ASTM E2801-11(2020)

Standard Test Method for Evaluating Emergency Response Robot Capabilities: Mobility: Confined Area Obstacles: Gaps

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 negotiate the specified types of obstacles, 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 performance 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 apparatus is scalable to constrain robot maneuverability during task performance for a range of robot sizes in confined areas associated with emergency response operations. Variants of the apparatus provide minimum lateral clearance of 2.4 m (8 ft) for robots expected to operate around the environments such as cluttered city streets, parking lots, and building lobbies; minimum lateral clearance of 1.2 m (4 ft) for robots expected to operate in and around the environments such as large buildings, stairwells, and urban sidewalks; minimum lateral clearance of 0.6 m (2 ft) for robots expected to operate within the environments such as dwellings and work spaces, buses and airplanes, and semi-collapsed structures; minimum lateral clearance of less than 0.6 m (2 ft) with a minimum vertical clearance adjustable from 0.6 m (2 ft) to 10 cm (4 in.) for robots expected to deploy through breech...
SCOPE
1.1 Purpose:  
1.1.1 The purpose of this test method is to quantitatively evaluate a teleoperated ground robot’s (see Terminology E2521) capability of crossing horizontal gaps in confined areas.  
1.1.2 Robots shall possess a certain set of mobility capabilities, including negotiating obstacles, to suit critical operations such as emergency responses. A horizontal gap with an unknown edge condition is a type of obstacle that exists in emergency response and other environments. These environments often pose constraints to robotic mobility to various degrees. This test method specifies apparatuses, procedures, and metrics to standardize this testing.  
1.1.3 The test apparatuses are scalable to provide a range of lateral dimensions to constrain the robotic mobility during task performance. Fig. 1 shows three apparatus sizes to test robots intended for different emergency response scenarios.  
FIG. 1 Mobility: Confined Area Obstacles: Gaps Apparatuses  
1.1.4 Emergency response ground robots shall be able to handle many types of obstacles and terrain complexities. The required mobility capabilities include traversing gaps, hurdles, stairs, slopes, various types of floor surfaces or terrains, and confined passageways. Yet additional mobility requirements include sustained speeds and towing capabilities. Standard test methods are required to evaluate whether candidate robots meet these requirements.  
1.1.5 ASTM Task Group E54.08.01 on Robotics specifies a mobility test suite, which consists of a set of test methods for evaluating these mobility capability requirements. This confined area gap test method is a part of the mobility 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.  
1.1.6 The mobility test suite quantifies elemental mobility...

General Information

• Status: Published
• Publication Date: 31-Dec-2019
• ICS: 13.200 - Accident and disaster control
• Technical Committee: E54 - Homeland Security Applications
• Drafting Committee: E54.09 - Response Robots

Relations

• Replaces: ASTM E2801-11 - Standard Test Method for Evaluating Emergency Response Robot Capabilities: Mobility: Confined Area Obstacles: Gaps
• 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 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 E2801-11(2020): Standard Test Method for Evaluating Emergency Response Robot Capabilities: Mobility: Confined Area Obstacles: Gaps establishes a quantitative procedure to assess how effectively teleoperated ground robots can traverse horizontal gaps in confined environments. Designed for emergency response scenarios, this standard delivers a repeatable and statistically significant approach to determining robot mobility and obstacle-negotiation performance, supporting higher confidence for procurement and deployment decisions by emergency responders and organizations.

Key Topics

• Robot Mobility in Confined Areas: The standard focuses on how response robots handle gaps of varying widths within spaces mimicking real-life environments, from building interiors to urban streets and rubble-filled disaster sites.
• Standardized Test Apparatus: Three scalable test setups provide different lateral clearances (2.4 m, 1.2 m, and 0.6 m), reflecting expected operational settings, such as public areas, building interiors, and confined voids.
• Performance Metrics: The robot's gap-crossing capability is established by determining the widest gap successfully traversed under controlled and repeatable conditions, further documented through the number of successful repetitions.
• Operator Influence: Testing is conducted via teleoperation from an insulated operator station. Operator skill, feedback, and proficiency are captured, recognizing the human factors involved in robot deployment under emergency response conditions.
• Environmental Variables: Test conditions may include different surface types, lighting levels, humidity, and other environmental factors to mimic the diversity of real-world challenges.

