Search and Retrieval of Human Casualties in Outdoor Environments with Unmanned Ground Systems—System Overview and Lessons Learned from ELROB 2014

  • Bernd Brüggemann
  • Dennis Wildermuth
  • Frank E. Schneider
Chapter
Part of the Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics book series (STAR, volume 113)

Abstract

The European Land Robot Trail (ELROB) is a robot competition running for nearly 10 years now. Its focus changes between military and civilian applications every other year. Although the ELROB is now one of the most established competition events in Europe, there have been changes in the tasks over the years. In 2014, for the first time, a search and rescue scenario was provided. This paper addresses this Medical Evacuation (MedEvac) scenario and describes our system design to approach the challenge, especially our innovative control mechanism for the manipulator. Comparing our solution with the other teams’ approaches we will show advantages which, finally, enabled us to achieve the first place in this trial.

References

  1. 1.
    Anderson, J., Baltes, J., Tu, K.Y.: Improving robotics competitions for real-world evaluation of AI. In: AAAI Spring Symposium: Experimental Design for Real-World Systems, pp. 1–8 (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Behnke, S.: Robot competitions-ideal benchmarks for robotics research. In: Proceedings of IROS-2006 Workshop on Benchmarks in Robotics Research (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brüggemann, B., Gaspers, B., Ciossek, A., Pellenz, J., Kroll, N.: Comparison of different control methods for mobile manipulation using standardized tests. In: 2013 IEEE International Symposium on Safety, Security, and Rescue Robotics (SSRR), pp. 1–2. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    De Cubber, G., Doroftei, D., Serrano, D., Chintamani, K., Sabino, R., Ourevitch, S.: The EU-ICARUS project: developing assistive robotic tools for search and rescue operations. In: Safety, Security, and Rescue Robotics, pp. 1–4. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    del Pobil A.P.: Why do we need benchmarks in robotics research. In: International Conference on Intelligent Robot and Systems, Beijing, China (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gilbert, G., Turner, T., Marchessault, R.: Army Medical Robotics Research, Army Telemedicine and Advanced Technology Research Center (TATRC) project report, Fort Detrick, MD (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hoffmann, J., Brüggemann, B., Krüger, B.: Automatic calibration of a motion capture system based on inertial sensors for tele-manipulation. In: ICINCO, vol. 2, pp. 121–128 (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Humphrey, C.M., Adams, J.A.: Robotic tasks for chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and explosive incident response. Adv. Robot. 23(9), 1217–1232 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Iwano, Y., Osuka, K., Amano, H.: Development of rescue support stretcher system with stair-climbing. In: 2011 IEEE International Symposium on Safety, Security, and Rescue Robotics (SSRR), pp. 245–250. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Iwano, Y., Osuka, K., Amano, H.: Posture manipulation for rescue activity via small traction robots. In: Safety, Security and Rescue Robotics, Workshop, 2005 IEEE International, pp. 87–92. IEEE (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jacoff, A., Messina, E., Evans, J.: A standard test course for urban search and rescue robots. NIST SPECIAL PUBLICATION SP, 253–259 (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kim, Y.D., Kim, Y.G., Lee, S.H., Kang, J.H., An, J.: Portable fire evacuation guide robot system. In: IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2009. IROS 2009, pp. 2789–2794. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Murphy, R.R., Riddle, D., Rasmussen, E.: Robot-assisted medical reachback: a survey of how medical personnel expect to interact with rescue robots. In: 13th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2004. ROMAN 2004, pp. 301–306. IEEE (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    ROS packages for multimaster support (discovering, synchronizing and management GUI). http://fkie.github.io/multimaster_fkie/
  15. 15.
    Schneider, F.E., Wildermuth, D.: Aims and Outcome of Professional Ground Robotic Competitions: A Systematic Comparison. In: Proceedings of the 3rd NATO EOD Demonstrations and Trials Workshop "New technologies assistance and limitations of the EOD in post-ISAF era", Trencin (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schneider, F.E., Wildermuth, D., Brüggemann, B., Röhling, T.: European Land Robot Trial (ELROB) Towards a Realistic Benchmark for Outdoor Robotics (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    The DARPA Robotics Challenge (DRC), official website. http://www.theroboticschallenge.org
  18. 18.
    Winfield, A.F., Franco, M.P., Brüggemann, B., Castro, A., Djapic, V., Ferri, G., Viguria, A.: euRathlon Outdoor Robotics Challenge: Year 1 Report. In: Advances in Autonomous Robotics Systems: 15th Annual Conference, TAROS 2014, Birmingham, UK, September 1–3, 2014. Proceedings, vol. 8717, p. 267. Springer (2014)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yim, M., Laucharoen, J., Yim, M., Laucharoen, J.: Towards small robot aided victim manipulation. J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 64(1), 119–139 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bernd Brüggemann
    • 1
  • Dennis Wildermuth
    • 1
  • Frank E. Schneider
    • 1
  1. 1.Fraunhofer FKIEWachtbergGermany

Personalised recommendations