Skip to Content
Version 12.1 by Rosa Van Tuijn on 2025/07/31 12:29
Show last authors
1 === **Indoor Drone Exploration and Victim Detection – USAR** ===
2
3 |=**Objective**|=(((
4 [[OB01: Increase effectiveness through exploration, sensing and communication means>>2\. Specification.Objectives.OB01\: Increase effectiveness through exploration, sensing and communication means.WebHome]]
5
6 [[OB04: Improve safety by providing overviews and warnings of environment conditions>>2\. Specification.Objectives.OB04\: Improve safety by providing overviews and warnings of environment conditions.WebHome]]
7
8 Use an indoor drone to explore buildings before entry, locate victims, and update the C3I map for safer and faster intervention.
9 )))
10 |**TDP**|TDP1, TDP2, TDP4, TDP5
11 |**IDP**|IDP1
12 |**Actors**|Drone Operator, Analyst, Team Leader, USAR Rescuers
13 |**Pre-Condition**|Structure is unsafe for entry; drone is available.
14 |**Post-Condition**|Victim locations marked; team briefed.
15 |**Status**|Validated during and refined after CFT 1, CFT 2, CFT 3
16
17
18
19 ----
20
21 === **Action Sequence** ===
22
23 1. **Deployment and Startup**
24  a. Team leader identifies structure as unsafe and requests drone deployment.
25  b. Drone operator sets up and tests the drone, connects it to the C3I system.
26  c. Analyst prepares the interface to process and annotate live data.
27 1. **Initial Entry and Autonomous Navigation**
28  a. Drone autonomously navigates through the structure using onboard sensors.
29  b. Drone detects victims, hazards, and structural features.
30  c. Data is transmitted to the analyst in real time.
31 1. **Live Monitoring and Victim Identification**
32  a. Analyst verifies detections and flags victims or hazards.
33  b. If needed, operator switches to manual control for detailed exploration.
34  c. Confirmed findings are tagged on the C3I map.
35 1. **Data Marking and Coordination**
36  a. Analyst shares tagged map and video with team leader.
37  b. Team leader updates the plan and briefs USAR team.
38  c. Drone finishes scan and returns or continues overwatch mode.
39
40 ----
41
42 |=**Claims (title)**|=**Function**|=**Effect(s)**|=**Action Sequence Step(s)**
43 |**CL1 Video-based pre-entry SA improvement**|Live video|(((
44 EFXX: Situation Awareness is improved.
45 → Measured with SAGAT method and questionnaire.
46
47 (Oude effect van Mark tussen haakjes steeds: Team enters with real-time building and victim data)
48 )))|3a, 3c, 4a
49 |**CL2 Mapping-based pre-entry SA improvement**|C3I mapping|Same as above|3c, 4a
50 |**CL3 Map-based responder safety improvement**|Drone maps hazard zones and structural integrity|(((
51 EFXX: First Responder [[5. Safety>>Main.b\. Human Factors.Safety.WebHome]] is improved
52 → Measured with near incident analysis. 
53 **Note: **is this function "victim detection" talking about that function of the human + drone together as one system. Or only of the technology, i.e. the drone?
54
55 (Minimizes exposure to unsafe zones)
56 )))|2b, 3a, 3b, 3c, 4a
57 |**CL4 Improved victim discovery & localization**|Autonomous navigation, (Thermal imaging?)|(((
58 Victims are detected more quickly, accurately and robustly than when the robot is directly controlled by a human.
59 → Measured with time until area mapped + victims correctly localized.
60 **Note**: Verwachten we hier echt dat dit sneller gaat dan een mens die het remotely operate? Of een mens die naar binnen gaat en het zelf doorzoekt? Autonoom is mogelijk wel robuuster bij e.g. verbinding verlies.
61
62 EFXX: Mental workload of drone operator and FR is low
63 → measured with NASA TLX questionnaire.
64 **Note**: Wat doen de drone operator en FR nu in de tussentijd? Wachten of meekijken? Is dat beter dan voorheen?
65
66 (Speeds up rescue prioritization)
67 )))|2a, 2b, 3a
68 |**CL5 Trustworthy SA**|Analyst verifies and adds missing detections and victims|(((
69 EFXX: Trust (or reliance?) in SA is good
70 → Measured with ??.
71
72 **Note: **meeste measures meten het vertrouwen in de robot, maar hier specifiek geïnteresseerd in het vertrouwen in het eindersultaat?
73 )))|3a
74 |**CL6 improved overall task performance**|Autonomous victim detection and marking by drone|(((
75 EFXX: Task performance increased.
76 → Measured with time until area mapped + victims correctly localized. (vs. e.g. human doing all victim detection on their own using camera stream).
77
78 EFXX: Mental Workload of drone operator acceptable
79 → Measured with NASA TLX questionnaire.
80
81 **Note: **Deze heeft overlap met Claim 2. Het idee erachter is: claim 2 gaat over mens + drone die victims detecteren en marken via de drone. Deze claim 5 gaat over dat het autonoom detecteren en marken van victims door de drone daarbij de gebruiker helpt om sneller en beter zijn taak te volbrengen.
82 )))|3a, 3b
83
84 Mogelijke andere claims:
85
86 1. Analyst verification zorgt voor geen responsibility gap