Slashdot Mirror
NASA show off new 'Star Wars' type PDA
urk writes "
NASA's got some prototypes of a new 'personal satellite assistant' that could be joining astronauts in 3 yrs time, from telling them about warnings of gas levels, checking on payloads to reading them bed time stories or teaching them russian. It's a little red sphere that floats around the shuttle / space station by itself. It should be able to talk, relay information and have conversations. Star wars comes to life! " The inspiration for this came from the Practice Ball in the Falcon in A New Hope.
Right now they are only working in 2 dimensions - they have a seperately controlled hover thing that suspends it on a cushion of air while they work on the thruster jets that move it from side to side, forward and backward. This same technology will be used when they incorporate the 3rd dimension of movement. (got a buddy working on this project - he had pics up on the net, but they took them down.)
So what happens if this sphere 'thinks' and decides to kill off the astronauts? NASA wouldn't be too happy then... :)
It looks like you have an oxygen leak.
Would you like help?
[] Get help fixing the oxygen leak
[] Just fix the oxygen leak without help
[] Cancel
NASA says they modeled it after the lightsaber training remote, but I can help but think that if you paint it black and stick a big ass hypodermic needle on it and you'd have the interrogator droid.
"Now we'll discuss yout the location of your secret rebel base."
It's great to hear from someone on the inside. Thanks for posting!
Here's a few of my off-the-cuff-dime-a-dozen ideas for propulsion mods/alternatives:
1. Your greatest fan.
ONE fan, possibly exterior, with some sort of rotating outer shell to direct the thrust. This could be a bigger fan with more thrust. Directing the thrust effectively could involve an overly fragile assembley, be overly complex and use up a lot of power, tho'. Or have a single fan statically mounted, but give the SMR some sort of internal gyro thingy that causes it to spin around to redirect the thrust quickly and on the fly (pun intended). It'd be like the space ships on the old Space War game, or Asteroids, except in 3d.
2. Alka-Selter.
The tablets go in, the chamber seals, water is injected, and voila! 'Gas' propulsion, directed to any of the 6 exhaust ports. (belch) Excuse me. Give it a docking bay so it can change tablets itself.
3. Electro-magnetic.
The power of attraction instead of thrust. There's lots of metal in the shuttle, I think. Would it take a lot of power to use internal magnets to pull it this way and that? Bit of a stretch, I know.
4. Carrots.
Design an SMR that likes carrots. Attach a short stick to the top of the SMR with a small bit of carrot fastened to the end of it. The SMR, equipped with various genetic electronic algorhythms, will eventually engineer its own way of attaining the carrot, the most likely result of which will be some sort of thrust. The danger here of course is that it could develop a mutation to get the carrot that compromises the integrity of the crew, like psionic abilities enabling the SMR to psychicly manipulate the crew into endless research and experimentation tasks soley devoted to growing carrots in space, at the expense of their normal duties and survival.
Well. There you have it. Can I have a lab coat?
**>>BELCH
OK, these little orbs are really cool and everything, but how much will they cost? I'm not just talking about the cost per ball; I'm talking about all of the research, development, Vomit Comet flights, programming, hardware, man-hours, and evertyhing else that goes into the making of a successful prototype. Correct me if I'm wrong, but NASA has been facing the budgetary squeeze for quite some time now by members of Congress. The space station is barely staying afloat (with no help from the Russians ;-) ), and NASA is struggling to find capital for numerous other projects. Could the money spent on this admittedly cool project have been better used elsewhere?
The astronauts originally wanted a "tricorder"-type device; a hand-held status report would have been just fine, and a floating sphere with voice recognition is overkill for this project. Was there perhaps a simpler and less expensive way to accomplish this task?
Friends don't let friends misuse the subjunctive.
Okay - this may get a bit disjointed.
Propulsion: I would think a stationary, counter-rotating dual blade ducted fan (to solve torque problem) with tubes would be a good way to propel it. Basically, have all the tubes open or closed all the time, but have a tiny wastegate in each to alter the airflow. I would think it could be made lighter than using separate fans for everything.
Another nifty device to have onboard would be a laser pointer:
(remote): Dave, there is a serious oxygen leak over here!
(Dave): Where?
(remote): Right there!
etc... some of those conversations would be much easier if the remote had a means of pointing to exactly what it was talking about.
As far as the voice recognition and control... since it costs about $10k per pound to get those astronauts up there in the first place, I think a ground controller could be paid to sit there & do nothing but watch the feedback from the remotes - if the remote is less than 90% certain what it's doing, he could clarify by keyboard...
