Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Robotics and Automation”

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.

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

At least 235 records · Page 13
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2003

Issues and Concerns in Robotic Drilling

Exploration of the Martian subsurface will be essential in the search for life and water, given the desiccated and highly oxidized conditions on the surface. Discovery of these, at least in non-fossil form, is unlikely without drilling or other physical access to the subsurface. Hence subsurface access will be critical for both future in-situ science and Mars sample return. Drilling applications present many new challenges for diagnosis and control technology. Traditionally, diagnosis has concentrated on determining the internal state of a system, and detecting failures of system components. In the case of drilling applications, an additional challenge is to diagnose the interactions between the drill and its environment. This is necessary because particular observations of the drilling operation may be consistent with a number of possible problems, including faults in the equipment, but also changes in the material being drilled (for example, from rock to ice). The diagnosis of a particular observation may also depend on knowledge of geological formations previously encountered during drilling, and different remedial actions may be required for each diagnosis. Current 2009 Mars mission scenarios call for no more than 33 sols to be spent drilling. Yet they also call for a baseline of two 2m-deep holes in each of three target areas, for a total of six drilling operations. Using current levels of automation, it is estimated that 15-16 sols would be required to drill each hole. As a result of this, either the drilling part of the mission plan will need to be severely downscoped to no more than two holes total, or on-board automation and robotics must be increased in order to reduce the number of sols required per hole by removing ground control from the drilling control loop. This lecture will discuss salient issues and concerns of robotic drilling automation compares with other applications, and implementation constraints.

Glass, Brian↗
NASA NTRS2011

Evidence Report, Risk of Inadequate Design of Human and Automation/Robotic Integration

The success of future exploration missions depends, even more than today, on effective integration of humans and technology (automation and robotics). This will not emerge by chance, but by design. Both crew and ground personnel will need to do more demanding tasks in more difficult conditions, amplifying the costs of poor design and the benefits of good design. This report has looked at the importance of good design and the risks from poor design from several perspectives: 1) If the relevant functions needed for a mission are not identified, then designs of technology and its use by humans are unlikely to be effective: critical functions will be missing and irrelevant functions will mislead or drain attention. 2) If functions are not distributed effectively among the (multiple) participating humans and automation/robotic systems, later design choices can do little to repair this: additional unnecessary coordination work may be introduced, workload may be redistributed to create problems, limited human attentional resources may be wasted, and the capabilities of both humans and technology underused. 3) If the design does not promote accurate understanding of the capabilities of the technology, the operators will not use the technology effectively: the system may be switched off in conditions where it would be effective, or used for tasks or in contexts where its effectiveness may be very limited. 4) If an ineffective interaction design is implemented and put into use, a wide range of problems can ensue. Many involve lack of transparency into the system: operators may be unable or find it very difficult to determine a) the current state and changes of state of the automation or robot, b) the current state and changes in state of the system being controlled or acted on, and c) what actions by human or by system had what effects. 5) If the human interfaces for operation and control of robotic agents are not designed to accommodate the unique points of view and operating environments of both the human and the robotic agent, then effective human-robot coordination cannot be achieved.

Zumbado, Jennifer Rochlis↗
DOE OSTI2020

Radioactive Cleaning Robot

Here at Fermi, work is centered around particle accelerators. With the functionality of these accelerators comes a small amount of radioactive dust. For the sake of all employees in this environment, a yearly deep clean is necessary. The aim of this robot is to save time by running an automated cleaning robot 24/7.

Stachowicz, Emily↗
NASA NTRS1988

Machine intelligence and autonomy for aerospace systems

The present volume discusses progress toward intelligent robot systems in aerospace applications, NASA Space Program automation and robotics efforts, the supervisory control of telerobotics in space, machine intelligence and crew/vehicle interfaces, expert-system terms and building tools, and knowledge-acquisition for autonomous systems. Also discussed are methods for validation of knowledge-based systems, a design methodology for knowledge-based management systems, knowledge-based simulation for aerospace systems, knowledge-based diagnosis, planning and scheduling methods in AI, the treatment of uncertainty in AI, vision-sensing techniques in aerospace applications, image-understanding techniques, tactile sensing for robots, distributed sensor integration, and the control of articulated and deformable space structures.

