Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Teleoperation”

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 289 records · Page 16
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2013

Discontinuity Detection for Analysis of Telerobot Trajectories

To identify spatial and temporal discontinuities in telerobot movement in order to describe the shift in operators control and error correction strategies from continuous control to move-and-wait strategies. This shift was studied under conditions of simulated increasingly time-delayed teleoperation. The ultimate goal is to determine if the time delay associated with the shift is invariant with independently imposed control difficulty. We expect this shift to manifest itself as changes in the number of discontinuity of movement path. We proposed an approach to spatial and temporal discontinuity detection algorithm for analysis of teleoperated trajectory in three dimensional space. The algorithm provides a simple and potentially objective method for detecting the discontinuity during telerobot operation and evaluating the difficulty of rotational coordinate condition in teleoperation.

Yeom, Kiwon↗
NASA NTRS2014

Robonaut 2 - IVA Experiments On-Board ISS and Development Towards EVA Capability

Robonaut 2 (R2) has completed its fixed base activities on-board the ISS and is scheduled to receive its climbing legs in early 2014. In its continuing line of firsts, the R2 torso finished up its on-orbit activities on its stanchion with the manipulation of space blanket materials and performed multiple tasks under teleoperation control by IVA astronauts. The successful completion of these two IVA experiments is a key step in Robonaut's progression towards an EVA capability. Integration with the legs and climbing inside the ISS will provide another important part of the experience that R2 will need prior to performing tasks on the outside of ISS. In support of these on-orbit activities, R2 has been traversing across handrails in simulated zero-g environments and working with EVA tools and equipment on the ground to determine manipulation strategies for an EVA Robonaut. R2 made significant advances in robotic manipulation of deformable materials in space while working with its softgoods task panel. This panel features quarter turn latches that secure a space blanket to the task panel structure. The space blanket covers two cloth cubes that are attached with Velcro to the structure. R2 was able to open and close the latches, pull back the blanket, and remove the cube underneath. R2 simulated cleaning up an EVA worksite as well, by replacing the cube and reattaching the blanket. In order to interact with the softgoods panel, R2 has both autonomously and with a human in the loop identified and localized these deformable objects. Using stereo color cameras, R2 identified characteristic elements on the softgoods panel then extracted the location and orientation of the object in its field of view using stereo disparity and kinematic transforms. R2 used both vision processing and supervisory control to successfully accomplish this important task. Teleoperation is a key capability for Robonaut's effectiveness as an EVA system. To build proficiency, crewmembers have attempted increasingly difficult tasks using R2 inside the Station. After donning motion capture equipment and a virtual reality visor, Expedition 34/35 flight engineer Tom Marshburn began operations with simple hand movements. Having gained confidence, Marshburn guided R2's arms in a leader-follower exercise with crewmate Chris Cassidy. He was also able to use the hand to grab a tumbling roll of tape, a task only demonstrable in microgravity. Later efforts saw Cassidy handle softgoods through shared control with ground operators, mimicking an activity previously achieved using only autonomy. Robotic climbing through the ISS on handrails requires both precision motion and compliant grasps in order to both position grippers on handrails/seat track and prevent large internal forces. R2 climbs using actively controlled compliance and torque limiting to meet both the precision and softness requirements. During a step, the attached leg is controlled to be strong and stiff in order to maintain precision trajectory tracking. The swing leg is controlled to be stiff but weak to minimize unintentional impact forces while maintaining precision. During a simulated dual limb grasp (as shown in Figure 1), the R2 controller maintains one limb rigid and one limb soft to prevent large internal forces from building up. R2's grippers also use a form of force control to limit grip force while not fully closed on either a handrail or seat track thus limiting unintentional forces on cables/objects that may be present in R2's translational path. The on-board torso R2 safety system relies on a single end-effector velocity limit to prevent potential impact forces from exceeding Station maximum load requirements. R2's mobile configuration required modifications to the velocity limiting safety function due to its large, dynamic inertia. R2's legs maneuver the robot's mass creating configuration dependent, joint-relative inertias. A single all-encompassing velocity limit to cover worst case inertia is prohibitively low. The upgraded R2 control and safety systems solve this problem using momentum limiting, momentum control, and kinetic energy minimization. Momentum and kinetic energy take the robot mass into account relieving low velocity restrictions on low inertia end-effectors while ensuring that the overall mass of R2 is limited from hazardous velocities. The momentum of R2's five safety nodes (each of the four end-effectors and the body) is monitored and compared to a single momentum limit. If any of the five nodes exceeds the safety limit, the motor power is removed and the robot comes to a stop. Momentum control/limiting also provides a simple, reliable method to integrate hand held tools into the safety system by providing the tool mass to the control system thus automatically reducing the allowable velocity of the end-effector with the tool. Work on the ground continues to build the skill set for an EVA Robonaut. Recent experiments (Figure 2) demonstrate how a teleoperator can use R2 to manipulate a tether hook, an important safety precaution on spacewalks. Another task displayed Robonaut's ability to pull back a protective jacket over a hose and search for damage, as well as inspect a quick-disconnect fitting for debris. Demonstrations such as these are indicative of EVA work done on ISS, specifically seen during a series of spacewalks over 2012 and 2013 where astronauts searched for an ammonia leak in one of the external cooling loops. Through experiments both on ISS and on the ground, R2 is evolving and providing the information needed to plan out the upgrades that will make an EVA Robonaut an effective tool. With the addition of legs, R2 will start climbing inside the space station and supply invaluable information on how the climbing strategies and task stabilization techniques must be refined. Ground R2 systems will continue to work with additional EVA tools and equipment in preparation for onboard IVA testing and future EVA applications.

