2010 robotic follow-up field test - lunar and planetary ...€¦ · robotic follow-up for...

Terry FongMaria Bualat

Matt DeansIntelligent Robotics Group

NASA Ames Research Center

2010 Robotic Follow-up Field Test Haughton Crater, Devon Island, Canadahttp://lunarscience.nasa.gov/robots

22010 Robotic Follow-up Field Test

An Exploration Problem

“If only I could have …”• Explorers often cannot do

everything during a mission

More observations to make

More samples to collect• Field geologists routinely face

this problem on Earth• The problem is worse in space

or on other worlds

Limited work time & resources

High-risk environment

Extremely difficult to return


Case in Point: Apollo 17

Shorty Crater

Landing Site

Presenter

Presentation Notes

EVA 2 On return leg to Landing Site, at Shorty Crater, Harrison Schmitt found orange pyroclastic glass Would have beneﬁted from a transect survey to characterize spatial distribution


Robotic Follow-up

A new field exploration technique• Augment human field work with subsequent robot activity• Use robots for work that is tedious or unproductive for humans to do• Collect supplementary and complementary data

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Supplementary: - additional samples, images, spectra, etc. Complementary: - verify findings at additional sites - deploy different instruments



July 12 – August 13, 2010• Use robots to “follow-up” after humans

Geologic mapping & subsurface survey

K10 robots remotely operated from NASA Ames

Variety of sites in and around Haughton Crater• Follows 2009 crew mission simulation

(by Mark Helper, EssamHeggy& Pascal Lee)• Funded by NASA MMAMA (SMD) & ETDP (ESMD)

20 km

Haughton Crater(Devon Island, Canada)

Haughton Crater(Devon Island, Canada)


Locations

Devon IslandDevon Island

NASA AmesNASA Ames

Haughton Crater

Haughton Crater

4,50

0 km


Devon Island

Devon Island is the largest uninhabited island on the Earth (66,800 sq. km)

Devon Island is the largest uninhabited island on the Earth (66,800 sq. km)

170 km

Resolute Bay (YRB)

HaughtonCrater


Haughton Crater: A Lunar Analog

.

Shackleton Crater at the South Pole of the Moon is 19 km in diameter and might present H2 O ice in surrounding shadowed zones. It is a prime candidate site for human exploration.Haughton Crater, also ~ 20 km in size, is by far the best preserved impact structure of its class on Earth and is located in a H2 O ground ice–rich rocky desert. Haughton may be the best overall scientific and operational analog for lunar craters such as Shackleton.

Shackleton Crater (lunar South Pole) 2005 Arecibo radar image

Shackleton Crater (lunar South Pole)2005 Arecibo radar image

Haughton Crater (Devon Island, Canada) radar image

Haughton Crater (Devon Island, Canada)radar image

20 km19 km

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Haughton is an excellent lunar analog: (1) Extreme environment (polar desert, frozen subsurface, high UV flux), (2)Relevant geologic features (ice-rich mixed impact rubble rich in ground ice, ejecta blocks and impact rock similar to materials and terrains on the Moon), (3) Remote & isolated with limited infrastructure (highly relevant for surface ops simulations) Also: - no vegetation - permanent daylight


NASA “Robotic Follow-up” Project

Objectives• Identify surface science scenarios for human explorers to draw

maximum benefit from robotic follow-up to vehicular traverses &EVAs• Identify science operations requirements for conducting robotic

follow-up on planetary surfaces after human exploration• Identify mission operations protocols for optimizing human field work

and robotic follow-up activities

Simulated multi-mission campaignMay 2009 Define science objectives June 2009 Plan crew mission #1July 2009 Crew mission #1 (Mark Helper &EssamHeggy)Oct 2009 Develop robotic follow-up #1July 2010 Robotic follow-up #1Aug 2010 Crew mission #2 (Kelsey Young)Dec 2010 Develop robotic follow-up #2July 2011 Robotic follow-up #2


Key Questions

Robotic rover• How do we adapt follow-up work to specific sites, science and tasks? • What scientific field work can be effectively performed by robots

following humans?

Ground control• What ground control structure (including science team) is needed to

support robotic follow-up activities? • How much time and resources are required for planning and

executing a robotic follow-up mission?

Human-robot exploration• How should robotic follow-up be incorporated into campaign planning? • How can we optimize human productivity, given what robots can do

afterwards?


K10 Robot

3D Lidar3D Lidar

GigaPanGigaPan

HazcamsHazcams

Wi-FiWi-Fi

RockersRockers

IMUIMU

GPSGPS

Microscopic Imager

Microscopic Imager

Sun tracker

Sun tracker

XRFSpectrometer

XRFSpectrometer

Ground Penetrating

Radar

Ground Penetrating

Radar

Presenter

Presentation Notes

.