Heer, Ewald↗
NASA NTRS1991

Automated site characterization for robotic sample acquisition systems

A mobile, semi-autonomous vehicle with multiple sensors and on-board intelligence is proposed for performing preliminary scientific investigations on extraterrestrial bodies prior to human exploration. Two technologies, a hybrid optical-digital computer system based on optical correlator technology and an image and instrument data analysis system, provide complementary capabilities which might be part of an instrument package for an intelligent robotic vehicle. The hybrid digital-optical vision system could perform real-time image classification tasks using an optical correlator with programmable matched filters under control of a digital microcomputer. The data analysis system would analyze visible and multiband imagery to extract mineral composition and textural information for geologic characterization. Together these technologies would support the site characterization needs of a robotic vehicle for both navigational and scientific purposes.

Scholl, Marija S.↗
NASA NTRS1989

The Space Station Freedom evolution-phase - Crew-EVA demand for robotic substitution by task primitive

Space Station Freedom represents a significant demand for automation and robotics services as substitutes for crew EVAs. Results are reported from a study aimed at identifying the demand for crew EVA and the crew-task primitive distributions derived for input to future robotic substitution studies. Generic EVA tasks are developed from historical EVA mission timelines, and a set of 70 task primitives defined. The generic task activities are partitioned into task setup, kernel, and tear-down, with standardized task times and frequencies. These standardized times are coupled with inputs from numerous mission data bases in a probabilistic simulation to obtain estimates of total crew-EVA task time demand by crew task primitive. The use of probabilistic model is found to be crucial for understanding, isolating, and addressing the large uncertainties in the EVA task kernels.

Smith, Jeffrey H.↗
NASA NTRS2006

Integrated Human-Robotic Missions to the Moon and Mars: Mission Operations Design Implications

For most of the history of space exploration, human and robotic programs have been independent, and have responded to distinct requirements. The NASA Vision for Space Exploration calls for the return of humans to the Moon, and the eventual human exploration of Mars; the complexity of this range of missions will require an unprecedented use of automation and robotics in support of human crews. The challenges of human Mars missions, including roundtrip communications time delays of 6 to 40 minutes, interplanetary transit times of many months, and the need to manage lifecycle costs, will require the evolution of a new mission operations paradigm far less dependent on real-time monitoring and response by an Earthbound operations team. Robotic systems and automation will augment human capability, increase human safety by providing means to perform many tasks without requiring immediate human presence, and enable the transfer of traditional mission control tasks from the ground to crews. Developing and validating the new paradigm and its associated infrastructure may place requirements on operations design for nearer-term lunar missions. The authors, representing both the human and robotic mission operations communities, assess human lunar and Mars mission challenges, and consider how human-robot operations may be integrated to enable efficient joint operations, with the eventual emergence of a unified exploration operations culture.

Korth, David↗
NASA NTRS2007

Integrated Human-Robotic Missions to the Moon and Mars: Mission Operations Design Implications

For most of the history of space exploration, human and robotic programs have been independent, and have responded to distinct requirements. The NASA Vision for Space Exploration calls for the return of humans to the Moon, and the eventual human exploration of Mars; the complexity of this range of missions will require an unprecedented use of automation and robotics in support of human crews. The challenges of human Mars missions, including roundtrip communications time delays of 6 to 40 minutes, interplanetary transit times of many months, and the need to manage lifecycle costs, will require the evolution of a new mission operations paradigm far less dependent on real-time monitoring and response by an Earthbound operations team. Robotic systems and automation will augment human capability, increase human safety by providing means to perform many tasks without requiring immediate human presence, and enable the transfer of traditional mission control tasks from the ground to crews. Developing and validating the new paradigm and its associated infrastructure may place requirements on operations design for nearer-term lunar missions. The authors, representing both the human and robotic mission operations communities, assess human lunar and Mars mission challenges, and consider how human-robot operations may be integrated to enable efficient joint operations, with the eventual emergence of a unified exploration operations culture.

