16 Oilfield Review

Robots to the Rescue

Formerly the subject of science fiction, robots have evolved to become a specialized

branch of engineering and technology. These machines are found in a myriad of

applications, from space exploration to domestic help. As robots free mankind from

danger and drudgery, they are making the improbable possible.

Geoff DowntonStonehouse, England

Steve GomezSugar Land, Texas, USA

Mark HaciEric MaidlaHouston, Texas

Charles RoyceOceaneering International, Inc.Houston, Texas

Oilfield Review Autumn 2010: 22, no. 3. Copyright © 2010 Schlumberger. For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Michael Tempel, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA; Charlie Vaida, iRobot Corporation, Bedford, Massachusetts; and Summer Wood, Oceaneering International, Inc., Houston.SLIDER is a mark of Schlumberger.AESOP and da Vinci are marks of Intuitive Surgical, Inc.Aware 2, Genghis, iRobot, PackBot and Roomba are marks of the iRobot Corporation.Google is a mark of Google, Inc.

As the Deepwater Horizon tragedy unfolded, millions sat transfixed at video monitors and tele-vision screens viewing live feeds streamed from remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) at the ocean floor. Beyond human capabilities—in water depths below the range of inhabitable sub-marines—these robotic heroes performed incredibly intricate tasks.

Robotics, however, encompasses much more than remote oceanic operations. In modern soci-ety, robots fill a variety of functions, relieving humans of mundane, repetitive tasks, on the one hand, while performing dangerous duties that are beyond human capabilities on the other. Industrial robots are used in a wide range of roles, primarily in factories. Service robots perform in hospital operating rooms, on battlefields, in outer space and in homes, as well as in the oil field. This article offers a short history of the field of robotics and presents a few of its diverse applications.

Menacing MachinesIn early 1800s England, the Industrial Revolutioncreated profound changes that reshaped the manufacturing landscape. A by-product of these changes in manufacturing methods was the dis-placement of traditional manual laborers. In the textile industry this was especially pronounced as automated looms replaced large numbers of unskilled workers.

Unfortunately, these workers had few job alternatives and in desperation a group of them banded together and attacked their perceived enemy, the mechanized loom. The movement took its name from Ned Ludd who, although not a part of this uprising, reportedly had smashed knitting frames in a fit of passion 30 years earlier. The actions of the Luddites were short lived—quickly quelled by military intervention—but a deep-seated animosity between man and machine was established. The concept of robots and robotics developed against the backdrop of this adversarial relationship.

The word robot first appeared in a 1921 work of fiction, R.U.R. (Rossum’s Universal Robots),by Czechoslovakian playwright Karel Capek.Derived from the Slavic word “rabota,” which means servitude, and “robota,” which means compulsory labor or drudgery, the term robot car-ried the connotation of a hard-working laborer. Capek’s robots were relegated to menial tasks, releasing humanity from drudgery and boredom. However, in the end the robots rebelled and turned on their human oppressors. From this inauspicious beginning, a genre of literature was born in which robots were cast most often as an enemy rather than a helper, perhaps reflecting earlier Luddite fears.

Autumn 2010 17

About 20 years later, one of the early masters of science-fiction writing, Isaac Asimov, intro-duced the concept of robot ethics with his Three Laws of Robotics.1 This is generally recognized as the first use of the term robotics, which is now an accepted branch of science and engineering. In Asimov’s novels, sentient anthropomorphic robots were almost human but lacked emotion. They are far different from modern society’s robot machines, which, although still lacking emotion, have moved from the pages of science fiction into factories, farms, oil fields, homes and a host of other environments.

Fiction to Fact(ory)There is no consensus on what constitutes a robot. Most definitions include the idea that it is a machine guided by automatic controls and that it often replaces human effort. With this concept

in mind, a likely candidate for first robot was born—as many inventions are—of necessity, although it is difficult to confer the title of first when definitions are a bit nebulous and there are competing interests for the title.

In the early 1940s, during the Manhattan Project, it was impossible to directly handle the radioactive materials being studied. Scientists developed a telemanipulator that allowed an operator to perform rudimentary tasks remotely and in relative safety.2 Although the device may lay claim to being first, because it was part of the top-secret project to develop the first atomic bomb, it was unavailable and unknown to the general public.

Today, the role of telerobotics in the nuclear industry is well established—every part of the fuel life cycle is managed by robotic machines. This includes transport, storage, fueling, rod retrieval, and, eventually, decommissioning.

Nuclear power plants maintain robots for a sec-ond line of defense; they are designed to disman-tle and remove first-line robots should they become stuck in the reactor.

The first generally recognized commercial robotic device was an invention of George Devol and Joseph Engelberger. In 1956, they offered Unimate—defined by the Robot Institute of America as an industrial manipulator—for sale. Unimate was an electronically controlled hydrau-lic arm that performed preprogrammed tasks and

1. Asimov’s Three Laws of Robotics are as follows: A robot may not injure a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

2. Murphy RR: Introduction to AI Robotics. Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA: The MIT Press, 2000.

Photograph used with permission of Oceaneering International, Inc.

