iTeh StandardsiTeh Standards
EURUSD
Your shopping cart is empty.
ASTM

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

Status
Published
Publication Date
31-Dec-2019
ICS
13.200 - Accident and disaster control
25.040.30 - Industrial robots. Manipulators
Technical Committee
E54 - Homeland Security Applications
Drafting Committee
E54.09 - Response Robots
Current Stage
Ref Project

Relations

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
Referred By
ASTM E3132/E3132M-17 - Standard Practice for Evaluating Response Robot Logistics: System Configuration
Effective Date
01-Jan-2020

Buy Standard

ASTM E2830-11(2020) - Standard Test Method for Evaluating the Mobility Capabilities of Emergency Response Robots Using Towing Tasks: Grasped SledsASTM E2830-11(2020) - Standard Test Method for Evaluating the Mobility Capabilities of Emergency Response Robots Using Towing Tasks: Grasped Sleds
PreviousNext
Standard
ASTM E2830-11(2020) - Standard Test Method for Evaluating the Mobility Capabilities of Emergency Response Robots Using Towing Tasks: Grasped Sleds
English language
7 pages
sale 15% off
Preview
sale 15% off
Preview

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
1
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-
3
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.
3
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
...

Questions, Comments and Discussion

Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.

This May Also Interest You

ASTM
ASTM E2802/E2802M-21e1(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Evaluating Response Robot Mobility Using Variable Hurdle Obstacles

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system mobility and remote operator proficiency. The variable hurdle obstacle as described challenges robotic system locomotion, suspension systems to maintain traction, rollover tendencies, self-righting (if necessary), chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, the variable hurdle obstacle can be used to represent obstacles in the environment, such as railroad tracks, curbs, and debris.  
5.2 The scale of the apparatus can vary to provide different constraints representative of typical obstacle spacing in the intended deployment environment. For example, the three configurations can be representative of repeatable complexity for unobstructed obstacles (open configuration), relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars (rectangular confinement configuration), or within bus, train, or plane aisles, or dwellings with hallways and doorways (square confinement configuration).  
5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.  
5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. The variable hurdle obstacle can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.  
5.5 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.  
5.6 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training as a repea...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to negotiate an obstacle in the form of hurdles. This test method is one of several related mobility tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.  
1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of most functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. This test method can be used to evaluate assistive or autonomous behaviors intended to improve the effectiveness or efficiency of remotely operated systems.  
1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.  
1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.  
1.5 Units—The International System of Units (a.k.a. SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (a.k.a. Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.  
1.6 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.  
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internation...

  • Standard
    12 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E2827/E2827M-20(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Evaluating Response Robot Mobility Using Crossing Pitch/Roll Ramp Terrains

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system mobility and remote operator proficiency. This crossing (discontinuous) pitch/roll ramp terrain specifically challenges robotic system locomotion, suspension systems to maintain traction, rollover tendencies, self-righting in complex terrain (if necessary), chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, it can be used to represent modest outdoor terrain complexity or indoor debris within confined areas.  
5.2 The overall size of the terrain apparatus can vary to provide different constraints depending on the typical obstacle spacing of the intended deployment environment. For example, the terrain with containment walls can be sized to represent repeatable complexity within bus, train, or plane aisles; dwellings with hallways and doorways; relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars; or unobstructed terrains.  
5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.  
5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. It can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.  
5.5 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.  
5.6 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training as a repeatable practice task or as an embedded task within training scenarios. The resulting mea...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to traverse complex terrains in the form of crossing (discontinuous) pitch/roll ramps. This test method is one of several related mobility tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.  
1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of all functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. Assistive features or autonomous behaviors that improve the effectiveness or efficiency of the overall system are encouraged.  
1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.  
1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.  
1.5 Units—The International System of Units (SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. This avoids excessive purchasing and fabrication costs. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.  
1.6 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.  
1.7 This international stand...

