InSight Surface Operations, 26 Nov 2018- 21 Dec 2022 |
InSight Surface Operations, 26 Nov 2018- 21 Dec 2022 |
Nov 26 2018, 08:20 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Merciless Robot Group: Admin Posts: 8785 Joined: 8-December 05 From: Los Angeles Member No.: 602 |
Congratulations to the InSight team on a successful landing! We'll discuss the remainder of the mission here.
-------------------- A few will take this knowledge and use this power of a dream realized as a force for change, an impetus for further discovery to make less ancient dreams real.
|
|
|
Dec 1 2018, 07:57 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Newbie Group: Members Posts: 4 Joined: 8-September 12 Member No.: 6644 |
With respect to the dust cover effectiveness. Here's some potentially useful context from Curiosity (I have no information on the InSight covers specifically)
Because the HazCams were a build to print of MER, they had already been qualification tested in a no-dust cover configuration when the risk of dirty HazCams was identified as requiring mitigation. As a result, the dust covers were not allowed to actually touch the lens assembly of the HazCam (to a avoid driving forces into the lens assembly that the camera was not qualified for). So it was accepted going in that they did not make a perfect seal. The cover hardware created a tortuous path that would require any dust to make 180 and 90 degree turns before ending up on the lens. The dust cover implementation was a balance of not doing anything that would hurt the camera, against having the best cover possible. Lots of discussions and working with the camera team to arrive at something everyone was satisfied with. Since InSight re-used a spare HazCam, the same 'no touch' requirement may have been imposed on this dust cover. It's possible that the dust and engine exhaust flow environment created by the lander engines is different than a rover under a skycrane, which allowed more dust to get around the cover onto the glass. My impression (based on everything I've read online) is that the current view will be completely OK for the uses of this camera. Dust on Curiosity's HazCams was more of a concern in terms of meeting mission requirements for drive distances - using the NavCams as backup hazard avoidance makes driving much slower. Edit: I also think if you look at the Sol 0 picture with the covers on, and the picture right before the covers deploy on Sol 4 - there is a lot of motion of the larger dust on the cover within that time. So there seems to be a lot of wind moving dust around. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 22nd September 2024 - 12:50 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. |