Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Lunar Terrain 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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Designing A Lunar Terrain Vehicle: Thermal Challenges

The Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) is an unpressurized rover that will be used to transport astronauts on the South Pole of the moon under the Artemis Program. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) will be partnering with an American industry partner to develop the LTV. This paper discusses the thermal challenges faced when designing a crewed lunar vehicle concept and shares a concept that addresses these constraints. One of the most difficult aspects of the design is surviving the cold lunar night on the South Pole which includes permanently shadowed regions (PSR) that can have an extended lunar night duration of 125 hours. Other challenges are critical component temperature limits and programmatic constraints.

Zaida Y. Hernandez↗
NASA NTRS2024

Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) Remote Teleoperation Studies Under Four Lunar Communication Latencies

Remotely operating a lunar rover from Earth while subject to an Earth-Moon time delay of multiple seconds could result in a dangerous state where the roving vehicle is either damaged or lost, thereby potentially compromising an entire mission or series of missions. Providing the right capabilities to the remote operator to manage inherent communication latencies will be important for remote driving to be successful. NASA conducted two studies to investigate the average speed and number of kilometers per day that an operator on Earth could teleoperate a notional Artemis unpressurized rover with minimal remote operator capabilities under 0- and 4-second communication delays (April 2023 study) and 6- and 8-second delays (August 2023 study). A primary goal of these studies was to understand if an Artemis Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) could cover 6 kilometers (km) in 24 hours when operated remotely. During the April 2023 evaluation, eight test operators used an in-house simulation of the lunar surface South Pole to teleoperate a NASA government reference LTV. Each operator received approximately 30 minutes of remote driving familiarization/training prior to their test run. Operators viewed the surrounding terrain via a single, rover mast-mounted, high-resolution camera with pan/tilt/zoom capabilities; continuous communication was provided throughout all testing. In the August 2023 evaluation, remote operators received approximately 3 hours of familiarization training in each latency, and the simulation environment provided remote operators with an operator-selected rate limiter to enable finer sensitivity in the hand controller and a predictive circle function to better assist operators with predicting the path the vehicle could take. All test operators were able to successfully navigate and drive through six different types of terrain and five planned traverse scenarios using natural lighting under all communication delays. Results for average speeds for each communication delay, computed by averaging the data from all test conditions for that latency and all operators, are shown in the table below. The average speed data was then used to derive the total time needed to cover 6 km, 8 km, and 20 km (distances relevant to LTV-SYS071 and -029 requirements). Remote operators drove slower and used the brake more frequently when subject to a communication latency as opposed to no communication latency. Subjective workload assessments revealed that while operating in a latency the overall workload significantly increased when compared to a 0-s delay with mental demand, frustration, and performance being the primary contributing factors. Driving strategies in the 0-s delay did not vary significantly among subjects; however, in the 4-s delay condition, three different driving strategies were identified. In the 6-s and 8-s latency conditions the operator’s use of the cruise control to maintain speed was more apparent. Additionally, over the course of the August study, the operator took advantage of the predictive circle indicator on the navigation display and over 95% of the operator’s navigation used the mast camera 180-degree panning function for ground truthing in terms of boulders and craters. Operators started to define more specific parameters in driving strategies for general operations. This consisted of setting the vehicle into a low-speed cruise mode of approximately 11.5 kph and noticing driving performance of the vehicle seemed to be much harder at slower speeds 0.4–0.8 kph; however, the vehicle was more responsive at speeds of 2.9–3.6 kph. Regardless of communication delay, operators used both the horizontal translation rails and the vehicle fenders as guides to predict a path for the vehicle through heavily concentrated terrain features. Test operators acknowledged that the teleoperations training for this study was substantially less than what an actual LTV remote operator will ultimately receive. They estimated a minimum of 20 to 100 hours spread across multiple days and weeks (e.g., strategies included immersion training over a 3-day period, to a short 8-week starter program) would be needed to get an operator ~ 60% proficient (i.e., able to complete a subset of remote driving tasks), to a yearlong program for full proficiency in remote driving tasks under all terrain types and natural lighting conditions. Remotely operating a vehicle on another planetary body while subject to communication latency is a complex task. Speed, distance covered, time spent driving, time spent navigating, brake usage and rock contacts are all affected by operator workload, driving strategies, workstation ergonomics and training. These studies provided a “first-look” answer to a potential system requirement (namely if a remote operator could cover a given distance in a given amount of time); however, considerable general knowledge was gained to begin to understand what it will take to make a successful lunar rover teleoperator.

