|
Items in cart [0] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 292
TELEROEO1TCS FOR THE EVOLVING SPACE STATION:
RESEARCH afire AND CUTSIANDING PROBLEMS
Lawrence Stark
INTRODUCTION
m e definition of robotics (TR) Hal not yet stabilized nor made the
standard English language dictionary. I tend to use telercbotics as
g remote control of robots by a human operator using supervisory
and some direct control. Emus, this is an important area for the NASA
evolving space station. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ . e_. _ 8
~ . ~
By robot, I mean a manipulator/mbbility device
with visual or other senses. ~ do not name manipulators, as in many
industrial automation set-ups, robots even if they can be flexibly
p~ug~uu~35; rather calling these programmable manipulators. Our own
laboratory at the University of California, Berkeley, has been involved
In problems in display of information to he human operator, In
crciblems of con~l of rate manipulator by he human Operator, and
~ rucat~on copays and bar~id~ch limitations as influencing both
control and the display. A number of recent reviews have appeared with
discussions of the history of Robotics beginning with nuclei'
plants and underseas oil rigs.
THREE SIMULTANEOUS RESEARCH DIRECllONS
, __ ~ _ _ _ ,
There are problems using man alone.
I believe that we should engage in triplicate or three way planning.
It is important to carry out our research to accomplish forks (i) with
man a Lone, if possible, such as in EVA extravehicular activities),
(ii) with autonc~us robots (AR), and (iii) with t=]erdbotics. By
comparing arxt contrasting the resort n~-=sary to carry out them
three approaches, we may clarify our present problems. (S~ Table 1)
the space environment is
hazardous. It is very expensive to have a man In space; NOVA must have
quite adeq late cost figures obta Bed from the demonstration projects
that have already been acccmplished with the shuttle program. We may
also need a higher quality of performance than man alone can provide in
terms of strength, resistance to fatigue, vigilance, and in meeting
special problems. For example, if the space suit is not of constant
volume under flexible changes of the limbs, then a great d=~1 of
strength is used up just in maintaining posture.
292
OCR for page 293
293
CABIN ~ Triplicate Plan m ng
Problems with man alone
Hazar~cus environment:
(space similar to nuclear plants, underseas)
Expensive (i.e. Eve ~ space)
Need ~ncr=asP~ quality in
Strength
Fatigue resistance
Vigilance
Performance
Problems with Autonomous Robots
Not yet available
Design not fixed
Feasibility not certain
Reliability not tested
Therefore: TR is a viable leading edge technology
All three directions should be sup ported for evolving space station
planning, research, and development.
Problems with autonomous robots lie in cur not having mastered the
technology to build them and have them perform satisfactorily. They
are not yet available! Indeed, designs are not yet fly arm it is not
chain how feasible they will be, especially In terms of rdbustr~ess
arm reliability.
Therefore, we can ~ that t~lerabotics is a Friable leading edge
technology. However, all three dir ~ ions should be intensively
pursued in research and development, especially for the next stages of
the evolving space station plane mg.
SPACE SIAIICN TASKS
One of the major roles that NASA can play is to hypothesize tasks for
the evolving space station. In this way research regarding the design
of t=]erabots to accomplish these tasks can be guided. For a list of
seven groups of tasks see Table 2.
\
OCR for page 294
294
TABLE 2 NOVA should Hypothesize TASKS for Evolving Space Station
Hcusekeeping
Life support systems
Inventory control, access and storage
Record keeping
Garbage disposal
Protection
From space garbage
Fin meteorites
From traffic flow
maintenance
Satellite
Vehicles
Space station itself
Construction
Additional space station structures
Manufacturing
Crystal growth, biopharmaceuti~als
Mobility
Automatic piloting
Navigation
Path planning
Scientific
Lan~sat type image processing for agriculture
Meteorology
Astronomy
Human factors research
Scientific record keeping
As I will consider' lakers it is important to distinguish between
those tasks unique to the NASA/evolving Space Station and those with
"industrial drivers" that will accomplish development of near
technologies In hopefully a superior fashion and thtlC ermble
consecration of limited NOVA resources.
