HR001119S0009.pdf

HR001119S0009

Broad Agency Announcement

ANGLER

TACTICAL TECHNOLOGY OFFICE

January 11, 2019

Contents

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

I. Funding Opportunity Description

A. Program Vision B. Program Description C. Program Risk Reduction and Demonstrations

II. Award Information A. General Award Information B. Fundamental Research

III. Eligibility Information A. Eligible Applicants B. Organizational Conflicts of Interest C. Cost Sharing/Matching

IV. Application and Submission Information A. Address to Request Application Package B. Content and Form of Application Submission

V. Application Review Information A. Evaluation Criteria B. Review of Proposals

VI. Award Administration Information A. Selection Notices and Notifications B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements C. Reporting D. Electronic Systems

VII. Agency Contacts VIII. Classified Addendum IX. Other Information

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

Federal Agency Name – Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Tactical Technology Office (TTO)

Funding Opportunity Title – Angler Announcement Type – Initial announcement.

Funding Opportunity Number – HR001119S0009 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) – Not applicable.

Dates o Posting Date – January 11, 2019 o Proposer’s Day – December 13, 2018 o Questions Due Date and Time – January 30, 2019, 11:59 PM (Midnight), EST o Abstract Due Date and Time – January 30, 2019, 4:00 PM, EST o Proposal Due Date and Time – March 23, 2019, 4:00 PM, EST o BAA Closing Date – July 10, 2019 o Concise description of the funding opportunity – Multiple performers will develop an autonomous undersea robot capable of transiting large distances and physically manipulating objects on the seabed with no communications or human intervention. Key aspects of the Angler program are classified. Only proposals addressing the classified aspects of Angler will be eligible for funding under this BAA. DARPA seeks proposals that present a credible path to a low cost, rapid demonstration of program objectives.

Anticipated Individual Awards – Multiple Awards o Anticipate multiple awards for robot design and integration (Track A) o Anticipate multiple awards for subsystem technology development (Track B)

Types of instruments that may be awarded – Procurement contract or other transaction for prototype.

Agency contact Points of Contact

The BAA Coordinator for this effort can be reached at:

HR001119S0009@darpa.mil

DARPA/TTO

ATTN: HR001119S0009

675 North Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-2114

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

I. Funding Opportunity Description

This publication constitutes a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) as contemplated in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.102(d)(2) and 35.016 and 2 CFR § 200.203. Any resultant award negotiations will follow all pertinent law and regulation, and any negotiations and/or awards for procurement contracts will use procedures under FAR 15.4, Contract Pricing, as specified in the BAA.

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is soliciting innovative proposals in the following technical areas:

Design and development of an undersea autonomous control system that processes mission commands, sensor inputs, and understanding of the seabed environment, and provides control inputs to a robotic system to complete physical manipulation objectives on the seafloor.

Design and development of an underwater robotic system that navigates to and physically manipulates objects in deep ocean environments.

Proposed research should investigate innovative approaches that enable revolutionary advances in science, devices, or systems. Specifically excluded is research that primarily results in evolutionary improvements to the existing state of practice.

A. Program Vision

1. Motivation for the DARPA Angler Program

Exploration and manipulation at the seafloor remains one of the most challenging earthbound domains, despite breakthrough advancements in terrestrial robotics, space robotics, and underwater sensing. While the seafloor can be assumed to be gently sloping sand dunes, the presence of natural and man-made obstacles significantly increases the complexity of search and navigation tasks. For example, large-scale structures, such as reefs, submarine vents, and fissures require careful traversal. Further, natural features can change at a much faster rate than traditional terrestrial environments, challenging classical perception techniques that are wholly dependent on feature recognition compared to a priori mapping. Finally, deep-sea missions can require continuous operation over thousands of kilometers without the aid of Global Positioning System (GPS) localization or human communication or cognition, imposing substantial autonomy requirements on an already complex system.

Underwater manipulation also presents several unique challenges. First, seawater may be partially opaque and turbid causing perception issues when performing search tasks, object recognition, or pose estimation. Second, since open ocean water tends to contain and deposit organic and inorganic detritus, manmade objects of interest may be deteriorated, slippery, partially covered or fouled, or adhered to other underwater structures. Third, due to the varied and often compliant composition of the seabed, operations at the sea floor do not offer the same permissive reaction forces and behaviors as are relied upon for terrestrial robots, while operations in the water column cannot rely on a fixed base at all, making for an even harder problem when manipulating heavy objects. Underwater manipulation therefore remains an extreme challenge, especially when executed autonomously rather than through teleoperation with the aid of human operators.

Currently, manipulation operations on the seabed are conducted by Remote Operated Vehicles (ROVs) tethered to a manned surface platform and tele-operated by a human pilot.

Exclusive use of ROVs severely limits the potential utility of robots in the marine domain, as ROVs cannot extend beyond their tether length and require multiple operators to achieve mission objectives. Wireless communications at the bandwidth necessary to reliably tele-operate an underwater robot is largely impractical due to the significant attenuation of electromagnetic wave propagation and available bandwidth in the acoustic spectrum.

