DARPA Robotics

7/28/2019 DARPA Robotics

1/80

DARPA RoboticsChallenge

Proposers Day

April 16, 2012


2/80

2

DARPA Robotics Challenge Proposers Day

The Proposers Day will

begin at 12:10 PM EDT

April 16, 2012


3/80

3


Dr. Gill PrattProgram Manager, DARPA


4/80

DARPA Robotics Challenge Proposers Day Agenda

4

12:00PM-12:10PM Set up/Test Connection

12:10PM-12:15PM Introductory Remarks, OSTP Dr. John Holdren, Assistant to the President forScience and Technology and Director of Scienceand Technology Policy (OSTP)

12:15PM-12:25PM Introductory Remarks,DARPA

Dr. Kaigham J. Gabriel, Acting Director, DARPA

12:25PM-12:40PM DARPA/TTO Overview Mr. Paul Eremenko, Acting Director/Deputy

Director, DARPA TTO

12:40PM-1:40PM Robotics Challenge Overview Dr. Gill Pratt, Program Manager, DARPA

1:40PM-1:55PM Contracts Management Mr. Chris Glista, Contracting Officer, DARPA

1:55PM-2:10PM GFE Hardware Dr. Robert Playter, Boston Dynamics, Inc.

2:10PM-2:25PM GFE Software Mr. Nate Koenig, Open Source Robotics

Foundation, Inc.

2:25PM-2:45PM Break

2:45PM-3:15PM Q/A Response

3:15PM Adjourn


5/80

5

Introductory Remarks, OSTP

Dr. John HoldrenAssistant to the President for Scienceand Technology and Director, Office ofScience and Technology Policy (OSTP)


6/80

Dr. John HoldrenVIDEO

4/16/20126Further dissemination only as directed by DARPA Public Release Center or higher DoD authority.


7/807

Introductory Remarks, DARPA

Dr. Kaigham J. GabrielActing Director, DARPA


8/80

4/16/20128Further dissemination only as directed by DARPA Public Release Center or higher DoD authority.

Dr. Kaigham J. GabrielVIDEO


9/80

DARPA/TTO Overview

Mr. Paul Eremenko, Acting Director

Tactical Technology Office

Briefing prepared for Robotics Challenge Proposers Day

April 16, 2012

Photo: DARPA

4/16/2012 9Distribution Statement A (Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited).


10/80

1 9 5 7

Sputnik

34th President of the United States 1953-1961.

Coined the term military-industrial complexand warned against its unwarranted influence.Created DARPA in response to Sputnik.

First orbiting satellite. The satellite was not a

threat, but the level of technology indicated thatthe Soviet Union possessed superior capability forintercontinental reconnaissance and bombing.

Dwight D. Eisenhower

1 9 5 8

DARPA



11/80

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)

was established in 1958 to prevent strategic surprisefrom negatively impacting U.S. national security and createstrategic surprise for U.S. adversaries by maintaining thetechnological superiority of the U.S. military.

To fulfill its mission, the Agency relies on diverseperformers to apply multi-disciplinary approaches to bothadvance knowledge through basic research and createinnovative technologies that address current practicalproblems through applied research.

As the DoDs primary innovation engine, DARPAundertakes projects that are finite in duration but thatcreatelasting revolutionary change.

Mission



12/80

Create and prevent strategic surprise

Lean, agile risk-taking organization

Idea-driven and outcome-oriented

Demonstrate solution concepts

Idea leadership culture



13/80

Impossible ideas become real life at DARPA



14/80

1 8 6 5 1 9 6 71 9 5 7

DARPA: F1 engine Saturn V

Photo: http://moonbooks.net

Books

Spaceflight



15/80

1 9 6 6 1 9 8 61 9 8 0 s

Photo: http://www.globalnerdy.com Photo: http://www.wired.com

TelevisionDARPA: research Cellular phone

Wireless communications



16/80

Original ARPAnet for remotely

sharing large volumes of data.

1 9 6 91 9 6 9

Fictional access news and personal

communication on tablet devices.

2 0 1 0

News and personal communication

available on tablet devices.

Photo: http://www.mercurybrief.com/2010/01/kubrick-slates-tablets-2001-film/

Photo: http://www.surfmobee.com

The internet



17/80

DARPA sponsored flight technology

demonstrator to improve survivability ofa single aircraft against a modern IADS

Combined with precise weapons

against C2 targets to improvesurvivability for allforces in

Desert Storm

1 9 9 11 9 7 81 9 7 6

Hopeless diamond concept

rejected by U.S. Air Force

Stealth



18/80

1 9 9 0 s1 9 6 3

DARPA Transit 2A satellite

pioneered doppler navigationfor specific military missions.

Became global precision

navigation technology formilitary and civilianuse.

Continued military and

commercial refinement fortactical applications

2 0 1 0

Global Positioning System



19/80

1 9 9 7 - 2 0 0 91 9 8 6

DARPA flight technology demonstrator to prove the

feasibility of the technology; shelved because it didnot fit into prevailing air operations thinking.

Rapidly adopted and matured to counter

new threats more effectively than existingplatforms and doctrine could.

Photo: General Atomics

Photo: General Atomics

Surveillance UAVs



20/80

2 0 1 11 9 2 7

DARPA: Autonomous Robotics Manipulation

Image: http://www.jeffbots.com/maria.html

2 0 X X

Movies

Automation



21/80

1 9 6 2 2 0 1 0 2 0 X X

Books Research

Image: http://www.tomswift.info

Multi-mode mobility



22/80

X-Planes

RF Stealth

The Internet

GPS

Space Launchand Navigation

SyntheticAperture Radar

AutonomousSystems

Continuous accomplishment



23/80

Comms &Networks

Global

Tactical ISR

Energy

HybridWarfare

Extreme

Environments

Space Systems &Space Awareness

Hypersonics

Space Access

Aero- &HydrodynamicSystems

Ground & SoldierSystems

Design Synthesis

Manufacturing

Qualification/V&V

Autonomy

Global ISR

Cyber

Social Networks

ComputationalSocial Science

LanguageTransparency

Edge Finding

Training/Education

Basic ScienceCore

Devices

Integration

Power

Architectures

Application

PhysicalSciences

Materials

Mathematics

Training &HumanEffectiveness

Biological

WarfareDefense

Biology

DSO MTOI2O TTOSTOAEO

AgilePrograms withFrequentDevelopmentCycles

ConductSystematicRigorous

Assessments

Explore NewContracting

Approaches

DevelopStrongRelationships

DefenseSciencesOffice

MicrosystemsTechnologyOffice

InformationInnovationOffice

TacticalTechnologyOffice

AdaptiveExecutionOffice

StrategicTechnologyOffice

Organization



24/80

Flat organization

Little hierarchy to ensure the free and rapid flow of information,ideas, and decisions.

Outstanding program managersDARPA hires creative, independent people with big ideas andempowers them.

Project-based assignmentsProjects organized around a challenge model and typically last threeto five years; longer if necessary to facilitate transition.

No DARPA labsMajority of the research is sponsored in industry and universities

with a small amount in government labs.

Flexible outsourcing of staff and performersGreat talents and ideas from industry, universities, and governmentlabs with technical, contracting, and administrative services fromother commercial and government agencies.

Professional reach



25/80

www.darpa.mil



26/80

DARPA Robotics Challenge

Proposers Day

April 16th, 2012

Dr. Gill A. Pratt, Program Manager

26Distribution Statement "A" (Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited)


27/80

Recent Disasters

27Distribution Statement "A" (Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited)Fukushima - 2011

Katrina - 2005 Deepwater

Horizon

2010

Man Computer Symbiosis


28/80

Inspiration and Goals


1. Target disaster response in dangerous

environments, and important DoD capability forHADR (Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster

Relief) missions

2. Advance supervised autonomy, mobility,

manipulation, and energetic efficiency.

3. Catalyze the robotics industry by developing a

validated, real-time, operator-interactive

simulator.

4. Welcome a wide range of international

contributors including traditional and non-

traditional DARPA performers from a variety of

fields.

Man-Computer Symbiosis J. C. R. Lic klid er (head of DARPA IPTO 1962)

IRE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics,volume HFE-1, pages 4-11, March 1960

close study of the disasters first 24 hours,before the cascade of failures carried reactor 1beyond any hope of salvation, reveals clearinflection points where minor differences wouldhave prevented events from spiraling out ofcontrol. IEEE Spectrum, November 2011 pg. 36.

Fukushima - 2011


29/80

1. Environment, even degraded, has been engineered for humans

2. No shortage of humantools, from hand tools to vehicles

3. Human-like robot capabilities are easier for domain experts to understand anduntrained operators to control

Why emphasize human-like robot capabilities?



30/80

30

Supervisory Autonomy and Predictive Models

EnvironmentHuman

EnvironmentTele-opRobot

Human

EnvironmentTele-opRobot

EnvironmentHumanPredictiveModel

EnvironmentSprv. Auto

Robot

Sprv. AutoRobot

EnvironmentHuman

DARPAChallenge

High Fidelity Interface

Low Fidelity Interface

Variable Fidelity Interface

PredictiveModel

Human PredictiveModel

Human PredictiveModel

Decouple

Decouple

Distribution Statement "A" (Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited)


31/80

31

Questions this Program will Address

HumanPredictiveModel

Sprv. AutoRobot

1. What kind of I/O

2. What kind of messages

3. What autonomy, mobility,manipulation, energetics

4. Tasks and Metrics



32/80

32

Example Disaster Challenge Scenario

Autonomy-Perception

AutonomyDecision-mak

ing

MountedMobility

Dism

ountedMobility

Dex

terity

Stre

ngth

End

urance

1. Drive utility vehicle to site X X X X

2. Travel dismounted across rubble X X X

3. Remove debris blocking entryway X X X X X

4. Open door, enter building X X X X

5. Climb industrial ladder, traverse industrial walkway X X X

6. Use tool to break through concrete panel X X X X X

7. Locate and close valve near leaking pipe X X X X X X

8. Replace component X X X

Tasks

Capabilities



33/80

33

Planned Tasks subject to change

Task 1 - Drive a utility vehicle to the site

The robot must demonstrate mounted mobility by ingress to the vehicle, driving it on a road,and egress from the vehicle. The robot must also demonstrate manipulation by operating thecontrols, including steering, throttle, brakes, and ignition. The robot must steer, accelerate,and brake.

Task 2 -Travel dismounted across rubble

The robot must demonstrate dismounted mobility by crossing terrain ranging from smoothand level, to rough and sloped, with some loose soil and rocks. This terrain will be easilytraversable by a human.

Task 3 - Remove debris blocking an entryway

The robot must demonstrate the dexterity and strength to move an object blocking anentryway. The object will have size, weight, and other properties to be movable either by aperson or by the GFE Platform. The object mass is expected not to exceed 5 kg.

Task 4 - Open a door and enter a building

The robot must demonstrate the dexterity to operate a door handle and the strength to push

the door open.Distribution Statement "A" (Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited)


34/80

34

Planned Tasks (cont.) subject to change

Task 5 - Climb an industrial ladder and traverse an industrial walkway

The robot must demonstrate dismounted mobility to traverse an industrial elevated walkway.It is expected that the walkway (or catwalk) will have a grated surface and handrails.

Task 6 - Use a tool to break through a concrete panel

The robot must demonstrate using a power tool to perform forceful manipulation. The powertool is expected to be an air or electric impact hammer and chisel, or an electric

reciprocating saw.

Task 7 - Locate and close valve near leaking pipe

The robot must demonstrate the perception ability to find a leaking pipe and a nearby valve,the dismounted mobility to approach the valve, and the manipulation ability to close the

valve

Task 8 - Replace cooling pump

The robot must demonstrate the perception ability to locate the pump, the manipulationability to loosen one or more fasteners, and the bi-manual manipulation ability to extract andreplace the pump.



35/80

Distribution Statement "A" (Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited) 35

Participation Options

Track A - Funded Teams design and build platform systems to participatein Disaster Response Challenge.

Track B Teams develop algorithms using DARPA provided Simulator.Disaster Virtual Challenge conducted to identify which teams will be

provided GFE Robot and additional funding to participate in DisasterResponse Challenge

Track C Unfunded teams use Simulator to and develop algorithms andparticipate in Disaster Virtual Challenge and will compete along withTrack B teams for GFE Robot and funding award

Track D Unfunded teams develop platforms to compete in DisasterResponse Challenges


36/80

Planned Schedule and Funding



37/80

37

Planned Program Funding

The program has planned the following funding for teams. This plan is subject to

change depending on the number of qualified teams and available resources.

Phase 1Track A: Up to $3M for each team (up to five (5) teams for fifteen (15) months).

Track B: first nine (9) months through the Virtual Disaster Response Challenge:

Up to $375k for each team, with up to twelve (12) teams.

Track B/Track C: last six (6) months after the Virtual Disaster ResponseChallenge: Up to $750k additional for each team, with up to six (6) teams.

Phase 2Up to $1M for up to eight (8) of the top performing teams from the first physicaldisaster challenge.

PrizeAnticipated to be $2M to a single team.



38/80

Planned Key Dates

38

May 31, 2012 BAA Closing

October 2012 Anticipated Contract Awards/Program Kickoff

June 2013 Virtual Disaster Response Challenge

December 2013 Disaster Response Challenge #1

December 2014 Disaster Response Challenge #2



39/80

www.darpa.mil



40/80

BAA Process

Mr. Chris Glista

DARPA Contracts Management Office


April 16, 2012

40Distribution Statement A


41/80

BAA and any amendments posted in FEDBIZOPPS

BAA covers all info needed to propose

TIME PERIOD BAA is open until May 31, 2012

Instructions are detailed in the BAA (Follow closely)

Following the proposal instructions assists the evaluation

team to clearly understand what is being proposed and

supports a timely negotiation.

ALL questions to [email protected]

BAA Specifics

4/16/12 41Distribution Statement A


42/80

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 35

http://farsite.hill.af.mil

A general announcement of an agencysresearch interest including criteria for selecting

proposals of all offerors capable of satisfying theGovernments needs.

For the acquisition of basic and applied research

not related to the development of a specificsystem or hardware procurement.

BAA Background


k d ( )
http://farsite.hill.af.mil/http://farsite.hill.af.mil/


43/80

Used when proposals with varying technical and

scientific approaches can be expected

Proposals need not be evaluated against oneanother since they are not submitted in

accordance with a common work statement. Primary basis for selecting proposals shall be

technical, importance to agency programs, andfund availability.

Cost realism shall also be considered

BAA Background (cont.)


BAA B k d ( )


44/80

Contractors SHALL NOT subcontract technical or

scientific work without the contracting officersknowledge

BAA Background (cont.)


IMPLICATIONS


45/80

FAR PART 15 Contracting By Negotiation does

not apply in full No competitive range determination

No mandatory discussions

No opportunity for proposal revision

Cost and Pricing Data (certification required forall FAR-based contract proposals greater than

$700K) Subcontract consent and key personnel clauses to

be included in awards

IMPLICATIONS


C i ti


46/80

ALL questions to [email protected]

After Receipt of Proposals Government (PM/PCO)may communicate with proposers to understand themeaning of some aspect of the proposal that is notclear or to obtain confirmation or substantiation of a

proposed approach, solution, or cost estimate

Informal feedback may be provided once selection(s)are made no ranking provided

Communications


A li t Eli ibilit
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


47/80

All interested/qualified sources may respond

International participants/resources may participate tothe extent authorized by applicable SecurityRegulations, Export Laws, etc.

Small Business Participation Encouraged, Teaming Not

Required

Applicant Eligibility


A li t Eli ibilit ( t )


48/80

Government agencies/labs, FFRDCs cannot propose to

this BAA in any capacity, UNLESS they can clearlydemonstrate the work is not otherwise available from theprivate sector AND they also provide writtendocumentation citing the specific statutory authority (aswell as, where relevant, contractual authority)establishing their eligibility to propose to governmentsolicitations

Applicant Eligibility (cont.)


O i ti l C fli t f I t t


49/80

All facts relative to a potential conflict of interest must be

disclosed. Examples of conflicts listed at FAR Part 9.505

Provided Systems Engineering and Technical Direction

Contractors MAY NOT simultaneously provide SETAsupport and be a technical performer at DARPA withoutwaiver approved by DARPA Director

Organizational Conflict of Interest


A a d T pe


50/80

Award Instrument

Contract, Grant, Cooperative Agreement, OtherTransaction

http://farsite.hill.af.mil/ (FAR Contracts)

http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/html/321006r.htm (Grants,Cooperative Agreements)

www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/Docs/otguide.doc (Other Transactions)

In all cases the Contracting Officer shall have sole

discretion to select award type instrument

Award Type

4/16/12 50Distribution Statement

Rights to Technical Data and Computer Software
http://farsite.hill.af.mil/http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/html/321006r.htmhttp://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/Docs/otguide.dochttp://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/Docs/otguide.dochttp://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/html/321006r.htmhttp://farsite.hill.af.mil/


51/80

Assert rights to all technical data & computer softwaregenerated, developed, and/or delivered to which theGovernment will receive less than Unlimited Rights

Assertions apply to Prime and Subs

Justify Basis of Assertion

Use defined Basis of Assertion and RightsCategory

Assessed during evaluation under the Potential toAccomplish Technology Transition Evaluation Factor

Rights to Technical Data and Computer Software



52/80

Atlas Robot Overview for DARPA

Robotics Challenge

Robert Playter

Marc RaibertApril 16, 2012

Atlas Overview


53/80

Atlas Overview

Near copy ofPETMAN/Atlas

50th percentile male

anthropometry

27 actuated, hydraulicDOFs

2 on-board computers

Power tether

Sensing head Modular wrist

Protective shells

Current Performance


54/80

Current Performance

PETMAN Video

Robot Degrees of Freedom (DOF)


55/80

Robot Degrees of Freedom (DOF)

27 Active DOFs

NECK: 2 DOF BACK: 3 DOF

SHOULDER: 3 DOF

ELBOW: 1 DOF

WRIST: 2 DOF

HIP: 3 DOF

KNEE: 1 DOF

ANKLE: 1 DOF

Hands attach through modular

wrist Mechanical interface

Electrical & data interface

Actuator Design Targets


56/80

56

Actuator Design Targets

Joint DoF

Derived RoM in degrees

Add uction /Abd uctio n ( rx) Flex ion/Extension ( r y) Internal/Medial Ro tat ion ( rz)

min max range min max range min max range

hip 3 -30 30 60 -100 20 120 -10 70 80

knee 1 0 135 135

ankle 2 -40 40 80

mid foot n/a

back 3 -40 40 80 -35 25 60 -45 45 90

neck 3 -45 45 90 -90 90 180

shoulder 3 0 115 115 -90 50 140 -40 100 140

elbow 1 -135 0 135

wrist 3 -30 60 90 -85 85 170

Joint DoF

Derived Strengths in Newton-Meters

Adduct ion/Abduction (rx) Flex ion/Extension (ry) Internal/Medial Ro tat ion (rz)

Strength Strength Strength

hip 3 180 260 110

knee 1 220ankle 2 220

mid foot 0 Passive Flexure

back 3 100 180 110

neck 3 25 54

shoulder 3 110 110 80

elbow 1 100

wrist 3 30 15

Robot Weight Estimates


57/80

57

Robot Weight Estimates

Weight estimate for current design:

178 lbs

COMPONENTMASS

[KG]MASS

[LBS]

Pelvis & Leg 30.7 67.7

Torso & Back 9.8 21.5

Arm & Hand 10.2 22.6

Head & Neck 1.8 4.0

Hoses & Cables 3.4 7.6

Skin 17.0 37.5

Misc. Hardware 5.5 12.1

Fluid (Oil/Water) 2.5 5.6

ROBOT TOTAL 81 178

Power Plant 22.0 48.5

TOTAL 103 227

12%13%

2%

4%

21%

7%

3%

38%

Pelvis & Leg

Torso & Back

Arm & Hand

Head & Neck

Hoses & Cables

Skin

Misc. Hardware

Fluid (Oil/Water)

Power Tether


58/80

58

Power

Pack

Tether

Electric power Cooling water

Power Tether

Laboratory

Electrical

Power

Cooling Water

Robot Computing Architecture


59/80

Robot Computing Architecture

Robot Computer

Actuators (27)

Joint Sensors

Hands

GigE

CANbus

GigE

User Computer

Sensors- IMU

- LIDAR

- Stereo Cameras

CANbus

WIFI


60/80

Mr. Nate KoenigOpen Source Robotics Foundation, Inc.


61/80

Simulation for robots

Focus on accurate physical simulationEasy transition to and from simulation

Remove hardware issues and resource constraints

Support common robot control softwareCustom client code

ROS interface

Player interface

Support sharing of resourcesNew sensors, actuators, models, and environments


62/80

Additional Benefits

No real-time constraintsSimulate faster than real time

Regression testing

Use simulation for automated tests

Universal test environmentCreate benchmarks

Run a competitionFlexibility

Handles a wide range of environments and tasks

Thin programmatic layer to Gazebo functionality


63/80


64/80


65/80


66/80


67/80


68/80

Architecture

Physics Visualization Interfaces

Rigid Body Dynamics OpenGL Plugins and IPC

ODE

Bullet

OGRE Google Protobuf

Boost


69/80

Robot Models

Simple platformsBuilt-in shapesMesh skinning

Realistic physical propertiesMeshes as collision objectsMass and inertia propertiesSurface friction6 joint types

Full sensor suiteLaser range findersMono/Stereo camerasKinectContact

J oint force/torques


70/80

Environments

SimpleFocusedscenarioManipulationPerception

Aerial robotsOutdoor mobile and legged robots

Outdoor

Indoor

Path planningMobile manipulationClone real environment


71/80

Show video with next slide

Presenter will talk to it


72/80

Gazebo Demo

Part 1: Canyon fly-through

Custom terrain generated from a greyscale image

Animated quadrotorThanks to J ohannes Meyer and Stefan Kohlbrecher

Part 2: Pioneer2dx and office environment

Player interface used to drive the Pioneer2dx

Laser range finder sensor visualization

Part 3: PR2 and YouBotPR2 object manipulation using ROS Interactive markers

Part 4: Character animation

Experimental animation of characters using skeletons

Thanks to Mihai Dohla


73/80

Tools

Command line toolsSystem inspection

Insert and remove models

Graphical toolsModel placement

J oint and mass visualizations

Sensor visualizations


74/80

Resources

Robot modelsDistributed in Gazebo

Work in progress

Online model databaseGraphical model builder

EnvironmentsDistributed in Gazebo

Google's 3D warehouse

Google Sketchup or Blender

Help

http://gazebosim.org


75/80

Roadmap

1.2

VehiclesToolsOutdoor environmentsCluster support

1.4

Bullet integrationMulti-floor structuresSonar, force-torque, pressuresensors

1.6

Customize GUI APILarge environmentsVehicle suspension models

2.0

Friction and noise modelsHardware in the loopDeformable objects


76/80

Community

Support and Contributinghttp://gazebosim.org/support.html

Wikihttp://gazebosim.org/wiki

Kforge projecthttps://kforge.ros.org/projects/gazebo/


77/80

Thank you

Physics LeadJ ohn Hsu

Co-Founder: RetiredAndrew Howard

Core ContributorMihai Dolha

ContributorsChristian GagneraudBrian GerkeyStefan Kohlbrecher

J ohannes MeyerAlexis Maldonado

J ordi PoloAbbas SadatRichard Vaughan


78/80

78


We are on a temporary breakand will be back shortly


79/80

79


Q&A Response


80/80


Adjourn

Documents

DARPA Robotics