Diftler, Myron↗
NASA NTRS2021

Mass Inferencing Model Creation And Deployment To Lunar Excavation Robot, RASSOR

NASA’s Regolith Advanced Surface Systems Operations Robot (RASSOR) Excavator is a teleoperated mobile robotic platform with a unique space regolith excavation capability. This research project developed functionality for inferencing regolith mass ingested during RASSOR operation, enhancing RASSOR’s ability to successfully complete ISRU missions. Radio wave propagation time to the Moon and back is ~2.56 seconds. Though teleoperation is possible with this delay, autonomous capability that enables RASSOR to plan and execute excavation missions intelligently and efficiently is preferred. To teleoperate or run autonomously, it is crucial for the quantity of regolith mass ingested by RASSOR to be available as a system state for efficient operation (e.g. knowledge of whether drums are full informs the task of highest priority, whether it be continuing to dig, or returning to a processing plant to offload regolith). A configurable data reduction and analysis pipeline was created to allow for straightforward incorporation of new data, such as that from lunar excavation, to improve model performance in new environments. Four distinct modeling approaches were employed in developing a mass inferencing approach that could work on RASSOR. All four models take in system states and output a mass prediction for each set of the robot’s bucket drums. Initial results from deployment to RASSOR and testing in a simulated lunar environment show that the models have <10% mean error during robot operation. Future work includes refinement of a model that estimates regolith mass in real-time during excavation as well as further testing of the developed models on the hardware.

ROS↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Uncrewed Lunar Surface Operations and Support Activities

