ASTM E2802-11(2020)
(Test Method)Standard Test Method for Evaluating Emergency Response Robot Capabilities: Mobility: Confined Area Obstacles: Hurdles
Standard Test Method for Evaluating Emergency Response Robot Capabilities: Mobility: Confined Area Obstacles: Hurdles
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 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 environments such as large buildings, stairwells, and urban sidewalks; minimum lateral clearance of 0.6 m (2 ft) for robots expected to operate within environments such as dwellings and workspaces, 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 breeches and operate...
SCOPE
1.1 Purpose:
1.1.1 The purpose of this test method, as a part of a suite of mobility test methods, is to quantitatively evaluate a teleoperated ground robot’s (see Terminology E2521) capability of traversing vertical obstacles 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 vertical step 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 obstacle for 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: Hurdles 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 hurdle 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...
General Information
Buy Standard
Standards Content (Sample)
NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or withdrawn.
Contact ASTM International (www.astm.org) for the latest information
Designation:E2802 −11 (Reapproved 2020)
Standard Test Method for
Evaluating Emergency Response Robot Capabilities:
Mobility: Confined Area Obstacles: Hurdles
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E2802; 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, as a part of a suite of
capabilities necessary for ground robots intended for emer-
mobility test methods, is to quantitatively evaluate a teleoper-
gency response applications. As such, users can use either the
ated ground robot’s (see Terminology E2521) capability of
entire suite or a subset based on their particular performance
traversing vertical obstacles in confined 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. A vertical step 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 obstacle for 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
developed to address additional or advanced robotic mobility capability
lateral dimensions to constrain the robotic mobility during task
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.
1.2 Performing Location—This test method shall be per-
1.1.4 Emergency response ground robots shall be able to
formed in a testing laboratory or the field where the specified
handle many types of obstacles and terrain complexities. The
apparatus and environmental conditions are implemented.
required mobility capabilities include traversing gaps, hurdles,
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-
Thesevaluesgiveninparenthesesareprovidedforinformation
fined area hurdle test method is a part of the mobility test suite.
only and are not considered standard.
The apparatuses associated with the test methods challenge
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the
specific robot capabilities in repeatable ways to facilitate
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
Homeland Security Applications and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee
mine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
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 E2802 – 11. DOI:
10.1520/E2802-11R20. 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
E2802−11 (2020)
FIG. 1Mobility: Confined Area Obstacles: Hurdles Apparatuses
Development of International Standards, Guides and Recom- 3.2.2 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
administrator shall notify the operator when the safety belay is
2.1 ASTM Standards:
available and ensure that the operator has either decided not to
E2521 Terminology for Evaluating Response Robot Capa-
use it or assigned a person to handle it properly; and the
bilities
administratorshallcalltheoperatortostartandendthetestand
E2592 Practice for Evaluating Response Robot Capabilities:
record the performance data and any notable observations
Logistics: Packaging for Urban Search and Rescue Task
during the test.
Force Equipment Caches
2.2 Other Standards: 3.2.3 emergency response robot, or response robot, n—a
National Response Framework , U.S. Department of Home-
robot deployed to perform operational tasks in an emergency
land Security response situation.
NIST Special Publication 1011-I-2.0 Autonomy Levels for
3.2.3.1 Discussion—Aresponserobotisadeployabledevice
Unmanned Systems intended to perform operational tasks at operational tempos
ALFUS Framework Volume I : Terminology, Version 2.0
during emergency responses. It is designed to serve as an
extension of the operator for gaining improved remote situ-
3. Terminology
ational awareness and for projecting her/his intent through the
equipped capabilities. It is designed to reduce risk to the
3.1 Terminology E2521 lists additional definitions relevant
operator while improving effectiveness and efficiency of the
to this test method.
mission. The desired features of a response robot include:
3.2 Definitions:
rapidly deployable; remotely operable from an appropriate
3.2.1 abstain, v—prior to starting a particular test method,
standoff distance; mobility in complex environments; suffi-
the robot manufacturer or designated operator shall choose to
ciently hardened against harsh environments; reliable and field
enter the test or abstain.Any abstention shall be granted before
serviceable; durable or cost effectively disposable, or both; and
the test begins. The test form shall be clearly marked as such,
equipped with operational safeguards.
indicating that the manufacturer acknowledges the omission of
3.2.4 fault condition—during the performance of the task(s)
theperformancedatawhilethetestmethodwasavailableatthe
as specified by the test method, a certain condition may occur
test time.
that renders the task execution to be failed. Such a condition is
3.2.1.1 Discussion—Abstentions may occur when the robot
called a fault condition. Fault conditions result in a loss of
configuration is neither designed nor equipped to perform the
credit for the partially completed repetition. The test time
tasks as specified in the test method. Practices within the test
continues until the operator determines that she/he can not
apparatus prior to testing should allow for establishing the
continueandnotifiestheadministrator.Theadministratorshall,
applicability of the test method for the given robot.
then, pause the test time and add a time-stamped note on the
test form indicating the reason for the fault condition.
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
3.2.4.1 Discussion—Faultconditionsincluderoboticsystem
contact ASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM
malfunction, such as de-tracking, and task execution problems,
Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on
such as excessive deviation from a specified path or failure to
the ASTM website.
Available from http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nrf/
recognize a target.
Available from National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 100
3.2.5 flat-floor terrain element—flat surface with overall
Bureau Dr., Stop 1070, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-1070, http://www.nist.gov.
Available from http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=824705 dimensions of 1.2 by 1.2-cm (4 by 4-ft) that is elevated by
E2802−11 (2020)
using 10 by 10-cm (4 by 4 in.) posts to form a 10 cm (4 in.) 3.2.13 test suite, n—designed collection of test methods that
thick pallet. The material used to build these elements shall be are used, collectively, to evaluate the performance of a robot’s
strong enough to enable the participating robots to execute the particular subsystem or functionality, including mobility,
tasks. manipulation, sensors, energy/power, communications,
human-robot interaction (HRI), logistics, safety, and aerial or
3.2.5.1 Discussion—The material that is typically used to
aquatic maneuvering.
build these elements, oriented strand board (OSB) is a com-
monly available construction material. The frictional charac-
3.2.14 testing task or task, n—a set of activities specified in
teristics of OSB resemble that of dust covered concrete and
a test method for testing robots and the operators to perform in
other human-improved flooring surfaces often encountered in
order for the performance to be evaluated according to the
emergency responses.
corresponding metric(s). A test method may specify multiple
tasks.
3.2.6 human-scale, adj—used to indicate that the objects,
terrains, or tasks specified in this test method are in a scale
4. Summary of Test Method
consistent with the environments and structures typically
negotiated by humans, although possibly compromised or
4.1 The task for this test method, vertical obstacle
collapsedenoughtolimithumanaccess.Also,thattheresponse
traversing, is defined as the entire robot traversing from the
robotsconsideredinthiscontextareinavolumetricandweight
starting flat-floor terrain element to the ending flat-floor terrain
scale appropriate for operation within these environments.
elementandback.SeeFig.1.Theteststartsatthe10cm(4in.)
3.2.6.1 Discussion—No precise size and weight ranges are
height, the lowest height. As the evaluation proceeds, the task
specifiedforthisterm.Thetestapparatusspecifiestheconfined
shall be performed on the increased obstacle heights as
areas in which to perform the tasks. Such constraints limit the
specified in Section 6.
overall sizes of robots to those considered applicable to
4.2 The robot’s vertical obstacle traversing capability is
emergency response operations.
defined as the highest elevation that the robot is able to
3.2.7 operator, n—person who controls the robot to perform
traverse. Further, the test sponsor can specify the statistical
thetasksasspecifiedinthetestmethod;she/heshallensurethe
reliability and confidence levels of such a capability and, thus,
readiness of all the applicable subsystems of the robot; she/he
dictate the number of successful task performance repetitions
through a designated second shall be responsible for the use of
that are required.
a safety belay; and she/he shall also determine whether to
4.3 Teleoperation shall be used from the operator station
abstain from the test.
specified by the administrator to test the robots using an OCU
3.2.7.1 Discussion—An operator is typically an emergency
provided by the operator. The operator station shall be posi-
responder in emergency response situations.
tioned and implemented in such a manner as to insulate the
3.2.8 operator station, n—apparatusforhostingtheoperator
operator from the sights and sounds generated at the test
and her/his operator control unit (OCU, see ALFUS Frame-
apparatuses.
work Volume I: Terminology) 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
suchamannersoastoinsulatetheoperatorfromthesightsand
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
3.2.9 repetition, n—robot’s completion of the task as speci-
the performance of a test repetition other than instructions on
fied in the test method and readiness for repeating the same
when to start and notifications of faults and any safety related
task when required.
conditions. The operator shall have the full responsibility to
3.2.9.1 Discussion—In a traversing task, the entire mobility determine whether and when the robot has completed a
mechanism shall be behind the START point before the repetitionandnotifytheadministratoraccordingly.However,it
traverse and shall pass the END point to complete a repetition. istheadministrator’sauthoritytojudgethecompletenessofthe
A test method can specify returning to the START point to repetition.
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.
3.2.10 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 appara
...
