Crew roles and operational protocols for rotary-wing micro-uavs in close urban environments

ABSTRACT

A crew organization and four-step operational protocol is recommended based on a cumulative descriptive field study of teleoperated rotary-wing micro air vehicles (MAV) used for structural inspection during the response and recovery phases of Hurricanes Katrina and Wilma. The use of MAVs for real civilian missions in real operating environments provides a unique opportunity to consider human-robot interaction. The analysis of the human-robot interaction during 8 days, 14 missions, and 38 flights finds that a three person crew is currently needed to perform distinct roles: Pilot, Mission Specialist, and Flight Director. The general operations procedure is driven by the need for safety of bystanders, other aircraft, the tactical team, and the MAV itself, which leads to missions being executed as a series of short, line-of-sight flights rather than a single flight. Safety concerns may limit the utility of autonomy in reducing the crew size or enabling beyond line-of-sight-operations but autonomy could lead to an increase in flights per mission and reduced Pilot training demands. This paper is expected to contribute to set a foundation for future research in HRI and MAV autonomy and to help establish regulations and acquisition guidelines for civilian operations. Additional research in autonomy, interfaces, attention, and out-of-the-loop (OOTL) control is warranted.

REFERENCES

• 1: W. J. Clancey. Observation of Work Practices in Natural Settings, pages 127--145. Cambridge University Press, 2002.
• 2: N. Cooke, H. Pedersen, L. Connor, J. Gorman, and D. Andrews. Acquiring team-level command and control skill for uav operation. In N. Cooke, H. Pedersen, and H. Pringle, editors, Human Factors of Remotely Operated Vehicles, volume Vol 7, pages 285--297. Elsevier, 2006.
• 3: Jill L. Drury , Laurel Riek , Nathan Rackliffe, A decomposition of UAV-related situation awareness, Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART conference on Human-robot interaction, March 02-03, 2006, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA [doi>10.1145/1121241.1121258]
• 4: W. E. Green and P. Y. Oh. A fixed--wing aircraft for hovering in caves, tunnels, and buildings,. In American Control Conference, pages 1--6, 2006.
• 5: S. Hrabar, G. Sukhatme, P. Corke, K. Usher, and J. Roberts. Combined optic-flow and stereo-based navigation of urban canyons for a uav. In Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2005. (IROS 2005). 2005 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on, pages 3309--3316, 2-6 Aug. 2005.
• 6: Y. Huahui, S. Bifeng, J. Dongchao, and Y. Tianxiang. Experiment research on situation awareness of the operators for unmanned aerial vehicle. In Computational Intelligence and Security, 2006 International Conference on, volume 2, pages 1225--1228, 2006.
• 7: B. P. Hunn and O. H. Heuckeroth. A shadow unmanned aerial vehicle (uav) improved performance research intergration tool (imprint) model supporting future combat systems. Technical Report ARL-TR-3731, Army Research Laboratory, February 2006.
• 8: M. Koeda, Y. Matsumoto, and T. Ogasawara. Annotation-based rescue assistance system for teleoperated unmanned helicopter with wearable augmented reality environment. In Safety, Security and Rescue Robotics, Workshop, 2005 IEEE International, pages 120--124, 2005.
• 9: W. Lee, H. Ryu, G. Yang, H. Kim, Y. Park, and S. Bang. Design guidelines for map-based human-robot interfaces: A colocated workspace perspective. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 37(7):589--604, 2007.
• 10: C. Lundberg, H. I. Christensen, and A. Hedstrom. The use of robots in harsh and unstructured field applications. pages 143--150, 2005.
• 11: J. S. McCarley and C. D. Wickens. Human factors implications of uavs in the national airspace. Technical Report AHFD-05-5/FAA-05-1, University of Illinois Institute of Aviation: Aviation Human Factors Division, Savoy, IL, 2005.
• 12: N. Metni and T. Hamel. A uav for bridge inspection: Visual servoing control law with orientation limits. Automation in Construction, 17(1):3--10, 2007.
• 13: R. R. Murphy. Fixed-and rotary-wing uavs at hurricane katrina. In IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (video proceedings), 2006.
• 14: R. R. Murphy, E. Steimle, C. Cullins, K. Pratt, and C. Griffin. Cooperative damage inspection with unmanned surface vehicle and micro aerial vehicle at hurricane wilma. In IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Inteliigent Robots and Systems (video proceedings), Beijing, China, 2006.
• 15: M. W. Orr, S. J. Rasmussen, E. D. Karni, and W. B. Blake. Framework for developing and evaluating mav control algorithms in a realistic urban setting. In American Control Conference, 2005. Proceedings of the 2005, pages 4096--4101 vol. 6, 2005.
• 16: M. Pachter, P. R. Chandler, and S. Darbha. Optimal sequential inspection. In Decision and Control, 2006 45th IEEE Conference on, pages 5930--5934, 2006.
• 17: M. Quigley, M. A. Goodrich, S. Griffiths, A. Eldredge, and R. W. Beard. Target acquisition, localization, and surveillance using a fixed-wing mini-uav and gimbaled camera. In Robotics and Automation, 2005. ICRA 2005. Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on, pages 2600--2605, 2005.
• 18: S. Scherer, S. Singh, L. Chamberlain, and S. Saripalli. Flying fast and low among obstacles. In Robotics and Automation, 2007. ICRA 2007. Proceedings 2007 IEEE International Conference on, 2007.
• 19: D. Schreckenghost. Checklists for human-robot collaboration during space operations. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 43rd Annual Meeting, pages 46-50, 1999.
• 20: D. H. Shim, H. Chung, H. J. Kim, and S. Sastry. Autonomous exploration in unknown urban environments for unmanned aerial vehicles. In Proceedings of the AIAA Conference on Guidance, Navigation, and Control, 2005. AIAA GN&C 2005., 2005.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  J. Computer Applications
  J.7 COMPUTERS IN OTHER SYSTEMS
      Subjects: Command and control

Additional Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.3 Group and Organization Interfaces
          Subjects: Collaborative computing; Evaluation/methodology

General Terms:
Human Factors

Keywords:
human-robot interaction, robot, unmanned aerial vehicle