Evaluation of a Predictor-Based Framework in High-Speed Teleoperated Military UGVs

Mobility of teleoperated unmanned ground vehicles can be significantly compromised under large communication delays, if the delays are not compensated. This article considers a recently developed delay compensation theory and presents its first empirical evaluation in improving mobility and drivability of a high-speed teleoperated vehicle under large delays. The said delay compensation theory is a predictor-based framework. Two realizations of this framework are considered: a model-free realization that relies only on model-free predictors, and a blended realization, where the heading predictions from the model-free predictor are blended with those from a steering-model-based feedforward predictor for a more accurate prediction of the vehicle heading. A teleoperated track-following task is designed in a human-in-the-loop simulation platform. This platform is used to compare the teleoperation performance with and without the predictor-based framework under both constant and varying delays. Through repeated measurement analysis of variance, it is concluded that the predictor-based framework is effective in achieving a higher vehicle speed, more accurate lateral control, and better drivability as indicated by the three performance metrics of track completion time, track keeping error, and steering control effort, respectively. In addition, it is shown that the blended architecture can lead to further improvements in these metrics compared to using the model-free predictors alone. The analysis also shows that there is no statistically significant difference between constant and varying delay cases in the designed experiment, nor there is any direct relation between drivers' skill level and level of improvement in metrics.

[1]  Emanuel Slawiñski,et al.  Delayed Bilateral Teleoperation of Wheeled Robots including a Command Metric , 2015 .

[2]  L. Daniel Metz,et al.  THE SIMULATION OF DRIVER INPUTS USING A VEHICLE DRIVER MODEL , 2000 .

[3]  P. Appelqvist,et al.  Development of an Unmanned Ground Vehicle for task-oriented operation - considerations on teleoperation and delay , 2007, 2007 IEEE/ASME international conference on advanced intelligent mechatronics.

[4]  Dawn M. Tilbury,et al.  Equating user performance among communication latency distributions and simulation fidelities for a teleoperated mobile robot , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).

[5]  Tulga Ersal,et al.  A Predictor-Based Framework for Delay Compensation in Networked Closed-Loop Systems , 2018, IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics.

[6]  Skye Lee Pazuchanics The Effects of Camera Perspective and Field of View on Performance in Teleoperated Navigation , 2006 .

[7]  Tulga Ersal,et al.  An Experimental Evaluation of a Model-Free Predictor Framework in Teleoperated Vehicles , 2016 .

[8]  Tulga Ersal,et al.  An Observer Based Framework to Improve Fidelity in Internet-Distributed Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulations , 2013 .

[9]  Jessie Y. C. Chen,et al.  Human Performance Issues and User Interface Design for Teleoperated Robots , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews).

[10]  Dale A. Lawrence Stability and transparency in bilateral teleoperation , 1993, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..

[11]  Patricia L. McDermott,et al.  An investigation of real world control of robotic assets under communication latency , 2006, HRI '06.

[12]  Markus Lienkamp,et al.  Predictive Haptic Feedback for Safe Lateral Control of Teleoperated Road Vehicles in Urban Areas , 2016, 2016 IEEE 83rd Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring).

[13]  Alonzo Kelly,et al.  Experimental Validation of Operator Aids for High Speed Vehicle Teleoperation , 2012, ISER.

[14]  Mark J Brudnak Predictive Displays for High Latency Teleoperation , 2016 .

[15]  S Stefan Lichiardopol,et al.  A Survey on Teleoperation , 2007 .

[16]  Tulga Ersal,et al.  A Delay Compensation Framework for Predicting Heading in Teleoperated Ground Vehicles , 2019, IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics.

[17]  Tulga Ersal,et al.  A model-free predictor framework for tele-operated vehicles , 2015, 2015 American Control Conference (ACC).

[18]  Won S. Kim,et al.  The phantom robot: predictive displays for teleoperation with time delay , 1990, Proceedings., IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[19]  Farrokh Janabi-Sharifi,et al.  Experimental Analysis of Mobile-Robot Teleoperation via Shared Impedance Control , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics).

[20]  Kaleb McDowell,et al.  The Effects of Time Lag on Driving Performance and a Possible Mitigation , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.

[21]  Zoran Filipi,et al.  Development and model-based transparency analysis of an Internet-distributed hardware-in-the-loop simulation platform , 2011 .

[22]  Patricia L. McDermott,et al.  The Tradeoff of Frame Rate and Resolution in a Route Clearing Task: Implications for Human-Robot Interaction , 2009 .

[23]  William Choi,et al.  Negotiating Corners With Teleoperated Mobile Robots With Time Delay , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems.

[24]  Abhinandan Jain,et al.  Evaluating mobility vs. latency in unmanned ground vehicles , 2018 .

[25]  Dongjun Lee,et al.  Bilateral teleoperation of a wheeled mobile robot over delayed communication network , 2006, Proceedings 2006 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2006. ICRA 2006..

[26]  Santosh Mathan,et al.  Efficacy of a predictive display, steering device, and vehicle body representation in the operation of a lunar vehicle , 1996, CHI Conference Companion.

[27]  Jeroen H. Hogema Compensation for Delay in the Visual Display of a Driving Simulator , 1997, Simul..

[28]  Markus Lienkamp,et al.  A System Design for Teleoperated Road Vehicles , 2013, ICINCO.

[29]  Tulga Ersal,et al.  Analysis of a Model-Free Predictor for Delay Compensation in Networked Systems , 2017 .

[30]  W W Wierwille,et al.  Effects of Visual Display and Motion System Delays on Operator Performance and Uneasiness in a Driving Simulator , 1988, Human factors.

[31]  Ya-Jun Pan,et al.  A New Predictive Approach for Bilateral Teleoperation With Applications to Drive-by-Wire Systems , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.

[32]  Thomas B. Sheridan,et al.  Space teleoperation through time delay: review and prognosis , 1993, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..

[33]  Frederic Emanuel Chucholowski Evaluation of Display Methods for Teleoperation of Road Vehicles , 2016 .

[34]  Justin G. Storms,et al.  Modeling and Improving Teleoperation Performance of Semi-Autonomous Wheeled Robots , 2017 .

[35]  Dongjun Lee,et al.  Haptic tele-driving of a wheeled mobile robot over the Internet: A PSPM approach , 2010, 49th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC).

[36]  Tulga Ersal,et al.  A study on model fidelity for model predictive control-based obstacle avoidance in high-speed autonomous ground vehicles , 2016 .

[37]  Craig R. Carignan,et al.  Effects of time delay on telerobotic control of neutral buoyancy vehicles , 2002, Proceedings 2002 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Cat. No.02CH37292).