ARGOS Challenge
Rules of the competition
(Preliminary version provided for the call)
This document in its current version denoted (V0) is provided as part of the call for proposals for
participating to the ARGOS Challenge. It describes the preliminary version of the rules. A new version
will be edited for the first competition session which is provisionally scheduled for July 2015. Changes
will be defined in agreement with the jury and the teams selected to enter the competition at the initial
kick-off meeting. The official rules for the first edition of the competition, version 1 denoted (V1), will
be published at least six months prior to the event.
Rules of the competition (V0)
Presentation of the ARGOS Challenge
Context and objectives
The goal of the ARGOS Challenge is to foster the development of advanced robotic capabilities in
oil & gas environments. The program focuses on robot systems which can safely operate in complete
or supervised autonomy over the entire onshore or offshore production site, potentially in hazardous
explosive atmospheres. The overall objective is to enhance the safety of operators in isolated production
sites.
If we consider only the situations in which information is needed, human teams are necessary onsite mainly because they can use their senses and if necessary move equipment to the correct location.
Human reasoning to conduct an intervention could be done remotely. The recent progresses in mobile
robotics allow envisioning the use of robots for surveillance and intervention activities. Indeed, numerous
technological bricks exist at varied levels of maturity. However, works of research and integration are
necessary to develop the robotic systems which can safely and reliably be operated on production sites.
The competition at a glance
An important issue to be addressed during the ARGOS Challenge is the operation of robots from a
remote location in a human engineered environment and potentially explosive atmosphere. During the
competition, the robot systems will be evaluated in scenarios representative of operational situation for
which three modes of operation are envisioned:
The autonomous operation mode is expected to be used for routine surveillance rounds. In an
extreme case, a robot could operate autonomously for up to six weeks (including docking station
battery recharging) in an unmanned production site. It will perform rounds and send reports. A
remote operator can access the reports and check the robot-system status at any time, but no direct
intervention is required except if an anomaly is detected.
The semi-autonomous mode is expected to be used for situations where a remote operator requires
situation awareness in order to investigate an anomaly. The interaction between the robot-system
and the remote operator is expected to be carried out through high-level commands.
The assisted teleoperation mode is expected to be used in case of incidents where the remote operators need to perform actions for which the robot system has not been programmed or in a degraded
environment. The robot system is expected to provide assistance functions such as collision avoidance and power management.
This challenge will involve 3 to 5 teams selected through a process operated by ANR on behalf
of TOTAL. The selected teams will enter a competition framework designed to test the above modes
of operations, which are typical of TOTAL’s operational conditions on site (human-engineered, multi
floor, . . . ) in order to demonstrate the capability of operating in challenging environmental conditions,
including potentially explosive atmospheres.
Three editions of the competition will be organized. The first edition will take place one year after
the beginning of the program (initial kick off meeting). The second and third editions will be organized
nine months later consecutively.
The robot systems will be evaluated using several criteria:
• mobility in a human-engineered environment (with stairs, steps, etc) in normal and abnormal
conditions
• capability to carry out autonomously a surveillance round
1
Rules of the competition (V0)
• capability to detect anomalies
• user-friendliness in operation (programming a new round in a known environment, . . . )
• user-friendliness in preparation (adaptation to a new site, . . . )
• energy consumption and management
• safe behaviour
A mono robot system, i.e. a single robot with the ability to move between floors is the preferred
solution; however a multi-robot system, i.e. one robot per floor, is also eligible. Other approaches such
as modular robots can also be considered.
2
Rules of the competition (V0)
CONTENTS
Contents
1 Presentation of the Challenge
1.1 Scenarios for the dynamical testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.1.1 The routine surveillance scenario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.1.2 The semi-autonomous reconnaissance scenario . . . . . . . .
1.1.3 The assisted teleoperation scenario . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2 Description of the environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2.1 Description of the testing ground . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2.2 Equipment of the facility (in real life and for the Challenge)
1.2.3 Environmental conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.3 Facilities for the participating teams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5
5
6
6
6
7
7
8
9
10
2 The robot systems
2.1 General requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.1 Data collection capability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.2 Characteristics of the robot system . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.3 Control station and interactions with the remote operator
2.1.4 Requirements for the datalink . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.5 Safety requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.6 Software requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2 Requirements for the multi-robot solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10
10
10
11
13
14
14
14
14
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
15
15
15
16
16
16
4 Between the competition sessions
4.1 Questions and support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.2 Access to the competition site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
16
16
16
5 Communication and legal issues
5.1 Intellectual property rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.2 Images utilisation rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
17
17
17
A Scenarios for dynamical testing
A.1 General description of a scenario . . . . .
A.2 Routine surveillance scenario . . . . . . .
A.2.1 Description of a nominal mission .
A.2.2 List of possible anomalies . . . . .
A.3 Semi-autonomous reconnaissance scenario
A.3.1 Description of a nominal mission .
A.3.2 List of possible anomalies . . . . .
A.4 Assisted teleoperation scenario . . . . . .
A.5 General conditions for all the scenario . .
A.5.1 Before all the missions . . . . . . .
A.5.2 Mission supervision . . . . . . . . .
18
18
19
19
20
21
21
23
23
23
24
24
3 The
3.1
3.2
3.3
competition
What is graded . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Designation of the winner . . . . . . . .
The competition events . . . . . . . . .
3.3.1 Venue for the competition events
3.3.2 Organisation of the events . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Rules of the competition (V0)
CONTENTS
A.5.3 End of a missions . . . . . . . . .
A.6 Hazards during the dynamical tests . . .
A.6.1 Hazards due to the environment
A.6.2 Hazards due to the robot system
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
24
25
25
25
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
26
26
27
27
28
28
C List of autonomous reactions
C.1 Actions in case of generic hazards . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
C.1.1 Hazards due to the environment . . . . . . . . . .
C.1.2 Hazards due to robot system operation . . . . . .
C.2 Routine surveillance mission: in case of anomaly detection
C.3 Routine surveillance mission: in case of gas leak detection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
29
29
29
30
30
31
D Metrics for comparing the solutions
D.1 Metrics for the static testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
D.2 Metrics for individual functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
D.2.1 Safe behaviour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
D.2.2 Mobility and navigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
D.2.3 Ease of use of the robot system . . . . . . . . . . .
D.2.4 Power Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
D.3 Metrics for the dynamical testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
D.3.1 Metrics for a routine surveillance mission . . . . .
D.3.2 Metrics for a semi-autonomous inspection mission
D.3.3 Metrics for an assisted-teleoperation mission . . .
D.4 Metrics for the presentation trials . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
D.5 Metrics from the technical dossier . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
32
32
32
32
32
32
33
33
33
33
34
34
34
B Measurement and check points
B.1 Visual measurement . . . . . . . .
B.2 Visual check points . . . . . . . . .
B.3 Sound measurement . . . . . . . .
B.4 Thermal measurement . . . . . . .
