Spidey Sense

Back to PRE2018 3 Group8

Problem statement

On January the 27th, a building in The Hague exploded due to gas leak. It took the aid workers eight hours to save all residents. Sharwin, who was one of the residents, got stuck underneath his bed. Fireman Arie van Doorijweert mentioned that in the beginning they could only communicate with Sharwin by shouting. [1] The time it takes to localize the victims and to remove the rubble is of great importance for the health of the victims. For aid workers it is necessary to know the specific situation of the victims, so that a personal approach can be made for the rescue. However, often there is no communication in disaster areas between aid workers and victims. This makes is harder for aid workers to estimate the critical situation, because they do not posses enough information to act upon. Victims can be helped quicker and more precise if aid workers would have access to the information of the victims themselves.

Objectives

The following objects are SMART objectives.

• The solution should localize the victims of a disaster area
• The solution should be ready for use
• The solution should be tiny/small
• The solution should be adaptable
• The solution should be strong (enough for mechanical loads)
• The solution should be partially autonomous
• The solution should be user-friendly
• The solution should be able to function in an unknown and dynamic environment
• The solution should be durable

Users & User needs

Primary users

Non-profit organisations

Non-profit organisations, e.g. the Red Cross, can give workshops/education about the use of the robot.

Needs

• Safety
• More volunteers

Aid Workers

They actually use the robot in the field.

Needs

• Working quicker, because the robot is ready for use
• Own safety
• More information/data about the situation in critical conditions

Secondary users

Volunteers

Family members, friends, neighbours and others who help with the search.

Needs

• Safety while trying to search for survivors/victims.

Victims

Victims of a post-disaster area. They interact with the rescue robot.

Needs

• Victims need the medical aid as fast as possible.

Tertiary users

Government

The government finances the search and rescue.

Needs

• Lower (medical) costs
• Less casualties

Hospitals

Hospitals where the victims are hospitalized.

Needs

• Quicker discharge of patients

Persona and Scenario

Name Sarah Janssen
Age 38
Work chief fire officer
Family married and two children, Jimmy (5) and Lisa (7)

Sarah is a devoted wife and mother, and works forty hours per week at the fire department. Besides combating fires and helping evacuees to safety, her job is to oversee the delivery of emergency services to accident scenes and burn sites. She is continuously working on improving the emergency services delivery for a quicker response time and rescue.

Frustrations

• Estimation of the number of victims is not accurate
• Evaluation of the victims’ personal situation in a disaster area is based on limited information
• Communicating with victims during the rescue is difficult

Goal
A way of communicating with the victims in a post-disaster area to gain information about their health and position for a more efficient and safe rescue.

Scenario

An earthquake of Richter magnitude 5 has caused the collapsing of a building. It is estimated that at the time of the collision, six people were inside. Sarah coordinates the rescue teams and rapidly has to decide how to rescue these people. With the help of Spidey Sense, she is able to virtually reach the victims and communicate on their personal situations. She can calm the victim by telling them help is on their way and analyse their situation based on the information provided. This way, Sarah knows the health conditions of the victims and how to remove the rubble, and can therefore bring everyone in safety more efficiently.

Design

Way of moving

When in a post-disaster scenario, it is of utmost importance to get a calming response from humans interacting with robots. This paragraph looks at whether the way a robot moves, the postures it displays, and its orientation can make a significant difference in how humans respond to the robot.

In most cases it is clear the direction from which the robot approaches the human is important. How it moves is often not mentioned though. There are several studies done about the direction, but most of these have been done with a single robot. This makes the question a lot harder. Furthermore the question is quite likely influenced by the victims personality, as is the case with approach distances (28).

One important thing to consider is the speed at which the robot approaches the victim. In an article about non-facial and non-verbal affective expressions for appearance-constrained robots (26) the following test is done. A robot is used in a dark, high-fidelity, confined-space simulated disaster site in two different modes. There is a standard and an emotive mode. In the emotive mode the robot exaggerates his movement. As the robots approached the participant they would exhibit cautious and interested behaviors through a creeping movement, and would slowly raise similar to a dog or squirrel investigating something unknown. When really close (in the so called intimate zone) the robots movements are very limited and controlled so the participant isn’t frightened. Furthermore, after initial contact with the participant, the robot would slowly back away from the participant showing concern and attentiveness. The study showed statistically significant results which indicated that participants felt the robots were more calming, friendly, and attentive in the emotive mode. This improved the social human-robot interaction.