To operate more effectively in these adverse underwater domains, DARPA is seeking proposals to develop a robotic system capable of long-distance, underwater manipulation missions. This robotic system, herein referred to simply as “Angler”, will operate autonomously and without external communication, to navigate, search, localize, and physically manipulate objects on or near the seabed, using an onboard sensor suite to self-localize, avoid obstacles, manage interaction with the seabed environment, and fulfill manipulation mission objectives. In addition to these navigation and positioning challenges, the robot will be able to perform these search and manipulation objectives autonomously, even in dark, turbulent, and semi-opaque sea conditions. Manipulation capability will be task-agnostic, allowing the onboard autonomy control module to identify optimal grasping, movement, and tool configurations to alter, place, or even recover underwater objects of interest. Specific missions and capability objectives are in the classified addendum to this BAA.

Within the scope of the Angler program, DARPA is specifically interested in the impact of technologies enabling manipulation and autonomy approaches in underwater robotics. Beyond the timeline of Angler program it is DARPA’s intention that these technologies be transitioned into an operational system that will adhere to strict specifications for support aspects relating to launch, recovery, storage, and maintenance. The final result of the Angler program should be designed to observe and conform to the support aspects of related existing underwater vehicles.

2. Program Goals

The Angler program seeks to migrate advancements from terrestrial and space-based floating-base robotics, terrestrial autonomous manipulation, and underwater sensing technologies into the undersea manipulation space, with specific focus on long-distance, seabed-based missions. Specifically, the program aims to discover innovative autonomous robotic solutions capable of navigating ocean depths, surveying wide areas, and physically manipulating manmade objects of interest. Given the unique challenges associated with this problem space, the Angler program seeks to realize technological breakthroughs that will offer key insights into:

a) Sensing techniques that provide high-resolution navigation in GPS-deprived underwater environments,

b) Perception and manipulation strategies for grasping degraded and malformed manmade objects with unknown parameters,

c) Long duration autonomy approaches that evaluate robotic self-awareness to optimize mission and individual objective execution, and

d) Undersea robots capable of long duration, long distance autonomy and mission planning without human intervention.

The Angler program will endow an underwater robot with the autonomy and control required to complete multiple, varied physical manipulation objectives during a single mission thread over an extended period of time without human intervention or surface expression. For this effort, performers should consider operations in deep ocean environments with reduced or no visibility, no communications, and no human interaction. Proposers should focus on autonomy and decision support algorithm technologies, prioritizing development and demonstration of new algorithms and techniques to identify challenging objects and plan and execute grasps of those objects. For affordability, where possible and appropriate, proposers should leverage existing hardware, software, simulation infrastructure and physical interfaces. DARPA envisions in-water demonstrations early in the program to prove capability and reduce technical risk, culminating in end-of-phase capstone demonstrations proving increasing mission complexity, increasing system capability, and operations in increasingly difficult environments.

DARPA offers the following additional guidance regarding the desired solution space to assist proposers in developing initial Angler concepts and scoping their efforts:

Capabilities of interest include, but are not limited to:

a) Autonomous mission execution to support long duration operations managing mission completion, energy consumption, risk, mission duration, mission and environmental uncertainty, and robot self-awareness

b) Information fusing techniques that continuously synthesize on-board sensors

c) Object recognition approaches that detect and classify manmade objects of interest in a natural environment

d) Ability for the robot to operate at or near the dynamic seabed while maintaining precision position control for manipulation activities

e) Autonomous grasp planning and execution algorithms to precisely interact with objects with unknown physical parameters (e.g. center of mass, center of buoyancy)

f) Ability to deliver explainable mission reports upon return and rendezvous with human operators, maximizing data retention to support mission evaluation and future mission planning

g) A novel underwater robot capable of efficient long-duration transits, dynamic station keeping at or near the seabed, and sustained sprint capabilities to evade obstacles and traffic

Technical elements for consideration include, but are not limited to:

a) Government purpose rights to autonomy frameworks built upon open architectures

b) Novel sensing hardware and integration approaches to support precision manipulation activities in a dynamic environment

c) Robot motion learning methods that enable increasingly effective operations through a mission progression

d) Adaptable manipulation hardware and decision making algorithms

e) Use of on-board storage for mission specific payloads and hardware

f) Sprint capability to egress mission areas or evade obstacles

g) Bi-manual manipulation capabilities

h) Novel approaches to asynchronous (i.e., not during the mission) command and control

i) Novel approaches for energy management and self-sustainment

j) Path planning approaches that use the natural environment for efficient transits

k) Manipulation techniques that minimize disturbances to the natural environment

DARPA specifically discourages proposals with focus in the following areas:

a) Evolutionary upgrades to existing technical capabilities that do not focus on Angler technology areas or address the Angler program vision

b) Significant hardware development in relatively mature technology areas such as physical manipulator arm design, energy sources, sonar arrays, and underwater cameras

