ASTM E2853-12(2021)
(Test Method)Standard Test Method for Evaluating Emergency Response Robot Capabilities: Human-System Interaction (HSI): Search Tasks: Random Mazes with Complex Terrain
Standard Test Method for Evaluating Emergency Response Robot Capabilities: Human-System Interaction (HSI): Search Tasks: Random Mazes with Complex Terrain
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. Robot performance data captured within this test method are indicative of the robotic system’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 method is part of a test suite and is intended to provide a capability baseline for the robotic HSI subsystems based on the identified needs of the emergency response community. Adequate performance using this test suite will not ensure successful operation in all emergency response situations due to possible extreme operational difficulties. Rather, this test method is intended to provide a common comparison of technologies against a reasonable simulation of emergency response environments and to provide quantitative performance data to emergency response organizations to 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...
SCOPE
1.1 Purpose:
1.1.1 The purpose of this test method, as a part of a suite of human-system interactions (HSI) test methods, is to quantitatively evaluate a teleoperated ground robot’s (see Terminology E2521) capability of searching in a maze.
1.1.2 Teleoperated robots shall possess a certain set of HSI capabilities to suit critical operations such as emergency responses, including enabling the operators to search for required targets. A passage that forms on complex terrains and possesses complex and visually similar branches is a type of environments that exists in emergency response and other robotically applicable situations. The complexity often poses challenges for the operators to teleoperate the robots to conduct searches. This test method is based on a standard maze and specifies metrics and a procedure for testing the search capability.
1.1.3 Emergency response robots shall enable the operator to handle many types of tasks. The required HSI capabilities include search and navigation on different types of terrains, passages, and confined spaces. 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 HSI test suite, which consists of a set of test methods for evaluating these HSI capability requirements. This random maze searching test method is a part of the HSI 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. (See Fig. 1.)
FIG. 1 HSI: Search Tasks: Random Maze Illustration
1.1.5 The test methods quantify elemental HSI capabilities necessary for ground robots intended for emergency response applications. As such, based on their particular capability requirements, users of this test suite can select only the applicable tes...
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: E2853 − 12 (Reapproved 2021)
Standard Test Method for
Evaluating Emergency Response Robot Capabilities:
Human-System Interaction (HSI): Search Tasks: Random
Mazes with Complex Terrain
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E2853; 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 requirements, users of this test suite can select only the
applicable test methods and can individually weight particular
1.1 Purpose:
test methods or particular metrics within a test method. The
1.1.1 The purpose of this test method, as a part of a suite of
testing results should collectively represent a ground robot’s
human-system interactions (HSI) test methods, is to quantita-
overall HSI capability. The test results can be used to guide
tively evaluate a teleoperated ground robot’s (see Terminology
procurement specifications and acceptance testing for robots
E2521) capability of searching in a maze.
intended for emergency response applications.
1.1.2 Teleoperated robots shall possess a certain set of HSI
capabilities to suit critical operations such as emergency
NOTE 1—The teleoperation performance is affected by the robot’s as
responses, including enabling the operators to search for
well as the operator’s capabilities. Among all the standard test methods
required targets.Apassage that forms on complex terrains and thatASTME54.08.01TaskGrouponRoboticshasspecified,somedepend
more on the former while the others on the latter, but it would be
possesses complex and visually similar branches is a type of
extremely hard to totally isolate the two factors. This HSI test suite is
environments that exists in emergency response and other
specified to focus on evaluating the operator’s capabilities of interacting
robotically applicable situations. The complexity often poses
with the robotic system, whereas a separately specified sensor test suite,
challengesfortheoperatorstoteleoperatetherobotstoconduct
including Test Method E2566, focuses on the robots’sensing capabilities.
searches. This test method is based on a standard maze and
NOTE 2—As robotic systems are more widely applied, emergency
specifies metrics and a procedure for testing the search responders might identify additional or advanced HSI capability require-
ments to help them respond to emergency situations. They might also
capability.
desire to use robots with higher levels of autonomy, beyond teleoperation
1.1.3 Emergency response robots shall enable the operator
to help reduce their workload—see NIST Special Publication 1011-II-1.0.
to handle many types of tasks. The required HSI capabilities
Further, emergency responders in expanded emergency response domains
include search and navigation on different types of terrains,
might also desire to apply robotic technologies to their situations, a source
passages, and confined spaces. Standard test methods are
for new sets of requirements. As a result, additional standards within the
suite would be developed. This standard is, nevertheless, standalone and
required to evaluate whether candidate robots meet these
complete.
requirements.
