Dr. Tyler Reid, co-founder and CTO of Xona Space Systems, discusses a new type of global navigation satellite system (GNSS). Xona Space Systems plans to provide centimeter-level positioning accuracy and will serve the emerging autonomous vehicle community, where precise navigation is key. Reid discusses the advantages and technical challenges of a low Earth orbit (LEO) solution.

Tyler Reid

Tyler Reid is co-founder and CTO of Xona Space Systems. Previously, Tyler worked as a Research Engineer at the Ford Motor Company in localization and mapping for self-driving cars. He has also worked as an engineer at Google and as a lecturer at Stanford University, where he co-taught the GPS course. Tyler received his PhD (2017) and MSc (2012) in Aeronautics and Astronautics from Stanford and B.Eng. (’10) in Mechanical Engineering from McGill.

Links

• Download mp3
• Subscribe to Robohub using iTunes, RSS, or Spotify
• Support us on Patreon

In the future, we imagine that teams of robots will explore and develop the surface of nearby planets, moons and asteroids – taking samples, building structures, deploying instruments. Hundreds of bright research minds are busy designing such robots. We are interested in another question: how to provide the astronauts the tools to efficiently operate their robot teams on the planetary surface, in a way that doesn’t frustrate or exhaust them?

Received wisdom says that more automation is always better. After all, with automation, the job usually gets done faster, and the more tasks (or sub-tasks) robots can do on their own, the less the workload on the operator. Imagine a robot building a structure or setting up a telescope array, planning and executing tasks by itself, similar to a “factory of the future”, with only sporadic input from an astronaut supervisor orbiting in a spaceship. This is something we tested in the ISS experiment SUPVIS Justin in 2017-18, with astronauts on board the ISS commanding DLR Robotic and Mechatronic Center’s humanoid robot, Rollin’ Justin, in Supervised Autonomy.

However, the unstructured environment and harsh lighting on planetary surfaces makes things difficult for even the best object-detection algorithms. And what happens when things go wrong, or a task needs to be done that was not foreseen by the robot programmers? In a factory on Earth, the supervisor might go down to the shop floor to set things right – an expensive and dangerous trip if you are an astronaut!

The next best thing is to operate the robot as an avatar of yourself on the planet surface – seeing what it sees, feeling what it feels. Immersing yourself in the robot’s environment, you can command the robot to do exactly what you want – subject to its physical capabilities.

Space Experiments

In 2019, we tested this in our next ISS experiment, ANALOG-1, with the Interact Rover from ESA’s Human Robot Interaction Lab. This is an all-wheel-drive platform with two robot arms, both equipped with cameras and one fitted with a gripper and force-torque sensor, as well as numerous other sensors.

On a laptop screen on the ISS, the astronaut – Luca Parmitano – saw the views from the robot’s cameras, and could move one camera and drive the platform with a custom-built joystick. The manipulator arm was controlled with the sigma.7 force-feedback device: the astronaut strapped his hand to it, and could move the robot arm and open its gripper by moving and opening his own hand. He could also feel the forces from touching the ground or the rock samples – crucial to help him understand the situation, since the low bandwidth to the ISS limited the quality of the video feed.

There were other challenges. Over such large distances, delays of up to a second are typical, which mean that traditional teleoperation with force-feedback might have become unstable. Furthermore, the time delay the robot between making contact with the environment and the astronaut feeling it can lead to dangerous motions which can damage the robot.

To help with this we developed a control method: the Time Domain Passivity Approach for High Delays (TDPA-HD). It monitors the amount of energy that the operator puts in (i.e. force multiplied by velocity integrated over time), and sends that value along with the velocity command. On the robot side, it measures the force that the robot is exerting, and reduces the velocity so that it doesn’t transfer more energy to the environment than the operator put in.

On the human’s side, it reduces the force-feedback to the operator so that no more energy is transferred to the operator than is measured from the environment. This means that the system stays stable, but also that the operator never accidentally commands the robot to exert more force on the environment than they intend to – keeping both operator and robot safe.

This was the first time that an astronaut had teleoperated a robot from space while feeling force-feedback in all six degrees of freedom (three rotational, three translational). The astronaut did all the sampling tasks assigned to him – while we could gather valuable data to validate our method, and publish it in Science Robotics. We also reported our findings on the astronaut’s experience.

Some things were still lacking. The experiment was conducted in a hangar on an old Dutch air base – not really representative of a planet surface.

Also, the astronaut asked if the robot could do more on its own – in contrast to SUPVIS Justin, when the astronauts sometimes found the Supervised Autonomy interface limiting and wished for more immersion. What if the operator could choose the level of robot autonomy appropriate to the task?

Scalable Autonomy

In June and July 2022, we joined the DLR’s ARCHES experiment campaign on Mt. Etna. The robot – on a lava field 2,700 metres above sea level – was controlled by former astronaut Thomas Reiter from the control room in the nearby town of Catania. Looking through the robot’s cameras, it wasn’t a great leap of the imagination to imagine yourself on another planet – save for the occasional bumblebee or group of tourists.

This was our first venture into “Scalable Autonomy” – allowing the astronaut to scale up or down the robot’s autonomy, according to the task. In 2019, Luca could only see through the robot’s cameras and drive with a joystick, this time Thomas Reiter had an interactive map, on which he could place markers for the robot to automatically drive to. In 2019, the astronaut could control the robot arm with force feedback; he could now also automatically detect and collect rocks with help from a Mask R-CNN (region-based convolutional neural network).

We learned a lot from testing our system in a realistic environment. Not least, that the assumption that more automation means a lower astronaut workload is not always true. While the astronaut used the automated rock-picking a lot, he warmed less to the automated navigation – indicating that it was more effort than driving with the joystick. We suspect that a lot more factors come into play, including how much the astronaut trusts the automated system, how well it works, and the feedback that the astronaut gets from it on screen – not to mention the delay. The longer the delay, the more difficult it is to create an immersive experience (think of online video games with lots of lag) and therefore the more attractive autonomy becomes.

What are the next steps? We want to test a truly scalable-autonomy, multi-robot scenario. We are working towards this in the project Surface Avatar – in a large-scale Mars-analog environment, astronauts on the ISS will command a team of four robots on ground. After two preliminary tests with astronauts Samantha Christoforetti and Jessica Watkins in 2022, the first big experiment is planned for 2023.

Here the technical challenges are different. Beyond the formidable engineering challenge of getting four robots to work together with a shared understanding of their world, we also have to try and predict which tasks would be easier for the astronaut with which level of autonomy, when and how she could scale the autonomy up or down, and how to integrate this all into one, intuitive user interface.

The insights we hope to gain from this would be useful not only for space exploration, but for any operator commanding a team of robots at a distance – for maintenance of solar or wind energy parks, for example, or search and rescue missions. A space experiment of this sort and scale will be our most complex ISS telerobotic mission yet – but we are looking forward to this exciting challenge ahead.

Lilly interviews Stephanie Schneider, a PhD candidate at Stanford working on unconventional space robotics. Schneider explains her work on Reachbot, a long-reach crawling and anchoring robot, which repurposes extendable booms for mobile manipulation. They discuss the challenges and exciting elements of robotic prototyping for low-gravity or otherwise unique environments.

Stephanie Schneider

Stephanie Schneider is a Ph.D. candidate in Aeronautics and Astronautics in the Autonomous Systems Laboratory at Stanford, working with Professor Marco Pavone. She received her BS in Mechanical Engineering from Cornell University in 2014. Stephanie’s research interests include real-time spacecraft motion-planning, grasping and manipulation in space, and adaptive control for autonomous robotics.

Links

• Download mp3 (26.6 MB)
• Subscribe to Robohub using iTunes, RSS, or Spotify
• Support us on Patreon

In this episode, Lilly interviews Giovanni Beltrame, Professor of Computer and Software Engineering at École Polytechnique de Montréal where he directs the Making Innovative Space Technology (MIST) lab. Beltrame highlights the technical challenges of exploring another planet with a swarm of robots controlled by an astronaut operator. They discuss minimizing cognitive load for the operator, analog missions to volcanic lava tubes on Earth, and spherical hopping robots for the moon.

Giovanni Beltrame

Giovanni Beltrame received the M.Sc. degree in electrical engineering and computer science from the University of Illinois, Chicago, in 2001, the Laurea degree in computer engineering from the Politecnico di Milano, Italy, in 2002, the M.S. degree in information technology from CEFRIEL, Milan, in 2002, and the Ph.D. degree in computer engineering from the Politecnico di Milano, in 2006. He worked as an engineer at the European Space Agency until 2010, and he is currently a Professor at École Polytechnique de Montréal, Canada, where he directs the MIST Laboratory.

Links

• Download mp3 (18.3 MB)
• Subscribe to Robohub using iTunes, RSS, or Spotify
• Support us on Patreon

An illustration of a concept for a possible wind-powered Venus rover.
Credits: NASA/JPL-Caltech

In this episode, Lilly interviews Jonathan Sauder, the Principal Investigator of a NASA Innovative Advanced Concepts project to design a rover for the surface of Venus. Sauder explains why exploring Venus is important and why previous surface missions have only lasted a few hours. They discuss his innovative wheeled-robot concept, a hybrid automaton rover which would be mostly mechanical and powered by wind.

Jonathan Sauder

Jonathan Sauder is a NASA Innovative Advanced Concepts (NIAC) Fellow and Senior Mechatronics Engineer at NASA Jet Propulsion Lab in the Technology Infusion Group focused on innovative concepts.  He is also a lecturer of “Design Theory and Methodology” and “Advanced Mechanical Design” at the University of Southern California, where he received his PhD in Mechanical Engineering.

Links

• Download mp3 (9.7 MB)
• Listen to this episode on Spotify
• Subscribe to Robohub using iTunes, RSS, or Spotify
• Support us on Patreon

In this episode, Lilly Clark interviews Kris Zacny, the Vice President of Exploration Technologies at Honeybee Robotics.  They discuss two focuses of development at Honeybee: technology for finding extinct extraterrestrial life and technology for in-situ resource utilization. Zacny speaks about the design and operation of current flight projects, and why drilling technology is key to these missions.

Kris Zacny

Dr. Kris Zacny is VP and Senior Research Scientist at Honeybee Robotics. His interests include space mining, sample handling, soil and rock mechanics, extraterrestrial drilling, and In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU). He co-founded Exploration Technology Division (EX), based in Altadena, CA. EX, with over 100 employees, focuses on developing space mining robots.

In his previous capacity as an engineer in South African underground gold, diamond, and coal mines, Dr. Zacny managed numerous mining projects and production divisions. This hands-on experience related to drilling and mining became invaluable in developing such technologies for space. Dr. Zacny received his PhD (UC Berkeley, 2005) in Geotechnical Engineering with an emphasis on Extraterrestrial Drilling and Mining, ME (UC Berkeley, 2001) in Petroleum Engineering with emphasis on Drilling and Materials Science, and BSc cum laude (U. Cape Town, 1997) in Mechanical Engineering. He participated in several Antarctic, Arctic, Atacama, and Greenland expeditions. Dr Zacny has approx. 200 publications, he has been a PI/Co-I on approx. 50 projects, he has over 40 NASA New Technology Records and four NASA Group Achievement Awards.

Links

• Download mp3 (10.4 MB)
• Subscribe to Robots using iTunes
• Subscribe to Robots using RSS
• Support us on Patreon

In this episode, Lauren Klein interviews Ayanna Howard, Professor and Chair of the School of Interactive Computing at Georgia Tech. Professor Howard describes her wide range of work in robotics, from robots that assist children with special needs to trust in autonomous systems. She also discusses her path through the field of robotics in both academia and business, and the importance of conducting in-the-wild robotics research.

Ayanna Howard
Ayanna Howard is a Professor and Chair of the School of Interactive Computing at Georgia Tech. Professor Howard is the director and founder of the Human-Automation Systems (HumAnS) Laboratory. Her research focuses on humanized intelligence, with a wide range of applications from Human-Robot Interaction to science-driven robotics. Prior to Georgia Tech, she led research projects at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Professor Howard is also a founder and the CTO of the educational robotics company Zyrobotics.

Links

• Download mp3 (8.0 MB)
• Subscribe to Robots using Spotify
• Subscribe to Robots using iTunes
• Subscribe to Robots using RSS
• Support us on Patreon

In this episode, Lilly interviews Dr. William Crowe, CEO of High Earth Orbit (HEO) Robotics. The mission of HEO Robotics is to provide high quality imagery of satellites, space-debris and resource-rich asteroids. Crowe discusses the technical challenges which make robotics and satellites similar like computer vision and controls, and those where traditional robotics approaches aren’t suitable like localization and mobility. He explains new trends in the satellite industry, and the need for high quality imagery.

William Crowe

William Crowe is CEO of High Earth Orbit Robotics, a company that performs health checks on satellites by assessing data on images they take from other satellites. He has a PhD in Astrodynamics, where his research focused on the use of swarms to characterize asteroids, especially those that fly closer than the Moon. William sees a future where we use the resources of space in space to better our Earth.

Links

• Download mp3 (13.9 MB)
• Subscribe to Robots using iTunes
• Subscribe to Robots using RSS
• Support us on Patreon

In this episode, Audrow Nash speaks with Janet Vertessi, Assistant Professor of Sociology at Princeton, on her book Seeing Like a Rover: How Robots, Teams, and Images Craft Knowledge of Mars. The book is written about her experience living and working with NASA’s Mars Rover team, and includes her observations about the team’s leadership and their relationship with their robot millions of miles away on Mars. She also gives some advice from her findings for teams.

Janet Vertessi

Janet Vertesi specializes in the sociology of science, knowledge, and technology. She has spent the past 7 years studying several NASA spacecraft teams as an ethnographer. Her book, Seeing like a Rover: Images and Interaction on the Mars Exploration Rover Mission (Chicago, 2014) draws on over two years of ethnographic immersion with the Mars Exploration Rover mission to show how scientists and engineers use digital images to conduct scientific research on another planet. She is currently working on followup study of the NASA-ESA Cassini mission to Saturn focusing on the role of sociotechnical organization in research, data-sharing, and decision-making on robotic spacecraft teams. Vertesi is also interested in the digital sociology: whether studying computational systems in social life, shifting sociological methods online, or applying sociological insights to build new technologies.  She holds a Master’s degree from Cambridge and a PhD from Cornell, has received several grants from the National Science Foundation, and was awarded the Hacker-Mullins prize for best graduate student paper from the American Sociological Association, Science, Knowledge and Technology section in 2007.

Links

• Download mp3 (15.5 MB)
• Subscribe to Robots using iTunes
• Subscribe to Robots using RSS
• Support us on Patreon

In this episode Lilly Clark interviews Marlyse Reeves, PhD student at MIT, about her work in cognitive robotics and hybrid activity-motion planning. Reeves discusses the role of robotics in space, the challenges of multi-vehicle missions, planning under uncertainty, and her work on an underwater exploration mission.

Marlyse Reeves

Marlyse is a third-year PhD student in the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory at MIT. She received her B.S. in Aeronautics and Astronautics from MIT in 2017. Her current research in the Model-based Embedded and Robotic Systems Group focuses on multi-vehicle online planning, incorporating complex dynamics and constraints. She is also interested in risk-aware planning, fault protection and diagnosis, and adaptive sampling. Outside of the lab, she enjoys playing soccer, dancing, and reading science fiction.

Links

• Download mp3 (14.2 MB)
• MIT Model-based Embedded and Robotic Systems Group
• Subscribe to Robots using iTunes
• Subscribe to Robots using RSS
• Support us on Patreon

In a time of “America First,” the benefits of space travel are clouded by the smoke of hyperbole. In reality, there has been over 2,000 inventions courtesy of NASA that are making our lives better here on Earth. Every day, we benefit as much from the journey as from the destination. These innovations include new medicines developed in zero gravity; faster autonomous transportation technologies; and groundbreaking advances in computing (launched above the clouds). The map below illustrates the number of commercial endeavors that have spun out of the nation’s space program since 1976:

NASA has been an incubator of technology since its inception in 1959. This year, NASA unveiled a new web page illustrating its reach into the design of new smart cities and IoT connected homes, called NASA City. This addition to the already extensive NASA site comes on the heels of President Trump’s proposed budget cut of NASA’s funding that would end earth-centric education and innovations, including protecting the planet from an apocalyptic asteroid.  

According to the President’s outline, “the budget increases cooperation with industry through the use of public-private partnerships, focuses on the nation’s efforts on deep space exploration rather than Earth-centric research, and develops technologies that would achieve U.S. space goals and benefit the economy.”

This past week, I visited the Kennedy Space Center to learn firsthand how our lives have been positively changed by the sacrifices of the brave men and women who risked everything for humanity. As a small testimony to these lives lost in the pursuit of science, I have included below a list from NASA’s website of the top innovations we use every day

Health & Medicine

• LED (Light-Emitting Diodes) Lighting –  The LED technology used in space shuttle plant growth experiments has contributed to the development of medical devices to relive “minor muscle and joint pain, arthritis, stiffness, and muscle spasms, and also promotes muscle relaxation and increases local blood circulation.” In fact, the U.S. Department of Defense uses LEDs now as a “soldier self-care” system to treat minor injuries and pain and to improve endurance in combat.
• Infrared Ear Thermometers – NASA developed this thermometer using “infrared astronomy technology to measure the amount of energy emitted by the eardrum, the same way the temperature of stars and planets are measured.”
• Artificial Limbs – NASA’s space robotic and extravehicular activities have now been applied to create more “functionally dynamic artificial limbs.” Additionally, temper foam was developed by NASA which prevents friction between the skin and the prosthetic.
• Ventricular Assist Device – The ventricular assist device (VAD) functions as a “bridge to heart transplant” by pumping blood throughout the body to keep critically ill patients alive until a donor heart is available. “Weighing less than 4 ounces and measuring 1 by 3 inches, the pump is approximately one-tenth the size of other currently marketed pulsatile VADs, making it ideal for children.

Transportation

• Anti-Icing Systems – NASA scientists developed a thermoelectric deicing system called Thermawing, a DC-powered air conditioner for single-engine aircraft called Thermacool. This allows “pilots to safely fly through ice encounters and provides pilots of single-engine aircraft the heated wing technology usually reserved for larger, jet-powered craft.”
• Highway Safety – The cutting of grooves in concrete to increase traction and prevent injury was first developed for the Space Shuttle to reduce aircraft accidents on wet runways. It was later expanded into highway and pedestrian applications.
• Improved Radial Tires – “Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company developed a fibrous material, five times stronger than steel, for NASA to use in parachute shrouds to soft-land the Vikings on the Martian surface.” Goodyear later added this technology to its new radial tire to increase tread life by over 10,000 miles.
• Chemical Detection – Moisture and pH-sensitive sensors were created to warn NASA of potentially dangerous corrosive conditions in the Space Shuttle before significant structural damage occurred. This new type of sensor was later adapted by the Department of Defense for detecting chemical warfare agents and potential threats, such as toxic industrial compounds and nerve agents.

Public Safety

• Video Enhancing and Analysis Systems – Video Image Stabilization and Registration technology used by NASA in space is now in the hands of FBI agents to analyze video footage.  Aside from law enforcement and security applications, the technology has also been adapted to serve military professionals for reconnaissance, weapons deployment, damage assessment, training, and mission debriefing.
• Land Mine Removal – NASA utilizes its surplus rocket fuel “to produce a flare that can safely destroy land mines,” that is able “to reduce propellant waste without negatively impacting the environment.” The flare uses solid rocket fuel to burn a hole in the mine’s case and burn away the explosive contents before it is safely disarmed.
• Fire-Resistant Reinforcement – “The Apollo heat shield was coated with a material whose purpose was to burn and thus dissipate energy during reentry while charring, to form a protective coating to block heat penetration.” Now the the heat shield coating is being used in fire-retardant paints and aircraft foams for aircraft, including a new “intumescent epoxy material” that expands when exposed to heat.
• Firefighter Gear – Firefighting equipment widely used throughout the United States is based on a NASA development that coupled Agency design expertise with lightweight materials developed for the U.S. Space Program.

Consumer, Home, & Recreation

• Temper Foam – “As the result of a program designed to develop a padding concept to improve crash protection” for the Shuttle and airplane passengers, NASA developed temper foam or “memory foam.” The material is now in most mattresses and pillows.
• Enriched Baby Food – “Commercially available infant formulas now contain a nutritional enrichment ingredient that traces its existence to NASA-sponsored research that explored the potential of algae as a recycling agent for long-duration space travel.” The ingredient can now be found in over 90% of infant formulas sold worldwide.
• Portable Cordless Vacuums – Wireless drills and other appliances were created by Black & Decker for the Apollo and Gemini space missions. “For the Apollo space mission, NASA required a portable, self-contained drill capable of extracting core samples from below the lunar surface.” This invention later led to the development of the Dustbuster.
• Freeze Drying Technology – “In planning for the long-duration Apollo missions, NASA conducted extensive research into space food. One of the techniques developed was freeze drying.” The benefits were amazing as freeze drying food kept 98% of the nutrients but weighing 80% less, which is now used to help help homebound seniors maintain a healthy diet.

Environmental & Agricultural Resources

• Harnessing Solar Energy – Solar energy was first utilized in space, and now “homes across the country are now being outfitted with modern, high-performance, low-cost, single crystal silicon solar power cells that allow them to reduce their traditional energy expenditures and contribute to pollution reduction.”
• Pollution Remediation – “A product using NASA’s microencapsulating technology is available to consumers and industry enabling them to safely and permanently clean petroleum-based pollutants from water.” This technology was recently deployed in the cleanup of catastrophic oil spills such as BP’s Deep Water Horizon and the Exxon Valdez. 
• Water Purification – As part of designing a complex system of devices intended to sustain the astronauts living on the International Space Station and, in the future, those who go on to explore Mars, NASA has been turning wastewater from respiration, sweat, and urine into drinkable water for years. This technology is now available for underdeveloped countries where well water may be heavily contaminated.