K10 Instruments (1)

3D Scanning Lidar• Optech ILRIS-3D• 3D topography

measurements• 5mm @ 500m

GigaPan (Pancam)• Canon G9 + pan-tilt• Oblique, wide-angle,

color, context views• 60x180 deg

Microscopic Imager (MI)• Canon G9• High-res, close-up,

color, terrain views• 33 micron / pixel

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Robotic recon provides data that COMPLEMENTS and SUPPLEMENTS orbital remote sensing. Measurements taken at ground level can have significantly higher resolution (spatial, spectral, temporal, etc.), can provide oblique views, can involve contact (with ground or environmental features), and can be ground-coupled (to obtain detailed subsurface readings). Our current system uses three robot-mounted instruments: 3D scanning lidar, color panoramic imager, and microscopic terrain imager. All of these instruments provide MUCH higher resolution than LRO and oblique (non-nadir pointing) views. GigaPan and MI have comparable resolutions to MER.


K10 Instruments (2)

XRF Spectrometer• Niton XL3t 900• Bulk analysis of

geologic materials• Identify light elements

Ground-penetrating radar• Mala X3M • 800 MHz antenna• Suitable for shallow

depth mapping

Presenter

Presentation Notes

X-ray ﬂuorescence (XRF) spectrometer GPR depth to 4 meters


Ground Control Structure

Ground control (NASA Ames)

Flight Control Team

Analog (Haughton Crater)

Science Operations TeamFlight

Director Flight

DirectorRobot Driver

Robot Driver

Data Downlink

Data Downlink

Ground Data System (GDS)

Ground Data System (GDS)

Science PI

Science PI

GDS Lead GDS Lead

Robot Expert Robot Expert

Instrument Leads

Instrument Leads ScientistsScientists

Plan Lead Plan Lead

Science Officer

Science Officer

Robot Officer Robot Officer

K10 Robot

commands

commands

telemetry

telemetry

MetricsMetrics

Presenter

Presentation Notes

design draws inspiration from the ground control used for Apollo, the Space Shuttle, the International Space Station, MER, and the planetary rover ﬁeld tests Flight Control Team: interactive, tactical decision making and control, hierarchical chain of command Science Operations Team: plan rover activities based on science objectives, analyze data acquired by rover Robot Support Team (not pictured here, based at Haughton, except for Robot Expert): deal with robot performance and health issues, provide tech support to other teams Science Officer (SPOC) and Plan Lead rotate.


Operations Timeline

A

A

BPlanning Tag-Up (optional)

Create Plan

Submit Plan

Review Plan (go / no-go)

Start Plan (go / no-go)

Uplink Plan

Execute Plan (multi-modes)

B

B

B-

A

C-

Start of shift

A B

End of shift

RobotIdle

Science Operations Team

Robot Operations TeamFlight Control Team

A

B

B

A

Command cycle “A”

Command cycle “B”

B

RobotActive

RobotActive

A

…

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Our robot operations model is similar to MER: the Science Team creates a plan, which is then submitted to the Flight Control Team for uplink (or teleop execution) to the robot. KEY POINT: In contrast to Mars remote operations, the duration of a command cycle is: (1) variable (not just one cycle per day (2) can be as short as a few minutes to execute or as long as a few hours; and (3) interleaves planning and execution (to minimize time spent waiting). Try to minimize Robot Idle time


Google Earth Ops (GEOps)

Instrument

FOV

Instrument

FOV

TasktimelineTasktimeline

Task

list

Task

list

InstrumentsInstruments

WaypointWaypoint

Google EarthGoogle EarthControl PaneControl Pane

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Waypoints can be directional or non-directional


VERVE

Presenter

Presentation Notes

“Visual Environment for Robotic Virtual Exploration” (VERVE) Runs within the NASA Ensemble framework Supports the NASA “Robot Application Programming Interface Delegate” (RAPID) messaging system


Science Data Interface


Performance Monitoring

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Monitors data sent from the rover in real-time characterize the rover’s progress on assigned tasks (navigating to a waypoint, acquiring data from an instrument, etc.)


Crew Mission (2009)

Geologic Mapping• Document geologic history,

structural geometry & major units• Example impact breccia&clasts• Take photos & collect samples

Geophysical Survey• Examine subsurface structure• 3D distribution of buried ground

ice in permafrost layer• Ground-penetrating radar:

manual deploy, 400/900 MHz

Mark Helper and Pascal Lee

Mark Helper and Pascal Lee

EssamHeggyand Pascal LeeEssamHeggy

and Pascal Lee

Presenter

Presentation Notes

A HMMWV was used as a simulated pressurized crew rover 2-man crew Short EVAs Prep for traverse: build a map based on orbital data similar to that available for the Moon (LRO, Chandryan 1) Constrained traverses with flight rules that reflect recent lunar architectures


Geologic Mapping

stratified

sediments

stratified

sediments

contact between

carbonates

contact between

carbonates

View East

into crater

View East

into crater

Gray

carbonate

breccia

Gray

carbonate

breccia

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Four of the panoramas taken during the geologic mapping traverse. Top left: the rounded, brown, low relief terrain in the middle ground are the intra-crater stratiﬁed sediments; top-right: Contact between gray carbonate breccia (right) with unstratiﬁed intra-crater carbonate; bottom-left: view East into the crater from the rim near station 13; bottom-right: intra-crater gray carbonate breccia forms the distinctive white ridge in right middle of photo.