B.5 Gas leak detection and localisation
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
E Definitions
35
F Detailed planning
F.1 Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
F.2 Competitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
36
36
36
G Role and composition of the jury
37
H Versions of this document
H.1 From Version V0 to version V1 for the competition of June 2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
H.2 From Version V1 to version V2 for the competition of spring 2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
H.3 From Version V2 to version V3 for the competition of end 2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
38
38
38
38
4
Rules of the competition (V0)
1
1 PRESENTATION OF THE CHALLENGE
Presentation of the Challenge
Figure 1: Competition site
The performances of the robot systems will be evaluated during competition sessions in a decommissioned unit representative of operational conditions. Scenarios derived from situations envisioned for the
robot systems when they are be deployed on operation sites will be used for dynamical testing. Additional
criteria will be assessed based on written documentation provided by the competitors and questions from
a jury. Some specific functions will be evaluated using dedicated tests.
The purpose of this Section is to describe what is expected of the robot systems and in which conditions
they will be tested. Requirements for the robot systems can be found in Section 2. The organisation of
the competition is described in Section 3.
1.1
Scenarios for the dynamical testing
The testing sessions are organised around three types of scenarios, one for each operation mode (autonomous, semi-autonomous, assisted teleoperation). They will take place in a nominally known environment subject to changes and hazards. The environment and the possible changes are described below
in Subsection 1.2.
For all the scenarios under consideration, it is assumed that the robot system has been deployed for
some time. This means that if an adaptation phase is required, for instance to learn the parameters of
the environment, we assume that it has been carried out previously. Provisions will be made for the
Teams to have access to the testing ground outside of the competition events.
A 3-D map of the testing ground will be available in several formats compatible with free software.
For realism sake, this map cannot be expected to be perfect. We present below an overview of the test
scenario. A detailed description can be found in Appendix A; information regarding the competition
metrics can be found in Appendix D.
5
Rules of the competition (V0)
1.1.1
1 PRESENTATION OF THE CHALLENGE
The routine surveillance scenario
The robot system has to carry out a surveillance round during which several elements, called checkpoints
have to be checked. These elements are chosen in a finite list and their location is part of the description
of the environment (but may be approximate). See Appendix B for a description of the checkpoints.
Before beginning the round, each checkpoint is associated with the description of the nominal situation
at this point (normal value for measurement, normal position for valves, . . . ). The reaction expected in
case of detection of an abnormal situation is also selected. If no hazard occurs and no abnormal situation
is detected, the robot system sends a report to the control room at the end of the round.
At any time while the robot system is carrying out its mission, the operator may request access
information on the round (stored or real-time) or take remote control.
In this scenario, the scoring metrics will include assessment of the reliability of the robot system as a
surveillance system and the time to complete a round.
1.1.2
The semi-autonomous reconnaissance scenario
The operator is alerted of a suspected anomaly raised to the control room by a particular instrument,
sensor or detector in a known location. This alarm may be spurious (there is no actual anomaly) and the
robot system is used to determine whether the alarm is real.
At the start of the mission, the robot system is programmed by the operator to locate a certain
checkpoint on the 3D Map and investigate. When the robot system locates the checkpoint with suspected
anomaly, it interacts with the operator to determine whether the check point is within normal operating
conditions (therefore spurious false alarm) or if it is outside of normal operating conditions (and therefore
the suspected anomaly is confirmed).
The focus of this scenario is about high-level interaction between the operator and the robot system.
The operator is not fully devoted to the reconnaissance mission. She/he has other duties and should
be able to delegate basic decisions to the robot system. For instance, for a given checkpoint, a set of
associated checkpoints can be defined so that in case of an anomaly, the robot system would autonomously
locate, read and record all of these associated checkpoints.
Example 1
Mission initiation:
Suspected anomaly at Pressure Gauge 2.
Associated measurement points: Pressure Gauge 2 has the following measurement points associated
with it: Pressure Gauge 1, Valve 3, Level Sensor 2
Associated action: If Pressure Gauge 2 anomaly is confirmed, then the robot system has to autonomously locate, read and record Pressure Gauge 1, Valve 3, Level Sensor 2, signal the operator
that the task is completed and wait for further orders.
In this scenario, the metrics will emphasize the ease of use, the time to program a mission and the
time to complete a mission as well as the cognitive load on the operator.
1.1.3
The assisted teleoperation scenario
In this scenario, the robot system is considered as a set of deported sensors for the operator who needs to
obtain as much information as possible in an area. A typical situation may include the requirement for
camera control and zoom into a difficult to reach location, behind certain equipment that cannot be seen
from the walkway. The operator would require controlling the mobile elements to allow a robot to move
6
Rules of the competition (V0)
1 PRESENTATION OF THE CHALLENGE
to an appropriate location, and controlling the robotic arm (depending on the robot design) to place the
sensor in the correct position.
This scenario may either be stand alone (where the operator assumes remote control of the robot
from the docking station) or incorporated during either the routine surveillance or semi-autonomous
reconnaissance missions. It is likely in a real life situation that the remote control functionality would be
used in these situations when:
1. an anomaly is detected by the robot system,
2. the robot system alarms to the control room,
3. all autonomous actions have been performed,
4. the operator still wants more information.
In order to make remote operation easy and safe, the robot system is expected to provide some assistance such as collision avoidance to prevents the operator from striking obstacles (which could potentially
contain hydrocarbons), or negative obstacle avoidance (preventing falls in stairs, for instance). It is also
important for the robot system to observe its power management and alert the operator when power is
running low.
Example 2 In the scenario where a sonic sensor is activated to simulate a gas leak, the operator may
want to assume remote control under the following conditions:
• The sonic sensor has been activated but the robot has not autonomously detected this.
• The robot has autonomously detected there is a leak but cannot find the sonic sensor.
• The robot has autonomously detected and localized the sensor, provided real time, image, position
and sound whilst it does so, but the operator still wants further information (camera control, zoom
etc).
In an assisted-teleoperation scenario, the metrics will emphasize the ease of use and safety of operation.
1.2
1.2.1
Description of the environment
Description of the testing ground
The facility used for the competition is a real unit which has been decommissioned and is used as a
training site for operators. It now uses utilities such as water and nitrogen. It is equipped with pumps
for circulating these utilities. Leaks of water can be generated (a good reason why the robot system
should be waterproof, or more precisely IP67). As can be seen on the picture (Figure 1), it is an outdoor
facility.
The important elements from the mobility point of view are detailed below. In particular, it is a
multi-floor facility without elevator between the floors. The robot system will have to cope with this
constraint under requirements described in Section 2.
A 3D map of the competition field will be provided to the teams.
Type of ground: concrete, plain steel, gratings as can be expected in an industrial environment. The
ground may be oily or wet.
Dimension of the course: The minimum width of the passageways is 800 mm, but some ”known
obstacles” may reduce the width at some points (see for instance Figure 11, where a valve is set on
the edge of the walkway).
7
Rules of the competition (V0)
1 PRESENTATION OF THE CHALLENGE
Steps and slopes: On a given floor, there may be some changes of level with steps of height up to
20 cm or slopes with maximum incline of 45%. Steps and slopes may be permanent features, or
may be temporary arrangements to protect a pipe crossing the walkway (for instance for repair
work). These arrangements are considered as ”normal obstacles” (see below).
Stairs between the floors:
• Width of walkway on stairs: 900mm
• Height from actual ground to first step on stairway: 220mm
• Distance between steps: 190mm
• step depth 238mm
• number of steps between two floors : 13
Doors (if any) will always be open for the robot
Obstacles: The robot system has to deal with fixed obstacles on the ground. Sets of obstacles are possible: pipes with different diameters, or steps with different widths. The robot system cannot stand
on pipes. If the robot system cannot deal with a type of obstacle or needs special infrastructures
(step, slope), penalties will be counted.
