ASTM E2830-11(2020)
(Test Method)Standard Test Method for Evaluating the Mobility Capabilities of Emergency Response Robots Using Towing Tasks: Grasped Sleds
Standard Test Method for Evaluating the Mobility Capabilities of Emergency Response Robots Using Towing Tasks: Grasped Sleds
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method corresponds to the requirements as specified by U.S. emergency responders and additional constituents. A robot’s performance in this test is indicative of its capabilities needed in such operations as emergency responses. To have the successfully tested robots available to the emergency operations is consistent with the National Response Framework.
5.2 Although these test methods were developed first for emergency response robots, they may be applicable to other operational domains, such as law enforcement and military. They can also be used to ascertain operator proficiencies during training or serve as practice tasks that exercise robot actuators, sensors, and OCUs.
5.3 The standard apparatus is specified to be easily assembled to facilitate robotic developers’ self evaluation of the robots and facilitate the emergency responders’ and other users’ proficiency training in applying the robotic tools.
5.4 The objective of using robots in emergency response operations is to enhance the emergency responder’s capability of operating in hazardous or hard-to-reach environments. The testing results of the candidate robot shall describe, in a statistically significant way, how reliably the robot is able to traverse the obstacle, thus enabling emergency responders to determine the applicability of the robot.
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 towing capability with the task of grasping loads and traversing a specified route on a flat and paved surface.
1.1.2 Robots shall possess a certain set of mobility capabilities, including towing, to suit critical operations such as emergency responses. This capability would be required to perform such emergency response-related tasks as delivering critical supplies, moving victims to safe locations, or transporting suspected packages away from humans.
1.1.3 Emergency response ground robots shall be able to handle many types of obstacles and terrains. 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.
1.1.4 ASTM Task Group E54.08.01 specifies a mobility test suite, which consists of a set of test methods for evaluating these mobility capability requirements. This towing-by-grasping 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.
1.1.5 The test methods quantify elemental mobility capabilities necessary for ground robot emergency response applications. As such, the test suite should be used collectively to represent a ground robot’s overall mobility performance.
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 mathematical conversions to inch-pound units that 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, hea...
General Information
Relations
Standards Content (Sample)
This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the
Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
Designation: E2830 − 11 (Reapproved 2020)
Standard Test Method for
Evaluating the Mobility Capabilities of Emergency Response
Robots Using Towing Tasks: Grasped Sleds
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E2830; 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.
requirements, including newly identified requirements and even for new
1. Scope
application domains.
1.1 Purpose:
1.2 Performing Location—This test method shall be per-
1.1.1 The purpose of this test method, as a part of a suite of
formed in a testing laboratory or the field where the specified
mobility test methods, is to quantitatively evaluate a teleoper-
apparatus and environmental conditions are implemented.
ated ground robot’s towing capability with the task of grasping
loads and traversing a specified route on a flat and paved 1.3 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded
surface. asthestandard.Thevaluesgiveninparenthesesaremathemati-
1.1.2 Robots shall possess a certain set of mobility cal conversions to inch-pound units that are provided for
capabilities,includingtowing,tosuitcriticaloperationssuchas information only and are not considered standard.
emergency responses. This capability would be required to
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the
perform such emergency response-related tasks as delivering
safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the
critical supplies, moving victims to safe locations, or transport-
responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-
ing suspected packages away from humans.
priate safety, health, and environmental practices and deter-
1.1.3 Emergency response ground robots shall be able to
mine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
handle many types of obstacles and terrains. The required
1.5 This international standard was developed in accor-
mobility capabilities include traversing gaps, hurdles, stairs,
dance with internationally recognized principles on standard-
slopes, various types of floor surfaces or terrains, and confined
ization established in the Decision on Principles for the
passageways. Yet additional mobility requirements include
Development of International Standards, Guides and Recom-
sustained speeds and towing capabilities. Standard test meth-
mendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical
ods are required to evaluate whether candidate robots meet
Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
these requirements.
1.1.4 ASTMTask Group E54.08.01 specifies a mobility test
2. Referenced Documents
suite, which consists of a set of test methods for evaluating 2
2.1 ASTM Standards:
these mobility capability requirements. This towing-by-
E2521 Terminology for Evaluating Response Robot Capa-
grasping test method is a part of the mobility test suite. The
bilities
apparatuses associated with the test methods challenge specific
E2592 Practice for Evaluating Response Robot Capabilities:
robotcapabilitiesinrepeatablewaystofacilitatecomparisonof
Logistics: Packaging for Urban Search and Rescue Task
different robot models as well as particular configurations of
Force Equipment Caches
similar robot models.
2.2 Other Standards:
1.1.5 The test methods quantify elemental mobility capa-
National Response Framework U.S. Department of Home-
bilities necessary for ground robot emergency response appli-
land Security
cations. As such, the test suite should be used collectively to
represent a ground robot’s overall mobility performance.
3. Terminology
NOTE 1—Additional test methods within the suite are anticipated to be
3.1 Terminology E2521 lists additional definitions relevant
developed to address additional or advanced robotic mobility capability
to this test method.
1 2
This test method is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E54 on For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
Homeland Security Applications and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee contact ASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM
E54.09 on Response Robots. Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on
Current edition approved Jan. 1, 2020. Published January 2020. Originally the ASTM website.
approved in 2011. Last previous edition approved in 2011 as E2830 – 11. DOI: Available from Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), P.O. Box
10.1520/E2830-11R20. 10055, Hyattsville, MD 20782-8055, http://www.fema.gov.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
E2830 − 11 (2020)
3.2 Definitions: 3.2.8 repetition, n—robot’s completion of the task as speci-
fied in the test method and readiness for repeating the same
3.2.1 abstain, v—the operator’s action of notifying the
task when required.
administrator to withdraw from the test, causing the result not
3.2.8.1 Discussion—In a traversing task, the entire mobility
to be reported and the test form to be marked as abstained.
mechanism shall be behind the START point before the
3.2.1.1 Discussion—The operator is the only person who
traverse and shall pass the END point to complete a repetition.
can convey the decision to abstain the test.The abstention may
A test method can specify returning to the START point to
be made when the robot configuration is not designed nor
complete the task. Multiple repetitions, performed in the same
equipped to perform the test. The testing sponsor should make
test condition, may be used to establish the test performance to
a consistent policy about the time period during which the
a certain degree of statistical significance as specified by the
abstentionisallowed.Theabstentionisgrantedonlybeforethe
testing sponsor.
test, as reflected in the procedure.
3.2.1.2 Discussion—Being marked as abstained indicates
3.2.9 test event or event, n—asetoftestingactivitiesthatare
that all the parties involved in the test acknowledge the planned and organized by the test sponsor and to be held at the
omission of the performance data while the test method was
designated test site(s).
available at the test time.
3.2.9.1 Discussion—Testing may be done with or without
being associated with a test event. A testing event may be
3.2.2 administrator, n—person who conducts the test.
organized for particular program purposes, such as procure-
3.2.2.1 Discussion—The administrator shall ensure the
ment or applicability study. In such a case, the program and the
readiness of the apparatus, the test form, and any required
organization names should be considered a part of the event
measuring devices such as stopwatch and light meter; the
name. Meanwhile, a robot may also be tested for its perfor-
administrator shall ensure that the specified or required envi-
mance record purposes independent of any particular event. A
ronmental conditions are met; the administrator shall notify the
testeventcanalsoservesuchadditionalpurposesaspromoting
operator when the safety belay is available and ensure that the
the robotic tool in a new user community and facilitating user
operator has either decided not to use it or assigned a person to
training.
handle it properly; and the administrator shall call the operator
3.2.10 test form, n—form corresponding to a test method
to start and end the test and record the performance data and
any notable observations during the test. and contains fields for recording the testing results and the
associated information, including: (1) Metrics and correspond-
3.2.3 fault condition, n—during the performance of the
ing measuring scales and ranges; (2) Any additional testing
task(s) as specified by the test method, a certain condition may
features such as those reflecting performance proficiency; (3)
occur that renders the task execution to be failed and such a
Important notes to be recorded during the test, including
condition is called a fault condition.
particular fault conditions that occurred, the reason for
3.2.3.1 Discussion—Faultconditionsincluderoboticsystem
abstaining, any observations by the administrator that could
malfunction, such as detracking, and task execution problems,
augment the recorded results in either positive or negative
such as excessive deviation from a specified path or failure to
ways, or any comments that the operator requests to be put on
recognize a target.
the form; (4) Administrative information including: names of
3.2.4 human-scale, adj—used to indicate that the object, a
the involved personnel, organizations, and robot; testing
response robot or an associated target, is in a volumetric and
date(s) and time; version number of the form; testing condi-
weight scale for a human or a small team of humans to handle
tions on the environment and the apparatus; and robotic
properly, such as carrying it using nothing more than hand
configuration (tether versus radio communication for ex-
tools.
ample). If audio/video recording is done during the testing, the
3.2.4.1 Discussion—No precise size and weight ranges are file names should be recorded on the form.
specified for this term. The test apparatus constrains the
3.2.11 test sponsor, n—organization or individual that com-
environment in which the tasks are performed. Such
missions a particular test event and receives the corresponding
constraints, in turn, limit the types of robots to be considered
test results.
applicable to emergency response operations.
3.2.12 test suite, n—designed collection of test methods that
3.2.5 operator, n—person who controls the robot to perform
are used, collectively, to evaluate the performance of a robot’s
the tasks as specified in the test method; she/he shall ensure the
particular subsystem or functionality, including mobility,
readiness of all the applicable subsystems of the robot; she/he,
manipulation, sensors, energy/power, communications,
through a designatedsecond,shallberesponsiblefor theuseof
human-robot interaction (HRI), logistics, safety, and aerial or
a safety belay; and she/he shall also determine whether to
aquatic maneuvering.
abstain from the test.
3.2.6 operator control unit (OCU), n—a device used by an 4. Summary of Test Method
operator to teleoperate the robot.
4.1 The task for this test method, towing by grasping, is
3.2.7 operator station, n—apparatusforhostingtheoperator defined as when the robot grasps either the specified sled that
and her/his operator control unit (OCU) to teleoperate (see carries the operator-selected weight and traverses from the
TerminologyE2521)therobot;sightandsoundinsulationfrom START post for a specified route to the END post and back
the robot may be required as specified by the testing sponsor. fully. The default route shall be a figure eight, also known as a
E2830 − 11 (2020)
continuous “S” that is anchored by the two posts, as described site(s)atwhichthetestmethodsareimplemented,todetermine
in Section 6. See Fig. 1 for an illustration. thecorrespondingstatisticalreliabilityandconfidencelevelsof
the results for each of the test methods, and to establish the
4.2 The robot’s towing capability is defined as when the
participation rules including the testing schedules and the test
robot is able to complete the task with the associated effective
environmental conditions.
speed. Further, the test sponsor can specify the statistical
reliability and confidence levels of such a capability and thus
5. Significance and Use
dictate the number of successful task performance repetitions
5.1 This test method corresponds to the requirements as
that are required. In such a case, the average effective speed
specified by U.S. emergency responders and additional con-
will be used, instead, as the robot’s capability.
stituents. A robot’s performance in this test is indicative of its
4.3 Teleoperation shall be used from the operator station
capabilities needed in such operations as emergency responses.
specified by the administrator to test the robots using an OCU
To have the successfully tested robots available to the emer-
provided by the operator. The operator station shall be posi-
gency operations is consistent with the National Response
tioned and implemented in such a manner so as to insulate the
Framework.
operator from the sights and sounds generated at the test
5.2 Although these test methods were developed first for
apparatuses.
emergency response robots, they may be applicable to other
4.4 The operator is allowed to practice before the test.
operational domains, such as law enforcement and military.
She/he is also allowed to abstain from the test before it is
Theycanalsobeusedtoascertainoperatorproficienciesduring
started. Once the test begins, there shall be no verbal commu-
training or serve as practice tasks that exercise robot actuators,
nication between the operator and the administrator regarding
sensors, and OCUs.
the performance of a test repetition other than instructions on
5.3 The standard apparatus is specified to be easily as-
when to start and notifications of faults and any safety related
sembled to facilitate robotic developers’self evaluation of the
conditions. The operator shall have the full responsibility to
robots and facilitate the emergency responders’ and other
determine whether and when the robot has completed a
users’ proficiency training in applying the robotic tools.
repetition, and notify the administrator accordingly. However,
5.4 The objective of using robots in emergency response
it is the administrator’s authority to judge the completeness of
operations is to enhance the emergency responder’s capability
the repetition.
of operating in hazardous or hard-to-reach environments. The
NOTE 2—Practice within the test apparatus could help establish the
testing results of the candidate robot shall describe, in a
applicability of the robot for the given test method. It allows the operator
statistically significant way, how reliably the robot is able to
to gain familiarity with the standard apparatus and environmental condi-
tions. It also helps the test administrator to establish the initial apparatus traverse the obstacle, thus enabling emergency responders to
setting for the test when applicable.
determine the applicability of the robot.
4.5 The test sponsor has the authority to select the test
6. Apparatus
methodsthatconstitutethetestevent,toselectoneormoretest
6.1 This test apparatus includes a flat, paved surface. Ea
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.