OCR for page 295
295
EMBLEMS IN TELEE;~:)BOllCE;
First I overview problems in telerdbotics: those concerning displays,
vision arid other senses (Table 3) and those dealing witch control art
rmn~nication (Table 4).
In each tahie, ~ start with basic properti== of the human operator
and end lo? with planned capabilities of autonctnom; robots. In between,
I try to Cover what knowledge exists new in our field of telerobotics.
~ rimental Set-Up for m rce-Axis Pick-and Place Tasks
A teleoperation simulator constructed with a display, joysticks, and a
computer enable] three-axis pick-and-place tasks to be performed and
various display and control conditions evaluated (Figure 1~. A vector
display system (Hewlett-Packard 1345A) was used for fast vector drawing
and updating with high resolution. An our experiments, displacement
joysticks were mainly used, although in one experiment a force joystick
was used to compare with a displacement joystick. An LSI-11/23
computer with the RT-ll cgerating system compute was connected to the
joystick outputs through 12-bit A/D converters, and to the vector
display system through a 16-bit parallel I/O port.
CABIN 3 Display Problems for the Human Operator
Display graphics (raster/vector)
Cn-the-screen enhancements
On-the-soene enhancements
Other senses displayed
Inputs to other senses
Perspective and Stereo Displays
Task performance criteria
Helmet Mounts Display
Telepresence; space constancy
Human Operator (H.O.) Performance
Fatigue, effort, vigilance
Robotic Vision
LLV - mips
MLV - blockworld and hidden lines
HLV - ICM, AI
OCR for page 296
296
]~E 4 Control and C~nication Problems for the Mean Operator
Chic properties of H.O., Medially for EVA task performance
ITerve, Muscle, AG/A~ model
Sampled data (SD) and adaptive control
Eviction, preview, optimal control--~lman filter
H.O. control of vehicles, mamal control
He 0. control of TR
H.O. Special control:
Previewer, delay, bilateral, h~nor~ihiccontro
Ideation (human, robotic):
Navigation ~ pathways
Potential field algorithms
HIC (high level control):
Supervisory control
MUltiperson cooperative control; RCCL; fuzzy sets
Autonomous robotic (AR) control
Sensory feedback, adaptive control, AI
A typical presentation on the disolav screen for three-axis
. ~ . .
p~c~-an~-p~ace tasks ~nc~udeu a cvlin~ri~1 manipulator. objects to
_, ~ ~ ~ _ . ~ . _~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~
~ ~ - - - J ~
plCK UPJ and Boxes In w m an to place them, all displayed in perspective
(Figure 2).
. . .
ounce perspecclve pro~ec~lon atone is not sufficient to
present ~nree-dimen~sionA' information on the twc-dimensional screen, a
grid representing a horizontal base plane and references lines
indicating vertical separations from the base mane are also Presented
{~1 l;c ~! =1 BOW. I; ~. =1
`~= =~ ~ - ~ . / do_, ~~` = - mu., 1985 sUl~nitt~) .
~ ~ ~ . .
The human operator
controlled the manipulator on the display us mg two joysticks to pick
up each object with the manipulator gripper and place it in the
corresponding box. One hand, using two axes of one joystick, controls
the gripper position for the two axes parallel to the horizontal base
plane (grid). The other hand, using one axis of the other joystick,
controls the gripper position for the third axis Overtires height)
E~r~icu~ar to ache base plane. Picking up an Object is accomplished
by touching an abject with the manipulator gripper. Liaise, placing
an Object is a~nplisl~ed by touching the correct box with the
manipulator gripper.
OCR for page 297
297
HP 1345A
Cal I Graphic
Display
4K x 16 bit
Memory
_5Z~
l
\7
Joysticks
J
FIGURE 1 F~t=1 It.
