Pancam Filter Issues, Sol 673 |
Pancam Filter Issues, Sol 673 |
Dec 18 2005, 04:46 PM
Post
#16
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 71 Joined: 11-May 05 From: Colorado USA Member No.: 386 |
QUOTE (tty @ Dec 17 2005, 04:09 PM) The bathtub curve really only applies to mechanical systems that can wear out, not to electronic components that tend to have rather constant failure rates. Of course there are lots of mechanical systems on the MER, and up to now they are the ones that have been showing signs of wear and incipient failure. Remember though that some vital electronic component can also fail at any time. tty Actually, in my experience over the past 20 years dealing with aging systems that are still in use but were built in the late 1960's through late 1980's, I have seen that even for electronics there is a right side wall to the bathtub curve. I think that for most electronics systems the end-of-life increase in failures is not seen because the systems are usually discarded upon first failure. The failure curve starts with initial infant mortality, followed by constant fairly low failure rates, and then a significant increase in failures (that at first appears random), with finally a rather catastrophic increase in failures caused by specific issues that affect large numbers of parts. These final failures are traced to things like internal bonding material failures, bimetallic formation leading to bond-wire and other connection failures, migrations of materials (flow), crystal growth, the formation and movement of conductive particulates, seal failures leading to leakage of electrolytes, epoxy degradation with age, shrinkage and hardening of soft goods (in connectors and shock mounts), etc. Most of these processes are greatly exacerbated by environmental extremes and low pressures. So really what we see are materials and mechanical failures within the electronics components. I have seen the oddest things happen. I have also become much more concerned about corrosion on Mars lately. Scott |
|
|
Dec 18 2005, 08:17 PM
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 350 Joined: 20-June 04 From: Portland, Oregon, U.S.A. Member No.: 86 |
As my good friend Yogi Berra once said, "It ain't over til it's over."
|
|
|
Guest_Myran_* |
Dec 18 2005, 08:50 PM
Post
#18
|
Guests |
Nope it isnt over yet, theres more working cameras on the rover. We can still get to see more interesting things even though the perspective would be rather distorted in some cases.
|
|
|
Dec 19 2005, 10:31 AM
Post
#19
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14432 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
You've had to have a failure of 4 cameras to kill of the driveability of a rover, and even then you've had to kill of FHAZ as well to make it really really impossible.
Given that there's a lot of PC imaging scheduled, I think we can put this down to a brief glitch that they understand or perhaps was the result of a brain-fart in a pancam sequence. Funny images, and they'll make a nice entry into a Mars talk anyway Doug |
|
|
Dec 19 2005, 01:22 PM
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 290 Joined: 26-March 04 From: Edam, The Netherlands Member No.: 65 |
QUOTE (djellison @ Dec 19 2005, 10:31 AM) Could this happen (acquisition of the image while the filterwheel is not positioned properly) simply because they sent up a faulty command sequence, or is there really something wrong ? I can imagine that there's a built in safety in the camera that makes sure the camera only snaps while wheel is in right place. Is there ? If yes....it obviously failed now ! |
|
|
Dec 19 2005, 05:27 PM
Post
#21
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 270 Joined: 29-December 04 From: NLA0: Member No.: 133 |
QUOTE (Marcel @ Dec 19 2005, 02:22 PM) I can imagine that there's a built in safety in the camera that makes sure the camera only snaps while wheel is in right place. Dunno. Most of also thought at first a MI sequence wouldn't run if the IDD deployment sequence would fail. A lot of people thought it was just a sequencing error at the day the first "MI in stowed position" images showed up, and that turned out to be a wrong assumption. I'm not placing any bets on this subject -------------------- PDP, VAX and Alpha fanatic ; HP-Compaq is the Satan! ; Let us pray daily while facing Maynard! ; Life starts at 150 km/h ;
|
|
|
Guest_Edward Schmitz_* |
Dec 20 2005, 01:54 AM
Post
#22
|
Guests |
QUOTE (DEChengst @ Dec 19 2005, 10:27 AM) Dunno. Most of also thought at first a MI sequence wouldn't run if the IDD deployment sequence would fail. A lot of people thought it was just a sequencing error at the day the first "MI in stowed position" images showed up, and that turned out to be a wrong assumption. I'm not placing any bets on this subject I thought that too, about the MI sequences. I started to realize later that those were the first in a long sequence of images designed to diagnose the arm failure. I think they were looking for small movements of the arm. They already knew the arm was stuck by the time we started wondering. |
|
|
Dec 20 2005, 05:54 AM
Post
#23
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2228 Joined: 1-December 04 From: Marble Falls, Texas, USA Member No.: 116 |
I'm encouraged by the fact that the filter wheel seems to be operating normally, now. But I think I am still in DEChengst's camp, or maybe it's SRAnderson's bathtub. I'm not ready to place any bets yet.