Sustained human presence on the surface of the Moon and future missions to Mars require increased independence from surface crews and Earth-based mission control to operate efficiently, safely, and reliably. The time for surface crews to perform tasks will be limited. Extravehicular activities by surface personnel are burdensome and time-consuming, even when a continuous human presence on the surface occurs. Identifying and balancing human/automation roles and tasks and infusing automation and autonomy practices early in a system’s lifecycle will be essential to achieve mission objectives. Among these objectives are attaining a sustained human presence, improving performance and mission effectiveness, reducing operations and maintenance (O&M) costs, and ensuring operations that are robust to communication delays. To achieve these objectives, an operational shift toward increased automation and autonomy with less reliance on humans is needed. Uncrewed lunar surface operations and support activities occur when surface crews are not present or are independent of surface crew timeline activities requiring no surface crew oversight or intervention. These uncrewed surface opportunities can also be planned to minimize crew workload that avoids routine maintenance and support tasks, thus maximizing crew exploration time. Uncrewed preparations such as staging and prepositioning equipment and materials before the crew arrives could improve crew task efficiency. Additional opportunities exist to conduct uncrewed science, exploration, and utilization. Uncrewed surface architecture functions can include science and exploration; habitation; launch and landing support; surface communication and navigation; surface power generation and distribution; human surface mobility; lifting, handling, manipulating; excavation, construction, and site preparation; logistics management; maintenance and repair; surface resource utilization; integrated site operations and shared support services (e.g., site scheduling/prioritization, dust mitigation/contamination control, and surface safety). Early robotic lunar surface campaigns will provide information on the availability of resources, such as oxygen and water, and demonstrate surface-based technologies. After the Artemis III human lunar return mission, a series of landers will deliver surface systems, cargo, supplies, science packages, spare parts, and commodities. A balance of crewed and uncrewed surface operations will enable a sustained lunar surface presence at the South Pole of the Moon at a site that will be known as the Artemis Base Camp (ABC). It is envisioned that base camp operations on and around the Moon will then help prepare for the mission durations and activities needed to support the first human mission to Mars. Before long-duration crew missions to the base camp can occur, the necessary surface infrastructure will be pre-deployed and verified operational. Surface assets will be teleoperated and remotely managed from Earth. Additionally, robotic and short-duration crewed missions to the ABC will ensure the site’s merit to achieve long-term science objectives, availability of usable resources, and that terrain, seasonal variations, and illumination conditions are acceptable. ABC will consist of different areas where specific functions and services are rendered, including: • Launch and Landing Area • Habitation Area • Power Production Area • Resource Areas Launch and Landing Area—The launch and landing area will support associated functions for the arrival and departure of vehicles, such as crewed landing and ascent and uncrewed cargo deliveries and offloading. It will evolve from an unimproved site at the beginning of the exploration campaign to a more sustainable landing and launch area that can support repeated arrivals and departures. Initial uncrewed Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) surface operations may include emplacement of navigation beacons and communication equipment, real-time video and photography of landing/liftoff events, and element repositioning, such as portable utility power (PUP) (applicable for other landed assets at other areas). Site preparations, such as surface leveling, soil compaction, and berm/path construction, may be needed for a more sustainable launch and landing area capable of accommodating vehicles that are increasingly more reusable and reduce the effects of plume surface interactions and ejecta impacts on nearby surface assets. During the ABC missions, cargo and logistics will be delivered to the lunar surface via robotic cargo landers before the crew arrives. These shipments, which can arrive in pressurized logistics carriers, will deliver the logistics necessary to support a crewed mission and include items such as food, water, equipment spares, etc. Providing the capability to retrieve, offload, and transport the logistics closer to the ABC site before the arrival of the crew will increase the overall efficiency of crew operations once they arrive. In the sustained phase of exploration, other supporting services may be needed, such as lander propellant servicing, surface power services, commodity refreshes, and additional inspection, maintenance, and repair capabilities, to sustain a cadence of extended personnel stays and cargo arrivals and departures. Habitation Area—Uncrewed support to surface habitation could involve supporting activation and pre-entry operations of the habitat while the crew is in orbit at the Gateway outpost preparing for a surface landing. Surface Habitat (SH) uncrewed operations may include bringing the cabin environment to a habitable temperature and air mix and activating other critical crew support systems. Potential crop production uncrewed tasks in the SH could also include autonomous watering and tending. Additionally, when the crew departs, the SH enters dormancy for the long period of uncrewed operation. A logistical staging area could also be collocated near the SH. If so, staging operations for crew supplies, waste re-location, and recycling operations may be opportunities for uncrewed operations. Power Production Area—The Fission Surface Power (FSP) element and its supporting distribution equipment provide power to surface elements as needed across the ABC to supplement day-to-day operations and survive lunar nights. Uncrewed support of this power system includes any initial LTV-assisted deployments of cables and other distributed equipment, associated electrical connections, and system testing and activation operations. Robotically performing some inspections, maintenance, or repair tasks on the power distribution equipment could reduce the surface crew workload. Resource Area— Uncrewed resource prospecting, mapping, and characterizing possible resource sites is likely to be time-consuming and represents an opportunity for uncrewed operations between crewed missions. Uncrewed mobile equipment operations will be needed in the extreme environments of permanently shadowed locations where resource extractions occur. As In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) pilot plant operations begin, uncrewed surface support activities with available mobile and portable assets (LTV, PUP, etc.) will better support these operations. Any produced commodities can be stored at a centralized storage location for future use. Also associated with these operations is the use of mobile robotic excavators for resource acquisition and robotic/autonomous regolith processing. The waste tailings generated during excavation and regolith processing would also need to be transported and deposited at a dedicated location. Surface assets will continue operating between crew visits to maintain surface capabilities, conduct lunar surface science, technology demonstrations, and public outreach opportunities. Additionally, certain sustaining tasks that would consume valuable crew time could be performed before crew arrival, or after their departure. This capability may offer more affordable options to construct, activate, test, and maintain a broad set of surface assets. Telerobotically operated human surface mobility systems, such as the LTV and Pressurized Rover (PR), can be utilized for various tasks. Surface environmental conditions pose a distinct challenge for all these activities. Surface illumination and localized shadows are one such factor. Night-survival operations could consist of thermal management, battery pre-charging, and load shedding. Some surface systems may hibernate through the night and then awake and continue nominal operations. Uncrewed mobile assets may use a more adaptive approach to optimize their power and operations; one method is to follow the sunlight. Night-survival operations may be initiated remotely by teleoperation, automated, or accomplished by supervised autonomous operation. The ability to pre-deploy and control remote assets in orbit or on Mars before the arrival of the mission crew is a key capability that can be simulated on the moon. The base camp provides a venue where these advanced operational concepts, technologies, and autonomous methods and techniques, including the incorporation of time delays to simulate Earth-Mars latency can be replicated to help buy down future Mars mission risks. This paper will examine the evolution of uncrewed lunar surface operations and support activities. It will also discuss the lunar surface environmental conditions (thermal, lighting, terrain, topography, communications) along with the challenges they pose on uncrewed surface operations, and the performance of these activities with limited to minimal human interaction and/or teleoperation. Since lunar missions include Mars mission analogs, such investigation provides the framework for future uncrewed Mars mission support.