Patina Arm Simulator
LSI - 1 1/23
Computer
Pare bed
I/0
12-bit a/D
Converter
I
In addition ~ the gylir~ri~al manipula=r simulation, the kinetics
are Tics of a six ~f-fre"am Rma robot awn were si~a~.
Each of ~ ese degrees of fre - An were controlled silrmltanecusly using
too joysticks;. Alff~algh no experiments have yet been performed with
the puma s;~1ation, it is hoped that it will be a step toward
experiments inch more complex manip~a~rs. A l~n~idth tan ep hone
connection to control two Puma arms at Jet Propulsion Labs in Pasadena
is plan net. The s;~1ation will allow prediction of the robots' Notion
to provide a preview display to help overcome the communication delays
inherent in such a low bandwidth connection, or as In transmissions to
manipulators in space.
.
OCR for page 298
298
l
-
T
n
1
I
FIGURE: 2 P~s-Berkeley visual errant display.
Helmet M=nted Display Design
Motivation
The motivation of the HMD system is to provide the human Orator with
a Iced epresence fey ing that he is actually In the rate site art
controls the telemanipulator clirec~y. The HO system deters the
h ~ n ~ rator's head motion, end controls the r ~ te stereo ~ ra
accordingly. In cur current system, the remote -~1emanipulation task
environment is simulated and the pictures for the display are generated
by the computer.
Head Orientation Sensors
A twc-axis magnetic Helmholtz coil arrangement was used as a head
orientation sensing device, to detect horizontal and vertical head
rotations (Figure 3). By assuming that the pan and tilt angles of a
remote stereo camera are controlled in accordance with the horizontal
and vertical head rotations, respectively, the cc mputer generates the
corresponding stereo picture for the HMD. m e head orientation sensing
OCR for page 299
299
Also ~1
I'
it_
At_
it'
FIGURE 3 Head orientation sensor device.
LACE \ ~
device IS composed of a search (sensing) coil mounted on or beneath the
helmet and two pairs of field coils fixed with respect to the human
operator's con Loll station. me right-left pair of the field coil
generates the horizontal magnetic flux of a 50 XHz square wave. m e
up-down pair of the field coil generates the vertical magnetic flux of
a 75 XHz square wave. The search coil detects the induced magnetic
flux, which is amplified and separated into 50 and 75 XHz components.
m e magnify ~- of each frequency component depends upon the orientation
of the search coil with respect to the corresponding field coil (Duffy,
1985~.
OCR for page 300
300
Ton Display
An early configuration of the HMD had a flat-panel Urn (liquid crystal
display) screen (a commercially available portable Ton television)
mcunt^~ on the helmet for the display (Figure 4). However, the picture
quality of the Ton screen was poor due not only to low resolution but
also to poor contrast.
CRY Display
A new design of the HMD that we currently have, mounted a pair of Sony
viewfinders (MbJel VF-208) on the helmet (Figure 5). Each viewfinder
has a 1- inch CR~ (cathode ray tube) screen and a converging Tense
through which the human operator views the OK screen. The
cc mputPr-generat-~ stereo picture pair (stereogram) is displayed on the
CAT screens; one for the left eye and the other for the right. m e
converging lens forms the virtual image of the stereogram behind the
actual display screen. When the OK screen is 4.2 cm apart from the
lens whose focal length is 5 cm, the virtual image of the Cal screen is
formed at 25 cm apart frees the lens with an image magnification of 6.
Emus, a I-~nch OK screen appears ~ be a o-lrx:n screen co me viewer.
At appropriate geometrical and Optical cor~itions, the right and left
images overlay, and most people can fuse the two images into a single
three divisional image. me ster~ic display formulas use to
generate the ster ~ r ~ for the hen - t mounted display are described in
references (Kim et al., 1987~.
LIGHT SOURCE
SUPPORT
CHANNELS
/
/
a..
