SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “robotic surface exploration”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 199 records · Page 11

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS1973

Scene analysis for a breadboard Mars robot functioning in an indoor environment

The problem is delt with of computer perception in an indoor laboratory environment containing rocks of various sizes. The sensory data processing is required for the NASA/JPL breadboard mobile robot that is a test system for an adaptive variably-autonomous vehicle that will conduct scientific explorations on the surface of Mars. Scene analysis is discussed in terms of object segmentation followed by feature extraction, which results in a representation of the scene in the robot's world model.

Levine, M. D.↗

NASA NTRS2012

Science Operations During Planetary Surface Exploration: Desert-RATS Tests 2009-2011

NASA s Research and Technology Studies (RATS) team evaluates technology, human-robotic systems and extravehicular equipment for use in future human space exploration missions. Tests are conducted in simulated space environments, or analog tests, using prototype instruments, vehicles, and systems. NASA engineers, scientists and technicians from across the country gather annually with representatives from industry and academia to perform the tests. Test scenarios include future missions to near-Earth asteroids (NEA), the moon and Mars.. Mission simulations help determine system requirements for exploring distant locations while developing the technical skills required of the next generation of explorers.

Cohen, Barbara↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling Deformable Linear Objects for Autonomous Robotic Outfitting of Lunar Surface Systems

This paper presents structural models of deformable linear objects (DLOs). DLOs are a subclass of deformable objects that encompasses common outfitting elements such as cables and ropes. Models are validated through hardware experiments, and integration in a robotic autonomy architecture for space environments is discussed. A persistent human presence on the lunar surface is one of the next major milestones in space exploration. This requires the development of robust extraplanetary construction technologies including structures and materials modeling and robotic systems. Previous robotic construction technology development has primarily focused on structural assembly, with significantly less focus on robotically performed outfitting tasks to instantiate subsystems providing power, data, life support, etc. These tasks involve manipulation of highly flexible elements, which are difficult to model, such as cable harnesses, ropes, and hoses. Robotic manipulation of DLOs, especially cable harnesses, is an active area of research as cable harnesses are essential for providing power and data to space assets. DLO models that can be used for robot manipulator trajectory generation are necessary for autonomous operation of lunar infrastructure. There are many proposed methods for modeling DLOs, and they primarily fall into three types: 1) discrete model-based, 2) continuum model-based, and 3) Neural Network-based. These types each have pros and cons, and the tradeoff between model accuracy and computational speed informs which type should be used. An understanding of this trade-off is imperative for real-time control of autonomous systems. High computational requirements reduce the speed of the model, making real-time control difficult, while accuracy is critical to preventing collisions. Discrete models, such as a mass-spring multibody representation, require relatively few calculations, and accuracy is directly tied to the step size of the discretization. Continuum models, such as a B-spline representation or a Cosserat rod model (a mix of continuous and discrete), are more informed of the structural properties of the cable and are much more accurate than a rigid body mass-spring model, but at significant computational cost. A Neural Network approach can provide an online solution with very few computational steps, but properly generating training data can be difficult and validation for an in-space application is not trivial. This paper explores the trade-off between different modeling approaches and compares accuracy and computational speed/complexity of the three types mentioned above. Model accuracy is evaluated using a cable in a static configuration. True cable shape is obtained using a depth camera for RGB images and point-cloud segmentation. The purpose of this experiment is to evaluate the trade-offs of different approaches to the DLO modeling problem. Understanding the tradeoffs between different cable modeling techniques paves the way for developing robotic control and planning architectures necessary for real-time manipulation of DLOs for lunar infrastructure outfitting. Real-time control is required for robotic systems to be able to actively manipulate a cable in a harsh environment where model and sensor errors compound, and environmental conditions can cause significant disturbances. Cable routing must be performed in areas with high density of objects/obstacles: through truss structures, near solar panels or mirror arrays, next to bundles of electrical equipment. Understanding the best way to plan and manipulate a cable without disrupting the environment or damaging the cable is imperative to robotic outfitting operations on the lunar surface.