Mark E Lewis↗
NASA NTRS1994

(abstract) A Mobile Robot for Remote Response to Incidents Involving Hazardous Materials

This paper will report the status of the Emergency Response Robotics project, a teleoperated mobile robot system being developed at JPL for use by the JPL Fire Department/HAZMAT Team. The project, which began in 1991, has been focused on developing a robotic vehicle which can be quickly deployed by HAZMAT Team personnel for first entry into an incident site. The primary goals of the system are to gain access to the site, locate and identify the hazard, and aid in its mitigation. The involvement of JPL Fire Department/HAZMAT Team personnel has been critical in guiding the design and evaluation of the system. A unique feature of the current robot, called HAZBOT III, is its special design for operation in combustible environments. This includes the use of all solid state electronics, brushless motors, and internal pressurization. Demonstration and testing of the system with HAZMAT Team personnel has shown that teleoperated robots, such as HAZBOT III, can successfully gain access to incident sites locating and identifying hazardous material spills. Work is continuing to enable more complex missions through the addition of appropriate sensor technology and enhancement of the operator interface.

robots teleoperator hazardous materials HAZMAT HAZ↗
NASA NTRS1994

A Mobile Robot for Remote Response to Incidents Involving Hazardous Materials

This paper will describe a teleoperated mobile robot system being developed at JPL for use by the JPL Fire Department/HAZMAT Team. The project, which began in October 1990, is focused on prototyping a robotic vehicle which can be quickly deployed and easily operated by HAZMAT Team personnel allowing remote entry and exploration of a hazardous material incident site. The close involvement of JPL Fire Department personnel has been critical in establishing system requirements as well as evaluating the system. The current robot, called HAZBOT III, has been especially designed for operation in environments that may contain combustible gases. Testing of the system with the Fire Department has shown that teleoperated robots can successfully gain access to incident sites allowing hazardous material spills to be remotely located and identified. Work is continuing to enable more complex missions through enhancement of the operator interface and by allowing tetherless operation.

robots teleoperator hazardous materials HAZMAT HAZ↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

How Autonomous Intelligent Systems Can Facilitate Earth-independent Medical Care: Going Beyond Telepresence