  • Standard
    10 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    10 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E2826/E2826M-20(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Evaluating Response Robot Mobility Using Continuous Pitch/Roll Ramp Terrains

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system mobility and remote operator proficiency. This continuous pitch/roll ramp terrain specifically challenges robotic system locomotion, suspension systems to maintain traction, rollover tendencies, self-righting in complex terrain (if necessary), chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, it can be used to represent modest outdoor terrain complexity or indoor debris within confined areas.  
5.2 The overall size of the terrain apparatus can vary to provide different constraints depending on the typical obstacle spacing of the intended deployment environment. For example, the terrain with containment walls can be sized to represent repeatable complexity within bus, train, or plane aisles; dwellings with hallways and doorways; relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars; or unobstructed terrains.  
5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.  
5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. It can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.  
5.5 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.  
5.6 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training as a repeatable practice task or as an embedded task within training scenarios. The resulting measures of remot...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to traverse complex terrains in the form of continuous pitch/roll ramps. This test method is one of several related mobility tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.  
1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of all functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. Assistive features or autonomous behaviors that improve the effectiveness or efficiency of the overall system are encouraged.  
1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.  
1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.  
1.5 Units—The International System of Units (SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. This avoids excessive purchasing and fabrication costs. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.  
1.6 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.  
1.7 This international standard was develo...

  • Standard
    10 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    10 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E2828/E2828M-20(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Evaluating Response Robot Mobility Using Symmetric Stepfields Terrains

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system mobility and remote operator proficiency. This symmetric stepfield terrain specifically challenges robotic system locomotion, suspension systems to maintain traction, rollover tendencies, self-righting in complex terrain (if necessary), chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, it can be used to represent modest outdoor terrain complexity or indoor debris within confined areas.  
5.2 The overall size of the terrain apparatus can vary to provide different constraints depending on the typical obstacle spacing of the intended deployment environment. For example, the terrain with containment walls can be sized to represent repeatable complexity within bus, train, or plane aisles; dwellings with hallways and doorways; relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars; or unobstructed terrains.  
5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.  
5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. It can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.  
5.5 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.  
5.6 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training as a repeatable practice task or as an embedded task within training scenarios. The resulting measures of remote opera...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to traverse complex terrains in the form of symmetric stepfields. This test method is one of several related mobility tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.  
1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of all functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. Assistive features or autonomous behaviors that improve the effectiveness or efficiency of the overall system are encouraged.  
1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.  
1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.  
1.5 Units—The International System of Units (SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. This avoids excessive purchasing and fabrication costs. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.  
1.6 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.  
1.7 This international standard was developed in ...

  • Standard
    11 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    11 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E2804-11(2020)(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Evaluating Emergency Response Robot Capabilities: Mobility: Confined Area Obstacles: Stairs/Landings

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 various types of obstacles, including the specified one, 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 The test apparatuses are 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 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 th...
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 traversing stairs with landings 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. Stairs with landings are 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: Stairs/Landings 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 stairs/landings 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 mobil...

  • Standard
    10 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E2803-11(2020)(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Evaluating Emergency Response Robot Capabilities: Mobility: Confined Area Obstacles: Inclined Planes

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 various types of obstacles, including the specified one, 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 The test apparatuses are scalable to constrain robot maneuverability during task performance for a range of robot sizes in confined areas associated with emergency response operations. (See 6.1 for specified incline sizes.)  
5.4 The standard apparatus is specified to be easily fabricated to facilitate self-evaluation by robot developers and provide practice tasks for emergency responders that exercise robot actuators, sensors, and operator interfaces. The standard apparatus can also be used to support operator training and establish operator proficiency.  
5.5 Although the test method was developed first for emergency response robots, it may be applicable to other operational domains.
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 traversing inclined planes 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. An inclined slope 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 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: Inclined Planes 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 specifies a mobility test suite, which consists of a set of test methods for evaluating these mobility capability requirements. This inclined-plane-traversing 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 test suite quantifies elemental mobility capabilities necessary for ground robot intended for emergency response applications. As such, users of this standard can use either the entire suite or a subset based on their particular performance requirements...

  • Standard
    10 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E2829-11(2020)(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Evaluating Emergency Response Robot Capabilities: Mobility: Maneuvering Tasks: Sustained Speed

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 traverse the specified types of terrains 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 The standard apparatus is specified to be easily fabricated to facilitate self-evaluation by robot developers and provide practice tasks for emergency responders to exercise robot actuators, sensors, and operator interfaces. The standard apparatus can also be used to support operator training and establish operator proficiency.  
5.4 Although the test method was developed first for emergency response robots, it may be applicable to other operational domains.
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) sustained maneuvering speed on paved surfaces.  
1.1.2 Robots shall possess a certain set of mobility capabilities, including maneuvering, to suit critical operations such as emergency responses. The environments often pose constraints to robotic mobility to various degrees. Being able to maneuver effectively for extended distances is essential for deployment down-range during emergency responses. This test method specifies apparatuses to standardize this maneuvering task for testing.  
1.1.3 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.  
1.1.4 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 sustained speed 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 intended for emergency response applications. As such, users of this standard 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 as required. 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 addres...