FIGURE 4: Folly HMD design with Ton screen.
LCD
DISP ~ Y
OCR for page 301
301
!
\~:
,. ~ ?
AL,
FIGURE 5 Current He design.
M~hani~1 Design
Five degrees of France were provided for the Satanical adjus~nent of
the position and orientation of each viewfinder, allowing three
orthogonal slidings ark two rotations (Figure 5~. A 1 Ib.
counterweight was attached to the back of the helmet for
count~r-balancing.
Communication Delay and Preview
Communication delay is a significant constraint in human performance in
controlling a remote manipulator. It has been shown (Sheridan et al,
1964, Sheridan, 1966; TcmizuXa and Whitney, 1976) that preview
information can be used to improve performance. Stark et al. (1987)
OCR for page 302
302
demonstrated that pr ~ few can significantly reduce error in tracking
experiments with Imposed delay.
Experiments were performed to investigate whether a preview display
could improve performance ~ pick-and-place tasks with delay. A single
bright diamond-shaped cursor was added to the display to represent
current joystick position. This was a perfect prediction of bat the
~ effecter position wand be after the delay Sternal. ~us, the
task was the same as if there were no delay, except that the H.0. had
to wait one delay period for confirmation that a target had been
touched or correctly placed (in the non-pre~riewed display, the target
letter was doubled when picked un. and hem finale In when Of
~ the correct box).
_ . .
4. , ~ ~~ ~ I__ _~ =~ ~
preview improved performance at delays up to 4 seconds so that it
was almost as good as for a small delay of 0.2 seconds (Figure 6~.
While tack completion time ~ the delayed condition increased greatly
with delay, them was only a small increase in the preview case. This
is because the H.O. Toast Sate for delays by using a
'~ve-and~ait" strategy, making a joystick movement and waiting to s=-
the resultant and effecter movement. In the preview case, this
ax
U;
o
_'
o
. -
U
it_
CL
o
45Q
400
35D
300
Z50
200
150
100
50
/
/
/
J
/
J
~ _
0.O O.5 1,0 1.S TO 2.5 3.O 3 5 4.D
De ~ By T i me (seconds)
FIGURE 6 Performance affected by delays and by preview control mode.
OCR for page 309
309
i- ~
O. 8
O.6
L
AL
U. G. 4
O.2
O.0
FIGURE 10 Han~rEihic Con~croller.
,'
l
: _
/~
-
'-E~~
Add.
-
~ _~ ~ ~
t
J
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Ver-t i cc~ ~ Ga i n
INIXJSTRLAL MOVERS FOR CERTAIN NECESSARY
SPACE STATION TECHNOLOGIES
e ~ . e _ . e _ _ _
This next section deals with the future' and e ~ cially with
preindustrial driver sll other than NINA for new technologies which may be
required in the evolving Space Station. In Table 5 I list nine
components of a Robotics system that certainly seem to be driven by
Important industrial hardware requirements, research and development.
Therefore, it seems reasonable for NASA to sit back and wait for and
evaluate these develcpments, saving its resources for those necessary
technologies that will not be so driven.
Looking at these figures gives ~~= some concept of how industrial
develop may provide various types of technologies for the evolving
Space Station; indeed' NASA may be able to pick and choose from
off-the-shelf items! For example, the most powerful computers on the
last space shuttles were the han5-held portable computers that the
OCR for page 310
310
o o o o
. . .
o ~ ¢ 0
~ ~2 ,
o
C\2
- Z ¢11~P
o o o o o o
~ CU ~ CU °
~ 1
UI - ~ ~I~P
-
I f
o o
o ~
~ ~2
o o o o
0 CO ~ o
~ C\2 ~
1 ~
Ul - X `-lI~P
o
.. _ tt, , _
. N
o
o
o
~ _
0 r'
C\2 ~
_ ~
O ~
1
O i
~D
O -
C" ·—
o
O
C`2
_ ~
o
o V
-
n
o 1
o E
o
o .