c) Designs or concepts requiring a surface expression for any portion of the mission

d) Designs or concepts requiring a tether or inorganic connection of any kind back to an operator

e) Systems or experimentation using animals

A successful system will need to demonstrate a core set of capabilities required for baseline missions, in addition to tailored autonomy approaches for task-specific manipulation tasks. The core set of capabilities includes navigation and obstacle avoidance on or near the seabed, autonomous mission management, object classification and localization, and manipulation objective completion. Task-specific autonomy includes unique perception approaches or algorithms, trajectory and grasp planning approaches, and task-specific risk parameters. These capabilities will be demonstrated on a robot with integrated controls on tasks requiring high degree of freedom (DOF) manipulators, where all manipulation operations are considered from a floating-base robot amidst the effects of water currents and surface effects. It is DARPA’s intention to advance open architecture solutions in this technology space using robust Model Based System Engineering (MBSE) practices throughout the entirety of the program.

B. Program Description

The primary goal of the Angler program is to develop specific robotic solutions to address underwater navigation, autonomous grasping, perception in dynamic environments, and robotic control to identify and physically interact with seabed objects on a large scale. Another goal is to advance enabling technologies through transferrable or easily integrated subsystem development in each of the program’s Technical Areas (TA). The program objectives and structure facilitate leap-ahead improvements in critical enabling technologies while developing new robotic system approaches capable of independent mission fulfillment with no human intervention for prolonged mission deployments in challenging environments. This section provides an overview of the program structure and outlines how individual program elements relate to the Angler mission.

1. Program Technical Areas

DARPA has identified two distinct Technical Areas (TA) for exploration during this program: Autonomous Controls Systems Development (TA 1) and Robotic System Development

(TA 2).

a) Technical Area 1: Autonomous Controls Systems Development

This technical area focuses on the operational behaviors of the robotic system, including perception, mission management, and manipulation planning and execution. Performers will develop an open-standard, autonomous controls architecture capable of achieving Angler’s mission objectives by integrating sensing, decision-making, and autonomous grasp planning.

Successful implementation of this technical area will produce an autonomy architecture and modules for perception mapping and object recognition, mission-specific decision-making protocols, path planning, and manipulation/grasping strategies. For the purposes of integration, DARPA is interested in architectures and computer software approaches that use code available to the Government with Government purpose rights as set forth in the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) Part 227. Subject areas falling under TA 1 consist of:

Perception: Perception approaches will focus on object and feature recognition strategies for natural and manmade objects to support obstacle avoidance and manipulation planning and execution in dynamic, unstructured environments.

Mission Management: Autonomy of the system will at no point require or allow human intervention during mission execution, relying on onboard instruments and self-awareness as means to complete mission objectives based on pre-assigned mission objectives, contextual understanding of the environment, mission risk parameters and object locations.

Path Planning: Decision making processes will identify optimal routes between deployment location, objective areas, and rendezvous point to optimize energy consumption, mission success, positioning information, and environmental conditions.

Grasp Planning: Manipulation capabilities will develop grasp planning and execution to determine optimal robot approach trajectories and grasp orientations, considering object pose as well as obstructions, reaction forces, surface friction parameters, and malformed or occluded objects with unknown physical parameters

Successful TA 1 proposals will detail approaches to:

(a) Endow full mission execution without human intervention over a prolonged deployment, with capabilities to improve system performance throughout the deployment based on understanding, adaptation, and optimization,

(b) Implement automated object recognition, map generation, and map retention of unknown and challenging objects over vast search areas,

(c) Implement autonomous robot motion and manipulator grasp planning and control, and

(d) Efficiently gather, generate, or simulate training scenarios to reduce technology risk for at-sea demonstrations.

b) Technical Area 2: Robotic System Development

This technical area focuses on the operational control of the robotic system, including development and control of the high-DOF robot, physical control of the robot’s external manipulators, physical control of the robot’s payloads, and navigation in an austere environment.

Performers will develop and integrate the physical implementation Angler, addressing mission requirements pertaining to transit, object search, manipulation, sprint, and dynamic positioning of a floating-base robot. For the purposes of integration, DARPA is interested in architectures and computer software approaches that utilize software approaches that ensure Government purpose rights. Subject areas falling under TA 2 consist of:

Navigation: Navigation approaches to eliminate reliance on GPS through a surface expression for long duration missions from shallow to full ocean depth operations.

Robot Control: Systems will be able to precisely control movement of the free body in the underwater environment and manage vehicle integrations of sensors and hardware.

Manipulator Control: Control of the robotic manipulators to deliver the precision, workspace and lift capacity to complete the assigned missions.