Amy M Quartaro↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Analysis of Exploration Capability Gaps for Future Habitation Systems to Inform Risk Assessment and Development Priorities

Within NASA, exploration capability gaps are defined as the difference between the current state-of-the-art in capabilities and the anticipated needs of future human spaceflight architectures. As NASA and its partners’ capabilities for human exploration of deep space continue to mature, it is necessary to understand the capability gaps that require closure to support future habitation systems, such as the Lunar Surface Habitat (SH) and Mars Transit Habitat (TH) currently in concept development. This paper will identify high-priority capability gaps for exploration habitation and show potential options for gap closure through investment in technology, development, and testing. High-priority capability gaps are divided into the following general taxonomy areas: human health/life support/habitation systems, flight computing and avionics, power and energy storage, communications and navigation, thermal management systems, human exploration destination systems, autonomous systems, sensors and instruments, GNC (guidance, navigation, and control), robotic systems, ground and uncrewed surface systems, and materials/structures/mechanical systems/manufacturing. In the gap identification process, teams of discipline experts from across NASA reviewed the latest habitation architecture needs against current capabilities to understand where gaps may exist. The results of the assessment established a basis for the current state-of-the-art within each gap and identified the capability needs of the proposed exploration missions the gap links to. An assessment of how each test platform (e.g., Ground, International Space Station (ISS), Commercial Low Earth Orbit (LEO) Destinations, Gateway) may be leveraged to mature capabilities and potentially provide a route to gap closure will be discussed. The notional timeline for gap closure to support reference missions and impacts to overall schedule are also assessed where appropriate. Based on the capability gap analysis described above, the paper summarizes important technology maturation considerations for human exploration architectures, with a focus on the Mars TH. The previously published NASA habitation ground rules and assumptions document is used as the basis to classify gaps as enabling, enhancing, or “push” opportunities for a particular architecture. Stepwise technology maturation plans/considerations are presented for some selected critical gaps. Overall, the analysis in this paper is intended to help influence development priorities for habitation systems, where high-priority, critical gaps are those currently assessed as having a low probability of closure by the anticipated need date. Capability gap analysis also informs the risk register for exploration habitation systems and mitigation strategies to ensure readiness of key technologies to support future mission timelines. Linkage between capability gaps for Moon and Mars is noted, as closure of a gap at a Lunar destination may subsequently enable or enhance Mars TH architectures.

technology development↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Analysis of Exploration Capability Gaps for Future Habitation Systems to Inform Risk Assessment and Development Priorities

technology development↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

LASSIE: Legged Autonomous Surface Science In Analogue Environments

Roving planetary surface exploration missions operate using a pre-programmed plan that can limit the capability to effectively detect unexpected changes in terrain properties, adjust locomotion or sampling strategies, and autonomously identify scientifically valuable observations and adjust exploration strategies. In particular, the inability to measure and react to unexpected changes in regolith properties can negatively impact mission operations. The Mars Exploration Rover Spirit and InSight lander both experienced challenges related to understanding the geotechnical properties of regolith. The advancements in legged robotic platforms hold potential to address these challenges through greater sensitivity to changing surface properties. The Legged Autonomous Surface Science In Analogue Environments (LASSIE) project explores how legged roving platforms can use the leg motors to measure geotechnical properties of crusted and icy surface regolith and utilize those measurements to autonomously update the science operations plans. These tests will be performed in martian and lunar analog environments and also within lab settings.