During the last decade, teleoperated robotic systems have extended humans’ sensorimotor competence to digitally fly beyond the physical barrier of distance and scale and thus transmit sensorimotor skills of the human through direct communication. Telepresence capabilities have enabled tele-physical remote access at small scales thanks to telerobotic mediums. Although the concept was initially motivated by space applications, such technologies quickly have expanded into the medical domain and resulted in teleoperated medical robots, including telerobotic surgical systems (such as the da Vinci surgical system). Effective telepresence fundamentally depends on an agile, reliable, and secure communication medium that can transmit real-time information between the operator and a remote device. However, direct telepresence may not be achievable for long-duration exploration spaceflight missions. Thus, autonomous systems and local intelligence represent potential solutions to the aforementioned issues. One example solution employs demonstration systems which enable learning from the pre-captured inputs of a skilled human operator. These will be computationally modeled and later probabilistically replicated toward the completion of remote physical tasks when direct telepresence is not viable - such as under communication blackout conditions. In other words, trained autonomous systems (e.g., robots) can perform remote operations that mimic the physical performance of experts during remote operations/training. Beyond learning the physics of the task, autonomous agents can also be used to conduct algorithmic decision-making that mimics the higher-level cognition of the expert. Thus, using an autonomous system, pre-trained cognitive and manipulation-based skills can be leveraged (acquired during pre-mission events) to produce digital twins of an intelligent operator. Such systems can be used for the real-time conduction of intricate tasks in complex and unstructured environments. Such systems will operationalize “cognitive digital twins” and can expand the reach of human cognition and manipulation through the power of data-driven learning from demonstration algorithms. This system category will be discussed as a fully autonomous operation in this talk. In addition to the above, we will also propose and discuss the possibility of partial-automation using remote intelligence and remote sensing. In contrast to full automation, partial automation can close the loop through a local operator equipped with augmented sensory awareness through wearable systems. Such technologies will allow the local operator to conduct delicate tasks while being guided using sensory augmentation and being monitored to gauge her/his level of cognitive focus and performance. The difference with the previous category is that a remote human will conduct the task. Further, rather than making a digital twin of human cognition, we will augment the control inputs of the local human to match those of the skilled expert operator who is not accessible in real-time. Going beyond classic telepresence and thus approaching intelligent telepresence, our vision is that autonomous agents will eventually enable the safe, consistent and efficient delivery of complex, remote and smart medical care during space exploration across operators in an Earth-independent fashion. We will discuss our collective vision from NASA and MERIIT@NYU lab in this talk.

Telepresence↗
DOE OSTI2026

A Modular Accelerator Robotics Framework for AD Robotics

Accelerator tunnels, such as the ones at Fermilab, remain highly radioactive after beam shutoff due to induced radiation from the beam. This residual radiation creates a hazardous environment for manual inspection and repair of beamline components. To minimize worker radiation dose and reduce beam downtime, the AD Robotics Initiative previously built a fleet of low-cost custom mobile robots. However, the custom Python sockets server-client architecture lacked standardization, causing development delays and complicating the integration of new sensors and actuators. Here, we developed a modular system using ROS2 and Docker to standardize the teleoperation and control interfaces. This system was validated by implementing a teleoperation controller with real-time, low-latency, and high-definition video feedback. The aim of this framework is for a new feature or even a robot to be integrated into the system simply by documenting the hardware configuration. Current integration of LiDAR, Odometry, and Depth Cameras provides the foundation for Simultaneous Localization and Mapping (SLAM) tasks. Finally, future work involves integration into the accelerator control system and the attachment of a 6 degree-of-freedom robotic arm for telemanipulation.

Rayyan Khan, M. [Fermilab; Rensselaer Poly.; Unlis↗
NASA NTRS1972

Manipulator systems extend man's capabilities in space.

Teleoperator components include manipulators and end effectors, sensors, a mobility unit, radio or hard-wire communications receiver and information processor, information display, man in the control loop at various levels of sophistication, the controls, and the transmitter. Possible applications of teleoperators in space cover a wide spectrum from various research and operational missions in earth orbit in conjunction with the space shuttle, space stations, and satellites to vehicles to explore the moon, planets and their moons, asteroids and comets.

Deutsch, S.↗
NASA NTRS1973

Earth-orbit mission considerations and Space Tug requirements.

The reusable Space Tug is a major system planned to augment the Space Shuttle's capability to deliver, retrieve, and support automated payloads. The Space Tug will be designed to perform round-trip missions from low earth orbit to geosynchronous orbit. Space Tug goals and requirements are discussed together with the characteristics of the full capability Tug. The Tug is to be operated in an unmanned 'teleoperator' fashion. Details of potential teleoperator applications are considered, giving attention to related systems studies, candidate Tug mission applications, Tug 'end-effector' alternatives, technical issues associated with Tug payload retrieval, and Tug/payload accommodations.

Huber, W. G.↗
NASA NTRS1973

Touch sensors and control.

Description of the equipment employed and results obtained in experiments with tactile feedback and different levels of automatic control. In the experiments described tactile feedback was investigated by incorporating a touch sensing and touch display system into a teleoperator, while the levels of automatic control were investigated by incorporating supervisory control features in the teleoperator control system. In particular, a hand contact system which senses and reproduces to the operator the contact between the end-effector and the object being touched or manipulated is described, as well as a jaw contact system which senses and reproduces to the operator the shape and location of the object held in the remote jaws, and an arm control system consisting of a control station where the operator controls the motion of the arm by transmitting commands, a remote station that accepts the commands and uses them, and a communications link that limits information flow. In addition, an algorithmic language for remote manipulation is described, and the desired features that an automatic arm controller should possess are reviewed.

