Endeavour Drive - Drivability analysis |
Endeavour Drive - Drivability analysis |
Sep 18 2008, 11:05 AM
Post
#1
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14432 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
http://www.sciencefriday.com/program/archives/200809191
You can listen via NPR, or via one of the web feeds that are listed on the site, but make sure you do listen if you can. |
|
|
Sep 24 2008, 05:05 AM
Post
#2
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 3419 Joined: 9-February 04 From: Minneapolis, MN, USA Member No.: 15 |
I'm all for the Fourier transforms and such, but I also think it's important to check these areas visually, as well. And for one good reason -- almost any mathematical analysis is no more reliable than the base data it has to work with.
I have in mind the following scenario: We run Fourier analyses transverse to the predominant ripple orientation, since that's what gives you crest-to-crest distances and also height estimations. But it also fails to capture, in any meaningful way, the same type of information for the crossover ripples that close off all the inter-ripple lanes after only a few tens of meters. Remember how we progressed through the Etched Terrain? The inter-ripple troughs would run for 10 to 20 meters, and then a crossover ripple would close off that lane. We had to then climb over a ripple to get to the next best trough over, one side or the other, if the crossover ripple appeared impassable (and it often did). When I look carefully at the full res images of some spots along the south route, I see the same kind of crossover ripple activity, and thus we'll see the same need to climb these ripples if we want to continue to move. But because of their deviation from the general north-south orientation, I'm concerned that perhaps Fourier analyses aren't likely to collect enough data about these ripples to be informative of the real trafficability. That's why I think we also need eyes looking through these mazes, to find likely routes that involve climbing over ripples we're certain Oppy can handle. But, on that score -- if, as Paolo has said, we have to keep in mind the 5-wheel scenario, we're really going to need to know just how easily a 5-wheeled Oppy is going to be able to climb or cross ripples. Without some feel for the real impact dragging a wheel will have on crossing ripples, I don't know how easily we can project a safe path into heavier ripple fields. I will say this -- I've taken another good full-res look at the terrain to the east-northeast, and while it looks very smooth at lower resolutions, when you look at it in full res you can see it's covered with ripples to at *least* the degree we saw at Viking and Vostok, and they, too, have a predominant north-south trend. If we can't handle moving steadily transverse to ripples of that size, then I guess the south route may be the best of a not-wonderful set of choices after all. Actually, one of the bigger reasons I had for wanting to take the east-northeast route above the worst of the ripple fields is that there is actually some exposed outcrop on rim remnants at the very northern extent of Endeavour's rimwall. What we see along the northwest quadrant looks a lot like a rim landform eroded way down and then covered over by the same evaporite groundcover that we've been seeing all along. Just seems to me that it's overall less mileage to more ancient rimwall outcrops if you go by the east-northeast route, since you won't have to backtrack back 5 km north to get to them in the northern rimwall, or go yet another 10 km south to get to outcrops on the southern rimwall... Of course, HiRISE images of the various sections of the rimwalls will help us decide just what we're actually targeting first at Endeavour, so perhaps we should wait for those before making the final decision as to the direction from which to approach. -the other Doug -------------------- “The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but that the lightning ain't distributed right.” -Mark Twain
|
|
|
Sep 24 2008, 06:01 AM
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Admin Posts: 976 Joined: 29-September 06 From: Pasadena, CA - USA Member No.: 1200 |
I'm all for the Fourier transforms and such, but I also think it's important to check these areas visually, as well. And for one good reason -- almost any mathematical analysis is no more reliable than the base data it has to work with. That is correct. I would use an automatically generated map as a starting point, not as a goal. Visual inspection will be a major part into this. QUOTE ... Remember how we progressed through the Etched Terrain? The inter-ripple troughs would run for 10 to 20 meters, and then a crossover ripple would close off that lane. We had to then climb over a ripple to get to the next best trough over, one side or the other, if the crossover ripple appeared impassable (and it often did). When I look carefully at the full res images of some spots along the south route, I see the same kind of crossover ripple activity, and thus we'll see the same need to climb these ripples if we want to continue to move. ... You are absolutely 100% correct. Unfortunately the HiRISE imagery does not provide enough details to tell us if and where we can cross over between ripples. The DEMs (digital elevation maps) I can get to do not have enough resolution to indicate possible passages. Only PANCAM and NAVCAM will tell us that. We can only guess that a field of tall ripples is less likely to provide passages between ripples, while smaller ripples might provide some. While the stock market always warns us that past performance is not guarantee of future returns, we have no choice but to hope that Mars is less capricious and we will find some passages when we are there. This is why I ws saying that trying to define the exact details of the path is very difficult and prone to being revisited on a sol by sol basis. QUOTE But, on that score -- if, as Paolo has said, we have to keep in mind the 5-wheel scenario, we're really going to need to know just how easily a 5-wheeled Oppy is going to be able to climb or cross ripples. Without some feel for the real impact dragging a wheel will have on crossing ripples, I don't know how easily we can project a safe path into heavier ripple fields. Hmmm except the experience with Spirit, we do not know how difficult is to cross a ripple with 5 wheels. We never tried and when we did testing in our sandbox for Purgatory we quickly found out that it is not trivial to do this types of testing (our sandbox is not yet equipped with a gravity field modifier). Once we are back in ripple field we might test 5 wheel driving on Mars, but I think it would be difficult for me to sell to the project. QUOTE I will say this -- I've taken another good full-res look at the terrain to the east-northeast, and while it looks very smooth at lower resolutions, when you look at it in full res you can see it's covered with ripples to at *least* the degree we saw at Viking and Vostok, and they, too, have a predominant north-south trend. If we can't handle moving steadily transverse to ripples of that size, then I guess the south route may be the best of a not-wonderful set of choices after all. You are again correct. The major difference between the drive from Endurance to VC vs the drive to Endeavour is that the former was north-south while the latter has a significant component in the east direction. When ripples are involved, this spells trouble. My hope is that with a map like we are talking about, we can find sections that would allow the rover to move east as much as we can. QUOTE Actually, one of the bigger reasons I had for wanting to take the east-northeast route above the worst of the ripple fields is that there is actually some exposed outcrop on rim remnants at the very northern extent of Endeavour's rimwall. What we see along the northwest quadrant looks a lot like a rim landform eroded way down and then covered over by the same evaporite groundcover that we've been seeing all along. Just seems to me that it's overall less mileage to more ancient rimwall outcrops if you go by the east-northeast route, since you won't have to backtrack back 5 km north to get to them in the northern rimwall, or go yet another 10 km south to get to outcrops on the southern rimwall... Of course, HiRISE images of the various sections of the rimwalls will help us decide just what we're actually targeting first at Endeavour, so perhaps we should wait for those before making the final decision as to the direction from which to approach. -the other Doug I agree. I think I said it earlier, and if I didn't I'm sorry. I think it is best if we prepare our tools, think up a procedure to analyze all the HiRISE images we need. In the meantime we can test our methods and procedures on the current HiRISE near VC. We can compare our predictions with actual drives and make appropriate changes to our procedures. Once we get down the new HiRISE we will have tools and procedures somewhat refined. Paolo -------------------- Disclaimer: all opinions, ideas and information included here are my own,and should not be intended to represent opinion or policy of my employer.
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 2nd June 2024 - 03:36 AM |
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. |