1.1.4 ASTM E54.08.01 Task Group on Robotics specifies a
1.2 Performing Location—This test method shall be per-
HSI test suite, which consists of a set of test methods for
formed in a testing laboratory or the field where the specified
evaluating these HSI capability requirements. This random
apparatus and environmental conditions are implemented.
maze searching test method is a part of the HSI test suite. The
1.3 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded
apparatuses associated with the test methods challenge specific
as the standard.The values given in parentheses are not precise
robotcapabilitiesinrepeatablewaystofacilitatecomparisonof
mathematical conversions to inch-pound units. They are close
different robot models as well as particular configurations of
approximate equivalents for the purpose of specifying material
similar robot models. (See Fig. 1.)
dimensions that are readily available to avoid excessive fabri-
1.1.5 The test methods quantify elemental HSI capabilities
cation costs of test apparatuses while maintaining repeatability
necessary for ground robots intended for emergency response
and reproducibility of the test method results. These values
applications. As such, based on their particular capability
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
This test method is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E54 on
Homeland Security Applications and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee
safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the
E54.09 on Response Robots.
responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-
Current edition approved Jan. 1, 2021. Published January 2021. Originally
priate safety, health, and environmental practices and deter-
approved in 2012. Last previous edition approved in 2012 as E2853 – 12. DOI:
10.1520/E2853-12R21. mine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
E2853 − 12 (2021)
FIG. 1 HSI: Search Tasks: Random Maze Illustration
1.5 This international standard was developed in accor- acknowledges the omission of the performance data while the
dance with internationally recognized principles on standard- test method was available at the test time.
ization established in the Decision on Principles for the 3.1.1.1 Discussion—Abstentions may occur when the robot
Development of International Standards, Guides and Recom- configuration is neither designed nor equipped to perform the
mendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical tasks as specified in the test method. Practices within the test
Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee. apparatus prior to testing should allow for establishing the
applicability of the test method for the given robot.
2. Referenced Documents
3.1.2 administrator, n—person who conducts the test—The
2.1 ASTM Standards:
administrator shall ensure the readiness of the apparatus, the
E2521 Terminology for Evaluating Response Robot Capa-
test form, and any required measuring devices such as stop-
bilities
watch and light meter; the administrator shall ensure that the
E2566 TestMethodforEvaluatingResponseRobotSensing:
specified or required environmental conditions are met; the
Visual Acuity
administrator shall notify the operator when the safety belay is
E2592 Practice for Evaluating Response Robot Capabilities:
available and ensure that the operator has either decided not to
Logistics: Packaging for Urban Search and Rescue Task
use it or assigned a person to handle; and the administrator
Force Equipment Caches
shall call the operator to start and end the test and record the
2.2 Additional Documents:
performance data and any notable observations during the test.
National Response Framework U.S. Department of Home-
3.1.3 emergency response robot, or response robot, n—a
land Security
mobile device deployable to perform operational tasks at
NIST Special Publication 1011-I-2.0 Autonomy Levels for
operational tempos to assist the operators to handle a disaster.
Unmanned Systems (ALFUS) Framework Volume I:
3.1.3.1 Discussion—A response robot is designed to serve
Terminology, Version 2.0
as an extension of the operator for gaining improved remote
NIST Special Publication 1011-II-1.0 Autonomy Levels for
situational awareness and for accomplishing the tasks remotely
Unmanned Systems (ALFUS) Framework Volume II:
through the equipped capabilities. The use of a robot is
Framework Models, Version 1.0
designed to reduce risk to the operator while improving
effectiveness and efficiency of the mission. The desired fea-
3. Terminology
tures of a response robot include: the ability to be rapidly
3.1 Definitions:
deployed and remotely operated from an appropriate standoff
3.1.1 abstain, v—the action of the manufacturer or desig-
distance and to be mobile in complex environments, suffi-
nated operator of the testing robot choosing not to enter the
ciently hardened against harsh environments, reliable and field
test. Any decision to take such an action shall be conveyed to
serviceable, durable and/or cost effectively disposable, and
the administrator before the test begins. The test form shall be
equipped with operational safeguards.
clearly marked as such, indicating that the manufacturer
3.1.4 fault condition, n—a certain situation or occurrence
during testing whereby the robot either cannot continue with-
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
out human intervention or has performed some defined rules
contact ASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM
infraction.
Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on
3.1.4.1 Discussion—Faultconditionsincluderoboticsystem
the ASTM website.
Available from Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), P.O. Box
malfunction such as de-tracking, task execution problems such
10055, Hyattsville, MD 20782-8055, http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nrf/.
as excessive deviation from a specified path, or uncontrolled
Available from National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 100
behaviors and other safety violations which require adminis-
Bureau Dr., Stop 1070, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-1070, http://www.nist.gov/el/isd/
ks/autonomy_levels.cfm. trative intervention.
E2853 − 12 (2021)
3.1.5 full-ramp terrain element, n—1.2 by 1.2 m (4 by 4 ft) 3.1.11 test event, or event, n—a set of testing activities that
surface ramp with 15° slope using solid wood support posts are planned and organized by the test sponsor and to be held at
with angle cuts.The material used to build these elements shall the designated test site(s).
be strong enough to allow the participating robots to execute
3.1.12 test form, n—a collection of data fields or graphics
the testing tasks.
used to record the testing results along with the associated
3.1.5.1 Discussion—The material that is typically used to
information. A single test form shall not be used to record the
build these elements, oriented strand board (OSB) is a com-
results of multiple trials.
monly available construction material. The frictional charac-
3.1.13 test sponsor, n—an organization or individual that
teristics of OSB resemble that of dust covered concrete and
commissions a particular test event and receives the corre-
other human improved flooring surfaces, often encountered in
sponding test results.
emergencyresponses.Solidwoodpostswith10by10cm(4by
4 in) cross-section dimensions typically support the ramped
3.1.14 test suite, n—designed collection of test methods that
surface.
are used, collectively, to evaluate the performance of a robot’s
3.1.5.2 Discussion—Elements similar to this type are used, particular subsystem or functionality, including HSI,
sometimes mixed and assembled in different configurations, to
manipulation, sensors, energy/power, communications,
create various levels of complexities for such robotic functions logistics, safety and operating environment, and aerial or
as orientation and traction.
aquatic maneuvering.
3.1.6 human-scale, adj—the environments and structures
3.1.15 testing target, or target, n—a designed physical
typically negotiated by humans, although possibly compro-
feature to be used by the testing robotic subsystem for
misedorcollapsedenoughtolimithumanaccess.Also,thatthe
evaluating the subsystem capabilities. The feature may be an
response robots considered in this context are in a volumetric
operationallyrelevantobject,anotionalobject,oronedesigned
and weight scale appropriate for operation within these envi-
specifically for exercising the subsystem features to its full
ronments.
extent.
3.1.6.1 Discussion—No precise size and weight ranges are
3.1.16 testing task, or task, n—a set of activities well
specifiedforthisterm.Thetestapparatusspecifiestheconfined
defined in a test method for testing robots and the operators to
areas in which to perform the tasks. Such constraints limit the
perform in order for the system’s capabilities to be evaluated
overall sizes of robots to those considered applicable to
according to the corresponding metric(s). A test method may
emergency response operations.
specify multiple tasks. A task corresponds to the associated
3.1.7 maze, n—a network of passages interconnected with-
metric(s).
out any repetitive order of opening and closing directions and
3.1.17 trial, n—the number of repetitions to be performed
meant to challenge robotic navigation from the designed
for a test to reach required statistical significance. The repeti-
starting and end points.
tions may be recorded on a single test form.
3.1.8 operator, n—person who controls the robot to perform
3.2 Terminology E2521 lists additional definitions relevant
the tasks as specified in the test method; she/he shall ensure the
to this test method.
readiness of all the applicable subsystems of the robot; she/he
through a designated second shall be responsible for the use of
4. Summary of Test Method
a safety belay; and she/he shall also determine whether to
abstain the test.