After looking at the best way to approach humans, the actual technical difficulties of reaching these solutions should be looked at. What different types of walking mechanisms are there, and which one suits the found solution best. Up until this point it was taken for granted a spider robot would be chosen, but is this the best possible idea? In a paper about the design of a spider robot it is mentioned that six-legged robots present opportunities by having a small size and practical mobility. The number of legs provide more controlled balance when comparing them to the majority of multi-legged robots. In the rescue application they could be very beneficial. Furthermore multi-legged robots are more versatile than wheeled robots, and can traverse many different terrains. The problem is the complexity of the robot, as well as power consumption. For this problem however, the versatility and ability to move through many different terrains is of more importance than the complexity and power consumption.

One of the ways to make the spider robot walk is by looking at an actual spider and its joints. At each joint a servo is placed so the root resembles a spider as much as possible. The design is shown in FIGURE?. This will make the robot able to move in every possible direction. This design has a few problems though. The first problem is the difficulty. Since three servos are used per leg, the system has a lot of degrees of freedom. Even standing still is a difficult thing to set. Another problem is the amount of weight the robot can carry. Since the parts are connected via servo’s the weight load is determined by either the strength of the material or the maximum moment about the servo axis. There should be at least two servo’s, something to control the servos, a power supply and an interface next to the servo acting as a moment on the servo’s of the legs. This either requires very low weight parts or very strong servo’s. Another option to reduce the moment is shortening the rod connecting servo b and c. This however will make the robot way less versatile, since smaller steps can be taken.

Another way of making the robot move is making use of Klann’s mechanism. This is a planar leg mechanism that uses a single rotary motion. There is one central crank that can be rotated using a rotary actuator such as an electric motor. All other links and pin joints are unactuated and move because of the motion imparted by the crank. The position and orientation of each of these links is uniquely defined by specifying the crank angle. Therefore the mechanism has only one degree of freedom. The mechanism can be seen in FIGURE?.

Another way to make the robot move, similar to Klann’s mechanism is the so called Jansen's linkage, developed by a Dutch kinetic sculptor called The Jansen. This mechanism makes for a simple simulation of an organic walking motion using only one rotary input.Again, the position and orientation of each of these links is uniquely defined by specifying the crank angle. Therefore this mechanism also only has one degree of freedom. The mechanism can be seen in FIGURE?

When comparing these three options a lot of things have to be taken into account. How smooth is the movement? What load can it hold? How hard is it to build? What is the construction expense? Can it run through rough and difficult environments? How hard is it to control? How much maintenance does it need?

To come to a conclusion the robot should move in a specific way. First of all the robot should not move too fast. The robot should look cautious at first, starting low at the ground and taking careful steps. After a while it should raise. In the intimate zone the robots movement should be very limited and controlled. The mechanism used to walk will be the Jansen’s linkage. This linkage has most of the benefits of Klann’s mechanism, but also makes for a more smooth and especially better looking movement. The leg looks more stable and sturdy than the Klann mechanism. CHOICE OF LINKAGE WILL BE ELABORATED UPON MORE

Colour of light

When the robot moves towards the patient in the dark environment under the rubble, this can be quite stressful for the patient. The robot would most likely not be completely silent when moving. To make the patient ready for what approaches him/her the robot could emit a light, making its form visible. As shown by multiple researches, the colour green and blue are mostly associated with the emotions peaceful and calming. If the the robot would emit a light in one of these colours this could already help the patient to calm down.

Approach of Person

The psychological study of how people establish mutual distances in communication is called proxemics. However, this study might not be applicable to robot-human communication. When a robot approaches a human, several considerations should be encountered in the way of approaching.

What to consider when approaching a person?

• Personal Space

A social convention that defines a region of space around individuals as personal

• Direction of Encounter

The preferred direction from which a person would like to be addressed

• Feasibility of interaction

The region of space where interaction is feasible

In the thesis ‘Approaching Independent Living with Robots’ by Elena Torta, these three positions are tested and evaluated for a sitting and standing positions of the test subjects. The results concluded a best mutual distance between 140-200 cm. Also, the central direction of encounter was preferred most. The experiments were conducted with the Nao robot and only encounter sitting and standing positions. However, in our scenario it is also possible that the victims are lying down and have less freedom of movement. Also, the appearance of the robot is different. Therefore, a new test should be conducted to determine the best approach with our designed robot.

