Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “robotics integration”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1989

User needs, benefits and integration of robotic systems in a space station laboratory

The methodology, results and conclusions of the User Needs, Benefits, and Integration Study (UNBIS) of Robotic Systems in the Space Station Microgravity and Materials Processing Facility are summarized. Study goals include the determination of user requirements for robotics within the Space Station, United States Laboratory. Three experiments were selected to determine user needs and to allow detailed investigation of microgravity requirements. A NASTRAN analysis of Space Station response to robotic disturbances, and acceleration measurement of a standard industrial robot (Intelledex Model 660) resulted in selection of two ranges of low gravity manipulation: Level 1 (10-3 to 10-5 G at greater than 1 Hz.) and Level 2 (less than = 10-6 G at 0.1 Hz). This included an evaluation of microstepping methods for controlling stepper motors and concluded that an industrial robot actuator can perform milli-G motion without modification. Relative merits of end-effectors and manipulators were studied in order to determine their ability to perform a range of tasks related to the three low gravity experiments. An Effectivity Rating was established for evaluating these robotic system capabilities. Preliminary interface requirements were determined such that definition of requirements for an orbital flight demonstration experiment may be established.

Farnell, K. E.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Simultaneous Trajectory Tracking Control and Online Mass Estimation for a Regolith Excavating Robot via Integral Concurrent Learning

An adaptive controller is developed for a regolith excavation robot to determine the mass of excavated material and to account for the effects of gravity and friction while on the surface of other celestial bodies. A data-based integral concurrent learning (ICL) parameter update law accounts for and estimates the unknown mass, gravity, and friction parameters. A Lyapunov-based analysis proves that the trajectory tracking error and the parameter estimate errors exponentially converge to zero. An estimation of the mass of regolith excavated by the robot is calculated from the estimated parameters. A simulation study is performed to show the performance of the developed technique. Simulation results show that for 3 kilograms of excavated material, the mass estimate has an error of 4.9 grams.

Max L. Greene↗
NASA NTRS1989

User Needs, Benefits, and Integration of Robotic Systems in a Space Station Laboratory

The methodology, results and conclusions of all tasks of the User Needs, Benefits, and Integration Study (UNBIS) of Robotic Systems in a Space Station Laboratory are summarized. Study goals included the determination of user requirements for robotics within the Space Station, United States Laboratory. In Task 1, three experiments were selected to determine user needs and to allow detailed investigation of microgravity requirements. In Task 2, a NASTRAN analysis of Space Station response to robotic disturbances, and acceleration measurement of a standard industrial robot (Intelledex Model 660) resulted in selection of two ranges of microgravity manipulation: Level 1 (10-3 to 10-5 G at greater than 1 Hz) and Level 2 (less than equal 10-6 G at 0.1 Hz). This task included an evaluation of microstepping methods for controlling stepper motors and concluded that an industrial robot actuator can perform milli-G motion without modification. Relative merits of end-effectors and manipulators were studied in Task 3 in order to determine their ability to perform a range of tasks related to the three microgravity experiments. An Effectivity Rating was established for evaluating these robotic system capabilities. Preliminary interface requirements for an orbital flight demonstration were determined in Task 4. Task 5 assessed the impact of robotics.

Dodd, W. R.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Robotic space simulation integration of vision algorithms into an orbital operations simulation

In order to successfully plan and analyze future space activities, computer-based simulations of activities in low earth orbit will be required to model and integrate vision and robotic operations with vehicle dynamics and proximity operations procedures. The orbital operations simulation (OOS) is configured and enhanced as a testbed for robotic space operations. Vision integration algorithms are being developed in three areas: preprocessing, recognition, and attitude/attitude rates. The vision program (Rice University) was modified for use in the OOS. Systems integration testing is now in progress.

Bochsler, Daniel C.↗
NASA NTRS1989

Experiences with the JPL telerobot testbed: Issues and insights

The Jet Propulsion Laboratory's (JPL) Telerobot Testbed is an integrated robotic testbed used to develop, implement, and evaluate the performance of advanced concepts in autonomous, tele-autonomous, and tele-operated control of robotic manipulators. Using the Telerobot Testbed, researchers demonstrated several of the capabilities and technological advances in the control and integration of robotic systems which have been under development at JPL for several years. In particular, the Telerobot Testbed was recently employed to perform a near completely automated, end-to-end, satellite grapple and repair sequence. The task of integrating existing as well as new concepts in robot control into the Telerobot Testbed has been a very difficult and timely one. Now that researchers have completed the first major milestone (i.e., the end-to-end demonstration) it is important to reflect back upon experiences and to collect the knowledge that has been gained so that improvements can be made to the existing system. It is also believed that the experiences are of value to the others in the robotics community. Therefore, the primary objective here will be to use the Telerobot Testbed as a case study to identify real problems and technological gaps which exist in the areas of robotics and in particular systems integration. Such problems have surely hindered the development of what could be reasonably called an intelligent robot. In addition to identifying such problems, researchers briefly discuss what approaches have been taken to resolve them or, in several cases, to circumvent them until better approaches can be developed.

