Miller Robotic Interface II Manual de usuario descargar pdf (Pagina 56)

positive comments for INL identified the ability to have both a three dimensional and two-

dimensional map. Subjects also liked the waypoint marking capabilities of the INL interface.

Due to these results, we modified the guideline that states the system should provide a map of

where the robot has been. We changed it to state that the system should provide a map of

where the robot has been and also allow the ability to label the created map with landmarks,

labels and waypoints (if the system supports autonomy).

There were a similar number of comments made on video about the two systems (13 for UML

and 16 for INL), seeming to suggest that video is very important in this task and that most

subjects were focused on having the best video possible. There were more positive comments

for UML (10 positive and 3 negative) and more negative comments for INL (3 positive and 13

negative). The INL video window moved when the camera was panned or tilted; the robot

stayed in a fixed position within the map while the video view moved around the robot. This

video movement caused occlusion and distortion of the video when the camera was panned and

tilted, making it difficult to use the window to identify victims or places in the environment.

Interestingly, most of the positive video comments for UML did not address a fixed position

window (only 1 comment). Four users commented that they liked the ability to home the camera

(INL had two positive comments about this feature as well). Three users commented that they

liked having two cameras.

All comments on input devices were negative for both robots, suggesting that people just expect

that things will work well for input devices and will complain only if they aren’t working. There

were a similar number of positive comments for autonomy, suggesting that users may have

noticed when the robot had behaviors that helped. It is possible that the users didn’t know what

to expect with a robot and thus were just happy with the exhibited behaviors and accepted

things that they may not have liked.

We saw many more comments on UML’s sensors (non-video), which identifies the emphasis on

adding sensors on the UML system. INL had two negative comments for not having lighting

available on their robot. UML had ten positive comments (one each for lights, FLIR and CO2,

four for the zoom mode display and three for the sonar ring display) and three negative

1 2 ... 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 ... 79 80

Sin comentarios

Miller Robotic Interface II Manual de usuario Pagina 56