Space Applications of Automation, Robotics and Machine Intelligence Systems (ARAMIS), phase 2. Volume 1: Telepresence technology base development

The field of telepresence is defined, and overviews of those capabilities that are now available, and those that will be required to support a NASA telepresence effort are provided. Investigation of NASA's plans and goals with regard to telepresence, extensive literature search for materials relating to relevant technologies, a description of these technologies and their state of the art, and projections for advances in these technologies over the next decade are included. Several space projects are examined in detail to determine what capabilities are required of a telepresence system in order to accomplish various tasks, such as servicing and assembly. The key operational and technological areas are identified, conclusions and recommendations are made for further research, and an example developmental program is presented, leading to an operational telepresence servicer

Human operator performance of remotely controlled tasks: Teleoperator research conducted at NASA's George C. Marshal Space Flight Center

The capabilities within the teleoperator laboratories to perform remote and teleoperated investigations for a wide variety of applications are described. Three major teleoperator issues are addressed: the human operator, the remote control and effecting subsystems, and the human/machine system performance results for specific teleoperated tasks

Anthropomorphic Robot Design and User Interaction Associated with Motion

Though in its original concept a robot was conceived to have some human-like shape, most robots now in use have specific industrial purposes and do not closely resemble humans. Nevertheless, robots that resemble human form in some way have continued to be introduced. They are called anthropomorphic robots. The fact that the user interface to all robots is now highly mediated means that the form of the user interface is not necessarily connected to the robots form, human or otherwise. Consequently, the unique way the design of anthropomorphic robots affects their user interaction is through their general appearance and the way they move. These robots human-like appearance acts as a kind of generalized predictor that gives its operators, and those with whom they may directly work, the expectation that they will behave to some extent like a human. This expectation is especially prominent for interactions with social robots, which are built to enhance it. Often interaction with them may be mainly cognitive because they are not necessarily kinematically intricate enough for complex physical interaction. Their body movement, for example, may be limited to simple wheeled locomotion. An anthropomorphic robot with human form, however, can be kinematically complex and designed, for example, to reproduce the details of human limb, torso, and head movement. Because of the mediated nature of robot control, there remains in general no necessary connection between the specific form of user interface and the anthropomorphic form of the robot. But their anthropomorphic kinematics and dynamics imply that the impact of their design shows up in the way the robot moves. The central finding of this report is that the control of this motion is a basic design element through which the anthropomorphic form can affect user interaction. In particular, designers of anthropomorphic robots can take advantage of the inherent human-like movement to 1) improve the users direct manual control over robot limbs and body positions, 2) improve users ability to detect anomalous robot behavior which could signal malfunction, and 3) enable users to be better able to infer the intent of robot movement. These three benefits of anthropomorphic design are inherent implications of the anthropomorphic form but they need to be recognized by designers as part of anthropomorphic design and explicitly enhanced to maximize their beneficial impact. Examples of such enhancements are provided in this report. If implemented, these benefits of anthropomorphic design can help reduce the risk of Inadequate Design of Human and Automation Robotic Integration (HARI) associated with the HARI-01 gap by providing efficient and dexterous operator control over robots and by improving operator ability to detect malfunctions and understand the intention of robot movement

Graphic overlays in high-precision teleoperation: Current and future work at JPL

In space teleoperation additional problems arise, including signal transmission time delays. These can greatly reduce operator performance. Recent advances in graphics open new possibilities for addressing these and other problems. Currently a multi-camera system with normal 3-D TV and video graphics capabilities is being developed. Trained and untrained operators will be tested for high precision performance using two force reflecting hand controllers and a voice recognition system to control two robot arms and up to 5 movable stereo or non-stereo TV cameras. A number of new techniques of integrating TV and video graphics displays to improve operator training and performance in teleoperation and supervised automation are evaluated

Human Machine Interfaces for Teleoperators and Virtual Environments

In Mar. 1990, a meeting organized around the general theme of teleoperation research into virtual environment display technology was conducted. This is a collection of conference-related fragments that will give a glimpse of the potential of the following fields and how they interplay: sensorimotor performance; human-machine interfaces; teleoperation; virtual environments; performance measurement and evaluation methods; and design principles and predictive models

Space Station Human Factors: Designing a Human-Robot Interface

The experiments described in this paper are part of a larger joint MIT/NASA research effort and focus on the development of a methodology for designing and evaluating integrated interfaces for highly dexterous and multifunctional telerobot. Specifically, a telerobotic workstation is being designed for an Extravehicular Activity (EVA) anthropomorphic space station telerobot called Robonaut. Previous researchers have designed telerobotic workstations based upon performance of discrete subsets of tasks (for example, peg-in-hole, tracking, etc.) without regard for transitions that operators go through between tasks performed sequentially in the context of larger integrated tasks. The experiments presented here took an integrated approach to describing teleoperator performance and assessed how subjects operating a full-immersion telerobot perform during fine position and gross position tasks. In addition, a Robonaut simulation was also developed as part of this research effort, and experimentally tested against Robonaut itself to determine its utility. Results show that subject performance of teleoperated tasks using both Robonaut and the simulation are virtually identical, with no significant difference between the two. These results indicate that the simulation can be utilized as both a Robonaut training tool, and as a powerful design platform for telepresence displays and aids

Human factors in space telepresence

The problems of interfacing a human with a teleoperation system, for work in space are discussed. Much of the information presented here is the result of experience gained by the M.I.T. Space Systems Laboratory during the past two years of work on the ARAMIS (Automation, Robotics, and Machine Intelligence Systems) project. Many factors impact the design of the man-machine interface for a teleoperator. The effects of each are described in turn. An annotated bibliography gives the key references that were used. No conclusions are presented as a best design, since much depends on the particular application desired, and the relevant technology is swiftly changing

NASA space station automation: AI-based technology review

Research and Development projects in automation for the Space Station are discussed. Artificial Intelligence (AI) based automation technologies are planned to enhance crew safety through reduced need for EVA, increase crew productivity through the reduction of routine operations, increase space station autonomy, and augment space station capability through the use of teleoperation and robotics. AI technology will also be developed for the servicing of satellites at the Space Station, system monitoring and diagnosis, space manufacturing, and the assembly of large space structures