












































Microsoft Word - 22-31_187.docx


ISSN 2744-1741 
Defense and Security Studies  Original Research 
Vol. 3, August 2022, pp.22-31 
https://doi.org/10.37868/dss.v3.id187 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) that allows others 
to share and adapt the material for any purpose (even commercially), in any medium with an acknowledgement of the work's 
authorship and initial publication in this journal. 
 22 

 
 
Minimum viable product: A robot solution to EOD operations 
 
Hamza Bećirspahić1*, Haris Basarić2, Tarik Namas3, Benjamin Duraković4 
1   Mechanical Engineering Department, International University of Sarajevo, Bosnia 
2,3 Electrical and Electronics Engineering Department, International University of Sarajevo, Bosnia 
4   Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences, International University of Sarajevo, Bosnia 
 
 

*Corresponding author E-mail:  hamzabecirspahic@gmail.com  

Received Feb. 27, 2022 
Revised Jun. 19, 2022 
Accepted Jun. 28, 2022 

Abstract 
This paper presents design and development of EOD robot, with MVP 
characteristics. The design is based on a solid base structure with arm 
manipulator attached to the base. The overall dimensions of the robot are 
590x860x340 mm and it weighs 55 kg. The robot is capable of towing heavy 
objects as well as lifting sensitive objects. The robot has a maximum horizontal 
reach of 1400 mm and a vertical of 1200 mm. The robot is tested according to 
guidelines developed in the USA, as much as the conditions allowed. Briefly, the 
results can be summarized as follows: the setup time for the robot is 10 minutes, 
it can reach speeds up to 8 km/h, it has a towing capacity of 40 kg and the 
maximum communication reach is 20 m. Among successful tests, the weaknesses 
were also found which act as a guide for future designs and developments. These 
weaknesses are what MVP concepts are actually developed for. 

© The Author 2022. 
Published by ARDA. 

Keywords: Explosive ordnance disposal, EOD robot, Ordnance, Robot testing, 
Minimum viable product, MVP 

1. Introduction 
Landmine and Cluster munition monitor reported that around 26 states and 3 other areas are contaminated by 
Cluster munition remnants, as of August 2021 [1]. Cluster munition remnants are defined, by the Convention 
on Cluster munition, as conventional munition designed to disperse explosive submunitions, weighing less 
than 20 kg and including that submunition, that failed to detonate [2]. It is very easy to conclude that the 
impact is still widely present and it is being addressed by many organizations, international as well as 
national. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, among the countries most hit by cluster munition and landmine 
contamination, the problem is still being addressed, as the country asked for the extension of the deadline for 
clearance in 2021 and expects clearance to be completed by late 2022 [1]. 

There is one more problem authors found. The defense industry companies, locally, are testing explosives at 
their premises and after an unsuccessful testing usually the human operator dismantles the explosive by hand 
which can lead to severe injuries, not uncommon to occur in these companies. This and the facts mentioned in 
the first paragraph, are what inspired and motivated the authors to try to contribute to a solution.  

The solution, as seen by the authors, is a remotely controlled robot that is equipped with a manipulator and a 
gripper and capable of handling operations that are required in an Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD). Since 
EOD robots are readily available on the market, some of the most popular are presented in Table 1. 



 DSS Vol. 3, August 2022, pp.22-31 

23 

Table 1. EOD robots available on the market 

 Company Model Max. lift  capacity Weight 
Reach  
(Forward) Speed Reference 

1. Telerob,  Germany 
tEODor 
EVO 100 kg 383 kg 1860 mm 3 km/h [3] 

2. 
Northrop 
Grumman,  
U.S.A. 

Andros F6A 61 kg 220 kg 1440 mm 4.8 km/h [4] 

3. QinetiQ Inc.,  U.S.A.  TALON 68 kg 81 kg 1570 mm N/A [5] 

4. 
L3Harris 
Technologies, 
U.S.A. 

T7 113+ kg 322 kg 2200 mm 8+ km/h [6] 

