Wiki source code of h. Test SFT1
Version 1.11 by Tjalling Haije on 2026/03/23 15:10
Hide last authors
| author | version | line-number | content |
|---|---|---|---|
| |
1.6 | 1 | **Experiment title** |
| |
1.2 | 2 | [Short, descriptive title] |
| 3 | |||
| |
1.6 | 4 | |
| |
1.2 | 5 | **2. Objective / Research Question** |
| |
1.6 | 6 | Do the SYNERGISE technologies together improve the below SYNERGISE [[Objectives>>2\. Specification.Objectives.WebHome]] without negative effects? |
| |
1.2 | 7 | |
| |
1.6 | 8 | 1. Mission effectiveness |
| 9 | 1. Mission efficiency | ||
| 10 | 1. FR Health | ||
| 11 | 1. FR and victim safety | ||
| 12 | |||
| 13 | |||
| |
1.2 | 14 | **3. Hypotheses / Expectations (optional)** |
| |
1.6 | 15 | See the claims from [[UC04.3: Detailed indoor exploration with ANYMAL (USAR)>>2\. Specification.b\. Use Cases.UC04\.0\: Detailed indoor exploration.UC04\.3\: Detailed indoor exploration with ANYMAL (USAR).WebHome]], being: |
| |
1.2 | 16 | |
| |
1.6 | 17 | * CL01: Improve safety for responders |
| 18 | * CL02: Increased SA | ||
| 19 | * CL03: Improved mission effectiveness | ||
| 20 | * CL04: acceptable workload | ||
| 21 | * CL05: trustworthy SA | ||
| 22 | * CL06: improved FR health | ||
| 23 | * CL07: degraded mission efficiency | ||
| 24 | |||
| 25 | |||
| |
1.2 | 26 | **4. Scenario / Context** |
| |
1.7 | 27 | ASR3: Detailed indoor exploration |
| |
1.2 | 28 | |
| |
1.7 | 29 | Preconditions from [[UC04.3: Detailed indoor exploration with ANYMAL (USAR)>>2\. Specification.b\. Use Cases.UC04\.0\: Detailed indoor exploration.UC04\.3\: Detailed indoor exploration with ANYMAL (USAR).WebHome]] : |
| 30 | |||
| 31 | * Structure is flagged as (relatively?) **safe for direct human entry**; sector/ worksite allocated. | ||
| 32 | * **FRs wearables** distributed, connected, and calibrated. | ||
| 33 | * Specific to scenario with ANYmal: | ||
| 34 | ** **ANYmal **is mission-ready (battery, controls, and payload checked). | ||
| 35 | ** **C3I is online**, role-based views are configurated (Operator/ Analyst/ Team leader/ Safety officer); **5G pods** are installed for connection. | ||
| 36 | |||
| 37 | |||
| |
1.2 | 38 | **5. Participants** |
| 39 | |||
| |
1.7 | 40 | * FR team ROBOT: |
| |
1.3 | 41 | ** 1x Squad leaders |
| 42 | ** 1x Robot operator | ||
| 43 | ** 1x Robot analyst | ||
| 44 | ** 2x First responder | ||
| |
1.7 | 45 | * FR team HUMAN: |
| |
1.3 | 46 | ** 1x Squad leaders |
| 47 | ** 2x First reponder | ||
| 48 | * Base of Operations: | ||
| |
1.6 | 49 | ** 1x Safety officer / medical specialist |
| |
1.3 | 50 | ** Team lead |
| |
1.2 | 51 | |
| |
1.6 | 52 | Number of participants: 9 |
| 53 | |||
| |
1.5 | 54 | |
| |
1.2 | 55 | **6. System(s) Under Test** |
| 56 | |||
| |
1.7 | 57 | |(% style="width:267px" %)Technology|(% style="width:1250px" %)Description |
| 58 | |(% style="width:267px" %)ANYmal|(% style="width:1250px" %)((( | ||
| 59 | * Robust mobility over uneven terrain (stairs, debris, slopes). | ||
| 60 | * Multi-sensor payload (video, LIDAR, thermal??) | ||
| 61 | * Reliable wireless communication/ connection in degraded environments. | ||
| 62 | * Support for tele‑operation with clear operator feedback. | ||
