Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NASA Robots and Rovers At Play In the Desert

Posted by timothy on from the not-enslaving-robots-no-sirree dept.

Geoffrey.landis writes "Robots and rovers will be running around in the desert in the NASA Desert RATS ('Research and Technology Studies') test in Arizona, including the heavy-lift rover 'All-Terrain Hex-Legged Extra-Terrestrial Explorer,' or ATHLETE. (See videos from newscientist.com). Some NASA robots from an earlier field test of robotic lunar excavators can be seen on video from the NASA page."

54 comments

  1. Desert Research and Technology Studies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Shouldn't that be "DRAT"s?

  2. THIS .... by WindBourne · · Score: 4, Insightful

    is exactly what NASA should be doing. RD to develop systems for off-world exploration and sciences. If we really do privatize Launch and hopefully human capabilities, we can allow NASA to go back to what they did in the 60's; RD new ideas/concepts and push the boundaries of science.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:THIS .... by kj_kabaje · · Score: 3, Insightful

      While I agree with the premise of NASA doing more basic research the privatization remark is a non sequitur. NASA has consistently had its funding slashed since the 60's. Increasing funding to allow them to do basic research should be the aim, not maintain a budget which doesn't allow them to perform their current appropriate and mandated missions.

    2. Re:THIS .... by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      To launch anal people into a tizzy ;-P

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    3. Re:THIS .... by kj_kabaje · · Score: 1

      Typo in my post. I meant "appropriated", not "appropriate". I'm not trying to make value judgments on what missions NASA should and shouldn't do.

    4. Re:THIS .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously mod the parent down. This isn't insightful. The 60's were about a huge government investment into applied research, not all about pure science. Parent is way off base--lunar even.

    5. Re:THIS .... by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      Here http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=29107 they are testing a lunar port-o-jon. Slightly over sized so the astronauts can maneuver into position with all the space equipment

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    6. Re:THIS .... by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      Imagine the discoveries that could be made if NASA had its head quarters on the South Pole of the Moon?

    7. Re:THIS .... by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      I thought that we already did. According to a number of posts here, it is just surrounded by either hollywood or desert.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    8. Re:THIS .... by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      There's more truth to your logic than meets the eye. I personally believe that if NASA were to actually get involved at the personal level of the exploration of space, then new discoveries would be more along the lines of what the average person would agree with; and from a revenue analysis, it's the average person that is paying for NASA's existence. From a more elevated horizon, Bureaucrats are successful at mantaining the Status Quo, not at Innovation. Space Exploration requires a more hands on experience, not a bag a Popcorn, and a Drink while sitting in an air conditioned room at the 'Cape.

  3. Predictable ending by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Martha, git me gun. I spotted one of them metallic Martian dogs again sniffing 'round a cactus. Everyone knows Martian dog pee is pure poison."

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
    1. Re:Predictable ending by snspdaarf · · Score: 1

      And here I thought Martian dog pee could be refined into a motor fuel.
      My mistake.

      --
      Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
    2. Re:Predictable ending by causality · · Score: 2, Funny

      And here I thought Martian dog pee could be refined into a motor fuel. My mistake.

      Well yeah, but you wouldn't drink motor fuel. It's pure poison!

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
  4. Re:Dune coons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    This is actually very insightful because it is likely that this technology will be used to develop fully or partially-autonomous killing robots to fight in the Middle East.
     
    The research is done under the umbrella of NASA so that the idiot public will feel good about it without thinking about how we'll be pissing our tax dollars and our credibility as a nation into the quagmire for another 10 years, just to fatten the pockets of the military industrial complex.

  5. So what comes first by Camaro · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The acronym or what it stands for? I always wondered that. Maybe companys and organizations have a whole team of people who's sole job is to brainstorm cool acronyms and then figure out words to fit.

    Anyway, I still think this exercise would be cool to watch.

    1. Re:So what comes first by natehoy · · Score: 1

      I agree, the exercise would be cool to watch, and by that I mean both exercises - the actual robots doing their thing, and watching people in a conference room try to brainstorm "not quite stupid enough to laugh" phrases that fit a word-based acronym.