Successful TA 2 proposals will detail approaches to:

(a) Robust, long-duration, GPS-less navigation approaches that are preferentially energy-efficient, and do not require pre-seeding aids to navigation,

(b) Systems engineering for developing and integrating highly complex subsystems in a single robot capable of completing the breadth of missions required,

(c) Robot control algorithms that will be used to manage a high-DOF, floating-base robot operating in proximity to seabed structures and objects,

(d) Manage the control of the high-DOF robot and manipulator system that may vary over time and in different operating environments

(e) Manipulator control for highly dexterous, precision operations in complex, dynamic environments,

(f) Close the perception hardware, robot control, and manipulator control loop during manipulation operations, and

(g) Test the robotic control systems early and often to reduce risk for integrated demonstrations in Phase 2 and 3.

2. Program Track Structure

The Angler program will include two performance tracks with similar goals but distinct scales. Track A necessitates full system development to include all Technical Area 1 and 2 objectives. Track B focuses on specific subsystem developments as part of either Technical Area 1 or 2. Proposers may choose to respond to both tracks within the Angler program. Proposals to Track A will focus on development of a single, integrated robot, addressing the full set of capabilities required to complete the mission vignettes defined in the classified addendum. Track A proposals will also include consideration for a future Angler operational system and its supportability attributes. These attributes include maximizing launch and recovery options from piers, boat ramps and/or surface ships; storage of the Angler vehicle on ships, at piers or at Naval bases; minimizing mission turnaround time (recovery, maintenance, refuel/recharge, payload reload, mission planning, launch). Proposals to Track B will develop specific subsystem technologies during Phase 1. Track A performers will have the opportunity to update their proposals for Phases 2 and 3 at the conclusion of Phase 1 to reflect updates based on developments in Phase 1 and potential integration of subsystems developed in Track B.

Performers in Track A are encouraged to maximize their ability for integration of new technologies developed in Track B. Performers in Track B during Phase 1 are encouraged to join Track A teams for Phases 2 and 3. Track A performers are encouraged to observe Track B quarterly reviews to facilitate integration of successful Track B technologies in subsequent phases.

Track Description

Track A

Responsible for full Angler system development, including both Autonomous Controls Systems Development (TA 1) and Robotic System Development (TA 2). Continued funding based on demonstrated and predicted performance.

Track B

Responsible for enabling technologies and specific subsystems for the Angler program in either TA 1 or TA 2. Performers in Track B are encouraged to team with performers in Track A to support full Angler system development during Phases 2 and 3.

Table 1: Descriptions of Track A and B participation in the Angler program

Track B exists separately from Track A to inform and possibly integrate into Track A proposals at the termination of Phase 1. Performers across both tracks should be able to accelerate the development of early stages of the robots with in-water testing in order to meet the aggressive timeline of this program. DARPA is specifically interested in solutions in both Tracks A and B that emphasize the ability to facilitate cross-Track integration. Note that:

a) A performer may submit multiple proposals to Track B provided there is no overlapping or identical scope of work between proposals.

b) A performer may submit a proposal to Track A and one or more proposals to Track B;

however, overlapping or identical scope of work will not be funded through multiple proposals. In the case where both proposals are considered selectable for potential award, the Track A proposal will be prioritized.

c) A performer proposing a critical enabling technology or subsystem in Track B may not propose the same critical enabling technology or subsystem as either a prime or a subcontractor to a Track A proposal.

After Phase 1 of the Angler program, Track B performers will not be funded directly (i.e., Track B performers will only be funded as part of a Track A team in Phases 2 and 3).

3. Program Phase Structure

The Angler program will be separated into three distinct phases. Each phase is intended to demonstrate the path to an integrated system with a specific trajectory toward improved capabilities to meet final program requirements.

a) Overview of Phase 1 (Component Demonstrations)

Phase 1 will last 12 months. For Track A performers, this phase will begin with a 3-month design period culminating in a Conceptual Design Review (CoDR) followed by simulation and/or lab demonstrations of the autonomy and robotic control subsystems. Track A Preliminary Design Review (PDR) and subsystem risk reduction demonstrations will be held by month 12. A Phase 2 & 3 proposal update period begins at month 9 to reflect subsystem demonstrations in Phase 1 and potential integration of Track B performers.

Track B performers will be responsible for independent advancement and development of subsystems through the first 12 months of this program. Multiple performers will cultivate subsystem technologies intended to enable perception, autonomy, mission control, robotic control, and long-distance precision navigation subsystems. All Track B performers will begin Phase 1 with a 5-month system design period leading to a CoDR, followed by risk reduction simulation, laboratory simulation or in-water demonstrations through month 10. The CoDRs and Phase 1 demonstrations can inform Track A PDR in month 12.

Phase 1 evaluation will focus on subsystem development, as pertaining to an exemplar mission defined in the classified addendum that involves the establishment of undersea infrastructure in an assigned geographic area with some location uncertainty while achieving metrics defined in Table 6. Teams should emphasize system testing and early reductions of risk to meet plans for Phases 2 and 3 of the program.

Throughout Phase 1, DARPA will establish opportunities for Track A and Track B teams to share their progress and technology and provide opportunities for teaming in Phases 2 and 3.

Detailed proposals for Phases 2 and 3 will be solicited from Track A prime performers at month 9 of Phase 1 and must be submitted by the time of the preliminary design review (PDR).