Some obstacles may be fragile, such as pipes on which a robot should not stand.
Figure 2: Typical obstacles
1.2.2
Equipment of the facility (in real life and for the Challenge)
Normal operational equipment – Operational sites will be equipped with power and communication
networks. The robot system is expected to use these networks.
Figure 3: Typical operational site communication
In real operational situations, the control station for the robot system may not be located within
the control room of the site. Information may be provided to the control room via either the control
station or the robot system directly. A typical operational site configuration can be seen in Figure 1.2.2.
However, communication between the control room and the control station is not part of the ARGOS
Challenge.
8
Rules of the competition (V0)
1 PRESENTATION OF THE CHALLENGE
Ad hoc equipment for the competition – The testing ground will be equipped with power for the
docking stations and a WiFi network connected to a server to which the Teams will connect their control
station. Videosurveillance will be available but not for control purposes, only for monitoring during the
events.
Network workload will be monitored and delays and faults may be injected in order to test the
robustness of the robot system.
Equipment and utilities are described in Table 1.
Table 1: Utilities
Electrical power supply
Telecommunications
Network of cameras or special
marking to help the robot locate itself
1.2.3
The teams will have to build their own docking station for their robot system battery recharging. In
both challenge and operational conditions, this docking station will be in a safe area (non-ATEX).
A 5 GHz Wifi network will be installed on the competition test site.
The teams can propose a slight additional system
(if made of ATEX compliant, reliable and cheap devices).
Environmental conditions
On the competition test site and within the framework of the ARGOS Challenge, some conditions may be
less constraining than those of the operational sites of TOTAL. Operational conditions (OP) and ARGOS
Challenge conditions (AC) are described below; the teams will have to design their robot at least for the
(AC) conditions, and will have to demonstrate in their technical dossier that their solution will be able
to deal with (OP) conditions, with slight post-challenge improvements (see Section 2).
Temperature The operational conditions (OP) are between -50◦ C and 50◦ for the outside temperature.
(AC) During the competition events which will be held during different seasons, outside temperature
between -10◦ C and 30◦ C can be expected.
Atmospheric conditions (OP) Due to hydrocarbon presence, explosive atmospheres are common in
normal operating conditions.
(OP) Corrosive environment: heavy precipitation, splash water, salty air, acid gases in atmosphere,
etc. Relative humidity 100%
(OP) Very windy conditions are possible (OP), up to 70 km/h or even 100 km/h.
(AC) Rain is likely to occur.
Visibility conditions The system should be able to operate during night and day (OP). For night
operations, no external artificial lighting will be available (OP). During the competition, some tests may
be carried out during the night (AC).
Other limitations to visibility are possible (rain, fog, vapour cloud or smoke, in emergency situation
for example) and may be tested during the competition.
9
Rules of the competition (V0)
1.3
2 THE ROBOT SYSTEMS
Facilities for the participating teams
Teams will be provided with an area next to the competition site that they will use as their control
station to allow them to remotely follow and operate their robot system.
Portacabin/Marquees will be provided to the teams for robot-system preparation purposes.
2
The robot systems
2.1
General requirements
The robot system has to be able to carry out the missions described in Subsection 1.1 in the environment
described in Subsection 1.2. The complete system is composed of a control station, a mobile segment
which can be composed of one or several robots, a datalink between the control station and the mobile
element, and a docking station to be deployed at the the competition site for robot system battery
recharging. We recall that the datalink is made of the WiFi network installed on the facility connected
to a server which is wired to the control station.
2.1.1
Data collection capability
The primary use of the robot system is to collect data which must be made available to a remote operator.
Depending on the mode of operation, the operator may want to access raw data or to get synthetic reports.
Requirement 1 (Payload sensors) Each robot must be endowed with at least:
• 2 video cameras (redundant system),
• a microphone,
• a night vision camera,
• a point Infra Red Gas Detection sensor,
• a thermal imaging device.
A flashlight may be installed for operations when no external lighting is available and the remote operator
requires video. It shall also be provided the option to install additional sensors on the robot.
Evaluation – The missions scenarios will require the use of all these sensors.
The sensors can be used both for obtaining measurements and for detecting anomalies. For the
purpose of measurements, a list of checkpoints will be defined and included in the 3D map; it may be for
instance a valve position to check, or a dial to read, or a point at which the temperature of a material
must be measured. Details of the anomalies and measurement points are described in Appendix B
Requirement 2 (Checkpoint access)
Checkpoints are at locations reachable for an average human being.
• Maximum height: 2m
• Maximum lateral deviation: 50cm
Because the orientation can be awkward, mounting sensors on an articulated appendage may be necessary.
Evaluation – Some mission scenarios will require access to difficult-to-reach checkpoints.
10
Rules of the competition (V0)
2 THE ROBOT SYSTEMS
Requirement 3 (Anomalies detection and analysis) In routine surveillance and semi-autonomous
reconnaissance scenarios, the system must autonomously detect, identify and report anomalies of the
following types
• Checkpoint anomalies from Appendix B
• Leaks characterized in Appendix B
• A modification of the architecture of the site (lack of a sensor, modification of the pathways, unforeseen obstacles, etc.)
• A loss of communication
• A system malfunction
The robot system must be capable of autonomous reactions associated to anomalies in a dynamic way. A
non-exhaustive list of autonomous reactions can be found in Appendix C.
Evaluation – Some mission scenarios will test autonomous reactions.
Requirement 4 (Sources of high temperature.) The robots should be able to stay away from sources
of significant heat, meaning > 50◦ C.
Evaluation – A specific test may be carried out under the control of firemen.
2.1.2
Characteristics of the robot system
We recall that the robot system is not expected to manipulate any object of its environment. Its purpose
is only surveillance and reconnaissance in a human-engineered environment. Therefore, a robot of the
system has to be able to move in the environment, to obtain measurements and to report. These basic
capabilities have to be exercised differently depending on the mode of operation selected by the remote
operator.
Physical constraints on the robots can be derived from the environment and mission descriptions.
Additional requirements are described here for safety and logistical issues.
Requirement 5 (Size and weight) The maximum width and length of a robot of the system can be
derived from the description of the facility. However, because the width of a robot can cause it to block a
pathway, the smaller the width the better.
A maximum height of 1,5m is allowed, not taking into account the added height due to an extended
arm. The maximum weight of the robot is fixed to 100kg.
Evaluation – Measurements will be taken during the competition. Negative points will be counted for
width superior to 350mm and weight above 100kg.
Mobility and navigation – In order to carry out its missions, the robot system must be able to reach
sensors in all areas and floors of the competition site that are reachable by an average human being.
One of the mobility issues is raised by the multi-floor environment and the stairs. In order to guarantee
the maximum flexibility, a mono-robot system able to reach all floors is the preferred solution. A multirobot solution is allowed. Specific constraints for the multi-robot solutions are described in 2.2.
Requirement 6 (Climbing capability) When a robot has to change floor, it has to be able to do so
under its own power. If an additional structure is needed, its footprint should not be larger than 1 square
meter.
