Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “SPACE ROBOTICS”

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 91 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1993

Integration of advanced teleoperation technologies for control of space robots

Teleoperated robots require one or more humans to control actuators, mechanisms, and other robot equipment given feedback from onboard sensors. To accomplish this task, the human or humans require some form of control station. Desirable features of such a control station include operation by a single human, comfort, and natural human interfaces (visual, audio, motion, tactile, etc.). These interfaces should work to maximize performance of the human/robot system by streamlining the link between human brain and robot equipment. This paper describes development of a control station testbed with the characteristics described above. Initially, this testbed will be used to control two teleoperated robots. Features of the robots include anthropomorphic mechanisms, slaving to the testbed, and delivery of sensory feedback to the testbed. The testbed will make use of technologies such as helmet mounted displays, voice recognition, and exoskeleton masters. It will allow tor integration and testing of emerging telepresence technologies along with techniques for coping with control link time delays. Systems developed from this testbed could be applied to ground control of space based robots. During man-tended operations, the Space Station Freedom may benefit from ground control of IVA or EVA robots with science or maintenance tasks. Planetary exploration may also find advanced teleoperation systems to be very useful.

Stagnaro, Michael J.↗
NASA NTRS1989

Advances in space robotics

The problem of the remote control of space operations is addressed by identifying the key technical challenge: the management of contact forces and the principal performance parameters. Three principal classes of devices for remote operation are identified: anthropomorphic exoskeletons, computer aided teleoperators, and supervised telerobots. Their fields of application are described, and areas in which progress has reached the level of system or subsystem laboratory demonstrations are indicated. Key test results, indicating performance at a level useful for design tradeoffs, are reported.

Varsi, Giulio↗
NASA NTRS1994

Concept verification of three dimensional free motion simulator for space robot

In the development of automatic assembling technologies for space structures, it is an indispensable matter to investigate and simulate the movements of robot satellites concerned with mission operation. The movement investigation and simulation on the ground will be effectively realized by a free motion simulator. Various types of ground systems for simulating free motion have been proposed and utilized. Some of these methods are a neutral buoyancy system, an air or magnetic suspension system, a passive suspension balance system, and a free flying aircraft or drop tower system. In addition, systems can be simulated by computers using an analytical model. Each free motion simulation method has limitations and well known problems, specifically, disturbance by water viscosity, limited number of degrees-of-freedom, complex dynamics induced by the attachment of the simulation system, short experiment time, and the lack of high speed super-computer simulation systems, respectively. The basic idea presented here is to realize 3-dimensional free motion. This is achieved by combining a spherical air bearing, a cylindrical air bearing, and a flat air bearing. A conventional air bearing system has difficulty realizing free vertical motion suspension. The idea of free vertical suspension is that a cylindrical air bearing and counter balance weight realize vertical free motion. This paper presents a design concept, configuration, and basic performance characteristics of an innovative free motion simulator. A prototype simulator verifies the feasibility of 3-dimensional free motion simulation.

Okamoto, Osamu↗
NASA NTRS1994

Noninteracting Control of Robotic Space Vehicles

This paper develops methods for noninteracting control of articulated, possibly flexible, multibody space vehicles based on the diagonalized equation of motion.

robotic space vehicles noninteracting control mass↗
NASA NTRS1987

Key technology issues for space robotic systems

Robotics has become a key technology consideration for the Space Station project to enable enhanced crew productivity and to maximize safety. There are many robotic functions currently being studied, including Space Station assembly, repair, and maintenance as well as satellite refurbishment, repair, and retrieval. Another area of concern is that of providing ground based experimenters with a natural interface that they might directly interact with their hardware onboard the Space Station or ancillary spacecraft. The state of the technology is such that the above functions are feasible; however, considerable development work is required for operation in this gravity-free vacuum environment. Furthermore, a program plan is evolving within NASA that will capitalize on recent government, university, and industrial robotics research and development (R and D) accomplishments. A brief summary is presented of the primary technology issues and physical examples are provided of the state of the technology for the initial operational capability (IOC) system as well as for the eventual final operational capability (FOC) Space Station.

Schappell, Roger T.↗
NASA NTRS1989

Space robotic system for proximity operations

Key to an efficient accomplishment of space station servicing operations is the development of a scenario where the presence of man in space is well integrated with the capability of teleoperated and automatic robot system outside the stations. Results focusing on mission requirements, trajectory sequences, propulsion subsystem features, and manipulative kit characteristics relevant to proximity servicing during a Man Tended Free Flyers Robotic Mission (MTFF-RM) are illustrated.

