1、Designation: E2855 12Standard Test Method forEvaluating Emergency Response Robot Capabilities: RadioCommunication: Non-Line-of-Sight Range1This standard is issued under the fixed designation E2855; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year oforiginal adoption or, in the cas
2、e of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. Asuperscript epsilon () indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.1. Scope1.1 Purpose:1.1.1 The purpose of this test method, as a part of a suite ofradio communication t
3、est methods, is to quantitatively evaluatea teleoperated robots (see Terminology E2521) capability toperform maneuvering and inspection tasks in a non-line-of-sight environment.1.1.2 Robots shall possess a certain set of radio communi-cation capabilities, including performing maneuvering andinspecti
4、on tasks in a non-line-of-sight environment, to suitcritical operations for emergency responses. The capability fora robot to perform these types of tasks in obstructed areas downrange is critical for emergency response operations. This testmethod specifies a standard set of apparatuses, procedures,
5、 andmetrics to evaluate the robot/operator capabilities for perform-ing these tasks.1.1.3 Emergency response robots shall be able to operateremotely using the equipped radios in line-of-sight environ-ments, in non-line-of-sight environments, and for signal pen-etration through such impediments as bu
6、ildings, rubbles, andtunnels. Additional capabilities include operating in the pres-ence of electromagnetic interference and providing link secu-rity and data logging. Standard test methods are required toevaluate whether candidate robots meet these requirements.1.1.4 ASTM E54.08.01 Task Group on Ro
7、botics specifies aradio communication test suite, which consists of a set of testmethods for evaluating these communication capabilities. Thisnon-line-of-sight range test method is a part of the radiocommunication test suite. The apparatuses associated with thetest methods challenge specific robot c
8、apabilities in repeatableways to facilitate comparison of different robot models as wellas particular configurations of similar robot models.1.1.5 This test method establishes procedures, apparatuses,and metrics for specifying and testing the capability of radio(wireless) links used between the oper
9、ator station and thetesting robot in a non-line-of-sight environment. These linksinclude the command and control channel(s) and video, audio,and other sensor data telemetry.1.1.6 This test method is intended to apply to ground basedrobotic systems and small unmanned aerial systems (sUAS)capable of h
10、overing to perform maneuvering and inspectiontasks down range for emergency response applications.1.1.7 This test method specifies an apparatus that is, first ofall, an essentially clear radio frequency channel for testing. Inaddition, a standard line-of-sight barrier between the testingoperator con
11、trol unit (OCU) and the robot is specified. Fig. 1provides an illustration.NOTE 1Frequency coordination and interoperability are not addressedin this standard. These issues should be resolved by the affected agencies(Fire, Police, and Urban Search and Rescue) and written into StandardOperating Proce
12、dures (SOPs) that guide the responses to emergencysituations.1.1.8 The radio communication test suite quantifies elemen-tal radio communication capabilities necessary for robotsintended for emergency response applications. As such, basedon their particular capability requirements, users of this test
13、suite can select only the applicable test methods and canindividually weight particular test methods or particular met-rics within a test method. The testing results should collec-tively represent an emergency response robots overall radiocommunication capability. These test results can be used togu
14、ide procurement specifications and acceptance testing forrobots intended for emergency response applications.NOTE 2As robotic systems are more widely applied, emergencyresponders might identify additional or advanced robotic radio commu-nication capability requirements to help them respond to emerge
15、ncysituations. They might also desire to use robots with higher levels ofautonomy, beyond teleoperate onto help reduce their workloadsee NISTSpecial Publication 1011-II-1.0. Further, emergency responders in ex-panded emergency response domains might also desire to apply robotictechnologies to their
16、situations, a source for new sets of requirements. Asa result, additional standards within the suite would be developed. Thisstandard is, nevertheless, standalone and complete.1.2 Performing LocationThis test method shall be per-formed in a testing laboratory or the field where the specifiedapparatu
17、s and environmental conditions are implemented.1.3 UnitsThe values stated in SI units shall be thestandard. The values given in parentheses are not precisemathematical conversions to inch-pound units. They are close1This test method is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E54 onHomeland Security
