Integrated Design of a Telerobotic Workstation

The experiments described in this paper are part of a larger joint MIT/NASA research effort that focuses on the development of a methodology for designing and evaluating integrated interfaces for highly dexterous and multi-functional telerobots. Specifically, a telerobotic workstation is being designed for an Extravehicular Activity (EVA) anthropomorphic space station telerobot. 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 exploratory research experiments presented here took an integrated approach and assessed how subjects operating a full-immersion telerobot perform during the transitions between sub-tasks of two common EVA tasks. Preliminary results show that up to 30% of total task time is spent gaining and maintaining Situation Awareness (SA) of their task space and environment during transitions. Although task performance improves over the two trial days, the percentage of time spent on SA remains the same. This method identifies areas where workstation displays and feedback mechanisms are most needed to increase operator performance and decrease operator workload - areas that previous research methods have not been able to address

Command and Telemetry Latency Effects on Operator Performance during International Space Station Robotics Operations

International Space Station (ISS) operations will require the on-board crew to perform numerous robotic-assisted assembly, maintenance, and inspection activities. Current estimates for some robotically performed maintenance timelines are disproportionate and potentially exceed crew availability and duty times. Ground-based control of the ISS robotic manipulators, specifically the Special Purpose Dexterous Manipulator (SPDM), is being examined as one potential solution to alleviate the excessive amounts of crew time required for extravehicular robotic maintenance and inspection tasks

Hands-Free Control Interfaces for an Extra Vehicular Jetpack

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) strategic vision includes, as part of its long-term goals, the exploration of deep space and Near Earth Asteroids (NEA). To support these endeavors, funds have been invested in research to develop advanced exploration capabilities. To enable the human mobility necessary to effectively explore NEA and deep space, a new extravehicular activity (EVA) Jetpack is under development at the Johnson Space Center. The new design leverages knowledge and experience gained from the current astronaut rescue device, the Simplified Aid for EVA Rescue (SAFER). Whereas the primary goal for a rescue device is to return the crew to a safe haven, in-space exploration and navigation requires an expanded set of capabilities. To accommodate the range of tasks astronauts may be expected to perform while utilizing the Jetpack, it was desired to offer a hands-free method of control. This paper describes the development and innovations involved in creating two hands-free control interfaces and an experimental test platform for a suited astronaut flying the Jetpack during an EVA

Development of Methodologies, Metrics, and Tools for Investigating Human-Robot Interaction in Space Robotics

Human-robot systems are expected to have a central role in future space exploration missions that extend beyond low-earth orbit [1]. As part of a directed research project funded by NASA s Human Research Program (HRP), researchers at the Johnson Space Center have started to use a variety of techniques, including literature reviews, case studies, knowledge capture, field studies, and experiments to understand critical human-robot interaction (HRI) variables for current and future systems. Activities accomplished to date include observations of the International Space Station s Special Purpose Dexterous Manipulator (SPDM), Robonaut, and Space Exploration Vehicle (SEV), as well as interviews with robotics trainers, robot operators, and developers of gesture interfaces. A survey of methods and metrics used in HRI was completed to identify those most applicable to space robotics. These methods and metrics included techniques and tools associated with task performance, the quantification of human-robot interactions and communication, usability, human workload, and situation awareness. The need for more research in areas such as natural interfaces, compensations for loss of signal and poor video quality, psycho-physiological feedback, and common HRI testbeds were identified. The initial findings from these activities and planned future research are discussed. Human-robot systems are expected to have a central role in future space exploration missions that extend beyond low-earth orbit [1]. As part of a directed research project funded by NASA s Human Research Program (HRP), researchers at the Johnson Space Center have started to use a variety of techniques, including literature reviews, case studies, knowledge capture, field studies, and experiments to understand critical human-robot interaction (HRI) variables for current and future systems. Activities accomplished to date include observations of the International Space Station s Special Purpose Dexterous Manipulator (SPDM), Robonaut, and Space Exploration Vehicle (SEV), as well as interviews with robotics trainers, robot operators, and developers of gesture interfaces. A survey of methods and metrics used in HRI was completed to identify those most applicable to space robotics. These methods and metrics included techniques and tools associated with task performance, the quantification of human-robot interactions and communication, usability, human workload, and situation awareness. The need for more research in areas such as natural interfaces, compensations for loss of signal and poor video quality, psycho-physiological feedback, and common HRI testbeds were identified. The initial findings from these activities and planned future research are discussed

