Urban Search and Rescue 2006 General Robotics 2006

Purpose • Carnegie Urban Rescue Force (CURF) has started a initiative with the General Robotics Class of Spring 2006 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

High Level Overview • • • Write a Proposal Checkpoint Demonstration Poster Self-Evaluation March 21 March 28 April 4 April 10

Design Proposal • Write-up: – – – – Basic schematics Descriptions Special features Obstacles Climbing Steering Controllability • Hand in by Tuesday, March 21 st, 2006 • Following outline is Highly Recommended. • 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: Margaret Morrison • Disaster: Volcano General Robotics 2005

Building Floor Plan General Robotics 2005

Common Difficulties • • Rubble and debris Collapsed objects Unstable structures Narrow hallways Obstacles Stairs Getting Inside the Building General Robotics 2005

This Year’s Scenario • Scaife • Meteor Strike General Robotics 2005

Building Floor Plan General Robotics 2005

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

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

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

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

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

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

Suspensions • 1 st: Wheel/track suspension – squishyness of wheels – span of tracks • 2 nd: Active Dampening Suspensions – Tube things in kits – LEGO shock absorbers – Random foam, springs • 3 rd: Passive suspensions General Robotics 2005

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

Camera and Camera Mount General Robotics 2005

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

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

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

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

“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

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 General Robotics 2005

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

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. March 21 st at 8 pm (the latest) General Robotics 2005

USAR Demonstration • April 4 th • One run – 2 minute setup time – 10 minute run • REL blackout on April 3 rd after 20: 00 h