The astronaut and the banana peel: An EVA retriever scenario

To prepare for the problem of accidents in Space Station activities, the Extravehicular Activity Retriever (EVAR) robot is being constructed, whose purpose is to retrieve astronauts and tools that float free of the Space Station. Advanced Decision Systems is at the beginning of a project to develop research software capable of guiding EVAR through the retrieval process. This involves addressing problems in machine vision, dexterous manipulation, real time construction of programs via speech input, and reactive execution of plans despite the mishaps and unexpected conditions that arise in uncontrolled domains. The problem analysis phase of this work is presented. An EVAR scenario is used to elucidate major domain and technical problems. An overview of the technical approach to prototyping an EVAR system is also presented

Modeling, Stability Analysis, and Testing of a Hybrid Docking Simulator

A hybrid docking simulator is a hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) simulator that includes a hardware element within a numerical simulation loop. One of the goals of performing a HIL simulation at the European Proximity Operation Simulator (EPOS) is the verification and validation of the docking phase in an on-orbit servicing mission.....Comment: 30 papge

Distributed Bio-inspired Humanoid Posture Control

This paper presents an innovative distributed bio-inspired posture control strategy for a humanoid, employing a balance control system DEC (Disturbance Estimation and Compensation). Its inherently modular structure could potentially lead to conflicts among modules, as already shown in literature. A distributed control strategy is presented here, whose underlying idea is to let only one module at a time perform balancing, whilst the other joints are controlled to be at a fixed position. Modules agree, in a distributed fashion, on which module to enable, by iterating a max-consensus protocol. Simulations performed with a triple inverted pendulum model show that this approach limits the conflicts among modules while achieving the desired posture and allows for saving energy while performing the task. This comes at the cost of a higher rise time.Comment: 2019 41st Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC

Safe, Remote-Access Swarm Robotics Research on the Robotarium

This paper describes the development of the Robotarium -- a remotely accessible, multi-robot research facility. The impetus behind the Robotarium is that multi-robot testbeds constitute an integral and essential part of the multi-agent research cycle, yet they are expensive, complex, and time-consuming to develop, operate, and maintain. These resource constraints, in turn, limit access for large groups of researchers and students, which is what the Robotarium is remedying by providing users with remote access to a state-of-the-art multi-robot test facility. This paper details the design and operation of the Robotarium as well as connects these to the particular considerations one must take when making complex hardware remotely accessible. In particular, safety must be built in already at the design phase without overly constraining which coordinated control programs the users can upload and execute, which calls for minimally invasive safety routines with provable performance guarantees.Comment: 13 pages, 7 figures, 3 code samples, 72 reference

Human Swarm Interaction: An Experimental Study of Two Types of Interaction with Foraging Swarms

In this paper we present the first study of human-swarm interaction comparing two fundamental types of interaction, coined intermittent and environmental. These types are exemplified by two control methods, selection and beacon control, made available to a human operator to control a foraging swarm of robots. Selection and beacon control differ with respect to their temporal and spatial influence on the swarm and enable an operator to generate different strategies from the basic behaviors of the swarm. Selection control requires an active selection of groups of robots while beacon control exerts an influence on nearby robots within a set range. Both control methods are implemented in a testbed in which operators solve an information foraging problem by utilizing a set of swarm behaviors. The robotic swarm has only local communication and sensing capabilities. The number of robots in the swarm range from 50 to 200. Operator performance for each control method is compared in a series of missions in different environments with no obstacles up to cluttered and structured obstacles. In addition, performance is compared to simple and advanced autonomous swarms. Thirty-two participants were recruited for participation in the study. Autonomous swarm algorithms were tested in repeated simulations. Our results showed that selection control scales better to larger swarms and generally outperforms beacon control. Operators utilized different swarm behaviors with different frequency across control methods, suggesting an adaptation to different strategies induced by choice of control method. Simple autonomous swarms outperformed human operators in open environments, but operators adapted better to complex environments with obstacles. Human controlled swarms fell short of task-specific benchmarks under all conditions. Our results reinforce the importance of understanding and choosing appropriate types of human-swarm interaction when designing swarm systems, in addition to choosing appropriate swarm behaviors

An intelligent, free-flying robot

The ground based demonstration of the extensive extravehicular activity (EVA) Retriever, a voice-supervised, intelligent, free flying robot, is designed to evaluate the capability to retrieve objects (astronauts, equipment, and tools) which have accidentally separated from the Space Station. The major objective of the EVA Retriever Project is to design, develop, and evaluate an integrated robotic hardware and on-board software system which autonomously: (1) performs system activation and check-out; (2) searches for and acquires the target; (3) plans and executes a rendezvous while continuously tracking the target; (4) avoids stationary and moving obstacles; (5) reaches for and grapples the target; (6) returns to transfer the object; and (7) returns to base