ROVER WHEELS: Monitoring changes over time, NOTE: Read back through the thread to avoid repeating misconceptions |
ROVER WHEELS: Monitoring changes over time, NOTE: Read back through the thread to avoid repeating misconceptions |
![]()
Post
#1
|
||
Junior Member ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 22 Joined: 10-August 12 From: Australia Member No.: 6530 ![]() |
[MOD NOTE: This thread follows on a post by Ed Truthan containing a MAHLI mosaic of MSL wheels taken on sol 275.]
Ed: zooming in on that marvellous underbelly MAHLI montage, there appears to be further (and previously noted) deformation of the wheel surfaces. Damage is most evident in the view of the front-left wheel inner surface. Such wear has previously been discussed and concerns allayed. Nevertheless, the front left wheel surface *appears* to have been punctured. We've only done 700 meters, and have 7000 more to get to Mt Sharp..... Given that more odometry has now accumulated, is any (re-)new(ed) concern valid? DeanM |
|
|
||
![]() |
![]()
Post
#2
|
|
![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 3419 Joined: 9-February 04 From: Minneapolis, MN, USA Member No.: 15 ![]() |
As has been pointed out, the MSL mobility testbed unit displays similar rips and tears in the wheels. It might be instructive to see the current status of the testbed wheels, along with a rough history of the number of meters it was driven and over what surfaces. I recall seeing video of the testbed recorded well before Curiosity landed that shows significant ripping and tearing in its wheels, so it must not take a huge amount of driving for these things to appear.
For the testbed experience to be truly applicable to the asset on Mars, I imagine the weight of the testbed would have to be roughly one-third of the actual MSL. I recall that the MER mobility testbed was weighted in this manner, I'm assuming MSL's was, too. -the other Doug -------------------- “The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but that the lightning ain't distributed right.” -Mark Twain
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#3
|
|
Senior Member ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2519 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 497 ![]() |
For the testbed experience to be truly applicable to the asset on Mars, I imagine the weight of the testbed would have to be roughly one-third of the actual MSL. Depends on what you mean by testbed. The VSTB (which Doug has posted pictures of) is a flight-like rover and probably has a mass similar to that of the flight system (I don't know if it has ballast for the RTG or not.) The "scarecrow" is 1/3rd mass but I don't know what the state of its wheels are/were. Of course some of the dynamics depend on mass, not weight, so there's no way to perfectly mimic the behavior on Mars on Earth. -------------------- Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 20th June 2024 - 02:15 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. |
![]() |