      But, after all, NASA is the one who now has a treadmill called the "Combined Operational Load Bearing External Resistance Treadmill", proving they have a sense of humor and a streak of brilliance at acronyms. They managed to appease the members of Colbert Nation and get a good laugh at the same time. :)

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    2. Re:So what comes first by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      I smell a new web-based biz startup

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    3. Re:So what comes first by Migraineman · · Score: 1

      Not to be pedantic, but technically it's a bacronym.

    4. Re:So what comes first by smoker2 · · Score: 1

      Which acronym ? I'm thinking NASA, as I'm pretty sure it used to mean National Aeronautic and Space Agency. But here they are fucking around in the desert. Is that their purview ?
      Surely they should concentrate on flying and getting between planets ?

  6. Learning to land by Jerry+Smith · · Score: 1

    I think practicing around on ground-level is good, but one of the mayor problems is getting the buggers there safely on the ground. I'd practice them to land.

    --
    All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.
    1. Re:Learning to land by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, that should read 'major', darnit.

    2. Re:Learning to land by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Uhm...those are typically two different vehicles, one being the carrier to the other (sure, you have to build the rover within certain mass & size specs, compatibility generally, but that's all, roughly)

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
  7. Re:Dune coons by wonkavader · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Agreed, on many levels. You're completely right that this is a stalking horse.

    On the other hand, if we're going to fight wars where we pacify populations then this is a much cheaper way to do it, in the long run, then the current way.

    (I was about to say "pointless wars where we pacify populations" but you know, even though the one(s) we're in have been badly mismanaged by a pack of morons and at least one of them we had no business getting into at all, that doesn't mean that pacifying a country is always a pointless, devastating, callous exercise. Almost always, but not completely so.)

    Besides, out of the killer robots which roam the countryside killing every biped or vehicle in a neutral zone will come better bots to clean our floors, install solar panels, manufacture AND install stuff, etc.

    HG wells makes the point in _The Food of the Gods_ that every, EVERY technology gets used, no matter how annoying or absurd the consequences. And specifically every tech is ultimately used for war. HG Wells was right on so many things it's scary.

  8. Sped Up by wonkavader · · Score: 1

    All these films are sped up. There's possible a jump cut (human intervention? long delay?) in one or more of them.

    Will Moore's law make this go away? Is the problem a simple CPU issue? Will 8 times faster machines in 3-4 years give us speedy robots that don't need to be shown in fast motion?

    1. Re:Sped Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean like this one?

      My guess is either that these robots are designed for lighter gravity and therefor underpowered or the inserted lag in the testing to similate real world conditions of distance.

      Of course there is also the possibility that they are slowing the maneuvering in an attempt to not damage them or even rotate different programing training (people at the controls) and so on.

    2. Re:Sped Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Is because the control software is written in Ruby

    3. Re:Sped Up by swanzilla · · Score: 3, Informative

      Processing speed is not the issue at hand. Energy management basically requires these things to move slowly, in order to achieve the mission goals set forth. Regardless of the CPU, simulations like these are limited to roughly twelve hours of sunlight as the power source. You could design a robot to move very quickly, but the energy expended to increase speed would not be beneficial to the overall aim of the project. Take the Mars Pathfinder mission into consideration. Over the course of around 2000 hours, the rover took over 17000 pictures and travelled about 100 meters. It didn't move quickly, but achieved what it set out to do.

      --
      0 = 1 + e^(Alt something)
    4. Re:Sped Up by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Funny

      All these films are sped up.

      That's so you can finish watching them before their server is slashdotted.
           

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
  9. Re:Dune coons by Paracelcus · · Score: 2, Funny

    But will they become self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time on August 29th and threaten humanity?