Applications

• Emergency Response Robot Evaluation: The primary use is to inform emergency management agencies, urban search and rescue (US&R) teams, and public safety organizations when selecting robots capable of negotiating obstacles commonly found in disasters such as collapsed buildings or hazardous industrial sites.
• Procurement and Acceptance Testing: Results generated according to ASTM E2801-11(2020) quantify robot mobility performance, aiding in procurement decisions and acceptance testing for field deployment.
• Operator Training and Proficiency: The standard test method also serves as a training tool for operators, ensuring familiarity with robot control in challenging, gap-filled environments to boost efficiency and safety during actual emergencies.
• Research and Development: Developers and manufacturers can use the defined metrics and apparatus to benchmark and improve the mobility capabilities of new or refined emergency response robots.
• Cross-industry Benchmarking: While tailored for emergency response, the method's versatility enables application in other domains where robotic gap traversal is required, such as industrial inspection, hazardous material handling, and underground exploration.

Related Standards

• ASTM E2521: Terminology for Evaluating Response Robot Capabilities - Offers definitions critical for interpreting and applying this standard.
• ASTM E2592: Practice for Evaluating Response Robot Capabilities: Logistics - Details packaging and logistics for urban search and rescue task force equipment.
• National Response Framework (US Department of Homeland Security): Guides the development of detailed, robust, all-hazards response plans, aligning with the intent of ASTM E2801.
• NIST SP 1011-I-2.0: Autonomy Levels for Unmanned Systems (ALFUS) Framework Volume I - Provides context on terminology and operational definitions relevant to robotic systems and teleoperation.

Practical Value

Adopting ASTM E2801-11(2020) ensures that robotics solutions for emergency response are objectively and repeatably evaluated for critical mobility tasks. By providing confidence in robot capability data, this standard supports safer, faster, and more effective operations in hazardous or inaccessible environments, directly enhancing responder safety and mission outcomes. It also delivers a concrete basis for comparative analysis between different robot models and system configurations, driving industry innovation and best practices in response robotics.

Keywords: emergency response robot, gap traversal, robot mobility, confined area obstacle, ASTM E2801, robot performance evaluation, search and rescue robots, robot testing standard.

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:E2801 −11 (Reapproved 2020)
Standard Test Method for
Evaluating Emergency Response Robot Capabilities:
Mobility: Confined Area Obstacles: Gaps
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E2801; 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 comparison of different robot models as well as particular
configurations of similar robot models.
1.1 Purpose:
1.1.6 The mobility test suite quantifies elemental mobility
1.1.1 The purpose of this test method is to quantitatively
capabilities necessary for ground robots intended for emer-
evaluate a teleoperated ground robot’s (see Terminology
gency response applications. As such, users can use either the
E2521) capability of crossing horizontal gaps in confined
entire suite or a subset based on their particular performance
areas.
requirements. Users are also allowed to weight particular test
1.1.2 Robots shall possess a certain set of mobility
methods or particular metrics within a test method differently
capabilities, including negotiating obstacles, to suit critical
based on their specific performance requirements. The testing
operations such as emergency responses.Ahorizontal gap with
results should collectively represent an emergency response
an unknown edge condition is a type of obstacle that exists in
ground robot’s overall mobility performance. These perfor-
emergency response and other environments. These environ-
mance data can be used to guide procurement specifications
ments often pose constraints to robotic mobility to various
and acceptance testing for robots intended for emergency
degrees. This test method specifies apparatuses, procedures,
response applications.
and metrics to standardize this testing.
1.1.3 The test apparatuses are scalable to provide a range of
NOTE 1—Additional test methods within the suite are anticipated to be
lateral dimensions to constrain the robotic mobility during task
developed to address additional or advanced robotic mobility capability
requirements, including newly identified requirements and even for new
performance. Fig. 1 shows three apparatus sizes to test robots
application domains.
intended for different emergency response scenarios.
1.1.4 Emergency response ground robots shall be able to
1.2 Performing Location—This test method shall be per-
handle many types of obstacles and terrain complexities. The
formed in a testing laboratory or the field where the specified
required mobility capabilities include traversing gaps, hurdles,
apparatus and environmental conditions are implemented.
stairs, slopes, various types of floor surfaces or terrains, and
1.3 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded
confined passageways. Yet additional mobility requirements
as the standard.The values given in parentheses are not precise
include sustained speeds and towing capabilities. Standard test
mathematical conversions to inch-pound units. They are close
methods are required to evaluate whether candidate robots
approximate equivalents for the purpose of specifying material
meet these requirements.
dimensions or quantities that are readily available to avoid
1.1.5 ASTM Task Group E54.08.01 on Robotics specifies a
excessive fabrication costs of test apparatuses while maintain-
mobility test suite, which consists of a set of test methods for
ing repeatability and reproducibility of the test method results.
evaluating these mobility capability requirements. This con-
These values given in parentheses are provided for information
fined area gap test method is a part of the mobility test suite.
only but are not considered standard.
The apparatuses associated with the test methods challenge
specific robot capabilities in repeatable ways to facilitate
1.4 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 appro-
priate safety, health, and environmental practices and deter-
This test method is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E54 on
mine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
Homeland Security Applications and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee
E54.09 on Response Robots.
1.5 This international standard was developed in accor-
Current edition approved Jan. 1, 2020. Published January 2020. Originally
dance with internationally recognized principles on standard-
approved in 2011. Last previous edition approved in 2011 as E2801 – 11. DOI:
10.1520/E2801-11R20. 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
E2801−11 (2020)
FIG. 1Mobility: Confined Area Obstacles: Gaps Apparatuses
Development of International Standards, Guides and Recom- 3.1.3 administrator, n—person who conducts the test—The
mendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical administrator shall ensure the readiness of the apparatus, the
Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
test form, and any required measuring devices such as stop-
watch and light meter; the administrator shall ensure that the
2. Referenced Documents
specified or required environmental conditions are met; the
2.1 ASTM Standards:
administrator shall notify the operator when the safety belay is
E2521 Terminology for Evaluating Response Robot Capa-
available and ensure that the operator has either decided not to
bilities
use it or assigned a person to handle it properly; and the
E2592 Practice for Evaluating Response Robot Capabilities:
administratorshallcalltheoperatortostartandendthetestand
Logistics: Packaging for Urban Search and Rescue Task
record the performance data and any notable observations
Force Equipment Caches
during the test.
2.2 Other Standards:
3.1.4 emergency response robot, or response robot, n—a
National Response Framework U.S. Department of Home-
3 robot deployed to perform operational tasks in an emergency
land Security
response situation.
NIST Special Publication 1011-I-2.0 Autonomy Levels for
3.1.4.1 Discussion—Aresponserobotisadeployabledevice
Unmanned Systems (ALFUS) Framework Volume I:
intended to perform operational tasks at operational tempos
Terminology, Version 2.0
during emergency responses. It is designed to serve as an
3. Terminology
extension of the operator for gaining improved remote situ-
ational awareness and for projecting her/his intent through the
3.1 Definitions:
equipped capabilities. It is designed to reduce risk to the
3.1.1 Terminology E2521 lists additional definitions rel-