~o/no _ ~ o~od Z
1 1
1.
~ 0 1
7jo/uo _ 9~1Od A
! ~
;
-
1 i !
~ o ,
`'o/uo ~ ~3od X
o
-
o
C~
o
0 1
CD
o
CP~
o
o
o
C\2
- e
o
0
.
o 1
o E
CO I,
o _
o
-
o
~2
- e
o
~o
o
o 6
~ ._
l~
~\
£
-
v
-,'
0
o
o
~_
-= ~
IL\ ~
£
·.
H
OCR for page 311
311
- ~
a o o o o
N — ~ _ ~ ~ — O O O o o O J1O/UQ — ~0 J Z
UI _ Z calf
~/~ — A?IlDOI9A Z
_
S
1 ~
Lo Lit I I No. ~
+ O I ~
O O . ~ O a a O
N , N ~ ~ ~ id ~ ~ ~ ~ ]]O/UO _ 2 ~03 ~
fig
~ ~ ~ ~ rim
Ul — ~ £'l1Dp
~~r ~ ~ it._ ~
+ O ,
O LIZ CO [~] CO ~ O O o o 0 ~ ~ O ] ~O/UO - a DJ03 V
[U - X ~2p S/LU _ ~°19^
OCR for page 312
312
o o o o o o
o ~ ~ ~ ~ o
~ O2 ~ CU
1 1
UI - Z ~I9P
1 / 1
-
-
J
-
1 ~
O O
O ~
~ C`2
O o o O
0 ~ O
1 1
,~ _ ~ ~I~P
/
o o o o
. . .
o
C~ ,
UI - X ~P
o o
· .
~ o
C\2 ~
~ 1
o o
/ - ~ . . _ ~ _
/ ~ O ~ I I ~
~ o .
,~o/no _ ~ ~od Z
o
-
o
C~
_ ~
o
o
0 1
o
C': ·—
o
o
-
o
C\2 ~
— C
o
o
o 1
o ~
C'7 ·—
o
_~
o
C\2
_
o
o
C~
o 1
o
~ ._
1
l tOD
-
~ o 1
}~°/~° - ao~o~
1 '
o
-
o
CU
- e
o
0
CD
0 ~
~ ._
o
-
.
0
~2
_
o
0
CD
o 1
~D
-
0 ~
C'~ ·-
],O/UO - BD103 X
-
C)
_ _-
_ _ ~
1"
811
-
(~
C~
£
-
-
-
-
~'
~ .~
11u ,5
at ~
~d
~:
5
OCR for page 313
313
TABLE 5 Drivers other than MESA for Nine Ne~ed Technologies
Robotic Manipulator arm Control S6h~
Joystick - Aircraft
AR ~nufacturir~ Ir~ustry, Nuclear Irx~ustry, Minim Irxlustry,
Sensors: Force and Touch; compliant control
ROV and Mobility
Military, tanks arm other vehicle plans?
Undersea ROV - Oil are] C ~ nications ~ stay
Lcoo motion - University Research
Shipping Industry: Ships at Sea EAR, TR, M~n]
TV Camera
~ ,
Entertainment Industry - commercial device
Security Industry
Need mounts, controls and motors for PAN, TILT and for Stereo VG
Graphics
Entertainment industry is a better driver than companies building
Flight Simulators;
HMD as an example.
EM sensors research/Head-Eye ME use
ICM
Landsat
Security
Medical Industry - CT and MRI
Industrial Production Lines
TD - Image Understanding
Computer
Computer Industry
(HDW) and (SFW)
Computer Science research base i
Communication
now very broad
Communication Industry is huge
Ships at Sea
BE Compression
Remote Oil Rigs
Arctic Stations
Plans and Protocols to Combat H.O. Fatigue and to Promote H.O.