The decision to continue the program into Phases 2 and 3 is the prerogative of the Government and will take into account the availability of funds and the determination that performers have made sufficient progress towards meeting program performance objectives, maturing the required technologies, and addressing risks. Selection of Phases 2 and 3 proposals will be made using criteria to be specified in the proposal request. Evaluation of performance during Phase 1 will also be considered in the selection decision. The decision to participate in Phases 2 and 3 is optional. Proposal preparation costs for Phases 2 and 3 proposals will not be reimbursed under Phase 1 awards.

b) Overview of Phase 2 (Subsystem Demonstrations)

This phase will include Track A teams selected from Phase 1 Track A performers. DARPA expects the schedule and milestones to be proposed. This phase will focus on integrating Phase 1 subsystems as well as any selected subsystems from Track B performers.

Performers will be responsible for the development of a fully autonomous robotic system for seabed intervention. Performers will mature their PDR-level system designs to Critical Design Review (CDR)-level systems designs, build a prototype system, and demonstrate the prototype in a representative, natural environment, executing a mission defined in the classified addendum focused on infrastructure protection.

Throughout this phase, progression of autonomy system development will be regularly tracked though a series of functional code demonstrations, simulations or in-water tests. Key subsystems to be exhibited at these demonstrations include: 1) mission planning, monitoring, and execution, 2) sensor management, processing, and object classification, 3) robot control systems, and 4) manipulator control systems. The Phase 2 prototype should be supported by rigorous system design, engineering analysis, modeling and simulation of critical technology/construction process development, risk reduction demonstrations, and a high-fidelity operational performance assessment. Phase 2 will conclude with a system demonstration in a relevant operational environment addressing metrics defined in Table 6 while performing the Phase 2 mission vignette found in the classified addendum.

c) Overview of Phase 3 (Integrated Demonstrations)

DARPA expects the Phase 3 schedule and milestones to be proposed. During Phase 3, performers will develop a fully autonomous robot achieving the Phase 3 mission objectives and meet Angler program metrics. Performers will further enhance the prototype Angler robot developed in Phase 2 to achieve technology capable of long duration missions with multiple objectives in multiple areas. Focus areas for this phase include refinement of each subsystem from Phases 1 and 2, with specific focus on longevity, reliability, and autonomous operation.

Design development will advance to a Final Design Review (FDR) level in Phase 3 to provide an opportunity to address modifications before the final Phase 3 demonstration. Phase 3 will conclude with the delivery of the Angler system, support systems, and full system documentation. The final demonstration of the Angler program will include an at-sea demonstration in a representative environment including multiple classified mission-objectives, achieving metrics in Table 8.

4. Program Development Plan

Angler will consist of a three-phase program approach, with evaluations and demonstrations at the culmination of each phase. In Phase 1, robot subsystem requirements will be defined in the CoDR, and each system will then be matured to the PDR level, with demonstration of systems/subsystems to demonstrate both current capabilities and future trajectory to meet Angler future phase metrics. In Phase 2, each performer will develop a specific robot system to meet Angler program metrics and will mature their Phase 1 systems to the CDR level, culminating in the Phase 2 evaluation vignette. Phase 3 will see the further maturation of Phase 2 systems to their final levels. Note that a Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) cost only is requested for Phases 2 and 3, but supported by documented cost estimates defining the total program cost to support cost realism evaluations.The milestones and deliverables schedules for Phase 1 are fixed as outlined in Tables 2, 4, 6, and 7 for Tracks A and B. Track A performers may propose tailored schedules for milestones and deliverables for Phases 2 and 3. Accelerated Phase 2 and Phase 3 timelines are encouraged.

Table 2: Phase 1 Notional Milestones for Track A

Table 3: Phase 2 and Phase 3 Notional Milestones for Track A

Program Milestones (Track A) Phase Venue

Months After

Contract Award

Months After

ATP

Kickoff 1 DARPA 0 0 QPR 1 - Conceptual Design Review 1 SSC, San Diego 3 3

QPR 2 1 DARPA 6 6

QPR 3 1 SSC, San Diego 8 8 Demonstrations 1 Performer-defined TBD TBD QPR 4 - Preliminary Design Review 1 Performer Facility 11 11 Proposal Update 1 N/A 12 12

Program Milestones (Track A) Phase Venue

Phase 2 Contract ATP Kickoff 2 DARPA Quarterly Progress Reviews 2 Performer Facility Critical Design Review 2 DARPA Integrated System Demonstrations 2 Performer-defined Test Readiness Review 2 DARPA In-water Demonstration 2 TBD

FPR 2 DARPA

Phase 3 Contract ATP Kickoff 3 DARPA Quarterly Progress Reviews 3 SSC, San Diego Final Design Review 3 DARPA Test Readiness Review 3 SSC, San Diego Full Mission Demonstration 3 TBD

FPR 3 DARPA

Table 4: Phase 1 Deliverables for Track A

Deliverables Phase Format

Months After

Contract Award

Months After

ATP

Weekly teleconferences 1 Document, Slide Presentation Weekly Weekly Systems Engineering Management Plan