| 63 | * Link with C3I, such as adding victims as pin on map. | ||
| 64 | * NO autonomy. | ||
| 65 | ))) | ||
| 66 | |(% style="width:267px" %)C3I (BoO and tablet version)|(% style="width:1250px" %)((( | ||
| 67 | * Interoperability with health and location sensors. | ||
| 68 | * Robust operation under limited connectivity (sync when possible). | ||
| 69 | * Usable tablet interface for field conditions (gloves, stress, time pressure). | ||
| 70 | ))) | ||
| 71 | |(% style="width:267px" %)Health sensors|(% style="width:1250px" %)((( | ||
| 72 | * Accurate and reliable physiological sensing (e.g. heart rate, exertion proxies). | ||
| 73 | * Comfortable, non‑intrusive form factor suitable for long missions. | ||
| 74 | * Secure wireless data transmission to C3I systems. | ||
| 75 | * Real‑time alerting and trend monitoring. | ||
| 76 | ))) | ||
| 77 | |(% style="width:267px" %)Location sensors|(% style="width:1250px" %)((( | ||
| 78 | * Indoor and outdoor localisation capability. | ||
| 79 | * Sufficient accuracy and update rate for safety‑critical use. | ||
| 80 | * Integration with C3I and mapping systems. | ||
| 81 | * Robustness to environmental interference (dust, debris, structures, height differences). | ||
| 82 | ))) | ||
| |
1.2 | 83 | |
| |
1.7 | 84 | |
| 85 | |||
| |
1.2 | 86 | **7. Tasks** |
| 87 | |||
| |
1.6 | 88 | [[UC04.3: Detailed indoor exploration with ANYMAL (USAR)>>2\. Specification.b\. Use Cases.UC04\.0\: Detailed indoor exploration.UC04\.3\: Detailed indoor exploration with ANYMAL (USAR).WebHome]] |
| 89 | |||
| 90 | [[UC04.4: Detailed indoor exploration without ANYMAL (USAR)>>2\. Specification.b\. Use Cases.UC04\.0\: Detailed indoor exploration.UC04\.3\: Detailed indoor exploration with ANYmal (USAR).WebHome]] | ||
| 91 | |||
| 92 | |||
| |
1.2 | 93 | **8. Experimental Conditions / Variants** |
| |
1.7 | 94 | |
| 95 | Two buildings: | ||
| 96 | |||
| |
1.8 | 97 | * Building A: Easier location, obstacles and environmental conditions. (clear visibility, ..) |
| 98 | * Building B: Challenging location, obstacles and environmental conditions for humans and robots (e.g. smoke and obstacles). | ||
| |
1.10 | 99 | * |
| |
1.7 | 100 | |
| |
1.8 | 101 | Trial 1: |
| |
1.7 | 102 | |
| |
1.8 | 103 | * FR Team ROBOT does Building A |
| 104 | * FR team HUMAN does Building B | ||
| |
1.7 | 105 | |
| |
1.8 | 106 | Trial 2: |
| |
1.7 | 107 | |
| |
1.8 | 108 | * FR Team ROBOT does Building B |
| 109 | * FR team HUMAN does Building A | ||
| |
1.7 | 110 | |
| 111 | |||
| |
1.2 | 112 | **9. Measurements** |
| 113 | |||
| |
1.8 | 114 | See the measurements from [[UC04.3: Detailed indoor exploration with ANYMAL (USAR)>>2\. Specification.b\. Use Cases.UC04\.0\: Detailed indoor exploration.UC04\.3\: Detailed indoor exploration with ANYMAL (USAR).WebHome]] |
| |
1.2 | 115 | |
| |
1.6 | 116 | |
| |
1.2 | 117 | **10. Procedure (Step-by-Step)** |
| 118 | |||
| |
1.11 | 119 | 1. Team training: |
| |
1.8 | 120 | 11. FR team ROBOT is trained in operating the robot, analysing the camera stream, and pinning information on C3I |
| 121 | 11. Squad leader and BoO are trained for both teams in interpreting the health and location sensor data. | ||
| 122 | 11. Experiment leader knows where hazards and victims are in both buildings. | ||