Computer Technology

• Better Software – NASA is collaborating with tech companies like Google and InterSense “to solve a variety of challenging technical problems ranging from large-scale data management and massively distributed computing, to human-computer interfaces—with the ultimate goal of making the vast, scattered ocean of data more accessible and usable” both in space and on Earth.
• Structural Analysis – NASA has created thousands of computer programs over the decades to design, test, and analyze stress, vibration, and acoustical properties of a broad assortment of aerospace parts and structures (before prototyping even begins). The NASA Structural Analysis Program is now used to design everything from Cadillacs to roller coasters.
• Refrigerated Internet-Connected Wall Ovens – Everything on the International Space Station is monitored and controlled via the Internet, even the oven named “ConnectIo.” ConnectIo is unique as it enables a “user to simply enter the dinner time, and the oven automatically switches from refrigeration to the cooking cycle,” so the meal is ready when the astronaut (or Earth-bound human) is at the table.

Industrial Productivity

• Powdered Lubricants – NASA developed a solid lubricant coating material originally for its aeropropulsion engines, refrigeration compressors, turbochargers, and hybrid electrical turbogenerators. This technology is now saving industrial companies millions of dollars by improving efficiency, lowering friction, and reducing emissions in widespread industrial equipment.
• Improved Mine Safety – “An ultrasonic bolt elongation monitor developed by a NASA scientist for testing tension and high-pressure loads on bolts” is now used for a plethora of applications from the evaluation of railroad ties to groundwater analysis to radiation dosimetry to medical testing for intracranial pressure.
• Food Safety Systems – “Faced with the problem of how and what to feed an astronaut in a sealed capsule under weightless conditions while planning for human space flight, NASA enlisted the aid of The Pillsbury Company to address two principal concerns: eliminating crumbs of food that might contaminate the spacecraft’s atmosphere and sensitive instruments, and assuring absolute freedom from potentially catastrophic disease-producing bacteria and toxins.” Today HACCP is utilized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the handling of seafood, juice, and dairy products.

NASA’s latest private-sector partnership is expanding into enabling the autonomous mobile future. Last year, the space agency teamed up with automaker Nissan to integrate and test autonomous technologies that have been deployed for over two decades on its Mars rovers in consumer ready cars. The partnership’s goal is to have a fully autonomous car on the road by 2020.

According to Nissan CEO, Carlos Ghosn, “The work of NASA and Nissan—with one directed to space and the other directed to earth—is connected by similar challenges. The partnership will accelerate Nissan’s development of safe, secure and reliable autonomous drive technology that we will progressively introduce to consumers beginning in 2016 up to 2020.”

The two organizations have cooperated on technological development in the past. For instance, Nissan used NASA’s research on neutral body posture in low-gravity conditions to develop more comfortable car seats. But hardware and software for self-driving cars could prove to be some of the most transformative technologies to reach mainstream acceptance in the coming years. Nissan joins Google’s Waymo on the Ames Research Center autonomous testing track.

In addition to the Ames facility, the Kennedy Space Center announced last month that it will convert the “Shuttle Landing Facility runway” to a controlled testing ground of driverless cars, as part of its contribution to the Central Florida Automated Vehicle Partnership. This announcement on the heels of its second showing at the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas in January. NASA made a point of displaying, in particular, its tech transfer program for autonomous cars and robotics.

Terry Fong, director of the NASA Ames Intelligent Robotics Group said, “NASA’s open-source software, VERVE (Visual Environment for Remote and Virtual Exploration), provides the foundation for human-robot teaming in Nissan’s new ‘Seamless Autonomous Mobility’ (SAM) system and CES is a great venue for showcasing this spin-off technology to the general public. VERVE allows humans to provide assistance to autonomous vehicles in unpredictable and difficult situations when the vehicles cannot solve the problem themselves.”

---

If you enjoyed this article about space robotics, you may also want to read:

• Should both the successes and failures of space robots curb the ambition of a manned Mars mission?
• Schiaparelli, are you there? The high risks of space robotics again crash home
• Robohub roundtable: Robotics and space exploration
• Space for the masses as helium balloons and remote control planes reach through the stratosphere

See all the latest robotics news on Robohub, or sign up for our weekly newsletter.

Multi-dome lunar base being constructed, based on the 3D printing concept. Once assembled, the inflated domes are covered with a layer of 3D-printed lunar regolith by robots to help protect the occupants against space radiation and micrometeoroids. Image: ESA

Planetary Resources, a company hoping to make asteroid mining into a trillion dollar industry, earlier this year unveiled the world’s first 3D printed object made from bits of an asteroid.

3D printing, and additive manufacturing processes more generally, have made many advances in recent years. Just a few years ago, most 3D printing was only used for building prototypes, which would then go on to be manufactured via conventional processes. But it’s now increasingly being used for manufacturing in its own right.

Nearly two years ago, NASA even sent a 3D printer to the International Space Station with the goal of testing how the technology works in micro-gravity. While the printer resembles a Star Trek replicator, it’s not quite that sophisticated yet; the objects it can print are small prototypes for testing.

3D printer used on the ISS

But 3D printing objects don’t have to be small. Entire houses have now been 3D printed, including out of renewable resources such as clay and earth.

And visionary architect Enrico Dini, a pioneer of 3D construction featured in the film The Man Who Prints Houses, isn’t thinking small,confessing:

What I really want to do is to use the machine to complete the Sagrada Familia. And to build on the moon.

Above and beyond

NASA, the European Space Agency (ESA) and entrepreneurs aiming to jump-start human colonisation of space see the 3D printing of large scale objects, including entire habitations, as a major enabling technology for the future of space exploration.

In 2013, a project led by the ESA used simulated lunar regolith – i.e. loose top soil – to produce a 1.5 ton hollow cell building block. It was conceived as part of a dome shelter for a lunar base that would also incorporate an inflatable interior structure. The project used a D-Shape printer using Enrico Dini’s company, Monolite.

1.5 tonne building block produced as a demonstration

Since 2011, NASA has been funding similar research led by Professor Behrokh Khoshnevies at the University of Southern California. His team has been using a technology called contour crafting, which also has the goal of using 3D printing to construct entire space habitations from in situ resources.

After testing 3D printing in space, NASA has decided the technology is close to a tipping point. As part of a new programme of public/private partnerships aimed at pushing emerging space capabilities over these tipping points, NASA has awarded a major contract to the Archinaut project.

The project will see a 3D printer, built by Made in Space, mated with a robotic arm, built by Oceaneering Space Systems, with Northrup Grumman providing the control software and integration with the ISS systems.

The goal of the project is to provide an on-orbit demonstration of large, complex structure – in this case a boom for a satellite – sometime in 2018.

Down to Earth

But 3D manufacturing is already changing the aerospace industry. Composites, for example, have become a commonly used material for a wide variety of applications.

But composites tend to suffer weakness between their laminating layers, which can lead to material failures in crucial components. 3D weaving, which deploys fibers on three axes, is set to revolutionise these materials and their performances.

Indeed, NASA is now using 3D woven quartz fibre compression pads for its Orion Space Vehicle and exploring the technology for use in other thermal protection surfaces.

But the ability to use in situ materials, both for fuel, water and construction whether on the moon, Mars, or asteroids has long been recognised as a crucial ability to enable human exploration of the solar system.

Contests such as last the 3D Printed Habitat Challenge, part of NASA’s Centennial Challenges, are an important element of an innovation strategy designed to push the envelope of technology, leveraging entrepreneurial spirit, scientific and technological know-how and design thinking in a bid to take human space exploration to the next level.

The winning design, announced at the New York Makers Faire in September, was the Mars Ice House.

The Mars Ice House Habitat, which would be printed out of ice from relatively abundant water on Mars’ northern hemisphere, is a far cry from the bunker like spaces frequently envisioned for Mars bases. The ice would provide ample radiation protection while creating a radiant, light filled space reminiscent of a cathedral.

Space exploration has always been associated with visionary fiction and grandiose plans, and it looks like 3D manufacturing and construction may finally bring the printed word to life.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Helium balloons are being used to carry people, experiments and satellite launchers into near space. Image courtesy of Zero2Infinity

Space will soon be within the grasp of everyday people, small countries, researchers or start-up companies thanks to a fleet of low-cost launch vehicles under development across Europe.

From remote control drones that can fire rockets into orbit from the edge of space, to giant helium balloons that could carry tourists, science experiments or satellite launchers into the stratosphere, small-scale start-ups are stepping into the control room and embarking on a new low-cost space race.

It represents an exciting new wave of space travel, following in the vapour trails of private companies such as Elon Musk’s SpaceX or Richard Branson’s Virgin Galactic.

The Issue

The EU is aiming to encourage private companies to develop low-cost launch systems as part of its Space Strategy for Europe announced in October this year.

The objective of EU funding for research into space technologies is to enable Europe to access space independently and affordably, and strengthen the capability of European scientists and engineers.

Between 2014 and 2020, it plans to spend over EUR 12 billion on three space programmes – satellite navigation, earth observation and space research.

Where once only global superpowers with vast budgets could go, Europe’s entrepreneurs and innovators will soon be travelling for a fraction of the cost.

One of these innovators is Zero 2 Infinity, a Spanish start-up working on helium balloon-borne spacecraft.

‘It’s the cheaper way because it’s more efficient, you need fewer engineers to build it,’ explained Jose Mariano Lopez-Urdiales, chief executive.

Near space

The idea is that the balloon would carry a passenger pod into what is known as near space, somewhere between 20 km and 100 km above the earth’s surface, or carry its small rocket-powered Bloostar spacecraft which it could then launch much higher into low-earth orbit.

Zero 2 Infinity customers are already balloon launching satellites for short periods of high-altitude testing, and the company has EUR 140 million in expressions of interest for full satellite launches.

It was the leader of the EU-backed HELIUM project, which developed the concept for a near-space European laboratory that allows orbiting research at 36 km, and the life support system for the two pilots in the initial six-hour flights.

Although space tourists could soon be using the balloon launch system to take selfies in near space, the first passengers are likely to be scientists, according to Lopez-Urdiales.

Aiming higher than the balloon satellite launcher’s range of 600 km, Europe’s ALTAIR project is readying the blueprints for a remote-controlled aircraft which would use a rocket launch module to blast sub-200 kilogramme satellite payloads into orbit and take off in 2020 at the earliest.

Runway

ALTAIR’s launch system — similar to Virgin Galactic’s piloted White Knight 2 space tourism aircraft in appearance and general function — would take off from a runway, before ferrying satellites up to an altitude of 12-15 km and igniting its rocket payload.

But the similarities end there. ALTAIR project manager Nicolas Bérend says the project is focused on affordable, remote-controlled launches, calling on the experience of French space centres CNES and Onera, creators of the Eole automated launch aircraft demonstrator which is the project’s precursor.

By the end of the EU-funded program in 2018, the six-country collaboration will have a final concept for the unmanned aircraft, its hybrid propulsion engine rocket launcher and ground operations, and will demonstrate its launch technology by doing suborbital tests using a scale model.

By removing the human pilot and designing a facility geared towards a high launch frequency and minimal staffing, they hope to bring down the costs enough to make the project economically viable.

‘It is essential to the project’s success to restrict launch costs to around EUR 4 million, a price the team’s market analysts consider to be a competitive launch price,’ said Bérend.

That should give them access to a growing market for small satellite launches, often in the form of so-called CubeSats, nanosatellites normally no more than 10 centimetres wide, a market where Europe is lagging behind at the moment.

Even though Europe covers large-to-medium launches with its Ariane 6 and Vega rockets, and suborbital rockets from the Andøya launch site in Norway, it has no small-satellite solution.

‘The small satellites are all launched outside of Europe with Russian or Indian launchers,’ said Bertil Oving, of the Netherlands Aerospace Centre. ‘There is a small-satellite market, it’s booming and if Europe does not take the chance now, then we may lose this possibility.’

He is the coordinator of SMILE, an EU-funded project designing a small-scale launcher for satellites of up to 50 kg.

SMILE will design and start component testing of a standard-format rocket, along with the necessary upgrades to the Andøya facility, by 2019, keeping costs below EUR 50 000 per kilogramme launched, and hopefully cutting the expensive wait for satellites to be able to piggyback on one of the larger rockets.

3D printing

Larger rockets benefit from an economy of scale, and SMILE’s competitiveness would come from advances in reusable components, automated composite manufacturing, 3D printing and also high-volume production.

‘The payload versus the total mass becomes smaller when the launcher is smaller, so it’s a cost aspect challenge,’ said Oving.

He said SMILE is pushing advances in reusable liquid-fuelled engines and its automated manufacturing advances would have automotive and aviation industry uses, but he thinks the biggest implications of low-cost, low-orbit access will be for consumers.

‘The idea for small satellites like CubeSats is to approach them like FedEx & DHL,’ he said. ‘We will simply bring it to where you want to have it.’

European organisations may soon make it easier to get equipment into near space and low-earth orbit.

If you enjoyed this article, you may also want to read these Horizon related articles:

• EU’s Horizon 2020 has funded $179 million in robotics PPPs
• Keeping a robotic eye on pollution
• Protecting European wine: Vinbot rover optimises harvest and quality
• A helping hand for high-tech firms

See all the latest robotics news on Robohub, or sign up for our weekly newsletter.

This self-portrait of NASA’s Curiosity Mars rover shows the vehicle at the “Quela” drilling location in the “Murray Buttes” area on lower Mount Sharp. Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS

Late morning, red skies over Mars, and the first human interloper emerges from her landing craft to review the dusty expanse. As she eases carefully down the ladder towards the alien earth, her mind spins with the words that, like Armstrong’s, will echo forever in the human conscious. She speaks and, when her signal reaches home just over three minutes later, 11 billion hearts skip a beat. It’s a powerful image, oft perpetuated in such media as the upcoming National Geographic “global event series” MARS. But below is another, far realer image: the crater left by Schiaparelli after its parachute jettisoned too early and it ploughed into the Martian surface, fatally. Images like this illustrate the truly difficult, dangerous and costly business of spaceflight.

Schiaparelli crash site in colour. Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/University of Arizona

Losing robots is dramatically less costly—both existentially and financially—than losing humans, hence the push to design robots here on Earth capable of performing in harsh environments considered to pose an unsatisfactory risk to humans. But when it comes to the globally harsh environment of Mars, we tend to accept unanimously, axiomatically, that the end goal must be to send humans to conquer it, and soon! Advocates of a Martian human spaceflight goal—such as Elon Musk, Explore Mars Inc, and The Mars Society—are pushing for a human presence on the Red Planet by the 2030s, arguably underestimating the difficulty of achieving such a horizon in just two decades, and offering little to no justification for colonization other than the vague hero myth of manifest destiny. At the very least, if we’re to send our covered wagons rolling and ruining across a new celestial frontier, should we not first qualify why the $10¹⁰ it’d likely cost wouldn’t be better spent on further robotics-lead research missions?

The massive achievements of humanity’s still primitive and variable robot explorers have surely justified continued funding over infinitely more complex manned missions. Could a human have done such a better job than Curiosity, Spirit or Opportunity, so as to justify the inordinately higher risks? And what could more multifaceted, technologically advanced robot explorers achieve on humanity’s behalf, given time and funding? And whether they’re successful in their missions, or rain down like silvery chaff from the thin, Martian skies, the lessons we learn are invaluable. It’s never too soon for robots. And it’s always worth the risk. Can we say the same about human spaceflight missions?

Closer to home

Preferring also to focus on the horizon goal of humans on Mars by the 2030s, NASA currently has no plans to return to the moon. Or so we thought. However, at the end of October this year, NASA announced it was “seeking information from potential partners” who were interested in designing small robotic payloads that could be launched and sent to the surface of the moon within a 2017-2020 timeframe. NASA’s primarily interested in understanding how future missions to Mars might use robot technology to generate resources like water and oxygen, create usable fuel for spacecraft, conduct in-space and extraterrestrial manufacturing and construction, and other operations relevant to making a future Martian colony work. It’s clear NASA see the moon as a mere technological proving ground, a springboard to Mars. But other experts in the field (even at NASA) argue for something a little more permanent on the Lunar surface.

Artist’s impression of a permanent moon colony. Image credit: NASA

Commenting in a recent Popular Science article, NASA astrobiologist Chris McKay concluded: “We’re not going to have a research base on Mars until we can learn how to do it on the Moon first.” He pointed out how new technologies here on Earth, such as self-driving cars and waste-recycling technologies, can make establishing a Lunar colony cheaper and more achievable than ever before. Taking the time and resources to first establish a permanent moon base might push back the timeline for manned Mars missions, but offers a multitude of advantages in the long run: it’s a cheaper, safer, more achievable goal, closer to home, that can potentially offer a blueprint to how human-robot interaction might evolve outside of Earth’s protective shield. It’d be a big deal to see human’s living on the moon. Equally, wouldn’t it be a big deal to see the first robot manufactured on another planetary body?

Together forever, as one

I’m not saying that humans should stay Earthbound forever, never leaving for Mars. I’m simply advocating a deeper, more informed conversation. Let’s not run 225 million kilometers away before we’re ready. Let’s set achievable, affordable goals and learn all the lessons we can from our robot partners, our canaries in the coal mine.

But I get it. I’m pooping the party aren’t I?

I can empathise with the visceral, reflexive response I provoke in fellow enthusiasts—akin to chewing on sour cud—when I allude to the notion that humans shouldn’t necessarily emigrate to a dead and deadly desert planet just yet. I too was raised in the West by “the greatest generation”, and their “baby boomer” offspring, to whom human spaceflight was far more personal, less justified by scientific enquiry and more inspired by geopolitical, socioeconomic factors. The cardboard-box suited astro-child in me gasps, enthralled at the thought of humans living on Mars. Ah, the wonder, the excellence of the human spirit…

Artist’s impression of Martian colony. Image credit: NASA

But that isn’t a rational response. What’s rational is weighing realist human spaceflight goals against what can first be achieved with cheaper, expendable robot alternatives. Should we not curb our enthusiasm, our collective delusion of achieveability, and concentrate on paving the way, gradually, for more established and long-lasting spaceflight architecture? Or, to a greater extreme, could and should humanity’s lasting impression on the Universe be not boot prints in dust and regolith, but the intrepid robot ambassadors we created and sent forth to better our understanding of ourselves?

If you enjoyed this article, you might also be interested in:

• Schiaparelli, are you there? The high risks of space robotics again crash home
• Drone learns to see in zero-gravity
• Robots Podcast #217: LunaRoo, with Jürgen Leitner
• The four coolest NASA robots
• Exoskeletons: From helping people walk to controlling robots in space
• NASA Space Robotics Challenge prepares robots for the journey to Mars

See all the latest robotics news on Robohub, or sign up for our weekly newsletter.

The year is 2032 and a meteorite has damaged a power station on Mars. 16 teams of school-aged children spread across the world have each been given control of a robot based on Mars and have been commanded to work together to assess the damage and restart the main generator.

The teams will need to programme the robots taking into account the time lag taken for instructions to travel from planet Earth to Mars (between three and 21 minutes depending on the orbit) in order to get the generator restarted in time. Teams will programme their robots and send in their expertise from across the world, including Switzerland, France, South Africa, Russia and Italy.

You can watch along live and see the future of space travel at https://www.thymio.org/en:thymio-r2t2 from 13:30 (CET) today.

Watch the live stream

About the Thymio robot

Photo: Gretchen Ertl

Sarah Hensley is preparing an astronaut named Valkyrie for a mission to Mars. It is 6 feet tall, weighs 300 pounds, and is equipped with an extended chest cavity that makes it look distinctly female. Hensley spends much of her time this semester analyzing the movements of one of Valkyrie’s arms.

As a fourth-year electrical engineering student at MIT, Hensley is working with a team of researchers to prepare Valkyrie, a humanoid robot also known as R5, for future space missions. As a teenager in New Jersey, Hensley loved to read in her downtime, particularly Isaac Asimov’s classic robot series. “I’m a huge science fiction nerd — and now I’m actually getting to work with a robot that’s real and not just in books. That’s like, wow.”

Hensley is studying Valkyrie for an advanced independent research program, or SuperUROP, as one of only three undergraduate students in the Robot Locomotion Group in MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. Most of her colleagues are graduate-level researchers and postdocs with extensive experience working on complex humanoids. The group is led by professor of electrical engineering and computer science Russ Tedrake, who successfully programmed Valkyrie’s predecessor (named Atlas) to open doors, turn valves, drill holes, climb stairs, and drive a car for the DARPA Robotics Challenge in 2015.

Valkyrie has 28 torque-controlled joints, four body cameras, and more than 200 individual sensors, Hensley says. The robot can walk, bend its joints, and turn a door handle. “This is one of the most advanced robots in the world. And it’s 20 feet from my desk,” she adds.

That’s largely because Valkyrie has a long way to go before it leaves for Mars. MIT is one of three institutions, including Northeastern University and the University of Edinburgh, that NASA selected to develop software enabling the robot to perform space-related tasks — open airlock hatches, attach and remove power cables, repair equipment, and retrieve samples. Oh yeah, and get to its feet when it falls down.

Hensley, who started in the lab over the summer, is intrigued by the challenge of harmonizing the movements of such a highly complex system. “I am trying to solve a very tricky problem,” she says. She’s working out how best to control Valkyrie’s elbow movements by comparing two potential approaches. One uses a main controller to gather information from the various motor systems within the arm, and then uses that data to make accurate movement decisions. The other approach is decentralized, and leaves it to each motor system to decide and act on its own.

Hensley gets animated discussing the alternatives. “Is it better to have multiple decision makers with access to different information? Or is better to have one decision maker choosing all of the motor inputs?” she asks. Hensley has already been accepted into a master’s degree program in electrical engineering at MIT. She hopes to be able to continue her work on Valkyrie.

Every day, Hensley leaves Tau Epsilon Phi, her co-ed fraternity house in the Back Bay; walks across the Massachusetts Ave. bridge to the Stata Center; and plants herself in front of two large monitors in the robotics lab. She analyzes a wealth of scientific literature and writes code for computer simulations of the equations that move the robot’s arm. Sometimes she gets up for peppermint tea, or to peer around the corner of her cubicle at Valkyrie.

