Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “roving vehicle”

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 145 records · Page 8
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Leveraging VIPER Geotechnical and Mobility Insights for Endurance Rover and Traverse Development

A new generation of lunar surface rover exploration is rapidly approaching. This is evidenced by the rise of commercially developed rovers from private companies (e.g., Lunar Outpost’s MAPP) and government agencies, like NASA’s Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER), the Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV), and the Endurance/Intrepid rover concepts, and the INSPIRE mission concept. The drive distance requirements for off-world vehicles are also rapidly increasing. For example, LTV driving requirements dictate a 20 km range on a single battery charge, with an overall lifetime requirement of 13,000 km over a minimum 10-year service life. Similarly, NASA's Endurance-A mission concept requires a 2000 km vehicle traverse distance, which is nearly 50 times further than the USSR's Lunokhod 2, the longest lunar rover mission to date. Previous planetary surface missions on the Moon and Mars have revealed harsh mobility conditions: aggressive rocky terrains on Mars severely damaged the Curiosity rover’s wheels, soft lunar regolith caused the Lunokhod 2 rover to sink and NASA’s Apollo 15 LRV (Lunar Roving Vehicle) spun out due to poor traction, which required manual correction. This demonstrates that mobility challenges like wheel degradation and soft soil driving performance must be accounted for in a mission’s design phase to meet increasingly aggressive mission durations and mobility goals. The success of these long duration missions requires highly reliable and durable mobility platforms in conjunction with a more developed understanding of the geotechnical properties of the lunar surface. The VIPER mission is uniquely posed to inform future missions about mobility performance, wheel durability, and lunar surface soil mechanics of sunlit and shadowed regions through use of data streams that already exist for other mission purposes. VIPER’s mission to the lunar south pole will provide a new perspective into off-world mobility challenges including traversal into permanently shadowed regions. Mobility data from VIPER’s mission will represent a first glimpse into the surface mobility challenges of the lunar South Pole. Utilization of VIPER’s existing capabilities including cameras, inertial measurement unit (IMU) data, motor currents/torque, drill data, and the rover’s suspension state and kinematics provide the opportunity to determine potentially useful information for future rover and traverse designs, as well as on-Earth testing practices. Data products collected during VIPER’s mission could inform design considerations for the Endurance rover much earlier than NASA’s standard “lessons learned” approach as VIPER has a highly tactical mission operations structure. This work outlines the specific links between possible data products from the VIPER mission and their potential impact on the Endurance/Intrepid mission concepts in their early design phases. From VIPER, we will also gain insights for future development of onboard mobility software as VIPER is a way-point driven rover which requires more constant human operation on Earth than some other rover missions (non-lunar surface). Primary VIPER data products and insights of interest include wheel sinkage, wheel slip, wheel degradation, surface soil shear strength, and terrain slope estimation. VIPER data products will be made available via the Planetary Data System’s Geosciences and Cartography and Imaging Sciences nodes, conforming to the PDS4 standard.

mobility↗
NASA NTRS1971

Apollo 15 Mission Report

A detailed discussion is presented of the Apollo 15 mission, which conducted exploration of the moon over longer periods, greater ranges, and with more instruments of scientific data acquisition than previous missions. The topics include trajectory, lunar surface science, inflight science and photography, command and service module performance, lunar module performance, lunar surface operational equipment, pilot's report, biomedical evaluation, mission support performance, assessment of mission objectives, launch phase summary, anomaly summary, and vehicle and equipment descriptions. The capability of transporting larger payloads and extending time on the moon were demonstrated. The ground-controlled TV camera allowed greater real-time participation by earth-bound personnel. The crew operated more as scientists and relied more on ground support team for systems monitoring. The modified pressure garment and portable life support system provided better mobility and extended EVA time. The lunar roving vehicle and the lunar communications relay unit were also demonstrated.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2017

The Utility of a Small Pressurized Rover with Suit Ports for Lunar Exploration: A Geologist's Perspective