USE Aspects

Users

Society

Enterprise

The device will have an economic impact on the hospitals, goverment and companies. It's able for the companies to get more brand awareness, when they will produce (a part of) the device.

Approach, milestones and deliverables

Approach

To tackle this project, we started with extensive research on the state of the art. This is done by examining the current literature on the subject. These examined papers outline the current state of the problem, solutions to these problems, and their flaws.

After obtaining a better view on the problem at hand, the USE (user, society and enterprise) aspects are analyzed, to determine why this problem is relevant. These three aspects should always be kept in mind during each stage of the project. These aspects may sometimes ask for different solutions to the same problem, so they must be analyzed to determine which aspect should be taken into account more, and compromises must be made. Also different subproblems may ask for different USE aspects, but two solutions from two subproblems may not always be able to be combined, meaning that choices must be made.

After having analyzed the USE aspects, a scenario will be made where the robot shows of its capabilities, and multiple persona’s will also be made who come into contact with the robot. Research has also been done about the interaction between rescue robots and the human victims. These papers will be used and important factors for the product to have will be determined.

Then, we will start the production of our own spider robot. As with each project with a tangible deliverable, the robot starts off as a sketch. Multiple designs will be made, and the best one will be chosen. This will most likely be done by making simplified prototypes. Another option is creating only parts of the robot like the legs. After this is done the necessary components will be analyzed and subsequently tested. After we know that the different components work, they will be assembled into our final product. After obtaining a finished product it will be tested and evaluated. If improvement is needed, the product will be improved. This does mean that planning of the different tasks is crucial. The sub-components should be finished on time so they can be tested and assembled into one product. Therefore the different parts will be created as early as possible. This can clearly be seen in the planning.

During the whole process, a report will be written in which the process is outlined in a more detailed manner, and which also follows our progress. This report will also more finely describe the problem and the solutions. Because this is done alongside the creation of the actual prototype, planning is important again. Some people will be working on the product and some on the report. This also means clear communication is of utmost importance. Alongside each progress meeting, the group will come together once or twice a week to discuss what has already been done and what should still be worked on. This way it will become clear if the goals will be reached in time and the project is on track.

After all this is done a presentation will be prepared and presented, the wiki will be done, and all deliverables will be handed in.

Milestones

• Decide on subject (06/02/19)
• Formulate problem statement (11/02/19)
• Finish literature study
• Finish sketches of product
• Finish assembly of product
• Present product
• Finalize the wiki

Deliverables

• Wiki (report)
• Final presentation
• A prototype

Planning

PLANNING 1.0

Week 1	Literature study (Gialesi, Lotte, Mark, Romy)	Problem statement (Everybody)	Define users and user needs (Everybody)		Make planning (Noor)	Update Wiki (Romy)
Week 2		List of sensors and components (Gialesi, Noor)	Scenario/persona's (Lotte)	Make designs (Everybody)	Analyze USE aspects (Romy)
Week 3	Assembly of product (Gialesi, Lotte, Noor, Mark)	Test sensors (Gialesi)		Write report (Everybody)
Week 4
Week 5 (Carnaval)
Week 6		Test prototype (Noor)
Week 7	Improve prototype (Gialesi, Lotte, Noor, Mark)	Evaluate Prototype (Mark)		Prepare presentation (Lotte)
Week 8
Week 9	Presentation		Hand in deliverables

PLANNING 2.0

Week 1	Literature study (Gialesi, Lotte, Mark, Noor, Romy)		Problem statement (Everybody)		Define users and user needs (Everybody)			Make planning (Noor)		Update Wiki (Every-body)
Week 2			Communication (Gialesi, Noor)	Walking (Mark, Gialesi)	Approach Victim (Romy, Lotte)	Hue of light (Gialesi, Noor)	Looks (Mark, Noor, Romy)	Scenario & persona (Lotte)	Analyze USE aspects (Romy)
Week 3	Sketches of design (Everybody)					Find materials (Everybody)
Week 4	Assembly of product (Gialesi, Lotte, Mark)			Design choices (Noor, Romy)			Link user to design choices (Gialesi, Romy)
Week 5 (Carnaval)
Week 6				User testing (Everybody finds people)
Week 7	Analyze user tests (Gialesi, Noor)			Evaluation of user needs (Romy)			Prepare presentation (Lotte)
Week 8	Finalize report
Week 9	Presentation					Hand in deliverables

Who's doing what?