K. R. Fisher↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

2024 Nasa Lunabotics University Competition: Site Preparation With Bulk Regolith

Introduction: Lunabotics provides accredited institutions of higher learning students (vocational-technical, college, university) an opportunity to apply the NASA systems engineering process to design and build a prototype robot. This robot would be capable of performing the proposed operations on the Lunar surface in support of future Artemis mission goals. Lunabotics features a systems engineering design challenge to engage students in the next phase of hu-man space exploration supporting the Artemis missions. This two-semester event encourages students to design and build an autonomous or telerobotic robot designed to traverse the simulated Lunar surface and complete the assigned construction tasks. The number of teams accepted into this challenge is not predetermined but is based on the scores and overall quality of the Project Management Plans received and other factors. The culmination of the Lunabotics virtual challenge will be the design, build and operation of a functional prototype Lunar robot. Teams are required to submit the following: (1) Project Management Plan, (2) Systems Engineering Paper, a (3) STEM Engage-ment Report, and a (4) Proof of Life Video. This is an optional item, but to qualify for the grand prize a team must also submit a: (5) Presentation and Demonstration. Background: The NASA Lunabotics University Competition was first held in 2010 as a follow on to the NASA Regolith Excavation Challenge [1]. The high level of interest and participation from over 50 universities each year has led to a sustained annual competi-ion cadence: it has been held every May for the past 14 years [2,3]. Over 6,000 students have participated and been inspired to pursue Science, Technology, En-gineering and Mathematics careers (STEM). 2024 Competition: The necessary lunar surface tasks are evolving to meet the NASA Artemis Mission requirements. In the past Lunabotics challenges we gathered data to support Lunar mining for consuma-bles in the Lunar regolith. Now, in 2024, the task is to gather data on Lunar site preparation and construction by designing and building a robot that will traverse the chaotic Lunar terrain and construct a regolith-based berm. The goal is to build a berm structure which would be useful to the Artemis Mission for blast and ejecta protection during lunar landings and launches, shading cryogenic propellant tank farms, providing radiation protection around a nuclear power plant and other mission critical uses. Lunabotics will consist of three separate events this year. The first event is NASA’s Lunabotics Project Development Challenge, where teams submit various deliverables to be scored by judges. The second event will be the University of Central Florida (UCF) Lunabotics Qualification challenge, in the Exolith laboratory, where teams will put their de-signs to the test. The top ten scoring teams from the Qualification challenge are then invited to the third and final event, NASA’s Lunabotics On-Site Challenge at Kennedy Space Center in Florida. This presentation will summarize the results and lessons learned from the NASA Lunabotics University Competition held in May 2024.

Lunabotics↗

NASA NTRS1992

The roles of humans and robots as field geologists on the Moon

The geologic exploration of the Moon will be one of the primary scientific functions of any lunar base program. Geologic reconnaissance, the broad-scale characterization of processes and regions, is an ongoing effort that has already started and will continue after base establishment. Such reconnaissance is best done by remote sensing from lunar orbit and simple, automated, sample return missions of the Soviet Luna class. Field study, in contrast, requires intensive work capabilities and the guiding influence of human intelligence. We suggest that the most effective way to accomplish the goals of geologic field study on the Moon is through the use of teleoperated robots, under the direct control of a human geologists who remains at the lunar base, or possibly on Earth. These robots would have a global traverse range, could possess sensory abilities optimized for geologic field work, and would accomplish surface exploration goals without the safety and life support concerns attendance with the use of human geologists on the Moon. By developing the capability to explore any point on the Moon immediately after base establishment, the use of such teleoperated, robotic field geologists makes the single-site lunar base into a 'global' base from the viewpoint of geologic exploration.

Spudis, Paul D.↗

NASA NTRS2017

Interactive Exploration Robots: Human-Robotic Collaboration and Interactions

For decades, NASA has employed different operational approaches for human and robotic missions. Human spaceflight missions to the Moon and in low Earth orbit have relied upon near-continuous communication with minimal time delays. During these missions, astronauts and mission control communicate interactively to perform tasks and resolve problems in real-time. In contrast, deep-space robotic missions are designed for operations in the presence of significant communication delay - from tens of minutes to hours. Consequently, robotic missions typically employ meticulously scripted and validated command sequences that are intermittently uplinked to the robot for independent execution over long periods. Over the next few years, however, we will see increasing use of robots that blend these two operational approaches. These interactive exploration robots will be remotely operated by humans on Earth or from a spacecraft. These robots will be used to support astronauts on the International Space Station (ISS), to conduct new missions to the Moon, and potentially to enable remote exploration of planetary surfaces in real-time. In this talk, I will discuss the technical challenges associated with building and operating robots in this manner, along with lessons learned from research conducted with the ISS and in the field.

Fong, Terry↗

NASA NTRS2003

Automation and Robotics for Human Mars Exploration (AROMA)

Automation and Robotics (A&R) systems are a key technology for Mars exploration. All over the world initiatives in this field aim at developing new A&R systems and technologies for planetary surface exploration. From December 2000 to February 2002 Kayser-Threde GmbH, Munich, Germany lead a study called AROMA (Automation and Robotics for Human Mars Exploration) under ESA contract in order to define a reference architecture of A&R elements in support of a human Mars exploration program. One of the goals of this effort is to initiate new developments and to maintain the competitiveness of European industry within this field. c2003 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.