This document is not an ASTM standard and is intended only to provide the user of an ASTM standard an indication of what changes have been made to the previous version. Because
it may not be technically possible to adequately depict all changes accurately, ASTM recommends that users consult prior editions as appropriate. In all cases only the current version
of the standard as published by ASTM is to be considered the official document.
Designation: E2802 − 11 E2802 − 11 (Reapproved 2020)
Standard Test Method for
Evaluating Emergency Response Robot Capabilities:
Mobility: Confined Area Obstacles: Hurdles
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E2802; 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
1.1 Purpose:
1.1.1 The purpose of this test method, as a part of a suite of mobility test methods, is to quantitatively evaluate a teleoperated
ground robot’s (see Terminology E2521) capability of traversing vertical obstacles 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 vertical step 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 obstacle for 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.
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 hurdle 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 capabilities necessary for ground robots intended for emergency
response applications. As such, users can use either the entire suite or a subset based on their particular performance requirements.
Users are also allowed to weight particular test methods or particular metrics within a test method differently based on their specific
performance requirements. The testing results should collectively represent an emergency response ground robot’s overall mobility
performance. These performance data can be used to guide procurement specifications and acceptance testing for robots intended
for emergency response applications.
NOTE 1—Additional test methods within the suite are anticipated to be developed to address additional or advanced robotic mobility capability
requirements, including newly identified requirements and even for new application domains.
1.2 Performing Location—This test method shall be performed in a testing laboratory or the field where the specified apparatus
and environmental conditions are implemented.
1.3 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are not precise
mathematical conversions to inch-pound units. They are close approximate equivalents for the purpose of specifying material
dimensions or quantities that are readily available to avoid excessive fabrication costs of test apparatuses while maintaining
repeatability and reproducibility of the test method results. These values given in parentheses are provided for information only
and are not considered standard.
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 appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory
limitations prior to use.
This test method is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E54 on Homeland Security Applications and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee E54.09 on
Response Robots.
Current edition approved July 1, 2011Jan. 1, 2020. Published October 2011January 2020. Originally approved in 2011. Last previous edition approved in 2011 as
E2802 – 11. DOI: 10.1520/E2802-11.10.1520/E2802-11R20.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
E2802 − 11 (2020)
FIG. 1 Mobility: Confined Area Obstacles: Hurdles Apparatuses
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 appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of
regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.5 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.
2. Referenced Documents
2.1 ASTM Standards:
E2521 Terminology for Evaluating Response Robot Capabilities
E2592 Practice for Evaluating Response Robot Capabilities: Logistics: Packaging for Urban Search and Rescue Task Force
Equipment Caches
2.2 Other Standards:
National Response Framework , U.S. Department of Homeland Security
NIST Special Publication 1011-I-2.0 Autonomy Levels for Unmanned Systems
ALFUS Framework Volume I : Terminology, Version 2.0
3. Terminology
3.1 Terminology E2521 lists additional definitions relevant to this test method.
3.2 Definitions:
3.2.1 abstain, v—prior to starting a particular test method, the robot manufacturer or designated operator shall choose to enter
the test or abstain. Any abstention shall be granted before the test begins. The test form shall be clearly marked as such, indicating
that the manufacturer acknowledges the omission of the performance data while the test method was available at the test time.
3.2.1.1 Discussion—
Abstentions may occur when the robot configuration is neither designed nor equipped to perform the tasks as specified in the test
method. Practices within the test apparatus prior to testing should allow for establishing the applicability of the test method for
the given robot.
3.2.2 administrator, n—person who conducts the test—Thetest—the administrator shall ensure the readiness of the apparatus,
the test form, and any required measuring devices such as stopwatch and light meter; the administrator shall ensure that the
specified or required environmental conditions are met; the administrator shall notify the operator when the safety belay is
available and ensure that the operator has either decided not to use it or assigned a person to handle it properly; and the
administrator shall call the operator to start and end the test and record the performance data and any notable observations during
the test.
3.2.3 emergency response robot, or response robot, n——aa robot deployed to perform operational tasks in an emergency
response situation.
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or 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 http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nrf/
Available from National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 100 Bureau Dr., Stop 1070, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-1070, http://www.nist.gov.
Available from http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=824705
E2802 − 11 (2020)
3.2.3.1 Discussion—
A response robot is a deployable device intended to perform operational tasks at operational tempos during emergency responses.
It is designed to serve as an extension of the operator for gaining improved remote situational awareness and for projecting her/his
intent through the equipped capabilities. It is designed to reduce risk to the operator while improving effectiveness and efficiency
of the mission. The desired features of a response robot include: rapidly deployable; remotely operable from an appropriate
standoff distance; mobility in complex environments; sufficiently hardened against harsh environments; reliable and field
serviceable; durable or cost effectively disposable, or both; and equipped with operational safeguards.