LTV↗
NASA NTRS2025

Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) Remote Teleoperation Studies Under Four Lunar Communication Latencies

Remotely operating a lunar rover from Earth while subject to an Earth-Moon time delay of multiple seconds could result in a dangerous state where the roving vehicle is either damaged or lost, thereby potentially compromising an entire mission or series of missions. Providing the right capabilities to the remote operator to manage inherent communication latencies will be important for remote driving to be successful. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) conducted two studies to investigate the average speed and number of kilometers per day that an operator on Earth could teleoperate a notional Artemis unpressurized rover with minimal remote operator capabilities under 0- and 4-second communication delays (April 2023 study) and 6- and 8-second delays (August 2023 study). A primary goal of these studies was to understand if an Artemis Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) could cover 6 kilometers (km) in 24 hours when operated remotely. During the April 2023 evaluation, eight test operators used an in-house simulation of the lunar surface South Pole to teleoperate a NASA government reference LTV. Each operator received approximately 30 minutes of remote driving familiarization/training prior to their test run. Operators viewed the surrounding terrain via a single, rover mast-mounted, high-resolution camera with pan/tilt/zoom capabilities; continuous communication was provided throughout all testing. In the August 2023 evaluation, remote operators received approximately 3 hours of familiarization training in each latency, and the simulation environment provided remote operators with an operator-selected rate limiter to enable finer sensitivity in the hand controller and a predictive circle function to better assist operators with predicting the path the vehicle could take. All test operators were able to successfully navigate and drive through six different types of terrain and five planned traverse scenarios using natural lighting under all communication delays. Results for average speeds for each communication delay, computed by averaging the data from all test conditions for that latency and all operators, are shown in the table below. The average speed data was then used to derive the total time needed to cover 6 km, 8 km, and 20 km. Remote operators drove slower and used the brake more frequently when subject to a communication latency as opposed to no communication latency. Subjective workload assessments revealed that while operating in a latency the overall workload significantly increased when compared to a 0-s delay with mental demand, frustration, and performance being the primary contributing factors. Driving strategies in the 0-s delay did not vary significantly among subjects; however, in the 4-s delay condition, three different driving strategies were identified. In the 6-s and 8-s latency conditions the operator’s use of the cruise control to maintain speed was more apparent. Additionally, over the course of the August study, the operator took advantage of the predictive circle indicator on the navigation display and over 95% of the operator’s navigation used the mast camera 180-degree panning function for ground truthing in terms of boulders and craters. Operators started to define more specific parameters in driving strategies for general operations. This consisted of setting the vehicle into a low-speed cruise mode of approximately 1–1.5 kph and noticing driving performance of the vehicle seemed to be much harder at slower speeds 0.4–0.8 kph; however, the vehicle was more responsive at speeds of 2.9–3.6 kph. Regardless of communication delay, operators used both the horizontal translation rails and the vehicle fenders as guides to predict a path for the vehicle through heavily concentrated terrain features. Test operators acknowledged that the teleoperations training for this study was substantially less than what an actual LTV remote operator will ultimately receive. They estimated a minimum of 20 to 100 hours spread across multiple days and weeks (e.g., strategies included immersion training over a 3-day period, to a short 8-week starter program) would be needed to get an operator ~ 60% proficient (i.e., able to complete a subset of remote driving tasks), to a yearlong program for full proficiency in remote driving tasks under all terrain types and natural lighting conditions. Remotely operating a vehicle on another planetary body while subject to communication latency is a complex task. Speed, distance covered, time spent driving, time spent navigating, brake usage and rock contacts are all affected by operator workload, driving strategies, workstation ergonomics and training. These studies provided a “firstlook” answer to a potential system requirement (namely if a remote operator could cover a given distance in a given amount of time); however, considerable general knowledge was gained to begin to understand what it will take to make a successful lunar rover teleoperator.