Space Flight/instrumentation↗

NASA NTRS1999

NASA Planetary Surface Exploration

Managed for NASA by the California Institute of Technology, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory is the lead U.S. center for robotic exploration of the solar system. JPL spacecraft have visited all known planets except Pluto (a Pluto mission is currently under study). In addition to its work for NASA, JPL conducts tasks for a variety of other federal agencies. In addition, JPL manages the worldwide Deep Space Network, which communicates with spacecraft and conducts scientific investigations from its complexes in California's Mojave Desert near Goldstone; near Madrid, Spain; and near Canberra, Australia. JPL employs about 6000 people.

Hayati, Samad↗

NASA NTRS2001

Robotic autonomy for space: cooperative and reconfigurable mobile surface systems

We overview some of our recent work on highly autonomous mobile robots for planetary exploration.

robotic outposts robot colonies↗

NASA NTRS2015

Software Defined Radio Architecture Contributions to Next Generation Space Communications

Space communications architecture concepts, comprising the elements of the system, the interactions among them, and the principles that govern their development, are essential factors in developing National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) future exploration and science missions. Accordingly, vital architectural attributes encompass flexibility, the extensibility to insert future capabilities, and to enable evolution to provide interoperability with other current and future systems. Space communications architectures and technologies for this century must satisfy a growing set of requirements, including those for Earth sensing, collaborative observation missions, robotic scientific missions, human missions for exploration of the Moon and Mars where surface activities require supporting communications, and in-space observatories for observing the earth, as well as other star systems and the universe. An advanced, integrated, communications infrastructure will enable the reliable, multipoint, high-data-rate capabilities needed on demand to provide continuous, maximum coverage for areas of concentrated activity. Importantly, the cost/value proposition of the future architecture must be an integral part of its design; an affordable and sustainable architecture is indispensable within anticipated future budget environments. Effective architecture design informs decision makers with insight into the capabilities needed to efficiently satisfy the demanding space-communication requirements of future missions and formulate appropriate requirements. A driving requirement for the architecture is the extensibility to address new requirements and provide low-cost on-ramps for new capabilities insertion, ensuring graceful growth as new functionality and new technologies are infused into the network infrastructure. In addition to extensibility, another key architectural attribute of the space communication equipment's interoperability with other NASA communications systems, as well as those communications and navigation systems operated by international space agencies and civilian and government agencies. In this paper, we review the philosophies, technologies, architectural attributes, mission services, and communications capabilities that form the structure of candidate next-generation integrated communication architectures for space communications and navigation. A key area that this paper explores is from the development and operation of the software defined radio for the NASA Space Communications and Navigation (SCaN) Testbed currently on the International Space Station (ISS). Evaluating the lessons learned from development and operation feed back into the communications architecture. Leveraging the reconfigurability provides a change in the way that operations are done and must be considered. Quantifying the impact on the NASA Space Telecommunications Radio System (STRS) software defined radio architecture provides feedback to keep the standard useful and up to date. NASA is not the only customer of these radios. Software defined radios are developed for other applications, and taking advantage of these developments promotes an architecture that is cost effective and sustainable. Developments in the following areas such as an updated operating environment, higher data rates, networking and security can be leveraged. The ability to sustain an architecture that uses radios for multiple markets can lower costs and keep new technology infused.

Lessons Learned↗

NASA NTRS2005

An Overview of Power Capability Requirements for Exploration Missions

Advanced power is one of the key capabilities that will be needed to achieve NASA's missions of exploration and scientific advancement. Significant gaps exist in advanced power capabilities that are on the critical path to enabling human exploration beyond Earth orbit and advanced robotic exploration of the solar system. Focused studies and investment are needed to answer key development issues for all candidate technologies before down-selection. The viability of candidate power technology alternatives will be a major factor in determining what exploration mission architectures are possible. Achieving the capabilities needed to enable the CEV, Moon, and Mars missions is dependent on adequate funding. Focused investment in advanced power technologies for human and robotic exploration missions is imperative now to reduce risk and to make informed decisions on potential exploration mission decisions beginning in 2008. This investment would begin the long lead-time needed to develop capabilities for human exploration missions in the 2015 to 2030 timeframe. This paper identifies some of the key technologies that will be needed to fill these power capability gaps. Recommendations are offered to address capability gaps in advanced power for Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) power, surface nuclear power systems, surface mobile power systems, high efficiency power systems, and space transportation power systems. These capabilities fill gaps that are on the critical path to enabling robotic and human exploration missions. The recommendations address the following critical technology areas: Energy Conversion, Energy Storage, and Power Management and Distribution.

