HOME  |  NEWS  |  BLOGS  |  MESSAGES  |  FEATURES  |  VIDEOS  |  WEBINARS  |  INDUSTRIES  |  FOCUS ON FUNDAMENTALS
  |  REGISTER  |  LOGIN  |  HELP
News
Automation & Control

Surgical Robots Could Fix NASA Satellite

Page 1 / 2 Next >
View Comments: Oldest First|Newest First|Threaded View
<<  <  Page 2/4  >  >>
Dave Palmer
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Sign of the times
Dave Palmer   1/26/2012 11:59:04 AM
NO RATINGS
@sensorpro: I definitely agree with you about spending cuts.  But NASA actually has quite a few interesting missions going on, even if nobody seems to be paying much attention to them in the news.  The Curiosity rover, which is scheduled to land on Mars this summer, is one of them.  And if you read NASA Tech Briefs, you can see that NASA is continuing to make numerous technological advances, to say nothing of the tremendous amount of scientific data which NASA missions generate.  No other country is doing anything like this.

sensor pro
User Rank
Gold
Re: Sign of the times
sensor pro   1/26/2012 12:10:55 PM
NO RATINGS
I agree that they still do some development, but....

My firm worked with NASA on a few nice projects in the past. One was Camera orientation for the two Mars Rowers. Another one was some special sensors on the fuel tanks for each shuttle, etc...

I see a serious change in the negative direction. It is a shame that we waste so much money on "garbage" and do not invest what we should in the technological future.  We have so much tallant. It is a shame. This is all i wanted to say.

We are basically on the same page.

Ann R. Thryft
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Sign of the times
Ann R. Thryft   1/26/2012 12:24:54 PM
NO RATINGS

Thanks, Chuck  this was a fun one. Re funding, like me, you may remember the Cold War/Sputnik days when it was the mil/aero sector that developed all the high-end new electronics and other "high" tech which then moved down to the commercial sector, as there was not yet a huge consumer electronics sector. Those days are long gone. Now the moneyed sectors seem to be consumer and medical.


AJ2X
User Rank
Silver
Re: COTS in Space
AJ2X   1/26/2012 1:51:15 PM
NO RATINGS
When I was a young engineer for RCA in the early '70s, my boss consulted with NASA regarding the early ideas for what became the Shuttle.  He said that they were looking to use COTS as much as possible to keep the cost down -- make it a "space truck."  There was a big conflict with making everything "space rated" (i.e., demonstrably very reliable under all possible conditions to assure human safety) and leveraging the considerable cost savings of COTS devices, especially for "non-essential" systems, such as the radios and TV cameras that our RCA division made.  Space-rating won out, and for good reasons.  But it still makes sense to adapt some things like the DaVinci surgical robot (an awesome piece of technology) for mission-specific applications.

The ISI DaVinci robot is primarily a tele-presence system, which is the sort of thing that will be needed more and more to extend human hands into remote and dangerous places.  NASA is our way into those places, at least if it's allowed (and funded) to do its job.

Rob Spiegel
User Rank
Blogger
Re: A helping hand
Rob Spiegel   1/26/2012 2:16:08 PM
NO RATINGS
I agree, Beth. This is a great use for robotic capabilities. As well as saving on expense, I would guess it's far quicker to send a machine to do the repair rather than scheduling a human to do the job. As for humans in space, I think humans should take the risk for loftier missions than repair jobs.

Island_Al
User Rank
Gold
Fixing satellites
Island_Al   1/26/2012 2:51:29 PM
NO RATINGS
I have said for years that the reason satellites work so well is that techs can not touch them.  No tweaking, no adjustments, no hands on work.  We start sending remote control techs into space we will once again have stuff broken high in the sky.  My old credo: Design it right the first time and you don't need techies mucking in the equipment breaking things.  My designs normally never include relays, switches, pots. electrolytic caps, or buttons and I grew up around such things. They do include a smattering of test points or muxes to remotes to prevent anyone from shorting out pins.  Currently I manage a group of techies and yes, they still are the major cause of equipment damage.

 

Ann R. Thryft
User Rank
Blogger
Re: COTS in Space
Ann R. Thryft   1/26/2012 3:17:44 PM
NO RATINGS

AJ2X, that's interesting input about NASA and COTS way back in the 70s. To clarify, the robot missions are for refueling and servicing once something has broken. I would think that, considering how much it costs to send either robots or humans out in space, the problems Island Al describes would be less likely to occur. 