1 Document 2 2

System Requirements 1 Slide Presentation, Spreadsheet & Model (e.g. DOORS)

2 2

Integrated Test Plan 1 Slide Presentation and Document

3 3

Conceptual Design 1 Slide Presentation, Document & Model

3 3

Monthly Status Report 1 Document and EVMS (or equivalent cost/schedule tool)

Monthly Monthly

Quarterly Progress Report 1 Slide presentation, annotated Quarterly Quarterly Test reports 1 Slide presentation, Document 30 days after tests 30 days after tests Interface Control Documentation

1 Document 6 6

PDR & Final Report 1 Slide Presentation & Document 12 12

Table 5: Phase 2 and Phase 3 Notional Deliverables for Track A

Table 6: Notional Milestones for Track B

Deliverables Phase Format

Phase 2 Contract ATP Weekly teleconferences 2 Document, Slide Presentation Monthly Status Report 2 Document Quarterly Progress Report 2 Slide presentation, annotated Critical Design Review 2 Slide Presentation & Document Test plans 2 Slide Presentation and Document System Hardware & Documentation 2 Hardware & Documentation Demonstration Report 2 Slide Presentation & Document Final Report 2 Document

Phase 3 Contract ATP Weekly teleconferences 3 Document, Slide Presentation Monthly Status Report 3 Document Quarterly Progress Report 3 Slide presentation, annotated Test plans 3 Slide Presentation and Document Final Design Review 3 Slide Presentation & Document System Hardware & Documentation 3 Hardware & Documentation Demonstration Report 3 Slide Presentation & Document Final Report 3 Document

Program Milestones (Track B) Phase Venue Months After Contract Award

Kickoff 1 DARPA 0 QPR 1 1 SSC, San Diego 2 QPR 2 – Conceptual Design Review

1 DARPA 5

Test reports 1 Slide presentation, Document 30 days after tests

Technology Maturation Plan 1 DARPA 6 QPR 3 – Test Readiness Review 1 SSC, San Diego 8 Laboratory simulation/In-water Demonstration

1 TBD 10

FPR 1 DARPA 11

Table 7: Deliverables for Track B

5. Design Reviews

Track A teams should develop and submit a Systems Engineering Management Plan as part of their Phase 1 deliverables. This master plan should include, at a minimum, scheduled execution of a System Requirements Review (SRR), PDR, CDR, Test Readiness Review (TRR), and an FDR with content and entrance and exit criteria tailored from a recognized industry or military standard (e.g. “Operation of the Defense Acquisition System”, Department of Defense (DoD) Instruction 5000.02) for appropriate application to a technology demonstration program.

Proposals should clearly address how these standards will be tailored in the proposed effort. Any tailoring of design review content and criteria must include an assessment of the design maturation of the robot, technical risk, and must incorporate demonstrable technology maturation progress and relevant achievements. The Angler program system design review expectations for those aspects of the program are outlined below, followed by specific SRR, PDR, CDR, TRR, and FDR guidance and should be incorporated into the performer’s comprehensive list of tailored design review criteria. The tailored SRR, PDR and CDR entrance and exit criteria, as well as the tailored SRR, PDR, CDR, TRR, and FDR content checklists will be evaluated to assess the adequacy of the proposed systems engineering processes. In addition, these checklists will need to be approved by the Government prior to the start of the reviews to allow the Government to understand and assess the adequacy of the proposed tailoring of these reviews.

a) General

Requirements Development – A complete set of system requirements is established down to the lowest expected level of the system hierarchy (i.e., system, subsystem, and component) for the subject review. Each requirement must include verification

Deliverables Phase Format Months After Contract Award

Weekly teleconferences 1 Document, Slide Presentation Weekly System Requirements 1 Slide Presentation & Document 3 Conceptual Design 1 Slide Presentation & Document 5 Monthly Status Reports 1 Document and EVMS (or equivalent cost/schedule tool) Monthly

Quarterly Progress Review 1 Slide presentation, annotated Quarterly Interface Control Documentation 1 Document 12 System Hardware and Documentation

1 Hardware & Document 12

Final Report 1 Document 12 provisions, must be traceable to a source and be validated for incorporation into the full robot. System interfaces are identified and documented.

Design Definition – The preferred robot hardware and controls architecture is established down to the lowest expected level of the system hierarchy for the subject review, is traceable to and satisfies established requirements, and is sufficiently detailed to enable the next level of design definition. Appropriate design margins are identified and maintained.

Risk Management – Technical risks are identified and assessed (e.g., consequence and likelihood). Mitigation plans are in place along with associated completion criteria.

Technical risks have been updated with results of any mitigation activities.