Teams can propose their own design for a complementary structure for moving a robot of their system
between floors.
11
Rules of the competition (V0)
2 THE ROBOT SYSTEMS
Evaluation – During the dynamical testing (only second and third editions of the competition, first
competition will be ground floor only).
Requirement 7 (Obstacles) On a given floor, a robot must be able to pass known obstacles autonomously.
Autonomous passing of unknown obstacles is not required; operator interaction with the robot system will
be used to determine if an unknown obstacle can be negociated. If special infrastructures, such as slopes,
are required for passing some obstacles, it will be allowed during the competition but with a penalty.
Evaluation – Some mission scenarios used for the competitions will require the passing of obstacles.
Requirement 8 (Speed) A minimal speed of 2 km/h on flat ground is required.
Evaluation – For each mission scenario, a nominal execution time will be allocated. A bonus will be
awarded for quick execution. A penalty will be applied for slow execution.
Requirement 9 (Autonomous navigation) The robot system must be able to connect any two points
in the environment (except in case of unknown obstacles).
Evaluation – Some mission scenarios used for the competitions will require the robot system to compute
a trajectory between two arbitrary points.
Requirement 10 The robot system must adapt to inconsistencies between the available 3D map and the
terrain reality.
Evaluation – For some scenarios, changes to the competition site will be implemented.
Requirement 11 (Endurance) A minimal endurance of 2 hours during normal operation is required.
The energy management (presence of a stand-by mode, management of the remaining energy, etc.) and
the recharging time will be part of the evaluation criteria.
Evaluation – The competition will include a standardized endurance test in order to compare the
solutions proposed by the competitors.
Environmental constraints and certification – The operational environment described in Subsection 1.2 is very demanding. However, the competitions will not be held in controlled environmental
conditions. Therefore, the range of environmental conditions encountered during the competition sessions
will be small with respect of realistic operational conditions.
Within the framework of this challenge, it is not necessary to go through ATEX certification. However,
this classification being mandatory for any equipment on the operational production sites of TOTAL,
teams must demonstrate that their solution is compliant with ATEX.
Full ATEX Certifiability of design will not form part of the evaluation criteria in the first and second
competitions; however, how teams are planning to solve the ATEX certifiability of design will form part
of the evaluation criteria. In the third and final competition teams will have to demonstrate that their
robot system is ATEX certifiable.
The required level of classification is ATEX Zone 1 (category 2 marked equipment): II2G IIA T3.
For more details, see ATEX directive 94/9/CE
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/mechanical/documents/legislation/atex/index_en.htm
Requirement 12 (ATEX certificability) The mobile elements of the robot system has to be compatible with an ATEX Zone 1 certification.
Evaluation – Compatibility will be assessed by experts at the different steps of the competition. Competitors will have to explain their solution for ATEX qualification in their written technical dossiers.
Presentations with external ATEX experts may also be organised.
12
Rules of the competition (V0)
2 THE ROBOT SYSTEMS
Requirement 13 (Waterproof ) Ingress Protection IP67 is required.
Evaluation – In their technical dossier, teams will have to demonstrate compliance with this level of
ingress protection. During dynamical testing, water jets may be used to simulate heavy liquid leaks.
The robot systems developed for the challenge are expected to work under the environmental conditions which will occur during the competitions. The competitors can propose different configurations of
their system to adapt to the full range of operational conditions.
Requirement 14 (Wind tolerance) High wind may have influence on the stability of the sensor-base,
for instance inducing vibration which may raise issues with image processing.
Evaluation – In their technical dossier, teams will have to detail how their robot system will manage
high wind situations.
2.1.3
Control station and interactions with the remote operator
Within the framework of this challenge, one control station (e.g. a dedicated computer or set of computers)
is expected for the robot system. The location and state of the robot(s) must be displayed in real-time.
Teams must be aware that non-specialists of robotics will have to use the robot system, meaning that
the software for accessing the data, programming the rounds, controlling the robot system, etc., has to
be as user-friendly as possible.
Requirement 15 (Self-diagnosis and reporting) In autonomous mode, the robot must warn the operator if a problem occurs:
1. In case of technical inner dysfunction,
2. If the robot is blocked or lost.
Evaluation – This function will have to be demonstrated to the jury.
Requirement 16 (Operator remote control) The operator must be able to take remote control of the
robot system at any time. Though, the collision avoidance and power management systems must remain
active when the robot system is remotely controlled.
Evaluation – This will be tested during the dynamical testing.
Requirement 17 It is expected that the robot system can be easily deployed in a new facility for which
a non-perfect 3D map is available.
Evaluation – The competitors will be required to explain the functionalities developed for this adaptation.
Requirement 18 Autonomous reactions to hazards must be part of a mission preparation.
Evaluation – Expected autonomous reactions will be part of a mission description. Time to program
will be part of the mission preparation time.
Requirement 19 The time to prepare a mission is an evaluation criteria. During the competition, a
time slot will be allocated for mission preparation given a mission script.
Evaluation – During the competition, the time-slot allocated to a team will include time to prepare the
mission.
Requirement 20 (External data output) The jury must have access to the output of the control
station via a remote monitor.
13
Rules of the competition (V0)
2.1.4
2 THE ROBOT SYSTEMS
Requirements for the datalink
Requirement 21 (Communication) All commands and data must be able to be communicated to and
from the mobile elements of the robot system by a wireless link: WiFi 5GHz. In case of loss of communication, data must be stored and sent when communication is restored. The WiFi network may be
turned off at the competition test site temporarily to simulate this condition. During a crisis, WiFi may
be completely turned off.
Evaluation – Network perturbations may be introduced during the dynamical testing to verify storage
and ability to resume mission or return to docking station appropriately.
2.1.5
Safety requirements
Requirement 22 (Safe behaviour) Robots must be safe for their environment. They must not collide
harmfully with any of the surrounding materials and structures. They must also avoid possible mobile
obstacles (humans) and have a safe guarded space which triggered emergency stop when penetrated.
Evaluation – Demonstration of safe behaviour will be part of the homologation.
Requirement 23 (Emergency stop) Each robot must have an emergency stop push button. A physical
button is required on the robot. A remote emergency stop must also be implemented. The remote stop
command will go through the WiFi connection.
Evaluation – These safety functions will be part of the homologation.
According to a general specification of TOTAL, escape routes shall not be obstructed by the robots.
Requirement 24 Therefore, the teams have to propose their solutions to remove the robots from escape
routes (stairs, walkways) in case of evacuation, and in case of failure of the robot system or loss of power.
TOTAL will provide the general specifications regarding escape, evacuation and rescue from fixed installations.
Requirement 25 (Emergency Safe Areas) Upon detecting a General Platform Alarm (GPA) or directly commanded by the operator, the robot system stops its current action and autonomously moves its
robots to nearest safe area which does not block walkways, stairs or emergency exits.
The list of safe areas in the competition site will be provided.
Evaluation – Time and ability to reach the nearest safe area when an Emergency situation is activated.
2.1.6
Software requirements
Requirement 26 (Modularity) Evaluation – Presentation of the software architecture to the jury.
Requirement 27 (Security) The safety and integrity of the software part must be guaranteed, especially
to ensure that the robot system cannot be controlled by a malicious external attacker. It requires a strong
architecture of the control system and encrypted communication links.