5. SuperDroid Robots, U.S.A. 
LT2-F 
“Bulldog” 

7+ kg 
Full 
extension 

40 kg 1220 mm 2 km/h [7] 

6. SuperDroid Robots, U.S.A. 
HD2-S 
“Mastiff” 

9+ kg 
Full 
extension 

68 kg 
Heaviest 
configuration 

890 mm 2 km/h [8] 

7. 
NIC Instruments 
Ltd., United 
Kingdom 

ZEUS 15 kg 51.7 kg 1460 mm 3 km/h [9] 

tEODor EVO is an EOD robot developed by Telerob company. The robot is capable of performing not just 
EOD operations but also CBRN operations, which stands for Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear 
threats. It is equipped with a 6 degrees-of-freedom manipulator and an onboard tool magazine for convenient 
remote tool change. It has intuitive control handling and it is very popular with military and law enforcement 
agencies [3]. 

Andros F6A is an EOD robot developed by a subsidiary company of Northrop Grumman, Remotec Inc. It is 
distinguished by the capability to pneumatically release its wheels for width reduction when applications 
demand it. It is equipped with a 7 degrees-of-freedom manipulator and capable of 3-4 hours on mission 
operations [4]. 

TALON robots are EOD robots developed by QinetiQ Inc. They are in active service since 2000s when they 
were used in Bosnia and Herzegovina for the disposal of live explosives. TALON robots are also one of the 
lightest robots on the market that are equipped with multiple degrees-of-freedom manipulators. It can also be 
equipped with multiple cameras with the option to be mounted with thermal cameras as well. The advantage 
of TALON certainly is the number of options that the controller comes with, for example, it comes as LCU, 
meaning Laptop Control Unit, as well as TRC, Tactical Robot Controller [5]. 

T7 is a heavy-duty robot developed by L3Harris Technologies in the United States. It is designed to assist not 
exclusively EOD operations but also HAZMAT, meaning hazardous materials cleanup, intelligence and 
surveillance operations as well. It can be mounted with many different tools such as a disruptor, which blasts 
pressurized water to neutralize the threat on-site, a forklift and many different sensors such as the sensors for 
CBRN operations. One of the most significant characteristics of this robot is certainly the haptics control it 
utilizes. Haptics provide the operator with the sense of touch and proximity, almost as good as a bare hand can 
provide [6]. 

SuperDroid Robots company manufactures the model LT2-F, commonly known by the name “Bulldog”. This 
model comes in many different configurations. It can be equipped with a 4-axis or a 6-axis arm manipulator, 
that can be equipped with wire cutters, different sensors for different applications. The arm manipulator can 



 DSS Vol. 3, August 2022, pp.22-31 

24 

be shortened or removed as well to aid in low clearance areas. As previously listed models it can be applied in 
many different scenarios, ranging from EOD to remote surveillance and building cleanups [7]. 

HD2-S also known as the “Mastiff” is another model manufactured by SuperDroid Robots. This model is a bit 
bulkier model compared to LT2-F model. It as well comes in different configurations and can be equipped 
with wire cutters and application dependent sensors. Capable of staying operational up to 8 hours [8]. 

Zeus EOD robot is developed by NIC Instruments Ltd. It is a very reliable product that utilizes a very 
effective communication type, an FSK, meaning Frequency Shifting Keying, which is a communication type 
that employs alternating frequencies used in communication to avoid any noise disturbances. It is equipped 
with a battery capable of operating from 2-4 hours, mission dependent. It comes in different configuration 
with different arm sections, meaning different degrees-of-freedom manipulators [9]. 

The preferred communication in unmanned vehicles utilizes the EMS (Electromagnetic spectrum), between 
operator unit and robot, because it ensures a long range of operation. The waveforms of the communication 
are encrypted, especially when used in military applications [10]. Sometimes EMS is not applicable, because 
of strong interferences or large pieces of metal, which disrupt the signal. In those instances, some 
manufacturers provide a cable connection, which can reach up to 200 m, ideally a fiber optic cable [9].  