Stone, Henry W.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Development of a facility using robotics for testing automation of inertial instruments

The Integrated Robotics System Simulation (ROBSIM) was used to evaluate the performance of the PUMA 560 arm as applied to testing of inertial sensors. Results of this effort were used in the design and development of a feasibility test environment using a PUMA 560 arm. The implemented facility demonstrated the ability to perform conventional static inertial instrument tests (rotation and tumble). The facility included an efficient data acquisitions capability along with a precision test servomechanism function resulting in various data presentations which are included in the paper. Analysis of inertial instrument testing accuracy, repeatability and noise characteristics are provided for the PUMA 560 as well as for other possible commercial arm configurations. Another integral aspect of the effort was an in-depth economic analysis and comparison of robot arm testing versus use of contemporary precision test equipment.

Greig, Joy Y.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Ice-Penetrating Robot for Scientific Exploration

The cryo-hydro integrated robotic penetrator system (CHIRPS) is a partially developed instrumentation system that includes a probe designed to deeply penetrate the European ice sheet in a search for signs of life. The CHIRPS could also be used on Earth for similar exploration of the polar ice caps especially at Lake Vostok in Antarctica. The CHIRPS probe advances downward by a combination of simple melting of ice (typically for upper, non-compacted layers of an ice sheet) or by a combination of melting of ice and pumping of meltwater (typically, for deeper, compacted layers). The heat and electric power for melting, pumping, and operating all of the onboard instrumentation and electronic circuitry are supplied by radioisotope power sources (RPSs) and thermoelectric converters energized by the RPSs. The instrumentation and electronic circuitry includes miniature guidance and control sensors and an advanced autonomous control system that has fault-management capabilities. The CHIRPS probe is about 1 m long and 15 cm in diameter. The RPSs generate a total thermal power of 1.8 kW. Initially, as this power melts the surrounding ice, a meltwater jacket about 1 mm thick forms around the probe. The center of gravity of the probe is well forward (down), so that the probe is vertically stabilized like a pendulum. Heat is circulated to the nose by means of miniature pumps and heat pipes. The probe melts ice to advance in a step-wise manner: Heat is applied to the nose to open up a melt void, then heat is applied to the side to allow the probe to slip down into the melt void. The melt void behind the probe is allowed to re-freeze. Four quadrant heaters on the nose and another four quadrant heaters on the rear (upper) surface of the probe are individually controllable for steering: Turning on two adjacent nose heaters on the nose and two adjacent heaters on the opposite side at the rear causes melt voids to form on opposing sides, such that the probe descends at an angle from vertical. This steering capability can be used to avoid debris trapped in the ice or to maneuver closer to a trapped object of scientific interest.

Zimmerman, Wayne↗
NASA NTRS2016

Anthropomorphic Robot Design and User Interaction Associated with Motion

Though in its original concept a robot was conceived to have some human-like shape, most robots now in use have specific industrial purposes and do not closely resemble humans. Nevertheless, robots that resemble human form in some way have continued to be introduced. They are called anthropomorphic robots. The fact that the user interface to all robots is now highly mediated means that the form of the user interface is not necessarily connected to the robots form, human or otherwise. Consequently, the unique way the design of anthropomorphic robots affects their user interaction is through their general appearance and the way they move. These robots human-like appearance acts as a kind of generalized predictor that gives its operators, and those with whom they may directly work, the expectation that they will behave to some extent like a human. This expectation is especially prominent for interactions with social robots, which are built to enhance it. Often interaction with them may be mainly cognitive because they are not necessarily kinematically intricate enough for complex physical interaction. Their body movement, for example, may be limited to simple wheeled locomotion. An anthropomorphic robot with human form, however, can be kinematically complex and designed, for example, to reproduce the details of human limb, torso, and head movement. Because of the mediated nature of robot control, there remains in general no necessary connection between the specific form of user interface and the anthropomorphic form of the robot. But their anthropomorphic kinematics and dynamics imply that the impact of their design shows up in the way the robot moves. The central finding of this report is that the control of this motion is a basic design element through which the anthropomorphic form can affect user interaction. In particular, designers of anthropomorphic robots can take advantage of the inherent human-like movement to 1) improve the users direct manual control over robot limbs and body positions, 2) improve users ability to detect anomalous robot behavior which could signal malfunction, and 3) enable users to be better able to infer the intent of robot movement. These three benefits of anthropomorphic design are inherent implications of the anthropomorphic form but they need to be recognized by designers as part of anthropomorphic design and explicitly enhanced to maximize their beneficial impact. Examples of such enhancements are provided in this report. If implemented, these benefits of anthropomorphic design can help reduce the risk of Inadequate Design of Human and Automation Robotic Integration (HARI) associated with the HARI-01 gap by providing efficient and dexterous operator control over robots and by improving operator ability to detect malfunctions and understand the intention of robot movement.

automation/robotic integration↗
NASA NTRS1992

A mobile robot system for ground servicing operations on the space shuttle

A mobile system for space shuttle servicing, the Tessellator, has been configured, designed and is currently being built and integrated. Robot tasks include chemical injection and inspection of the shuttle's thermal protection system. This paper outlines tasks, rationale, and facility requirements for the development of this system. A detailed look at the mobile system and manipulator follow with a look at mechanics, electronics, and software. Salient features of the mobile robot include omnidirectionality, high reach, high stiffness and accuracy with safety and self-reliance integral to all aspects of the design. The robot system is shown to meet task, facility, and NASA requirements in its design resulting in unprecedented specifications for a mobile-manipulation system.