Vigilance
Office Automation Forces
Air Traffic Control NOF5.C
Security Industry
Cooperative Control
Military - submarme control
Helicopter flight control
Air traffic controllers
Nuclear industry
Chemical plant industry
OCR for page 314
314
astronauts bought aboard With contained huh greater capability than
the on-board computers;; those had been frozen in their design ten year;
ago in the planning stages for the space shuttle.
NECESSARY TEIEEK)I~lIC~ IECHNOLOGTF~ 10 BE SPARED BY MESA
However, there are several areas in telerobotics that may likely not be
driven independently of NASA, or where MESA may have an important role
to play. Indeed, the Congress has specifically mandated that 10% of
the Space Station budget should be used for Automation and Rcbotics
development, and that this in some sense should spearhead industrial
robotics In the United States (Table 6~.
TABLE 6 Areas Sparked by ROSA not industrially Driven
Visual Enhancements for Graphic Display
Telepresence with Stereo Helmet Mounded Display (HMD)
Multisensory Input Ports:
Worry about H.O. overload condition
(especially with cooperative control and communication)
Higher Level Robotic Vision:
Example Image Compression by Modeling (IC~)
(to require less information flaw and faster update)
Special Control Modes for H.O.
Hcmeomorphic control
Bilateral control
Time delay and preview control for time delay
Compliant control
Higher Level Control Languages
(such as RCCL; fuzzy control; path planning by potential field
construction)
Remote operating vehicles (ROY) special control problems:
Navigation, orientation, obstacle avoidance for ROV
Cooperative Control:
Cocperation amongst humans, telercbots, and autonomous robots
Ccmpliant, Flexible, Hcmeomorphic Manipulators
Grasp versus tool using
Homeomorphic Dual Mode Control
Impedance Control
OCR for page 315
315
UNIV~S11Y NINA RESEARC]I
I now would like to make a plea that NASA should ex pen] and stimulate
teleroboti~= research conducted within the university environment. Of
course, as a professor I may have a bias On this direction and I am
willing to listen to contrary arguments! In addition to the benefits
of the research accomplished by universities, NEST also gets the
education and training of new engineering manpower specifically
directed towards telerobotics, and focused on the evolving Space
Station.
What kind of university and educational research should be funded in
general by NASA. I believe there are two levels of cost (with however
three directions) into which these educational research labs should be
classified.
(i] First are Simulation Telerobotics Laboratories. Here we need
graphics computers, perhaps ~cyst~cKs, perhaps nigher level supervisory
control languages, cameras, image compression techniques and
communication schemes. I would guess that cur country needs at least
thirty such systems for education and~rainir~. mese systems should
be very ~ne~ensive, approximately $50,000 each. hey need not even be
paid for by No=, since universities can provide SU*1 research
simulation laboratories out of their educational budgets or fray small
indivi~1 Church grants. Our Teler~ibotics Unit at Berkeley has been
thus funded. A good deal of exploratory rerun can be carried Ant
inexpensively in this manner.
( ii ) Secorxt, we need Telerobotic ~boratoriPs with whys ical
manipulators pent as important r~r~ components. In this way,
experiments with various rcibotic manipulators, especially those with
Special control characteristics such as flexibility, h~norphic form,
new devel ~ nts In gras ~ rs, and variable i ~ nce control m ~es,
other than are found in standard industrial manipulators, would be
possible. ~ guess that there are about five such laboratories On some
stage of development at major universities in the country. ~ would
further estimate that these laboratories could each use an initial
development budget of $300,000 to enable them to purchase necessary
hardware in ablution to software as existent in the Simulated
Teleroboti~= Laboratories.