I was thinking a compressed gas propulsion system might work, but it would need to be something that can be done with small, lower pressure cartridges (CO2 and Nitrous Oxide come to mind...but I'm not sure I'd want a half-dozen remotes hovering around me farting Carbon Dioxide or Laughing gas...)
And yes, the fans spinning up in micro-g cause all kinds of control problems. From where I'm sitting, I can see two
people that are using up all of our writing pads trying to solve them.
Hi! I might have a solution. I'd guess you are using the fans in pairs, two next to each other
on three axis. (if not, this solution is bogus)
Anyway, set the fans up so that they counter-rotate. The spins will (roughly) cancel each other out.
If the SMR was designed with this in mind (the structure), it could be built with a 3-axis "core" that is hollow, with the fans mounted inside, so it could thrust in 6 directions. It would be able to produce thrust in 3 directions, and change vectors quickly.
Anyway, if you want to brainstorm, email me at "gigantin@shore.net" or start a discussion on sci.space.policy, with either "SMR" or "PSA" in the subject.
Good luck with the project, it's a great idea! And, market the damn thing, when it's finished! 8)
J05H
gigantino.tv - Heavy but weighs nothing.
Okay, not to throw a light of doubt on this, but I'm not so sure an A/C claiming to work at NASA throwing around some ideas should really be trusted.
Couple reasons:
1) The fans spinning wouldn't be an issue with a simple fixed-axis gyroscopic system like they use in airplanes for the horizon control.
2) You can't use one of those with six fans, that's the biggest proof that this guy doesn't know what he's talking about. To move around in a 2-d surface, you'd need fans to push it in each of the directions in 3-d space (6, unless you're reversing the fans, but that'd mean having air passages through the device, which uses up a lot of the interior space), PLUS you need fans to control orientation in space. Sure, you could use actuators on a system like the one I mentioned above to force it to turn against the interia of the gyroscopes, but if they were doing that, then the stability wouldn't be an issue would it?
There's pleanty of other ways to counteract the tendancy of the device to spin when the fans turn -- like doubling up on the fans, on axis, and spinning them in opposite directions. But that's twelve fans, and still doesn't solve the problem how how to adjuct yaw, pitch, and roll.
I dunno, I just don't find this post that likely to be real.
I also can't imagine that carrying compressed air really would be an issue. Weight isn't an issue, only mass. And anyone whose ever had the luck to see someone knock a valve off a scuba tank can tell you that mass to thrust, you can get a lot of oomph out of compressed gas, especially in a microgravity environment.
You'd think an engineer working on this would know the distinction.
Voice rec is getting pretty damn good these days actually. I have a friend at Lucent who's working on "Daisy"- a sort of computerized secretary. And even though she's working on relavtively older tech, she's VERY good at voice rec and command lookup- bad phone lines can screw her up, but I don't imagine that would be the case in space. The real problems in voice rec aren't actual recognition, but trying to figure out confused meanings (like "read" (present) and "read" (past) being two different words). Doing this requires tons more computational power for syntax and grammar analysis, which is usually way more bulky than designers want (and terrible forfloating PDAs....) But if you use a simple, constant verbal command system, there really isn't any problem, and depending on how big you want the language lookup tables to be, you can definately get "holler when it's lunch time." Holler = verb lunch time = noun when = conditional- time- related to "lunch time" command form once speech recognition is down, creating a modular language interp isn't THAT hard. It can be VERY buggy, because it's just about impossible to program for all eventualities of creative linguistic expression, but as long as you don't read the "Jaberwocky" to the thing, it should be able to do just fine.
There have been a lot of posts about how fan control would work in 3 space, and the answer is NOT 6 fans (though that would work). The minimum number of control points you need is 4, distributed evenly over the surface of the device.
The four would give you all the mobility you would need, though the control logic would be horrible (but logic is cheap, hardware is expensive) For starters, every adjustment would use all the fans (except for maybee a few distinct special cases).
Also, if it's gyro stabilized, your aditude adjustments would largely be gyro based, with occasional gyro spin downs using the fans.
Personaly, I would stick a dual fan in the core (on axis, spining in alternate directions) and route inflow and out flow with valves leading to external control points. properly engineered, it could be used as a gyro as well.
My $0.02
-Crutcher
-- Crutcher --
#include <disclaimer.h>
Confucius say: Is better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt. I believe the AC; I can't take you seriously.
Time is Nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once... the bitch.
Damn Jim, I'm a ball, not a doctor!
I doubt the voice recognition and analyzation software to do what they are talking about even exists, or will for awhile. 'Give a holler when it's lunch time'??? A small nitpick I know but pretty important. I wouldn't want to be fixing a leak or something when I tell the droid thingie to get me a wrench and it fetches a glass of Tang. It's definately a cool idea though.