Geologic Mapping

top row: shock metamorphosed basement clastsbottom: shatter cone, polymict gray breccia, “vesicular” carbonatetop row: shock metamorphosed basement clastsbottom: shatter cone, polymict gray breccia, “vesicular” carbonate

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Impact derived samples collected during the geologic mapping traverse. Top row: shock metamorphosed basement clasts; bottom row: shatter cone in limestone clast, polymict gray breccia, “vesicular” carbonate. Black and white scale bar is graduated in 1 cm increments. Robotic follow up for sample characterization: we focused on characterization gin greater depth the composition, distribution, and geologic context of major lithologies - paid special attention to impact breccia materials to characterize the major types of clasts and textures encountered in them


Geophysical Survey

subsurface ice wedges

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Robotic follow-up for systematic mapping involved investigating the near-subsurface structure and 3-D distribution of ground ice at Haughton as an operational analog to investigating near-subsurface volatiles on the Moon. we focused on performing transect surveys so that 3D maps of the structure of the near-subsurface and distribution of ground ice in different substrates could be constructed


Robotic Follow-up Plan

11

2233

99

88

6677

4455

crater rim

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Selected “sites” (logistically compact) and “locales” (focused region of operations with specific science activities) Prioiritized to create hierarchy of investigations Developed initial rover traverses Incorporated other mission constraints (logistics, communications coverage, and schedule margin) => Campaign strategy and schedule


Robotic Follow-up Mission (2010)

ScheduleJuly 16 Field team departs

NASA AmesJuly 21 Complete K10

check-outJuly 22 - 23 Geologic mapping

(locale 8)July 24 - 28 Subsurface mapping

(locales 1, 2&3)July 29 - Aug 1Complete remote

ops check-outJuly 29 - Aug 2Subsurface mapping

(locale 9)Aug 3 - 5 Geologic mapping

(locale 7)

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Completed 6 of the 9 locales. (Sites 4, 5, 6 were lower priority)


K10 Robot at Haughton Crater


Results: Science

Geologic Mapping• Robot data enabled verifying

and amending the geologic map in several locations

• In some places, robot data was ambiguous, or lacked sufficient detail to re-interpret the map

Geophysical Survey• Robot data enabled study of

“polygon” features and determination of the average depth of the buried ice layer


Lessons Learned

Benefits• Robotic follow-up can support geologic mapping & geophysical survey• Robotic follow-up can provide quantitative data that complements and

supplements data previously collected by humans• Robotic follow-up can improve the coverage, completeness and

quality of planetary exploration

Requirements• Planning for human missions needs to consider what robots will do:

Must consider robot capabilities (instruments, mobility, etc.)

Must consider how long robot mission will operate • Consistent localization (including orientation) is needed to co-register

and coordinate data between missions• Orbital remote sensing, human field work and robotic follow-up are

highly complementary

Each provides different types of data, viewpoints, and resolution

None is fully sufficient to completely explore planetary surfaces

Presenter

Presentation Notes

As always: Comm is a hard problem


Robotic Follow-up Team

Experiment Team• PI : Terry Fong• Test Manager: Linda Kobayashi• Sim Sup: EstrellinaPacis, Maria Bualat

Flight Control Team• Flight Directors: Tim Kennedy (JSC),

Rob Landis (ARC), Frank Jurgens (JSC)• Controllers: Mark Allan, Xavier

Bouyssounouse, Lorenzo Fluckiger, Jason Lum, Mike Lundy

Science Operations Team• Plan Leads:EssamHeggy (JPL), Mark

Helper (UT Austin), Jose Hurtado (UTEP)• Scientists: Martha Altobelli (UT Austin),

Joshua Garber (UC Davis), Elizabeth Palmer (Case), Tim Shin (UT Austin)

• GDS: Tamar Cohen, Dave Lees• K10 Expert: DW Wheeler, Liam Petersen

K10 Robot Team (at HMP)• Field Lead: Matt Deans• Robot System Lead: Hans Utz• Robot Engineers: Susan Lee,

Eric Park, Vinh To• Data Systems: Trey Smith• Science: Byron Adams (ASU),

Kelsey Young (ASU)

Support Team (at HMP)• HMP Manager: Pascal Lee• Logistics: KiraLorber• Communications: Steve Braham• and many others …


Questions?

Intelligent Robotics GroupIntelligent Systems Division

NASA Ames Research Center

irg.arc.nasa.gov

2010 robotic follow-up field test - lunar and planetary ...€¦ · robotic follow-up for...

Documents