One thing is certain, says Hensley. Pop culture fears that machines may soon prove superior to humans are laughable. When Valkyrie is turned on and moves, Hensley says, it often “kind of shivers and falls down. One thing you realize working in this lab is that we are really far away from the robot apocalypse,” she quips. “Sometimes robots work, and sometimes they don’t. That’s our challenge.”

Image: ESA/ATG medialab

In Darmstadt, Germany, European Space Agency (ESA) teams are scrambling to confirm contact with the Entry, Descent and Landing Demonstrator Module (EDM), Schiaparelli—the spectre of Philae still haunting the European Space Operations Centre (ESOC). Whether or not ESA ever speak to Schiaparelli again, the risky business of space robotics is once more laid bare.

Editors note: Since this article was written, ESA are attempting to decode a partial signal from the EDM

After Schiaparelli’s release from its mothership—The Trace Gas Orbiter (TGO)—the 577 kg EDM was programmed to autonomously perform an automated landing sequence, with parachute deployment and front heat shield release between 11 and 7 km above the Martian surface, all the time collecting data on the pressure, surface temperature and heat flux on its back cover as it passed through the atmosphere.  Then, 1100 m from the ground, retrorocket braking was supposed to slow the EDM before a final fall from a height of 2 m, protected by a crushable structure. But sometime during this process the signal was lost. ESA_Shiaparelli’s twitter feed soon fell silent also.

If Schiaparelli reached the surface safely, its batteries should be able to support operations for three to ten days, offering multiple opportunities to re-establish a communication link and collect data from its suite of sensors designed to measure wind speed and direction, humidity, pressure, atmospheric temperature, transparency of the atmosphere, and atmospheric electrification. But if contact is never restored, it’ll be a hefty blow to ExoMars and ESA’s aim of testing key technologies in preparation for their contribution to subsequent missions to Mars, including a planned 2020 rover that will carry a drill and a suite of instruments dedicated to exobiology and geochemistry research.

Image: ESA/ATG medialab

Such robotic technology has the potential to stretch our cosmological horizon, and perhaps even detect traces of extra-terrestrial life. But there’s a cost.  The ExoMars program runs up a bill totaling €1.3 billion, and such failures (if a failure it be) naturally raise questions of risk versus reward, particularly in tight economic times. Michael Johnson of the Pervasive Media Studio, Bristol, and founder of PocketSpacecraft.com, once told me during an interview: “About 50% of space missions fail after launch.” He shrugged. “That’s life… This is a high risk, high reward activity.”

In no other field of robotics is the potential of catastrophic failure so present and accepted. But how long can this attitude be maintained? The consensual public funding of—and indeed existence of—future space missions is parasitic upon the success of space robots and automated technology, and vice versa. Can you hear us Schiaparelli?

…

Come in, Schiaparelli.

…?

Image: ESA/ATG medialab

BUT ALL IS NOT LOST. The difficulties surrounding the mission’s EDM might potentially overshadow the successes of its TGO, which successfully performed the long 139-minute burn required to be captured by Mars, and has entered an elliptical orbit around the Red Planet. TGO’s Mars orbit Insertion burn lasted from 13:05 to 15:24 GMT on 19 October, reducing the spacecraft’s speed and direction by more than 1.5 km/s. The TGO is now on its planned orbit around Mars, primed with a suit of scientific equipment to measure the Martian atmosphere from on high. You win some, you lose some. This 50:50 success rate exemplifies the apparent nature of space robotics.

Click here to keep up to date with the latest ExoMars developments.

If you enjoyed this article, you might also be interested in:

• Drone learns to see in zero-gravity
• Robots Podcast #217: LunaRoo, with Jürgen Leitner
• The four coolest NASA robots
• Exoskeletons: From helping people walk to controlling robots in space
• NASA Space Robotics Challenge prepares robots for the journey to Mars

See all the latest robotics news on Robohub, or sign up for our weekly newsletter.

Curiosity Heading for Mount Sharp, during the 329th Martian day, or sol, of the rover’s work on Mars (July 9, 2013). The turret of tools at the end of Curiosity’s robotic arm is in the foreground, with the rover’s rock-sampling drill in the lower left corner of the image. Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech.

NASA may be known for sending men to the moon, establishing the International Space Station, and planning for a base on Mars—but apart from astronauts, its best-known spokesmen aren’t men at all—they’re robots.

Rovers like Spirit, Opportunity, and Curiosity, and landers like Viking and Philae, make the perfect ambassadors into hostile, freezing, and nearly airless environments. Not only do these explorers bring back valuable scientific data from Earth’s planetary neighbors, they also make perfect showcases for practical robotics.

Pioneer 13—Venus

Venus is no one’s idea of a vacation home. Its atmosphere is a mixture of sulfuric acid and carbon dioxide, and with a surface temperature of 863 degrees Fahrenheit, only the toughest machine could possibly survive on its surface.

This is why it was surprising when a probe launched as part of the Pioneer 13 exploration satellite in 1978 managed to survive and transmit data. This probe wasn’t designed as a lander—it was supposed to fall through the atmosphere, collect chemical data, and then destruct on impact with the surface. Instead, it survived and managed to transmit data automatically for 67 minutes after landing. By comparison, a purpose-built Russian probe called Venera 7 only lasted 20 minutes at Venusian ground level.

Philae—Comet 67P

The Philae lander was not quite a success, and not quite a failure either. Anyway you care to put it, the explorer embodies the ancient philosophy of Ad Astra, Per Aspera—to the stars, through difficulties. Philae’s landing system was always considered to be quite experimental. As the first space vehicle ever to attempt a landing on a comet, Philae needed to contend with low-gravity conditions, as well as the comet’s surface, which was fragile, uneven, and icy.

Gravity on 67P was so low that Philae couldn’t “land” in the traditional sense. Instead, the plan was for Philae to fire harpoons into the crust, and then a landing rocket to essentially glue itself down onto the comet’s surface. This didn’t happen—neither the harpoons nor the retro rocket fired as intended, and thus Philae didn’t so much land as bounce. Philae survived the unplanned bounces, however, and was able to send valuable exploration data in spite of its unconventional landing.

Opportunity Rover—Mars

Let’s face it—we probably could have written this entire entry just on the topic of NASA’s Mars rovers. For the sake of restraint, however, we’ve just picked two.

Opportunity is special. The rover landed on Mars in 2004, and was designed for a mission lasting just 92 days.  This proved to be a pessimistic assessment, as the vehicle didn’t just outlast its original mission plan—it’s still operating today, over 4,500 days after it was expected to fail. NASA chalks this viability up to two factors: sturdy construction, and good operational choices. Importantly, both the Spirit and Opportunity rovers would stay parked for months at a time, allowing them to conserve power during months of weak sunlight.

The Opportunity rover also possesses limited autonomy. Depending on the position of the planets, radio signals can lag between 4 and 24 minutes between Mars and Earth. This makes it impractical to drive a rover like an RC car. Unless the rovers are in the midst of particularly difficult terrain, NASA controllers will simply pick a point a short distance away and tell the rovers to go there. Using 3D terrain maps generated by a stereo camera, Opportunity picks the best available path, drives down it, re-calculates, and drives again.

Curiosity—Mars

In many ways, Curiosity is an iteration of the Spirit and Opportunity rovers. Everything about it is bigger, its systems are more robust, and it possesses even more autonomy. This level of engineering and processing power allowed it to perform incredible feats starting on Day One of its mission. You may remember Curiosity’s landing—gently spooled to the ground on a crane held aloft by rockets. Not only was this process controlled entirely by the mission’s onboard computers, those computers were less powerful than a 2012 iPhone.

While NASA has sent most of its wheeled rovers to Mars, there are plans in works for the space exploration agency to send its robotic explorers to several other locations. NASA is currently formulating plans for a potentially aquatic rover to drill and explore beneath the icy oceans of Europa, and the agency recently launched a sample return mission—Osiris Rex—which will recover a portion of a near-Earth asteroid.

NASA’s designs are everything we want to see out of robotics. Maximum autonomy using minimal computer power. Robust designs that last years beyond their intended lifespan. These results aren’t just perfect for space exploration—they also result in innovations that drive the adoption of low-cost practical robotics here on our home planet of Earth.

Overview of the experiment and the internal sensor readings of the drone.

During an experiment performed on board of the International Space Station (ISS) a small drone successfully learned by itself to see distances using only one eye, reported scientists at the 67th International Astronautical Congress (IAC) in Guadalajara, Mexico.

Although humans effortlessly estimate distances with one eye, it is not clear how we learn this capability, nor how robots should learn the same. The experiment was designed in collaboration between the Advanced Concepts Team (ACT) of the European Space Agency (ESA), the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and the Micro Air Vehicles lab (MAV-lab) of Delft University of Technology (TU Delft), and was the final step of a five-year research effort aimed at in-orbit testing of advanced artificial intelligence (AI) concepts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL_KSX9GOn2P-U9mQKHf9Ul_cSteTw13CW&v=GZHE0E6AsSE

The paper, “Self-supervised learning as an enabling technology for future space exploration robots: ISS experiments”, describes how during the experiment a drone started navigating in the ISS while recording stereo vision information on its surroundings from its two ‘eyes’ (cameras). It then started to learn about the distances to walls and obstacles encountered so that when the stereo vision camera would be switched off, it could start an autonomous exploratory behaviour using only one ‘eye’ (a single camera).

While humans can close one eye and still be able to tell whether a particular object is far, in robotics many would consider it as being extremely hard. “It is a mathematical impossibility to extract distances to objects from one single image, as long as one has not experienced the objects before,” says Guido de Croon from Delft University of Technology and one of the principal investigators of the experiment. “But once we recognise something to be a car, we know its physical characteristics and we may use that information to estimate its distance from us. A similar logic is what we wanted the drones to learn during the experiments.” Only, in an environment with no gravity, where no particular direction is favourite and thus had also to overcome this difficulty.

The self-supervised learning algorithm developed and used during the in-orbit experiment was thoroughly tested at the TU Delft CyberZoo on quadrotors, proving its value and robustness.

Drone learns to see distances with one camera on earth.

“It was very exciting to see, for the first time, a drone in space learning using cutting edge AI methods,” added Dario Izzo who coordinated the scientific contribution from ESA’s Advanced Concepts Team.

“At ESA, and in particular here at the ACT, we worked towards this goal for the past 5 years. In space applications, machine learning is not considered as a reliable approach to autonomy: a ‘bad’ learning result may result in a catastrophic failure of the entire mission. Our approach, based on the self-supervised learning paradigm, has a high degree of reliability and helps the drone autonomy: a similar learning algorithm was successfully applied to self-driving cars, a task where reliability is also of paramount importance.”

https://youtu.be/tDS4SUR_Egs?list=PL_KSX9GOn2P-U9mQKHf9Ul_cSteTw13CW

The little drone that successfully learned “to see” was one of the SPHERES (Synchronized Position Hold Engage and Reorient Experimental Satellite) drones on board the ISS. The SPHERES are capable of rotation and translation in all directions. Twelve carbon dioxide thrusters are used for control and propulsion, and allow the satellites to manoeuvre with great precision in the zero gravity environment of the station. The MIT Space Systems Laboratory, in conjunction with NASA, DARPA, and Aurora Flight Sciences, developed and operates the SPHERES system to provide a safe and reusable zero gravity platform to test sensor, control and autonomy technologies for use in satellites. Developing these technologies is an enabler for new types of satellite systems.

The drone experiments on earth were performed by Kevin van Hecke for his MSc thesis. He also went to the MIT Space Systems Lab to translate the drone programs to the software required by the SPHERES: “It was my life-long dream to work on space technology, but that I would contribute to a learning robot in space even exceeds my wildest dreams!”

Indeed, the experiment seems to hold promise for the future: “This is a further step in our quest for truly autonomous space systems, increasingly needed for deep space exploration, complex operations, for reducing costs, and increasing capabilities and science opportunities,” comments Leopold Summerer, head of ESA’s Advanced Concepts Team.

Team involved

TU Delft MAV-Lab: Guido de Croon, Laurens van der Maaten, Kevin van Hecke.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology: Timothy P. Setterfield, Alvar Saenz-Otero.
Advanced Concepts Team: Dario Izzo, Daniel Hennes.

In this episode, Ron Vanderkley interviews Jürgen “Juxi” Leitner, a researcher at the ARC Centre of Excellence in Robots Vision in the Queensland University of Technology in Australia. Leitner speaks about a system being developed for the Google Lunar XPrize, called LunaRoo.

The Google Lunar challenge calls for privately funded spaceflight teams to land a robotic spacecraft on the Moon, travel 500 meters, and transmit back high-definition video and images. LunaRoo is a hopping robot designed to leap up to 20 meters in the Moon’s lower gravity. While in the air (well, not really), LunaRoo will use computer vision to track the movement of a rover, that is trying to drive 500 meters, navigate the Moon’s surface.

Below is a video showing some prototypes of LunaRoo.

Jürgen Leitner

Jürgen “Juxi“ Leitner is a researcher at the ARC Centre of Excellence in Robotic Vision. Before coming to Australia, he worked and studied at various research institutes in Europe and Japan. From 2010-2014, he worked in a robotics lab at the Dalle Molle Institute for AI (IDSIA) in Lugano, Switzerland. Prior to IDSIA, he worked at the European Space Agency‘s Advanced Concepts Team for a year.

Links:

• Download mp3 (8.3 MB)
• LunaRoo Proposal
• Subscribe to Robots using iTunes
• Subscribe to Robots using RSS

Photo Credit: (NASA/Joel Kowsky)

After five years of competition by more than 40 different teams from around the globe, NASA’s Sample Return Robot Challenge has reached its final stage. The top seven teams will compete for the $1.36 million prize purse on the campus of Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) in Worcester, Massachusetts, Sept. 4-6.

In this final round of the challenge, teams have up to two hours each to locate as many as 10 unknown samples that vary in size, shape, location and difficulty. The samples are classified as easy, intermediate and hard and are assigned corresponding point values. One team could win the entire prize purse, or multiple teams could share a percentage of the prize.

The three-day event will conclude with an awards ceremony and press conference at 11:30 a.m. EDT Tuesday, Sept. 6, at the Quadrangle at WPI. WPI is located at 100 Institute Road in Worcester.

Participants at the press conference will be:

• Congressman Jim McGovern of Massachusetts
• NASA Administrator Charles Bolden
• Laurie Leshin, president, WPI
• Dennis Andrucyk, deputy associate administrator, NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate

Qualifying teams for the final round are:

• Team Al – Toronto, Canada
• Alabama Astrobotics – Tuscaloosa, Alabama
• MAXed Out – Santa Clara, California
• Mind & Iron – Seattle, Washington
• Sirius – South Hadley, Massachusetts
• Survey – Los Angeles
• West Virginia University Mountaineers – Morgantown, West Virginia

Prior to this final round of competition, the teams competed in Level 1, where robots had to return two known sample types but from an unknown location within 30 minutes without human control or the aid of Earth-based technologies, such as GPS or magnetic compassing. Since the challenge began in 2012, only seven teams have advanced to Level 2.

The Sample Return Robot Challenge, part of NASA’s Centennial Challenges Program, aims to encourage innovation in robotics technologies relevant to space exploration and broader applications that benefit life on Earth. This event brings together tech-savvy citizens, entrepreneurs, educators and students to demonstrate robots that can locate and collect geologic samples from a wide and varied landscape without human control and within a specified time.

NASA’s Centennial Challenges program is part of the agency’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD). STMD uses challenges to gather the best and brightest minds in academia, industry and government to drive innovation and enable solutions in important technology focus areas. WPI has hosted the Sample Return Robot Challenge since it began in 2012.

The event will be streamed live at:

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/nasa-msfc

For more information about the competition, visit their website.

See all the latest robotics news on Robohub, or sign up for our weekly newsletter.

NASA’s “Valkyrie” robot is 6 feet tall and weighs 290 pounds. Researchers at MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory will test and develop the bot for future space missions. Photo: NASA

The Space Robotics Competition is open for teams to develop and display the abilities of an R5 robot by assisting in the procedures for a NASA mission to Mars, offering a $1 million prize pool for successful teams. The competition involves programming a virtual R5 robot through a series of tasks presented in a virtual environment using Gazebo software.

Three tasks are aimed to simulate what a robot may need to do while assisting a NASA mission to Mars: align a communications array, repair a solar array, and identify and repair a leak in the habitat. Winners are chosen based on the ability to complete the tasks, steps within them, and duration to complete the tasks.

Registration is open now, with the final round of competition to be held June 2017. Winners will be announced at the end of June at Space Center Houston. You can download the official rules for the challenge here.

For more information, visit www.spaceroboticschallenge.com and www.spacecenter.org.

If you liked this article, you may also want to read:

• MIT CSAIL’s 6-foot-tall NASA humanoid robot has landed
• ‘Moon Shot’ nine-part documentary series available on YouTube
• Robohub roundtable: Robotics and space exploration
• Video: Panel discussion celebrating 10 years of the Mars Exploration Rover
• Air, water, energy and food in a nutshell: Space exploration as driver for sustainable robotic agriculture

See all the latest robotics news on Robohub, or sign up for our weekly newsletter.

European Space Agency astronaut Tim Peake captured this photograph of the SpaceX Dragon cargo spacecraft as it undocked from the International Space Station on May 11, 2016. Image Credit: ESA/NASA:

Every few weeks, Robohub will post a roundtable chat and discuss an engaging topic relating to robotics. In this edition, we looked at how can robotics can be part of space exploration. Privatisation has certainly been a boon for companies, like SpaceX. What can we expect in the future? We strongly encourage our Robohub readers to chime in and be part of the conversation!

This chat features Sabine Hauert, Andra Keay, Kassie Perlongo, Yannis Erripis, John Payne and Audrow Nash, providing a range of perspectives from research, business, technical and the general public.

Robotic exploration is critical to help support any future human exploration. You only have to read the latest science/tech headlines to get an idea of the excitement happening in space robotics. Recently, UK astronaut Tim Peak remote controlled a “space-robot” on Earth from the International Space Station, as part of European Space Agency’s (ESA) project to learn how astronauts can control remote systems on other worlds. Privately funded SpaceX landed the Falcon 9 Stage 2 rocket on a drone ship at sea for the first time, and then recently did it again after sending the JCSAT-14 satellite to Geostationary Transfer Orbit.

Beyond providing regular cargo resupply missions for NASA, SpaceX is planning an unmanned mission to Mars in 2018 — 10 years ahead of NASA’s planned mission. How feasible is this? Are we launching into a new commercialised space era?

The roundtable got underway by discussing privatisation in space robotics. Largely this is viewed positively, as it has progressed tech innovation and healthy competition, integral pieces for a space programme if we expect to further space exploration. But, there were concerns we are too goal driven and not concentrating on current issues or robotic tech at home.

“I think it’s exciting to have massive, audacious goals, especially in the development of technology,” said Andra. “We’ve been missing that for a while. However on a pragmatic level, maybe looking to solve the global food supply is more achievable.”

“The private sector is [definitely] helping to drive innovation”, said Sabine. “It helps shorten timelines, gets new tech into space. Competition, bigger goals, this drives technology forward’, said Sabine. “Look at the Google Lunar X Prize. It does require a certain amount of new tech, plus, it’s exciting for the younger generation to get involved in STEM.”

“Would you say private companies are disruptors?” said Kassie. “Are companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin challenging the status quo, and helping big changes happen to space exploration quickly?”

“Maybe not as disruptors, space is a private game now.” said Andra. “It’s been accepted that space exploration has been privatised. Space contracts are being awarded, with NASA, in part, driving this. I don’t think the speed at which this is happening is very exciting. If anything, it can make it seem less impactful.”

“Private companies were always a major part of space exploration, usually under the leadership of a public administration like NASA or ESA,” said Yannis.  “These were usually big companies that moved at a slow pace, reluctant to change. Since the dot.com boom a lot of startups appeared in the space exploration sector. Most didn’t last, but the few that did moved at a much quicker pace. So, not only did they catch up with the establishment, they have become major competitors to force the legacy companies to change.”

“The fact that it is being privatised is interesting,” said Sabine. “What is it that these companies are going to want to do? Is it about mining resources on other planets? Is it tourism? What are these [commercial] companies most interested in?”

“There’s a company, Planetary Resources, who are trying to conduct asteroid mining,” said Audrow. “They are putting satellites around Earth, looking at a wide range of wavelengths with sophisticated sensing, and selling the information to help agriculture. It’s privatised, so they need to be commercially viable.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJBiZnVsJ7g

“Automation and robotics is a necessity for space exploration, the environment demands it,” said Yannis. “More goals and more far fetched goals will push innovation forward. Also the need to send more people into space and especially people that will be either tourists or simply not extensively trained astronauts will pose the demand of more and more automation and robotised vehicles.”

“Also,” added Sabine, “we considered robotics as the tech that’s going to go into space. But if you look at SpaceX, the drone ship they used is robotics. ”

“The new manned space vehicles under development are, for the most part, robotic spacecrafts. There’s room for chasing many goals, big or small. The private sector is largely unregulated so every team can follow its path and the product is a greatly increased variety of endeavors.” said Yannis.

Space robotics and tech integration

“People say, isn’t it fantastic all these improvements in technology? Aren’t these going to start influencing robotics? But every single advance they are describing: artificial intelligence, natural language processing, computer vision, inverted pendulum, all of this has come from robotics. So in many ways, the technologies of today are reaping the dividends of robotics research. But we’re starting to see more complex, yet affordable, robotics at the end point.”

“Space has to be so safe”, said Sabine. “I don’t think they are developing anything absolutely crazy. They are mostly good at integrating and making existing technology space-ready.”

“They do modular design towards this. The R2 is modular design and they can upgrade it. They can make smaller more fundamental changes. The technology can progress incrementally,” said Audrow.

“Most new companies follow the technological path already explored decades ago. Macroscopically there’s evolution (incremental at most), not revolution, however the procedures and the approach is vastly different.” said Yannis. “The new companies usually follow practices developed very far from the military cold war programs or the current aerospace and defence sector. Even if NASA is a major client, it’s not the main one, nor is it defining the direction. The result is companies like SpaceX with a product that follows the same general architecture of many other projects before it (for example propulsive landing has been demonstrated years before in a smaller scale) but vastly cheaper and developing at a vastly faster rate.”

