urban search and rescue initiative 2005 avi siegel, director of carnegie urban rescue force eddie...

Urban Search and Rescue Initiative 2005

Avi Siegel, Director of Carnegie Urban Rescue Force

Eddie Lu, Chief Evaluation Officer

Eric West, West Campus Architect

Debbie Hugh, Pittsburgh Architect

David Rosenberg, Control and Vision Expert

David Choi, Graduate Student

Jason Geist, LEGOLand Consultant

General Robotics 2005

Introduction• The recent natural disasters in Louisiana

and Pakistan had highlighted a great need by rescue workers for improved rescue efforts.

• There is a growing demand for highly mobile, all terrain and easy to use mobile robots to assist in Urban Search and Rescue efforts.


Purpose• Carnegie Urban Rescue Force (CURF) has

started a initiative with the General Robotics Class of Fall 2005 to develop a fleet of highly compatible robots to help in the rescue effort.


Design Criteria• Size Constraints

– Width: 6.0”– Depth: 8.5”– Height: 6.0”– Includes the vision system

• Tele-operation

• Vision System

• Extra Parts– Extra LEGO motor– $50 spending limit for LEGO parts


Design Proposal• Write-up:

– Basic schematics– Descriptions– Special features– Obstacles– Climbing– Steering– Controllability

• Hand in by Tuesday, October 25

• Note: You cannot continue on with the prototyping phase if your design proposal does not meet these requirements General Robotics 2005

Last Year’s Scenario

• Location: Scaife Building

• Disaster: Hurricane

• Rescue Efforts: H1ghlander


Building Floor Plan


Zone by Zone Analysis

•Zone 1: Courtyard–Stability: High

•Zone 2: Room with Stairs

–Stability: Medium

•Zone 3: Titled On-ramp–Stability: Low-Medium

•Zone 4: Danger Room–Stability: Low


Common Difficulties

• Rubble and debris

• Collapsed objects

• Unstable structures

• Narrow hallways

• Obstacles

• Stairs


This Year’s Scenario

• Campus History

• Volcano

• Rescue Team


Building Floor Plan


Designing Good Robot Platform for Adverse Terrain

• Drive trains revisited• Tank Treads• Differential drive configurations• Center of Gravity• Mechanical Robustness• Suspensions• Testing


Drive Trains Revisited

• High-torque situations

• Back driving

• Foreign objects

• Weak links


Tank Treads

In the past, people forgot:

• Slack on top or bottom depending upon location of driven wheel

• Idler on top of tread can increase tension and area of drive wheel in contact with tread


Differential Drive

•Advantages in steering

•What happens if you lose a DOF?


Center of Gravity

•Masses–Handy Board–LEGO motors–Added mass (batteries, fishing weights, etc.)

•High CG is bad•Consider CG in relation to length and width•Traction


Mechanical Robustness

• Masses

• Internal forces

• Odd forces

• No parts sticking out

• Zip Ties


Suspensions

• 1st: Wheel/track suspension – squishyness of wheels– span of tracks

• 2nd: Active Dampening Suspensions– Tube things in kits– LEGO shock absorbers– Random foam, springs

• 3rd: Passive suspensions General Robotics 2005

Testing

• Torque Tests• Stall drive wheels • Hill Tests • Various terrain• Ground clearance• Break-over angle• Ridges


Camera and Camera Mount


Pan and Tilt Camera Mount

• Camera moves

• Robot doesn’t

• Greater visibility

• Obstacles


Control and Control Issues

• Robot has 1st person perspective

• Pilot has 3rd person perspective (sometimes occluded)

• Moveable Camera

• Where to put intelligence?

• Autonomy?


Control: Robot Intelligence• Robot has encoders

– go(int inches)– turn(int degrees)

• Ground sensors – feelers

• Inclination sensors– mercury switches– rolling ball inclinometers, – accelerometers

• Internal sensor • Self-diagnostics


Control: Robot Autonomy

• Autonomous functions to deploy equipment

• Autonomously navigate occluded areas (i.e. wall following)

• Automate compounded functions such as expanding


“Smart Mechanism”• Mechanisms that compound DOFs

– Can do different things depending on which way turned

• Release mechanisms

• Expanding Mechanisms

• Locking Mechanisms– Can lock an expansion or an appendage

into position

• E-Mail me (and other TAs) for consulting


Neat Ideas

•Marsupial Robots–Robin Murphy, USF

•Shape Reconfiguring robots–Inuktun.com

•Asymmetry•NASA Rovers


•Current off road vehicle examples

–Land Rover–Jeep–Hummer–Moon Rover–Mars Rovers–ATVs–The Animal (ok, old)–Other Toys

Design Exploration

• Qualitative analysis– Mobility, user friendliness, coolness

• Quantitative analysis– Top speed, ground clearance, torque

• For the proposal, we would like you to think numerically.


Prototype Evaluation

• 6 of the 8 checkpoints

• Ability to move and turn,

• Use the camera

• Surmount various obstacles.

• None of these require autonomy.

• This must be done during lab hours.

• November 1st at 8pm (the latest)


urban search and rescue initiative 2005 avi siegel, director of carnegie urban rescue force eddie...

Documents

h1ghlandergeneral robotics

widthtractiongeneral

angleridgesgeneral robotics

lowgeneral robotics

treadgeneral robotics

requirementsgeneral

camera mountgeneral

lego parts general robotics