Lunar Drilling and Driving Carnegie Mellon 13-14 December 2007 Red Whittaker.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Mechanics of Rigid Body. C
Advertisements

Loading and Hauling.
8.6 Frictional Forces on Collar Bearings, Pivot Bearings and Disks
Curiosity The Robotic Rover on Mars Aviel Atias Omri Ben Eliezer Yaniv Sabo 29/04/13 1 Curiousity.
NNJ09BH0123RAppendix L A-Crew, Robotics, Avionics, and Vehicle Equipment (CRAVE)- Unrestricted Data Attachment L-2-A-1.
Presented by: Team NightStriker Course: EDSGN Section: 006.
Mars Pathfinder Mission Breakthrough on the Surface of Mars.
1 Pacific International Science Center for Exploration Systems (PISCES) Conference – Nov 12, 2008 Commercial Lunar Business Perspectives John Kohut Chief.
Human Extraction Rescue Robot Material Handling Methodology & Proof-of-Concept Prototype Matthew P. King Erin B. Rapacki In partnership with… ADVISORS.
Carnegie Mellon | 13 December Testing and Characterization December 2007 Carnegie Mellon.
Payload Site One Upon landing, the LOW prepares for single-site goals and multi-site goals. A drop-box is prepared for single-site goals utilizing various.
ATHLETE: An Option for Mobile Lunar Habitats Brian Wilcox ATHLETE Principal Investigator Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology.
Project X pedition Spacecraft Senior Design – Spring 2009
Click for next slide. HWH ® Active Air, is a four-point electronically controlled suspension system that provides ride comfort while driving by rapidly.
Oculus Superne. 2 System Definition Review Mission Objectives Concept of Operations Aircraft Concept Selection Payload Constraint Analysis and Diagrams.
Settlement Site Selection and Exploration Through Hierarchical Roving Gregory Konesky SGK Nanostructures, Inc. Rutgers Symposium on Lunar Settlements Rutgers.
Autonomous Landing Hazard Avoidance Technology (ALHAT) Page 1 March 2008 Go for Lunar Landing Real-Time Imaging Technology for the Return to the Moon Dr.
Life in the AtacamaCarnegie Mellon Hyperion Mobility Testing Dimi Apostolopoulos Michael Wagner Kevin Peterson July 28, 2003.
© RESCUER Consortium Meeting Genoa March 2006 © RESCUER Consortium Meeting Genoa March 2006 Task 3.1: Design and development of the mobile.
Navigation Systems for Lunar Landing Ian J. Gravseth Ball Aerospace and Technologies Corp. March 5 th, 2007 Ian J. Gravseth Ball Aerospace and Technologies.
Autonomous Systems Lab 1 Evaluation and Optimization of Rover Locomotion Performance Machines that know what they do Thomas Thueer & Roland Siegwart ICRA’07,
Dr. Jennifer Rochlis. Overview Build a technology testbed for future rover concepts Develop and demonstrate operations and mission concepts.
Student Satellite Project University of Arizona Team Goals Design, Fabricate, and Analyze a Structure that will Support the Payload –Space Allocation of.
Alternatives Concepts White Paper IPT 02E. Project Management The University of Alabama Huntsville Team LeaderEddie Kiessling StructuresNathan Coffee.
Motion Control Locomotion Mobile Robot Kinematics Legged Locomotion
Urban Search and Rescue 2007 General Robotics 2007.
Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS) MAE 491 / IPT Design Competition Instructors: Dr. P.J. Benfield and Dr. Matt Turner Team Frankenstein.
LUNAR ROVER Concept proposal meeting Dr. Ashish Dutta Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur Kanpur, INDIA ( *** for private circulation only)
M E T ROVER MSCD Engineering Technology Critical Design Review Metropolitan State College of Denver April 2004.
ARTEMIS Advanced Rover Technology for Exploration on the Moon using In Situ utilization Jesse Hecht Sean Fierman Cedrick Ngalande.
AAE450 Spring 2009 Final Slide Concepts March 26, 2009 [Cory Alban] [Mission Ops] [Locomotion] 1.
General Robotics General Robotics LEGO Rover Design Workshop 2000 Michael Rosenblatt.
