(VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Finland)(2) Hanna Koskinen
(VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Finland)(3) Antti Väätänen
(VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Finland)*corresponding author
AbstractDesigning a swarm of autonomous robots for commercial, military, or other purposes is a challenging engineering and human factors design effort. The challenges argue in favor of practices and tools for better integration of different engineering disciplines and for the advancement of communication between stakeholders with different interests. The Concept of Operations (ConOps) approach is widely used in Systems Engineering for this purpose. A ConOps is a high-level description of how the elements of a system and entities in its environment interact in order to achieve their stated goals. This paper will present the development of a ConOps for a swarm of autonomous robotic vehicles in the military domain to demonstrate how autonomic robotic swarms can be deployed in different military branches in the future. The proposed ConOps can be considered as a boundary object in the design, validation, or procurement of an autonomous robotic swarm system. We also propose that the ConOps should be maintained throughout the system life-cycle as an overview description and definition of overall goals and policies.
KeywordsConcept of Operation; Knowledge Boundary; Boundary Object; Robotic Swarm; Autonomy; Human-Robot Interaction
|
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.31763/ijrcs.v2i4.834 |
Article metrics10.31763/ijrcs.v2i4.834 Abstract views : 922 | PDF views : 311 |
Cite |
Full Text Download
|
References
[1] S. F. Akkerman, and A. Bakker, “Boundary crosing and boundary objects,” Rev. Educ. Res., vol. 81, pp. 132-169, 2011, https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311404435.
[2] P. Alin, J. Iorio, and J. E. Taylor, “Digital boundary objects as negotiation facilitators: Spanning boundaries in virtual engineering project networks,” Proj. Manag. J., vol. 44, pp. 48-63, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1002/pmj.21339.
[3] B. T. Baxley, W. C. Johnson, J. Scardina, and R. F. Shay, “Air Traffic Management Technology Demonstration-1 Concept of Operations (ATD-1 ConOps), Version 3.0,” NASA/TM–2012-217585, NASA, 2016, https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20160010100/downloads/20160010100.pdf.
[4] B. A. Bechky, “Sharing meaning across occupational communities: the transformation of understanding on a production,” Organ. Sci., vol. 14, pp. 312-330, 2003, https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.14.3.312.15162.
[5] M. Bresnen, “Keeping it real? Constituting partnering through boundary objects,” Construct. Manag. Econ., vol. 28, pp. 615-628, 2010, https://doi.org/10.1080/01446191003587711.
[6] F. Cabitza, G. Colombo, and C. Simone, “Leveraging underspecification in knowledge artifacts to foster collaborative activities in professional communities,” Int. J. Hum. Comput. St., vol. 71, pp. 24-25, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2012.02.005.
[7] P. R. Carlile, “A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: Boundary objects in new product development,” Organ. Sci., vol. 13, pp. 442-455, 2002, https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.13.4.442.2953.
[8] P. R. Carlile, “Transferring, translating, and transforming. An integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries,” Organ. Sci., vol. 15, pp. 555-568, 2004, https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0094.
[9] B. Ewenstein, and J. Whyte, “Knowledge practices in design: The role of visual representations as ‘epistemic objects’,” Organ. Stud., vol. 30, pp. 7-30, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840608083014.
[10] R. E. Fairley, and R. H. Thayer, “The concept of operations: The bridge from operational requirements to technical specifications,” Ann. Softw. Eng., vol. 3, pp. 417-432, 1997, https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/292405.
[11] F. Flemisch, M. Heesen, T. Hesse, J. Kelsch, A. Schieben, and J. Beller, “Towards a dynamic balance between humans and automation: authority, ability, responsibility and control in shared and cooperative control situations,” Cogn. Technol. Work, vol. 14, pp. 3-18, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-011-0191-6.
[12] I. J. Grimstead, D. W. Walker, and N. J. Avis, “Collaborative visualization: A review and taxonomy,” in Proceedings of the 2005 Ninth IEEE International Symposium on Distributed Simulation and Real-Time Applications (DS-RT’05), 2005, https://doi.org/10.1109/DISTRA.2005.12.
[13] M. F. B. Mohamed Salleh, and K. H. Low, “Concept of operations (ConOps) for traffic management of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (TM-UAS) in urban environment,” In AIAA Information Systems-AIAA Infotech@ Aerospace, p. 223, 2017, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2017-0223.
[14] M. Kalashnyk-Rybalko, “Features of provision of sustainable navigation aids functioning under heliogeophysic disturbances,” Proceedings of the National aviation university, vol. 2, pp. 35-42, 2018, https://doi.org/10.18372/2306-1472.75.13115.