Rover trade study: As summarized recently, mission simulations at Black Point Lava Flow (Arizona) that included realistic extravehicular activity (EVA) tasking, accurate traverse timelines, and an in-loop science CAPCOM (or SciCOM) showed that a small pressurized rover (SPR) was a better mobility asset than an unpressurized rover (UPR). Traverses within the SPR were easier on crew than spending an entire day in a spacesuit, enhancing crew productivity at each station. The SPR, named Lunar Electric Rover (LER), and sometimes called the Space Exploration Vehicle (SEV), could also provide shelter during a suit malfunction, radiation event, or medical emergency that might occur on the Moon. Intravehicular activity (IVA) capabilities: From within the vehicle, crew could describe and photo-document distant features during drives between stations, as well as in the near-field, directly in front of the LER, providing an ability to begin EVA planning on approach to each outcrop prior to egress. The vehicle can rotate 360º without any lateral movement, providing views in all directions. It has high-visibility windows, a ForeCam, AftCam, port and starboard cameras, docking cameras, and a GigaPan camera. EVA capabilities: To reduce timeline, mass, and volumetric overhead, rapid egress and ingress were envisioned, replacing an airlock with lower cabin pressure than on the International Space Station and suit ports on the aft cabin wall [2]. When needed for closer inspection and sample collecting, crew could egress in about 10 minutes through suit ports. Crew use SuitCams for additional photo-documentation, transmit mobile observations verbally, and collect surface materials. Typical simulations involved 3 to 4 EVA stations/day and 2 to 3 hr/day of boots on the ground. This allowed crew to explore a far larger territory, with more complex geological and in situ resource utilization (ISRU) features, than would a single, longer-duration EVA at one location, while also minimizing crew time in a spacesuit. Additionally, the vehicle could be driven with crew locked into the suit ports. This approach could involve a driver in the cockpit with a suited crewmember in a suit port, or the vehicle could be driven from the aft deck with both crewmembers in their suit ports. This approach was used when distances between stops were short enough that vehicle ingress and egress were less efficient than remaining in the suits and driving. Utility of suit ports: The advantages of suit ports were clearly demonstrated in those field-based trade studies. To illustrate those advantages further, consider the consequences of a SPR without suit ports at the Apollo 17 landing site. At that site, the crew's second EVA was an approximately 18 km loop conducted in a UPR, called the Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV), in 7 hr 36 min 56 s. The traverse was composed of 5 formal stations, plus 8 additional LRV stations where crew made brief scientific stops. In a scenario involving a SPR without suit ports, crew would go EVA through an airlock and probably be limited to a single EVA per day. In that case, crew could drive the SPR ~9 km from the landing site to station 2, go EVA, and complete station 2 tasks. However, to conduct station 3 tasks, the crew would then need to walk approximately 3 km to station 3, while ground control in Houston tele-robotically drives the LER to station 3. A walk of approximately 3 km is possible, as that is what the Apollo 14 crew did before LRVs were deployed, but it is a lengthy and potentially grueling EVA. Assuming crew completes station 3 tasks, they would likely need to re-enter the SPR, ending the day's EVA, and return to the landing site. They would not be able to walk the additional distances to stations 4 and 5 (the latter being about 6 km from station 3). Thus, crew in an SPR without suit ports would require two days to accomplish the same tasks Apollo 17 crew completed in a single day. If a future crew is involved in long duration traverses on the lunar surface, the deployment of a vehicle with suit ports would probably be a better solution.

Kring, David A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Ground Test Unit (GTU) Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) Conceptual Hand Controllers Studies

Over that past year, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has been preparing and developing a set of standardized testing protocols for the commercial LTV vendor selection. Two studies have been conducted on two possible hand controller concepts specifically designed for the operation of NASA’s Ground Test Unit (GTU) Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) that can be applied to the heretofore unknown designs developed by future LTV vendors. The objective for the two studies were to determine which hand controller enable acceptable operation of the LTV in a simulated lunar traverse. In the first evaluation a total of nine subjects in shirtsleeves with ungloved hands performed two simulated lunar driving courses in an engineering simulator with each hand controller. Controller concept one was the T-handle fashioned after the Apollo Lunar Roving Vehicle’s (LRV) T-Handle controller. The rational for using this design is it’s a proven design while in a pressurized suit. However, the LTV does have a driving mode the LRV did not consider. The mode of crabbing or strafing the vehicle at different angles; thus, the idea of a dual T-Handle controllers to accommodate this function without using a switch or display was introduced. The second concept controller is a new innovative controller call the Tri-Rotor [NASA patent review MSC-27385-1]. Inspired by Formula One race steering, the Tri-Rotor was designed to take advantage of the restricted movement and dexterity of a pressurized space suit. During testing, all subjects were able to successfully navigate through two test courses of varying lengths and complexity. Results indicated the dual Thandle had minimal recommendations for improvement while the Tri-Rotor had more extensive ones. It must be noted, the Tri-Rotor is a first-generation prototype and has some known mechanical concerns; thus, recommendations from this study will be incorporated into the second generation.