Technology Maturation - Robot system attributes requiring maturation have been identified and associated analysis, test, and demonstration objectives have been documented. The representative test article design is documented.

b) SRR

The System Requirements Review will confirm that mission requirements and metrics have been translated into system-specific technical requirements. The SRR will provide evidence that technologies and systems critical to program success have been identified and demonstrable progress in these areas has been planned, with risks and corresponding mitigation plans identified, and will address the following at a minimum:

Requirements Development – Requirements are complete and preliminary interfaces are defined.

Conceptual Design – Technology conceptual design is complete, and the approach is shown to be feasible through initial analysis. A pathway to the preliminary design is identified.

Software Development – A software development plan, including verification and validation approach, is complete

Cost – Initial cost estimates are documented and show a feasible path to a Bill of Materials (BOM) cost that meets cost goals.

c) PDR

A Preliminary Design Review will consist of the initial design in terms of design requirements for each subsystem and any relevant configurations. The PDR will identify functions, performance, and interface requirements that pertain to any components at the subsystem level or below, and will address the following at a minimum:

Requirements Development - Robot and subsystem requirements are complete. Initial verification methods (e.g., Analysis, Inspection, Test, Demonstration) are identified and the specifics of the validation method is detailed (e.g. the specific test, analysis or demonstration). Requirements must be traceable to concepts that meet BAA performance metrics. External interfaces are documented.

Design Definition – Assess the allocated design documented in subsystem requirements.

Angler robot preliminary design is complete to the subsystem level, closes around documented requirements, adequately demonstrates that performance achieves minimum and maximum threshold ranges, and subsystems meet both program metrics and operational criteria of proposed mission vignette.

Software Development – Development plan with processes and metrics to measure progress. Adequately demonstrate through simulation or testing that software performance achieves minimum program metrics and operational criteria while accounting for operational and environmental uncertainty the Angler robot will be required to address to complete proposed missions. Demonstrate software scalability in meeting future risks and metrics. Adequately demonstrate sources and fidelity of training data used for any algorithms. Produce explainable models based on defined training or simulation data.

Risk Management – Risks must include robot subsystem design risks.

Technology Maturation – Desired trajectory of technological maturation is demonstrated to be achievable through planned development within program budget and schedule. Test plans define objectives and expected results that will validate design proof-of-concept.

Cost – Revised system cost cased on the preliminary design is documented and within established cost metrics.

d) CDR

The Critical Design Review will be used to determine if the system design documentation is sufficient to initiate system production. It will include reviews of hardware and software interfaces, as well as reviews of test plans, and will address the following at a minimum:

Requirements Development – Robot system component requirements are complete.

Verification approach for each requirement has been established. Traceability of requirements across all levels the system hierarchy must be documented. Internal interfaces between major subsystems are documented along with requirements allocated to each side of the interface.

Software Development – Updated development plan with included processes and metrics for design, performance evaluation, and test characteristics with supporting documentation. Continued demonstration of software maturity and simulation testing plan to meet future program metrics.

Design Definition – Robot system critical design is complete to the component level and achieves compliance with all associated requirements.

Technology Maturation – Initial testing results support proceeding with planned conditions representative of evaluation mission.

Cost – Design for robot system costs are documented and within cost metrics.

e) TRR

The Test Readiness Review will assess test objectives, procedures and resources testing coordination. The TRR will determine the completeness of the test procedures to be applied in the proposed system demonstration(s), as well as their compliance with previously planned test outlines and descriptions, and will be captured in test plans provided for government review.

The TRR should be conducted substantially ahead of the demonstration to allow adjustments based on Government feedback. Demonstration unit design and instrumentation for recording data associated with major performance requirements should be reviewed. Limitations of the test should be discussed and possible mitigations considered.

Prior to the TRR, the performer should confirm the following criteria:

All hardware is available or will be delivered in time with a reasonable margin for system integration and demonstration;

All firmware/software is in a final review/simulation and under configuration control;

The test article(s) and the procedures and plans for their use have been submitted to the safety entity responsible for evaluating the test safety;

Training material is complete for personnel to be involved in the testing concerning the objectives of the test(s) and jobs personnel are responsible for accomplishing;

Resources (people equipment, and materials) need to accomplish the testing are available and ready for testing;

The equipment, facilities, and ranges (if applicable) are evaluated as ready for test; and Documentation of evaluations, assessments, plans, procedures, training, and other factors applicable to tests are available for Government review.

f) FDR

The Final Design Review will be used to primarily as an opportunity to confirm design decisions and review alignment with the program vision and SEMP. Additionally, the Final Design Review will verify any planned changes or developments required before the completion of the Angler program. The FDR will also serve as an opportunity to discuss projected risks and mitigation strategies in future development beyond the Angler program.

6. Program Metrics

Program success will be evaluated against a set of high-level mission metrics (Table 8) and mission vignettes. It is expected that performers will use these metrics and vignettes to derive and track functional and physical requirements for subsystem development. Paramount to the Angler program is the ability to execute mission with no external support (e.g., external positioning signals, remote operation, etc.).