Dowling, K.↗
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.

Korth, David↗
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 NTRS2016

International Space Station Configuration Analysis and Integration

Ambitious engineering projects, such as NASA's International Space Station (ISS), require dependable modeling, analysis, visualization, and robotics to ensure that complex mission strategies are carried out cost effectively, sustainably, and safely. Learn how Booz Allen Hamilton's Modeling, Analysis, Visualization, and Robotics Integration Center (MAVRIC) team performs engineering analysis of the ISS Configuration based primarily on the use of 3D CAD models. To support mission planning and execution, the team tracks the configuration of ISS and maintains configuration requirements to ensure operational goals are met. The MAVRIC team performs multi-disciplinary integration and trade studies to ensure future configurations meet stakeholder needs.

Anchondo, Rebekah↗
NASA NTRS2014

Vision Based Autonomous Robotic Control for Advanced Inspection and Repair

The advanced inspection system is an autonomous control and analysis system that improves the inspection and remediation operations for ground and surface systems. It uses optical imaging technology with intelligent computer vision algorithms to analyze physical features of the real-world environment to make decisions and learn from experience. The advanced inspection system plans to control a robotic manipulator arm, an unmanned ground vehicle and cameras remotely, automatically and autonomously. There are many computer vision, image processing and machine learning techniques available as open source for using vision as a sensory feedback in decision-making and autonomous robotic movement. My responsibilities for the advanced inspection system are to create a software architecture that integrates and provides a framework for all the different subsystem components; identify open-source algorithms and techniques; and integrate robot hardware.

sensory feedback↗
NASA NTRS1990

Robotics technology discipline

Viewgraphs on robotics technology discipline for Space Station Freedom are presented. Topics covered include: mechanisms; sensors; systems engineering processes for integrated robotics; man/machine cooperative control; 3D-real-time machine perception; multiple arm redundancy control; manipulator control from a movable base; multi-agent reasoning; and surfacing evolution technologies.

Montemerlo, Melvin D.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Technology for an intelligent, free-flying robot for crew and equipment retrieval in space

Crew rescue and equipment retrieval is a Space Station Freedom requirement. During Freedom's lifetime, there is a high probability that a number of objects will accidently become separated. Members of the crew, replacement units, and key tools are examples. Retrieval of these objects within a short time is essential. Systems engineering studies were conducted to identify system requirements and candidate approaches. One such approach, based on a voice-supervised, intelligent, free-flying robot was selected for further analysis. A ground-based technology demonstration, now in its second phase, was designed to provide an integrated robotic hardware and software testbed supporting design of a space-borne system. The ground system, known as the EVA Retriever, is examining the problem of autonomously planning and executing a target rendezvous, grapple, and return to base while avoiding stationary and moving obstacles. The current prototype is an anthropomorphic manipulator unit with dexterous arms and hands attached to a robot body and latched in a manned maneuvering unit. A precision air-bearing floor is used to simulate space. Sensor data include two vision systems and force/proximity/tactile sensors on the hands and arms. Planning for a shuttle file experiment is underway. A set of scenarios and strawman requirements were defined to support conceptual development. Initial design activities are expected to begin in late 1989 with the flight occurring in 1994. The flight hardware and software will be based on lessons learned from both the ground prototype and computer simulations.

Erickson, J. D.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Rendezvous Integration Complexities of NASA Human Flight Vehicles

Propellant-optimal trajectories, relative sensors and navigation, and docking/capture mechanisms are rendezvous disciplines that receive much attention in the technical literature. However, other areas must be considered. These include absolute navigation, maneuver targeting, attitude control, power generation, software development and verification, redundancy management, thermal control, avionics integration, robotics, communications, lighting, human factors, crew timeline, procedure development, orbital debris risk mitigation, structures, plume impingement, logistics, and in some cases extravehicular activity. While current and future spaceflight programs will introduce new technologies and operations concepts, the complexity of integrating multiple systems on multiple spacecraft will remain. The systems integration task may become more difficult as increasingly complex software is used to meet current and future automation, autonomy, and robotic operation requirements.

Brazzel, Jack P.↗
NASA NTRS1989

An intelligent, free-flying robot

The ground based demonstration of the extensive extravehicular activity (EVA) Retriever, a voice-supervised, intelligent, free flying robot, is designed to evaluate the capability to retrieve objects (astronauts, equipment, and tools) which have accidentally separated from the Space Station. The major objective of the EVA Retriever Project is to design, develop, and evaluate an integrated robotic hardware and on-board software system which autonomously: (1) performs system activation and check-out; (2) searches for and acquires the target; (3) plans and executes a rendezvous while continuously tracking the target; (4) avoids stationary and moving obstacles; (5) reaches for and grapples the target; (6) returns to transfer the object; and (7) returns to base.

Reuter, G. J.↗