The pricing of these robots is not readily available on the official websites of the companies. An interesting 
article, which presents cost-wise accessible EOD solutions, states that the range of prices for commercial 
robots, such as the ones presented in Table 1., is from $40 000 to $150 000 [11]. 

The purpose of this paper is to design a minimum viable product for EOD operations. An iterative design-
build-test cycle is performed with the aim of developing a low-cost optimal physical platform for EOD robot 
in the category. The configuration test purpose is to quantitatively evaluate the packaging and setup tools used 
to start up the robot. The goal is to come up with metrics about the weight of packaging, setup time from 
configuration to deployment, weights of the control unit and the tools needed for repair. Particularly, the 
following objectives are achieved: physical design and development, mobility test on a flat paved terrain, 
mobility test with towing capacity, radio communications test by establishing a line of sight, manipulation test 
grasping dexterity and robot configuration for logistics tests.  

2. Methods  
The design of an EOD robot proposed by the authors was inspired by the robots readily available on the 
market. The base structure of the robot is made from steel bars, roughly 25 cm2 in cross-section area. The bars 
are welded together to form a structure that consists of two rectangles connected by bars with an angle, as 
seen from the side. The rectangle closer to ground level is reinforced by bars welded to form a cross like 
symbol. Four DC motors are used to power mobility and they are welded on to the lower rectangle, with steel 
axels welded on them and to the wheels. The wheels are standard inflatable rubber wheels that come from 
small garden carts. The manipulator is made of three steel bar segments. The first segment is welded to the 
bottom of the base structure at its middle and extends some 50 cm from the weld. The second segment is 
welded to a door hinge which is welded to the first segment and the same procedure is applied to the third 
segment as well. The gripper is positioned at the end of the third segment and is made from aluminum. It is 
manufactured on a CNC machine and coated in plastics on the inside to secure maximum gripping. The 
manipulation of the arm is made possible by three linear electrical actuators which can lift weights up to 100 
kg, respectively. The actuators are fastened to the segments of the arm manipulator by screws and nuts. The 
whole base structure is enclosed by plywood pieces and inside is the „brain“ of the robot. Electronically, the 
robot is manipulated by simple relays which are powered through a car battery of 12 V. The opening and 
closing of switches, depending on the operation that needs to be applied, and the relays is controlled by 
Raspberry Pi which is powered by a power bank. The underlying circuit is called an H bridge. The 
communication with the robot is established through the wireless network connection that Raspberry Pi emits. 
The final design elaborated is presented in Figure 1. followed by Table 2. where the components used in the 
manufacturing are briefly presented. 



 DSS Vol. 3, August 2022, pp.22-31 

25 

As the title of this paper suggests, the authors presents a Minimum Viable Product (MVP), described as: “a 
version of a new product that allows a team to collect the maximum amount of validated learning about the 
customers with the least amount of effort “, by Eric Ries, founder of Lean Startup methodology [12]. 

 
Figure 1. Design of the robot 

Table 2. List of components built in physical steel platform 
Number. Component Specifications Quantity 

1.  Motor 12V high torque motors 4 
2.  Wheel 20 cm diameter wheel 4 

3.  Relay 5V 8 channel output relay board, maximum current 10A 2 

4.  Raspberry Pi Raspberry Pi model 4 1 
5.  Battery 12V car battery 1 

6.  Actuator Linear electric actuator 12V, maximum load capacity 100 kg 3 

7.  Power bank 5V DC power bank 1 

It is important to emphasize the Viable part of the name as well as the Minimum part and not fall into the trap 
of favoring one over another [13]. In other words, the product has to satisfy the functionality requirements. 
The authors do emphasize that their design is not fully functional as compared to the robots listed in Table 1. 
in the introduction.  