Davis, Jose M.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Autonomous Ocean World Exploration: Advancement of a Software Testbed

The search for life signs and potentially habitable bodies in our solar system and beyond is one of NASA’s top priorities. The prime destinations for such exploration are bodies containing liquid water, such as Jupiter’s moon Europa and Saturn’s moon Enceladus. Initial missions to these “ocean worlds” will be robotic, and because of long communication lags and blackouts, harsh environments, and limited battery life, a high degree of onboard autonomy will be required. To this end NASA has developed the Ocean Worlds Autonomy Testbed for Exploration, Research, and Simulation (OceanWATERS), a software testbed for surface mission autonomy. Under grants from NASA’s Autonomous Robotics Research for Ocean Worlds (ARROW) and Concepts for Ocean worlds Life Detection Technology (COLDTech) programs, collectively 6 research teams at universities and companies across the United States have developed autonomy solutions using OceanWATERS, tackling a variety of surface mission challenges and employing state-of-the-art AI-based solutions. This paper provides a self-contained high-level description of OceanWATERS while detailing enhancements made since its 2020 release. It provides a high-level summary of the projects undertaken by participants in the ARROW and COLDTech programs and how these efforts have helped shape OceanWATERS. Finally, potential future work and directions for the testbed are listed.

K Michael Dalal↗

NASA NTRS1992

SP-100 space reactor power system for lunar, Mars, and robotic exploration

The SP-100 power system is described which was developed for three missions, namely, Pluto Orbiter with nuclear electric propulsion; human-rated surface reactor power system for lunar and Mars exploration; and earth surveillance with an integrated nuclear electric propulsion system. The reactor power systems technology is being developed to meet these requirements so that the technical database, design tools, and specifications will be applicable to these missions. The SP-100 power system design includes the following subsystems: reactor, reactor instrumentation and control, shield, heat transport, converter, heat rejection, power conditioning control and distribution, and mechanical/structural. Particular attention is given to a demonstration mission aimed at validating technology readiness for robotic, lunar, and Mars operational missions.

Mondt, Jack F.↗

NASA NTRS2004

Mars Exploration Rover thermal test program overview

In January 2004, two Mars Exploration Rovers (MER) landed on the surface of Mars to begin their mission as robotic geologists. A year prior to these historic landings, both rovers and the spacecraft that delivered them to Mars, were completing a series of environmental tests in facilities at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. This paper describes the test program undertaken to validate the thermal design and verify the workmanship integrity of both rovers and the spacecraft. The spacecraft, which contained the rover within the aeroshell, were tested in a 7.5 m diameter thermal vacuum chamber. Thermal balance was performed for the near earth (hot case) condition and for the near Mars (cold case) condition. A solar simulator was used to provide the solar boundary condition on the solar array. IR lamps were used to simulate the solar heat load on the aeroshell for the off-sun attitudes experienced by the spacecraft during its cruise to Mars. Each rover was tested separately in a 3.0 m diameter thermal vacuum chamber over conditions simulating the warmest and coldest expected Mars diurnal temperature cycles. The environmental tests were conducted in a quiescent nitrogen atmosphere at a pressure of 8 to 10 Torr. In addition to thermal balance testing, the science instruments on board the rovers were tested successfully in the extreme environmental conditions anticipated for the mission. A solar simulator was not used in these tests.

thermal vacuum test↗

NASA NTRS2006

Humanoids in Support of Lunar and Planetary Surface Operations

This paper presents a vision of humanoid robots as human's key partners in future space exploration, in particular for construction, maintenance/repair and operation of lunar/planetary habitats, bases and settlements. It integrates this vision with the recent plans for human and robotic exploration, aligning a set of milestones for operational capability of humanoids with the schedule for the next decades and development spirals in the Project Constellation. These milestones relate to a set of incremental challenges, for the solving of which new humanoid technologies are needed. A system of systems integrative approach that would lead to readiness of cooperating humanoid crews is sketched. Robot fostering, training/education techniques, and improved cognitive/sensory/motor development techniques are considered essential elements for achieving intelligent humanoids. A pilot project using small-scale Fujitsu HOAP-2 humanoid is outlined.

imitation↗