Human-Robot Interaction Directed Research Project

Human-robot interaction (HRI) is about understanding and shaping the interactions between humans and robots (Goodrich & Schultz, 2007). It is important to evaluate how the design of interfaces and command modalities affect the human s ability to perform tasks accurately, efficiently, and effectively (Crandall, Goodrich, Olsen Jr., & Nielsen, 2005) It is also critical to evaluate the effects of human-robot interfaces and command modalities on operator mental workload (Sheridan, 1992) and situation awareness (Endsley, Bolt , & Jones, 2003). By understanding the effects of interface design on human performance, workload, and situation awareness, interfaces can be developed that support the human in performing tasks with minimal errors and with appropriate interaction time and effort. Thus, the results of research on human-robot interfaces have direct implications for design. Because the factors associated with interfaces and command modalities in HRI are too numerous to address in 3 years of research, the proposed research concentrates on three manageable areas applicable to National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) robot systems. These topic areas emerged from the Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 work that included extensive literature reviews and observations of NASA systems. The three topic areas are: 1) video overlays, 2) camera views, and 3) command modalities. Each area is described in detail below, along with relevance to existing NASA human-robot systems. In addition to studies in these three topic areas, a workshop is proposed for FY12. The workshop will bring together experts in human-robot interaction and robotics to discuss the state of the practice as applicable to research in space robotics. Studies proposed in the area of video overlays consider two factors in the implementation of augmented reality (AR) for operator displays during teleoperation. The first of these factors is the type of navigational guidance provided by AR symbology. In the proposed studies, participants performance during teleoperation of a robot arm will be compared when they are provided with command-guidance symbology (that is, directing the operator what commands to make) or situation-guidance symbology (that is, providing natural cues so that the operator can infer what commands to make). The second factor for AR symbology is the effects of overlays that are either superimposed or integrated into the external view of the world. A study is proposed in which the effects of superimposed and integrated overlays on operator task performance during teleoperated driving tasks are compare

A vibrotactile display for aiding extravehicular activity (EVA) navigation in space

Thesis (M.S.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1998.Includes bibliographical references (leaves 138-140).by Jennifer Lisa Rochlis.M.S

Human factors and telerobotics : tools and approaches for designing remote robotic workstation displays

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Aeronautics and Astronautics, February 2002.Includes bibliographical references (v. 2, leaves 297-300).A methodology is created for designing and testing an intuitive synthesized telerobotic workstation display configuration for controlling a high degree of freedom dexterous manipulator for use on the International Space Station. With the construction and maintenance of the International Space Station, the number of Extravehicular Activity (EVA) hours is expected to increase by a factor of four over the current Space Shuttle missions, resulting in higher demands on the EVA crewmembers and EVA crew systems. One approach to utilizing EVA resources more effectively while increasing crew safety and efficiency is to perform routine and high-risk EVA tasks telerobotically. NASA's Johnson Space Center is developing the state-of-the-art dexterous robotic manipulator. An anthropomorphic telerobot called Robonaut is being constructed that is capable of performing all of the tasks required of an EVA suited crewmember. Robonaut is comparable in size to a suited crewmember and consists of two 7 DOF arms, two 12 DOF hands, a 6+ DOF "stinger tail", and a 2+ DOF stereo camera platform. Current robotic workstations are insufficient for controlling highly dexterous manipulators, which require full immersion operator telepresence. The Robonaut workstation must be designed to allow an operator to intuitively control numerous degrees of freedom simultaneously, in varying levels of supervisory control and for all types of EVA tasks. This effort critically reviewed previous research into areas including telerobotic interfaces, human-machine interactions, microgravity physiology, supervisory control, force feedback, virtual reality, and manual control.(cont.) A methodology is developed for designing and evaluating integrated interfaces for highly dexterous and multi-functional telerobots. In addition a classification of telerobotic tasks is proposed. Experiments were conducted with subjects performing EVA tasks with Space Station hardware using Robonaut and a Robonaut simulation (also under development). Results indicate that Robonaut simulation subject performance matches Robonaut performance. The simulation can be used for training operators for full-immersion teleoperation and for developing and evaluating future telerobotic workstations. A baseline amount of Situation Awareness time was determined and reduced using the display design iteration.by Jennifer Lisa Rochlis.Ph.D