The Department of Homeland Security of U.S.A. alongside with the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology wrote a guide on the topic of testing and validating performance indicators of response robots, 
which include robots applied in dismantling explosive devices, searching for survivors in collapsed structures, 
investigating of illicit border tunnels and many more fields of application [14]. Under the sponsorship of 
Department of Homeland Security, the response robots undergo real-life scenarios which can include 
navigating through the test site and execution of different tasks such as: climbing stairs, handling of objects 
with manipulators, testing of communication range and many more [14]. The tests performed in this research 
are: Logistics - robot test configuration, Mobility on a flat paved terrain, Mobility with towing capacity, Radio 
communications - establishing a line of sight, Manipulation- grasping dexterity [14].  

The mobility on a flat paved surface evaluates the speed of the robot. It is done by navigating the robot 
between two pylons 50 m apart. Average time is calculated from 10 repetitions. Mobility with towing capacity 
evaluates the maximum capacity the robot can tow on a flat paved surface. Average time for 10 repetitions is 
used as a metric. Radio communications test method establishes a line of sight which is the maximum 
downrange distance at which the robot completes the tasks to verify the functionality of control, video, audio 



 DSS Vol. 3, August 2022, pp.22-31 

26 

and sensing mechanisms. Manipulation evaluates the grasping dexterity of the arm manipulator. It is measured 
by the number of pick-and-place operations a robot can complete in as little time possible. 

In addition to tests elaborated above, energy consumption of the robot is also measured. It is evaluated using a 
multimeter, which measures how much current is drawn by actuators under specified load application.  

3. Results and discussion 
As a result of the methods used in the construction of the robot, the basic specifications of the robot are 
presented next. The robot`s base structure is roughly 590 mm in width, measurement which includes wheels, 
820 mm in depth, measured from the center of the wheels and 340 mm in height, measured from the ground 
up. The arm manipulator has a maximum reach of roughly 1400 mm in horizontal direction and a maximum 
reach of 1200 mm in the vertical direction. The overall weight of the robot is roughly 55 kg, which includes 
all inside components. The dimensions are displayed in Figure 2.  

 
Figure 2. Dimensional sketch of the robot 

The robot`s functionality is measured according to the guidelines presented in the methods section. The 
guideline was written by the Department of Homeland Security with its associates. The authors specifically 
chose applicable tests from the guideline such as setup time, speed test, mobility with towing capacity, radio 
communication test, object manipulation and lifting capacity. The test results are briefly presented in Table 3.  

Table 3. Test results 

Setup time Speed 
Mobility 

with towing 
capacity 

Flat 
paved 

surface 
mobility 

Radio 
communication 

test 
Manipulation 

of objects 
Lifting 

capacity 

10 min Up to 8km/h 40 kg 
10 

repetitions 
in 10 min 

20 m line-of-
sight 

3 objects per 
10 min 

At full 
extension 15 

kg 

The first test conducted is the robot test configuration which measures the setup time of the robot and its 
equipment. The authors also took into consideration the transport of the robot using an automobile. Since the 
height of the arm, when all the actuators are in the fully retracted position, prevents the robot to fit into an 
average size automobile, a necessary measure is to dismantle the actuator, stemming from the base of the 
robot to the arm, to be able to fit the robot into the automobile. This increases the setup time which amounts to 
10 minutes and includes: extracting the robot from the car, connecting the actuator that was dismantled 
previously, connecting the power wires to the car battery, connecting the power bank to the Raspberry Pi and 
finally connecting the laptop to the Wi-Fi connection of the Raspberry Pi. The most time-consuming setup 



 DSS Vol. 3, August 2022, pp.22-31 

27 

process is surely the connection of the actuator which requires the use of ordinary plyers and a size 13 wrench. 
To conclude the results, setup time amounts to 10 minutes, with the weight of the equipment of 4 kg (laptop as 
the control unit, plyers and a wrench, additional wiring for repair). 