    --
    I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
  10. GMOD + Reallife = NASA! by carp3_noct3m · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Since there have been a number of recent updates to GMOD (a Half-Life 2 open sandbox "game" where you can create just about anything you can think of within the limits of the physics/materials/models) came out I have played with it everyonce in a while and find it very fun to take ideas I've had in the past and try to make them and try to find out how well they would work. I think the potential is there for very easy and semi-realistic prototype and R&D type building to go on, the poor mans NASA testbed! I have seen and made many designs, and one that I keep coming to is some sort of all terrain vehicle (I am a ATV and Jeep guy that loves off roading) and many of my designs have looked very similar to the ATHLETE. One thing I think those scientist types could use is some real world off-roading/rocking experience. Anybody can just rumble across rough terrain, the important part is to do it A) without breaking anything or putting yourself at an extreme risk/reward ratio, and B)Do it well enough that it actually becomes "smooth". Off roading is all about wheel-placement and physics estimation combined with experience. If my wheelbase is X long and my approach/departure angles are B and this incline is Y steep, should I attack it straight or at an angle, etc. Anyway, now I'm just rambling but I would give a left nut to have the funding to be able to create some of my off-roading ideas in real life, so its really cool to get to see other people able to, till then back to GMOD.

    --
    "It's ok, I'm completely secure as long as my iron is off"
    1. Re:GMOD + Reallife = NASA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of those folks do have off-roading experience. The SCARAB (I think it's CMU's), which showed up at Moses Lake last year, has been working the rocking (rocking the working?) pretty hard. I think they call their technique "worming". It's essentially rocking applied to getting up steep slopes. Good stuff. You should read up on it, I think you'd enjoy it.

      The ATHLETEs are huge and designed to carry extremely high-value payloads. They are slow - though faster than I would have expected - and can do some really neat stuff with their legs/wheels.

      As a counterpoint, the K10 series robots are more of the "scout" type mentioned in a different post. These are smallish, made with as many COTS elements as possible (running RHEL for example), and designed with multiple control modes (full/part autonomy) in mind. They do the scouting in advance of higher-value exploration / engineering. One of the things they were experimenting with last year were com bricks, a sort of trail-of-breadcrumbs com network idea.

  11. ! *LIKE* It! by camperdave · · Score: 1

    I want one. It reminds me of the ODEX 1 robot from the early 1980s. However, this one is a lot more capable.

    I guess I'll have to get a few more motors and build one myself.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  12. Exactly like the 1960s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Of course NASA did a lot of desert work in the 1960s. They had to create all those fake moon-landing films and photographs they released in the early 1970s.

  13. AH! by wonkavader · · Score: 1

    So better solar panel, better batteries, etc. are the real slowdown, not mechanical stuff?

    Do you know if the processing power is now in excess, such that they could go pleasantly fast (unencumbered human speed or better) if they had unlimited power?

    1. Re:AH! by Tekfactory · · Score: 1

      How fast do you want this thing to move when the Lag to and from Mars is measured in Minutes?

      Your fast Rover is very likely to wind up in a ditch before you see it coming to correct its trajectory.

    2. Re:AH! by wonkavader · · Score: 1

      While you don't want to travel fast, once you know an area very well, you want to dig samples quickly, pick things up and place them (if you're doing assembly) quickly, etc.

    3. Re:AH! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have two robots designed to compliment each other and released at the same mission site.

      First robot will be your scout. It'll have a good enough AI so it won't go jump off a cliff, so you don't have to worry about 8-minute lag time. And it'll be able to traverse terrain at a good 5-10 MPH (8.05 - 16.09 km/h) for 10 hours at a time, so you can cover a lot of ground and find things of interest. It won't have much extra equipment other than optics, and it's com-link can be minimalized and won't need much power because the second robot will have the relay package and recording equipment that does all the talking back to home. So it can well afford to be "zippy".

      Second robot will contain the science packages and mission communications and not be all that fast. But it can be programmed with safe routes determined by the first, so it doesn't need much at all in the way of AI. It's energy can be used to run more equipment and data sampling stuff. It should be more effective with the equipment, because instead of deciding where to take the equipment the operating team already knows where it should go. So it just traverses from one job to the next, while the first robot does all the looking.