3.2.4 fault condition—during the performance of the task(s) as specified by the test method, a certain condition may occur that
renders the task execution to be failed. Such a condition is called a fault condition. Fault conditions result in a loss of credit for
the partially completed repetition. The test time continues until the operator determines that she/he can not continue and notifies
the administrator. The administrator shall, then, pause the test time and add a time-stamped note on the test form indicating the
reason for the fault condition.
3.2.4.1 Discussion—
Fault conditions include robotic system malfunction, such as de-tracking, and task execution problems, such as excessive deviation
from a specified path or failure to recognize a target.
3.2.5 flat-floor terrain element—flat surface with overall dimensions of 1.2 by 1.2-cm (4 by 4-ft) that is elevated by using 10
by 10-cm (4 by 4 in.) posts to form a 10 cm (4 in.) thick pallet. The material used to build these elements shall be strong enough
to enable the participating robots to execute the tasks.
3.2.5.1 Discussion—
The material that is typically used to build these elements, oriented strand board (OSB) is a commonly available construction
material. The frictional characteristics of OSB resemble that of dust covered concrete and other human-improved flooring surfaces
often encountered in emergency responses.
3.2.6 human-scale, adj—used to indicate that the objects, terrains, or tasks specified in this test method are in a scale consistent
with the environments and structures typically negotiated by humans, although possibly compromised or collapsed enough to limit
human access. Also, that the response robots considered in this context are in a volumetric and weight scale appropriate for
operation within these environments.
3.2.6.1 Discussion—
No precise size and weight ranges are specified for this term. The test apparatus specifies the confined areas in which to perform
the tasks. Such constraints limit the overall sizes of robots to those considered applicable to emergency response operations.
3.2.7 operator, n—person who controls the robot to perform the tasks as specified in the test method; she/he shall ensure the
readiness of all the applicable subsystems of the robot; she/he through a designated second shall be responsible for the use of a
safety belay; and she/he shall also determine whether to abstain from the test.
3.2.7.1 Discussion—
An operator is typically an emergency responder in emergency response situations.
3.2.8 operator station, n—apparatus for hosting the operator and her/his operator control unit (OCU, see ALFUS Framework
Volume I: Terminology) to teleoperate (see Terminology E2521) the robot; the operator station shall be positioned in such a manner
so as to insulate the operator from the sights and sounds generated at the test apparatuses.
3.2.9 repetition, n—robot’s completion of the task as specified in the test method and readiness for repeating the same task when
required.
3.2.9.1 Discussion—
In a traversing task, the entire mobility mechanism shall be behind the START point before the traverse and shall pass the END
point to complete a repetition. A test method can specify returning to the START point to complete the task. Multiple repetitions,
performed in the same test condition, may be used to establish the test performance to a certain degree of statistical significance
as specified by the testing sponsor.
E2802 − 11 (2020)
3.2.10 test event or event, n—a set of testing activities that are planned and organized by the test sponsor and to be held at the
designated test site(s).
3.2.11 test form, n—the form corresponding to a test method that contains fields for recording the testing results and the
associated information.
3.2.12 test sponsor, n—an organization or individual that commissions a particular test event and receives the corresponding test
results.
3.2.13 test suite, n—designed collection of test methods that are used, collectively, to evaluate the performance of a robot’s
particular subsystem or functionality, including mobility, manipulation, sensors, energy/power, communications, human-robot
interaction (HRI), logistics, safety, and aerial or aquatic maneuvering.
3.2.14 testing task or task, n—a set of activities specified in a test method for testing robots and the operators to perform in order
for the performance to be evaluated according to the corresponding metric(s). A test method may specify multiple tasks.
4. Summary of Test Method
4.1 The task for this test method, vertical obstacle traversing, is defined as the entire robot traversing from the starting flat-floor
terrain element to the ending flat-floor terrain element and back. See Fig. 1. The test starts at the 10 cm (4 in.) height, the lowest
height. As the evaluation proceeds, the task shall be performed on the increased obstacle heights as specified in Section 6.
4.2 The robot’s vertical obstacle traversing capability is defined as the highest elevation that the robot is able to traverse. Further,
the test sponsor can specify the statistical reliability and confidence levels of such a capability and, thus, dictate the number of
successful task performance repetitions that are required.
4.3 Teleoperation shall be used from the operator station specified by the administrator to test the robots using an OCU provided
by the operator. The operator station shall be positioned and implemented in such a manner as to insulate the operator from the
sights and sou
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.