Human Systems Integration in Practice: Constellation Lessons Learned

NASA's Constellation program provided a unique testbed for Human Systems Integration (HSI) as a fundamental element of the Systems Engineering process. Constellation was the first major program to have HSI mandated by NASA's Human Rating document. Proper HSI is critical to the success of any project that relies on humans to function as operators, maintainers, or controllers of a system. HSI improves mission, system and human performance, significantly reduces lifecycle costs, lowers risk and minimizes re-design. Successful HSI begins with sufficient project schedule dedicated to the generation of human systems requirements, but is by no means solely a requirements management process. A top-down systems engineering process that recognizes throughout the organization, human factors as a technical discipline equal to traditional engineering disciplines with authority for the overall system. This partners with a bottoms-up mechanism for human-centered design and technical issue resolution. The Constellation Human Systems Integration Group (HSIG) was a part of the Systems Engineering and Integration (SE&I) organization within the program office, and existed alongside similar groups such as Flight Performance, Environments & Constraints, and Integrated Loads, Structures and Mechanisms. While the HSIG successfully managed, via influence leadership, a down-and-in Community of Practice to facilitate technical integration and issue resolution, it lacked parallel top-down authority to drive integrated design. This presentation will discuss how HSI was applied to Constellation, the lessons learned and best practices it revealed, and recommendations to future NASA program and project managers. This presentation will discuss how Human Systems Integration (HSI) was applied to NASA's Constellation program, the lessons learned and best practices it revealed, and recommendations to future NASA program and project managers on how to accomplish this critical function

Human Systems Integration (HSI) Practitioner's Guide

The NASA/SP-2015-3709, Human Systems Integration (HSI) Practitioner's Guide, also known as the "HSIPG," provides a tool for implementing HSI activities within the NASA systems engineering framework. The HSIPG is written to aid the HSI practitioner engaged in a program or project (P/P), and serves as a knowledge base to allow the practitioner to step into an HSI lead or team member role for NASA missions. Additionally, this HSIPG is written to address the role of HSI in the P/P management and systems engineering communities and aid their understanding of the value added by incorporating good HSI practices into their programs and projects. Through helping to build a community of knowledgeable HSI practitioners, this document also hopes to build advocacy across the Agency for establishing strong, consistent HSI policies and practices. Human Systems Integration (HSI) has been successfully adopted (and adapted) by several federal agencies-most notably the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)-as a methodology for reducing system life cycle costs (LCCs). These cost savings manifest themselves due to reductions in required numbers of personnel, the practice of human-centered design, decreased reliance on specialized skills for operations, shortened training time, efficient logistics and maintenance, and fewer safety-related risks and mishaps due to unintended human/system interactions. The HSI process for NASA establishes how cost savings and mission success can be realized through systems engineering. Every program or project has unique attributes. This HSIPG is not intended to provide one-size-fits-all recommendations for HSI implementation. Rather, HSI processes should be tailored to the size, scope, and goals of individual situations. The instructions and processes identified here are best used as a starting point for implementing human-centered system concepts and designs across programs and projects of varying types, including manned and unmanned, human spaceflight, aviation, robotics, and environmental science missions. The practitioner using this guide should have expertise in Systems Engineering or other disciplines involved in producing systems with anticipated human interactions. (See section 1.6 of this guide for further discussion on HSI discipline domains.) The HSIPG provides an "HSI layer" to the NASA Systems Engineering Engine (SEE), detailed in NASA Procedural Requirement (NPR) 7123.1B, NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements, and further explained in NASA/SP-2007-6105, Systems Engineering Handbook (see HSIPG Table 2.2-1, NASA Documents with HSI Content, for specific references and document versions)

Human Systems Integration (HSI) at NASA

No abstract availabl