Human Factors↗
NASA NTRS2007

Biomedical Support of U.S. Extravehicular Activity

The world's first extravehicular activity (EVA) was performed by A. A. Leonov on March 18, 1965 during the Russian Voskhod-2 mission. The first US EVA was executed by Gemini IV astronaut Ed White on June 3, 1965, with an umbilical tether that included communications and an oxygen supply. A hand-held maneuvering unit (HHMU) also was used to test maneuverability during the brief EVA; however the somewhat stiff umbilical limited controlled movement. That constraint, plus difficulty returning through the vehicle hatch, highlighted the need for increased thermal control and improved EVA ergonomics. Clearly, requirements for a useful EVA were interrelated with the vehicle design. The early Gemini EVAs generated requirements for suits providing micro-meteor protection, adequate visual field and eye protection from solar visual and infrared radiation, gloves optimized for dexterity while pressurized, and thermal systems capable of protecting the astronaut while rejecting metabolic heat during high workloads. Subsequent Gemini EVAs built upon this early experience and included development of a portable environmental control and life support systems (ECLSS) and an astronaut maneuvering unit. The ECLSS provided a pressure vessel and controller with functional control over suit pressure, oxygen flow, carbon dioxide removal, humidity, and temperature control. Gemini EVA experience also identified the usefulness of underwater neutral buoyancy and altitude chamber task training, and the importance of developing reliable task timelines. Improved thermal management and carbon dioxide control also were required for high workload tasks. With the Apollo project, EVA activity was primarily on the lunar surface; and suit durability, integrated liquid cooling garments, and low suit operating pressures (3.75 pounds per square inch absolute [psia] or 25.8 kilopascal [kPa],) were required to facilitate longer EVAs with ambulation and significant physical workloads with average metabolic rates of 1000 BTU/hr and peaks of up to 2200 BTU/hr. Mobility was further augmented with the Lunar Roving Vehicle. The Apollo extravehicular mobility unit (EMU) was made up of over 15 components, ranging from a biomedical belt for capturing and transmitting biomedical data, urine and fecal containment systems, a liquid cooling garment, communications cap, a modular portable life support system (PLSS), a boot system, thermal overgloves, and a bubble helmet with eye protection. Apollo lunar astronauts performed successful EVAs on the lunar surface from a 5 psia (34.4 kPa) 100% oxygen environment in the Lunar Lander. A maximum of three EVAs were performed on any mission. For Skylab a modified A7LB suit, used for Apollo 15, was selected. The Skylab astronaut life support assembly (ALSA) provided umbilical support through the life support umbilical (LSU) and used open loop oxygen flow, rather than closed-loop as in Apollo missions. Thermal control was provided by liquid water circulated by spacecraft pumps and electrical power also was provided from the spacecraft via the umbilical. The cabin atmosphere of 5 psia (34.4 kPa), 70% oxygen, provided a normoxic atmosphere and because of the very low nitrogen partial pressures, no special protocols were required to protect against decompression sickness (DCS) as was the case with the Apollo spacecraft with a 5 psi, 100% oxygen environment.

Gernhardt, Michael L.↗
NASA NTRS1959

LUNAR SOFT LANDING STUDY

The information contained in this document is intended primarily for use of ABMA in the preparation of a “Luna Soft Landing Study” for the National Aeronautical and Space Administration. However, it may be of interest to other personnel concerned with the development of the SATURN system and with other space projects. Material in this document is presented in three sections: Section I, Ground Support Equipment; Section II, Manned Lunar Capsule Recovery; and Section III, Lunar Roving Vehicle. It should be pointed out that a majority of the ground support equipment described in Section I has already been developed or has been designed for use in the overall SATURN Vehicle Program. Therefore, most of this section is a proposal only in the sense that it is proposed to use existing SATURN Ground Support Equipment in the Lunar Soft Landing System. However, the information presented in Section II and Section III is based on preliminary design studies only and is submitted as a proposal subject to a complete R&D Program. Since information presented herein is very general in nature it is not intended for use as final design criteria.

Owen L. Sparks↗
NASA NTRS1965

Slrv control study final report

Surveyor Lunar Roving Vehicle /SLRV/ control system with television and photographic equipment in earth-based control

PHOTOGRAPHIC APPARATUS↗
NASA NTRS1970

Odometer navigation system

Pure odometer navigation system for measuring distance traveled by lunar roving vehicle and LRV heading

Source record↗