human robotic missions↗
NASA NTRS2006

Integrated human-robotic missions to the Moon and Mars : mission operations design implications

For most of the history of space exploration, human and robotic programs have been independent, and have responded to distinct requirements. The NASA Vision for Space Exploration calls for the return of humans to the Moon, and the eventual human exploration of Mars; the complexity of this range of missions will require an unprecedented use of automation and robotics in support of human crews. The challenges of human Mars missions, including roundtrip communications time delays of 6 to 40 minutes, interplanetary transit times of many months, and the need to manage lifecycle costs, will require the evolution of a new mission operations paradigm far less dependent on real-time monitoring and response by an Earthbound operations team. Robotic systems and automation will augment human capability, increase human safety by providing means to perform many tasks without requiring immediate human presence, and enable the transfer of traditional mission control tasks from the ground to crews. Developing and validating the new paradigm and its associated infrastructure may place requirements on operations design for nearer-term lunar missions. The authors, representing both the human and robotic mission operations communities, assess human lunar and Mars mission challenges, and consider how human-robot operations may be integrated to enable efficient joint operations, with the eventual emergence of a unified exploration operations culture.

Lee, Young↗
NASA NTRS1988

Robotic vision technology and algorithms for space applications

The vision data requirements for various automation and robotics applications for the Space Station are discussed. The advanced systems technology involved with robotic sensing for perception is reviewed, noting the unique requirements of vision systems in space. Three areas of algorithm development are discussed: shape extraction based on illumination, shape extraction by sensor fusion, and generalized image point correspondence. Possibilities for future developments in robotic vision technology are considered.

Krishen, Kumar↗
NASA NTRS2016

Human-Robot Interaction in High Vulnerability Domains

Future NASA missions will require successful integration of the human with highly complex systems. Highly complex systems are likely to involve humans, automation, and some level of robotic assistance. The complex environments will require successful integration of the human with automation, with robots, and with human-automation-robot teams to accomplish mission critical goals. Many challenges exist for the human performing in these types of operational environments with these kinds of systems. Systems must be designed to optimally integrate various levels of inputs and outputs based on the roles and responsibilities of the human, the automation, and the robots; from direct manual control, shared human-robotic control, or no active human control (i.e. human supervisory control). It is assumed that the human will remain involved at some level. Technologies that vary based on contextual demands and on operator characteristics (workload, situation awareness) will be needed when the human integrates into these systems. Predictive models that estimate the impact of the technologies on the system performance and the on the human operator are also needed to meet the challenges associated with such future complex human-automation-robot systems in extreme environments.

workload↗
NASA NTRS1990

Advanced robotics for in-space vehicle processing

An analysis of spaceborne vehicle processing is described. Generic crew-extravehicular activity tasks are presented for a specific vehicle, the orbital maneuvering vehicle (OMV), with general implications to other on-orbit vehicles. The OMV is examined with respect to both servicing and maintenance. Crew-EVA activities are presented by task and mapped to a common set of generic crew-EVA primitives to identify high-demand areas for robot services. Similarly, a set of robot primitives is presented that can be used to model robot actions for alternative robot reference configurations. The robot primitives are tied to technologies and used for composing robot operations for an automated refueling scenario. Robotics technology issues and design accommodation guidelines (hooks and scars) for Space Station Freedom are described.

Smith, Jeffrey H.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Reflections on Descriptive Psychology: NASA, Media and Technology, Observation

At NASA, we have used methods of Descriptive Psychology (DP) to solve problems in several areas: Simulation of proposed Lunar/Mars missions at high level to assess feasibility and needs in the robotics and automation areas. How we would go about making a "person-like" robot. Design and implementation of Systems Engineering practices on behalf of future projects with emphasis on interoperability. Design of a Question and Answer dialog system to handle student questions about Advanced Life Support (ALS) systems - students learn biology by applying it to ALS projects.

Aucoin, Paschal J., Jr.↗