Magnani, P. G.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Laboratory testing of candidate robotic applications for space

Robots have potential for increasing the value of man's presence in space. Some categories with potential benefit are: (1) performing extravehicular tasks like satellite and station servicing, (2) supporting the science mission of the station by manipulating experiment tasks, and (3) performing intravehicular activities which would be boring, tedious, exacting, or otherwise unpleasant for astronauts. An important issue in space robotics is selection of an appropriate level of autonomy. In broad terms three levels of autonomy can be defined: (1) teleoperated - an operator explicitly controls robot movement; (2) telerobotic - an operator controls the robot directly, but by high-level commands, without, for example, detailed control of trajectories; and (3) autonomous - an operator supplies a single high-level command, the robot does all necessary task sequencing and planning to satisfy the command. Researchers chose three projects for their exploration of technology and implementation issues in space robots, one each of the three application areas, each with a different level of autonomy. The projects were: (1) satellite servicing - teleoperated; (2) laboratory assistant - telerobotic; and (3) on-orbit inventory manager - autonomous. These projects are described and some results of testing are summarized.

Purves, R. B.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Human-Automation Allocations for Current Robotic Space Operations

Within the Human Research Program, one risk delineates the uncertainty surrounding crew working with automation and robotics in spaceflight. The Risk of Inadequate Design of Human and Automation/Robotic Integration (HARI) is concerned with the detrimental effects on crew performance due to ineffective user interfaces, system designs and/or functional task allocation, potentially compromising mission success and safety. Risk arises because we have limited experience with complex automation and robotics. One key gap within HARI, is the gap related to functional allocation. The gap states: We need to evaluate, develop, and validate methods and guidelines for identifying human-automation/robot task information needs, function allocation, and team composition for future long duration, long distance space missions. Allocations determine the human-system performance as it identifies the functions and performance levels required by the automation/robotic system, and in turn, what work the crew is expected to perform and the necessary human performance requirements. Allocations must take into account each of the human, automation, and robotic systems capabilities and limitations. Some functions may be intuitively assigned to the human versus the robot, but to optimize efficiency and effectiveness, purposeful role assignments will be required. The role of automation and robotics will significantly change in future exploration missions, particularly as crew becomes more autonomous from ground controllers. Thus, we must understand the suitability of existing function allocation methods within NASA as well as the existing allocations established by the few robotic systems that are operational in spaceflight. In order to evaluate future methods of robotic allocations, we must first benchmark the allocations and allocation methods that have been used. We will present 1) documentation of human-automation-robotic allocations in existing, operational spaceflight systems; and 2) To gather existing lessons learned and best practices in these role assignments, from spaceflight operational experience of crew and ground teams that may be used to guide development for future systems. NASA and other space agencies have operational spaceflight experience with two key Human-Automation-Robotic (HAR) systems: heavy lift robotic arms and planetary robotic explorers. Additionally, NASA has invested in high-fidelity rover systems that can carry crew, building beyond Apollo's lunar rover. The heavy lift robotic arms reviewed are: Space Station Remote Manipulator System (SSRMS), Japanese Remote Manipulator System (JEMRMS), and the European Robotic Arm (ERA, designed but not deployed in space). The robotic rover systems reviewed are: Mars Exploration Rovers, Mars Science Laboratory rover, and the high-fidelity K10 rovers. Much of the design and operational feedback for these systems have been communicated to flight controllers and robotic design teams. As part of the mitigating the HARI risk for future human spaceflight operations, we must document function allocations between robots and humans that have worked well in practice.

robotic allocation↗
NASA NTRS1989

Space robotics in the '90s

The use of telerobots and rovers in space missions is examined. The functioning of the telerobots and rovers and their proposed applications are described. Research developments needed to design robots for specific environments and functions are described. Examples of NASA robotics projects are presented.

Ruoff, Carl F.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Failure recovery control for space robotic systems

The problem of controlling a failed joint of a space manipulator is addressed. It is shown that failure-recovery control is possible when dynamic coupling exists between the link whose joint has failed and some other link whose joint is working and when the system inertia matrix is invariant with respect to the failed joint angle. A failure-recovery control technique is developed and applied to two simple examples.

Papadopoulos, Evangelos↗
NASA NTRS1989

The flight telerobotic servicer: NASA's first operational space robot

Alternatives to the exploration of Mars by direct human presence are under consideration by both the United States and the Soviet Union. In these concepts, autonomous surface vehicles would navigate the planet performing a variety of detailed exploratory functions such as mapping, seismic measurements, sample collection and analysis. Both of these approaches to the exploration of Mars depend to a high degree on the ability of robotic machinery to perform complex functions without real time human direction. Closer to home and in time, robotics will begin to play a role in space operations in the construction and maintenance of Space Station Freedom. The Flight Telerobotic Servicer Project is introduced as an element of the Space Station Freedom, and its objectives and some special challenges it faces are discussed.

Fuechsel, Charles F.↗