| |
1.11 | 123 | 1. Usecase preparation |
| 124 | 11. Building is prepped with victims, hazards, etc. | ||
| |
1.8 | 125 | 1. Briefing: |
| 126 | 11. Same for both teams for both building types: Building has been inspected from outside and is estimated safe for entry. Situation inside unknown. Victims possibly present. Goal: find, assess, and extract victims while avoiding and mapping hazards. | ||
| 127 | 11. One person is notified that their health sensor will be triggered during the Building B (difficult building) situation. | ||
| 128 | 1. Execution: | ||
| 129 | 11. For FR team ROBOT, see: [[UC04.3: Detailed indoor exploration with ANYMAL (USAR)>>2\. Specification.b\. Use Cases.UC04\.0\: Detailed indoor exploration.UC04\.3\: Detailed indoor exploration with ANYMAL (USAR).WebHome]] | ||
| 130 | 11. For FR team HUMAN, see: [[UC04.4: Detailed indoor exploration without ANYMAL (USAR)>>2\. Specification.b\. Use Cases.UC04\.0\: Detailed indoor exploration.UC04\.3\: Detailed indoor exploration with ANYmal (USAR).WebHome]] | ||
| 131 | 11. During execution of both teams, performance will be measured by experiment leader: | ||
| 132 | 111. Mission completion time | ||
| 133 | 111. Health indicators stay within acceptable range | ||
| 134 | 111. Time for tackling any health alerts | ||
| 135 | 111. Track FR path | ||
| 136 | 1. Hotwash: | ||
| 137 | 11. Questions on: | ||
| 138 | 111. Near-incident report | ||
| 139 | 111. Path inside | ||
| 140 | 111. FR location and status of hazards, victims, and layout | ||
| 141 | 111. Mission effectiveness | ||
| 142 | 111. Self-reported workload | ||
| 143 | 111. Trust survey | ||
| |
1.2 | 144 | |
| |
1.10 | 145 | Planning: |
| |
1.6 | 146 | |
| |
1.11 | 147 | * Team training: Day before. 1 hour. |
| 148 | * Trial 1: | ||
| 149 | ** Setup usecase: Test day 1. 09:00 - 09:30 | ||
| 150 | ** Setup tech and perform checks: Test day 1. 09:00 - 09:30 | ||
| 151 | ** Briefing of each team individually (outside building): Test day 1: 09:00 - 09:30 | ||
| 152 | ** Mission execution: Test day 1. 09:30 - 10:30 | ||
| 153 | ** Hot wash: Test day 1. 10:30-11:00 | ||
| 154 | ** Usecase reset: test day 1. 10:30-11:00 | ||
| 155 | * Teams switch location: Test day 1. 11:00-11:15 | ||
| 156 | * Trial 2: | ||
| 157 | ** Setup usecase: Test day 1. 12:30 - 13:00 | ||
| 158 | ** Setup tech and perform checks: Test day 1. 12:30 - 13:00 | ||
| 159 | ** Briefing of each team individually (outside building): Test day 1: 12:30 - 13:00 | ||
| 160 | ** Mission execution: Test day 1. 13:00 - 14:00 | ||
| 161 | ** Hot wash: Test day 1. 14:00-14:30 | ||
| 162 | ** Cleanup area and store tech. 14:00-14:30 | ||
| |
1.2 | 163 | |
| |
1.6 | 164 | |
| |
1.2 | 165 | |
| 166 | |||
| |
1.10 | 167 | **~11. Materials / Setup Components** |
| 168 | [List equipment, environment layout, props, simulation assets] | ||
| |
1.6 | 169 | |
| |
1.10 | 170 | |
| |
1.2 | 171 | **14. Dependencies** |
| 172 | [Other WPs, required assets, system availability, permissions] | ||
| 173 | |||
| |
1.6 | 174 | |
| |
1.2 | 175 | **15. Success Criteria** |
| 176 | [How do you know the experiment worked as intended?] | ||
| 177 | |||
| 178 | |||
| 179 |