LTV↗
NASA NTRS2024

Thermal Sensitivity Study of Lunar Terrain Vehicle Wheels

Since the early development of lunar vehicles for the Apollo program, designing a wheel capable of functioning in the harsh equatorial lunar environment was identified as a uniquely difficult engineering challenge. The Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) must contend with many of the same challenges encountered during the Apollo missions, but with the addition of colder, more complex thermal environments at the lunar south pole and longer Artemis mission timelines. A full thermal assessment of LTV wheels should capture these and other details to assess heat leak through the wheels and extreme hot and cold temperatures. The goals of this study are to provide bounding lunar south pole thermal environments; to define sensitivity to interactions between the wheel and the lunar surface in different operation modes, such as parked and traversing; and to identify thermal performance concerns related to the use of shape memory alloys.

Lunar Terrain Vehicle↗
NASA NTRS2024

Wheel Module Motor Trade Study for Lunar Terrain Vehicle Thermal Control System

Conducting a lunar mission, whether it is a robotic mission or one with astronauts, has many challenges; one of which is the thermal control of the motors of the wheel module that are used to propel and steer the vehicle. This paper describes the thermal analysis approach, design assumptions, and results of passive thermally controlled wheel module motors, meaning there are not cold plates, fluid loops, or other active thermal control methods to controlling the temperatures. It will also highlight challenges faced in the design of wheel modules for a rover on the lunar south pole. There are three main design change approaches that are considered, the first one keeps the nominal design with the motors mounted at the wheel hub on each wheel, but the motors have lower temperature limits. The second approach requires no thermal control of the motors, allowing them to get below the manufacturers lowest thermal limit and warming them back up prior to actuation during the lunar day. The last approach moves the motors inside of the main body of the vehicle.

Thermal Control System↗
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 NTRSDate not supplied

Design Considerations for LTV HITL Testing of Pressurized Suited Crew on a Motion-Based Platform

The upcoming NASA Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) will succeed the Apollo Lunar Roving Vehicle, performing both surface exploration and logistics transfer in NASA’s return to the Moon. Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) testing will play a key role in refining the design of the LTV, ensuring its usability and ability to accommodate the astronaut population. A motion-based platform and a lunar terrain and lighting model can simulate the conditions of the lunar south pole region. It can be used by NASA to conduct HITL testing in concert with HITL testing of the drivable Ground Reference Unit (GTU) concept vehicle. The dynamic motion of the platform combined with the mobility restrictions of pressurized suits could help improve NASA understanding of vehicle-suit-astronaut interfaces. NASA human factors practitioners have proposed multiple HITL test series to use the motion-based platform in conjunction with testing of the GTU in hopes that lessons learned can be applied to help select a commercial partner to develop the Artemis LTV.

LTV↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lunar Rover Motion-Based Simulation System

Our team developed a motion-based simulation system for lunar terrain vehicles which resides at Johnson Space Center’s Systems Engineering Simulator (SES) facility. This activity integrates existing fixed base simulation capabilities with a newly procured motion base platform for the design, development, evaluation, and training associated with lunar terrain vehicles. This incorporates a South Pole Lunar virtual reality simulation, combined with a pair of VR headsets, integrated within a rover cockpit on a motion platform for evaluating human performance and vehicle handling qualities for concept roving vehicle designs for surface mobility operations.

Motion-Based↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Initial Testing Results and Forward Design Considerations for the Tri-Rotor Hand Controller

The Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) is one of the key elements of NASA’s Artemis return to the Moon. As an unpressurized rover, the LTV hand controller must take into account the limitations of the spacesuit worn by the crew as well as lessons learned operating the Apollo Lunar Roving Vehicle and preliminary NASA simulations. Because the NASA Ground Test Unit (GTU) design features omnidirectional steering, NASA engineers developed the TriRotor is an innovation to minimize crew fatigue and discomfort. NASA conducted a series of tests, initially with 3D printed mockup controllers, and expanding to a functional prototype used in an LTV video wall simulation. The Tri-Rotor compared favorably with legacy Apollo T-Handles, though numerous test subject comments were collected to improve the controller’s usability. Several options to improve the Tri-Rotor’s usability are also discussed, along with opportunities to test the Tri-Rotor in Virtual Reality, a motion table, and in field analogs.

