IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

13 Pages V  « < 6 7 8 9 10 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Spirit cleaner?
Ant103
post Jul 11 2007, 03:26 PM
Post #106


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1619
Joined: 12-February 06
From: Bergerac - FR
Member No.: 678



Hum... I don't know if the rover takes the pictures at the same time. I hope so because I've remarked that they take the exactly same portion of the sky with Grissom Hil at the left. To reveal colors, I apply exacctly the same processing to have a regular following, but I'm aware that ambiant light have an influence on the exposure. And this is one of the parameter that I can control to have a quite perfect series of pictures and compare them.
But, I hope that this board show -partially- the evolution of dust level in the martian air.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mhoward
post Jul 11 2007, 03:44 PM
Post #107


Senior Member
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 3431
Joined: 11-August 04
From: USA
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (Ant103 @ Jul 11 2007, 03:26 PM) *
I'm aware that ambiant light have an influence on the exposure


There's more than that going on: the raw JPGs are automatically brightness-stretched before they get to us, so the brightness levels in the individual images are more or less unpredictable. If you are using the raw JPGs, you can't reliably conclude anything about the brightness levels. Still, it's an interesting series of images.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fredk
post Jul 11 2007, 04:01 PM
Post #108


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4247
Joined: 17-January 05
Member No.: 152



I should add that although the autostretching means you can't trust the overall brightness and colour of the images, you can trust the change in relative brightness across individual images. So that "inversion" effect, where in the early sols the sky is brighter near the horizon, but more recently and especially during the storm the sky is darker near the horizon, is real. Also we can probably trust the increased haziness of the distant peak at later sols.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ant103
post Jul 11 2007, 04:10 PM
Post #109


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1619
Joined: 12-February 06
From: Bergerac - FR
Member No.: 678



Okay wink.gif

Two other board who show Oppy's and Spirit's panels. To the left, many time before the storm. To the right, just after the maximum level of it :
Attached Image
Attached Image


We can se quickly that solar panels are more clean than the others sols ago.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mhoward
post Jul 11 2007, 04:12 PM
Post #110


Senior Member
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 3431
Joined: 11-August 04
From: USA
Member No.: 98



True, you can make some very broad qualitative observations; but probably not much, and not very reliably. And even then, you must be careful to take other variables into account, like time of day, to say nothing of filter choice (for Pancam).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
helvick
post Jul 11 2007, 05:37 PM
Post #111


Dublin Correspondent
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 1799
Joined: 28-March 05
From: Celbridge, Ireland
Member No.: 220



QUOTE (djellison @ Jul 11 2007, 04:02 PM) *
I'm sure I heard 3x (i.e. 270 sols for MER )

I heard that somewhere too but it always depends on what you mean by "margin".
The solar panel requirements for the rovers specified that they had to deal with a predicted dust loss rate of 0.18% per Sol which left them at around 700Whr after 90 sols, 600 after 180 sols and 500 after 270 sols. If that rate had been seen consistently throughout the mission with no cleaning Spirit could have lasted until somewhere between sol 750 and 800. You might read that as a 7 or 8x margin.

However the initial power requirement was to be able to deliver a minimum of around 350-400 Whr/sol at 90 Sols so the initial design really only gave about a 2x margin after 90 sols and given that a single storm like the one we are seeing right now would reduced that to zero, you could argue that there was no margin at all.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
climber
post Jul 11 2007, 06:21 PM
Post #112


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2921
Joined: 14-February 06
From: Very close to the Pyrénées Mountains (France)
Member No.: 682



QUOTE (djellison @ Jul 11 2007, 05:02 PM) *
I'm sure I heard 3x (i.e. 270 sols for MER )
Doug

So it'll be 1800 Sols for MSL. Well, they may be have to think about a way to protect lenses for that long afterall.
BTW, for a launching date in summer 2009, MSL would be around by summer 2015 with only 3 times is scheduled life... you'll have a new shed by them wink.gif


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ElkGroveDan
post Jul 11 2007, 06:27 PM
Post #113


Senior Member
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 4763
Joined: 15-March 05
From: Glendale, AZ
Member No.: 197



QUOTE (climber @ Jul 11 2007, 10:21 AM) *
... you'll have a new shed by then wink.gif

Then we will have to start calling him Doug "Two-Sheds" Ellison.