evant to this test method. operator while improving effectiveness and efficiency of the
3.1.2 abstain, v—prior to starting a particular test method, mission.Thedesiredfeaturesofaresponserobotinclude:rapid
the robot manufacturer or designated operator shall choose to
deployment; remote operation from an appropriate standoff
enter the test or abstain.Any abstention shall be granted before distance; mobility in complex environments; sufficiently hard-
the test begins. The test form shall be clearly marked as such,
enedagainstharshenvironments;reliableandfieldserviceable;
indicating that the manufacturer acknowledges the omission of
durable or cost effectively disposable, or both; and equipped
theperformancedatawhilethetestmethodwasavailableatthe
with operational safeguards.
test time.
3.1.5 fault condition—during the performance of the task(s)
3.1.2.1 Discussion—Abstentions may occur when the robot
as specified by the test method, a certain condition may occur
configuration is neither designed nor equipped to perform the
thatrendersthetaskexecutiontobefailedandsuchacondition
tasks as specified in the test method. Practices within the test
is called a fault condition. Fault conditions result in a loss of
apparatus prior to testing should allow for establishing the
credit for the partially completed repetition. The test time
applicability of the test method for the given robot.
continues until the operator determines that she/he can not
continueandnotifiestheadministrator.Theadministratorshall,
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
then, pause the test time and add a time-stamped note on the
contact ASTM Customer Service at [e-mail]. For Annual Book of ASTM
test form indicating the reason for the fault condition.
Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on
the ASTM website.
3.1.5.1 Discussion—Faultconditionsincluderoboticsystem
Available from Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), P.O. Box
malfunction, such as de-tracking, and task execution problems,
10055, Hyattsville, MD 20782-8055, http://www.fema.gov.
4 such as excessive deviation from a specified path or failure to
Available from National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 100
Bureau Dr., Stop 1070, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-1070, http://www.nist.gov. recognize a target.
E2801−11 (2020)
3.1.6 flat-floor terrain element—flat surface with overall 3.1.14 test suite, n—designed collection of test methods that
dimensions of 1.2 by 1.2 m (4 by 4 ft) which is elevated by are used, collectively, to evaluate the performance of a robot’s
using 10 by 10-cm (4 by 4-in.) posts to form a 10 cm (4 in.) particular subsystem or functionality, including mobility,
thick pallet. The material used to build these elements shall be manipulation, sensors, energy/power, communications,
strong enough to allow the participating robots to execute the human-robot interaction (HRI), logistics, safety, and aerial or
testing tasks. aquatic maneuvering.
3.1.6.1 Discussion—The material that is typically used to
3.1.15 testing task, or task, n—a set of activities specified in
build these elements, oriented strand board (OSB) is a com-
a test method for testing robots and the operators to perform in
monly available construction material. The frictional charac-
order for the performance to be evaluated according to the
teristics of OSB resemble that of dust-covered concrete and
corresponding metric(s). A test method may specify multiple
other human-improved flooring surfaces often encountered in
tasks.
emergency responses.
3.1.7 human-scale, adj—used to indicate that the objects, 4. Summary of Test Method
terrains, or tasks specified in this test method are in a scale
4.1 The task for this test method, horizontal gap traversing,
consistent with the environments and structures typically
is defined as the entire robot traversing from the starting
negotiated by humans, although possibly compromised or
flat-floor terrain element to the ending flat-floor terrain element
collapsedenoughtolimithumanaccess.Also,thattheresponse
and back. See Fig. 1 for an illustration. The test starts at the
robotsconsideredinthiscontextareinavolumetricandweight
narrowest gap, which is 10 cm (4-in.) wide. As the evaluation
scale appropriate for operation within these environments.
proceeds, the task shall be performed on the wider gaps as
3.1.7.1 Discussion—No precise size and weight ranges are
specified in Section 6.
specified for this term. The test apparatus constrains the
4.2 The robot’s gap-crossing capability is defined as the
environment in which the tasks are performed. Such
widest gap that the robot is able to traverse. Further, the test
constraints, in turn, limit the types of robots to be considered
sponsor can specify the statistical reliability and confidence
applicable to emergency response operations.
levels of such a capability and, thus, dictate the number of
3.1.8 operator, n—person who controls the robot to perform
successful task performance repetitions that is required.
thetasksasspecifiedinthetestmethod;she/heshallensurethe
readiness of all the applicable subsystems of the robot; she/he
4.3 Teleoperation shall be used from an administrator-
through a designated second shall be responsible for the use of
specified operator station to test the robots using an OCU
a safety belay; and she/he shall also determine whether to
provided by the operator. The operator station shall be posi-
abstain the test.
tioned and implemented in such a manner as to insulate the
operator from the sights and sounds generated at the test
3.1.9 operator station, n—apparatusforhostingtheoperator
apparatus.
and her/his operator control unit (OCU, see NIST Special
Publication 1011-I-2.0) to teleoperate (see Terminology
4.4 The operator is allowed to practice before the test.
E2521) the robot. The operator station shall be positioned in
She/he is also allowed to abstain from the test before it is
such a manner as to insulate the operator from the sights and
started. Once the test begins, there shall be no verbal commu-
sounds generated at the test apparatuses.
nication between the operator and the administrator regarding
the performance of a test repetition other than instructions on
3.1.10 repetition, n—robot’s completion of the task as
when to start and notifications of faults and any safety related