The second test conducted is the „speed test“. According to authors measuring, the robot can achieve speeds 
up to 8 km/h, which is competitive enough. The authors note that the robot does not possess speed control, 
since the DC motors are taken form windshield car wipers and are programmed to utilize one speed of motion. 
On the bright side, these DC motors can generate around 30 Nm of torque, well enough to power the robot.  

Mobility with towing capacity is the test that the authors conducted inside the laboratory where the robot is 
constructed. The maximum tow value tested is 40 kg. The robot`s capability of towing motion was also 
successfully tested with the towing of a wheeled chair with a person sitting on the chair. Although the chair is 
wheeled, this test proves that the robot has substantial towing capacity.  

Radio communications test, testes the capability of the robot to continue working and receiving signals from 
the control unit far away from it. This test is probably the weakest point of the robot, since the communication 
with the robot is achieved through Wi-Fi signal of the Raspberry Pi. The furthest distance away from the 
control unit, at which the communication still operates without interferences is roughly around 20 m. This 
distance is further lowered with the introduction of obstacles such as walls. This weak point is surely 
something the authors are working to improve.  

Manipulation of objects is a test which measures the capability of the robot to pick-and-place as many objects 
in as little time possible. The authors do mention here that the gripper is designed in a such a way, that the 
objects need to be gripped with the very tip of the gripper in order to lift them. This especially applies to thin 
objects such as bottles, which would otherwise fall through the gripper because of the width of the gripper at 
its middle. The authors manipulated objects such as bottles, desk chairs, bricks, metal objects etc. One of the 
disadvantages of the gripping of the robot is the fact that the whole robot needs to be moved in order to place 
the end of the gripper in the position to grab an object. This is due to the fact that the arm can only be 
manipulated in the vertical direction. To conclude, due to the limitations in the mobility of the arm, the robot 
can pick-and-place only 3 objects in the time span of 10 minutes. 

In addition to these tests, a diagram of the lifting capacity of the robot is presented in Figure 3. below. The 
outer circle presents the lifting capacity at maximum extension and the inner circle represents the lifting 
capacity at full retraction. These values can be narrowed down to a single value because the lifting is executed 
only using one actuator at a time. Here the values differ only because of the fact that the arm is loosely 
constructed and is not capable of handling higher loads at full extension.  

 
Figure 3. Lifting capacity in relation to reach 



 DSS Vol. 3, August 2022, pp.22-31 

28 

Further tests are related to energy consumption also related to the lifting capacity. The relationship between 
current consumption and lifting capacity is shown in Figure 4. 

 
Figure 4. Current consumption vs. load values 

Figure 4. shows current consumption on different loads expressed in kg that is needed for actuator. It can be 
seen that the relationship is almost linear. Also considering manufacturer’s datasheets it should be indeed 
linear. Peak current consumption is 2.3 - 2.5 A for the 20 kg load with 12 V source configuration. For loads 
less than 6 kg energy consumption is 1 A or less. Power-vise 30 W of power is used at peak. Measurement is 
done by using a multimeter device (also can be done using amperemeter or oscilloscope). Actuators are 
connected in series and tested for various loads with constant 12 V voltage supply. Figure 5. below shows 
how speed of the motor is slowly decreasing when the load is increased. The relationship is also linear. 

 
Figure 5. Speed vs. load values 

Value drops slightly from 28 mm/s for load <2 kg to around 25.6 mm/s for the 20 kg load. First measurement 
experiment is done using timer and measuring tape. Time is measured for 5 seconds with exact starting point 
after which distance is measured after timer is stopped. This measurement was repeated several times. Second 
technique was directly programming actuators to be switched for exact amount of time controlled by main 
controller. This gives exact and more precise time of 5 s.  



 DSS Vol. 3, August 2022, pp.22-31 

29 

Based on the test result obtained in this research, a comparative analysis is done and the results are listed in  
Table 4.  