--------------------
If Occam had heard my theory, things would be very different now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post Jul 11 2007, 06:34 PM
Post #114


Founder
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 14432
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



THREE sheds. Technically I had a little brick one at the end of the garage, the woodern office one...and then I'll probably get a small JCB in and go for some sort of large basement in the garden smile.gif

Doug
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fredk
post Jul 12 2007, 04:29 PM
Post #115


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4247
Joined: 17-January 05
Member No.: 152



Dramatic changes on the ground, too. Compare these pairs of navcams from sols 1239 and 1250:

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all...ATP0755R0M1.JPG
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all...CMP0765R0M1.JPG

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all...ATP0755R0M1.JPG
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all...CMP0765R0M1.JPG

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all...ATP0755R0M1.JPG
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all...CMP0765R0M1.JPG

The local times of these pairs are only about 15 minutes apart, so the solar incidence angle is essentially the same, although there is a bit of movement of the rover between sols.

The rover tracks are much less prominent now - it seems to be mostly due to albedo effects. Exposed light areas have been covered in darker dust. And generally, the whole ground has taken on a "mottled" look, which I recall from after the previous big cleaning event near Larry's Lookout. That mottling seems to do a great job of hiding the older tracks - some of them are almost invisible now.

I can think of a couple explanations for the mottling - perhaps the thickness of the lighter dust varies like the mottling pattern, so when the wind removes light dust the pattern is exposed. Or it may be that the wind generates eddies or turbulence that actually remove dust in the mottled pattern.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ant103
post Jul 12 2007, 05:43 PM
Post #116


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1619
Joined: 12-February 06
From: Bergerac - FR
Member No.: 678



Hum... Interesting. At many places around the rocks, the ground has darken, and in the same time, at local elevation of the ground (top of ripples), the ground has lighten. And, I don't know if is it my eyes who play me a trick, but, I see very faint dark trails.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Pertinax
post Jul 12 2007, 06:07 PM
Post #117


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 198
Joined: 2-March 05
From: Richmond, VA USA
Member No.: 181



The recently windswept areas look (to me at least) to be areas where the lighter sulfate (and silica?) rich soil is now much less covered by / peaking through the darker fines (which themselves accumulated in crevasses and in the lee of objects).

-- Pertinax
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
alan
post Jul 12 2007, 06:51 PM
Post #118


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1887
Joined: 20-November 04
From: Iowa
Member No.: 110



I wonder how much of the apparent change in albedo is due to changes in lighting. Although the local time is similar the lighting has been changed due to the increase in tau, which according to Doug's graph has more than doubled at Spirit's location during the two weeks.

More diffuse lighting, caused by the light being scattered by dust in the atmosphere, could increase the importance of albedo vs. the slope of the ground or dust drifts relative to the sun.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fredk
post Jul 12 2007, 07:18 PM
Post #119


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4247
Joined: 17-January 05
Member No.: 152



Good point, Alan. Still, there are plenty of very smooth areas, where the slope is more or less constant, which have become mottled. But definitely the more diffuse lighting would make relief features like the tracks less noticible.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
slinted
post Jul 12 2007, 11:17 PM
Post #120


Member
***

Group: Admin
Posts: 468
Joined: 11-February 04
From: USA
Member No.: 21



I'm glad we keep having good reason to come back to this thread. Spirit cleaner? Cleaner yet as of sol 1252!

Here's the sweep magnet sol 1251->1252, in L7, showing the strength of the winds (this one probable rivaled the big cleaning back on sol 421) picking up dust from one side very well, and dumping/spreading it down onto the other side...like an arrow, pointing in the direction of the winds.



The area around Spirit shows some effects from the wind as well (even the dust mottling on the front haz's changed):

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

13 Pages V  « < 6 7 8 9 10 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 24th May 2024 - 02:19 PM
RULES AND GUIDELINES
Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting.

IMAGE COPYRIGHT
Images posted on UnmannedSpaceflight.com may be copyrighted. Do not reproduce without permission. Read here for further information on space images and 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.