Settlement Site Selection and Exploration Through Hierarchical Roving Gregory Konesky SGK Nanostructures, Inc. Rutgers Symposium on Lunar Settlements Rutgers.

Settlement Site Selection and Exploration ThroughHierarchical Roving

Gregory Konesky

SGK Nanostructures, Inc.

Rutgers Symposium on Lunar Settlements

Rutgers University

3-8 June 2007

Man

Or

Machine?

Man

Or

Machine?

YES!

Machines Scout Ahead

Man Soon Follows

NASA JSC

Man/Machine Synergism

NASA JSC

Remote Teleoperated Man/Machine Synergism

Teleoperation from the Moon

or from the Earth:

Lunokhod 1 (Arrival 11/17/1970)

Traveled 10.5 km

Lunokhod 2 (Arrival 1/15/1973)

Traveled 37 km

Approx. 1.3 second one-way delay

On-site Rover Teleoperation for

Settlement Site Selection and Exploration

Provide “Ground Truth”

Given cost of $1,000,000 / day

to support a Man on the Moon

Economic Leveraging effect of

Teleoperated Rovers

Rover Size Affects Capability

NASA JPL

Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

Sojourner

Alpha Proton X-Ray Spectrometer (APXS)

Deployment Mechanism

Imaging

Spirit/Opportunity

APXS

Rock Abrasion Tool

Microscopic Imager

Deployment Mechanism

Stereoscopic Panoramic Cameras

Navigation Cameras

Hazard Avoidance Cameras

Miniature Thermal Emission Spectrometer

Mossbauer Spectrometer

Magnetic Particle Detection

Sojourner (1997)

Traveled a few hundred meters

Lasted a few months

Contact Lost

Spirit/Opportunity (2004)

Traveled tens of kilometers

Continue to operate today

By chance, Sojourner landed in a strewn rock field.

It easily navigated around/between them.

Had Spirit/Opportunity landed there, they might

have had considerable navigation difficulty.

Small size can be an enabling asset

When proceeding into unknown terrain, it would

be ideal to have both benefits at your disposal

→ Hierarchical Roving

Payload Capacity and Distribution

- Small Rovers spatially distribute payloads

- Simultaneously sense a much larger environment

- Redundancy

- Navigation Agility

- Levels of Hierarchy

Large/Small Rover Tradeoffs

Small Rover Specialization

Imaging

Sample Collection and Processing

Analytical

Manipulators

Collective Interaction of Multiple Small Rovers

on a Common Task

Small Rover Specialization - continued

Imaging Applications

Navigation

Terrain Mapping and Understanding

Hazard Identification

Locating Areas of Interest for Visit by Other Rovers

Standoff Self-Imaging

Self-Rescue

Carrier Rover Characteristics

Deploy/Recover/Transport Small Rover Fleet

Communications Relay Link between

Command Center(s) and Small Rover Fleet

Recharge Small Rover Batteries

Traditional Approach

Distributed Capability Approach

Operational Scenarios –Identify Region of Interest

Sample Acquisition and Analysis

Multiple Analysis Vehicles

Archive a Sample

Rover Command Transmission

Command Reception and Retransmission

Design Example Characteristics

DimensionsVehicle: 52” Long, 34” Wide, 37” High

Carrier Bay: 31” Long, 24” Wide, 18” High

WeightCarrier Vehicle: 152 Pounds

Available Payload: 48 PoundsTypical Small Rover: 5-10 Pounds

Power66 Watts Solar Panels

56 Amp-Hr Lead Acid Battery Reserve

Georgia Tech

Levels of Earth-bound

Teleoperation Users

Vehicle Drivers (10 channels)

Active Viewers (500 channels)

Passive Viewers (unlimited)

Conclusions

Hierarchical Roving represents a paradigm shiftin the decision between a large and small rover.

Best of both choices incorporated into one platform.

Provides the ability to sense/sample the environment from several mobile points simultaneously.

Multiple levels of Hierarchy are possible.

Acknowledgements