Hill, J. W.↗
NASA NTRS1975

A manipulator arm for zero-g simulations

A 12-ft counterbalanced Slave Manipulator Arm (SMA) was designed and fabricated to be used for resolving the questions of operational applications, capabilities, and limitations for such remote manned systems as the Payload Deployment and Retrieval Mechanism (PDRM) for the shuttle, the Free-Flying Teleoperator System, the Advanced Space Tug, and Planetary Rovers. As a developmental tool for the shuttle manipulator system (or PDRM), the SMA represents an approximate one-quarter scale working model for simulating and demonstrating payload handling, docking assistance, and satellite servicing. For the Free-Flying Teleoperator System and the Advanced Tug, the SMA provides a near full-scale developmental tool for satellite servicing, docking, and deployment/retrieval procedures, techniques, and support equipment requirements. For the Planetary Rovers, it provides an oversize developmental tool for sample handling and soil mechanics investigations. The design of the SMA was based on concepts developed for a 40-ft NASA technology arm to be used for zero-g shuttle manipulator simulations.

Brodie, S. B.↗
NASA NTRS1975

Control and stability problems of remote orbital capture

The dynamics and control aspects of orbital capture of space objects were studied. Differential angular rates and orientation between the object and the grappler were used to investigate the effects of misalignment as well as stability and control. The control responses after capture are discussed. The feasibility of nulling combined spin and nutation of a typical satellite is demonstrated by a Lagrangian formulation to establish a baseline situation. A free-flying teleoperator (FFTO) with a dynamically unbalanced grappler is shown to be desirable because extremely adverse cyclic torques may be generated. A combined teleoperator-satellite system assuming misalignments during capture was dynamically analyzed. Related responses and stability evaluations are included.

Kaplan, M. H.↗
NASA NTRS1977

Control and stability problems of remote orbital capture

Certain space shuttle missions may require retrieval of passive spinning and precessing satellites. One proposed means of retrieval utilizes a free-flying teleoperator launched from the shuttle. A study of misalignment, stability, and certain control aspects during capture of an object is reported here. The approach used is to model the dynamics by a Lagrangian formulation and apply torque components to dissipate motion. Differential angular rates between teleoperator and object are assumed, and control responses after capture are reviewed.

Kaplan, M. H.↗
NASA NTRS1983

A robot in space as a large space structures control experiment

The control systems design issues for large space structures can be addressed by a robotics experiment which defines a teleoperator or a robot or uses the RMS. The robotics control demonstration brings the large space structures control technology to an effective state of readiness and provides a useful robot when the experiment is finished. Three major options in such an experiment are the RMS, a flexible arm that is going to be put on the Shuttle for other reasons, or a dexetrous manipulator or teleoperator.

Gran, R.↗
NASA NTRS1983

Control of robot manipulators for handling and assembly in space

Long-range NASA planning includes construction and erection of large systems in space requiring automatic handling equipment, teleoperators, or robots under supervisory control. This paper investigates and explores some of the requirements for the control of teleoperated and autonomous space manipulators. The critical technology development areas are identified and discussed in the context of the developments at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), and other places.

Heer, E.↗
NASA NTRS1983

Human factors in space telepresence

The problems of interfacing a human with a teleoperation system, for work in space are discussed. Much of the information presented here is the result of experience gained by the M.I.T. Space Systems Laboratory during the past two years of work on the ARAMIS (Automation, Robotics, and Machine Intelligence Systems) project. Many factors impact the design of the man-machine interface for a teleoperator. The effects of each are described in turn. An annotated bibliography gives the key references that were used. No conclusions are presented as a best design, since much depends on the particular application desired, and the relevant technology is swiftly changing.

Akin, D. L.↗
NASA NTRS1985

Transportation Applications, Part 2

The capabilities of a tethered teleoperator are discussed, including payload transfer reentry, rendezvous and docking, and deployment and retrieval of the tether teleoperator maneuvering system (TTMS). The expected advantages of the TTMS in the areas of payload transfer, rendezvous, docking, and reentry are outlined. The applicability of the TTMS concept to NASA space stations is examined.

Lorenzini, E.↗