Evaluation – Presentation of the software architecture to the jury.
2.2
Requirements for the multi-robot solutions
A multi-robot solution has to satisfy all the requirements above. However, some requirements, such as
ATEX certification, can be alleviated for some robot of the system.
Requirement 28 (Number of robots for the competition) If multi-robot systems enter the competition:
14
Rules of the competition (V0)
3 THE COMPETITION
• At least two robots must be used during the competition in order to demonstrate the multi-robot
capabilities.
• At least one robot compatible with ATEX certification must be used during the competition.
3
3.1
The competition
What is graded
The ranking of the competitors will be made according to grades in the following categories:
Static testing, for criteria which have to be provided in the technical dossier or depend on the physical
parameters of the robot system. ATEX compatibility is an important criteria in this category.
Functional tests, for basic functions such as energy management.
Dynamic testing, during which the robot systems will have to perform missions representative of the
missions described in Subsection 1.1.
Presentation, mainly for the jury to understand the assets and liabilities of the robot system, but also
for communication purposes.
Metrics associated with these categories are provided in appendix D.
Competition events will be organized in order to compare and rank the robot systems proposed by the
competitors. During these events, trial runs will be organized in the facility described in Subsection 1.2.
For each event, all the teams will have to prepare a set of documents, envisioned as:
A confidential dossier (to be sent prior to the events) which reports:
• the
the
• the
• the
• the
the
progress of the project (including a list of tasks still needed to be performed to achieve
complete robot system),
detailed architecture of the robot system,
technical choices regarding hardware and software,
solutions to deal with the ATEX specifications, the constraints and the tasks described in
rules document.
This dossier will only be read by members of the organisation of the challenge and the jury under
a non-disclosure agreement.
A public slideshow which will be presented during the event and explains:
• the general architecture of the robot system,
• its main characteristics and skills.
A public leaflet (4 pages) presenting the Team and their robot system, for diffusion to other participants, to the public and for TOTAL communication purposes.
3.2
Designation of the winner
For each competition event, the winner of the edition will be the team whose robot system ranks highest
according to the metrics defined for the edition and published in the updated version of the present
document.
The overall winner will be designated after the third competition event, taking into account the
performance of their robot system during the three editions.
15
Rules of the competition (V0)
3.3
4 BETWEEN THE COMPETITION SESSIONS
The competition events
Three such events will be organized during the project. The duration of these events will be from 3 to 5
days.
3.3.1
Venue for the competition events
The competition events will take place in Lacq (South of France), at the UMAD training site which is
under the responsibility of the company SOBEGI.
The dates of the competitions will be published at least 6 months in advance. The first competition
will take place one year after the initial kick-off meeting. The following events will be organised with a
periodicity of 9 months.
3.3.2
Organisation of the events
Each event will contain the different following sessions.
Safety demonstration and homologation (checking of the emergency stop system, the size and weight
of the robots, etc.),
ATEX compliancy verification ,
Oral presentation, with questions from the jury,
Training sessions, during which the competitors will have access to the testing ground,
Functional tests, for individual functions,
Dynamic testing
Free demonstration session, with a program to be approved (not part of the first competition edition).
A detailled planning will be provided in Appendix F.
The jury will adjust the difficulty of the events as the program progresses, depending on capabilities demonstrated and practical considerations. Details of the scenarios will also intentionally vary to
encourage generality and discourage tuning or optimization of parameters for a small range of conditions.
4
4.1
Between the competition sessions
Questions and support
Communication with the organisation team and with the jury will be organised through the ARGOS
website www.argos-challenge.com.
4.2
Access to the competition site
Teams will be allocated time on the competition sites before the competition editions. Conditions will
be exposed during the initial kick-off meeting.
16
Rules of the competition (V0)
5
5.1
5
COMMUNICATION AND LEGAL ISSUES
Communication and legal issues
Intellectual property rights
Intellectual property for the robotics solutions developed for the ARGOS challenge will be defined in the
contract between TOTAL and the selected teams.
The technical dossiers which are also required for the competition will be covered by a non-disclosure
agreement signed by all the members of the jury.
5.2
Images utilisation rules
Image utilization rules will be defined in the contract between TOTAL and the selected teams.
17
Rules of the competition (V0)
A
A SCENARIOS FOR DYNAMICAL TESTING
Scenarios for dynamical testing
A.1
General description of a scenario
Figure 4: General description of a scenario
We provide here a graphical representation for the scenarios. It is based on a set of states (seen at
a very general level) for the robot system. Arrows in Figure 4 indicate that a transition is possible. A
transition can occur either autonomously or upon request from the remote operator.
This representation is NOT a specification for the system. It is only a representation given from the
point of view of an operator. For sake of simplicity, the model does not cover states associated with
hazards of the system nor states specific to multi-robots systems.
Each scenario will use only several states and prescribe transitions conditions between the states.
18
Rules of the competition (V0)
A.2
A SCENARIOS FOR DYNAMICAL TESTING
Routine surveillance scenario
Figure 5: Routine surveillance scenario without anomaly
A.2.1
Description of a nominal mission
Before the mission, the robot system is pre-programmed with all of the measurement points it must
locate, read and report. For each, the normal operating condition values or normal valve positions
are programmed, as well as autonomous reactions expected in case of anomaly detection.
At the start of the mission, the robot system is in standby, at its docking station. It starts the
pre-programmed inspection round at pre-defined time.
As long as all the checkpoints have not been checked, the robot system autonomously locates
checkpoints, and reads and records their value. It reports these values according to the mission
preparation parameters.
If an anomaly is detected at a checkpoint, the robot system autonomously reacts and reports according to the mission preparation parameters.
At all times during the mission, the robot system must be able to
• provide the operator, at her/his request, with real-time image, sound and position, remaining power of the mobile elements, status of the round (whether minor anomalies have been
detected, . . . );
19
Rules of the competition (V0)
A SCENARIOS FOR DYNAMICAL TESTING
• process the audio detection to determine whether there is a leak (which will be simulated by
a source of sound);
• process the audio detection to determine whether the General Platform Alarm (GPA) is sounding.
Moreover, the operator must be able to take remote control of the robot system.
If the operator takes remote control, the system saves the status of the round in order to be ready
to resume when the operator requests it.
In case of hazard occurrence, appropriate actions are described in Appendix C.
When all measurement points have been checked or if the operator requests it, the mobile
elements autonomously return to their docking station and the robot system sends to the control
station the inspection report (.xml file) with all recorded values and thermal images captured.
Figure 6: Routine surveillance scenario with anomaly.
A.2.2
List of possible anomalies
During the round, the following detections must lead to appropriate actions to be chosen in the list
provided in Appendix C.
• A sensor is not found.
20
Rules of the competition (V0)
A SCENARIOS FOR DYNAMICAL TESTING
• The value read on a dial or a glass level is outwith normal operating conditions.
• A valve is in the wrong position.
• A safety alarm is raised (source of sound activated to simulate a GPA or the robot system is directly
commanded by the operator): all robots must go to safe areas and wait.
• A gas leak is detected (source of sound).
A.3
Semi-autonomous reconnaissance scenario
Figure 7: A semi-autonomous reconnaissance scenario
A.3.1
Description of a nominal mission
At the beginning of the mission, the robot system is programmed by the operator to locate a specific measurement point on the 3D map where an anomaly is suspected.