4.1 The search task for this test method is for a teleoperated
3.1.8.1 Discussion—An emergency responder would be a
robot to traverse in a specified maze to completely cover and
typical operator in emergency response situations.
clear specified targets. Standard hazardous materials
(HAZMAT) labels shall be used as the targets. Coverage of a
3.1.9 operator station, n—apparatusforhostingtheoperator
target is defined as when the operator correctly detects the
and her/his operator control unit (OCU, see NIST Special
existence of the target through the video images displayed on
Publication 1011-I-2.0) to teleoperate (see Terminology
the Operator Control Unit (OCU) and conveys such existence
E2521) the robot. The operator station shall be positioned in
to the administrator. Clearance of a target is defined as when
such a manner as to insulate the operator from the sights and
theoperatorcorrectlyconveysthenamesofatleastthreeoutof
sounds generated at the test apparatuses.
the following four features on the label: color, icon, number,
3.1.10 repetition, n—robot’s completion of the task as
and words to the administrator. When the operator correctly
specified in the test method and readiness for repeating the
conve
...
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: E2853 − 12 E2853 − 12 (Reapproved 2021)
Standard Test Method for
Evaluating Emergency Response Robot Capabilities:
Human-System Interaction (HSI): Search Tasks: Random
Mazes with Complex Terrain
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E2853; 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 human-system interactions (HSI) test methods, is to quantitatively
evaluate a teleoperated ground robot’s (see Terminology E2521) capability of searching in a maze.
1.1.2 Teleoperated robots shall possess a certain set of HSI capabilities to suit critical operations such as emergency responses,
including enabling the operators to search for required targets. A passage that forms on complex terrains and possesses complex
and visually similar branches is a type of environments that exists in emergency response and other robotically applicable
situations. The complexity often poses challenges for the operators to teleoperate the robots to conduct searches. This test method
is based on a standard maze and specifies metrics and a procedure for testing the search capability.
1.1.3 Emergency response robots shall enable the operator to handle many types of tasks. The required HSI capabilities include
search and navigation on different types of terrains, passages, and confined spaces. 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 HSI test suite, which consists of a set of test methods for evaluating
these HSI capability requirements. This random maze searching test method is a part of the HSI 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. (See Fig. 1.)
1.1.5 The test methods quantify elemental HSI capabilities necessary for ground robots intended for emergency response
applications. As such, based on their particular capability requirements, users of this test suite can select only the applicable test
methods and can individually weight particular test methods or particular metrics within a test method. The testing results should
collectively represent a ground robot’s overall HSI capability. The test results can be used to guide procurement specifications and
acceptance testing for robots intended for emergency response applications.
NOTE 1—The teleoperation performance is affected by the robot’s as well as the operator’s capabilities. Among all the standard test methods that ASTM
E54.08.01 Task Group on Robotics has specified, some depend more on the former while the others on the latter, but it would be extremely hard to totally
isolate the two factors. This HSI test suite is specified to focus on evaluating the operator’s capabilities of interacting with the robotic system, whereas
a separately specified sensor test suite, including Test Method E2566, focuses on the robots’ sensing capabilities.
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 Feb. 1, 2012Jan. 1, 2021. Published April 2012January 2021. Originally approved in 2012. Last previous edition approved in 2012 as E2853 – 12.
DOI: 10.1520/E2853-12.10.1520/E2853-12R21.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
E2853 − 12 (2021)
FIG. 1 HSI: Search Tasks: Random Maze Illustration
NOTE 2—As robotic systems are more widely applied, emergency responders might identify additional or advanced HSI capability requirements to help
them respond to emergency situations. They might also desire to use robots with higher levels of autonomy, beyond teleoperation to help reduce their
workload—see NIST Special Publication 1011-II-1.0. Further, emergency responders in expanded 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
standard is, nevertheless, standalone and complete.