18、 Applications and is the direct responsibility of SubcommitteeE54.08 on Operational Equipment.Current edition approved Feb. 1, 2012. Published April 2012. DOI: 10.1520/E2855-12.1Copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.approxim
19、ate equivalents for the purpose of specifying materialdimensions or quantities that are readily available to avoidexcessive fabrication costs of test apparatuses while maintain-ing repeatability and reproducibility of the test method results.These values given in parentheses facilitate testing but a
20、re notconsidered standard.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of thesafety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is theresponsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-priate safety and health practices and determine the applica-bility of regulatory limitations pr
21、ior to use.2. Referenced Documents2.1 ASTM Standards:2E2521 Terminology for Urban Search and Rescue RoboticOperationsE2592 Practice for Evaluating Cache Packaged Weight andVolume of Robots for Urban Search and Rescue2.2 Additional Documents:National Response Framework U.S. Department of Home-land Se
22、curity3NIST Special Publication 1011-I-2.0 Autonomy Levels forUnmanned Systems (ALFUS) Framework Volume I: Ter-minology, Version 2.04NIST Special Publication 1011-II-1.0 Autonomy Levels forUnmanned Systems (ALFUS) Framework Volume II:Framework Models, Version 1.043. Terminology3.1 Definitions:3.1.1
23、abstain, vthe action of the manufacturer or desig-nated operator of the testing robot choosing not to enter thetest. Any decision to take such an action shall be conveyed tothe administrator before the test begins. The test form shall beclearly marked as such, indicating that the manufactureracknowl
24、edges the omission of the performance data while thetest method was available at the test time.3.1.1.1 DiscussionAbstentions may occur when the robotconfiguration is neither designed nor equipped to perform thetasks as specified in the test method. Practices within the testapparatus prior to testing
25、 should allow for establishing theapplicability of the test method for the given robot.3.1.2 administrator, nperson who conducts the testTheadministrator shall ensure the readiness of the apparatus, thetest form, and any required measuring devices such as stop-watch and light meter; the administrato
26、r shall ensure that thespecified or required environmental conditions are met; theadministrator shall notify the operator when the safety belay isavailable and ensure that the operator has either decided not touse it or assigned a person to handle it properly; and theadministrator shall call the ope
27、rator to start the test and recordthe performance data and any notable observations during thetest.3.1.3 emergency response robot, or response robot, naremotely deployed device intended to perform operationaltasks at operational tempos to assist the operators to handle adisaster.3.1.3.1 DiscussionA
28、response robot is designed to serveas an extension of the operator for gaining improved remotesituational awareness and for accomplishing the tasks remotelythrough the equipped capabilities. The use of a robot isdesigned to reduce risk to the equipped capabilities. It isdesigned to reduce risk to th
29、e operator while improvingeffectiveness and efficiency of the mission. The desired fea-tures of a response robot include: rapid deployment; remoteoperation from an appropriate standoff distance; mobile incomplex environments; sufficiently hardened against harsh2For referenced ASTM standards, visit t
30、he ASTM website, www.astm.org, orcontact ASTM Customer Service at serviceastm.org. For Annual Book of ASTMStandards volume information, refer to the standards Document Summary page onthe ASTM website.3Available from Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), P.O. Box10055, Hyattsville, MD 20782-805
31、5, http:/www.fema.gov/emergency/nrf/.4Available from National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 100Bureau Dr., Stop 1070, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-1070, http:/www.nist.gov/el/isd/ks/autonomy_levels.cfm.Left: The non-line-of-sight range test method uses an airstrip or flat, paved road with
32、robot test stations placed in front of and behind a wall constructed of stacked 12m (40 ft) International Standards Organization (ISO) shipping containers. Right: Robot test stations are prototyped behind the wall with targets on the barrels for visualinspection tasks and circular paths for maneuver
33、ing tasks.FIG. 1 Test Fabrication at An Air StripE2855 122environments; reliable and field serviceable; durable and/orcost effectively disposable; and equipped with operationalsafeguards.3.1.4 fault condition, na certain situation or occurrenceduring testing whereby the robot either cannot continue