TJ McDermott
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Fixing satellites
TJ McDermott   1/26/2012 4:45:18 PM
NO RATINGS
Island Al, the solar arrays on the space station were designed for automatic extension and furling.  Yet one of them broke during the process.  The repairs executed by humans on STS120 to fix it could not have been done easily by robots.  I'm hesitant to say never be done by robots.

Humans fixed it, with on-hand materials, in just a couple of hours.

The rotary joints for the solar arrays also needed repairs.  Humans fixed it; a robotic repair probably could not have executed it

I'l give you the rebuttals to these human successes; when a tool bag containing grease guns for that same joint repair got away from an astronaut on STS126.  Or on Apollo 16, where an astronaut's foot got caught in a cable, yanking it out at the connector and thus ruining an extrodinarily expensive experiment.

Humans can pull success from the jaws of utter defeat, and can cost incalculable damage from a simple pratfall.  Overall, the successes outweigh the oops in space.  I'll take a human over robot any day.

William K.
User Rank
Platinum
Surgical robots repair a satellite
William K.   1/26/2012 6:26:19 PM
NO RATINGS
That is an interesting assertion about the "techies" being the source of most damage. MY guess is that those who are guilty are both overpaid and underqualified. Repairs should really be handled by a "rocket scientist" because at that distance it really is "rocket science". What I mean is that just like in the early days of our space programs, those folks sitting at the consoles in mission control knew and understood every single bit of their system. Every bit of it was in their head, so they would instantly be able to understand a problem. That is one huge difference from those who are mostly qualified to fix car stereos.

The problem that I do see as very big with robot repair workers is the lack of strength and compliance. The robot would need to have the correct wrench, an astronaut could use a channel-locks wrench and handle a fitting that was a bit off centered. ON the other hand, it certainly should be possible to create a robot that could do most repairs. OF course, it will be bigger and stronger than a minimum capabilities package, and cost a bit more as well.

Alexander Wolfe
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Surgical robots repair a satellite
Alexander Wolfe   1/26/2012 7:47:27 PM
NO RATINGS
It's relevant to note that repairs in space often cost more (or cost a high percentage) of the original cost of the equipment). Think Hubble Space Telescope, though the scope of the original error (a bad mirror) makes this an outlier. Anyway, this means design for repairability or redundancy is or should be a requirement for space, except there's the factor that weight reduction is a higher priority and designing for redundancy by definition adds weight. So it's an insoluable technical tautology, at least in a lingustic sense. (The robot discussed in this story do provide something of a solution, a la both the COTS cost savings I commented on earlier and the lessening of the requirement for human intervention.

<<  <  Page 2/4  >  >>
Partner Zone
Latest Analysis
Take a look at the top 20 US undergraduate engineering programs. Then tell us -- did your school make the cut?
Producing high-quality end-production metal parts with additive manufacturing for applications like aerospace and medical requires very tightly controlled processes and materials. New standards and guidelines for machines and processes, materials, and printed parts are underway from bodies such as ASTM International.
Engineers at the University of San Diego’s Jacobs School of Engineering have designed biobatteries on commercial tattoo paper, with an anode and cathode screen-printed on and modified to harvest energy from lactate in a person’s sweat.
A Silicon Valley company has made the biggest splash yet in the high-performance end of the electric car market, announcing an EV that zips from 0 to 60 mph in 3.4 seconds and costs $529,000.
The biggest robot swarm to date is made of 1,000 Kilobots, which can follow simple rules to autonomously assemble into predetermined shapes. Hardware and software are open-source.
More:Blogs|News
Design News Webinar Series
7/23/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
7/17/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
6/25/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
5/13/2014 10:00 a.m. California / 1:00 p.m. New York / 6:00 p.m. London
Quick Poll
The Continuing Education Center offers engineers an entirely new way to get the education they need to formulate next-generation solutions.
Sep 8 - 12, Get Ready for the New Internet: IPv6
SEMESTERS: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6


Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.
Next Class: September 30 - October 2
Sponsored by Altera
Learn More   |   Login   |   Archived Classes
Twitter Feed
Design News Twitter Feed
Like Us on Facebook

Sponsored Content

Technology Marketplace

Copyright © 2014 UBM Canon, A UBM company, All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service