Another set of costly laboratories would be Telerobotics
Laboratories with remote operatoring vehicles (ROV). Here again, we
need about five laboratories at universities with first class
engineering schools. Again, ~ estimate about $300,000 each for the
initial hardware support of these REV labs. They could then study
transfer vehicles, local Space Station vehicles, R bon/Mars Ravers, and
even compare MMU vs. Robotic controlled vehicles.
m e university laboratories WoN1d contrast with and serve a
different function than ongoing aerospace industrial laboratories, and
MESA and other government laboratories. mese latter assemble hardware
for demonstration and feasibility sues. men unfortunately they
are somehow unable to carry out careful human factors research dealing
with the changing design of such piers= of equipment. In the
university setting, this apparatus could be taken apart, changed,
OCR for page 316
316
revitalized, modified arm the flexibility Ed inform our current
capably i=. I wand like to contrast the Gossamer Condor and Gossamer
Albatross with the NASA program. It was char that if Ready was
ever to be sulfur, he had ~ build an experimental plane Rich was
~ to break down each experiments day. But He plane could be
repaired few mimers! This "Laboratory beech" concept is so
different from t~renty-y-~r-ahead-plannir~ currently controlling our
space page ~ that ha= been effectively eliminated at NASA. I think it
is important to reintroduce rough and ready field laboratories back
into the space program.
NMA MAZE;
Another role that NOVA might play IS to offer demonstration contracts
or, even better, prizes for accomplishment of specific tacks. Again I
turn to the Kremer Prize; here a private individual donated prize money
to be awarded to the first to build a man-paw aircraft conformirx~
to cercain carefully laid Ant Specifications.
Fornication Barbels for controlling rate vehicles and Rae
manipulators are already set up. Thus we cc=d have prize contestants
demDnstratir~ at differing locations on earth at one "g"; next
demonstrations using elements capable of cperatlng in space, or even
more stringently, of having that minimum mass capable of being lifted
into spare; and then we might have true shuttle and space station
demonstrations.
DUAL ~~ ~ TR FOR THE SPACE STATION
Finally, I would like to leave you with the thought that the list of
t~be-spark~¢y-N~A prcblens ~ Table 6 contains many important
int~ll~tua1 prcd31ems facing the area of tel~otics. Although these
areas are being approached ~ our regears Unity at the present
time, it may not be possible to foresee what novel kirks of dhall~es
will face the evolving Apace Station In twenty years;. Even though I
may not predict accurately, ~ Mainly hope I am Scheme in person to
watch t=1er~tics playing a major role In Operating the Space Station.
i~Y hone I ~ =~e in An to
SPRY
The telerdbotic, IR, sync em is a simulated distant Abbot with vision
and manipulator an4/or mbbilit-v subsystems controlled by a human
cgerator, H.O. the H.O. is informed mainly by a visual display, but
also by other sensors and other sensory displays, i.e. auditory, force
or tactile. His control can be Direct via joysticks, or supervisory
via command and control proves et-tec~ed by partially autonomous
rc3:otic functions. Delays and bandwidth limitations In Fornication
are key problems, complicating display and control (Stark et al.,
1987) .
OCR for page 317
317
Class e~erim~ts Tabled our Telertibotic Unit at Me Un~versi~r of
California, Berkeley to explore in a mmixr of ~ directions.
The ~ direction has now been greatly exterxied and is a major focus In
our laboratory. C'n the other harm, the homomorphic controller' did not
seem to be a pr Inductive project to continue because of the adaptability
of the H.O. to many configurations of control. Also, our interest in
supervisory and other high level controls is beading us away from the
direct manual control. me students taking a graduate control course,
ME 210 "Biological Control Sybems: Telerobotics," during the fall
semester, 1985, in which the helmet mounted display, HMD, is
emphasized, were enthusiastic and felt the course stimulated the ~
creativity and provided an opportunity for them to engage in relatively
unstructured laboratory work--a good model for subsequent thesis
rem.
ACKN~
We are pled to acknowledge support Frau the NASA-Ames Pe#earch
Center (Cooperative Agreement NoC 2-86) and the Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, California Institute of Technology (Contract #956873).