Table 4 in this research briefly presents the comparative advantages and disadvantages of authors EOD robot 
to the robots availaible from Table 1. in the introduction section. In a nutshell, authors robot is lower in 
performance features compared to models tEODor EVO and model T7, which mainly reflects in lower weight 
and lifting capabilities. On the other hand, lower cost presents an important advantage compared to these two 
models.  

Competitive performances can also be observed compared to models ZEUS, HD2-S, LT2-F, Andros F6A. 
These are mainly in regards to reach and lifting capacity. A significant advantage in lifting capacity, speed and 
reach potential performances are achieved compared to models HD2-S, LT2-F and Andros F6A. To 
summarize, authors EOD robot has a high potential to compete against the models already available on the 
market.  

Table 4. Comparative results 
Model Specification This EOD robot 

This EOD Robot 

Max. lift capacity: 20 kg 
Weight: 55 kg 
Reach (Forward): 1400 mm  
Speed: Up to 8 km/h 

 Competitive in category 

tEODor EVO [3] 

Max. lift capacity: 100 kg 
Weight: 383 kg 
Reach (Forward): 1860 mm 
Speed: 3 km/h 

 Lower category 
 Lower performances 
 Lower cost as an advantage 

Andros F6A [4] 

Max. lift capacity: 61 kg  
Weight: 220 kg 
Reach (Forward): 1440 mm 
Speed: 4.8 km/h 

 Same category 
 Competitive reach potential 
 Higher speed of mobility 
 Lower overall weight 

TALON [5] 

Max. lift capacity: 68 kg 
Weight: 81 kg 
Reach (Forward): 1570 mm 
Speed: 

 Same category 
 Lower lifting capacity 

T7 [6] 

Max. lift capacity: 113+ kg 
Weight: 322 kg 
Reach (Forward): 2200 mm 
Speed: 8+ km/h 

 Lower category 
 Significantly lower lifting capacity 
 Lower reach 

LT2-F “Bulldog” [7] 

Max. lift capacity: 7+ kg 
Full extension 
Weight: 40 kg 
Reach (Forward): 1220 mm 
Speed: 2 km/h 

 Same category 
 Significantly higher lift capacity 
 Competitive performances per each 

parameter 
 Lower cost as an advantage 

HD2-S 
“Mastiff” [8] 

Max. lift capacity: 9+ kg Full 
extension 
Weight: 68 kg, with the heaviest 
configuration 
Reach (Forward): 890 mm 
Speed: 2 km/h 

 Significantly higher reach potential 
 Higher speed of mobility 
 Competitive overall weight 
 Higher lifting capacity at full extension 

ZEUS [9] 

Max. lift capacity: 15 kg 
Weight: 51.7 kg 
Reach (Forward): 1460 mm 
Speed: 3 km/h 

 Same category 
 Higher overall weight 
 Competitive reach potential 
 Competitive lift capacity 



 DSS Vol. 3, August 2022, pp.22-31 

30 

4. Conclusion 
This paper presents the design and development of an MVP EOD robot, specifically designed to operate with 
explosive devices in their removal, disposal and neutralization. This MVP design is functionality-wise limited, 
due to budget limitations, but nevertheless, presents a solid opportunity for testing and presentation purposes. 
The final design is 590x820x340 mm in dimensions, weighs 55 kg with a maximum manipulator reach of 
1400 mm. The vertical reach is 1200 mm. 

The setup time of the robot with all of its configurations is 10 minutes, and the equipment weighs 4 kg which 
includes a laptop, as a control unit, plyers, a wrench and some additional wiring for repairs. Compared to 
models from Table 1. authors robot lacks a control unit which is highly durable and easily carried. Other 
equipment is carried independently and also lacks a custom-made bag. The setup time is mostly slowed 
because of the fact that the manipulator must be partially dismantled to fit into an average size car. Models 
from Table 1. Usually come with a modular manipulator and other accessories which are easily mounted on 
the robot. Slower setup time is also due to the fact that the Raspberry Pi needs to be manually turned on with a 
power cable and the program needs to be compiled each time the session is ended. Fortunately, these 
specifications are easily made easier and improved. The robot can reach a speed of 8 km/h due to its high 
torque DC motors. The towing capacity is roughly 40 kg, which highly depends on the surface of the motion.  