[15] A. C. Jost, “ConOps: The cryptex to operational system mission success,” J. Defence Software Eng., vol. 20, pp. 13-16, 2007, http://www.docdatabase.net/more-conopsthe-cryptex-to-operational-system-mission-success-898705.html.
[16] P. Korfiatis, R. Cloutier, and T. Zigh, “Graphical CONOPS development to enhance model-based systems engineering,” in Proceedings of the Third International Engineering Systems Symposium CESUN2012, Delft University of Technology, pp. 18-20, June 2012, http://calimar.com/CESUN2012-GraphicalCONOPS-MBSE.pdf.
[17] K. U. Koskinen, and S. Mäkinen, “Role of boundary objects in negotiations of project contracts,” Int. J. Proj. Manag., vol. 27, pp. 31-38, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.10.006.
[18] J. Laarni, H. Koskinen, and A. Väätänen, “Concept of Operations Development for Autonomous and Semi-Autonomous Swarm of Robotic Vehicles,” in HRI '17 Companion, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1145/3029798.3038380.
[19] A. Mostashari, S. A. McComb, D. M. Kennedy, R. Cloutler, and P. Korfiatis, “Developing a stakeholder-assisted agile CONOPS development process,” Systems Eng., vol. 15, pp. 1-13, 2011, https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.20190.
[20] H. Muslin, and M. Itoh, “A theoretical framework for designing human-centered automotive automation systems,” Cogn Technol Work, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-018-0509-8.
[21] G. Guglieri, and G. Ristorto, “Safety assessment for light remotely piloted aircraft systems,” In 2016 INAIR-International Conference on Air Transport, pp. 1-7, 2016, https://www.mavtech.eu/site/assets/files/2395/safety_assessment_for_light_remotely_piloted_aircraft_systems_inair_template_2016_final.pdf.
[22] K. S. Pratt, R. Murphy, S. Stover, and C. Griffin, “CONOPS and autonomy recommendations for VTOL small unmanned aerial system based on Hurricane Katrina operations,” J. Field Robot., vol. 26, pp. 636-650, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1002/rob.20304.
[23] C. Shannon, and W. Weaver, “A mathematical theory of communication,” The Bell system technical journal, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 379-423, 1948, https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb01338.x.
[24] T. B. Sheridan, and W. L. Verplank, “Human and computer control of undersea teleoperators,” Man-Machine Systems Laboratory Report. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 1978, https://doi.org/10.21236/ADA057655.
[25] S. L. Star, and J. R. Griesemer, “Institutional ecology, “translations” and boundary objects,” Soc. Stud. Sci., vol. 19, pp. 387-420, 1989, https://doi.org/10.1177/030631289019003001.
[26] B. Stark, C. Coopmans, Y. Q. Chen, “Concept of Operations of Small Unmanned Aerial Systems: Basis for Airworthiness Towards Personal Remote Sensing,” in Handbook of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, pp. 2339-2360, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9707-1_105.
[27] C. Thronesbery, A. Molin, and D. L. Schreckenghost, “A storyborad tool to assist Concept of Operations development,” in Proceedings of Aerospace Conference, 2007, https://doi.org/10.1109/AERO.2007.352990.
[28] S. Tillement, and J. Hayes, “Maintenance schedules as boundary objects for improved organizational reliability,” Cogn. Technol. Work, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-018-0530-y.
[29] L. Macchi, P. Oedewald, M. R. Eitrheim, and C. Axelsson, “Understanding maintenance activities in a macrocognitive work system,” In Proceedings of the 30th European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics, pp. 52-57, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1145/2448136.2448147.
[30] A. S. Kumar, G. Manikutty, R. R. Bhavani, and M. S. Couceiro, “Search and rescue operations using robotic darwinian particle swarm optimization,” In 2017 International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communications and Informatics (ICACCI), pp. 1839-1843, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1109/ICACCI.2017.8126112.
[31] S. Zieba, P. Polet, F. Vanderhaegen, and S. Debernard, “Principles of adjustable autonomy: a framework for resilient human–machine cooperation,” Cogn. Technol. Work, vol. 12, pp. 193-203, 2010, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-009-0134-7.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2022 Jari Laarni
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
| About the Journal | Journal Policies | Author | Information |
International Journal of Robotics and Control Systems
e-ISSN: 2775-2658
Website: https://pubs2.ascee.org/index.php/IJRCS
Email: ijrcs@ascee.org
Organized by: Association for Scientific Computing Electronics and Engineering (ASCEE), Peneliti Teknologi Teknik Indonesia, Department of Electrical Engineering, Universitas Ahmad Dahlan and Kuliah Teknik Elektro
Published by: Association for Scientific Computing Electronics and Engineering (ASCEE)
Office: Jalan Janti, Karangjambe 130B, Banguntapan, Bantul, Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta, Indonesia