TY - GEN
T1 - Safety considerations for small unmanned aerial systems with distributed users
AU - Duncan, Brittany A.
AU - Murphy, Robin R.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2014 IEEE.
PY - 2014/1/21
Y1 - 2014/1/21
N2 - This paper identifies three categories of safety risks posed by allowing multiple users to engage with small Unmanned Aerial Systems (sUAS) and offers five recommendations on how to reduce or mitigate these vulnerabilities. Data from sUAS can benefit multiple experts at a disaster who may not be familiar with robots or colocated with the pilot. Two different styles of interfaces have been developed and tested with responders conducting exercises to facilitate team coordination with a quadrotor at Texas A&M Engineering Extension Service's Disaster City® over a four year period. The two interfaces illustrate three distinct categories of safety concerns: unsafe control regimes, loss of situation awareness, and increased stress. Five recommendations are proposed to mitigate or eliminate the safety concerns: separate the payload camera from the platform, giving the pilot a dedicated "pilot-cam" and the experts a fully gimbaled payload; use artificial intelligence to resolve conflicts between competing directives from multiple experts; allow the pilot, or a software agent, to turn off the expert's ability to control or communication; use multi-modal warnings rather than rely on visual cues; and add guarded motion to prevent collisions.
AB - This paper identifies three categories of safety risks posed by allowing multiple users to engage with small Unmanned Aerial Systems (sUAS) and offers five recommendations on how to reduce or mitigate these vulnerabilities. Data from sUAS can benefit multiple experts at a disaster who may not be familiar with robots or colocated with the pilot. Two different styles of interfaces have been developed and tested with responders conducting exercises to facilitate team coordination with a quadrotor at Texas A&M Engineering Extension Service's Disaster City® over a four year period. The two interfaces illustrate three distinct categories of safety concerns: unsafe control regimes, loss of situation awareness, and increased stress. Five recommendations are proposed to mitigate or eliminate the safety concerns: separate the payload camera from the platform, giving the pilot a dedicated "pilot-cam" and the experts a fully gimbaled payload; use artificial intelligence to resolve conflicts between competing directives from multiple experts; allow the pilot, or a software agent, to turn off the expert's ability to control or communication; use multi-modal warnings rather than rely on visual cues; and add guarded motion to prevent collisions.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84946690936&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84946690936&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1109/SSRR.2014.7017648
DO - 10.1109/SSRR.2014.7017648
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:84946690936
T3 - 12th IEEE International Symposium on Safety, Security and Rescue Robotics, SSRR 2014 - Symposium Proceedings
BT - 12th IEEE International Symposium on Safety, Security and Rescue Robotics, SSRR 2014 - Symposium Proceedings
PB - Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.
T2 - 12th IEEE International Symposium on Safety, Security and Rescue Robotics, SSRR 2014
Y2 - 27 October 2014 through 30 October 2014
ER -