Carnegie Mellon Zoë Computing Design Design Review December 19, 2003 Michael Wagner 
Urban Search and Rescue Initiative 2005 Avi Siegel, Director of Carnegie Urban Rescue Force Eddie Lu, Chief Evaluation Officer Eric West, West Campus Architect.
Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS) MAE 491 / IPT Design Competition Instructors: Dr. P.J. Benfield and Dr. Matt Turner Team Frankenstein.
Final Report on LOW Design Maximizing Science While Minimizing Single Point Failure.
Scarab Design Carnegie Mellon December 2007.
Universal Chassis for Modular Ground Vehicles University of Michigan Mars Rover Team Presented by Eric Nytko August 6, 2005 The 2 nd Mars Expedition Planning.
ICRA Planetary Rover Workshop / 19 May 2008 / D. Thompson / Carnegie Mellon University A Tale of Two Rovers: Mission Scenarios for Kilometer-Scale Site.
Dynamic Modeling of the Chariot Suspension System Joseph Shoer / ES6 Exit Presentation 7 August 2009.
Life in the AtacamaCarnegie Mellon Hyperion Mobility Testing July 28, 2003 Dimi Apostolopoulos Michael Wagner Kevin Peterson James Teza Stuart Heys.
Weight: 52 kg Hull Diameter: 21.3 cm Vehicle Length: 1.5 meters Depth Range: 4–200 meter (coastal model) or 1000 meter (1- km model) Speed: 0.4 m/sec.
Carnegie Mellon Zoë Vehicle Controller Design Design Review December 19, 2003 Michael Wagner 
Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS) Customer Briefing LETS go to the Moon!
Phoenix The Phoenix Mars Mission Doug Lombardi Education and Public Outreach Manager Lunar and Planetary Laboratory The University of Arizona
Apollo 50 Lunar Mission Concept Goal: Initiate a series of lunar campaign missions, inspired by Apollo 11, to explore the potential of the Moon for science.
1 Team Mieux Critical Design Review ASME Bulk Material Transporter AME 470 Ltd. December 7, 2004.
Ground Pressure Rating = 2.6 The lower the ground pressure, the softer the material the vehicle can traverse, i.e. sand or loose gravel. Ground pressure.
Crew Mobility for Lunar Surface Exploration Dr. Rob Ambrose NASA-JSC May 2008.
Rover and Instrument Capabilities Life in the Atacama 2004 Science & Technology Workshop Michael Wagner, James Teza, Stuart Heys Robotics Institute, Carnegie.
AAE450 Spring 2009 Final Lander Volume and Mass 10kg, 100g, Arbitrary March 12, 2009 Lunar Descent Phase Group [Ryan Nelson] [STRC] 1.
Life in the Atacama, Design Review, December 19, 2003 Carnegie Mellon Rover Chassis Life in the Atacama Design Review December 19, 2003 Stu Heys, Dimi.
Pre-decisional – for Planning and Discussion Purposes Only 1 Technology Planning for Future Mars Missions Samad Hayati Manager, Mars Technology Program.
Hardware and Locomotion
Frictional Forces This topic may be abrasive. Friction Friction is a force that opposes motion Friction will cause a moving object to slow down and finally.
Scarab Autonomous Traverse Carnegie Mellon December 2007 David Wettergreen.
Life in the Atacama, Design Review, December 19, 2003 Carnegie Mellon Subsurface Access Mechanism Life in the Atacama Design Review December 19, 2003 Stu.
MECHANICAL and AEROSPACE ENGINEERING Active Reconfiguration for Performance Enhancement in Articulated Wheeled Vehicles Aliakbar Alamdari PhD Candidate.
Page 1 GSI, Hydraulic Actuators for PANDA Target Spectrometer Jost Lühning, GSI Darmstadt Functional Specifications for moving the TS: Two synchronous.
Gaits Cost of Transportation Wheeled Mobile Robots Most popular locomotion mechanism Highly efficient Simple mechanical implementation Balancing is.
Dr Ravi Kumar Puli National Institute of Technology WARANGAL.
Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS)
Sprawl Robots Biomimetic Design Analysis: Simplified Models
Lunar Descent Trajectory
Lunar Landscape Analysis Rover Procedure on Lunar Surface
FRICTION.
FRICTION.
FRICTION.
FRICTION.
LOCOMOTION Farahnaz AttarHamidi Samaneh Mahmoudi Mehraneh NezamiRad.
Presentation transcript:

Lunar Drilling and Driving Carnegie Mellon December 2007 Red Whittaker

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December Mission Scenario Land on crater floor Operate in perpetual darkness Multiple drill-drive cycles

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December 20074

5

6

7 Coring 1 meter drilling –ø30 cm borehole –ø1.5 cm continuous core –~50 kg –0.5 m x 0.5 m x 1.5 m volume Operations: –Drill to depth –Capture core, transfer –Chop core segments –Crush –Load oven

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December Coring, Crushing, Baking, Analysis Coring Sample transfer MeteringCrushingBaking Extraction Sensing

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December 20079

10

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December Polar Scenario Land in crater –Direct to floor, no crater wall descent –Minimal lander Communicate by polar orbiter relay Power from isotope source, no solar Navigate in darkness –Active sensing using laser light-striping Operate with supervised autonomy Survey multiple locations –Characterize regolith composition and physical properties –Determine nature and abundance of hydrogen Survive 7 months –25 drill sites x (5 days/site, 3 days/traverse) = 200 days Mass kg

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December Issues for Robotic Drilling Drill dominated Robot Design –Stiffness & Reaction to drill –Crouching to lower drill before boring Mobility over rough terrain –Suspension and flotation for lunar terrain –Sensing and operation in darkness Power –Radioisotopic power scenario

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December Mass and Scaling of Robot Robot weight on lunar surface enables drilling Applied thrust Resisted torque

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December Scarab Rover

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December System attributes Drill implementation –Central location on vehicle to maximize weight for downforce –Direct mounting to chassis –Fixed drill structure Reduced actuation Functions as navigation mast Simplifies kinematics & mass properties Adjustable kinematic suspension –Body roll averaging over terrain –Bring drill to surface to operate –High stiffness platform to react drilling forces Skid steering –Reduced actuation –Increased stiffness Thermal approach –Utilize heat from radioisotope power supply –Shunt excess heat to radiator surface

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December Straddling

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December Drilling

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December Pose adjustment mechanism Raises & lowers by actuating wing angle (independent L & R) Center link bisects wing angle: enables lift-and-level body averaging Retains advantages of passive rocker bogie

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December Leveling

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December Differencing

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December Objectives Develop Drill-dominated Mobility –Accommodate drill and sample processing payload –Stabilize mechanism during drilling –Access sites of interest Address Lunar Polar Considerations –Operation in darkness No solar power Constant low-temperature (80K) Active perception –Mission relevant concept Multiple drill-drive cycles over kilometer scale Rover scale and mass

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December Vehicle requirements Drill dominated design –Bring drill to surface to operate –High stiffness platform to react forces Mobility over rough terrain –30 cm obstacles –Steep soil slopes Environments –Fine, abrasive dust –Vacuum, 40 K ground, 3 K sky Power –Radioisotopic power supply

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December Integrated Driving and Drilling Drill implementation –Central location on vehicle to maximize weight for downforce –Direct mounting to chassis –Fixed drill structure Reduced actuation Functions as navigation mast Simplifies kinematics & mass properties Adjustable kinematic suspension –Body roll averaging over terrain –Bring drill to surface to operate –High stiffness platform to react drilling forces Skid steering –Reduced actuation –Increased stiffness Thermal approach –Utilize heat from radioisotope power supply –Shunt excess heat to radiator surface

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December Specifications Mass: 280 kg Weight:460 N  2750 N  Power (driving): 200 W (peak)  Power (posing):380 W (peak)  Power (idle): 78 W Speed: 5.0 cm/s (6.0 cm/s max) Height (with drill tower): 2.2 m high stance, 1.6 m low stance Width (wheelbase):1.4 m Length (wheelbase): m Aspect (track/wheelbase):1:1 low stance, 1:2 nominal, 1:7 high Wheel diameter:60 cm

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December Specifications CG height: 0.64m nominal, 0.60m low, 0.72m high Static pitchover: 42° nominal stance, 29° high, 45° low Static rollover: 53° nominal stance, 48° high, 55° low Maximum / minimum straddle:57 cm, Belly contact Approach / departure angle:105° nominal stance Breakover angle:115° nominal stance Rim pull (single wheel): 2500 N Drawbar pull:1560 N (medium-coarse grain sand)

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December Driving in the dark Localization –Rim camera Terrain Mapping and Obstacle Detection –Light striping (front/rear) –Both horizontal and vertical stripes for terrain mapping while driving straight and turning Imaging –Flash stereo / Flash ladar –Mounted on a pan/tilt for 360º coverage Dead reckoning / mapping support –IMU –Wheel encoders Workspace imager –Underbelly mounted camera with LED illumination

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December

Carnegie Mellon | 13 December Future Evolutions Internal actuation; eliminate external wiring;Shaft-drive Actuated suspension to surmount extreme obstacle or extricate from twist Space-relevant wheels & tread: design, fab, mount Hosting more of RESOLVE subsystems Adding Nav sensors and position estimation from rim Increase dimensions of chassis and body-averaging beam Thermal isolation of cold drill and warm body Use Scarab to load RESOLVE experiments ‘Inchworm’ locomotion