Reconnaissance programming: If an anomaly is detected at the measurement point, a list of actions
to be carried out autonomously is programmed.
Start of the mission
21
Rules of the competition (V0)
A SCENARIOS FOR DYNAMICAL TESTING
Start Mission (when the robot system is in standby, at its docking station)
Locate checkpoint with suspected
anomaly
The robot system autonomously begins the reconnaissance mission when commanded by the operator to start.
The robot system autonomously locates the check point
with suspected anomaly.
If the checkpoint reads normal
The robot system autonomously reads checkpoint. If
checkpoint is within normal operating conditions, robot
system autonomously states this and the value to control
station. Operator may then command robot system to
autonomously return to docking station.
Read checkpoint – No anomaly
If the checkpoint reads abnormal
Read checkpoint – Anomaly detected
The robot system autonomously reads checkpoint. If
checkpoint is out with normal operating conditions, robot
system autonomously confirms the suspected anomaly is
real and the value of the checkpoint to the control station.
If operator has not commanded the robot system to provide real time image, sound and position yet, robot system
autonomously provides this at this stage. Robot system
autonomously sends image(s) of located checkpoint with
confirmed anomaly to provide operators at control station
with situational awareness of the designated area.
Operator may request for video at this stage.
Locate, Read and Record all programmed checkpoints associated
with checkpoint with confirmed
anomaly
Robot system autonomously locates, reads and records all
instrument values, valve positions and hot spots that are
associated with the first checkpoint.
Anomaly
haviour
For each associated checkpoint if no anomaly found,
robot system autonomously alarms to control station
to state that checkpoint is in normal operating condition. Robot system autonomously locates next associated
checkpoint. For any associated checkpoint anomaly found,
programmed reactions are carried out.
detection
reaction
be-
At all time during the mission, the robot system must be able to
• provide the operator, at her/his request, with real-time image, sound and position, remaining power of the mobile elements, status of the round (whether minor anomalies have been
detected, . . . );
• process the audio detection to determine whether there is a leak (which will be simulated by
a source of sound);
• process the audio detection to determine whether the GPA is sounding.
Moreover, the operator must be able to take remote control of the robot system.
If the operator takes remote control, the system saves the status of the round in order to be ready
to resume when the operator requests it.
22
Rules of the competition (V0)
A SCENARIOS FOR DYNAMICAL TESTING
In case of hazard occurrence, appropriate actions are described in Appendix C.
End of the mission
On completion of location and analysis of all checkpoints
A.3.2
Once the last associated checkpoint has been recorded,
robot system autonomously reports to control room stating all associated checkpoints have been located, read,
recorded and analysed and waits for further instructions.
At this point operator may request the robot system to
autonomously return to docking station.
List of possible anomalies
During the mission, the following detections must lead to appropriate actions to be chosen in the list
provided in Appendix C.
• A sensor is not found.
• a sensor is not readable
• The value read on a dial or a glass level is outwith normal operation conditions.
• A valve is in the wrong position.
• A safety alarm is raised (source of sound activated to simulate a GPA or the system is directly
commanded by the operator): all robot systems must go to safe areas and wait.
• A gas leak is detected (source of sound).
A.4
Assisted teleoperation scenario
For operator to obtain as much information as possible in an area utilising the robot system functions in
remote control rather than autonomous. In real life a typical scenario may include the requirement for
camera control and zoom into a difficult to reach location, behind certain equipment that cannot be seen
from the walkway. The operator would require controlling the mobile base to allow the robot to move and
the robotic arm (depending on the robot design). Testing of the collision avoidance system is important
here so that even in remote control mode the robot system prevents the operator from striking obstacles
(which could potentially contain hydro carbons). In remote control mode it would be important for the
robot system to observe its power management and alert operator when power is running low.
This mission may either be stand alone where the operator assumes remote control of the robot from
the docking station or incorporated during either the routine inspection (A.3) or advanced supervision
(A.4) scenarios.
A.5
General conditions for all the scenario
An important part of the environment is the list and location of checkpoints which the robot system has
to be able to check. An exhaustive list with all the characteristics will be available. A preliminary list
can be found in Appendix B.
23
Rules of the competition (V0)
A SCENARIOS FOR DYNAMICAL TESTING
Figure 8: Assisted-teleoperation scenario
A.5.1
Before all the missions
For each mission, it is assumed that the necessary preparation procedures have been carried out. This
may include:
• loading the map and necessary location information
• charging of the batteries
A.5.2
Mission supervision
At each time, the operator must have access to
• The position of the robot(s) (location, orientation),
• The status of the robot(s) (everything is ok; a sensor is malfunctioning; the robot is recharging,
the battery is fully charged; the robot is carrying out its inspection round, the robot is waiting for
further instructions; etc.)
A.5.3
End of a missions
A log file of the mission must be produced. The template for this log will be provided.
24
Rules of the competition (V0)
A.6
A SCENARIOS FOR DYNAMICAL TESTING
Hazards during the dynamical tests
Whatever the mission, the following issues can occur:
A.6.1
Hazards due to the environment
• unknown fixed obstacle
• unknown moving obstacles (humans)
• short loss of communication (a few seconds)
• long loss of communication (more than 30 seconds)
A.6.2
Hazards due to the robot system
• Low battery level
• One sensor of the robot system is out of order
• A camera is obscured
• A robot of the system tips over
• The robot system reboots in a different place than the starting point
The robot system is expected to react in a way that is described in Appendix C.
25
Rules of the competition (V0)
B
B
MEASUREMENT AND CHECK POINTS
Measurement and check points
We recall that all the measurement and checkpoints for which the robot system is expected to report are
today checked by human beings. They are checked visually or using dedicated measurement instruments
to detect potential anomalies. Sound and smell are also senses used by the operator to detect potential
anomalies.
It means in particular that for autonomous surveillance missions, the robot systems should be able to
process visual and sound signals so as to become the eyes and ears of an operator. For semi-autonomous
and teleoperation missions, visual and audio signals should be transmitted to the control station.
It also means that the location of all the measurement and check points are within the reach of an
average human being with standard equipment.
B.1
Visual measurement
The task of the robot system will be to read sensors which have been designed to be read by humans.
The complete lists of these sensors and their characteristics will be provided. Their position within the
3D map of the environment will also be provided.
• Maximum height of the control points: 2m
• Maximum lateral deviation from path: 50cm
The accuracy of readings expected for each visual measurement point will be provided. Each time a
sensor has to be read, a range of normal conditions will be provided so that an alarm can be raised if the
reading is outwith normal operating conditions.
We recall that these visual measurements must be carried out during night and day conditions without
external artificial lighting source.
Sensor dial (pressure gauge):
There are several types of dials. An example is provided in Figure 9.
Figure 9: Example of a pressure gauge dial
The orientation of a dial may vary after a maintenance operation.
Tank level: There are several types of glass liquid levels. An example is provided in Figure 10.
26
Rules of the competition (V0)
B
MEASUREMENT AND CHECK POINTS
Figure 10: Example of a glass liquid level
B.2
Visual check points
In addition to reading sensor values, the robot system is expected to check the situation of several
materials.
