HOME  |  NEWS  |  BLOGS  |  MESSAGES  |  FEATURES  |  VIDEOS  |  WEBINARS  |  INDUSTRIES  |  FOCUS ON FUNDAMENTALS
  |  REGISTER  |  LOGIN  |  HELP
Comments
View Comments: Newest First|Oldest First|Threaded View
<<  <  Page 2/4  >  >>
Charles Murray
User Rank
Blogger
Re: What I would like to see
Charles Murray   11/26/2012 6:44:47 PM
NO RATINGS
@Mr_bandit. I would imagine that provides a peaceful, easy feeling.

Dave Palmer
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Sorry but No Go
Dave Palmer   11/26/2012 6:30:40 PM
NO RATINGS
@ervin0072002: I think this is a difference of terminology.  When they say "prototype," think "proof of concept." Actually, even that might be too strong of a term.  The CSA doesn't have the means to put one of these on the Moon or Mars, even if they wanted to.  These are basically just show and tell pieces that will hopefully benefit Canadian companies. 

Rob Spiegel
User Rank
Blogger
Re: What I would like to see
Rob Spiegel   11/26/2012 6:02:23 PM
NO RATINGS
Actually, this is a pretty good idea, Mr_bandit. Not sure it would be as cost effective as the current rover. But maybe it would, With smaller rovers, there would be less of a chance of malfunction since it would be spread across multiple units.

mr_bandit
User Rank
Iron
What I would like to see
mr_bandit   11/26/2012 5:09:56 PM
NO RATINGS
The problem with the rovers to date is the "all eggs in one basket".

I read about a concept in 1988 where you take a bunch of small "rovers" - think of the RC cars that can bounce all over the terrain or one of the small robots by Big Dog - and a "mother ship". Assume 100 of the small rovers per Mother. Assume 10..50 Mothers. The Mother would land with the small rovers, and act as a home base for re-transmitting signals, swarm coordination, and refueling (electrical power).

The rovers would be redundant - ie 10 would have lasers, 10 with soil analysis, 10 with a mass spec, etc. Mission control would give a target, the Mother would direct the right mix to the spot. Need more laser power? use more laser rovers.

The redundancy gives you a much higher success rate - you can easily lose 10% without degradation of the general mission.

So - I respectfully ask - what is the problem with this? Why not do it, esp on Mars? The Bouncy Ball rover delivery would work. We Have The Technology.

BTW - the "Flagstaff Meteor Crater" is closer to Winslow (20 miles) than Flagstaff (36 miles). Drove past it last week. Also stood on a particular corner in Winslow, AZ, such a fine sight to see.

ervin0072002
User Rank
Gold
Re: Sorry but No Go
ervin0072002   11/26/2012 1:13:02 PM
NO RATINGS
I am used to a different environment. My prototypes go through assurance testing and have to perform same as the product that goes into certification. there is a large list of things that can go wrong during lift-off as well as space operation.

Ann R. Thryft
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Sorry but No Go
Ann R. Thryft   11/26/2012 11:59:15 AM
NO RATINGS
Nadine, thanks for the Exploratorium links--great info and photos. Dave is right: these prototype rovers are eventually destined for space apps, but their testing will occur on Earth.

mrdon
User Rank
Gold
Re: Sorry but No Go
mrdon   11/26/2012 11:55:04 AM
NO RATINGS
NadineJ, Your point was right on target and you're quite welcome!

NadineJ
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Sorry but No Go
NadineJ   11/26/2012 11:37:05 AM
NO RATINGS
mrdon-thanks for agreeing with the point that I made.

mrdon
User Rank
Gold
Re: Sorry but No Go
mrdon   11/26/2012 11:05:58 AM
NO RATINGS
NadineJ, I agree. Electronic Controls prototypes I've worked on were never designed for production use but for technology Proof of Concept. The cases were made of SLA material and looked like homebrew boxes but the electronics worked quite well under test. These rover designs definitely fit the category of "What If" just by their appearance.

mrdon
User Rank
Gold
Re: Sorry but No Go
mrdon   11/26/2012 11:00:17 AM
NO RATINGS
ervin0072002, I noticed the holes and cabling as well. Maybe the intent behind these prototypes is to demonstrate Driveability Proof of Concept regarding rough terrain. Some of the designs look plain but in space functionality is what really matters.

<<  <  Page 2/4  >  >>


Partner Zone
Latest Analysis
With Radio Shack on the ropes, let's take a memory trip through the highlights of Radio Shack products.
We Have FPGAs with On-chip MCUs, but How About MCUs with On-chip FPGAs?
Polish design firm NAS-DRA has proposed parasitic robotic drones that capture carbon dioxide from the air during the day and release it at night to plants growing on their wings.
Computer security firm Norton has partnered with clothing company Betaband on a pair of jeans that will keep your RFID-tagged credit cards and documents safe from wireless theft.
With erupting concern over police brutality, law enforcement agencies are turning to body-worn cameras to collect evidence and protect police and suspects. But how do they work? And are they even really effective?
More:Blogs|News
Design News Webinar Series
12/11/2014 8:00 a.m. California / 11:00 a.m. New York
12/10/2014 8:00 a.m. California / 11:00 a.m. New York
11/19/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
11/6/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
Quick Poll
The Continuing Education Center offers engineers an entirely new way to get the education they need to formulate next-generation solutions.
Dec 15 - 19, An Introduction to Web Application Security
SEMESTERS: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  67


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.
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