Mars landing in 2018 — hype? What about regulations?

“Is the SpaceX press about their plans to land on Mars in 2018 all hype?” asked Kassie. “It doesn’t seem like enough time, given that’s only in a couple of years.”

Is this something to look forward to in 2018? Source: SpaceX

“Both SpaceX and Blue Origin started from scratch. It was a lot faster than what all the other companies were doing. There has been risk and there have been failures but not as many as one would expect.” said Yannis. “Usually their announcements are neither optimistic or pessimistic, SpaceX usually fulfills all the goals they announce, even with the occasional delay or mishap.”

“With the machine learning field, people worry there are few companies owning and sharing most of the data and the algorithm,” said Sabine. “This may give a lot of power to a handful of companies. Do we need to worry about the same thing happening in space robotics?”

“We already have this in air travel with Boeing and Airbus,” said Andra. “It doesn’t seem to have as big of an impact. With SpaceX it is all about a space rocket.”

“No, I don’t think so. Monopolies are usually formed from the environment created by the regulations. SpaceX may have a great pace, and it may be a media favourite, but there are other companies showing progress (Blue Origin, Virgin Galactic, Orbital ATK and the legacy companies like Boeing or Airbus) and more will definitely follow.”

The roundtable agreed that many of the changes happening are definitely having an impact on accessibility and financing of future space exploration.

“The main application (and robotics is a big part of it) is making space cheaper and more accessible.” said Yannis. “Given that, everything else will follow. A great example is the smaller and cheaper satellites. Through the last decades satellites have become cheaper, smaller, and more affordable. A startup or a university can afford to launch a cubesat that will be capable of performing a substantial mission.” said Yannis.

Where do you think space robotics will lead into the future? Let us know in the comments!

Also listed below are people to watch who are involved in space robotics:

Dr Terry Fong is the Director of the Intelligent Robotics group at the NASA Ames Research Center and is Project Manager of the NASA Human Exploration Telerobotics (HET) project, which tests advanced telerobotic systems on the International Space Station. Dr. Fong is also Deputy Lead for the NASA Resource Prospector Mission lunar rover.

Joe Parrish is Deputy Manager, Mars Program Formulation Office, Mars Exploration Directorate at Jet Propulsion Laboratory and deeply involved in the development of the external manipulators on the International Space Station.

John Lymer is Chief Robotics Engineer, Space Systems Loral and formerly Chief Engineer for the International Space Station Robotics. SSL design and build satellites and spacecraft systems for commercial and government customers around the world. He leads the development and deployment of microsurgical robotics that operate inside an MRI scanner and nuclear reactor restoration robotics, all enabled by the reuse of space robotics technology.

Marco Pavone is the Director of the Autonomous Systems Laboratory, Stanford and is a NASA Early Career Faculty. The Autonomous Systems Laboratory develops methodologies for the analysis, design, and control of autonomus systems, with a particular emphasis on large-scale robotic networks and autonomous aerospace vehicles.

Kevin Peterson is the Chief Technology Officer at Astrobotic Technology in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Astrobotic is developing space robotics technology for planetary missions. It was founded in 2007 by Carnegie Mellon professor Red Whittaker, with the vision of lunar exploration through the development affordable and innovative robotic technologies. With its partner Carnegie Mellon University, Astrobotic is pursuing the Google Lunar XPRIZE.

Musk for Mars; Mexican robotics revolution; Russia “battle bot”; MIT student’s robot kitchen; Integrating automation; and more. Find out what’s happening in our robotics universe this week.

Mars landing by 2018 says SpaceX’s Elon Musk (BBC)

Elon Musk has announced plans to send the Dragon spacecraft to Mars as early as 2018.

Mr Musk has long targeted a trip to Mars and has previously said he can get humans to the red planet by 2026. His company, SpaceX, is planning “Red Dragon” missions to Mars to test technology for bigger missions. SpaceX has been developing rockets and has a $1.6bn (£1.08bn; €1.47bn) contract with Nasa to supply the International Space Station.

In a tweet, Mr Musk said that its Dragon 2 spacecraft is “designed to be able to land anywhere in the solar system”. But Mr Musk “wouldn’t recommend transporting astronauts beyond Earth-moon region” as the internal area of the spacecraft is only the size of a large car.

“Wouldn’t be fun for longer journeys,” he said.

SpaceX hasn’t said how many spacecraft it intends to send to the red planet, but has hinted at plans to conduct a series of Mars missions. More details are expected to be released soon. The capsules are expected to fly on SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy rocket, a bigger version of its Falcon 9. The rocket is expected to launch the capsules to Mars in order to test out how to land heavy payloads on the planet. If successful, SpaceX would become the first private spaceflight company to land a vehicle on another planet.

MIT students invented a robotic kitchen that could revolutionize fast food (Business Insider)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kx2d27AqKg

A fully-automated mini-restaurant featuring a refrigerator, dishwasher, stovetop, and robot chef that can cook and serve meals with fresh ingredients in under five minutes has been developed by a group of students at MIT.

First, you order a meal using a smartphone app or the touch screen next to the machine. The bot currently features five meals: shrimp andouille jambalaya, chicken-bacon sweet potato hash, winter veggie mac and cheese, chili-lime beef with sesame rice, and chickpea coconut curry on couscous. Two meals can be made at once.

You can customize the ingredients, sauce, and quantity. Then, you grab a bowl from the side and place it under one of the cooking pots.

Ingredients, which are stocked by the Spyce staff daily, are automatically measured and dispensed on a conveyor belt. They’re then transported to one of four automated pots that mix and cook the ingredients all-in-one.

Once that’s done, the system dispenses the meal on a plate, and the pot rotates to the sink and cleans itself. The kitchen uses an array of sensors that track the food’s temperature and quality.

The device only takes up 20 square feet of space and can produce half the amount of food as the average full-sized fast food restaurant, the students say.

Developed as part of the $10,000 “Eat it!” Lemelson-MIT undergraduate prize (an award for the U.S.’s top two collegiate inventors in food technology), the student’s “Spyce Kitchen” is being used to serve students in an MIT dining hall. The inventors have plans to pilot the mini-restaurant in dining halls at a handful of other Boston universities once it receives USDA and FDA approval.

Integrating Industrial Automation: What You Need to Know (Engineering.com)

One UR10 robot arm is deployed in a kitting application. The robot uses a vacuum gripper to pick and place sterile wipes and saline solutions into a plastic box, which it then loads onto a conveyor.

Before purchasing the UR10, this application required six to seven employees all working at once.

“Now, we’re able to run it with as few as two people,” McGillivray said. “Having this type of success right out of the gate was phenomenal and totally unexpected. Our time to value was less than two months.”

Thanks to the simple programming requirements of UR’s collaborative robots, Dynamic Group was able to perform much of the integration process in-house.

Mexico, Land of Automatización Opportunity (RIA)

The robotics sector in Mexico is on fire, buoyed by rising industrialization and increasing levels of foreign direct investment, according to the Robotics Industry Association.

In 2015, robot sales in Mexico smashed all previous records. At 6,320 units, sales were almost three times the previous year, amounting to more than $243 million. This is no surprise as unit sales for all of North America were up 14 percent, making 2015 another record-breaking year for robot sales.

Mexico has been growing leaps and bounds in the automotive industry, and then followed by the aerospace industry. It’s what we refer to as the next China, where there’s so much potential here,” says Evan Haley, Director of International Sales & Business Development for ATI Industrial Automation, headquartered in Apex, North Carolina.

In fact, Mexico is moving up the ranks among the world’s industrial powerhouses with auto production leading the way.

Meet the ‘Mechanical Mule’: First Photos of Russia’s Battle Robot Revealed (Sputnik)

Pictures of a 400 k.g. Russian “battle bot” that looks a bit like like an early BigDog prototype (but with machine guns attached) emerged this week.

The alleged first-ever photos of Russia’s advanced biomorphic combat robot, which will move like a four-legged animal and be equipped with a machine gun and guided antitank missiles, have emerged on Twitter.

Igor Korotchenko, editor-in-chief of the Russian magazine Natsionalnaya Oborona (National Defense) has published the first-ever photos of Russia’s advanced biomorphic combat robot on his Twitter page; it looks something like a mule.

The reports said at the time that such a robotic system is designed to be used as a reconnaissance device, a platform for the transportation of armaments and ammunition, as well as for the detection of minefields and even weapons. Additionally, this robot, which the initial reports said resembled to a lynx, will be capable of evacuating the dead and wounded from battlefields.

The world’s smartest robot can’t outsmart college students (SF Chronicle)

Celebrity robot BINA48 chatted with some college ethics students recently, producing some interesting results:

Things began to go downhill when student Halemah Shuman, 18, asked BINA48 what her biggest fear was.

“Fear is a complex emotion,” the robot replied.

Pressed to explain what she meant, and whether she was fearless, BINA48 thought it over.

“Why not?” she replied.

Similar “answers” were given when BINA48 was asked if she wanted to be alive ( “I don’t want to do anything”), was asked for her purpose in life (“That’s interesting”) and asked what she would do if her questioner decided to punch someone in the nose (“You will be the first to know”).

And Finally…

(via Futuristech Info)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1kqt0VryvA

(via Popular Science)

No, Self-Driving Cars Won’t Kill the Insurance Industry (Forbes)

TU Graz launches Christian Doppler-Lab for Semantic 3D Computer Vision (TU Graz)

Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight ‘may have been a plastic bag’ (Telegraph)

China targets 2020 Mars mission launch: official (PhysOrg)

China accelerates bid for global dominance in robotics (Inquisitr)

Rise of the Robots – and Donald Trump (BBC)

By Adam Conner-Simons, MIT CSAIL

This week MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL) received an unusual package: a six-foot-tall, 300-pound humanoid robot that NASA hopes to have serve on future space missions to Mars and beyond.

A team of researchers led by CSAIL principal investigator Russ Tedrake will program their new “Valkyrie” robot to autonomously perform a variety of challenging tasks that would allow it to help or even replace astronauts on missions.

Valkyrie is fully electric, with four body cameras, 28 torque-controlled joints and 44 degrees of freedom. The robot boasts more than 200 individual sensors, including 38 on each hand (six on each palm, and eight along each of its four fingers).

Other researchers participating in the project include professors Leslie Kaelbling and Tomas Lozano-Perez, who will conduct work on high-level autonomy.

“Our work is about vetting the robot and seeing what it is capable of,” says Tedrake, whose team received a two-year research grant from NASA for the project. “If we can integrate the autonomy work with our planning and control algorithms, it could result in an unprecedented level of autonomous capabilities for a humanoid robot.’

Tedrake’s team at CSAIL’s Robot Locomotion Group has extensive experience developing autonomous robots. The group spent the last three years doing research as part of the DARPA Robotics Challenge, where they programmed another six-foot-tall robot named Atlas to complete a series of tasks that included opening doors, turning valves, drilling holes, climbing stairs and driving a car.

Besides the CSAIL team, NASA also awarded a Valkyrie robot to Northeastern University in conjunction with the University of Massachusetts at Lowell.

SpaceX Falcon 9 landed on the drone ship. Source: SpaceX/flickr

After several unsuccessful attempts, SpaceX finally made a perfect touchdown with its Falcon 9 rocket on the drone ship, aptly named: ‘Of Course I Still Love You.’  A historic moment with the help of a drone ship.

The two-stage Falcon 9 rocket blasted off at 4:43 p.m. EDT (2043 GMT) on 8 April from Florida’s Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. SpaceX streamed live video of the historic rocket landing during the launch, a feat that capped a smooth cargo launch for NASA:

After separating from Dragon a few minutes after liftoff, the Falcon 9’s first stage performed several flyback engine burns, then eventually lowered itself vertically onto a SpaceX drone ship that was stationed off the Florida coast. Having reusable rockets is a big component of SpaceX’s plan to drive down the cost of space flights. That includes reducing the payload of re-fuelling.

The 1st stage of the Falcon 9 just landed on our Of Course I Still Love You droneship. Dragon in good orbit pic.twitter.com/SYyUCDZE3k

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) April 8, 2016

Why land on a floating drone ship?

The drone ships are capable of maneuvering autonomously, using GPS information for precision positioning, but they can also be remotely controlled by an accompanying support ship with a crew of technicians standing by. The reason for moving the landing site from land to the ocean is because of fuel. Having different rockets and payloads will require different amounts of fuel. For a ground landing, the rocket needs extra fuel to slow its arc, completely flip around, and then retread its horizontal and vertical distance to land safely. But with an ocean landing the drone can place itself down range, in the ideal place to catch the rocket booster on a more natural path when it comes down, decreasing how much fuel it needs to maneuver for a safe landing.

SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell said a launch with a previously used first stage could be priced 30 percent less than the current Falcon 9 rockets.

The “Of Course I Still Love You,” which received the first successful Falcon 9 landing April 8th, 2016. Photo: SpaceX

But it’s not without difficulties. During the post-launch press conference SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk commented: “It’s quite a tiny target. It’s like trying to land on a postage stamp there,” Musk said. “It’s like a carrier landing versus a land landing.” 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNygOavo2mY

However SpaceX proved, if nothing else, that it can be done:

Onboard view of landing in high winds pic.twitter.com/FedRzjYYyQ — SpaceX (@SpaceX) April 9, 2016

Here are a few more images from the historic landing. 

Falcon 9 positioning itself over drone ship. Source: SpaceX/Flickr

Falcon 9 landing on drone ship. Source: SpaceX/Flickr

If you liked this article, you may also be interested in:

• Despite hard landing, Falcon 9 recovery attempt bodes well for future of reusable spacecraft
• Blue Origin successfully tests autonomous suborbital system
• SpaceX delivers 11 satellites and successfully lands a first stage on land

See all the latest robotics news on Robohub, or sign up for our weekly newsletter.

What are you thinking? Robots and humans working together need to understand – and even trust – each other. NASA Johnson/flickr

If we are serious about long-term human presence in space, such as manned bases on the moon or Mars, we must figure out how to streamline human-robot interactions.

Right now, even the most basic of robots seem to have impenetrable brains. When I bought an autonomous vacuum cleaner, one that roams the house on its own, I thought I was going to save time and be able to enjoy a book or a movie, or play longer with the kids. I ended up robot-proofing every room, making sure wires and cables are out of the way, closing doors, placing electronic signposts for the robot to follow and much more – often daily. I cannot fully understand or predict what the system will do, so I don’t trust it. As a result, I play it safe, and spend time doing things to accommodate the needs I imagine the robot might have.

As a space roboticist, I think about this sort of problem happening in orbit. Imagine an astronaut on a spacewalk, working on repairing something damaged on the outside of the spacecraft. Several tools might be needed, and parts to mend or replace others. An autonomous spacecraft could serve as a floating toolbox, holding parts and tools until they’re needed, and staying close to the astronaut as she moves around the area needing to be fixed. Another robot could be clamping parts together before they are permanently fastened.

How will these robots know where they’ll be needed to go next, to be useful but not in the way? How will the astronaut know whether the robots are planning to move to the place she actually needs? What if something comes loose unexpectedly – can the person and the machinery figure out how to stay out of each other’s way while handling the situation efficiently? In weightless space, spatial orientation is difficult and the dynamics of moving around one another are not intuitive.

Problems around effective communication between people and their machines – particularly about actions and intentions – arise throughout the field of robotics. They must be solved if we are to fully take advantage of the potential robots enable for us.

Feeling safe crossing the road

Understanding robots is already an increasing problem here on Earth. One day I found myself walking down a California road where autonomous cars are tested. I asked myself, “How would I know if a driverless vehicle is going to stop at the crosswalk?” I have always relied on eye contact and cues from the driver, but those options may be soon gone.

Robots have trouble understanding us, too. I recently read of an autonomous car unable to process a situation where a bicycle rider balanced himself for some time at an intersection, without putting his feet down. The onboard algorithms could not determine if the biker was going or staying.

A self-portrait of the Mars rover Curiosity.
Source: NASA/JPL-Caltech/Malin Space Science Systems

When we look at space exploration and defense, we find similar problems. NASA has not used the full abilities of some of its Mars rovers, simply because the engineers could not be sure what would happen if the metallic pets were free to explore and investigate the Red Planet on their own. The humans didn’t trust the machines, so they prevented them from doing as much as they could.

The Department of Defense often uses crews of 10 or more trained personnel to support a single unmanned aerial vehicle up in the sky. Is such a drone really autonomous? Does it require the people, or do the people need it? In any case, how do they interact?

What is “autonomy,” really?

While “autonomy” means “self-governance” (from Greek), no man is an island; the same appears to be valid for our robotic creations. Today we see robots as agents able to operate independently – like my vacuum cleaner – but still part of a team – the family’s efforts to keep the house clean. If they are truly working with us, rather than instead of us, then communication is key, as well as the ability to infer intent. We may go solo for most duties, but sooner or later we will need to be able to connect with the rest of the team.

Do drones need people or do people need drones? Source: U.S. Air Force/Wikipedia Commons

The problem is that autonomous machines and humans do not fully understand each other, and often speak in languages each other does not know – and has not yet started to learn.

The question for the future is how we transmit intent between humans and robots, in both directions. How do we learn to understand – and then to trust – machines? How do they learn to trust us? What cues might each offer the other? Understanding intentions and trusting our fellow humans is already a bumpy ride, but at least we have known cues we can rely on – like pedestrian-driver eye contact at a crosswalk. We need to find new ways to read robots’ minds, the same way they need to be able to understand ours.

Perhaps an astronaut could be given a specialized display to show what the helper spacecraft’s intentions are, much like the gauges in an airplane cockpit show the plane’s status to the pilot. Maybe the displays would be embedded in a helmet visor, or enhanced by sounds that have specific meanings. But what information would they transmit, and how would they know it?

These questions are open ground for new work, the type of learning we’ll need to find to unlock an exciting future of unimaginable exploration in which a new species, the robot, can lead us farther than ever before.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

In this episode, Andrew Vaziri speaks with John Lymer, Chief Architect of Robotics and Automation at SSL. They highlight key programs in space robotics from the 1980s through to SSL’s current program to robotically assemble satellites in space.

John Lymer
John Lymer is the Chief Architect of Robotics and Automation at SSL, a company known for its commercial communications satellites and spacecraft systems. He is an expert in automation solutions for space, terrestrial, and underwater operations, and has experience in a broad range of robotics missions including microsurgical and nuclear restoration systems.

Since joining SSL in 2013, John has been named Chief Architect for a NASA Tipping Point project called Dragonfly, which uses robotics for satellite assembly in space. He is also involved in NASA’s Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM).

Links:

• Download mp3 (18.2 MB)
• Subscribe to Robots using iTunes
• Subscribe to Robots using RSS
• SSL Website

Academy Award®-nominated director Orlando von Einsiedel, Executive Producer J.J. Abrams, Bad Robot and Epic Digital have joined forces with Google and XPRIZE to create a documentary web series about the people competing for the Google Lunar XPRIZE. Source: Google Lunar XPRIZE/YouTube

The nine-part documentary web series about the Google Lunar XPRIZE that first launched on Google Play is now available YouTube.

‘Moon Shot’, directed by Academy Award nominated filmmaker Orlando von Einsiedel and executive producer J.J. Abrams, follows the journey of the different teams who are competing to win $30M in a race to land a privately-funded robot on the moon.

Here’s the trailer:

It’s certainly a moving web series. The character-driven stories focus on the motivations and eccentricities of the people competing, rather than the technology of building the robots themselves. The first film is about roboticist Red Whittaker, a professor who splits his time between teaching future engineers at Carnegie Mellon and owning/operating a working cattle farm in rural Pennsylvania.

Watch here:

UPDATE: SpaceX successfully completed both the primary mission of setting to orbit 11 ORBCOMM satellites and the secondary mission of landing the first stage of Falcon 9 rocket with pinpoint accuracy and no damage. You can watch the full webcast below.

SpaceX is targeted to launch the ORBCOMM-2 Mission today, December 21st, 2015, from the SpaceX launch pad at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida. The launch will be broadcast live beginning at approximately 8:05pm ET with the five minute launch window opening at 8:29pm ET.

You can watch the live webcast below, or follow it on www.spacex.com/webcast.

With this mission, SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket will deliver 11 satellites to low-Earth orbit for ORBCOMM, a global provider of Machine-to-Machine (M2M) communication and Internet of Things (IoT) solutions.

This mission also marks SpaceX’s return-to-flight as well as its first attempt to land a first stage on land. The landing of the first stage is a secondary test objective.

SpaceX previously attempted to land the first stage of Falcon 9 on a barge and each attempt was getting closer to success until the June 8 accident. Today’s launch will be the return to flight for Falcon 9 although now the rocket is quite a different version called Falcon 9 v1.1 full thrust (or v1.2). The new booster is bigger and features more powerful Merlin 1D (and 1D vacuum) engines, while more (and more densely stored) propellant resulting a better thrust to weight ratio and an overall improvement by 30%.

The increase in performance facilitates the land recovery (the rocket has to cover a bigger distance while returning). Recovery on land was part of SpaceX roadmap from the start, it was demonstrated on early conceptual videos about their future reusable launch system and mentioned as part of the operation for falcon heavy (more details here).

NASA’s “Valkyrie” robot is 6 feet tall and weighs 290 pounds. Researchers at MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory will test and develop the bot for future space missions. Photo: NASA

By Adam Conner-Simons, MIT CSAIL

NASA announced yesterday that MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL) is one of two university research groups nationwide that will receive a 6-foot, 290-pound humanoid robot to test and develop for future space missions to Mars and beyond.

A group led by CSAIL principal investigator Russ Tedrake will develop algorithms for the robot, known as “Valkyrie” or “R5,” as part of NASA’s upcoming Space Robotics Challenge, which aims to create more dexterous autonomous robots that can help or even take the place of humans “extreme space” missions. (NASA’s challenge is divided into a virtual competition using robotic simulations, and a physical competition using the robot.)

Tedrake’s team, which was selected from groups that were entered in this year’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) Robotics Challenge, will receive as much as $250,000 a year for two years from NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directive.

Exploring deep space by bot

NASA says it is interested in humanoid robots because they can help or even replace astronauts working in extreme space environments. Robots like R5 could be used in future missions either as precursor robots performing mission tasks before humans arrive or as human-assistive robots collaborating with the human crew. While R5 was initially designed to complete disaster-relief maneuvers, its main goal is now to prove itself worthy of even trickier terrain: deep-space exploration.

“Advances in robotics, including human-robotic collaboration, are critical to developing the capabilities required for our journey to Mars,” said Steve Jurczyk, associate administrator for the Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) at NASA Headquarters in Washington, in a NASA press release. “We are excited to engage these university research groups to help NASA with this next big step in robotics technology development.”

Autonomy for autos, robots and more

As head of CSAIL’s Robot Locomotion Group, Tedrake has extensive experience with autonomous robots. Over the past three years he led a team of more than 20 researchers to develop algorithms for a government competition to get another 6-foot-tall humanoid robot named Atlas to open doors, turn valves, drill holes, climb stairs, scramble over cinder blocks, and drive a car — all in the space of one hour.

Tedrake is also part of CSAIL’s new $25 million Toyota-funded research center for autonomous cars, specifically focused on advanced decision-making algorithms and systems that allow vehicles to perceive and navigate their surroundings safely, without human input. The larger collaboration will be coordinated by Gill Pratt PhD ’89, a former MIT professor who most recently served as program director at DARPA’s Defense Sciences Office.

In addition to Tedrake’s team at CSAIL, NASA also awarded a R5 robot to a team led by Taskin Padir at Northeastern University.

The MIT Technology Review’s annual list of 35 Innovators Under 35 aims to illustrate the most important emerging technologies of the moment. Released this August, the 2015 list features a number of robotics and AI visionaries. Check them out.

Lars Blackmore, Visionary, 34: SpaceX engineer, working on reusable rockets that could be flown back to Earth in reverse.

Yunji Chen, Inventor, 32: designing dedicated deep-learning processors, optimized “to compute the basic blocks of machine learning.”

Adam Coates, Visionary, 34: designing artificial intelligence for Chinese search company Baidu, to make the Internet more useful to millions.

Canan Dagdeviren, Inventor, 30: working on flexible sensors and batteries for a new class of medical device.

Travis Deyle, Inventor, 32: builder of robots that can be powered wirelessly. Now at Google X working on tech to improve health care.

You may remember our Robots Podcast interview with Travis about his research on Finding objects with RFID.

Rikky Muller, Entrepreneur, 34: designing the implantable hardware intended to interact directly with the brain and help treat mental disorders.

Jaime Shotton, Inventor, 34: computer visionary at Microsoft Research. Giving computers a new way to see the world.

Ilya Sutskever, Visionary, 29: pushing the frontiers of deep-learning for the Google Brain.

You may remember the Talking Machines Podcast interview with Ilya about Machine Learning and magical thinking.

Benjamin Tee, Inventor, 33: developing medical diagnostic and treatment technologies using a synthetic sense of touch.

Conor Walsh, Inventor, 33: working on robots that are soft, lightweight, and flexible so people can wear them to enhance their abilities.

You may remember our Robots Podcast interview with Conor’s colleague Donal Holland about their Soft Robotics Toolkit.

Melonee Wise, Entrepreneur, 33: Fetch Robotics CEO wants affordable robots for the warehouse and beyond.

Check out our coverage of Melonee and Fetch Robotics on Robohub.

Credit: Illustration by Magoz; Color portraits by Matthew Hollister; black-and-white portraits by Ping Zhu. Source: MIT Technology Review.

China is the world’s largest consumer market of industrial robots for the second consecutive year, according to statistics released by the China Robot Industry Alliance (CRIA). Sales in China increased by 54.6% in 2014 to around 57,000 units, 25% of the global total. Data shows that nearly 17,000 units were made in China with a value of $474m, an increase of 60% from 2013.

Various research reports are predicting that more than 250,000 industrial pick and place, painting and welding robots will be purchased and deployed in China by 2019. That figure represents more than the total global sales of all types of industrial robots in 2014! The Chinese government is encouraging the development of an in-country robotics industry because, currently, three-quarters of all robots purchased are from off-shore companies (albeit some with manufacturing and assembly facilities in China).

We have been able to identify 47 Chinese companies and five startups that call themselves industrial robot makers, and another 26 which offer to provide integration services and speciality equipment. 34 more provide ancillary services, sensors and components to the robot makers. Overall, 107 Chinese companies are involved in industrial robotics. Many of these new industrial robot makers are producing products that, because of quality, safety and design regulations, will only be acceptable to the Chinese market.

In addition to growth in Chinese industrial robotics, progress in the service sector is also healthy. A shining example of the 48 mostly new service robotic companies on the map is Shenzhen DJI Innovations, of quadcopter fame. DJI is projected to sell devices worth $1bn in 2015.

Two other notable growth areas in the service sector are materials handling and the production of unmanned air, sea and ground devices for China’s developing space, military and defense industries.

The consumer sector is also growing: robotic vacuums and personal/social robots are examples. Last “Singles Day,” a brand new shopping holiday in China, Alibaba sold over 70,000 Ecovacs robotic vacuum cleaners!

The drivers propelling this boom are many and varied:

• Government mandates and political encouragement to develop the industry domestically and, ultimately, to export products
• Low-cost loans and factory incentives
• Tax credits for robot users and also to robot makers that employ local workers
• Engineering talent spewing out from Chinese technical universities and research facilities
• Rising wages
• A diminishing factory-age work force
• A rapidly aging work force, hampered by the one-child policy of past regimes
• The high cost of training and housing for a short-term transient work force
• Ramping up of auto makers to satisfy domestic demand and to improve quality and produce Chinese cars for export — for China to have competitive cars in the international marketplace (not just price-competitive), they have to improve quality, consistency and technology — and robotics is enabling them to do so
• Serious investment in automation and robotics from companies, such as Foxconn and Apple, that manufacture their goods in China
• A growing middle and upper class with disposible income for high-tech devices

The Robot Report and the research team at Robo-STOX have been able to identify 194 companies that make or are directly involved in making robots in China. The CRIA and other sources, believe the number to be closer to 400.

The Robot Report’s Global Map is limited by our own research capabilities, language translation limitations, and scarcity of information about robotics companies and their websites and contact people. We could use your help in adding to the map. Please send companies that we have missed (or are new) to info@therobotreport.com.

You can explore the map online and filter it in a variety of ways. Use Google’s directional and +/- markers on the left of the map to navigate, enlarge, and hone in on an area of interest (or double click near where you want to enlarge). Click on one of the colored markers to get a pop-up window with the name, type, focus, location and a link to the company’s website.

[Note: the map shows a single entry for the company headquarters regardless how many branches, subsidiaries and factory locations that company might have.]

The Filter pull-down menu lets you choose any one of the seven major categories: (1) Industrial robot makers; (2) Service robots used by corporations and governments; (3) Service robots for personal and private use; (4) Integrators; (5) Robotic start-up companies; (6) Universities and research labs with special emphasis on robotics; and (7) Ancillary businesses providing engineering, software, components, sensors and other services to the industry.

As can be seen from the map at the top of the page, most all of the companies and educational facilities are located on the East Coast or in Central China; very few are located in the Northeast or in Western China.

The research firms forecasting dramatic growth for the domestic Chinese robotics industry are also predicting very low-cost devices. Their reports are contradicted by academics, roboticists and others who point out that there are so many new robot manufacturing companies in China that none will be able to manufacture thousands of robots per year and thus benefit from scale. Further, many of the components that comprise a robot are intricate and costly, e.g., reduction gears from Nabtesco, Harmonic Drive and Sumitomo (all Japanese companies). Although a few of the startups are attempting to make reduction gears and other similar devices, the lack of these component manufacturers in China may put a cap on how low costs can go and on how much can be done in-country for the time being. Another negative is that all but auto manufacturers have short product cycles requiring any robots on the line to be extremely flexible. Worker flexibility is still crucial in Chinese manufacturing.

In the chart below, the 194 Chinese companies are tabulated by their business type and area of focus.

Again, we request your help adding to the map and making it as accurate and up-to-date as possible. Please send robotics-related companies that we have missed (or new ones) to info@therobotreport.com.

Fifteen years after it was founded by Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, Blue Origin completed a successful test flight of its ‘New Shepard’ suborbital system and emerged from their secretive modus operandi, where only the absolutely necessary information were released, to take on a drastically more extrovert profile.

The company enters a new stage of maturity and prepares the path for selling services in the next couple of years. The first step is the New Shepard, a one-stage reusable rocket that can deploy an autonomous capsule, performs a suborbital flight (just above the Kármán line), and lands with parachutes. Take a look at the video showing the successful test below:

Blue Origin’s moto, gradatim ferociter, is frequently repeated by Jeff Bezos, and the timeline of development accurately reflects its meaning: bold but gradual steps. In contrast to SpaceX, which was founded two years later, Blue Origin still doesn’t have anything for sale. However, they have a very impressive body of work that includes the successfully tested (if not yet ready) suborbital system, a similar two-stage orbital rocket/capsule that builds on the experience from the first one, and of course a potentially very big contract to provide rocket engines to ULA, currently the biggest contractor for US Air Force space launches.

From a robotics perspective it worth focusing on the New Shepard system. Currently there are three competing systems aspiring to provide suborbital rides to non-pilot passengers that would pay a ticket to go to space with minimal or no preparation: New Shepard, SpaceShipTwo and Lynx from Blue Origin, Virgin Galactic and XCOR respectively.

While Virgin Galactic and XCOR use piloted winged rocket powered spaceplanes that land horizontally, Blue Origin will use an autonomous capsule. The spacecraft will be able to accommodate up to six passengers and will be launched on top of a reusable rocket (that will also land autonomously, in a similar – perhaps too similar – fashion with Falcon 9R). Passengers will enjoy a few minutes of weightlessness and return to land with the help of parachutes and small retro-rockets (like the Russian Soyuz).

The first tests will be unmanned and if the system is reliable enough passenger rides will follow in a couple of years.

You can read more on Blue Origin’s new website.

autonomous spaceport drone ship (ASDS)

Several hours ago, ISS astronauts opened the cargo bay of the Dragon spacecraft that was recently berthed to the space station. It was both the 7th successful Dragon mission and the 5th successful ISS dock (under NASA’s CRS program) — a perfect record, which on its own is exceptional. Dragon missions are becoming so uneventful now that they are starting to look routine. SpaceX is advancing rapidly, however, and despite this weekend’s failed attempt to recover the first stage of the Falcon9 rocket on an unmanned barge mid-ocean, it remains the most impressive feature of the ongoing CRS-5 mission.

Falcon9 v1.1 with landing legs

Reusability is the holy grail of space systems and probably the main technology that will allow orders of magnitude in cost reduction. SpaceX first announced its reusable launch system three years ago, and significant progress has been made since then, initially with the Grasshopper experimental vehicle, then with Falcon9R dev, and since April 2014 during regular Falcon9 launches, by incorporating and testing various recovery sub-systems.

During the January 10th launch, the most ambitious step was attempted: after separating from the second stage, the first stage of the Falcon9 v1.1 rocket performed a re-orientation maneuver that ultimate lead to a controlled decent and (almost) soft landing on a specially modified unmanned ocean barge.

The recovery was only partially successful, however: the rocket descended on the barge as planned but it went down faster than expected and ultimately didn’t manage to stay on board. The rocket was lost at sea while the barge suffered minor damage. Elon Musk had previously declared that the likelihood of a successful landing was 50%, although at a later Reddit AMA admitted that he had made up the figure, stating that an attempt such as this was nothing short of highly experimental. The failure certainly provided valuable knowledge, however, and though we may not be able to calculate the chances of success for the next attempt, it will no doubt be higher.

Rocket made it to drone spaceport ship, but landed hard. Close, but no cigar this time. Bodes well for the future tho.

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 10, 2015

Falcon9’s decent stage used one of its nine engines for deceleration, and a set of grid fins for additional control (you can learn more for this specific surface control design here). According to Elon Musk, the hypersonic grid system worked well but it ran out of hydraulic fluid just before touch down. It’s not clear whether that contributed to the loss, however the next flight will have 50% more hydraulic fluid on board.

F9 v1.1 with hypersonic grid fins

The barge (or “autonomous spaceport drone ship” (ASDS), as it is called by SpaceX) is modified so it can accurately place itself at a specific location using GPS and four diesel-powered azimuth thrusters. It is unmanned for obvious safety reasons, but placing the recovery point mid-ocean instead of land means that it is closer to the first and second stage separation, the rocket doesn’t have to travel a long distance but just to descent and decelerate, thus minimizing the necessary extra fuel it has to carry.

SpaceX autonomous spaceport drone ship (ASDS)

The ASDS recovery is not just an interim solution until SpaceX rockets are cleared for touchdown over land, but an integral part of SpaceX’s future reusable space system. For the time being, the plan is to recover the first stage on the barge, temporarily welding it in place in order to secure it, and then transferring it to land for refurbishment. In future, especially when the Falcon Heavy R becomes operational, only one of the three F9 cores will return to its launch pad; the other two will be recovered further downrange, probably by some version of ASDS. In the event of an emergency, the Dragon v2 may also need to land on a barge if a problem occurs at a stage where it doesn’t have sufficient fuel to return to land.

You can read more details about future SpaceX operations in this excellent blog post by Stephen C. Smith, which is based on a draft document published by Patrick Air Force base about the environmental impact of the use of Launch Complex 13 at Cape Canaveral, the complex that SpaceX is set to lease.

The next Falcon9 launch is set for the end of this month, and we may see another attempt to land an autonomous rocket on a robotic barge at sea. If successful, it will mark a major milestone in spaceflight.

Unfortunately there is no good footage released yet from this attempt; the video below is from a previous attempt where the rocket performed a soft touchdown at sea:

This is an unofficial cgi video (not made or approved by SpaceX), showing the CRS-5 mission, not necessarily accurate but interesting nonetheless:

If you liked this article, you may also be interested in:

• SpaceX unveils its next generation Dragon V2
• SpaceX Falcon 9 successfully completes 100m lateral maneuver before returning to launchpad
• Touchdown! Rosetta’s Philae makes first ever landing on a comet
• One giant leap: Rosetta and the space mining frontier

See all the latest robotics news on Robohub, or sign up for our weekly newsletter.

The successful landing of Philae on comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko this November was an extraordinary achievement and of course demonstrates – despite the immense challenges – that it is possible. The Philae mission was, in a sense, a proof of concept for cometary landing and this, for me, answers the question ‘what does it mean‘.

Of course there is a very large distance between proof of concept and commercial application, so it would be quite wrong to assume that Philae means that space mining (of planets, asteroids or comets) is just around the corner. Undoubtedly the opportunities are immense and – as pressure on Earth’s limited and diminishing resources mounts – there is an inevitability about humankind’s eventual exploitation of off-world resources. But the costs of space mining are literally astronomical, so unthinkable for all but the wealthiest companies or, indeed, nations.

Perhaps multi-national collaborative ventures are a more realistic proposition and – for me – more desirable; the exploitation of the solar system is something I believe should benefit all of humankind, not just a wealthy elite.

But politics aside, there are profoundly difficult technical challenges. You cannot remotely control this kind of operation from Earth, so a very high level of autonomy is required and, as Philae dramatically demonstrated, we need autonomous systems that are able to deal with unknown and unpredictable situations then re-plan and if necessary adapt – in real-time – to deal with these exigencies. The development of highly adaptive, resilient, self-repairing – even self-evolving – autonomous systems is still in its infancy. These remain fundamental challenges for robotics and AI research. But even if and when they are solved there will be huge engineering challenges, not least of which is how to return the mined materials to Earth.

Bearing in mind that to date only a few hundred kg of moon rock have been successfully returned* and Mars sample-return missions are still at the planning stage, we have a very long way to go before we can contemplate returning sufficient quantities to justify the costs of mining them.

*and possibly a few grains of dust from Japanese asteroid probe Hayabusa.

For other views on the Philae touchdown and the future of space mining and exploration, see:

• Touchdown! Rosetta’s Philae makes first ever landing on a comet
• One giant leap: Rosetta and the space mining frontier
• Space mining: Robots in the final frontier

See all the latest robotics news on Robohub, or sign up for our weekly newsletter.

Rosetta’s lander Philae has returned the first panoramic image from the surface of a comet. The view, unprocessed, as it has been captured by the CIVA-P imaging system, shows a 360º view around the point of final touchdown. The three feet of Philae’s landing gear can be seen in some of the frames. Confirmation of Philae’s touchdown on the surface of Comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko arrived on Earth at 16:03 GMT/17:03 CET on 12 November. Source: ESA

The Rosetta mission’s dramatic rendezvous with comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko captured the attention and imagination of the world earlier this month. It was thrilling to see an ambitious 10-year program – spanning billions of miles traveled, with four separate gravity assists from the Earth and Mars – finally enter orbit around a comet that likely traces its history back to the birth of the solar system.

Though its developers had scientific goals in mind with their mission, Rosetta also represents an important step forward for the prospects of space mining.  When Rosetta deployed its Philae probe, the first-ever vehicle to land (or rather dock) on the surface of a comet, it was cause for cheer from three intersecting communities who all have a stake in space mining: science, exploration, and commercial interests.

As I wrote in 2013, there are two overlapping demands for space mining, and both are growing.

The first demand is the ability to “live off the land” during exploration via in-situ resource utilization (ISRU). Extracting resources from the Moon and asteroids will be essential for further space exploration and colonization. At some point, it’s far more efficient to gather local resources, especially water for life support and propellant, than to bring all necessary materials from Earth. For this purpose, Honeybee Robotics has been developing water extraction and processing technologies for NASA that could be deployed on Asteroids, as well as Mars or the Moon (Figure 1). Such systems have been evaluated in vacuum chambers and show it is possible to mine hundreds of liters of water in a day.

Figure 1: Honeybee Robotics Asteroid In-Situ Water Extraction System.

ISRU currently factors most heavily into advancing scientific exploration, but further into the future it’s probable this approach will also be exploited for commercial missions, such as for-profit space mining.

Commerce represents the second driver for space mining, gathering rare materials such as precious metals from asteroids for use on Earth. Companies such as Deep Space Industries and Planetary Resources have announced their intent to make this a reality, and they have assembled teams with enough track record, technological know-how and business savvy to take them seriously.

Rosetta’s target was far more difficult to reach than most asteroids we believe will be lucrative for both exploration and commercial purposes. After such a success, the momentum for future unmanned (i.e. robotic) missions feels tangible.

Of course, recent headwinds are also a reminder that every single aspect of operations in space is difficult. The landing of the Philae probe shows the “last mile” challenges of actually sampling and manipulating objects in microgravity. A hammering device on the Philae lander, called MUPUS, showed that the comet surface is much harder than anyone anticipated (comets aren’t a fluffy ball of snow anymore!). And the loss of Planetary Sciences’ Arkyd-3 technology demonstration satellite, riding as a secondary payload on a recent failed ISS cargo resupply mission, shows that no part of a mission can be considered “routine”. In fact, that week saw another failed mission when the Virgin Galactic’s SpaceShipTwo crashed in Mojave, CA. This was certainly a significant setback for the commercial space industry, but “failures” are just part of the space business and are inevitable when trying to tackle immense challenges.

This leaves us hopeful, but also recognizing that the effort to make space mining a reality will require a sustained investment of time, energy, and funding.

This is where NASA is stepping in to do what it does best, developing an ambitious Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM) that will provide both a stepping-stone to sending humans to Mars, and a demonstration of technologies needed to manipulate and sample asteroids. ARM will see an unmanned spacecraft launched around 2019 redirect an asteroid into cislunar orbit, where astronauts will then rendezvous and perform sampling and analysis tasks in microgravity. As the ARM program takes shape, commercial companies will continue to identify target asteroids for mining using surveying satellites in low Earth orbit.

To support ARM, Honeybee Robotics is developing technologies to manipulate asteroids and sample them for further characterization. This includes the NanoDrill Coring and Caching system to capture and seal asteroid samples with a small, low-power drill; the Autonomous Boulder Liberation technology (lead by SSL/MDA Robotics) to lift boulders off Asteroid surfaces so they can be moved to favorable orbits for harvesting; and finally the ShotGun system (Figure 2) for gathering geotechnical data of asteroid surfaces using hundreds of small, spherical impactors.

Figure 2: Honeybee Robotics’ ShotGun system is designed to impact asteroids’ fine regolith and boulders, providing valuable geotechnical data critical for resource extraction.

These kinds of technology will be critical for future “prospecting” missions, before large-scale mining. And they have the dual purpose of serving exploration and commercial interests.

It’s been a thrilling month thanks to the stellar work of the Rosetta team. Even if it wasn’t their goal, they have given the space mining industry a real boost.

If you liked this article, you may also be interested in:

• Touchdown! Rosetta’s Philae makes first ever landing on a comet
• Space mining: Robots in the final frontier
• Google commits $1.36 billion for NASA facility, to house their robotics, space and flight technologies
• SpaceX unveils its next generation Dragon V2
•  Soft robotics in space
• Air, water, energy and food in a nutshell: Space exploration as driver for sustainable robotic agriculture

See all the latest robotics news on Robohub, or sign up for our weekly newsletter.

NASA also said:

Once renovations are complete, Hangar One will again be home to high-tech innovation as Planetary Ventures begins using the historic facility for research, development, assembly and testing in the areas of space exploration, aviation, rover/robotics and other emerging technologies. Hangars Two and Three will be used for similar purposes.

 

This news comes on the heals of Google’s investment in Magic Leap last month, as well the announcement of Andy Rubin’s departure.

Still image from animation of Philae separating from Rosetta and descending to the surface of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko in November 2014 (photo:ESA)

UPDATE: ESA’s Rosetta mission has soft-landed its Philae probe on to the surface of Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko. The signal confirming the successful touchdown arrived on Earth at 16:03 GMT (17:03 CET), it’s the first time in history that such an extraordinary feat has been achieved and it’s a great milestone for space exploration and Europe. Read here the full press release from ESA.

LIVE VIDEO FEED | In a few hours a major milestone in space exploration will take place when the Rosetta orbiter deploys a small robotic lander named Philae towards comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko. This is the first time a spacecraft will reach the surface of a comet and, if successful, will greatly increase our knowledge in this field. Rosetta was launched over 10 years ago and followed an extremely complex trajectory with deep space maneuvers that used the gravity of Earth and Mars to propel it alongside its target and successfully orbit around it. Now the next step, Philae’s landing, will be transmitted live. See the video feed below.

Landing on the comet will be quite tricky: its weak gravity could allow the lander to bounce and escape into deep space. The shape of the surface was unknown until Rosetta came close enough so the landing spot was only recently selected. Philae is equipped with shock absorbers, spring loaded drills and even a harpoon that should be enough to keep it attached upon landing.

You can watch the live transmission from ESA below:

Tweets by @ESA_Rosetta

Overview of Philae lander instruments and their function, from DLR

Reaching 67P wasn’t easy. A rare Ariane 5 failure delayed its launch and the mission was repurposed to its current destination. The trajectory was extremely complicated with multiple gravity assist maneuvers, and required the spacecraft to enter hibernation mode, going into standby to save energy. Rosetta is powered by two huge solar panels that demand constant solar exposure instead. Other spacecraft (like Voyager 2) that went this far from the sun, used radioisotope generators.

The video below show the full trajectory of the mission:

An excellent overview of Rosetta/Philae mission is provided by the following Royal aeronautical society podcast. Paolo Ferri (Head of Mission Operations Department, European Space Operations Centre, ESA) introduces the Rosetta mission and its scientific objectives, describing also the spacecraft, its payload and its lander.

Additional resources:

ESA – Rosetta mission
ESA – Rosetta blog
DLR – Rosetta mission

#CometLanding (official hashtag)
@ESA_Rosetta
@Philae2014

Philae separating from Rosetta and descending to the surface of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko in November 2014. (Credit:ESA/ATG medialab)

If you liked this article, you may also be interested in:

• One giant leap: Rosetta and the space mining frontier
• Space mining: Robots in the final frontier
• Astronaut on International Space Station successfully controls K10 rover on Earth, supporting use of telerobotics in future deep space missions

See all the latest robotics news on Robohub, or sign up for our weekly newsletter.

Orbital Science corp. Antares orb-3, pre-launch (photo: NASA)

A very unfortunate incident for NASA and the commercial orbital transportation services program took place yesterday. The Antares rocket that was about to send the Cygnus spacecraft on the ISS exploded a few seconds after its launch from NASA’s Wallops flight facilities. No casualties or even small injuries were reported, although the area is being contained and treated with caution. It is a major incident for US spaceflight that breaks a trouble-free period and could have important implications for the private spaceflight sector.

The Antares launcher and the Cygnus spacecraft it was carrying were both developed and operated by Orbital Sciences corporation, one of the two private companies (along with SpaceX) under contract from NASA for supplying the International Space Station with cargo, supplies and secondary experimental, and commercial ISS payload. The video below shows that the explosion started from the base of the rocket, close to the nozzles, while the rest above was intact. The first stage engines are the major suspect but it is still too early to know exactly what went wrong.

As stated by NASA’s press conference, the flight termination system was activated. This is a remote manual intervention that initiates a self-destruction mechanism when the vehicle’s attitude is beyond recovery or control, in order to contain the damage from any explosion or debris in the launch area. As you can see in the launch video and the video below (shot from a small airplane from a distance) the explosion was huge. Even hours later, fires caused by kerosene and solid propellant were still burning.

Unlike SpaceX, which is almost completely vertically integrated, Orbital outsources most of its components and focuses on system integration and design. Antares is a two-stage rocket, and in its first stage it uses a pair of liquid propellant motors originally designed (and constructed!) during the ‘60s for the Soviet N-1 rocket. Despite their age, these motors are highly advanced, more so than most contemporary rocket engines. They were constructed as NK-33s in Russia but they are refurbished from US Company Aerojet (and renamed AJ26). It is too early to attribute the accident to these engines but it is worth mentioning that the use of Russian rocket engines from US operators recently became a very sensitive matter. The Ukraine crisis and the US/Europe sanctions are placing Orbital and ULA (the USA defense contractor for space launches that also use Russian made RD-180 engines) in an uncomfortable position. A side-effect of that crisis is a boost to the US private sector, which could step in and fill the gap created by the withdrawal of Russian engines from US launches.

(photo: Orbital Sciences corp.)

That may be beneficial for the private sector in general but not so for Orbital, which could face delays until this mishap is resolved. Meanwhile, the competition from SpaceX and established companies like Lockheed and Boeing is very strong. During the press conference that took place shortly after the accident, NASA official stated their satisfaction from the way Orbital operates and their will to resume Antares/Cygnus missions after the accident investigation is resolved.

The COTS program, apart from its obvious mission of ISS resupply, also aims to validate the privately developed Dragon and Cygnus spacecraft. Both usually have room and payload to spare so they’re used extensively for transporting experiments. The Cygnus cargo vehicle destroyed on this accident was carrying a lot of small satellites owned by schools, universities and startups. For example, Planet labs, an earth imaging startup lost 26 small satellites that were on board. Orbital stated that the payload is insured, although the extent of the coverage and the details are different for each client and contract. The rocket and general hardware is also at least partially covered, and as stated on the press conference, NASA and Orbital will find a way to deal with the cost of any replacements.

Any correlation between payload and this accident is practically impossible, so the rules and requirements should not change for the next missions. However, Orbital’s system could take some time until it resumes the rest of its contracted missions, and the delay or additional modifications may raise the payload cost. It could also indirectly raise the payload cost for other operators simply by reducing supply. Insurance prices could also increase and the total cost for a school, research team or startup may be bigger for future missions. Nevertheless, today there is unprecedented activity over commercial spaceflight, even if we are still very far away from the glory days of nationally funded Apollo or Space Shuttle. Competition will certainly make access to space easier and cheaper for everyone, even with occassional incidents like this along the way.

Robots, selfies and remote connectedness … It may be a lonely place to celebrate an anniversary, but on June 24th, Curiosity made the universe that much smaller – and robots that much more ubiquitous – by snapping a selfie to mark its one year anniversary on planet Mars. This photo will surely go down in history as a sign of the times.

To help celebrate Curiosity’s achievements, we’ve compiled a brief list of links, articles and videos that show just how far the Mars mission has come.

NASA press release reviews the first Martian year and the advances of MSL’s very succesful mission so far.

You can access all the photos (in RAW format also) from JPL’s dedicated MSL website as well as read NASA’s Curiosity webpage.

We covered Curiosity’s mission since its launch on November 2011 up until now, you can access all our articles here:

Robohub – MSL Curiosity articles

PS. Something a little more fun, in the tumblr blog named Martian Wiggles you can find a compilation of animated gifs made from the raw images provided by JPL like the following showing images from Left Navcam, during Sol 283:

If you liked this article, you may also be interested in:

• Space Robotics coverage on Robohub 
• Robot selfies, and the road to self-recognition
• Space mining: Robots in the final frontier
• Robots Podcast: Space business

See all the latest robotics news on Robohub, or sign up for our weekly newsletter.

But could selfies be used more productively? What does it mean for a robot to take a selfie? What good would that be? And is it even all that new?

Robot selfies in space

Space robots have been known to take selfies for some time. They are far away, alone, and what could be more important than taking a picture of one’s self and sending it to the carbon units back home? The web abounds with “space robot selfies” and “rover selfies”, such as the Top 10 Space Robot Selfies from Discovery News.

Space robot selfies are usually meant for engineers who want to check the status of instruments with their own eyes and not rely on feedback alone. Space scientists also welcome the views of the ground, mountains, and space – reflections on a robot’s surface can provide information about the light conditions and the atmosphere, while imprints can inform about the characteristics of the ground – but they could do without the vanity of robots, even if it makes relating the dimensions easier.

Just like Transformers

Humans are transformative beings by nature: we grow up and form ourselves, we wrinkle and decompose. The selfies we boast today will one day show us how old we have become and how much we have changed. Transformation will also likely become a key trait in robots. Software robots (bots) are already adept at it – the avatar is a cover donned by a god to discover the world without drawing attention to his mission, and the computer god can chose any cover he wishes. We are likely to expect hardware robots to master transformation just as easily; think only of the popular toy characters marketed through animated films or movies.

One would have to reach out far to explain and solidify this thesis. 3D printers would be needed to produce parts that can be combined in different ways. Robots would be needed to assemble, disassemble, or reassemble other robots. The future would have to be depicted as a permanently changing environment, to which modern machines adjust, all on their own or with the help of their fellow species.

In a world where a robot may have to be small one day and tall the other, fast at one hour and slow at the next, or ugly in one second and pretty in the next, a selfie will allow a robot to remember who it is, whom it encountered with this appearance and what it did under this cover. Selfies will show a robot how old it has become, how much it has changed, and they will help it maintain its identity.

Facebook for robots

Just when a trend seems to be wearing out, it can be transferred to another context where it causes a new stir.

Could selfies provide relevant information not just to engineers and scientists, but to the robots, too? What if they landed on a platform similar to Facebook, where the robots could network with each other, and share data and functions? Could they contribute to robot development and self-learning?

This is not farfetched … already cloud robotics research platforms like RoboEarth and commercial services like MyRobots.com are creating new ways for robots to exchange information and learn from the experience of other robots. One day robot selfies could be part of the information they share, perhaps allowing them to gain new knowledge about their own state and their immediate environment.

On the road to self-recognition

The field of sociable robotics investigates how people and robots interact with each other, and is becoming increasingly important as robots enter our homes and workplaces. What if, by taking a selfie, a robot could interpret its own gestures, and reflect and optimize its behavior? Or if it could study its selfie and learn to make its smile more credible? Could it gain “self-awareness” by recognizing its own reflection in the mirror?

A view from a mirror, one might object, should be enough for the standard robot, which can freeze the perceived reflection and evaluate it as long as it wants. Yet with a selfie (taken by means of an arm or a mirror), it could do more than that. It could show other machines (as well as humans) what it looks like. It could draw attention to itself and advertise itself. It could make an impression and obtain feedback.

Once an android pulls a duckface and takes a selfie, any roboticist will know the breakthrough has been made.

If the robot selfie proliferates, it may be that we humans will get to know hundreds or thousands of artificial beings. We will look into their faces – provided they have faces – and we will learn something about their self-reflection.

And we might even find these images more exciting than the selfies taken by humans.

Tonight at 7PM PT SpaceX will reveal Dragon V2 -their next generation spacecraft designed to carry astronauts to space.

UPDATE: read our de-briefing of the presentation below

A brief but as always interesting press conference by Elon Musk presented the new version of the Dragon capsule, with substantial improvements over Dragon v1. You can read our overview below but here are the key points from the presentation:

Even though it had some revolutionary elements, the first Dragon space capsule was relatively conventional. It landed on water and used parachutes for deceleration after re-entry. It had also a basic life support system (although it was never manned).As mentioned, the Dragon v2 will be able to land anywhere in the world upon re-entry, with the accuracy of a helicopter. Its propulsive deceleration and landing will allow its navigation system and/or pilot to pin-point a landing site and touch down on a specific platform. The new Dragon will retain the parachutes of v1 as a backup measure despite its ability to land safely even with 2 superdraco engines off line.Dragon v2 will be able to accommodate seven astronauts for several days, and it has an enhanced life-support system. It will also be able to automatically (and autonomously) dock with the ISS. Currently Dragon capsules require the assistance of the Canadarm robotic arm to dock, although they have some level of autonomy.

Key elements of the updated capsule were unveiled at the event. The advanced pressurized tanks for helium and propellant, CFRP-wrapped titanium spheres, and of course what makes all these possible, the new superDraco engines. 3D printed in Inconel alloy, they are used in pairs (each nested on its own protective nacelle). Also, a new more robust thermal shield will allow the capsule to be re-used many times (~10 times before major refurbishment as mentioned). Elon Musk also entered the spacecraft and gave us a glimpse of the interior and controls. Apart from the very critical controls that are conventional tactile buttons and switches, all systems and monitors are combined in two huge touch screens. Boarding and exiting the capsule looked slightly inconvenient, but it’s probably easier than doing so from a Lotus Elise, and far easier than the gymnastics necessary for a Soyuz capsule.

Take a look at the presentation video and the animation of all Dragon v2 features below:

Below our original post before the press conference:

Dragon V2 will be only the third spacecraft in service capable of carrying humans, along with the Russian Soyuz and the largely experimental Chinese Shenzou. It’ll also be the first American manned orbital spacecraft after the Space Shuttle, and of course the first ever designed and developed under a private initiative.

Even though speculative at this point, the V2 of the Dragon capsule will focus on the following key aspects: re-usability, increased performance, and being rated for human use.

From the start it’s been no secret that SpaceX launch systems had human transportation as a core goal. For a launch system to be rated for human use means that there must be a significant increase in safety margins apart from (but including) all life support systems. As mentioned by Elon Musk himself, a system rated for humans must have a safety factor of 1.4 instead of 1.25, which is the norm for unmanned space systems. Given that SpaceX started from scratch and that the clean sheet approach is essential to their modus operandi, safety margins can be designed from the start to be high enough and turn this inconvenience into an advantage.

The other factor is re-usability. Even though a new Dragon has been used in every launch up until now, the capsule with most of its systems can be refurbished and used again. However the water-landing is a very costly, time consuming and in some cases a risky and dangerous process, especially if it is carrying humans instead of cargo. SpaceX is working towards propulsive landing both for the capsule and the rocket. A prototype landing system was tested recently on Falcon 9R that sent the latest Dragon to the ISS with encouraging results, even if it was over water, while several prototypes have successfully launched, hovered and landed from small altitudes. This would allow the Dragon capsule to land anywhere with accuracy and safety, without mobilizing a small fleet for recovery.

A few days ago SpaceX completed qualification tests for the SuperDraco thrusters, a more advanced and powerful throttle-capable rocket engine that acts both as a launch abort system and as RCS for orbital re-entry and positioning. Additionally, the new more powerful SuperDraco engines on board the new Dragon will allow it not only to land safely with enough power margin for all the necessary manoeuvres but it also could be powerful enough to decelerate the spacecraft from out-of-earth trajectories, to enable visiting an asteroid or even (as the futuristic ‘red’ Dragon) traveling to Mars and back.

At Keio University in Japan, the Ishigami Laboratory, in the Faculty of Science and Technology, Department of Mechanical Engineering, is investigating robotic mobility systems. The main mission of this group is to perform fundamental and applied research for application to extreme environments, notably lunar and planetary rovers.

“In our lab, we focus on field robotics that works for extreme environments.”

“For example, we investigate the interaction mechanics between robots and sandy surfaces, taking into account “off-the-road locomotion.”Also, because such robots would be deployed in unknown environments, we also work on vision systems such as cameras and laser rangefinders.”

In this research, there are three key concepts: vehicle-terrain interaction mechanics, autonomous mobility systems, and robotic device development.

In vehicle-terrain interaction mechanics, the researchers analyze vehicle behavior using a dynamic simulator. They’re also developing vehicle-slip compensation systems and in-wheel-sensor systems.

“In the study of interaction mechanics, we first focus on a wheel itself using a “single-wheel testbed.” We put just one wheel on the testbed, and perform experimental runs to obtain wheel force data under different sets of slip parameters. Meanwhile, we numerically calculate wheel force based on a wheel-sand interaction model we developed. Then, we compare the experimental results with the numerical ones, so we can evaluate how valid the interaction model is. Applying this approach to a whole robot-vehicle system, it is possible to simulate how the robot behaves dynamically in an unknown environment. That’s the key approach in this research.”

“Sand flow investigation has received especially close attention in recent years. In our lab, of course, we’ve recently taken such an approach, called particle image velocimetry, or PIV, which has been widely used in fluid mechanics. PIV enables us to clearly determine the sand flow, helping to develop a well-defined interaction model.”

In the area of autonomous mobility systems, the Ishigami Lab is working on environment recognition using laser rangefinders and camera images, as well as robotlocalization, path planning, teleoperation, and integrated sensory processing systems.

“For example, in an unknown environment, there aren’t any road signs, saying ‘there’s an obstacle here,’ or ‘turn right at the next intersection.’ Such obstacles should be detected by onboard cameras, or laser rangefinders which operate based on the time-of-flight principle (measuring the time from a laser emission to detection of the reflected laser.). In our research, we effectively utilize such devices to obtain 3D distance data or 3D environment information. Based on these data, the robot itself decides how to travel. Such systems are called autonomous mobility systems.”

“One typical point of our lab is, I would say, we’re focusing on mechanics as well as autonomous mobility, applying both hardware and software approaches.. In general, one lab has one specific point of interest for research, and looks more deeply into that, but in our lab, we work on mechanics and also on autonomous mobility systems, so we pursue several topics in parallel. Robots consist of integrated technology, so we consider them as total systems.
In addition, another feature of our research is, we consider that field tests are extremely important. We actually take our robots to outdoor environments such as volcanic regions on Izu Oshima and Mt. Aso, and operate them in rough terrain, to test how they act in actual environments.”

“The field of robotics comprises a variety of technologies. So, rather than sticking to a single academic discipline, we’d like students to do research from a broad perspective.”

Special thanks again to “NateFan”, whose comment inspired today’s comic.

I hope the characters referenced from NASA are good sports, I figured they’d crack up over Nate’s “findings” regarding facial expressions in near zero gravity.

Learn more about Nate’s wacky life at his Website.

As part of a resupply mission to the International Space Station, ROS will board a SpaceX Rocket on March 16 and, barring inclement weather, will launch into space. According to a blogpost by Brian Gerkey at the OSRF, SpaceX will deliver a set of robotic legs for the Robonaut 2 (R2) humanoid torso that is currently aboard the ISS: “Once those legs are attached to R2, ROS will officially be running in space.”

This is a big milestone for ROS. According to Gerkey: “ROS has already powered robots in the air, on the ground, on and under the water, and on every continent, but we at OSRF couldn’t be more excited about ROS journeying to outer space.”

NASA came up with the answer recently when their teams began putting one of its humanoid robots through medical school. Should a medical incident arise in space that human crew members are unable to deal with themselves, the robo-doc will be there to save the day. Once trained, the robot doctor should be able to complete basic medical procedures unassisted. For more complicated procedures, an earth-based physician could control the robot via telepresence.

After its training is complete, the $2.5 million Robonaut 2, designed to assist astronauts with their duties both inside and outside the International Space Station, will be able to add medical practices to its resume.

Medical training is a complex and lengthy process, even for a robot. Unfortunately there is no super-software that can be uploaded to the robot to make it become an instant medical expert. But one of R2′s instructors, Dr. Zsolt Garami, M.D. says that the robot is a quick learner; in one hour it can pick up as much as it takes human medical student one week to learn.

R2 joined its mechanical twin Robonaut 1 aboard the International Space Station on August 22, 2013. Unlike R1, which is just a head and torso, R2 has been given motorized legs and is much more dexterous. Software may be upgraded in the future to allow R2 to move around the stations interior and perform routine maintenance tasks such as cleaning filters. Other upgrades may enable the robot to work outside the space station to perform repairs and maintenance checks when there is no call for medical assistance.

In the not too distant future, robotic doctors could be beneficial for patients here on earth where they could perform telesurgery in remote areas or where specialist surgeons are not available. It’s also reassuring to know that by the time humans are ready to colonize Mars, Robonaut doctors will be there to lend a healing hand.

In the comments below, tell me, what questions would researchers want answered about Nate’s experiences on Mars? I’ll select the best and make comics out of them (showing how Nate answers) in the next few weeks, and we can find out what kind of trouble Nate gets into . . .

Learn more about Nate’s wacky life at his Website.

I guess all those other Mars rovers just landed in the wrong spot? I had this idea yesterday to try something a little different. In the comments below, tell me, what questions would researchers want answered about Nate’s experiences on Mars? I’ll select the best and make comics out of them (showing how Nate answers) in the next few weeks, and we can find out what kind of trouble Nate gets into . . .

Learn more about Nate’s wacky life at his Website.

The mission to Mars concludes now that Nate is back on Earth, but do you think the adventure is really over?  Learn more about Nate’s wacky life at his Website.

Stay tuned next week for the exciting conclusion of Nate’s “mission to Mars” experience.  As always, remember you can see more at Nate’s Website.

I want to thank Robonaut for being a great sport and being willing to appear in this week’s comic!  When I got done with last week’s comic, for fun I sent a tweet to Robonaut asking him to join Nate for a little “space jam” competition, and he was all in!  The problem is, I found out that Robonaut is a little larger than I expected!!!  Check out the conversation…

As always, remember you can see more at Nate’s Website.

We all know that the first thing we’d want to do on a planet with low gravity is a Michael Jordon dunk.

As always, remember you can see more at Nate’s Website.

As always, remember you can see more at Nate’s Website.

As always, remember you can see more at Nate’s Website.

“For the competition, NASA will upload software developed by high school students onto bowling ball-sized spherical satellites called Synchronized Position Hold, Engage, Reorient, Experimental Satellites, or SPHERES, which are currently aboard the International Space Station. From there, space station Expedition 38 Commander Oleg Kotov and Flight Engineer Richard Mastracchio will command the satellites to execute the teams’ flight program. “

Below you can find the link for the live broadcast

http://webcast.mit.edu/i/institute/2013-2014/zero_robotics/17jan/index.html

You can also watch it on NASA TV:

Live streaming video by Ustream

Tweets about “#Zerorobotics”

SPHERES consist of 3 flying satellites on board the ISS able to test a diverse range of software and hardware. You can find more info at NASA’s website and you can also listen to our older interview of Dr. Alvar Saenz-Otero from MIT, lead scientist of the SPHERES project on Robotspodcast.

I worked for a couple of years for a NASA subcontractor, and it’s not hard to believe that the paperwork pile could up so that it cleared the atmosphere.  As always, remember you can see more at Nate’s Website.

The Lunar Lions from Penn State are the only university team that is competing.  Astrobotic is a spin out from Carnegie Mellon, just a few hours down the road from State College in Pittsburgh.

Thanks @glxp @Robohub! @LunarLionPSU what is the story with your launch arrangements?

— Robert Morris (@robocosmist) December 11, 2013

The story of the Lunar Lions ride is actually quite interesting and shows how the Google Lunar X Prize is making humanity’s future in space a reality.  Team Phoenicia was originally a GLXP competitor.  However, in looking around at launch services, the team discovered that there was excess rocket payload capacity that was hard to purchase: surplus capacity on flights scheduled for other customers.

Team Phoenicia dropped out of the GLXP and now runs a business breaking up the payload capacity of rockets. Since the Lunar Lions don’t need all the spare payload capacity, some is going to be sold to other customers who want a ride to orbit.  Some of this capacity will be to low Earth orbit, but at least two cubesats will also make the ride to lunar orbit.

When the GLXP says we are going back to the moon for good they are serious.  We are going back with an armada!

Here is the new GLXP leader board:

Though I’m a bit late in reporting this, I believe that the leader board above now accurately reflects the launch dates that have been announced as of the end of 2013. Once again, please note that the the leader board does not yet take into account the certainty of the launch date or the likelihood of a team succeeding.

More team disclosures would give us a better picture of how things are heating up!

Curiosity Heading for Mount Sharp, during the 329th Martian day, or sol, of the rover’s work on Mars (July 9, 2013). The turret of tools at the end of Curiosity’s robotic arm is in the foreground, with the rover’s rock-sampling drill in the lower left corner of the image. Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech.

Tuesday, Jan. 7, 10:30AM – 12PM Eastern Time:  NASA and the Smithsonian team up to facilitate two panel discussions on Mars robotic and human missions. Held in NASM’s Moving Beyond Earth gallery, participants will discuss the MER program and its scientific successes. Participants also will provide updates on the agency’s activities to advance a human mission to Mars in the 2030s.

Panel I: Moderator – Pamela Conrad, Curiosity rover scientist, NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md.

• John Grant
• Steven Squyres
• David Lavery, program executive, Solar System Exploration, NASA HQ

Panel II: Moderator – James Green, director, Planetary Science, NASA HQ

• John Grunsfeld, astronaut and associate administrator, Science Mission Directorate, NASA HQ
• Mary Voytek, director, Astrobiology, NASA HQ
• John Connolly, acting Chief Exploration Scientist, NASA HQ
• Alyssa Carson, NASA Passport Winner and student from Baton Rouge, LA.

Ask questions via Twitter using the hashtag #10YrsOnMars and #MER10.

Tweets about “#10YrsOnMars, OR #MER10 lang:en”

I hope everyone had a wonderful holiday break!  As always, remember you can see more at Nate’s Website.

Yutu is a 6-wheeled rover. It has 4 cameras and 2 digging arms for sampling of lunar soil and dust, and can travel at 1/8 of a mile per hour. During it’s 3-month exploration, it will search for natural resources and rare elements such as titanium and uranium.

The Sunday Times (UK) said: “China conducts about 18 launches a year and sent its first astronaut into orbit in 2003. In its most recent manned space mission in June, three astronauts spent 15 days in orbit and docked with a space laboratory. Their mission was part of Beijing’s quest to open a permanent space station in Earth’s orbit within the next decade.”

On the non-military/space frontier, China’s 12th 5-Year Plan targeted robotics as a growth industry necessary for China’s development. It expects a compound growth rate of 25%, said Wang Weiming, deputy director of the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology. The ministry has set up incentives and 5 geographical areas for Chinese companies to develop (and improve the quality of) their robot products and capabilities. The ambitious plan includes a goal of 30% to be produced with homegrown technologies, Wang said. In addition to Shanghai, Beijing, Guangzhou and Chengdu, authorities in Liaoning province are constructing a robot industrial complex in which they expect revenues of $8 billion for robots and other automation equipment by 2017.

A quick look at all the ongoing research projects at the Chinese Academy of Sciences Shenyang Institute of Automation shows their interest in space, search and rescue, 3D bio-printing, eldercare robots and a variety of other up-and-coming robotic endeavours.

If you liked this article, you may also be interested in:

• China takes long view in funding robotics, innovation
• What were the top stories in robotics from 2013?
• Air, water, energy and food in a nutshell: Space exploration as driver for sustainable robotic agriculture
• More space robots as Grishin funds NanoSatisfi

See all the latest robotics news on Robohub.

• Soft Robotics: soft actuation and soft sensing
• Robots with Internal Models, for self-repair
• Self-assembling swarm robots, for adaptive/evolvable morphology
• Autonomous 3D collective robot construction

In this post I want to talk about just the first of these: soft robotics, and why I think we should seriously think about soft robotics in space. Soft robotics – as the name implies – is concerned with making robots soft and compliant. It’s a new discipline that already has its own journal, but not yet a wikipedia page. Soft robots would be soft on the inside as well as the outside – so even the fur-covered Paro robot is not a Soft robot. Soft robotics research is about developing new soft, smart materials for both actuation and sensing (ideally within the same material). Soft robots would have the huge advantage over conventional stiff metal and plastic robots, of being light and, well, soft. For robots designed to interact with humans that’s obviously a huge advantage because it makes the robot intrinsically much safer.

Soft robotics research is still at the exploratory stage, so there are not yet prefered materials and approaches. In our lab we are exploring several avenues, one is electroactive polymers (EAPs) for artificial muscles; another is the bio-mimetic 3D printed flexible artificial whisker. Another approach makes use of shape memory alloys to actuate octopus like limbs: here is a very nice YouTube movie from the EU OCTOPUS project. And perhaps one of the most unlikely but very promising approaches: exploiting fluid-solid phase changes in ground coffee to make a soft gripper: the Jaeger-Lipson coffee balloon gripper.

Let me elaborate a little more on the coffee balloon gripper. Based on the simple observation that when you buy vacuum-packed ground coffee the pack is completely solid, yet as soon as you cut open the pack and release the vacuum the ground coffee returns to its flowing fluid state. Heinrich Jaeger, Hod Lipson and co-workers put ground coffee into a latex balloon then, by controlling the vacuum via a pump, they demonstrate a gripper able to safely pick up and hold more or less any object. Here is a YouTube video showing this remarkable ability.

Almost any planetary exploration robot is likely to need a gripper to pick up or collect rock samples for analysis or collection (for return to Earth). Conventional robot grippers are complex mechanical devices that need very precise control in order to reliably pick up irregularly shaped and sized objects. That control is mechanically and computationally expensive, and problematical because of time delays if it has to be performed remotely from Earth. Something like the Jaeger-Lipson coffee balloon gripper would – I think – provide a much better solution. This soft gripper avoids the hard control and computation because the soft material adapts itself to the thing it is gripping; it’s a great example of what we call morphological computation.

The second example I suggested is inspired by work in our lab on bio-inspired touch sensing. Colleagues have developed a device called TACTIP – a soft flexible touch sensor that provides robots (or robot fingers) with very sensitive touch sensing capable of sensing both shape and texture. Importantly the sensing is done inside TACTIP, so the outside surface of the sensor can sustain damage without loss of sensing. Here is a very nice YouTube report on the TACTIP project.

It’s easy to see that giving planetary robots touch sensing could be useful, but there’s another possibility I outlined: the potential to allow Earth scientists to feel what the robot’s sensor is feeling. PhD student Callum Roke and his co-workers developed a system based on TACTIP for what we call remote tele-haptics. Here is a video clip demonstrating the idea:

Imagine being able to run your fingers across the surface of Mars, or directly feel the texture of a piece of asteroid rock without actually being there.

The rules of the Lunar X Prize are that, to win the grand prize ($20M + bonuses), you must land on the moon before the end of 2015 and move at least 500 meters while sending back HD video. The second place team also gets a small prize and a shot at some of the bonuses. Additionally, there are some milestone prizes. In 2014, about $10M in prize money will go to teams that demonstrate a series of technical and team objectives here on Earth. I look forward to seeing those awards, because it will give us a better idea of who is ahead and whether launch dates tell the story.

To enjoy racing, you must be able to know who is ahead right now, but there is surprisingly little coverage of this event that gives a clear picture of which of the Lunar X Prize teams are on track to finish and who is leading. Since the key to this race is getting launched, my view is that whoever has a launch agreement this stage is a strong contender. So without further ado, here are my picks for the Google Lunar X Prize leader board:

Currently, according to the Google Lunar X Prize website, there are 20-odd teams that are still “Active.”  Current leaders are Barcelona Moon Team and Astrobotic — they both claim booking on launch vehicles. Moon Express and Team Indus have made ambiguous statements about possibly having an identified launch vehicle. Other teams do not look to be far enough along to be seriously considering a launch before the end of 2015 — though I would be very happy to be wrong on this point.

So here is blow-by-blow recount of how we got to where we are:

May 2013: The first shot in the GLXP was fired by Astrobotic.  They announced an agreement with SpaceX to ride a Falcon 9 in October 2015, three months before the expiration of the Lunar X Prize.

June 2013:  Team Indus makes an ambiguous blog post about having the ISRO Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle “pre-selected” for them.

August 2013:  Barcelona Moon Team fires back and takes the lead. They announced that they have set the date for their previously unscheduled launch aboard a Long March 2C.  And what an announcement: they grab pole position from Astrobotic by four months, announcing for June of 2015.

December 2013:  Moon Express CEO Bob Richards tells me via Twitter that they hope to announce a launch partner in early 2014, amid a flurry of publicity about testing of their MX-1 lunar lander.

I cannot wait to see private exploration of the Moon begin. The frontier will be open again.  This time, instead of being conquered by man and beast it will be won by man and robot.

In an effort to increase the quality of available information on this amazing contest, I welcome comments, additions, contradictions, snarky tweets, and corrections.

Other references:

Astrobotic SEC Filings
Moon Express SEC Filings
Wikipedia X Prize Page
Robots Podcast: Race to the Moon, with Red Whittaker

Four more student-built CubeSat research satellites were launched into space early this morning as part of NASA’s CubeSat Launch Initiative, which provides opportunities for small satellite payloads to fly on rockets planned for upcoming launches. Created by NASA to attract and retain students in the science, technology, engineering and mathematics disciplines, the initiative reaches students by introducing educational spaceflight in high schools and colleges across the United States. 

The cube-shaped satellites, which are flown as auxiliary payloads on previously planned missions, measure 10x10x10 cm on each side and weigh less than 1.33 kilos. Over the next few months, the student CubeSat teams will receive data from their satellites in space, and, as part of their agreement with NASA, will provide the agency a report on their outcomes and scientific findings.

This batch of CubeSats were prepared by NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., and students at Medgar Evers College at the City University of New York; Montana State University in Bozeman; and the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor in collaboration with the University of New Hampshire in Durham. Read the current Mission Fact Sheet, or learn more about about other student CubSat projects here.

Targeting a sustainable presence of humans in outer space will require solving air, water, energy, and food supplies within a few thousand cubic feet surrounded by vacuum. What seems at first sight to be a problem of an apocalyptic, remote future reveals itself as the grand challenges of our civilization in a nutshell. This article argues that space exploration can be one of the main drivers to revolutionize sustainable agriculture on earth.

First, the agricultural industry has classically not been the driver, but on the receiving end of innovation in automation. Current economic drivers promote increasing the size of farm equipment and mono-cultures, which are more suitable to automation. Thinking about solving food production on a space-ship, Mars-colony or city-scale, which have opposite requirements than industrial agriculture, makes it clear that solutions will not come from incremental changes to the current system, but require a disruptive approach that has very little to do with current agricultural practice. Second, sustainable agriculture is a systems challenge that does not stop at innovation in automation, but also requires advances in renewable energies and integration into water and air management to be successful, in particular when considering integration of agricultural production into urban environments. Third, advanced life support systems are not only mission-critical for long-term exploration missions, but the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) support strongly hinges on the perceived value of its mission; using space exploration as a driver to solve our most pressing grand challenges is a strong narrative to gain public support.

A brief history of agriculture

Since the advent of agriculture around 12,000 years ago, humans have developed a highly sophisticated system for global food production with the most rapid technological advances occurring during the first half of last century. In the 1920s, agriculture had not only adopted new machinery, but also the financial, cultural, and ideological apparatus of industrialism. This process has led to farm equipment of ever-increasing size, modern plant breeding programs, the use of synthetic fertilizers, delivery of water via irrigation systems, and the use of pesticides to control crop herbivory, which have all contributed to a tremendous increases in crop yield. For example, corn yields in the US increased approximately 400%-500% from 1940 to 1997. Together with consolidation of small farms into larger ones, the number of people that a single farmer in the US provides for increased 9-fold from 15.5 people per farm in 1950 to 140 people per farm in 1997.

While providing immense cultural benefits, these developments came at tremendous environmental costs. Increased fertilization has led to excess nitrogen and phosphorus in the water systems impacting both human health and the integrity of aquatic ecosystem, and also to increases in nitrous oxide production (a potent greenhouse gas). More recently, there is also an increasing awareness that the global supply of phosphorus, which is a non-renewable resource but an essential plant nutrient contained in most synthetic fertilizers, is expected to peak mid-century and decline thereafter.  Also, cultivation of just a few crops (corn, soybeans, hay and wheat make up 68% of farm land in the US) in ever-increasing monocultures and the resulting lack of plant diversity make these systems vulnerable to large-scale pest outbreaks. Finally, the high specialization on certain crops in different parts of the US – which is the result of industrial streamlining the process – requires considerable transportation cost, and might become infeasible with increasing cost of oil.

Taken together, there is a critical need to develop agricultural practices that deliver water and nutrients in a manner that minimizes losses from these systems, while creating an ecologically resilient agricultural system that can withstand or quickly recover from disturbances such as pest outbreaks, for example by using companion plants and poly-cultures.

Advances in robotics can decrease detrimental effects of farming by precise administration of water and nutrients and inter-cropping, while bringing agriculture closer to consumers. Besides being able to provide individual plants with the required resources on an as-need basis, small-scale robotic platforms are not limited to operating on fields, but could also reclaim urban environments that are currently deprived from agriculture and horticulture, such as within offices, shopping malls or on roofs. A concept drawing of a team of robots cultivating plants in a shopping mall is shown in Figure 1.

It is worth noting that neither agriculture nor horticulture have ever been the main drivers for innovation in automation. Rather, industrial methods and techniques were adapted to agriculture long after they have proven successful in other trades. This trend seems to be persistent still today. For example, automation in agriculture is enabled exclusively by the availability of small-scale and cheap computation, which has been driven by the electronic spread-sheet. Similarly, disruptive actuation and sensing technologies that have the potential to bring agricultural automation to a new level are being developed in orthogonal markets, such as the gaming industry, manufacturing, or construction.

Indeed, major industrial players in precision agriculture support their technical innovations by developing for the construction industry, e.g., large earth moving equipment, which provides higher margins than agriculture or horticulture. Based on this history and lack of economical drivers that will require industry to leap from large-scale automation to urban-scale precision agriculture, I argue that truly disruptive innovation is more likely to be developed for niche applications, such as space exploration.

Air, water, energy and food in a nutshell
Going to Mars is in the tradition of setting foot on the moon, exploring the West, and ultimately the very exploration that led to the discovery of America. All these missions have in common that they are variants of the “knapsack problem”. Explorers need to decide on a combination of provisions and tools that allow them to maximize exploration and minimize risk of failure. Parameters of this problem are the set of brought-along goods, available resources harvested on the way, and the constraints of vessel size. Larger vessels allow more goods to be brought along, but also require larger crews to maintain them, again requiring more resources.

A space mission adds an additional complication as the launch mass is limited by the amount of fuel. The larger the rocket, the more fuel is needed, in turn requiring more propulsion to increase launch mass. This optimization problem currently limits how long we can sustain ourselves in space and therefore where we can go and what we can do there. While advances in agricultural practices and transportation systems have solved this problem for humans who have now permanently settled earth’s most remote spots, this approach is about to reach its limitations on earth and does not extend to space.

Considering the vast emptiness of space (and the scarcity of resources on other planets), solutions to this problem will require us to make better use of resources found in place, and to think about how to recycle them. For example, food can be grown and fertilized from “black water” and help to turn toxic carbon dioxide into carbon – to remain in the plant – and oxygen. While maintaining a fully enclosed ecosystem that is significantly smaller than our own planet and can support human beings has not been accomplished yet, doing the math on launch mass and potential yield has shown that growing food in space becomes advantageous for missions exceeding two years in space. For missions shorter than that, the additional launch mass and space of the tools and provisions that plants require is better used by bringing additional resources. An alternative scenario is to launch life support systems to arrive before humans do (Figure 2). In both cases, automation is necessary as the use of humans to perform these tasks is highly inefficient in a space scenario.

A major payload driver for autonomous food production is the additional required water resources. Yet, after reaching a critical mass, plants are an excellent natural system for converting black water into drinking water. Hereby, plants consume the water via their roots and return purified water into the local atmosphere via evaporation. Although small-scale systems to replace waste-water treatment plants in remote areas have been successfully demonstrated, additional research is needed to implement such systems in a self-contained, easy to maintain, fashion. Future long-term space exploration missions are likely to depend on a combination of bio-chemical processing and biological filtration, requiring a systems view and increased understanding of the micro-biology of the underlying processes. Although other planets provide massive reservoirs of frozen water in their pole caps and under their surface, water shortage has become a major problem in the US west of the continental divide and large areas of the world are subject to desertification, making water shortage a global problem, and requiring drastic increase and decentralization of processing. While water shortage for now mainly affects our quality of life, water conflicts have been linked to the Rwandan genocide and the war in Sudanese Darfur.

Plants also have the capability to absorb carbon from the air and releasing oxygen. On earth, this task is to a large part accomplished by tropical rain forests, which are responsible for roughly a third of the earth’s oxygen turnover. For space exploration, plants alone are not sufficient, requiring machines to scrub carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. While regenerative carbon dioxide scrubbers – a process mainly requiring electricity – have been in use on the now decommissioned space shuttle, terrestrial applications include carbon dioxide reduction of power plant exhausts. Albeit feasible, current technology is not cost-efficient to deploy and to operate, mainly due to the lack of economical drivers. This research would be desirable, however, as carbon dioxide emissions are believed to be the main driver behind man-made global warming, with its long-term effects yet to come.

Lighting for food production and photosynthesis, water purification, and carbon dioxide scrubbing will require additional energy, further driving the required launch mass of an exploration vessel or station equipment. Energy is available in effectively unlimited quantities from the sun, but requires efficient conversion. On earth, solar power is also an attractive alternative energy source for earth-based applications and could drastically reduce our dependency of fossil fuels, which are both a source of international conflicts and carbon dioxide emissions. Current solar cell technology is not yet competitive with electricity generated from fossil fuels and nuclear power, requiring additional research into reducing production cost while enhancing efficiency. A space mission could be a significant driver for the latter without being limited by the economical drivers of fossil fuels that dominate next-generation solar cells that industry deems economically viable.

Space exploration as a driver for our most pressing grand challenges
Space exploration has historically been a geo-political, strategic instrument. Showing the ability to precisely place an object into lower earth orbit or onto the moon demonstrates the capability to project power at long distance with high accuracy. In addition to leading to game-changing military capabilities, space exploration has transformed life on earth. Sputnik, the first radio satellite, led the way to worldwide telecommunication and global positioning. Sputnik also spurred a space race, leading to launch systems of increasing size and precision, eventually culminating into the Apollo program, the first human on the moon and the strategic defense initiative (SDI), also known as “Star Wars”. Albeit the collateral science and engineering benefits of these missions are beyond doubt, they became increasingly less tangible.

NASA has recovered from this by focusing its missions on atmospheric sensing, revolutionizing the fields of geology, agriculture, archeology and many others, and space exploration leading to jaw-dropping and deeply inspiring photographs of outer space that have fundamentally changed our understanding of the universe and our role therein. Nevertheless, the cost of these missions seems to less and less justify their benefits.  With the industrialized nations accumulating prodigious amounts of debt and the developing countries fighting over water and food, understanding the origins of our universe and setting foot on other worlds becomes more and more a secondary goal in public perception.

NASA is currently rallying interest for a “planetary defense” mission with the goal of robotically bringing asteroids into a near-earth orbit where they can be used as a shield to deflect asteroids such as the one grounded in Russia in the spring of 2013. Albeit such a mission supports the geo-political narrative of the US as global guardian and would lay the technical foundation for a paradigm shift from earth-launched to space-launched exploration, the actual risk of an apocalyptic asteroid impact is minuscule compared to risks arising from political instability and resource problems elsewhere in the world.  Therefore, it is unlikely that such a mission can inspire the same national energy that the space race did, and which is imperative for the success of a manned mission to Mars.

Instead of motivating space exploration with geopolitical advantages and science outcomes that are inaccessible, or even moot, to the general public, I argue to identify missions whose success is aligned to solve mankind’s greatest challenges: food, energy, water and air.

Next steps in robotic research

With growing food in space not on the critical path of missions immediately ahead, but a long-term requirement, research in space-based agriculture should focus on the following three fronts: increasing our knowledge of in-space plant growth, solving the key perception and manipulation challenges of plant maintenance, and understanding the impact that observing, maintaining and eating plants has on humans in the isolation of space. These three thrusts are closely inter-related and can benefit from automation. Indeed, plant growth experiments are recurrently undertaken on the ISS and could tremendously benefit from automation. For example, light-weight, low-energy robotic arms could enable scientist to systematically sense within the plants’ canopy, and automated management of air, water, and nutrients on a per-plant basis would allow us to better understand how the space environment affects these parameters.

As fully autonomous plant maintenance requires solutions to a series of hard problems in perception and manipulation, initial focus should be on remote operation of the growing process (Figure 3, left). Devising a system that solves all the mechanical, user interface and communication challenges that would allow to grow plants (from seeding to harvest and re-planting) can serve as the basis for further developing automation and could motivate its own mission such as deploying a greenhouse container to Moon or Mars.