These would make a really *cool* floating, talking beowulf cluster.
Reminds me alot of B.O.B. from the old Disney flick The Black Hole. If it runs WinCE, Microsoft could market it as: Microsoft B.O.B.!!!
"It could also sit by an astronaut, offering advice on an intricate systems upgrade" I gave up on thinking how cool this was. It reminded me of the oh-so-hightech cars of the eighties that -oh my god- talked to you. Those puppies were so cool that they advised you to fasten your seat belt ("please fasten your seatbelt"), or that your door was open ("your passenger side door is ajar").
If our NASA elite have not yet set some sort of detection system to alert the astronauts of an oxygen leak then as of now - I have stopped supporting them.
Lastly, I'm sure that's the first thing an astronaut wants when he is trying to think of a solution is a stupid red ball flying around his head like a horse-fly saying -
"YOU HAVE AN OXYGEN LEAK"
"YOU ARE GOING TO DIE SOON IF YOU DON'T THINK OF SOMETHING"
"GOOD THING I DON'T NEED OXYGEN"
"YOU SHOULD UPDATE YOUR CARGO BAY DOOR DRIVERS"
"I AM A BALL, WHY AREN'T YOU LISTENING TO ME"
I could see it now - an astronaut swating violently at some ball that is dodging his every swipe while repeating in a Johny5 voice "you have an oxygen leak, you have an oxygen leak"
I would just save the R&D money and stick with the alert buzzer/light.
. . . "Welcome to the jungle baby, you're gonna die!"
If this works, expect a larger unit for vacuum work, as NASA tries to do everything possible to reduce the number of EVAs required. You would need another propulsion system (likely a compressed-air system), some lead shielding (orbital radiation is likely to mess up your average microprocessor), and something to bleed off waste heat (you have to radiate, rather than just dump heat to the surrounding air).
--The basis of all love is respect
It would be pretty much trivial to have straightening vanes on all the fans, so that the net torque is zero... or not. Another solution is contra-rotating fans on opposite faces; they can either produce thrust while cancelling torque, or produce torque while cancelling thrust. This allows the fans to push, twist, or any combination along/around the axis of the fan shafts. Pairs arranged as top/bottom and left/right look easy, but a back/forward pair appears problematic for little things like the camera field of view.
Time is Nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once... the bitch.
No offense, folks, but I'm seeing a lot of posts offering some rather obvious ideas for providing propulsion to these things.
:)
Think about it: These guys are NASA engineers; I don't think a bunch of Slashdot posts are going to come up with anything they haven't thought of yet.
That's not to say I don't enjoy reading them, and I'd probably enjoy reading NASA's take on propulsion ideas more, but here on Slashdot, these ideas are all academic and, for the most part, either redundant or faulty.
Just use the fans for acceleration. Use pitch/roll/yaw gyroscopes for steering. That way you control spin without worring about COE.
-- lk t lv ll th vwls t f wrds. T svs lts f tm t wrt bt ts pn n th ss t rd nd mks m lk lk cmplt dpsht.
I figure I may as well chime in here. I'm one of the research scientists at NASA working on the PSA (though it's been renamed SMR, Spacecraft MicroRobot, nobody seems to want to call it that). Right now, we have a version that floats on an air hockey table in two dimensions (actually, a fifteen ton granite slab is the table, and the PSA has an air pump so that it floats like a hovercraft), just as a proof of concept and to test control algorithms. We are currently designing the gimbal to test the three dimensional (though larger, since it will still be a prototype) version, which we are also designing right now.
As for a few of the things posted by other people: the speech technology is pretty far along. If you look at the NYT this morning, there is an article about a car computer that accepts speech commands. There are still many issues that we need to work on, but it's not that far off.
The current plan for propulsion are a bank of six fans (not pictured on the model). We have four fans on the 2D version, so 6 will give us enough to move in 3D. Compressed air is a nice idea, but the question becomes how to direct it, how to generate it (assumming that you don't want to have to carry a canister, which is very heavy), and how much force you can actually get from it.
I like the image of a PSA avatar (the dancing paperclip).
We can test it in microgravity in two ways: First, we are building the gimbal that I mentioned above, which allows us to test it in a limited range here in the lab. Second, we will use the "Vomit Comet", the plane that goes into a long dive, providing low-gravity for about thirty seconds at a time.
And yes, the fans spinning up in micro-g cause all kinds of control problems. From where I'm sitting, I can see two people that are using up all of our writing pads trying to solve them.
Help you practice your lightsabre skills.
Actually work as a tennis ball;
Always end its statements by 'But then again, I'm just a ball!'
Come coated with Nerf foam for stress relief.
"There is no surer way to ruin a good discussion than to contaminate it with the facts."