mobile in
3.1.10 radio interference, n—adverse effect on the transfer
complex environments; sufficiently hardened against harsh
of data when unrelated external signals are received by a robot
environments; reliable and field serviceable; durable and/or
receiver or an operator station receiver.
cost effectively disposable; and equipped with operational
3.1.10.1 Discussion—In licensed frequency bands such as
safeguards.
those used by the public safety community, each radio trans-
mitter and receiver is assigned a unique frequency channel
3.1.4 fault condition, n—a certain situation or occurrence
typically with limits on power emissions. Some radio systems
during testing whereby the robot either cannot continue with-
aredesignedtoworkeffectivelywhenmultiplesystemsoperate
out human intervention or has performed some defined rules
in the same frequency band at the same time. Many of these
infraction.
systems can be found in the unlicensed Industrial, Scientific,
3.1.4.1 Discussion—Faultconditionsincluderoboticsystem
and Medical (ISM) frequency bands.
malfunctions such as de-tracking, task execution problems
such as excessive deviation from a specified path, or uncon-
3.1.11 repetition, n—robot’scompletionofthetaskasspeci-
trolled behaviors and other safety violations which require
fied in the test method and readiness for repeating the same
administrative intervention.
task when required.
3.1.11.1 Discussion—In a traversing task, the entire mobil-
3.1.5 human-scale, adj—used to indicate that the objects,
ity mechanism shall be behind the START point before the
terrains, or tasks specified in this test method are in a scale
traverse and shall pass the END point to complete a repetition.
consistent with the environments and structures typically
A test method can specify returning to the START point to
negotiated by humans, although possibly compromised or
complete the task. Multiple repetitions, performed in the same
collapsedenoughtolimithumanaccess.Also,thattheresponse
test condition, may be used to establish the tested capability to
robotsconsideredinthiscontextareinavolumetricandweight
a certain degree of statistical significance as specified by the
scale appropriate for operation within these environments.
test sponsor.
3.1.5.1 Discussion—No precise size and weight ranges are
3.1.12 test event, or event, n—a set of testing activities that
specified for this term. The test apparatus constrains the
are planned and organized by the test sponsor to be held at the
environment in which the tasks are performed. Such
one or multiple designated test site(s).
constraints, in turn, limit the types of robots to be considered
applicable to emergency response operations.
3.1.13 test form, n—a collection of data fields or graphics
used to record the testing results along with the associated
3.1.6 line-of-sight communications, n—propagating electro-
information. A single test form shall not be used to record the
magnetic energy with a direct path between a transmitting
results of multiple trials.
radio antenna and a receiving radio antenna which are in visual
contact with each other with no obstructions between them. In 3.1.14 test sponsor, n—an organization or individual that
the ideal case, the only paths that the radio waves can take in
commissions a particular test event and receives the corre-
the line-of-sight case are either the direct path between the sponding test results.
transmitter and receiver or a path that corresponds to a single
3.1.15 test suite, n—a designed collection of test methods
reflection of the radio wave off of the ground before it
that are used collectively to evaluate the performance of a
encounters the receiving antenna.
robot’s particular subsystem or functionality, including
3.1.7 non-line-of-sight communications, n—propagating mobility, manipulation, sensors, energy/power,
communications, human-system interaction (HSI), logistics,
electromagnetic energy with no direct path between a trans-
mitting radio anten
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.