1 / 28

Urban Search and Rescue Initiative 2005

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

marilynclements
Télécharger la présentation

Urban Search and Rescue Initiative 2005

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 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

  2. 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. General Robotics 2005

  3. 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. General Robotics 2005

  4. 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 General Robotics 2005

  5. 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

  6. Last Year’s Scenario • Location: Scaife Building • Disaster: Hurricane • Rescue Efforts: H1ghlander General Robotics 2005

  7. Building Floor Plan General Robotics 2005

  8. 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 General Robotics 2005

  9. Common Difficulties • Rubble and debris • Collapsed objects • Unstable structures • Narrow hallways • Obstacles • Stairs General Robotics 2005

  10. This Year’s Scenario • Campus History • Volcano • Rescue Team General Robotics 2005

  11. Building Floor Plan General Robotics 2005

  12. Designing Good Robot Platform for Adverse Terrain • Drive trains revisited • Tank Treads • Differential drive configurations • Center of Gravity • Mechanical Robustness • Suspensions • Testing General Robotics 2005

  13. Drive Trains Revisited • High-torque situations • Back driving • Foreign objects • Weak links General Robotics 2005

  14. 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 General Robotics 2005

  15. Differential Drive • Advantages in steering • What happens if you lose a DOF? General Robotics 2005

  16. 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 General Robotics 2005

  17. Mechanical Robustness • Masses • Internal forces • Odd forces • No parts sticking out • Zip Ties General Robotics 2005

  18. 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

  19. Testing • Torque Tests • Stall drive wheels • Hill Tests • Various terrain • Ground clearance • Break-over angle • Ridges General Robotics 2005

  20. Camera and Camera Mount General Robotics 2005

  21. Pan and Tilt Camera Mount • Camera moves • Robot doesn’t • Greater visibility • Obstacles General Robotics 2005

  22. Control and Control Issues • Robot has 1st person perspective • Pilot has 3rd person perspective (sometimes occluded) • Moveable Camera • Where to put intelligence? • Autonomy? General Robotics 2005

  23. 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 General Robotics 2005

  24. Control: Robot Autonomy • Autonomous functions to deploy equipment • Autonomously navigate occluded areas (i.e. wall following) • Automate compounded functions such as expanding General Robotics 2005

  25. “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 General Robotics 2005

  26. 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 Neat Ideas General Robotics 2005

  27. 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. General Robotics 2005

  28. 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) General Robotics 2005

More Related