Christian B. Carstens

A tactile option to reduce robot controller size

In response to operational requirements for smaller robotic controller devices for use by dismounted US Army soldiers, three types of robot controller navigation map display configurations were evaluated for effects on beyond line-of-sight robotic navigation tasks. We predicted better performance with the larger split screen display that presents both a map display and a camera-based driving display on a 6.5 inch screen. Two smaller alternatives were also evaluated. One alternative was a 3.5 inch display that allowed the operator to toggle back and forth between the driving display and the map display. The third option added a torso-mounted tactile display to the toggle-based display in order to provide direction information simultaneously with the camera display and thus reduce the need to toggle as frequently to the map display. Each display option was evaluated based on objective performance data, expert-based observations, and scaled subjective soldier questionnaire items. Findings indicated that operators’ navigation performance with the multimodal 3.5 inch toggle display was as effective as their performance with a 6.5 inch split screen display. Operator performance was significantly lower with the 3.5 inch toggle display that did not have the tactile display.

Scaling Robotic Systems for Dismounted Warfighters

As robot usage becomes more widespread, there is a pressing need to develop smaller, lighter robotic control systems that have good training transfer from larger systems; do not overload the operator cognitively or physically; and enable good performance across a variety of settings. This article describes four experiments designed to investigate options for scaling robot controllers for dismounted use. The authors evaluated many different controller characteristics, chosen from consideration of available options and guided by factors expected to affect operator performance in realistic missions. These factors included camera display screen size, comparisons of handheld versus head-mounted displays and split screen displays versus toggle-driven and multimodal displays, and three approaches to reducing the size of the control interface. Each configuration examined was chosen on the basis of theory-based expectations and availability of technology. Participants were 108 soldiers from various military occupational specialties with ages ranging from 21 to 38. Results demonstrated the following fruitful methods for reducing controller size: reducing driving displays to between 3.5 and 6.5 inches, using handheld displays (HHDs), adding a tactile belt to a toggle screen for driving and map reading, and miniaturizing existing control size. All recommended options for reducing controller size had no adverse impact on cognitive requirements or performance.