1 / 25

Design and Tele-Operation of a Lunar Excavator for the NASA Centennial Challenge

Design and Tele-Operation of a Lunar Excavator for the NASA Centennial Challenge. Taylor Cooper, Amy Cheng, Ian Phillips, Andre Wild and John Meech Mar. 17, 2010. University of British Columbia, Department of Mining Engineering Centre for Environmental Research in Minerals, Metals & Materials

donnan
Télécharger la présentation

Design and Tele-Operation of a Lunar Excavator for the NASA Centennial Challenge

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Design and Tele-Operation of a Lunar Excavator for the NASA Centennial Challenge Taylor Cooper, Amy Cheng, Ian Phillips, Andre Wild and John Meech Mar. 17, 2010 University of British Columbia, Department of Mining Engineering Centre for Environmental Research in Minerals, Metals & Materials Vancouver, BC, V6T1Z4 Canada Major Sponsors: Miskin Scraper Works/Ibeo/Domino’s Pizza

  2. Outline • UBC Thunderbird Robotics • 2008 Competition Rules • 2009 Competition Rules • Testing • Design Phase • Final Design • Results of the Competition • Improvements • Conclusions • Questions

  3. UBC Thunderbird Robotics • Student-operated organization • Educational Environment • “The Future is Autonomous” • Founded in 2004 by UBC-CERM3 • Projects • 2004 DARPA GRAND CHALLENGE • 2005 Robot Racing (continuing) • 2006 DARPA URBAN CHALLENGE • 2007 NASA Regolith Excavator Challenge • 2008 Thunderbots – Robo-soccer (continuing) • 2009 The 2010 ZERO Race: Electric Car Club • 2010 Canadian Space Agency Satellite Design Challenge

  4. 2008 Competition Rules • Gather 150kg of Regolith Simulant in 30 minutes • Average power use less then 150 Watts • Excavator weight below 70kg • Robot must navigate fully-autonomously • 2008 prize money was $750,000.

  5. 2009 Competition Details • Very Similar To 2008 • One Major Change: Telerobotic operations consistent with operation on the moon • Weight restriction < 80 kg • 4 Second Round Trip Command Delay <link> • Competition took place Oct. 16/17, 2009 • NASA Ames, Mountain View, CA

  6. Testing • Mobility in sand • Possibility of ignoring obstacles • Validation of Bekker Theory • Traction and Productivity  vehicle weight and contact area • Validation of scraper design • Dust/fines consideration

  7. Testing 3x3m Sand Box Shovel Filled w/ Dirt 80/20 Mounting Posts

  8. Testing • Shovel Angle 8° • Shovel Depth 4cm

  9. Testing Scale Model Test Shovel Linear Actuator Bucket For JSC-1 / Sand

  10. Design Phase • Most successful 2008 entry excavated 100kg • Inefficient • Speed of Buckets • Fines tossed into air • Fines trapped in buckets • Mechanically Complex • Focus: Simpler Design • Desirable alternative • Less Points of Failure

  11. Design Phase • Scraper hauler design • SME Mining Engineering Handbook design 2006 • Scraper reduces dust and re-handling • Based on Miskin D-19 • Reduced Cycle Times • Reduced Mechanical Complexity • Further Shovel Characterization • Regolith simulant • Power consumption - 24V * 9A max motor consumption. 7A High and 3A Average • Sensors for semi-autonomy • 2 Logitech Web Cameras used for line-following • Crucial in the dump phase

  12. Design Phase

  13. Chosen for efficiency low power motors can have high excavation rates a b c a. Low angle causes dirt to compact; b. Steeper blade pushes payload up – not flat c. Miskin’s high-angle blade: lower power - higher payloads. Design Phase

  14. Multiple Iterations were designed and cut to arrive at final design Chassis and treads redesigned Scraper was designed for efficiency – tandem facing Final Design

  15. Final Design

  16. Final Design Software Design

  17. Final Design Graphical User Interface

  18. Software Design C was used for microcontroller design (Arduino Mega) C used for the LIDAR proxies & line-following algorithm Python-driven GUI GTK Graphics Library Integrated 2 LIDAR laser scanners and interpreted feedback as point clouds for vision Analog USB Logitech Controller, 7 buttons and 2 analog sticks Design Phase

  19. Final Design • Ready to Climb – at the Ramp

  20. Competition Results

  21. Improvements • Fully Autonomous System • Lower profile treads with slots cut in them • Lowers weight • Allows Regolith build-up to fall through • Wider scraper pan allows for larger excavation quantity • Steeper blade angle with cutting edge • Dual actuation for the scraper pan • and apron see video • Shaker motor

  22. Conclusion • Treads for locomotion are superior to wheels • Dust and lunar gravity constraints favour a Scraper over Bucket Excavator/Elevators • Future competitions should have a Quality criteria in addition to Quantity • Allowing international participation should be encouraged by NASA – not discouraged • Experience was of great benefit to our team members

  23. 2009 Sponsors/Donors UBC-Mining

  24. Questions? • Team TREAD • Back (L-R): John Meech, Josh Weinstein, Ivar Schoenmeyr, Dirk van Zyl, André Wild, George Sterling. • Front (L-R): Ian Phillips, Amy Cheng, Taylor Cooper.

  25. Videos • Autonomous Climb in the Lab - video Autonomous Climb at NASA - video

More Related