• Lotte Hollander: writing report + wiki, graphic design, prototyping
• Romy Lauwers: writing report + wiki, literature, photoshop
• Mark Wijnands: mechanics, control, 3D design
• Noor Schroen: literature, electronics
• Gialesi Notkamp: literature, electronics

State-of-the-Art

Spider Robot and Motion:
[2] This paper looks at certain safe points where the spider robot can place its feet and where not in a plane.
[3] This paper looks at certain points where the spider can and cannot place its feet.
[4] This paper looks at a spider robot that climbs autonomously in pipelines. Could be useful for the small spaces.
[5] This paper is about the capabilities of the spider and studies the foot force and torque distribution of the spider in different conditions and compares the leg configurations in order to minimize the torque effort.
[6] This paper discusses foot designs and fabrication for use with a spider-inspired climbing robot.
[7] This paper is about a four-legged spider robot that learns how to move in its environment and reacts to physical changes.
[8] This article discusses a dragline-forming robot inspired by spiders
[9] This is the site of Robugtix. This company has a small spider robot, which can make smooth, life-like motions. The toy comes equipped with a 3D printed body, 26 motors, and microcontroller board pre-loaded with the Bigfoot™ Inverse Kinematics Engine.
[10] This paper focusses on a spider-imitated robot used for rescue

Relevant Rescue Robots
[11] This paper is about a rescue robot with debris opening function
[12] This paper is about MOIRA the Mobile Inspection robot for Rescue Activities.
[13] This paper is about a robot that can move the debris.
[14] This patent is about an all-terrain rescue and disaster-relief robot.
[15] This paper discusses an aerial search and rescue robot and its application to a specific earthquake.
[16] This paper is about modular, reconfigurable rescue robots.
[17] This article describes a so called WALK-MAN robot in post-earthquake scenario's.
[18] This patent is for an autonomous detection system and method of rescue robot in disaster area for complex environment
[19] This patent is for a full topography intelligence rescue robot with self-balancing objective table
[20] This patent is about an emergency relief goods transporting robot
[21] This article presents several different types of robots that can be easily deployed in rescue operations

Disaster Rescue
[22] This patent focusses on a method for priority evaluation for robots under disaster rescue environment
[23] This article is about a challenge that aims to accelerate the development of robots that can help humans, not only with nuclear emergencies but also with fires, floods, earthquakes, chemical spills, and other kinds of natural and man-made disasters.
[24] This patent is about video search and a rescue robot based on ZigBee wireless positioning and search and rescue method
[25] This article discusses a simulation project for disaster rescue

Rescue robot interaction
[26] This paper provides a short tutorial on how robots are currently used in urban search and rescue and discusses some robot-human interaction issues encountered over the past eight years.
[27] This paper talks about non-facial and non-verbal affective expressions for appearance-constrained robots.
[28] This paper presents findings from field trials observing human-robot interaction between certified rescue workers and two types of tactical mobile robots at a rescue training site.
[29] In this article the influence of personal traits of a person on the approach distances of robots is discussed.

Prototypes of a spider robot
[30] This paper is about a high tech spider prototype, mady by reseachers of the Fraunhofer Institute for Manufacturing Engineering and Automation IPA. The prototype will provide emergency responders with an image of the situation on the ground, along with any data about poisonous substances. Future plans envision its use as an exploratory tool in environments that are too hazardous for humans, or too difficult to get to. Furthermore, the prototype is very cheap to produce.
[31] This site has an instruction guide to print 3D parts of a spider robot with four legs. It is possible to place an arduino in the middle of the design.
[32] This patent is for a novel rescue robot that can efficiently walk in a complex post-disaster area through a design of a spider-like structure

Robots with interesting factors
[33] This robot is portable and foldable and quickly carried in a backpack to a site where inspection, exploration, search and rescue, and other tasks are required to performed.

Regulation
[34] Regulation and entrainment in human-robot interaction