Hand Controller↗
NASA NTRS2022

Moon to Mars (M2M) Habitation Considerations: A Snap Shot As of January 2022

The following NASA Technical Memorandum (TM) is intended to provide a snapshot in time of NASA’s current considerations (ground rules and assumptions, functional allocations, logistics) for habitation systems for the lunar surface (non-roving) and Mars transits. As NASA continues to refine the reference designs to meet the needs of an evolving architecture, it is expected that this information will also be updated as a result. Where appropriate, relevant publicly released documents will be referenced to provide further detail. NASA’s human lunar exploration plan under the Artemis program calls for achieving the goal of sending the first woman and first person of color to the surface of the Moon in the mid- 2020s and working toward sustainable exploration by the end of the decade. Working with both commercial and international partners, NASA will establish a permanent human presence on the Moon to uncover new scientific discoveries and lay the foundation for private companies to build a lunar economy. Longer duration missions on the lunar surface and in lunar orbit will also serve as a test bed for technologies to support future Mars exploration campaigns. The agency will use what we learn on the Moon to prepare for humanity's next giant leap – sending astronauts to Mars. NASA intends to establish a sustained lunar presence with the development of the Artemis Base Camp to prove technologies and capabilities that will one day enable humans to live and work on Mars, beginning with core elements including the Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV), the Pressurized Rover (PR), the lunar Surface Habitat (SH), power systems, and in-situ resource utilization (ISRU) systems. For in space operations and eventual transport of humans to Mars, NASA will utilize a Mars Transit Habitat (TH). Following deployment, the TH will complete a series of longer duration missions and shakedown testing while docked at Gateway, leveraging Gateway’s habitation redundancy for safety measures. Proposed Gateway-TH missions will far exceed the longest duration cislunar human missions to date. They will be the first operational readiness tests of our long-duration deep space systems, and of the split crew (two crew on the surface, two crew in space) operations that are vital to the approach for the first human Mars mission. Both the SH and TH are major architectural elements of NASA’s Moon to Mars (M2M) approach, each with very different concepts of operation. The SH is intended for use on the lunar surface as a home for astronauts, surface operations base, science facility, hub for communications, extravehicular activity (EVA) equipment repair site, waste processing facility, and supply hub. It serves as an enabler for a sustained surface presence and preparation for partial gravity operations during Mars missions. The SH will be designed to be self-sufficient for operations on the lunar surface. The SH will independently provide several functions, including its own power generation, energy storage capability, sleep quarters, hygiene areas, work areas, and dining areas. It will be capable of communicating with surface assets, orbital assets, and directly with Earth ground stations. It is planned to operate with two crew in the habitat for ~28- day stays with crew swap-outs in which the PR crew of two trades places with the habitat crew. During the swap-out, the habitat will nominally support four crew for a short period of time. For contingency scenarios, the habitat must also be capable of supporting four crew for up to 7 days. The TH will be designed to be capable of up to ~1,200-day Mars missions with the ability to carry all food and supplies needed to support a crew of four for this duration. An assumed Mars mission profile for the TH is to carry crew and supplies for ~850-day roundtrips between Earth and Mars orbit that allows 30-day stays on the Martian surface. To test the systems for this long journey, the TH will be used to extend the duration of missions at Gateway, enabling the orbiting outpost to be used as a Mars analog. These analog missions will be accomplished by attaching the TH to Gateway and conducting lunar surface operations from the TH. The TH may also need to perform free-flying shakedown missions to test out all systems prior to leaving for Mars. The habitat provides many critical functions including: a contingency airlock, crew quarters, galley, hygiene areas, safe haven capability, and science equipment. It can receive docked items from either axial end or on a radial port.

Habitat↗
NASA NTRS2024

Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility Program (EHP) Exploration EVA (xEVA) System Compatibility Standards

Extravehicular Activity (EVA) is a significant capability for Artemis Systems which includes Gateway Program (modules), Human Landing System (HLS) Program (Integrated Lander and Human Class Delivery Lander), Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV), Pressurized Rover (PR), Payloads, and any other future lunar surface assets that will be utilized for exploration or science. The EVA and Human Surface Mobility Program (EHP) will provide the following: Exploration EVA (xEVA) suits, xEVA tools and crew aids along with vehicle integration/support hardware, LTV, and PR. Being a distributed and dynamic capability (moving components), xEVA System hardware will interface with almost all elements of the Artemis architecture. As such, it is important to document a singular set of EVA compatibility standards at the programmatic level to articulate “how to interface with xEVA suit hardware” and “how to design hardware that EVA crewmembers will access and manipulate.”