We Could also like to thank visiting lecturers from NASA-Ames; park
Cohen, Stephen Ellis, Scott Fisher, Arthur Grunewald, John Perrone and
Mbrdeccai Velger; Drs. Won Soo Kim and Blake Hannaford, and Frank
Tendick, Constance Ramos and Christopher Clark of University of
California, Berkeley.
. , ~—
. ~—, ~ ~~
Argonne National Laboratory
1967 Manipulator System for Span Applications. T - hnical
Report, A~orme.
Bejczy, A. K.
1980 Sensors, controls, and man-machine interface for advance
t~lecperation. Science 208~4450~:1327-1335.
Duffy, M. K.
1985 A Head Monitor System Using the Search Coil Method.
Master's thesis, Department of Electrical Engineering and
Computer Sciences, University of California, Berkeley.
Ellis, S. R., Tyler, M., Kin, W. S., M~Greevy, M. W., and Stark, L.
1985 Visual enhancements for perspective displays: perspective
parameters. Pp. 815-818 in A::: Proceedings of the
International Conference on Systems, Hen, and Cybernetics.
OCR for page 318
318
Flatau, C. R.
1973 Ibe manipulator as a nears; of ~ our d~s
capab; ~ ities to larger arm smaller scales. Pp. 47-50 In
P~ings of 21st Conference on Pate System
Tedhnolo=.
Ha', E.
1973 Perwtely Mewed Systems: Exploration and Operation In
Space. ~1 ifornia Institute of T~logy.
J~, E. G., and Corliss, W. R.
1971 Swan Factors Applications In leleaperator Design and
Operation. Wiley-Intersci~e.
Jordan, T.
1985 The Simulated Anne Maneuvering Unit and Pursuit
~rixnts. Mastery thesis! Department of M~ani~1
Engineering, l~iveristy of C~lifornia, Berkeley.
Kim, W. S., Ellis, S. R., Tyler, M., Seafood, B., arm Stark, L.
1987 A quantitative evaluation of dative arm s~ic
displays In his martial tracking tasks. l :. Trans.
On System, Mi3n, arm Cybernetics 16:61-72.
Kin, W. S., Ellis, S. R., Tyler, M., ark Stark, L.
1985 Visual ~a~ts for t~ler~tics. up. 807-811 ~ I::
Pigs of the Int. Conf. on System, Man, and
Comics.
Kiln, W. S., T~ic~k, F., and Stark, L.
1986 Visual er~nc~nts ~ pi~and-place tasks: human
c~rator's controlling a simian pylir~ri~1 manipulator.
Submitted to the i::: Journal of Robotics arx]Automation.
Miner, D., Graham, D., Mel, E., ark P~eisener, W.
1965 than Pilot dynamics In C~nsatory Systems: Ohm—~
Models, and Experiments with C:on~lled Elements and Foxfire
Fashion Variations. U. S. Air Force, A~D~R-65-15.
Sheridan, T. B.
1966 Three newels of Paris' consul. ~ Hewn
, _
Factors ~ Electronics H=-7: 91-102.
Sheridan, T. B., M~1, M. H., et al.
1964 She predictive ads of the human controller. Progress
in Astronomics and Aeronautics. Vol. 13. Academic Press
Inc., N - r York.
Stark, L.
968 Neurological Con~cro1 Systems :
Pit Em.
Studies in Bioer~in~rir~.
OCR for page 319
319
Stark, L., Kin, W. S., lyrics, F., et al.
1987 Teler~tics: display, control and fiction problems
l ~:~:~: Journal of Robotics and Automation RA-3 (1) :67-75.
.
Tcmiz~a, M., arm ~itr~ey, D. E.
1976 me human Operator ~ previewer traduce: an ~pe:riment arc
its maleling via septic control. Transactions In the ASME
Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurements, arc Control
98:407-413.
Yours, L. R.
1969 On adaptive mat control.
Systems M~-10 (4): 292-331.
lo::: ~=iO~ ~ ache
Representative terms from entire chapter:
rate control