18 Oilfield Review

was first sold to General Motors and General Electric (left).3 Industrial manipulators and automated guided vehicles are the two most com-mon robot technologies that have evolved for industrial use. In 2000, materials handling and manipulators used for welding occupied three-quarters of the applications of industrial robots in the US.

Early on, the trend in industrial applications of robotics was in mass production, a concept that would have pleased Henry Ford, who is credited with developing the assembly-line method of automobile production. His four principles of mass production—interchangeable parts, contin-uous flow, waste reduction and the division of labor—are well suited for robots. Division of labor allows an assembly-line worker to focus on doing one task very well rather than having to perform multiple tasks, possibly less effectively. Based on Ford’s legacy, it should come as no surprise that the worldwide automotive industry employs more robots than all other industries combined.

The successful introduction of industrial robots in automotive manufacturing was soon replicated in other industries. Just as robots were being widely introduced into the workplace, manufacturers began demanding broad custom-ization for products. This need for customization, in contrast to assembly-line uniformity, has been perceived by experts in the robotics industry as a setback for the acceptance of robots in some industries. The difficulty in retooling and repro-gramming added unwanted inefficiencies. In the past decade, however, there has been a resur-gence of robots in the manufacturing sector, especially in Asia, with Japan leading in the pur-suit of robotization. Today, there are more than one million industrial robots in operation world-wide (left).4

However, the factory is by no means the only place for robots. Unmanned space exploration offers an ideal venue for the use of robotics. In the early days of space exploration, the assump-tion was that space flight would have to be manned to complete tasks necessary to make the journey. This has not proved to be the case. The only foray to the surface of a planet other than our own, Mars, has been by robot rovers: Sojourner in 1997 followed by Spirit and Opportunity in 2004 (next page). The robotic unmanned Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 spacecrafthold the distinction of being the only human-made devices to depart our solar system.

These space travelers, although not autono-mous, were designed to sense their environment and perform tasks based on their findings. Distance and time between issuing and receiving

> The first commercial robot. The Unimate industrial robot could handle parts weighing up to 226 kg [500 lbm]. It removed hot die castings from presses and stacked them for later use. It was also used to spot weld automobile frames. (Photograph copyright Joseph Engelberger.)

> Industrial robot growth. The worldwide economic climate curtailed new installations of industrial robots in 2009; however, the estimated stock of operational industrial robots topped one million units that year (top). From 2006 to 2009, Japan led all countries in the pursuit of industrial robotization (bottom). (Adapted from the International Federation of Robotics, reference 4.)

1,200

1,000

800

600

400

200

0

Num

ber o

f uni

ts, 1

,000

1973 1983 1990 1995 2000

Worldwide Operational Stock of Industrialized Robots

† estimated ‡ forecast2005 2009† 2013‡

366

454

605

750

9231,025

1,100

40,000

35,000

30,000

25,000

20,000

15,000

10,000

5,000

0

Num

ber o

f uni

ts

Japan Germany NorthAmerica

20062007

SouthKorea

China Italy

Largest Markets for Industrial Robots 2006 to 2009

† estimated

20082009†

Autumn 2010 19

commands make full remote control impractical. As a consequence, scientists working in astro-nautics have been instrumental in many of the developments in the field of artificial intelligence (AI). Lessons learned from Sojourner were applied to later space missions, and basic AI pro-gramming improved robot rover response time and reaction in the Martian environment.

The most common experience with robotics for most people, however, is not with space explo-ration but in the form of service robots. This branch of robotics encompasses a wide array of domestic, medical, military and other applica-tions. A promising development in this category is the provision of assistance for humans with physi-cal challenges. The interdependent relationship between humans and machines, in contrast to earlier direct opposition, is opening the world to many who are bound by physical limitations.

State of the ArtAlthough a universally accepted definition is not available, a robot is defined as an automati-cally controlled, reprogrammable, multipurpose manipulator programmable in three or more axes, which may be either fixed in place or mobile for use in industrial automation applications—according to International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 8373.

With the ISO 8373 definition in mind, robots fall into several categories based on their level of complexity. The most basic is teleoperation, in which a human operator controls a robot from some distance. Since the operator is remote, some form of interface is required. ROVs and the early telemanipulators fall into this category.

A more advanced design, telepresence, is similar to teleoperation but attempts to over-come some of teleoperation’s shortcomings. The master-slave relationship of remote operations often produces cognitive fatigue for the human manipulator. This is primarily a result of informa-tion updates being much slower than the human brain expects or is able to process. Telepresence often incorporates virtual reality, an immersive medium, to reduce cognitive fatigue. Simulating a robot’s actions using images on a computer monitor is an alternative to virtual reality. The operator controls a graphic image of the robot and commands are then translated and carried out by the physical robot.

Haptics, from the Greek word for touch, is the study of sensory feedback that has experienced resurgence in the developing field of telepresent remote manipulators, particularly surgical robots. Three-dimensional stereographic imaging also

offers a means of improving the human-machine interface. This technology is used extensively in the nuclear-power industry where only robots can work in and near the reactor. When these plants were first developed, guiding robots using images from conventional television or computer monitors was difficult because these technolo-gies provided no depth perception. People with vision in one eye were more adept at overcoming this deficiency, and it was common practice to employ those with monocular vision to operate the robots. The use of 3D imaging has overcome this limitation.

Whether it is through 3D visualization or sen-sory feedback, it is beneficial for the operator to have real- or near real-time control of the equip-ment. Semiautonomous control, also referred to as supervisory control, is another means of connect-ing man to machine with higher levels of robot complexity. There are two basic types: shared con-trol and control trading. In shared control, the

teleoperator instructs the robot to perform a task or performs the task using direct control. An example of semiautonomous control is using a robotic arm in space. The operator instructs the arm to move to a specific position then takes control for tasks requiring manual dexterity.

Control trading operates under the assump-tion that the robotic machine is capable of com-pleting tasks that, once initiated, require no operator intervention. An operator can control multiple robots as long as they don’t encounter unforeseen circumstances. Uncertainty and unexpected situations have increased the need for some level of AI, which is the most advanced level of robotics.

3. Dorf RC and Nof SY (eds): Concise International Encyclopedia of Robotics: Applications and Automation.New York City: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1990.

4. “The International Federation of Robotics Round Table on the Future of Robotics,” June 9, 2010, http://www.worldrobotics.org/downloads/2010_Presentation_IFR_RoundTable.pdf (accessed August 31, 2010).

> Robotic geologist. Robot geologists in the form of rovers explore the surface of Mars. Equipped with robotic arms capable of movement similar to that of a human with an elbow and wrist, rovers place various instruments against rocks and soil to take measurements. These instruments include a thermal emission spectrometer to assay the surroundings, a Mössbauer spectrometer to identify iron-bearing minerals, an alpha particle X-ray spectrometer for elemental analysis of collected samples and a microscopic imager for high-resolution photographs that are sent back to Earth. Communication is maintained by a network of antennas on Earth and two spacecraft orbiting Mars that relay messages to Earth and send control signals directly to the rovers. Martian rover Spirit became silent in July 2010following nearly seven years of exploration and may not survive the brutal Martian winter. Its counterpart, Opportunity, continues to perform, and on September 16, 2010, Opportunity traveled about 81 m [265 ft]. Since landing in January 2004, it has covered more than 23 km [14.3 mi] in what was originally planned as a three-month mission. [Adapted from NASA website: http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov (accessed September 20, 2010). Image used with permission.]

20 Oilfield Review

There are several levels of robot AI, the oldest method being the hierarchical paradigm origi-nating in the 1960s, based on a sense-plan-act sequence (left).5 Early AI-enabled robots typi-cally operated using this method. The robot’s sensors validate a predefined world, a specific task is planned given its understanding of that world, and then the robot acts accordingly. The major disadvantage of this method is the plan-ning stage in which, after the robot has defined its world, any unanticipated event may create a major disruption. This method deals poorly with uncertainty, and there is no feedback system to validate successful completion of a task.

Acknowledging the shortcomings of this approach, roboticists looked to biological sci-ences for direction. The reactive paradigm emerged in the 1980s and minimized the plan-ning stage of the previous methodology. This system coupled sense and act sequences in an overarching concept of behavior; programmers determine the desired behavior and can combine behaviors based on what the robot senses. This is more representative of biological thought pro-cesses. For example, in a fight-or-flight situation, animals using lower-order thinking rarely plot an escape route; they react. Actions and reactions are quicker than thoughtful planning. However, this reaction may be detrimental if the perceived escape route leads to a trap.

The problem with the reactive methodology is that robots shared a human characteristic; paraphrasing George Santayana: If they could not learn from their mistakes, they were condemned to repeat them. In the 1990s, roboticists built machines with powerful but increasingly less expensive processors. This increased power allowed programming theory to evolve and develop the hybrid deliberative/reactive para-digm. In this methodology, a reactive robot learns from past experiences and chooses a response that best accomplishes a task, learning, it is hoped, from previous attempts.

A number of architectures have been devel-oped using the hybrid methodology, all in an effort to create autonomous thinking machines. As computer processing power and speed con-tinue to increase, and software complexity evolves, the science fiction writer’s vision of anthropomorphic robots may become reality. For now, however, robots generally fill a very different role: the three Ds of robotics.6 With a few notable exceptions, they perform tasks that are dirty, dull or dangerous. Difficult is a fourth D often pro-posed by roboticists.