specified in the test method and readiness for repeating the
conditions. The operator shall have the full responsibility to
same task when required.
determine whether and when the robot has completed a
3.1.10.1 Discussion—In a traversing task, the entire mobil-
repetitionandnotifytheadministratoraccordingly.However,it
ity mechanism shall be behind the START point before the
istheadministrator’sauthoritytojudgethecompletenessofthe
traverse and shall pass the END point to complete a repetition.
repetition.
A test method can specify returning to the START point to
complete the task. Multiple repetitions, performed in the same
NOTE 2—Practice within the test apparatus could help establish the
test condition, may be used to establish the test performance to
applicability of the robot for the given test method. It allows the operator
a certain degree of statistical significance as specified by the to gain familiarity with the standard apparatus and environmental condi-
tions. It also helps the test administrator to establish the initial apparatus
testing sponsor.
setting for the test when applicable.
3.1.11 test event or event, n—a set of testing activities that
4.5 The test sponsor has the authority to select the size of
are planned and organized by the test sponsor and to be held at
the lateral clearance for the specified confined area apparatus.
the designated test site(s).
The test sponsor also has the authority to select the test
3.1.12 test form, n—form corresponding to a test method
methodsthatconstitutethetestevent,toselectoneormoretest
that contains fields for recording the testing results and the
site(s)atwhichthetestmethodsareimplemented,todetermine
associated information.
thecorrespondingstatisticalreliabilityandconfidencelevelsof
3.1.13 test sponsor, n—an organization or individual that the results for each of the test methods, and to establish the
commissions a particular test event and receives the corre- participation rules including the testing schedules and the test
sponding test results. environmental conditions.
E2801−11 (2020)
5. Significance and Use 5.4 The standard apparatus is specified to be easily fabri-
cated to facilitate self-evaluation by robot developers and
5.1 A main purpose of using robots in emergency response
provide practice tasks for emergency responders that exercise
operations is to enhance the safety and effectiveness of
robot actuators, sensors, and operator interfaces. The standard
emergency responders operating in hazardous or inaccessible
apparatus can also be used to support operator training and
environments. The testing results of the candidate robot shall
establish operator proficiency.
describe, in a statistically significant way, how reliably the
robot is able to negotiate the specified types of obstacles, and
5.5 Although the test method was developed first for emer-
thus provide emergency responders sufficiently high levels of gency response robots, it may be applicable to other opera-
confidence to determine the applicability of the robot.
tional domains.
5.2 This test method addresses robot performance require-
6. Apparatus
ments expressed by emergency responders and representatives
from other interested organizations. The performance data
6.1 Thetestapparatusesarefabricatedfromflat-floorterrain
captured within this test method are indicative of the testing
elements placed side by side and separated by a controllable
robot’s capabilities. Having available a roster of successfully
gap (Fig. 2 and Fig. 3). The gap between the flat floor terrain
tested robots with associated performance data to guide pro-
elements may be adjusted to be between 10 and 100 cm (4 and
curement and deployment decisions for emergency responders
40 in.) in 10-cm (4-in.) units.Alayer of sand may be placed on
is consistent with the guideline of “Governments at all levels
the floor in the gap to help the test administrator determine
have a responsibility to develop detailed, robust, all-hazards
whether the robot has touched the floor, which is a fault
response plans” as stated in National Response Framework.
condition. The flat-floor terrain elements are surrounded with
containment walls. A safety rope belay shall be provided,
5.3 This test apparatus is scalable to constrain robot maneu-
although it is the operator’s option and responsibility to attach,
verability during task performance for a range of robot sizes in
route, and handle it such that the robot can be secured when
confined areas associated with emergency response operations.
needed.
Variants of the apparatus provide minimum lateral clearance of
2.4 m (8 ft) for robots expected to operate around the
6.2 The test apparatuses specify three lateral clearances
environments such as cluttered city streets, parking lots, and
(Figs. 1-3), which are 2.4 m (8 ft), 1.2 m (4 ft), or 0.6 m (2 ft)
building lobbies; minimum lateral clearance of 1.2 m (4 ft) for
wide, to be determined by the test sponsor. All three scales
robots expected to operate in and around the environments
have 2.4 m (8 ft) long launch and landing areas as their default
such as large buildings, stairwells, and urban sidewalks;
setting. The apparatuses shall be strong enough to allow the
minimum lateral clearance of 0.6 m (2 ft) for robots expected
participating robots to execute the testing tasks.
to operate within the environments such as dwellings and work
6.3 The test sponsor has the authority to implement further
spaces, buses and airplanes, and semi-collapsed structures;
confined launch and landing areas, which are square to match
minimum lateral clearance of less than 0.6 m (2 ft) with a
the selected lateral clearance. Removable containment walls
minimum vertical clearance adjustable from 0.6 m (2 ft) to 10
shall be placed accordingly.
cm (4 in.) for robots expected to deploy through breeches and
operate within sub-human size confined spaces voids in col-
6.4 The test sponsor has the authority to determine the
lapsed structures. traction level at the edges of the gap. When elected, plastic
FIG. 2Mobility: Confined Area Obstacles: Gaps Apparatus (Perspective Views)
E2801−11 (2020)
FIG. 3Mobility: Confined Area Obstacles: Gap Apparatus (Projection Views)
be stressful not only to the humans but also to the robots, such as high or
pipes with a diameter of 10 cm (4 in.) are stacked along the
low temperatures, excessive moisture, and rough terrains that can damage
vertical su
...