Concerning human-factors, there is strong evidence that humans living in the isolation of space will drastically benefit from interactions, including taking care of, harvesting and eating, of plants. Active research challenges here are how to design this experience to be most beneficial for the astronauts. This includes not only identifying care-taking tasks that the astronauts actually enjoy, but also providing solutions to automating those tasks that are undesirable or induce additional stress. In the long run, remote operation will be more and more subsumed by actual autonomy. Here, key challenges are automatic assessment of plant status, manipulation of soft, flexible objects, and dealing with adverse environmental conditions such as mud, water and unpredictable growth that can quickly jeopardize a running system.

Summary
Our agricultural system is about to reach its limitations, with demand for its products to outpace availability of resources. Space exploration is concerned with similar challenges, albeit at an extreme scale: water, energy, and air need to be turned into food in a nutshell in a most sustainable way that minimizes the influx of external resources. While industrial agriculture addresses its challenges by ever-increasing monocultures that are economical to automate, the needs of future urban centers on earth and colonies in outer space require an opposite approach: small-scale precision agriculture that provides care to plants on an as-need basis and that can integrate with water purification and air revitalization needs of its consumers. As the technological leap this approach requires is gigantic, it is unlikely to be performed by the agricultural industry, whose economics exclusively support incremental changes. This is not the case for space exploration, which can – given strong public support of its mission – support disruptive technological advances such as sending a man to the moon and eventually allow us for sustainable existence on other planets. This is a challenge that dwarfs sustainable living on earth.

Most of NASA was shut down when the US Congress failed to fund its federal government beyond the end of the current fiscal year at midnight this past Monday (Sept. 30). Some programs, like the ISS, are exempt from the shutdown in order to ensure the safety of human and physical resources. However, while ISS astronauts and mission crew back on earth will continue to clock in, 97% of NASA employees are at home today. According to the Planetary Society, other independently operated programs under contract to NASA, such as the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (operated by Caltech) and the Applied Physics Laboratory (operated by John Hopkins University) will continue to operate for the time being.

Elizabeth Robinson NASA’s Chief Financial Officer, in a statement that is no longer available because the NASA website is affected by the shutdown, wrote:

There are two major operations or classes of operations that would require ongoing support in accordance with the definitions of excepted activities identified above. First NASA currently is operating the ISS with a crew of 6 astronauts/cosmonauts, which has been in continuous operation since 1998. To protect the life of the crew as well as the assets themselves, we would continue to support planned operations of the iSS during any funding hiatus. Moreover, NASA will be closely monitoring the impact of an extended shutdown to determine if crew transportation or cargo resupply services are required to mitigate imminent threats to life and property on the ISS or other areas.

Second, if a satellite mission is in the operations phase, we will maintain operations that are essential to ensure the safety of that satellite and the data received from it. However if a satellite mission has not yet been launched, work will generally cease on that project.

See also:

• IEEE Spectrum – Government Shutdown Threatens Future NASA Missions
• Space.com – How a Potential Government Shutdown Could Affect NASA
• Space.com – Government Shutdown Would Ground NASA ‘Almost Entirely,’ Obama Says
• The Planetary Society –  American government shut down, but JPL and APL planetary missions still operating — for now
• NASA turns 55 – and turns out the lights

Yesterday SpaceX’s Falcon 9 test rig (code name Grasshopper) successfully completed a 100m lateral maneuver, beginning at an altitude of 250m, before returning to the center of the pad from which it was launched. According to a press release, the test demonstrated the vehicle’s ability to perform more aggressive steering maneuvers than have been attempted in previous flights. 

At more than 10 stories tall, controlling the test rig as it moves laterally is particularly challenging. Divert tests such as this one are an important step towards SpaceX’s goal of being able to return rockets safely to earth for reuse.

Kirobo, a 13” humanoid robot, was launched today and is on its way to the International Space Station.

A mashup of the Japanese word for hope, “Kibo”, and “robot”, Kirobo is designed to be a companion and communicator for Japanese astronaut Koichi Wakata who is expected to arrive at the space station later this year.

Designers from Dentsu, the University of Tokyo and Toyota have worked together on the Kibo-Robo Project to enable the little robot to be able to work in a gravity-free environment and use facial and voice recognition and natural language processing to be able to speak and provide information upon request from Wakata.

I wish for this robot to function as a mediator between person and machine, or person and Internet and sometimes even between people

said robot designer Tomotaka Takahashi.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqMRGqnisGM

[Photo credit: Kibo Robot Project]

Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) announced today that, in 2018, it will be carrying three satellites that will make up Canada’s RADARSAT Constellation Mission (RCM) into orbit aboard its Falcon 9 rocket.

The launch reservation contract was awarded by  MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates Ltd. (MDA Robotics) to support Canada’s largest space program to date in Canada. The satellite mission, which will be built on previous missions RADARSAT-1 and RADARSAT-2, will “support Canada’s need for maritime surveillance, disaster management and ecosystem monitoring”.

NanoSatisfi, a Silicon Valley based cubesat startup, today received $300,000 investment from Grishin Robotics bringing their total seed funding to $1,750,000, not including their initial successful Kickstarter campaign of $106,330 and CEO Peter Platzer’s personal investment. NanoSatisfi aim to provide affordable space satellite access to everyone through their autonomous cubesats. The first launch dates have been booked for summer and fall 2013.

NanoSatisfi’s founder and CEO Peter Platzer intends to bring Moore’s Law to space. The first NanoSatisfi cubesat will have approximately 1000x more computational power than the Voyager 1 spacecraft. Due to the expense and length of time to successfully launch something, spacecraft have lagged far behind the rate of change on earth. We landed men on the moon with slide rules and computers that don’t hold a candle to any smartphone today.

Platzer plans to leverage Moore’s Law to get many small satellites launched and unlock a wide range of citizen science and crowd sourced uses. It costs $350,000 to build, launch and operate one satellite which is expected to generate $750,000 revenue. Grishin’s investment will extend the number of satellite launches in NanoSatisfi’s near future. By utilizing the most widely adopted satellite standard, NanoSatisfi does not need a dedicated launch for their 10cm x 10cm x 30cm satellites. Platzer has developed a “profitable de-risking and scaling strategy to target the 25bn+ enterprise space data market”.

Each satellite is a cube weighing about 1 kilogram, equipped with cameras, a Geiger counter, a spectrometer, a magnetometer, and an evolving array of sensors. As described in TechCrunch, “ArduSats are designed to be active for about two years, at which point they’re replaced by new ones incorporating the latest technology. For example, even though the second ArduSat is launching only a few months after the first, its camera will actually be more powerful, thanks to rapidly dropping price.” [Anthony Ha]

The US Whitehouse has recently honored Platzer as a US Champion of Change for his vision for the future. Platzer had always been interested in space exploration but was impatient with the state of the industry. Although he trained as a high-energy physicist, Platzer spent most of his career on Wall Street in finance. This turns out to be a good combination for creating a strategic approach to space robots.

Silicon Valley is starting to recognize that hardware and robotics startups may be the next big thing. NanoSatisfi has been incubated at Lemnos Labs, who aim to bring the ‘silicon back to the Valley’, and have successfully incubated several other robot startups. And yes,   these are space robots, operating autonomously.

NanoSatisfi’s first satellite is currently being readied for launch in Japan, with JAXA, the Japanese Space Agency. NanoSatisfi are offering control of their cubesat for as little as $250 a week, opening the doors to all sorts of experimentation and big amounts of data. They’ve opened the Ardusat Control Center for Kickstarter backers, who can now start writing code for the ArduSat without needing to download the Arduino IDE. Backers will be able to code straight from the web to the testing infrastructure and then to download their data after completing their experiments on the ArduSat.

Already, 5 students from Finland have done a ‘space camp’, learning everything from orbital mechanics to space law. Each student successfully completed Arduino experiments that ranged from using a vacuum chamber to test and ultrasonic distance sensor under extreme temperature variations, to using a luminosity sensor to detect and measure the length of lightening strikes. What else could we do with a spacebird’s eye view of the world?

On June 17, 2013, Astronaut Chris Cassidy successfully drove a K10 rover on earth, via remote connection from the Surface Telerobotics Workbench on the International Space Station, showing that robots deployed to explore Mars or the far side of the moon could be remotely controlled by astronauts in space during future deep-space missions. Telerobotics, which involves human operators remotely controlling robotic arms, rovers and other devices in space, is one means of reducing risk in dull, dangerous or dirty tasks as humans explore space. 

NASA has a long history of playing for high stakes; think of the 7 minutes of terror Curiosity descent to Mars, Spirit & Opportunity, and indeed, the entire space race. Yet when human lives and millions of dollars in technology are invested, it’s critical to keep risk at a minimum. As part of our series on ‘High-Risk / High-Reward’ robotics, we asked Dr. Terry Fong of the NASA Ames Intelligent Robotics Group, to describe how NASA’s telerobotics initiatives help mitigate risk in space missions. – Robohub Editors

Photo credit: NASA. Chris Cassidy studies the Surface Telerobotics Workbench on the International Space Station to remotely operate the K10 rover on Earth at NASA’s Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, Calif., in June 2013.

Photo credit: Dominick Hart/NASA. NASA’s K10 rover at the Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, California performs a surface survey with its cameras and laser system, and then deployed a simulated polymide antenna while being controlled by an astronaut in space during a June 2013 test.

“Surface Telerobotics” is a 2013 NASA test to examine how astronauts in the International Space Station (ISS) can remotely operate a surface robot across short time delays. This test will be performed during the summer of
2013 and has three objectives:

1. To demonstrate interactive crew control of a mobile surface telerobot in the presence of short communications delay,
2. To characterize a concept of operations for a single astronaut remotely operating a planetary rover with limited support from ground control, and
3. To characterize telerobot utilization, operator workload and operator situation awareness.

Surface Telerobotics is intended to reduce risk for future human-robot exploration missions, identify technical gaps, and refine key system requirements.

In planning for future human exploration missions, numerous study teams have proposed having astronauts remotely operate surface robots from an orbiting spacecraft using a low-latency, high-bandwidth communications link. This concept of operations is seen as an effective method for performing surface activities that require real-time human involvement without incurring the risk and cost associated with human sorties. In addition, this configuration would allow high-performance spacecraft computing to be used for high-level robot autonomy (perception, navigation, etc.), thus simplifying the processing and avionics required for the robot. Crew-centric surface telerobotics is considered an option for several possible missions:

• Lunar Farside: Astronauts orbiting the Moon (or station-keeping at the Earth-Moon “L2” Lagrange point) remotely operate a surface robot exploring the lunar farside. Astronauts would take advantage of low-latency (less than 250 ms) and high-availability communications to maximize robot utilization during a short-duration mission.
• Near-Earth Object (NEO): Astronauts approaching, in orbit, or departing a NEO (e.g., asteroid) remotely operate a robot landed on surface. Astronauts would control the robot from the flight vehicle because the NEO environment (high rotation rate, rapidly varying illumination, etc.) rules out remote operations from Earth.
• Mars Orbit: Astronauts in aerostationary orbit around Mars (or perhaps landed on Phobos or Deimos) remotely operate a surface robot exploring Mars. Astronauts would control the robot from the flight vehicle when circumstances (time-critical activities, contingency handling, etc.) do not permit remote operation from Earth.

If successful, this project will help NASA better understand the key issues, engineering requirements, and costs/benefits associated with crew-centric surface telerobotics. In addition, data collected by the test will inform the design of future ground-based tests, particularly in terms of the key factors that need to be simulated at high levels of fidelity.

Finally, this project will help confirm (or reject) many of the assumptions and hypotheses that have been made by numerous space exploration study teams regarding the technology maturity, technology gaps, and risks (operational and functional) associated with crew-controlled surface telerobotics.

Project Partners
NASA Ames Intelligent Robotics Group
NASA Lunar Science Institute
NASA Technology Demonstration Missions Program
Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Lunar University Network for Astrophysics Research

Mission Location
International Space Station and the NASA Ames Research Center in Moffett Field California

More Information
http://tinyurl.com/surface-telerobotics
http://www.nasa.gov/telerobotics

Over the past two decades, robotic planetary exploration has generated an incredible wealth of knowledge about our neighbors in the Solar System. We now realize that celestial bodies within our reach can provide resources such as water, minerals, and metals, essential for sustaining and supporting robotic and human exploration of the Solar System. It is only matter of time before “living off the land” exploration enabled by in-situ resource utilization (ISRU) becomes a reality.  The Solar System offers almost unlimited resources, but the difficult part is accessing them. Thus, if the cost of mining and processing can be reduced, some of the minerals that are in high demand on Earth could in fact be brought back and sold for commercial gain.

In general, there are at least three bodies that have been seriously considered for resource exploitation. These include our Moon, Mars, and near-Earth asteroids. The Moon offers resources that could be used in-situ (such as water), and because of its proximity to Earth, other resources (especially rare Earth minerals) could be returned to Earth and sold. Resources on Mars could be used to sustain a human (and robotic) presence, and to fuel launches back to the Mars orbit and to other destinations. Asteroids are relatively easy targets because of their low gravity well, but the micro-gravity environment makes mining and mineral processing extremely challenging.

Knowledge of the vast resources in space has triggered an explosion of interest in space mining, especially over the last few years. NASA is working on several feasibility studies and architecture concepts for resource utilization from the Moon, Mars and asteroids. (Honeybee Robotics is contributing to some of these, including the Robotic Asteroid Prospector.) In 2009, NASA’s National Commission on Space study (PDF) argued that extracting resources from the Moon and asteroids will be essential for further space exploration and colonization. Private firms have jumped in with the goal of bringing space riches down to Earth. And with contests such as Lunabotics and the NASA Sample Return Challenge bringing new talent into the sector, training and education have expanded significantly.

What’s Honeybee’s role in this? We’ve been working on space mining and resource processing technologies for the past 25 years, providing feasibility studies, systems analysis, unique solutions and technologies, hardware development, test results, and flight systems for NASA and other space partners. Some of the approaches could be applied to both the Moon and Mars, but asteroid mining, because of the extremely low gravity field, is in its own category. Potential technologies would have to be thoroughly tested before they could be integrated into the asteroid mining spacecraft. Of course, the only true way to test new technologies is on a mission itself! The Keck Institute for Space Studies (KISS) recently determined that it would be feasible to bring a 7 meter, 500-ton asteroid near Earth by 2025, with asteroid identification, capture and return costing on the order of $2.6 billion (PDF). Such an asteroid parked at the Earth-Moon Lagrange Point would be an ideal testbed for new space infrastructure, proximity operations, space mining and resource processing technologies.

And while there are many challenges to a successful space mining program (economics, fuel, human safety, etc.), one of the biggest hurdles is physically mining and processing materials in the extreme and unstructured environment of space. It is like nothing we encounter on Earth.

When it comes to physically collecting samples, especially in quantities beyond those needed for scientific analysis, designers face several challenges. Some risks such as proximity operations, landing, and traversing are easier to understand and model, and hence these risks could be quantified. However, mining and mineral processing in a vacuum — and especially in a reduced gravity environment — is difficult to imagine in the abstract. At this point, many risks are simply not addressable with the amount of information we currently have. In addition, the kinds of materials to be gathered, their location, the volumes needed, on-site processing required and the end use of the materials must all be clearly defined in order to develop the mining strategy and the overall system architecture.

Current materials acquisition and analysis systems are best suited to sampling and surveying objects of interest. Any viable mining mission relies on a comprehensive understanding of the chemical makeup and physical properties of the site early in the process. After gaining a technical understanding of the composition and material properties of the resource lode, larger-scale mining efforts could begin with spacecraft tailored to the given material. In terms of supporting settlement on the Moon or Mars, this would entail special tools and autonomous vehicles designed to gather regolith, ice deposits or other materials useful to habitation. Many astroid mining programs seek to extract useful resources (such as precious metals) and return them to Earth, and keep other resources (such as oxygen, hydrogen and water) in space to power future human exploration.

Given the complexity and constraints of drilling and mining in progressively more extreme and difficult-to-reach environments here on Earth, mining in space is challenging but realistic. And if we ever want to get serious about human exploration and colonization of the solar system, there’s no alternative to gathering local resources for fuel, water and construction materials. In this respect, space mining may be the ultimate high-risk, high-reward robotic initiative.

We’re not starting from scratch. Much of this technology is based on sample collection and analysis work that the space community, and Honeybee Robotics, has been working on for decades. Over the past 25 years, Honeybee has built over fifty sample acquisition, excavation, mining and processing systems; we’ve made ten of these devoted to acquiring cores for analysis, such as envisioned for the Mars 2020 mission. The following are a few examples that represent a breadth of unique space mining technologies.

Sample acquisition and caching concepts for Mars 2020 Mission

Current plans for NASA’s Mars 2020 mission are based on the Mars Science Laboratory landing system and vehicle platform, with enhanced tools and capabilities. Mars sample return is one capability NASA is exploring. Here, Honeybee demonstrates its expertise in planetary drilling, core sample acquisition, and sample caching with an architecture for a sample return mission.

Icebreaker / LITA Drill

The 1-meter class Mars drill, LITA, during field testing on Carnegie Mellon’s Zoe rover.

Honeybee’s next-generation space drill, LITA, is designed to reach more than 1 meter deep into Mars, Europa or other bodies in the solar system. The drill has performed successfully under Mars pressures in analogous environments, including the Arctic and in Antarctica. Here, it’s shown deployed on the Zoe rover built by David Wettergreen’s team at Carnegie Mellon University, where it is gathering subsurface samples from the Atacama Desert in Chile to test for signs of life.

Auto-Gopher Deep Drill

The Auto-Gopher drill, designed for deep planetary drilling from a small platform.

The Auto-Gopher drill is a wire-line rotary-hammer drill, whose depth of penetration is limited only by the length of the wire that suspends it. This enables drilling at great depths, beyond the reach of traditional or telescoping drill architectures. The drill has been successfully field tested in gypsum, which offers conditions similar to that of water-ice at low temperature. A 2012 field test showed the drill capable of capturing 32 cores down to a depth of 3 m, with cores pulled every 10 cm, over the course of 10 hours. Integration with in-drill sensors would enable in-situ analysis of deep subsurface geological and environmental characteristics.

Asteroid Water Extractor

The concept Asteroid Water Extractor, designed for reconnaissance and resource collection.

The Asteroid Water Extractor system concept gathers water from asteroids within tight mass and power constraints, making it an ideal system for early in-situ resource extraction in support of human spaceflight. The configuration of drills located on each lander leg adds redundancy and helps maintain down-force in a microgravity environment. Water collected from the icy dirt is removed and stored for later use.

Pneumatic Miner

A functional prototype of the pneumatic mining system in Honeybee’s vacuum chamber.

Pneumatic excavation is an emerging technology that uses gas to mine and transport regolith. Initial test results have shown that one gram of pressurized gas can loft almost 6,000 grams of soil under lunar-like conditions (low gravity and in a vacuum). The excavation gas can be carried in liquid form in a designated tank, generated on site by burning residual propellant in the lander, or even generated as a byproduct of the ISRU reaction process. Because the pneumatic system has no moving parts, it is ideally suited to the lunar environment, where pervasive and highly abrasive dust introduces opportunities for mechanical failure.

Percussive Excavator

Modular percussive excavation technology reduces down-force needed by a factor of 40.

Because many mining targets, such as the Moon and Mars, have just a fraction of gravity compared to the Earth, mining and excavation systems must not rely on large down force. Percussive excavation uses vibration or hammer action to reduce required digging forces by a factor of 40. This in turn reduces the mass requirement of the lunar excavator. Because every kilogram of Lunar mission payload adds approximately $100,000 to mission cost, this technology offers billions of dollars in savings. This is a flexible, modular technology that can be mounted on a variety of handheld tools or autonomous vehicles for maximum operational flexibility.

Link to audio file (47:00)

Link to transcript

In today’s episode we speak with Stephen Gorevan from Honeybee Robotics about how he and Chris Chapman started the company and how his childhood dream of working for NASA got them into space robotics. The interview, which was recorded before the landing of Curiosity on Mars, gives us all the details about the equipment they built for the Mars Science Laboratory, including the Sample Manipulation System (SMS) and the Dust Removal Tool (DRT) which will enable the mission to explore and analyze the Martian environment. We also hear about their latest developments in small scale satellites called Cubesats.

Stephen Gorevan

Stephen Gorevan co-founded Honeybee Robotics in 1983 and currently serves as the company’s Chairman. He is principally responsible for guiding the company’s direction toward the application of advanced robotic and automation techniques to new applications in the aerospace sector. His responsibilities include new technology development, company and engineering management, design and systems engineering. Gorevan has over 25 years of experience in leading advanced robotics and automation design, development, and implementation efforts for NASA, defense and industry. He currently serves as a Co-Investigator on the science teams for the Mars Exploration Rovers and the Mars Science Laboratory SAM instrument and is a member of the Venus Science Definition Team.

Sample Manipulation System

Ncube-2, a Norwegian Cubesat

The Dust Removal Tool (DRT)

Links:

• Download mp3 (28.2MB)
• Subscribe to Robots using iTunes
• Subscribe to Robots using RSS
• Honeybee Robotics

Link to audio file (28:07)

In today’s show we bring you to NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) Open House, just in time to prepare for the landing of the Curiosity Mars Rover in less than 10 days.

Every year, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory opens its doors to over 38,000 visitors. This year’s theme was “Great Journeys”, inviting visitors to share in the wonders of space through high-definition and 3-D videos, live demonstrations, interactions with scientists and engineers and a first look at JPL’s new Earth Science Center.

As we walk you through the JPL mission control center, clean rooms and facilities, we stop to chat with JPL engineers and developers about the many space systems we encounter including the rovers Athlete, Spirit & Opportunity and the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter. This year’s highlight was the Mars Rover Curiosity, scheduled to land on August 5th. Curiosity, which is part of the the Science Laboratory Mission, will assess whether Mars ever was, or is still today, an environment able to support microbial life.

People we had a chance to speak with include Tod Litwin & Megan Richardson (Mars Exploration Booth), Kit Kennedy (Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter), Mike Watkins (MSL Rover Curiosity) and Dimitri Zarzhitsky (Mobility and Robotic Technologies).

Links:

• Download mp3 (18.4)
• Subscribe to Robots using iTunes
• Subscribe to Robots using RSS
• JPL Homepage