Table 8: Angler Program Metrics

a) Metrics overview

Autonomous Control o Operational environment: The Angler system is expected to be capable of operating in dark, turbid and dynamic seabed environments throughout the world. Proposals should reflect the ability of the system to operate in these environments, as demonstrations will be conducted in these environments to show system maturity.

o Human Interventions: Number of accepted physical or digital interactions with a human or human controlled robot, device, or object.

o Object types: Known objects are those that are made available to Angler during mission planning, with knowledge of specific features or dimensions. Unknown objects are those that may be defined by approximate shape, dimension, or other features during mission planning. Proposers must provide detailed characterization of the parameters of objects able to be manipulated by their proposed solution (e.g., minimum and maximum dimensions, weight and material types).

Robotic Control o Total Mission Range: Minimum expected distance between launch point, objective areas and recovery point. This does not include required distances to search, locate and confirm objects of interest based on object uncertainty, defined below. Proposals should indicate search capability of the system (search rate, sensor coverage, etc.).

o # of objectives per mission: Number of physical manipulation objectives per single deployment of the robot.

o Object uncertainty: Radius defining 50% probability that object of interest falls within this radius.

o Manipulation capability: Manipulation objective required to complete each mission.

o Endurance: Expected minimum operation time to complete the transit and manipulation objective(s) defined in the classified addendum. It is expected that endurance will exceed the time required for the system to complete the missions, allowing for periods of dormancy or low energy operations.

o Sprint: Capability of the system to sprint for 1 hour at 6 knots average speed through water (speed of robot relative to the water) after each physical manipulation objective is completed to evade obstacles o Size: Maximize size of the vehicle to support independently deployed operations (primary) and ship launched applications (secondary) o Operating Depth: Expected maximum operating depth

C. Program Risk Reduction and Demonstrations

1. Phase 1 Demonstration

For both Tracks A and B, Phase 1 will focus on establishing overall baseline functionality of Angler subsystem capabilities and path to an integrated system. This will include all subsystems pertaining to the success criteria outlined above in Table 8. Performers will provide a technology maturation plan supporting success and scalability of presented technology, including aspects from robot control, manipulation, perception, and navigation beyond these threshold benchmarks during this process.

For this phase, Track A and B teams will propose the test structure, location, and environment sufficient to demonstrate the subsystem capability and path to achieving Phase 2 and 3 objectives in a quantifiable manner. The primary objective of the mission in this phase regards the establishment of undersea infrastructure, summarized below and defined in the classified addendum.

a) Sample mission vignette:

This mission begins with a transit over a controlled seabed environment. Angler robots should plan for a dynamically changing and unstructured environment, including currents, poor lighting conditions, soil flurries, animals, and potentially moveable terrain.

Following successful navigation to the first task location, the Angler robot will search a known set of undersea infrastructures to conduct a mission to further expand or establish the infrastructure. See Section III (“Objective #1”) in the classified addendum for additional details.

Upon completion of undersea infrastructure establishment, the Angler robot will develop and execute a navigation plan to transit to a rendezvous location that may be different then the initial start location.

Figure 1: Angler Phase 1 mission vignette, consisting of a single objective area

b) Phase 1 Development Objectives:

Successfully navigate Phase 1 mission thread without external (e.g., GPS) navigation aids, without human intervention, and with sufficient onboard energy storage

Successfully identify and localize cooperative objects with known characteristics and demonstrate ability to perceive object grasp approaches in controlled environment

Successfully develop and execute grasp plan to physically manipulate objects

Successfully control robot positioning to complete manipulation-related objectives

2. Phase 2 Demonstration

Phase 2 will consist of partially or fully integrated Angler prototypes completing an underwater mission in an operationally relevant environment. The specific mission is detailed in the classified addendum.

For this phase, a highly integrated Angler prototype demonstrated in an operationally relevant test environment (dynamic, dark and turbid waters) is favored. Prior to deployment, the Angler robot will be provided with mission parameters, and will be expected to be self-deployed and complete all other mission objectives autonomously.

a) Sample mission vignette:

This mission begins with a transit over a dynamic seabed environment of varying conditions. Angler should plan for a dynamically changing and unstructured environment, including variable currents, poor lighting conditions as found in the disphotic and aphotic zones and as induced by turbidities as defined in Table 6, benthic and pelagic organisms, and unstable terrain.

Upon arrival at the first objective area, Angler will complete the objective #1. See Section III (“Objective #1”) in the classified addendum for additional details.

Following the completion of the first objective, Angler will develop and execute a navigation plan to a second mission objective area. This transit includes a sprint phase lasting a minimum of 1 hr at 6 knots speed through water (speed of robot relative to the water).

Following successful navigation to the second objective area, Angler will complete the objective #2. See Section IV (“Objective #2”) in the classified addendum for additional details.

Upon completion of the two mission objectives, Angler will develop and execute a navigation plan to transit to a rendezvous location that may be different then the initial start location. This transit includes a sprint phase lasting a minimum of 1 hr at 6 knots speed through water (speed of robot relative to the water).

Figure 2: Angler Phase 2 mission vignette, comprised of two objective areas (sequence chosen by Angler)

b)…