Field and FactoryLike other service robots, oilfield robots perform all three: dirty, dull and dangerous tasks. These activities include automated directional drilling and closed-loop continuous drilling. In addition, service robots such as ROVs have made drilling operations in deepwater environments possible.

As oil companies began exploring in deeper waters, the water-depth limit for drilling was defined by the maximum depth of human inter-vention. With specialized diving equipment, that

> Organized artificial intelligence. Control theory for robotic artificial intelligence (AI) has evolved over time. The oldest methodology, the sequentially ordered hierarchical paradigm, was developed for robots to perform a specific task. The reactive paradigm that followed is a faster protocol but lacks feedback and error correction. The hybrid paradigm is more adaptive and offers greater flexibility. Hybrid versions of AI are generally more robust and can offer a more cognitive, or more intelligent, approach because robots adapt to changing environments and may learn from their mistakes. (Adapted from Murphy, reference 2.)

Hierarchical Paradigm

Reactive Paradigm

Hybrid Deliberative/Reactive Paradigm

Sense Plan Act

Sense Act

Plan

Sense Act

> ROVs in action. Under a master-slave protocol, the control operator maneuvers the underwater ROV using umbilical-supplied control sequences. (Photographs used with permission of Oceaneering International, Inc.)

Autumn 2010 21

5. For more detailed information on AI robotics: Murphy, reference 2.

6. Murphy, reference 2.7. Bleicher A: “The Gulf Spill’s Lessons for Robotics,”

http://spectrum.ieee.org/robotics/industrial-robots/the-gulf-spills-lessons-for-robotics (accessed September 7, 2010).

8. Maidla E, Haci M and Wright D: “Case History Summary: Horizontal Drilling Performance Improvement Due to Torque Rocking in 800 Horizontal Land Wells Drilled for

limit was about 300 m [1,000 ft]. Manned subma-rines were a possible option but they could only operate to about 600 m [2,000 ft]. Below these depths, ROVs are the only option for intervention. For this reason, all floating rigs currently in oper-ation have at least one ROV. Even for wells being drilled in water depths where human interaction is possible, ROVs have replaced humans as the primary means of underwater intervention.

ROVs are classified as remotely controlled manipulators and belong to the professional service robot branch of robotics (previous page, bottom). They can perform a multitude of tasks, as long as these tasks have been engineered prior to the initiation of the job. Unlike human opera-tors, who can respond to changing conditions, ROVs have difficulty completing even simple tasks when operations diverge from the plan.7

Experimentation is a difficult option. Thus, for ROVs, operator planning is the most critical stage of job execution, and reaction is a function of the ROV operator’s ability to understand and respond to the situation.

Other robotics applications in the oil and gas industry may replace processes that require reac-tions that exceed human capability. For example, a recently introduced technique automates an approach used for drilling lateral wells with rotary steerable assemblies. The SLIDER auto-mated surface rotation control system uses a robotic drilling approach (right). Based on a torque-rocking technique, this technology offers a layer of automation that greatly enhances ROP, improves safety and increases the life of down-hole equipment. ROP improvements of 294% have been achieved with the technique.8

In torque rocking, which has been used for many years, predetermined torque values are applied using a topdrive drilling system. This surface-applied torque is dissipated in the drill-string before it reaches the bottomhole assembly.The objective is to minimize drag while simulta-neously keeping the toolface of the bottomhole assembly unchanged.

Manual control of the technique used in devi-ated and short lateral sections has been realized, but as well profiles have become more complex, the technique has been less successful. It is virtu-ally impossible to efficiently perform the manual torque-rocking technique when drilling extended laterals or complex wellbore geometries because of the large volume of information from input sources that must be integrated and processed. The SLIDER system automates the application of torque and reacts to both uphole and downhole conditions. Not only is the reactive torque mea-sured downhole and incorporated into the timing

and amount of applied torque, the system can detect dangerous conditions—such as bit stall-ing, pipe back off and sticking—and take imme-diate corrective action.9 The original version used robotic controls to turn knobs, move levers and push buttons. The most recent version uses an

electronic interface to control existing rig equip-ment, precisely regulating voltage and current at the drive control panel.

Four example wells, representing a broad spectrum of types and complexity, were studied and the benefits monetized based on extended

> Robotic control for the torque-rocking technique. The original robotic SLIDER system, shown here attached to a drilling console (bottom), used servo-motors to control the power swivel while drilling. Today, the interface (not shown) electronically controls torque while monitoring topside and downhole conditions. In one example, the SLIDER system provided improved drilling results, compared with manual control (top). In 45 minutes, the bit stalled nine times as indicated by pressure spikes (red curve) under manual control (tan shading) and the orientation of the toolface was very unstable (black curve). Under automated control (green shading), only one stall occurred and the toolface was much more stable.

