Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “driving”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 901 records · Page 50
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2022

Lunar Rover Localization Using Craters as Landmarks

Onboard localization capabilities for planetary rovers to date have used relative navigation, by integrating combinations of wheel odometry, visual odometry, and inertial measurements during each drive to track position relative to the start of each drive. At the end of each drive, a “ground-in-the-loop” (GITL) interaction is used to get a position update from human operators in a more global reference frame, such as a map frame defined by orbital reconnaissance imaging of a large region around the rover’s current position. For Mars rovers, this typically has involved downlinking imagery from the rover mast cameras and using interactive visualization tools on Earth to register such images to the orbital reconnaissance images. For safety purposes, rover mission operations typically specify “keep out zones”, which human operators recognize as being unsafe in the orbital images. Autonomous rover drives are limited in distance so that accumulated relative navigation error does not risk the possibility of the rover driving into a keep out zone. The allowable autonomous drive distance in this mode of operation depends on the distribution of keep out zones and the accuracy of relative navigation; in practice, drive limits of a few hundred meters between GITL cycles are to be expected. Several rover mission concepts have recently been studied that require much longer drives between GITL cycles, particularly for the Moon. This includes lunar rover mission concepts that involve (1) driving mostly in sunlight at low latitudes, (2) driving in permanently shadowed regions near the south pole, and (3) a mixture of day and night driving in mid-latitudes. These concepts include total traverse distance requirements of up to 1,800 km in 4 Earth years, with individual drives of several kilometers between stops for downlink. These concepts require greater autonomy to minimize GITL cycles to enable such large range; onboard global localization is a key element of such autonomy. Multiple techniques have been studied in the past for onboard rover global localization, including radio navigation aiding from an orbiter, recognizing horizon landmarks that are known in a regional elevation map, and correlating a local elevation map created onboard the rover with a regional elevation map. These techniques all have drawbacks, including requiring an expensive extra mission element (navigation orbiter), unavailability of sufficient regional elevation map data, or limited accuracy in resulting position estimates (e.g. a few hundred meters with horizon landmarks). For the Moon, the ubiquitous craters offer another possibility, which involves mapping craters from orbit, then recognizing crater landmarks with cameras and/or a lidar onboard the rover. This approach is applicable everywhere on the Moon, does not require high resolution stereo imaging from orbit as some other approaches do, and has potential to enable position knowledge with order of 10 m accuracy at all times. This paper will provide more detail on our technical approach to crater-based lunar rover localization and will present initial results on crater detection using 3-D point cloud data from onboard lidar or stereo cameras and using shading cues in monocular onboard imagery.

Ono, M.↗
NASA NTRS2024

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

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

LTV↗
NASA NTRS2025

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

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

LTV↗
NASA NTRS1977

Mechanical sequencer

A mechanical sequencer having a rotatable drive shaft is described. The drive shaft has a spline formed thereon. A freely rotatable shaft contains a plurality of rollers positioned thereon, the axis of the freely rotatable shaft having an axis parallel to and offset from the axis of the drive shaft. A drive fitting has an opening therein, the drive fitting being positioned on the drive shaft spline for rotating the fitting with the shaft. A finger is formed integral with the drive fitting for enabling the fitting to move the rollers and the freely rotatable shift. A crank structure is positioned in a plane in a plane perpendicular to the axis of the drive shaft and the freely rotatable shaft. The crank structure has a drive shaft opening through which the shaft passes. The crank structure further contains a slot into which the freely rotatable shaft and one of the rollers extends for driving the crank structure during movement of the freely rotatable shaft.

Appleberry, W. T.↗
NASA NTRS1998

Apparatus and Method for Focusing a Light Beam in a Three-Dimensional Recording Medium by a Dynamic Holographic Device

An apparatus is disclosed for reading and/or writing information or to from an optical recording medium having a plurality of information storage layers. The apparatus includes a dynamic holographic optical element configured to focus light on the optical recording medium. a control circuit arranged to supply a drive signal to the holographic optical element, and a storage device in communication with the control circuit and storing at least a first drive signal and a second drive signal. The holographic optical element focusses light on a first one of the plurality of information storage layers when driven by the first drive signal on a second one of the plurality of information storage layers when driven by the second drive signal. An optical switch is also disclosed for connecting at least one light source in a source array to at least one light receiver in a receiver array. The switch includes a dynamic holographic optical element configured to receive light from the source array and to transmit light to the receiver array, a control circuit arranged to supply a drive signal to the holographic optical element, and a storage device in communication with the control circuit and storing at least a first drive signal and a second drive signal. The holographic optical element connects a first light source in the source array to a first light receiver in the receiver array when driven by the first drive signal and the holographic optical element connects the first light source with the first light receiver and a second light receiver when driven by the second drive signal.

Juday, Richard D.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Propulsion Electric Grid Simulator (PEGS) for Future Turboelectric Distributed Propulsion Aircraft

NASA Glenn Research Center, in collaboration with the aerospace industry and academia, has begun the development of technology for a future hybrid-wing body electric airplane with a turboelectric distributed propulsion (TeDP) system. It is essential to design a subscale system to emulate the TeDP power grid, which would enable rapid analysis and demonstration of the proof-of-concept of the TeDP electrical system. This paper describes how small electrical machines with their controllers can emulate all the components in a TeDP power train. The whole system model in Matlab/Simulink was first developed and tested in simulation, and the simulation results showed that system dynamic characteristics could be implemented by using the closed-loop control of the electric motor drive systems. Then we designed a subscale experimental system to emulate the entire power system from the turbine engine to the propulsive fans. Firstly, we built a system to emulate a gas turbine engine driving a generator, consisting of two permanent magnet (PM) motors with brushless motor drives, coupled by a shaft. We programmed the first motor and its drive to mimic the speed-torque characteristic of the gas turbine engine, while the second motor and drive act as a generator and produce a torque load on the first motor. Secondly, we built another system of two PM motors and drives to emulate a motor driving a propulsive fan. We programmed the first motor and drive to emulate a wound-rotor synchronous motor. The propulsive fan was emulated by implementing fan maps and flight conditions into the fourth motor and drive, which produce a torque load on the driving motor. The stator of each PM motor is designed to travel axially to change the coupling between rotor and stator. This feature allows the PM motor to more closely emulate a wound-rotor synchronous machine. These techniques can convert the plain motor system into a unique TeDP power grid emulator that enables real-time simulation performance using hardware-in-the-loop (HIL).

electric power grid emulator↗