      On the topic of robots that both walk and roll on wheels with minimal transition, ask Japan. Anime artists have been designing those things for years. Although few have actually been built, some conceptual designs are well enough within plausibility that they're worth developing with real engineering behind them. NASA variants of a tachikoma-type chassis in rover form would be pretty spiffy and effective.

    4. Re:AH! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      twin scouting is already in the works, has been for a while. the intelligent robotics group at ames is putting a lot of thought into "robotic precursors". so are many other people. that said, there's no real reason to make them superfast. they carry a lot more than optics, though all the instrumentation is currently along those lines.

      the thing is, optics don't necessarily tell you what's interesting, and the real point of scouting is to high-grade sites for more careful investigation. so the K10s have already been tested with things like optics (binocular), gigapan, microscopic imaging, ground penetrating radar, and lidar... things useful to geologists and engineers.

      the idea is to get them there with enough lead time to be useful. that's relatively easy. then, during the frequent downtime required during human exploration, the robots keep working. the rover concept CHARIOT will also be able to work on its own. there's no reason to just make "vehicles" when most of the time the stuff is up there, humans won't be around to tell it what to do.

  14. Take a Look at the Tweels by Quantus347 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I was involved in the project designing them, so I have to bring your attention to the wheels, which are adapted from Michelin's Tweel design, using metals rather than rubbers which cannot take the vast temperature ranges seen on the lunar surface. Its a spoke based system that is unique in that it accomplishes a uniform pressure on the contact area without the need for any sort of pressurization or air. And while the wire coil wheels used on the original lunar rover had a service life of weeks, these are intended to last years, so that the Athlete's can just roam around the moon, meeting manned missions at whatever landing site they'll be using.

    --
    Common Sense isn't as Common as people think...
    1. Re:Take a Look at the Tweels by andrewd18 · · Score: 1

      so that the Athlete's can just roam around the moon

      http://www.angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif

    2. Re:Take a Look at the Tweels by smoker2 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Nice.

  15. Dept of A.C.R.O.N.Y.M.S. by Arancaytar · · Score: 4, Funny

    Clearly, NASA employs a Department of ACRONYMS:

    Artfully Coded & Readable Operative Names, Yielding Mnemonic Sentences.

  16. Why NOT both by tjstork · · Score: 1

    I think it is fair to say that manned programs push the boundaries of engineering and with it, science. Just because we got a person to hang out in orbit or walk on the moon means that we are masters of it. There is a lot to learn.

    Space science is a strategic priority for the United States or at least should be treated like one. If you need to have basic research and exploration, and I want my manned exploration, then let us geeks stand up for this one, double NASA's budget, and chop something else. Surely we can find 10B out of 150B a year of people that aren't really needing social security disability

    --
    This is my sig.
  17. Re:Dune coons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HG Wells was right on so many things it's scary.

    But not surprising. All the guys thinking this stuff up read HG Wells.

  18. RIP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From TFA:

    The tests will include a simulated 14-day mission during which two crew members -- an astronaut and a geologist -- will live inside NASA's prototype Lunar Electric Rover. They will scout the test area for features of geological interest and conduct simulated moonwalks to collect samples.

    If only they had thought of that a few months ago they could have conducted a genuine moonwalk.

  19. Re:Dune coons by bitrex · · Score: 1

    HG wells makes the point in _The Food of the Gods_ that every, EVERY technology gets used, no matter how annoying or absurd the consequences. And specifically every tech is ultimately used for war.

    You're talking about the SlapChop, right?

  20. I wonder if... by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

    they gave it six legs, just to be able to name it that way:

    'All-Terrain Hex-Legged Extra-Terrestrial Explorer,' or ATHLETE.

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  21. Oh, and.. by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

    From the description

    The first version of the ATHLETE vehicle is under development and has the following characteristics:
    [...]
    * Able to dock or mate with special-purpose devices, including a launchable/releasable grappling hook, refueling stations, excavation implements, and/or special end effectors
    [...]

    That sounds like some wild "mating"... :D

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.