Valve position: There are different types of valves. Only manual valves with bar handle actuators will
be treated in the challenge. Sizes will differ. In normal operation, they either may be closed, or open,
but not in between. The robot system has to be able to detect the position of each valve and to check
whether it is correct according to the settings provided during mission preparation. Two examples of
valves are provided on Figure 11.
Absence of a plug at the end of a pipe The plugs are used to end or block a run of pipe. The
robot system may have to be able to detect any missing plug, which is similar to a missing checkpoint.
Safety equipment: The robot system may have to detect whether the fire extinguishers on the competition site are in the correct location. The list and position will be provided.
B.3
Sound measurement
Human operators are trained to detect abnormal conditions by abnormal noises. Such a capability is
expected from the robot system. Time will be allocated for the robot systems to learn the parameters of
normal conditions. Recordings will be provided to detect:
• A gas leak (see below)
• A general platform alarm (GPA)
27
Rules of the competition (V0)
B
MEASUREMENT AND CHECK POINTS
Figure 11: Two examples of valves
B.4
Thermal measurement
The temperature of some materials may be checked during the missions. The points at which these
measurements are taken will be provided.
B.5
Gas leak detection and localisation
An important part of any surveillance round is to detect an eventual gas leak. A semi-autonomous
reconnaissance mission may also have the objective of localizing the source of a gas leak which has been
detected by the robot system or by another sensor.
In real operating conditions, the robot system will be expected to detect the concentration of various
combustible gases which must stay below the Lower Explosive Limit (LEL). For the purpose of the
competition, a gas leak will be simulated using a source of sound (through a speaker) which the robot
system must detect and localize. An acoustic noise mapping survey of the competition site will be carried
out and this noise mapping will be provided to the teams to differentiate between normal background
noise and gas leak conditions.
For demonstration purposes, the robot system is to be equipped with point infra red gas detection
sensors. On an adjacent site to the competition site and under the supervision of trained firemen, the
robot system will demonstrate its ability to detect and localize small concentrations of methane. This
shall not form part of the challenge but will be used for demonstration purposes only.
28
Rules of the competition (V0)
C
C.1
C.1.1
C LIST OF AUTONOMOUS REACTIONS
List of autonomous reactions
Actions in case of generic hazards
Hazards due to the environment
Unknown obstacles can be the result of normal operating conditions or of an incident. An unknown
obstacle must always be signaled to the operator who will determine whether the situation is normal or
not. An obstacle is said to be unknown if it does not appear on the map and it has not been detected
and dealt with previously.
Normal temporary unknown obstacles They are due mostly to maintenance carried out on the
plant where the robot system is operating. It can be assumed that these obstacles will always be
passable by the robots following the specification of obstacles in Subsection 1.2.
• Pipes of various diameters
• Hose
• Wooden crate
• Chemical drum
Abnormal unknown obstacles due to incident They may not be passable by the robot systems.
• Pipes of various diameters
Interaction Mode Robot Initiative: Robot system sends an alarm to the control station stating
an unknown obstacle has been identified. Robot system sends real time image of obstacle and position.
Interaction Mode Operator Action: Operator determines whether robot system can negociate
the obstacle by moving round or over. If operator decides robot system cannot do either, operator
commands robot system to recalculate a new route.
Remark 1 A normal temporary obstacle can be recorded for future occurrences. It is a way to maintain
the current map.
Interaction Mode Robot Action: If robot system is commanded to recalculate a new route but
an alternative route is not available, robot system sends an alarm to control station stating this and
autonomously returns to docking station.
General Platform Alarm (GPA) (detected externally) Robot system stops its current action
and autonomously moves to nearest safe area which does not block walkways, stairs, or emergency exits.
The list of safe areas in the competiton site will be provided.
Remark 2 GPA situation can be detected by the robot system itself using its audio sensors. It can also
be directly commanded by the operator.
Loss of WiFi Communications Robot system autonomously detects that there is a loss in communications. Robot system must automatically save all recorded pieces of data collected, autonomously move
to nearest safe area and goes into power saving/energy conservation mode.
Upon restoration of communication, Interaction Mode Robot system Initiative: Robot
system alarms to control room, that there has been a loss of communications, and states its position.
Interaction Mode Operator Action: Operator determines whether robot system continues the
routine mission, or returns to docking station.
29
Rules of the competition (V0)
C.1.2
C LIST OF AUTONOMOUS REACTIONS
Hazards due to robot system operation
Robot system malfunction The robot system is able to autonomously detect any inner technical
malfunction, e.g. a sensor which is compromised.
Interaction Mode Robot system Initiative: Robot system alarms to control room, that it has
experienced a technical malfunction.
Interaction Mode Operator Action: Depending on the technical malfunction robot sytem is
experiencing, the operator determines whether the robot system can continue mission, return to docking
station, or nearest safe area and commands the robot system the appropriate action.
Power Autonomy Robot system constantly knows remaining power available and how much power
is required to return to docking station.
Interaction Mode Robot Initiative: When power is approaching this critical level, robot system
alarms to control room and autonomously returns to docking station.
C.2
Routine surveillance mission: in case of anomaly detection
Here are some examples of autonomous reactions when the robot system detects an anomaly.
Example 3 (Wrong value requires instructions)
Anomaly:
Valve 1 which is normally open is found closed.
Autonomous reaction:
Closure of exception:
Alarm to control room and wait for further instructions.
Operator may request robot system to either:
• Autonomously return to docking station
• Autonomously return to inspection round
Example 4 (Wrong value requires subsequent checking)
Anomaly:
Valve 2 which is normally closed is found open.
Autonomous reaction: Alarm to control room and autonomously go to upstream pressure Gauge 1 to
read pressure, and to all other associated checkpoints, record and report values to the control room
then wait for further instructions.
Closure of exception:
Operator may request robot system to either:
• Autonomously return to docking station
• Autonomously return to inspection round
30
Rules of the competition (V0)
C LIST OF AUTONOMOUS REACTIONS
Example 5 (Missing checkpoint)
Anomaly: 3D Map shows an instrument/valve, however it has been removed on the actual competition
site (in real situation possibly for maintenance).
Autonomous reaction: Robot system must alarm to control room that checkpoint is missing and wait
for further instructions.
Closure of exception:
Operator may request robot system to either:
• Autonomously return to docking station
• Autonomously return to inspection round
C.3
Routine surveillance mission: in case of gas leak detection
For unmanned installation scenario: Robot system stops its current action if it is on a mission,
autonomously alarms to the control room that it has detected a gas leak and autonomously localises the
source of sound. Robot system autonomously provides real time, image, position and sound whilst it
localises the source of sound.
For manned installation scenario: Introduce moving obstacles (humans). Robot system stops its
current action if it is on a mission, autonomously alarms to the control room that it has detected a gas
leak and autonomously moves to the nearest safe area.
Interaction Mode Operator Initiative: Operator requests real time, image, position and sound
whilst robot system moves to safe area. Once all humans have safely escaped, operator can send confirmation signal to robot system that it is safe for the robot system to autonomously localise the source of
sound.
31
Rules of the competition (V0)
D
D
METRICS FOR COMPARING THE SOLUTIONS
Metrics for comparing the solutions
D.1
Metrics for the static testing
For each edition of the competition, the robot systems will undergo a homologation procedure. The
following elements will be measured:
• Weight of the mobile elements. If the weight is in excess of 100kg, negative points will be applied.