34、with-out human intervention or has performed some defined rulesinfraction.3.1.4.1 DiscussionFault conditions include robotic sys-tem malfunctions such as de-tracking, task execution problemssuch as excessive deviation from a specified path, or uncon-trolled behaviors and other safety violations whic
35、h requireadministrative intervention.3.1.5 human-scale, adjused to indicate that the objects,terrains, or tasks specified in this test method are in a scaleconsistent with the environments and structures typicallynegotiated by humans, although possibly compromised orcollapsed enough to limit human a
36、ccess.Also, that the responserobots considered in this context are in a volumetric and weightscale appropriate for operation within these environments.3.1.5.1 DiscussionNo precise size and weight ranges arespecified for this term. The test apparatus constrains theenvironment in which the tasks are p
37、erformed. Such con-straints, in turn, limit the types of robots to be consideredapplicable to emergency response operations.3.1.6 line-of-sight communications, npropagating electro-magnetic energy with a direct path between a transmittingradio antenna and a receiving radio antenna which are in visua
38、lcontact with each other with no obstructions between them. Inthe ideal case, the only paths that the radio waves can take inthe line-of-sight case are either the direct path between thetransmitter and receiver or a path that corresponds to a singlereflection of the radio wave off of the ground befo
39、re itencounters the receiving antenna.3.1.7 non-line-of-sight communications, npropagatingelectromagnetic energy with no direct path between a trans-mitting radio antenna and a receiving radio antenna which arenot in visual contact with each other due to obstructionsbetween them. Radio waves propaga
40、te between the transmit-ting and the receiving antennas via reflections off structures,diffraction around structures, and/or passage through structureswith attenuation.3.1.8 operator, nperson who controls the robot to performthe tasks as specified in the test method; she/he shall ensure thereadiness
41、 of all the applicable subsystems of the robot; she/hethrough a designated second shall be responsible for the use ofa safety belay; and she/he shall also determine whether toabstain the test.3.1.8.1 DiscussionAn emergency responder would be atypical operator in emergency response situations.3.1.9 o
42、perator station, napparatus for hosting the opera-tor and her/his operator control unit (OCU, see NIST SpecialPublication 1011-I-2.0) to teleoperate (see TerminologyE2521) the robot. The operator station shall be positioned insuch a manner as to insulate the operator from the sights andsounds genera
43、ted at the test apparatuses.3.1.10 radio interference, nadverse effect on the transferof data when unrelated external signals are received by a robotreceiver or an operator station receiver.3.1.10.1 DiscussionIn licensed frequency bands such asthose used by the public safety community, each radio tr
44、ans-mitter and receiver is assigned a unique frequency channeltypically with limits on power emissions. Some radio systemsare designed to work effectively when multiple systems operatein the same frequency band at the same time. Many of thesesystems can be found in the unlicensed Industrial, Scienti
45、fic,and Medical (ISM) frequency bands.3.1.11 repetition, nrobots completion of the task asspecified in the test method and readiness for repeating thesame task when required.3.1.11.1 DiscussionIn a traversing task, the entire mobil-ity mechanism shall be behind the START point before thetraverse and
46、 shall pass the END point to complete a repetition.A test method can specify returning to the START point tocomplete the task. Multiple repetitions, performed in the sametest condition, may be used to establish the tested capability toa certain degree of statistical significance as specified by thet
47、est sponsor.3.1.12 test event, or event, na set of testing activities thatare planned and organized by the test sponsor to be held at theone or multiple designated test site(s).3.1.13 test form, na collection of data fields or graphicsused to record the testing results along with the associatedinfor
48、mation. A single test form shall not be used to record theresults of multiple trials.3.1.14 test sponsor, nan organization or individual thatcommissions a particular test event and receives the corre-sponding test results.3.1.15 test suite, na designed collection of test methodsthat are used collect
49、ively to evaluate the performance of arobots particular subsystem or functionality, including mobil-ity, manipulation, sensors, energy/power, communications,human-system interaction (HSI), logistics, safety and operatingenvironment, and aerial or aquatic maneuvering.3.1.16 testing target, or target, na designed physicalfeature to be used by the testing robotic subsystem forevaluating the subsystem capabilities. The feature may be anoperationally relevant object, a notional object, or one designedspecifically for exercising the subsystem features to i