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 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 safety, health, and healthenvironmental 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
E2566 Test Method for Evaluating Response Robot Sensing: Visual Acuity
E2592 Practice for Evaluating Response Robot Capabilities: Logistics: Packaging for Urban Search and Rescue Task Force
Equipment Caches
2.2 Additional Documents:
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
NIST Special Publication 1011-II-1.0 Autonomy Levels for Unmanned Systems (ALFUS) Framework Volume II: Framework
Models, Version 1.0
3. Terminology
3.1 Definitions:
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 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), P.O. Box 10055, Hyattsville, MD 20782-8055, 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/el/isd/ks/
autonomy_levels.cfm.
E2853 − 12 (2021)
3.1.1 abstain, v—the action of the manufacturer or designated operator of the testing robot choosing not to enter the test. Any
decision to take such an action shall be conveyed to the administrator 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.
3.1.1.1 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.
3.1.2 administrator, n—person who conducts the test—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; 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.
3.1.3 emergency response robot, or response robot, n—a mobile device deployable to perform operational tasks at operational
tempos to assist the operators to handle a disaster.
3.1.3.1 Discussion—
A response robot is designed to serve as an extension of the operator for gaining improved remote situational awareness and for
accomplishing the tasks remotely through the equipped capabilities. The use of a robot is designed to reduce risk to the operator
while improving effectiveness and efficiency of the mission. The desired features of a response robot include: the ability to be
rapidly deployed and remotely operated from an appropriate standoff distance and to be mobile in complex environments,
sufficiently hardened against harsh environments, reliable and field serviceable, durable and/or cost effectively disposable, and
equipped with operational safeguards.
3.1.4 fault condition, n—a certain situation or occurrence during testing whereby the robot either cannot continue without human
intervention or has performed some defined rules infraction.
3.1.4.1 Discussion—
Fault conditions include robotic system malfunction such as de-tracking, task execution problems such as excessive deviation from
a specified path, or uncontrolled behaviors and other safety violations which require administrative intervention.
3.1.5 full-ramp terrain element, n—1.2 by 1.2 m (4 by 4 ft) surface ramp with 15° slope using solid wood support posts with angle
cuts. The material used to build these elements shall be strong enough to allow the participating robots to execute the testing tasks.
3.1.5.1 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. Solid wood posts with 10 by 10 cm (4 by 4 in) cross-section dimensions typically
support the ramped surface.
3.1.5.2 Discussion—
Elements similar to this type are used, sometimes mixed and assembled in different configurations, to create various levels of
complexities for such robotic functions as orientation and traction.
3.1.6 human-scale, adj—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.
3.1.6.1 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.
3.1.7 maze, n—a network of passages interconnected without any repetitive order of opening and closing directions and meant to
challenge robotic navigation from the designed starting and end points.
3.1.8 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 the test.
E2853 − 12 (2021)
3.1.8.1 Discussion—
An emergency responder would be a typical operator in emergency response situations.
3.1.9 operator station, n—apparatus for hosting the operator and her/his operator control unit (OCU, see NIST Special Publication
1011-I-2.0) to teleoperate (see Terminology E2521) the robot. The operator station shall be positioned in such a manner as to
insulate the operator from the sights and sounds generated at the test apparatuses.
3.1.10 repetition, n—robot’s completion of the task as specified in the test method and readiness for repeating the same task when
required.
3.1.10.1 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 testing condition, may be used to establish the tested capability to a certain degree of statistical significance
as specified by the test sponsor.
3.1.11 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).
3.1.12 test form, n—a collection of data fields or graphics used to record the testing results along with the associated information.
A single test form shall not be used to record the results of multiple trials.
3.1.13 test sponsor, n—an organization or individual that commissions a particular test event and receives the corresponding test
results.
3.1.14 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 HSI, manipulation, sensors, energy/power, communications, logistics, safety and
operating environment, and aerial or aquatic maneuvering.
3.1.15 testing target, or target, n—a designed physical feature to be used by the testing robotic subsystem for evaluating the
subsystem capabilities. The feature may be an operationally relevant object, a notional object, or one designed specifically for
exercising the subsystem features to its full extent.
3.1.16 testing task, or task, n—a set of activities well defined in a test method for testing robots and the operators to perform in
order for the system’s capabilities to be evaluated according to the corresponding metric(s). A test method may specify multiple
tasks. A task corresponds to the associated metric(s).
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.