UV Online 
AUVSI - Joint service EOD robot family concept outlined
Among the highlights at this week's Association of Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) Unmanned Systems Program Review 2009 was an update on current and future US joint service explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) robot activities.
"EOD has had robots out in the field since the 1990s," observed Byron Brezina. As a civilian assigned to the Naval Surface Warfare Center Naval EOD Technology Division (a field activity of the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA)), Brezina's overview reflected the U.S. Navy's role as "the single service manager for joint EOD technology training."
He began with a quick review of the current joint service EOD robot fleet, which encompasses approximately 2500 fielded systems, including Mk 1 (PackBot EOD - iRobot Corp.), Mk 2 (TALON - Foster Miller Inc.), and [approximately 350] Mk 3 (Remote Ordnance Neutralization System (RONS) - Northrop Grumman) designs.
Describing the current EOD robot fleet, Brezina noted that the systems are all "modified commercial items." As a result, they present joint service planners with a number of challenges. One example is found in different architectures - logical, physical, and electrical - between the systems. Other design challenges he identified included a lack of common controller, limited autonomy, and separate logistics footprints.
Some of these challenges are being addressed through programs such as the Mk 2 battery pack replacement effort, which replaces the current Mk 2 Lithium Ion custom battery pack with the military standard BB-2590 Lithium Ion battery.
However, Brezina noted that the "process of developing and fielding needed upgrades and enhancements is cumbersome and expensive."
One result of the current situation has been the emergence of a concept for a "next generation" of EOD robots. Called the Advanced Explosive Ordnance Disposal Robot System (AEODRS), it is emerging as a "family of UGV systems" that will be used by Joint EOD forces to counter the threat posed by unexploded ordnance (UXO) and improvised explosive devices (IED).
Brezina pointed to a number of key players on the current AEODRS Technology Team, including his own NSWC Naval EOD Technology Division, SPAWAR Systems Center Pacific, The John Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab, The Penn State University Applied Research Lab, and Battelle Memorial Institute.
In conducting the early AEODRS activity, the team is focusing on 10 'Technology Areas,' including key aspects like Standards / Architecture / Metrics, Communications, and Human - Robot Interaction.
As a result of this carefully considered emphasis, benefits being attributed to the emerging AEODRS 'family' include: interoperability across the entire family; increased industry competition; faster retrofit and upgrades; decreased logistics footprints; and the ability for users to configure the systems to meet the needs of a particular mission.
Noting that "the government will define all interfacing elements" between any two functional components, Brezina revealed the likelihood that the government would hold an AEODRS "Industry Day" in late summer or early fall to allow industry to comment on the draft system architecture.
He presented a rough projection of AEODRS programmatic milestones, including Technology Demonstrations running through the middle of 2010, followed by a "Milestone B" decision early in the 3rd Quarter of FY 10. That milestone, and the subsequent movement of the program into the Engineering and Manufacturing Development phase, would also need to be supported by a user-generated Capability Development Document (CDD). He added that the requisite CDD is being drafted at the current time.
The notional program structure outlined by Brezina outlines three different UGVs within the AEODRS family. The smallest, UGV 1, would be the lead system and follow the schedule noted above. Under the schedule, it would enter production late in 2013.
A second "Milestone B," which would address the medium (UGV 2) and large (UGV 3) components of the AEODRS family, would not occur until early in the 3rd Quarter of FY12.
He was quick to note that the family approach meant that the range of related science and technology projects would feed both of the "Milestone B" decision points.
Brezina then moved to some rough descriptions for each of the three elements, although stressing by disclaimer that there were all notional and could change at any time over the next year + until the CDDs are approved.
After reiterating the disclaimer, he described UGV 1 as tailored for the "Dismounted Operations" role. As such, it would be man-packable, with a notional weight of 35 pounds (including pack), have a 100 meter range, 6 hour battery endurance, a manipulator arm capable of 5 lbs. lift, an no stair climbing requirement.
The mid-sized UGV 2 would fill the "Tactical Operations" role within the AEODRS family. Disclaimers repeated, it could potentially call for the vehicle portion to be two-man transportable, with a weight of 164 pounds, a 1000 meter range, and two manipulator arms - with at least one of those being anthropomorphic in gripping, grasping, and movement capabilities.
AEODRS UGV 3 would fill the requirement for "Base / Infrastructure Operations." Heavier than the UGV 2, it would be able to fit through a 36 inch doorway, have a 1200 meter range, 6 hours battery endurance, and two manipulator arms - again, at least one of those with anthropomorphic features. The system would be capable of 75 lbs. lift at full manipulator extension and 300 lbs. for close-in lifting. Other possible characteristics include an 8 mph vehicle speed and stair climbing abilities.
"A common controller for all three systems is a given here," he added.
By Scott Gourley - North America Editor
Email this to a friend.