Mars Science Lab Cameras |
Mars Science Lab Cameras |
Guest_Sunspot_* |
May 20 2004, 01:23 PM
Post
#1
|
Guests |
Has anyone any idea what kind of imaging system is being proposed for the MSL? Would it be the same or simiilar to the MER's, or as improved as the MER pancams are to those that were used on Pathfinder?
With a nuclear power source for the rover, and hopefully the mars telecoms orbiter in place the data rate and data volume could be phenomenal |
|
|
Nov 8 2008, 07:41 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 104 Joined: 1-June 08 Member No.: 4172 |
One issue that just popped into my head (not sure if it's been mentioned before): MSL will survive for a long time, so there will probably be significant dust buildup on MastCam (and on the other cameras), just like with MER. Phoenix showed that a magnetic ring around a surface will prevent that surface from being covered with dust. Has any effort been put into such a system on MSL's camera lenses? Would it even be possible?
|
|
|
Nov 8 2008, 08:08 PM
Post
#3
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2517 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 497 |
...there will probably be significant dust buildup on MastCam (and on the other cameras), just like with MER. I'm unaware of any quantitative analysis of how much dust buildup there has been on Pancam; maybe others know more. I had thought the dust buildup was mostly on the hazcams, which are much closer to the ground. As for Mastcam, the current fixed-focal-length systems have the lenses set quite far back inside the sunshades (if you look at http://www.msss.com/msl/mastcam/index.html the front element is at about the front of the lens barrel, color-coded red), so the path for dust is quite long. MAHLI, of course, has a movable cover. -------------------- Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
|
|
|
Nov 8 2008, 09:31 PM
Post
#4
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14432 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
I had thought the dust buildup was mostly on the hazcams, which are much closer to the ground. Spirit's cameras all remain in great health Opportunity got a smattering in both Navcams and Pancam's. If you notice a lot of Pancam imaging with Opportunity is done with only one half, or 3/4s of the CCD, as one side got quite a smattering. http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all...nity_p1671.html is an example of the technique. http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all...CSP2629L4M1.JPG is a typical example of the obstruction Doug |
|
|
Nov 8 2008, 09:46 PM
Post
#5
|
|
Senior Member Group: Moderator Posts: 3431 Joined: 11-August 04 From: USA Member No.: 98 |
Opportunity got a smattering in both Navcams and Pancam's. The contamination happened during the dust storm, didn't it? So it's not exactly 'buildup' so much as a 'smattering' as you put it. Regardless, the contamination of Opportunity's optics remains distressing - I'm sure to the science team as well as the sightseers. |
|
|
Nov 8 2008, 11:34 PM
Post
#6
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2517 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 497 |
Regardless, the contamination of Opportunity's optics remains distressing... http://www.planetary.org/news/2007/0930_Ma...ate_Spirit.html It looks like the effects of this contamination could easily be taken out with a proper flat field, and I'm a little surprised that they haven't done this. That said, owing to the configuration of the Mastcam I think it will be far more resilient to this sort of problem. There was never any serious consideration given to adding a cover mechanism to the Mastcam, and nothing I see in the Pancam data would justify the added cost, complexity, and risk. I wouldn't even know how to begin to implement a "wiper" that would work reliably under martian conditions, and some kind of roll of clear material that could be driven past the lens would be problematic for all kinds of reasons. -------------------- Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
|
|
|
Nov 9 2008, 09:40 PM
Post
#7
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 3648 Joined: 1-October 05 From: Croatia Member No.: 523 |
http://www.planetary.org/news/2007/0930_Ma...ate_Spirit.html It looks like the effects of this contamination could easily be taken out with a proper flat field, and I'm a little surprised that they haven't done this. If you look closely at the comparison mosaic on that page, notice that while the corner darkening was removed with a new flatfield, the frames suffer from lowered contrast there. The dust particles are no longer just a nuisance in the way, they diffuse/diffract the light. The effect can be likened to Titan's haze but on a much different scale. A flatfield simply cannot remove that. Had the dust been deposited on the actual CCD the situation would probably have been different. -------------------- |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 1st June 2024 - 09:54 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. |