360

315

270

225

180

135

90

45

06:00 6:30 7:00 7:30

Time, h:min

Control box

Screen andmain computer

Automated Torque ControlManual Control

8:00 8:30To

olfa

ce, d

egre

es

4,000

3,500

3,000

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

Pres

sure

, psi

9 stalls 1 stall

Pressure

Toolface

Rocking arm

Unconventional Gas Resources,” paper SPE 123161, presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, October 4–7, 2009.

9. Reactive torque is defined practically as the length of pipe measured from the bit toward the surface that fully dissipates the torque produced while drilling in sliding mode. It is measured by correlating the pressure differential value in rotary mode with that during sliding mode.

22 Oilfield Review

> Remote surgical-assistant robots. SARs, such as the da Vinci system shown here, bring robots to the operating room. The surgeon (left) sits at a computer console and remotely manipulates robotic arms. The patient (center) is operated on with assistance from support staff. The surgeon’s hand movements are sensed and translated electronically to micromovements on the operating platform. The ability to magnify and inspect areas of concern gives greater control than is possible with traditional surgical methods. Remote observation (right) provides additional visual access for training or consultation. (Image courtesy of Intuitive Surgical, Inc., copyright 2010.)

reach, mud additive savings, bit trip reduction, speed of orientation and increase in sliding ROP (left). This robotic process improved drilling effi-ciency, lowered costs and reduced downtime from damage to drilling equipment while remov-ing the guesswork that is common with torque-rocking techniques.

At Your ServiceThe SLIDER system is an example of a service robot, but there is no internationally accepted definition for this classification. The International Federation of Robotics has adopted the following preliminary definition: A service robot operates semi- or fully autonomously to perform services useful to the well-being of humans and equip-ment, excluding manufacturing operations.10

There are two subcategories of service robots: professional service robots (examples include the SLIDER system, bomb disposal and surgical robots) and personal service robots (examples are vacuum-cleaner, lawnmower and disability-assistant robots).

> SLIDER drilling system improvements. These four wells represent a range of wellbore types and display different efficiencies and cost-saving modes: extending the reach (green), mud additive savings (gray), fewer bit trips (red), faster orientation (orange) and increased sliding ROP (blue). The well types are shown with the associated increased benefit from using the robotic SLIDER torque-rocking technique. Well 1 was drilled to 1,300 ft [396 m] TVD with a 8,500-ft [2,592-m] horizontal displacement. Well 2 was kicked off at 6,730 ft [2,052 m] and had a horizontal displacement of 5,500 ft [1,676 m]. Well 3is a horizontal well drilled to a measured depth of 7,976 ft [2,431 m]. Well 4 is an offshore directional well with a 58° inclination dropping to vertical with a 122° turn.

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

Bene

fit v

alue

, US$

1,0

00

Well 15-day well

SLIDER Benefits

24% savings

Well 214-day well

28% savings

Well 313-day well

12% savings

Well 430-day well

23% savingsExtending horizontal reach

Fewer mud additives

Fewer bit trips

Faster orientation

Increased sliding ROP

Autumn 2010 23

Surgical assistant robots (SARs) are a special-ized branch of professional service robots. They allow doctors to perform remotely controlled, minimally invasive procedures through small inci-sions. In some cases, traditional invasive surger-ies have been reduced to outpatient procedures. Because of the decreased physical trauma, pain and recovery times are greatly minimized.

The first documented robot-assisted proce-dure, a neurosurgical biopsy, was performed in 1985 using the Puma 560 system.11 Soon after, researchers at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), in conjunction with the Stanford Research Institute in Palo Alto, California, USA, developed a dexterous telema-nipulator for surgery; its goal was to give the sur-geon, located elsewhere, the sense of operating directly on a patient. NASA’s interest was in pro-viding surgical options in remote operations, especially in outer space.

Recognizing the potential for these develop-ments, the US military funded research for bring-ing a surgeon to wounded soldiers through telepresence. In such a scenario, a soldier is taken to a mobile unit and operated on remotely. As of today, the system has not been used on actual field casualties, but successful remote operations were carried out on animals. This demonstrated the tremendous potential for remote robotic surgical procedures.12

Engineers and surgeons who worked on the earlier projects developed a commercial SAR. With the AESOP endoscope positioner, a surgeon used voice commands to manipulate a robotic arm containing an endoscopic camera. Built and sold by Computer Motion Inc., this was the first robotic system approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). After extensive modifica-tion and redesign, these early developments evolved into the da Vinci master-slave surgical robot marketed by Intuitive Surgical, Inc.

The da Vinci system is designed to give a sur-geon the feeling that he is in direct contact with the patient (previous page, bottom). Three-dimensional visualization and the ability to zoom in on areas of interest provide the surgeon greater control and insight than is possible with traditional surgical techniques. Ongoing research seeks ways to incorporate haptic technology, giv-ing surgeons even greater control of operative procedures. The FDA has approved this system for laparoscopic and thoracic surgery. Trials are underway for endoscopic coronary artery bypass graft surgery.13

The benefits of robotic surgery, with devices such as the da Vinci system, include minimal invasion (sometimes referred to as bloodless sur-gery), minor scarring, reduced infection rates, minimal side effects and same- or next-day hospi-tal discharge. One such procedure is the robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Prerobotic methods required large incisions, which often resulted in postoperative complications and necessitated prolonged recovery periods. Patients frequently experienced excessive blood loss dur-ing surgery and had an increased risk of post-operative infection. Prolonged hospital stays and considerable pain followed by high incidence of

bladder and sexual dysfunction meant surgery was often a last recourse. Because of the robotic surgery option, this may no longer be the case.

Into the Battlefield and back HomeThe need for remote surgical operations in bat-tlefields led to the development of the first com-mercial SARs, but this is not the only military application of service robots. In 1990, iRobot Corporation envisioned making practical robots a reality. The founders first produced the Genghis robot for space exploration (above).14 A series of service robots ensued, including the iRobot PackBot series, which was used to search the

>NASA’s Genghis robot. Developed for space exploration, the Genghis robot was modeled after an insect. Outfitted with an array of sensors, it could traverse rough terrains but was never deployed in outer space. It presently resides at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum, Washington, D.C. (Image courtesy of iRobot Corporation.)

10. “Provisional Definition of Service Robots,” http://www.ifr.org/service-robots/ (accessed September 9, 2010).

11. Lanfranco AR, Castellanos AE, Desai JP and Meyers WC: “Robotic Surgery: A Current Perspective,” Annals of Surgery 239, no. 1 (January 2004): 14–21.

12. Satava RM: “Virtual Reality and Telepresence for Military Medicine,” Computers in Biology and Medicine 25, no. 2 (March 1995): 229–236.

13. Argenziano M, Katz M, Bonatti J, Srivastava S, Murphy D, Poirier R, Loulmet D, Siwek L, Kreaden U and Ligon D: “Results of the Prospective Multicenter Trial of Robotically Assisted Totally Endoscopic Coronary Bypass Grafting,” Annals of Thoracic Surgery 81, no. 5 (May 2006): 1666–1675.

14. Jong A, Chen JKC, Yuan BJC and Liu JHJ: “A Study of Personal Service Robot Future Marketing Trend with the Foresight of Technological Innovation,” presented at the 15th International Conference on Management of Technology, Beijing, May 22–26, 2006.

24 Oilfield Review

wreckage at the World Trade Center in New York City in 2001. The following year, a PackBot robot was first deployed for military use.

Military conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq marked the first time robotic systems played a meaningful role in combat operations.15 Robots remotely performed activities such as cave and bunker reconnaissance, chemical and radiologi-cal substance detection and explosive ordnance disposal (left). Detecting and disarming impro-vised explosive devices (IEDs) are among their primary roles.

During the early days of a United Nations–sponsored project using robots to clear land mines in Afghanistan, social implications similar to those experienced during the Industrial Revolution surfaced. A contingent of local work-ers was employed to clear land mines, and their robotic counterparts were seen as a threat to their livelihoods. But, with training, they discov-ered that their jobs could be accomplished in a far safer manner. Rather than being displaced, they learned that robots enabled them to accom-plish more with less risk.16

In 2002, the same year that the PackBot robot saw its first military action, iRobot Corporation released its first personal service robot for gen-eral home use—the iRobot Roomba vacuuming robot (left). It uses sensors to navigate around obstructions, and its software, similar to that developed for land-mine sweeping, ensures full coverage in an efficient manner.

For control, the Roomba floor-vacuuming robot uses logic similar to the reactive paradigm. The unit calculates an optimal path to clean an entire floor using iRobot Aware 2 robot intelli-gence software (sense step). It then activates one of several modes of operation to clean the floor (act step). These modes include wall follow-ing (tracing the perimeter of the room and navi-gating around furniture and obstacles), room crossing (crisscrossing to ensure full coverage) and spiraling (cleaning a concentrated area).

> Roomba robot vacuum cleaner. Since introduction of this personal service robot, the iRobot Roomba vacuum cleaner has shown continual growth in popularity among consumers. The iRobot Corporation has sold more than five million personal service robots since 2002. (Image courtesy of iRobot Corporation.)

> Robot inspectors. PackBot devices, such as the one shown here, were the first robots used extensively in military applications. Remote inspection and detection allow the operator to assess potential hazards from a safe distance. (Image courtesy of iRobot Corporation.)

15. Everett HR, Pacis EB, Kogut G, Farrington N and Khurana S: “Toward a Warfighter’s Associate: Eliminating the Operator Control Unit,” in Gage DW (ed): Mobile Robots XVII, 5609. Bellingham, Washington, USA: SPIE Press (October 2004): 267–279.

16. “A Robotic Helping Hand,” http://www.titech.ac.jp/bulletin/archives_category/topics/topics_z1.html(accessed August 20, 2010).

17. Guizzo E: “10 Stats You Should Know about Robots but Never Bothered Googling Up,” Automaton, March 21, 2008, http://spectrum.ieee.org/automaton/robotics/robotics-software/10_stats_you_should_know_about_robots (accessed September 7, 2010).

18. “Wheelchair Statistics: How Many Wheelchair Users Are There,” http://www.newdisability.com/wheelchairstatistics.htm (accessed September 28, 2010).

Autumn 2010 25

A dirt-detection sensor alerts the unit that more-intense cleaning is needed and it automatically adjusts to those conditions. When the unit has completed its task, or the battery drains below a predetermined level, it automatically returns to and docks in its recharging station.

The World Robotics Survey conducted by the United Nations estimated that 3.54 million robot units were in operation at the end of 2006. Since then the numbers have increased rapidly, with a projection that a total of more than 8.3 million units will be in operation by the end of 2010 (above).17 These personal service robots, although smart and helpful, have not progressed to a fully

autonomous state and human intervention is often required. With the rapid development of autonomous technologies, it seems reasonable to assume that domestic robots with greater auton-omy will eventually become commonplace.

Personal service robots include robotic pets, lawn care, home surveillance and home automa-tion, but one area with tremendous growth poten-tial is in rehabilitation and handicap assistance. In the US alone, it is estimated that 3 million people have some form of disability that necessi-tates the use of a wheelchair.18 Many rely exclu-sively on a wheelchair as their primary means of

mobility. Worldwide, the number of wheelchair users may exceed 67 million.

Engineers are developing orthotic robots that will provide mobility to people who are physically challenged or have lost the use of their legs. The University of California, Berkeley Robotics and Human Engineering Laboratory developed the Berkeley Lower Extremity Exoskeleton (BLEEX), one of several robotic walking frames. Although its design was intended to allow the user to manipulate large loads with minimal exertion, it can also be adapted to assist individuals with impaired mobility. The system attaches to the hips and legs; sensors help wearers lift their legs,

> Increasing numbers of service robots. The number of professional service robots through 2004 was dominated by underwater robots, primarily ROVs (top). From 2005 through 2008, mobile robot platforms and field robots showed significant growth. Programmed to function in a nonmanufacturing environment, mobile robot platforms encompass a broad category of wheeled and track-drive vehicles. Field robots work in unstructured environments such as mines, forests and farms. Over the same four-year span, personal service robots experienced great growth, approaching US$ 8 billion in sales (bottom left). The number of vacuum cleaner and lawnmower robots increased nearly fourfold to just over four million units (bottom right). (Adapted from Jong et al, reference 14.)

6,000

5,000

4,000

3,000

2,000

1,000

0

Num

ber o

f uni

ts

Underw

ater

Cleanin

g

Labora

tory

Constr

uction

/

demoli

tion

Medica

l

Mobile

robo

t

platfo

rms Fie

ld

Defense

, rescu

e

and s

ecurity

Logist

ics

All othe

rs

9,000

6,000

3,000

8,000

5,000

2,000

7,000

4,000

1,000

0

US$

mill

ion

Household Entertainmentand leisure

Total personalservice robots

4,500

3,000

1,500

4,000

2,500

1,000

3,500

2,000

500

0

Num

ber o

f uni

ts, 1

,000

Vacuumcleaners andlawn mowers

Entertainmentand leisure

Othercleaning

Through 2004New installations 2005 through 2008

Number of Worldwide Professional Service Robots

Personal Service Robot Sales Number of Personal Service Robots Sold

Through 2004New installations2005 through 2008

Through 2004New installations 2005 through 2008

26 Oilfield Review

climb and move forward while maintaining stabil-ity. Power comes from a wearable pack (below).19

The current state of robotic motor skills is still poor compared to that of humans and ani-mals. Considerable research is ongoing in this area to improve the human-machine interface to enhance mobility as well as restore it to those who have lost it.20 In the interim period, robotic wheelchairs that respond to commands and are modified to climb stairs offer promise.

Some quadriplegics, with no use of their hands, use a “sip-’n’-puff” technique to control motorized wheelchairs and operate computers. The user blows into a tube, creating air pressure, which translates to commands that are inter-preted by a computer interface. The method has several drawbacks, including slow response, a limited set of commands and the need for fre-quent cleaning of the tube. Because this tech-nique requires diaphragm control, it may not

> Power-assisted walking. The biomimetric BLEEX, developed by the University of California, Berkeley Robotics and Human Engineering Laboratory, allows the wearer to maneuver with extreme loads while feeling only a few-pound load. Designed for enhancement of strength and endurance, this and similar devices could be used to provide mobility to individuals with physical impairments. (Photograph courtesy of Dr. H. Kazerooni, University of California, Berkeley, and is used with permission.)

benefit those who rely on ventilators. Researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, USA, recently developed a tongue-drive system (TDS) that has opened a new world of opportuni-ties for individuals with disabilities (next page, top).21 The tongue-operated assistive technology can operate a computer or direct a wheelchair.

Connected directly to the brain by the hypo-glossal nerve rather than by the spinal cord, the tongue is usually unaffected by spinal cord dam-age. Tongue movements are fast, accurate and require little concentrated effort to control. In addition, the tongue muscle does not fatigue eas-ily. A TDS may potentially substitute for arm and hand movements. Replacements for these func-tionalities are considered the highest priorities for individuals with severe disabilities.

The TDS is minimally invasive, unobtrusive, noncontact, wireless and wearable. The device uses a rice grain–sized magnet implanted in or

applied to the tongue. External sensors detect movement of the magnet and software translates the motion. A number of operations are possible, including the use of a virtual joystick to drive a wheelchair or operate a computer. This novel development demonstrates an effective interface between man and machine that can greatly improve quality of life.

The TDS functions as a master-slave robot, translating movement into commands. The ulti-mate symbiotic relationship would be to control a robot using a brain-machine interface. Although this may sound like science fiction, in 2009 the research wing of Honda Motors, in conjunc-tion with the Japanese government–affiliated Advanced Telecommunications Research Institute International and Japan-based equipment maker Shimadzu, demonstrated a device that responds to brain activity and requires no body move-ment.22 The device measures electrical activity in a person’s brain using electroencephalography and measures blood flow with near-infrared spectros-copy. Honda claims a 90% success rate in using this method to correctly analyze thoughts.

What the Future HoldsAt the turn of the previous century, in part due to their fictional portrayal, robots were often viewed as potential enemies of humanity. Today most people are willing to embrace technology in gen-eral and robots specifically. Schlumberger Excellence in Educational Development (SEED) is a volunteer-based, nonprofit education pro-gram focused on underserved communities where Schlumberger employees live and work. Volunteers, teachers and students incorporate robotics into projects, workshops and day-to-day activities at schools. Using GoGo boards—inexpensive microcontrollers that can be pro-grammed to perform robotic functions—students are creating innovative projects covering a wide range of topics.23

At a recent SEED workshop in Tyumen, Russia, students designed and built a robotic turtle that crawled around on a tabletop without falling off (next page, bottom). A sensor, which detected the table edge, directed the turtle to back up and turn away. In Brazil, students and teachers built a model of an automatic irrigation system. Rainwater collected from the roof was stored in a cistern, and when a moisture sensor determined that the ground was dry, the system activated an irrigation pump. At Colegio Alfonso Jaramillo in Bogotá, Colombia, a robotics club has enriched the learning experience of all the

Autumn 2010 27

> Power of the tongue. This tongue-powered device uses a small magnet and external sensors (left ) with a computer interface. This device can provide mobility to individuals with severe physical disabilities and overcomes limitations of traditional assistance methods such as sip ’n’ puff. It can be programmed to perform a number of operations including control of a robotic wheelchair (right ). (Photographs courtesy of Georgia Institute of Technology.)

> Robotics and SEED workshops. This student uses a construction kit during a SEED workshop to build a robotic turtle. Gaining exposure to computer programming through inexpensive kits and GoGo boards, students worldwide are learning about robotics.

students with several practical projects, includ-ing a robotic rainwater collection system. In part, because of the interest generated by the robotics club, the school has gained increased respect within the local community.

As technology continues to develop and computer processing power increases almost exponentially, the potential for symbiosis between humans and machines grows closer to reality. Considering the rapid evolution of personal com-puting and the growth of the Internet, it will be exciting to see what develops in the robotics field; achievements may come faster than even the experts have imagined. Roboticists of the future will plot a course for thinking machines that stretches beyond the dangerous, dull and dirty jobs to areas that we can only dream of today. As the students in Russia, Brazil and Colombia have embraced the dynamic world of robotics so, it is hoped, will the rest of the world. —TS

19. “Berkeley Lower Extremity Exoskeleton,” http://bleex.me.berkeley.edu/bleex.htm (accessed October 1, 2010).

20. European Robotics Research Network, http://www.euron.org/resources/projects/2010 (accessed August 30, 2010).

21. Huo X and Ghovanloo M: “Using Unconstrained Tongue Motion as an Alternative Control Mechanism for Wheeled Mobility,” IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 56, no. 6 (June 2009): 1719–1726.“Magnetic Control: Tongue Drive System Allows Individuals with Disabilities to Operate Powered

Wheelchairs and Computers,” http://gtresearchnews.gatech.edu/newsrelease/tongue-drive.htm (accessed September 7, 2010).

22. “Honda, ATR and Shimadzu Jointly Develop Brain-Machine Interface Technology Enabling Control of a Robot by Human Thought Alone,” http://world.honda.com/news/2009/c090331Brain-Machine-Interface-Technology/ (accessed September 9, 2010).

23. For more on the SEED robotics projects: http://www.seed.slb.com/voices_article.aspx?id=35753&terms=robotics(accessed October 1, 2010).