  • Standard
    9 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E2802/E2802M-21e1(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Evaluating Response Robot Mobility Using Variable Hurdle Obstacles

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system mobility and remote operator proficiency. The variable hurdle obstacle as described challenges robotic system locomotion, suspension systems to maintain traction, rollover tendencies, self-righting (if necessary), chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, the variable hurdle obstacle can be used to represent obstacles in the environment, such as railroad tracks, curbs, and debris.  
5.2 The scale of the apparatus can vary to provide different constraints representative of typical obstacle spacing in the intended deployment environment. For example, the three configurations can be representative of repeatable complexity for unobstructed obstacles (open configuration), relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars (rectangular confinement configuration), or within bus, train, or plane aisles, or dwellings with hallways and doorways (square confinement configuration).  
5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.  
5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. The variable hurdle obstacle can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.  
5.5 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.  
5.6 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training as a repea...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to negotiate an obstacle in the form of hurdles. This test method is one of several related mobility tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.  
1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of most functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. This test method can be used to evaluate assistive or autonomous behaviors intended to improve the effectiveness or efficiency of remotely operated systems.  
1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.  
1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.  
1.5 Units—The International System of Units (a.k.a. SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (a.k.a. Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.  
1.6 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.  
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internation...

  • Standard
    12 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E2827/E2827M-20(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Evaluating Response Robot Mobility Using Crossing Pitch/Roll Ramp Terrains

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system mobility and remote operator proficiency. This crossing (discontinuous) pitch/roll ramp terrain specifically challenges robotic system locomotion, suspension systems to maintain traction, rollover tendencies, self-righting in complex terrain (if necessary), chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, it can be used to represent modest outdoor terrain complexity or indoor debris within confined areas.  
5.2 The overall size of the terrain apparatus can vary to provide different constraints depending on the typical obstacle spacing of the intended deployment environment. For example, the terrain with containment walls can be sized to represent repeatable complexity within bus, train, or plane aisles; dwellings with hallways and doorways; relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars; or unobstructed terrains.  
5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.  
5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. It can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.  
5.5 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.  
5.6 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training as a repeatable practice task or as an embedded task within training scenarios. The resulting mea...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to traverse complex terrains in the form of crossing (discontinuous) pitch/roll ramps. This test method is one of several related mobility tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.  
1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of all functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. Assistive features or autonomous behaviors that improve the effectiveness or efficiency of the overall system are encouraged.  
1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.  
1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.  
1.5 Units—The International System of Units (SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. This avoids excessive purchasing and fabrication costs. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.  
1.6 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.  
1.7 This international stand...

  • Standard
    10 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    10 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E2826/E2826M-20(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Evaluating Response Robot Mobility Using Continuous Pitch/Roll Ramp Terrains

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system mobility and remote operator proficiency. This continuous pitch/roll ramp terrain specifically challenges robotic system locomotion, suspension systems to maintain traction, rollover tendencies, self-righting in complex terrain (if necessary), chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, it can be used to represent modest outdoor terrain complexity or indoor debris within confined areas.  
5.2 The overall size of the terrain apparatus can vary to provide different constraints depending on the typical obstacle spacing of the intended deployment environment. For example, the terrain with containment walls can be sized to represent repeatable complexity within bus, train, or plane aisles; dwellings with hallways and doorways; relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars; or unobstructed terrains.  
5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.  
5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. It can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.  
5.5 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.  
5.6 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training as a repeatable practice task or as an embedded task within training scenarios. The resulting measures of remot...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to traverse complex terrains in the form of continuous pitch/roll ramps. This test method is one of several related mobility tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.  
1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of all functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. Assistive features or autonomous behaviors that improve the effectiveness or efficiency of the overall system are encouraged.  
1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.  
1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.  
1.5 Units—The International System of Units (SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. This avoids excessive purchasing and fabrication costs. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.  
1.6 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.  
1.7 This international standard was develo...

  • Standard
    10 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    10 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off