If the excess is too large, the jury may refuse the participation of the system.
• Width of the mobile elements. Due to the width of the pathways, a width superior to 700mm will
prevent a robot from entering the dynamical testing. Negative points will be applied if a robot
system width is greater than 350mm.
D.2
Metrics for individual functions
Tests will be devised for measuring the performance of individual functions. These tests will be described
in the further versions of the document. The following (non-exhaustive list) provides indications of what
may be tested.
D.2.1
Safe behaviour
• emergency stop commanded by a physical push button on the robot systems
• remote emergency stop commanded through the control station
• no contact with structure during manoeuvres in the competition test site
• safe behaviour in the presence of humans
• avoidance of forbidden areas
D.2.2
Mobility and navigation
• Smoothness of the path to go between two points in the competition test site.
• Time to go between two points in the competition test site.
D.2.3
Ease of use of the robot system
The amount of time it takes for a robot system to adapt to the environment
in which
it has to operate is an important issue for deployment. The Teams may be asked to demonstrate this
procedure. It is possible that the map issued for the first edition will only cover the ground floor. Then
for the second edition, the time to get ready for performing missions on the three floors will be measured.
The amount of time it takes to program the robot system
for performing an autonomous
routine surveillance round will be measured by changing the parameters of the rounds between sessions.
32
Rules of the competition (V0)
D.2.4
D
METRICS FOR COMPARING THE SOLUTIONS
Power Management
The primary metric for energy is whether the robot system is able to complete a given mission scenario.
However, it may also be necessary to compare the energy consumption of the different robot systems
involved in the competition. Installation of a device to measure consumption (power-meter) may be
required.
Testing of battery autonomy. Each team must be subjected to the same tests. e.g. number of times
the robot system can autonomously complete routine surveillance mission with no anomalies .
Robot system does not run out of power during mission
Recharging time at docking station from completely discharged battery state.
several missions without recharge
D.3
D.3.1
Metrics for the dynamical testing
Metrics for a routine surveillance mission
• Completion time,
• Successful Location AND Accuracy of control point measurements.
– Awards points for Correct Location and Accurate measurement
– Awards points for Correct Location only
– Negative points for Correct Location combined with Inaccurate measurement
– Negative points for Incorrect Location
• Correct anomaly reaction behaviour. For each of the anomalies introduced, the required autonomous
reaction is achieved. Scoring is weighted depending on the importance of the anomaly.
Other metrics will be defined in order to grade
• accuracy of reporting
• accuracy of anomaly detection
D.3.2
Metrics for a semi-autonomous inspection mission
In this mission, the most important aspect to be tested is the way the system and the operator interact.
It is assumed that the operator does not focus entirely on the robot system operation.
The ease of use of the system will be graded using
• the time to launch a new mission,
• time to complete a mission.
The cognitive load involved in carrying out the mission will be tested by asking the operator to conduct
tasks which are ecologic with respect to the normal operating environment. The obvious associated metric
will be a measure of the overall performance of the mission. Another possible metric can be the score
obtain at a questionnaire filled-in by a naive operator.
33
Rules of the competition (V0)
D.3.3
D
METRICS FOR COMPARING THE SOLUTIONS
Metrics for an assisted-teleoperation mission
It is envisioned that an important metric will be the score at a questionnaire filled in by a ”naive”
operator. Other metrics will be devised in order to grade
• the efficiency of assistance for safety
• the tolerance to delays in the communication system
• the tolerance to loss of communication (long, short)
• the tolerance to loss of bandwidth (for video)
D.4
Metrics for the presentation trials
to be defined later
D.5
Metrics from the technical dossier
(OP) Ability to sustain 70km/h of wind (taking into account the vibration of the mobile base or of the
arm which may induce vibrations and pollute the reading)
• complexity of the system
• possibility for integration of new sensors, flexibility of the architecture
• code readability and maintenability
34
Rules of the competition (V0)
E
E
DEFINITIONS
Definitions
Definitions will be added as and when required
Definition 1 (ATEX classification) ATmosphere EXplosive directive1 (for Europe) and IECEx certification scheme2 (for international) address equipment and instrumentation intended for use in potentially explosive atmospheres (gas or dust). Areas with gas explosive atmospheres are divided into three
sub-zones:
• Zone 0: Constant danger (permanent presence of explosive gases),
• Zone 1: Potential danger (occasional presence of explosive gases during normal duty),
• Zone 2: Presence of explosive gases is not likely to occur or only for a short period of time.
For each zone, protection concepts following specific standards are defined.
Definition 2 (IP (Ingress Protection) Rating for Equipment and Enclosures) A two-digit number used to provide an IP Rating to a piece of electronic equipment or to an enclosure for electronic
equipment. The two digits represent different forms of environmental influence: The first digit represents protection against ingress of solid objects. The second digit represents protection against ingress
of liquids.
1 http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/mechanical/documents/legislation/atex/
2 http://www.iecex.com/
35
Rules of the competition (V0)
F
F.1
F
DETAILED PLANNING
Detailed planning
Meetings
An initial kick-off meeting will be held with all the selected teams and the jury. It is expected to be held
in Lacq, close to the competition site, provisionally scheduled for July 2014. A debriefing meeting will
be held several weeks after the first and second editions of the competition. At least one representative
from each team will have to attend these meetings.
An important outcome of these meetings will be the official ”Rules of the competition - V1” for
the first edition of the competition. This document will evolve, taking into account inputs from the
participation teams in order to keep the competition very challenging but with realistic expectations.
F.2
Competitions
The first edition of the competition will be organized one year after the kick-off. The second and third
editions will each be held nine months after the previous edition. A detailed planning of the first edition
of the competition will be provided during the initial kick-off meeting
36
Rules of the competition (V0)
G
G
ROLE AND COMPOSITION OF THE JURY
Role and composition of the jury
A jury will be in charge of refereeing the competition. It means that:
• The jury will have to approve the rules applicable for each edition of the competition.
• The jury will grade the presentation part of the competition (technical dossiers, oral presentations,
posters, free demonstration program, . . . ).
It will be composed of representatives from TOTAL as well as robotic experts from academia and
from industry.
37
Rules of the competition (V0)
H
H VERSIONS OF THIS DOCUMENT
Versions of this document
This appendix will be updated for each edition of the competition.
H.1
From Version V0 to version V1 for the competition of June 2015
Environment:
Ground Floor Only.
ATEX Certifiability – Full ATEX Certifiability of design will not form part of evaluation criteria in
first competition. However how teams are planning to solve the ATEX Certifiability and design is to be
included in the dossier and will form part of the technical dossier and presentation evaluation criteria in
the first competition
H.2
From Version V1 to version V2 for the competition of spring 2016
Environment:
Introduction of multi-floor mission scenarios.
Free demonstration program – For the second and final editions of the competition, the participating teams may propose a ”free demonstration program”. It means that they may be awarded a time-slot
on the testing ground during which they will have the opportunity to demonstrate the best characteristics
of their solutions. They may demonstrate functions which are not required for the formal competition.
H.3
From Version V2 to version V3 for the competition of end 2016
ATEX Certifiability – In the third and final competition, teams will have to demonstrate that their
robot system is fully ATEX certifiable.
38