The weakest point in the design is the communication reach, which is limited by Wi-Fi signal, to 20 m. The 
second weakest point is the gripping, which needs to be very precise, especially for thin, narrow objects, such 
as bottles. Compared to the robots from Table 1, this low-cost EOD robot platform represents a solid 
foundation into further design and development endeavors, which will hopefully take place in the near future. 
The plan for future work is to upgrade the existing physical platform to an autonomous EOD robot with the 
ability to detect explosive devices and mark them or safely dispose of them. 

Declaration of competing interest  
The authors declare that they have no any known financial or non-financial competing interests in any 
material discussed in this paper. 

Funding information 
No funding was received from any financial organization to conduct this research. 

References 
[1] “Cluster Munition Monitor 2021”, Reports, http://www.the-monitor.org/en-gb/reports/2021/cluster-

munition-monitor-2021.aspx (accessed Apr. 10, 2022). 
[2] O. English and F. Spanish, “Diplomatic conference for the adoption of a convention on cluster 

munitions Convention on Cluster Munitions,” 2008. 
[3] “tEODor EVO.” https://www.telerob.com/en/products/teodor-evo (accessed Apr. 11, 2022). 
[4] “Home - Northrop Grumman.” https://www.northropgrumman.com/ (accessed Apr. 11, 2022). 
[5] “Bomb Disposal Robot - QinetiQ.” https://www.qinetiq.com/en-us/capabilities/robotics-and-

autonomy/talon-medium-sized-tactical-robot (accessed Apr. 11, 2022). 
[6] H. Technologies, “Ruggedized robot for military, police and hazardous missions,” 2020. 
[7] “LT2-F Bulldog - Lightweight Tactical Support Robot by SuperDroid Robots.” 

https://www.sdrtactical.com/Robots/SDRT_Bulldog.php (accessed Apr. 18, 2022). 
[8] “HD2-S Mastiff - Heavy-duty Support Robot by SuperDroid Robots.” 

https://www.sdrtactical.com/Robots/SDRT_Mastiff.php (accessed Apr. 18, 2022). 
[9] “Zeus Bomb Disposal Robot Manufacture & Supply | NIC Instruments.” 

https://www.nicltd.co.uk/zeus-ultimate-modular-unmanned-ground-vehicle/ (accessed Apr. 18, 2022). 
[10] “Unmanned Systems Integrated Roadmap - UNT Digital Library.” 

https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc949794/ (accessed Apr. 18, 2022). 
[11] T. Andrew Czop, K. Hacker, J. Murphy, T. Zimmerman, A. Czop, and T. Zimmerman Titan, “Low-

cost explosive ordnance disposal robot using off-the-shelf parts,” https://doi.org/10.1117/12.602526, 
vol. 5804, no. 27, pp. 130–140, May 2005, doi: 10.1117/12.602526. 

[12] “Minimum Viable Product - What is a MVP and why is it important?” 
https://www.productplan.com/glossary/minimum-viable-product/ (accessed May 08, 2022). 



 DSS Vol. 3, August 2022, pp.22-31 

31 

[13] “What is a Minimum Viable Product (MVP)?”, Agile Alliance. 
https://www.agilealliance.org/glossary/mvp/#q=~(infinite~false~filters~(tags~(~’mvp))~searchTerm~
’~sort~false~sortDirection~’asc~page~1) (accessed May 08, 2022). 

[14] “Department of Homeland Security Response Robot Performance Standards”, NIST, 
https://www.nist.gov/programs-projects/department-homeland-security-response-robot-performance-
standards (accessed May 08, 2022). 

  