This may have been a spurious event, but I'm pretty sure they didn't plan to do this. -------------------- ...Tom
I'm not a Space Fan, I'm a Space Exploration Enthusiast. |
|
|
Dec 20 2005, 11:23 AM
Post
#24
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 688 Joined: 20-April 05 From: Sweden Member No.: 273 |
QUOTE (sranderson @ Dec 18 2005, 06:46 PM) Actually, in my experience over the past 20 years dealing with aging systems that are still in use but were built in the late 1960's through late 1980's, I have seen that even for electronics there is a right side wall to the bathtub curve. I think that for most electronics systems the end-of-life increase in failures is not seen because the systems are usually discarded upon first failure. The failure curve starts with initial infant mortality, followed by constant fairly low failure rates, and then a significant increase in failures (that at first appears random), with finally a rather catastrophic increase in failures caused by specific issues that affect large numbers of parts. These final failures are traced to things like internal bonding material failures, bimetallic formation leading to bond-wire and other connection failures, migrations of materials (flow), crystal growth, the formation and movement of conductive particulates, seal failures leading to leakage of electrolytes, epoxy degradation with age, shrinkage and hardening of soft goods (in connectors and shock mounts), etc. Most of these processes are greatly exacerbated by environmental extremes and low pressures. So really what we see are materials and mechanical failures within the electronics components. I have seen the oddest things happen. I have also become much more concerned about corrosion on Mars lately. Scott That does not fit well with my experience. We had quite a lot of 50’s and 60’s vintage avionics flying until quite recently (some still do) and while we have had a few issues about particular brands of insulation materials deteriorating, there have been no massive reliability problems. In my experience aging electronics go out of service because: a spares are no longer obtainable b operating and maintaining them has become a lost art c integrating digital and analog systems can be very difficult Perhaps living up here in the cool and fairly dry north has something to do with it. One thing we have learned in recent years is that dehumidifiers, even if only used intermittently, dramatically improves the reliability of electronics (and almost everything else). In this respect at least Mars should be a very favorable environment though that still leaves extreme temperature cycles, dust, low pressure and perhaps corrosive chemicals. tty |
|
|
Dec 20 2005, 01:06 PM
Post
#25
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 510 Joined: 17-March 05 From: Southeast Michigan Member No.: 209 |
If they are using a full encoder on the filter wheel, and the software counts pulses to know when a filter is in place, they could have fat-fingered the number of pulses to count in the rotation sequence. But I would imagine that there are some "fixed" subroutines to handle pulse counting for moves from filter to filter that would make it a no-brainer.
My ST-237 CCD camera uses a simpler system on its filter wheel. Each filter has a single dot beside it that a simple photo detector sees and the software keys off of when responding to commands. Sometimes it does miss and I get a few extra spins before it finds itself again. I haven't seen them get stuck in the middle, though. Encoders are a robust technology, we've got thousands of robots out there that have been running for many years with few encoder failures - admittedly they're not running in such a harsh environment. I suspect a sequencing error too... -------------------- --O'Dave
|
|
|
Dec 21 2005, 05:23 AM
Post
#26
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 71 Joined: 11-May 05 From: Colorado USA Member No.: 386 |
QUOTE (tty @ Dec 20 2005, 05:23 AM) That does not fit well with my experience. We had quite a lot of 50’s and 60’s vintage avionics flying until quite recently (some still do) and while we have had a few issues about particular brands of insulation materials deteriorating, there have been no massive reliability problems. In my experience aging electronics go out of service because: a spares are no longer obtainable b operating and maintaining them has become a lost art c integrating digital and analog systems can be very difficult Perhaps living up here in the cool and fairly dry north has something to do with it. One thing we have learned in recent years is that dehumidifiers, even if only used intermittently, dramatically improves the reliability of electronics (and almost everything else). In this respect at least Mars should be a very favorable environment though that still leaves extreme temperature cycles, dust, low pressure and perhaps corrosive chemicals. tty Hmm....your post sure brought back some memories of meetings where there were heated discussions of whether the problems we were seeing were indicative of ageing or were caused by handling/environments. Your "b" above is particularly true when you combine it with the fact that young engineers out of college don't want to do patch-up redesign on 40-year-old systems. What finally forced retirement of the system I'm talking about was a microscopic corrosion issue (which was caused by humidity outgassing from materials inside sealed boxes), along with your "b." As far as the rovers go (after looking at some old briefing charts that I dug up), I think you have convinced me that it is unlikely that we will see any increase in electronics failures during their useful lifetime -- at least for those electronics that are protected in the WEB. But a random failure could still happen at any time. Scott |
|
|
Dec 21 2005, 05:28 AM
Post
#27
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2228 Joined: 1-December 04 From: Marble Falls, Texas, USA Member No.: 116 |
QUOTE (sranderson @ Dec 18 2005, 10:46 AM) One might suspect that, but we haven't seen any signs of corrosion on any of the imageable parts of the rover so far, have we? -------------------- ...Tom
I'm not a Space Fan, I'm a Space Exploration Enthusiast. |
|
|
Jan 16 2006, 06:05 PM
Post
#28
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14432 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
Dragging up an old thread, but I've spoken to Jim Bell about this and the root cause was that the filter wheel wasnt heated enough. It was an early morning sequence, and the thermal system engineers did not think that the wheel would be as cold as it was, so they didnt use the heater. It turned out that it was JUST a little bit too cold and so there was some 'stiction'. The right filter wheel doesnt stick until a tiny bit colder than the left wheel, and just by chance, the temperature at the time was between the two.
No harm done, and the wheel has been fine ever since, they've just adjusted the thermal models and reshot the sequence later. Doug |
|
|
Jan 16 2006, 07:12 PM
Post
#29
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 408 Joined: 3-August 05 Member No.: 453 |
Thanks for following up on that issue Doug; good to know it was just a procedural issue after all.
Airbag |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 27th May 2024 - 11:01 PM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |