Bilevel shared control for teleoperators

A shared system is disclosed for robot control including integration of the human and autonomous input modalities for an improved control. Autonomously planned motion trajectories are modified by a teleoperator to track unmodelled target motions, while nominal teleoperator motions are modified through compliance to accommodate geometric errors autonomously in the latter. A hierarchical shared system intelligently shares control over a remote robot between the autonomous and teleoperative portions of an overall control system. Architecture is hierarchical, and consists of two levels. The top level represents the task level, while the bottom, the execution level. In space applications, the performance of pure teleoperation systems depend significantly on the communication time delays between the local and the remote sites. Selection/mixing matrices are provided with entries which reflect how each input's signals modality is weighted. The shared control minimizes the detrimental effects caused by these time delays between earth and space

Experiences with the JPL telerobot testbed: Issues and insights

The Jet Propulsion Laboratory's (JPL) Telerobot Testbed is an integrated robotic testbed used to develop, implement, and evaluate the performance of advanced concepts in autonomous, tele-autonomous, and tele-operated control of robotic manipulators. Using the Telerobot Testbed, researchers demonstrated several of the capabilities and technological advances in the control and integration of robotic systems which have been under development at JPL for several years. In particular, the Telerobot Testbed was recently employed to perform a near completely automated, end-to-end, satellite grapple and repair sequence. The task of integrating existing as well as new concepts in robot control into the Telerobot Testbed has been a very difficult and timely one. Now that researchers have completed the first major milestone (i.e., the end-to-end demonstration) it is important to reflect back upon experiences and to collect the knowledge that has been gained so that improvements can be made to the existing system. It is also believed that the experiences are of value to the others in the robotics community. Therefore, the primary objective here will be to use the Telerobot Testbed as a case study to identify real problems and technological gaps which exist in the areas of robotics and in particular systems integration. Such problems have surely hindered the development of what could be reasonably called an intelligent robot. In addition to identifying such problems, researchers briefly discuss what approaches have been taken to resolve them or, in several cases, to circumvent them until better approaches can be developed

Planning robot actions under position and shape uncertainty

Geometric uncertainty may cause various failures during the execution of a robot control program. Avoiding such failures makes it necessary to reason about the effects of uncertainty in order to implement robust strategies. Researchers first point out that a manipulation program has to be faced with two types of uncertainty: those that might be locally processed using appropriate sensor based motions, and those that require a more global processing leading to insert new sensing operations. Then, they briefly describe how they solved the two related problems in the SHARP system: how to automatically synthesize a fine motion strategy allowing the robot to progressively achieve a given assembly relation despite position uncertainty, and how to represent uncertainty and to determine the points where a given manipulation program might fail

Time-delayed operation of a telerobot via geosynchronous relay

Operation of a telerobot is compromised if a time delay of more than a few hundred milliseconds exists between the operator and remote manipulator. However, the most economically attractive way to perform telerobotic functions such as assembly, maintenance, and repair in Earth orbit is via geosynchronous relay satellites to a ground-based operator. This induces loop delays from one-half to two seconds, depending on how many relays are involved. Such large delays makes direct master-slave, force-reflecting teleoperated systems infeasible. Research at JPL on a useful telerobot that operates with such time delays is described

Comparative evaluation of approaches in T.4.1-4.3 and working definition of adaptive module

The goal of this deliverable is two-fold: (1) to present and compare different approaches towards learning and encoding movements us- ing dynamical systems that have been developed by the AMARSi partners (in the past during the first 6 months of the project), and (2) to analyze their suitability to be used as adaptive modules, i.e. as building blocks for the complete architecture that will be devel- oped in the project. The document presents a total of eight approaches, in two groups: modules for discrete movements (i.e. with a clear goal where the movement stops) and for rhythmic movements (i.e. which exhibit periodicity). The basic formulation of each approach is presented together with some illustrative simulation results. Key character- istics such as the type of dynamical behavior, learning algorithm, generalization properties, stability analysis are then discussed for each approach. We then make a comparative analysis of the different approaches by comparing these characteristics and discussing their suitability for the AMARSi project