Exploration↗
NASA NTRS2024

LTV-xEVA Applied Injury Biomechanics

Beginning in Artemis V, Lunar Terrain Vehicles (LTV) will be utilized to enable astronauts to explore the lunar south pole and conduct science farther from the landing site than during the Apollo program. However, LTV operation has the potential to cause injury to the suited crew member during their Extravehicular Activity (EVA). Injury risk caused by LTV acceleration and jerk combined with blunt loading from rigid suit components needs to be better understood. An effort began to create requirements for, model, and address the injury risk caused by the LTV combined with Exploration EVA (xEVA) suits. Mitigation of crew injury is a shared responsibility between LTV and the suit since neither can accomplish this independently. The modeling completed in Fiscal Year 2023 (FY23) helped to verify the fidelity of the requirements and parse out vendor responsibility (LTV, xEVAS, or NASA) for Artemis V and beyond. The scope of the modeling in FY23 used the LTV System Requirements Document (SRD) as worst-case inputs and modeled female 5th-, male 50th-, and male 95th-percentile subjects in hard-mounted seated and semi-standing postures. Soft-mounted (i.e., lap belt) and testing to validate the analysis was determined out of scope for FY23 work.

Spacesuit↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

LTV-xEVA Applied Injury Biomechanics

Beginning in Artemis V, Lunar Terrain Vehicles (LTV) will be utilized to enable astronauts to explore the lunar south pole and conduct science farther from the landing site than during the Apollo program. However, LTV operation has the potential to cause injury to the suited crew member during their Extravehicular Activity (EVA). Injury risk caused by LTV acceleration and jerk combined with blunt loading from rigid suit components needs to be better understood. An effort began to create requirements for, model, and address the injury risk caused by the LTV combined with Exploration EVA (xEVA) suits. Mitigation of crew injury is a shared responsibility between LTV and the suit since neither can accomplish this independently. The modeling completed in Fiscal Year 2023 (FY23) helped to verify the fidelity of the requirements and parse out vendor responsibility (LTV, xEVAS, or NASA) for Artemis V and beyond. The scope of the modeling in FY23 used the LTV System Requirements Document (SRD) as worst-case inputs and modeled female 5th-, male 50th-, and male 95th-percentile subjects in hard-mounted seated and semi-standing postures. Soft-mounted (i.e., lap belt) and testing to validate the analysis was determined out of scope for FY23 work.

Spacesuit↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Thermal Impact of Lunar Dust on Rovers

Experience and ground tests have shown that lunar dust coverage can severely degrade thermal system performance, and with the push to go back to the Moon for longer than a few days, lunar dust is being recognized as a significant technical challenge. The Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) and Pressurized Rover (PR) will be operating on the lunar surface for long durations and roving at high speeds with interaction with astronauts and other robotics, which will cause dust to transfer to the vehicle, potentially to critical thermal surfaces. Dust coverage results in a change of overall optical properties, increased resistance to heat rejection due to the insulating effect of a dust layer, and even abrasion to thermal surfaces and soft goods. This paper provides an overview of what is currently known and unknown about what will happen to thermal surfaces exposed to dust on the Lunar South Pole, some dust mitigation options and testing guidance, and what resources can be used to help overcome this problem.

Lunar dust↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Thermal Impacts of Lunar Dust For Rovers

Experience and ground tests have shown that lunar dust coverage can severely degrade thermal system performance, and with the push to go back to the Moon for longer than a few days, lunar dust is being recognized as a significant technical challenge. The Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) and Pressurized Rover (PR) will be operating on the lunar surface for long durations and roving at high speeds with interaction with astronauts and other robotics, which will cause dust to transfer to the vehicle, potentially to critical thermal surfaces. Dust coverage results in a change of overall optical properties, increased resistance to heat rejection due to the insulating effect of a dust layer, and even abrasion to thermal surfaces and soft goods. This paper provides an overview of what is currently known and unknown about what will happen to thermal surfaces exposed to dust on the Lunar South Pole, some dust mitigation options and testing guidance, and what resources can be used to help overcome this problem.

Lunar dust↗