1 / 19

Science Objectives & Investigation Methodology

Science Objectives & Investigation Methodology. Life in the Atacama 2005 Science & Technology Workshop January 6-7, 2005 Nathalie A. Cabrol NASA Ames. Introduction. Topic: Science Objectives & Methods Outline: 2004 The plan and what was accomplished

Download Presentation

Science Objectives & Investigation Methodology

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. Science Objectives & Investigation Methodology Life in the Atacama 2005Science & Technology WorkshopJanuary 6-7, 2005 Nathalie A. CabrolNASA Ames

  2. Introduction • Topic: Science Objectives & Methods • Outline: • 2004 • The plan and what was accomplished • Pre-mission exploration strategies and post-field test adjustment for 2005 • 2005 Issues • Difference between targeted sampling and regional mapping? • Ground-Truthing and Sampling • Info archival NASA Ames Research Center /Carnegie Mellon

  3. Summary of Mission Goal: The Plan NASA Ames Research Center /Carnegie Mellon

  4. Summary of Achievements (1) • 41 locales listed; 24 unique locales investigated • Total science traverses: • Site B: ~ 6 km -- to be confirmed by E.T(all manual) • Site C: ~ 23.5 km -- to be confirmed by E.T(13.9/12.5) • Outstanding and first time demos for future missions (e.g., MSL and Sample Return): • During the same sol (014): • Successful return to a locale (040) of high-science value; • Return ~150 m to LS after one week of investigation. The original plan was to allow 2 sols to get back accurately to a site. NASA Ames Research Center /Carnegie Mellon

  5. Summary of Achievements (2) • • ~ Longest science traverse during ops: ~1.2km; • • 3.3 km autonomous traverse (post-science ops); • 0% autonomy at Site B; • 83% autonomy at Site C after the camera were working; • Mean autonomy at Site C: 59% • Overall autonomy (Site B + Site C): 47% NASA Ames Research Center /Carnegie Mellon

  6. Summary of Achievements (3) NASA Ames Research Center /Carnegie Mellon

  7. Summary of Achievements (4-1) NASA Ames Research Center /Carnegie Mellon

  8. Summary of Achievements (4-2) NASA Ames Research Center /Carnegie Mellon

  9. Summary of Achievements (4-3) NASA Ames Research Center /Carnegie Mellon

  10. Summary of Achievements (5) NASA Ames Research Center /Carnegie Mellon

  11. Searching for Life: Where do we Stand? Uncertain diagnosis Increased confidence in diagnosis Increased level of confidence of RSTs NASA Ames Research Center /Carnegie Mellon

  12. Pre-Mission Exploration Strategy • Regional Mapping: Along a traverse from A to B, rover stops every determined n-meters, deploys a set number of instruments and always acquire same type of data • Targeted Sampling: Thorough investigation of science targets of interest identified in the scene. NASA Ames Research Center /Carnegie Mellon

  13. Post-Mission Exploration Strategy Adjustments (1) • The demonstration of the ability to go back accurately to a distant site of science interest with the rover is opening new possibilities in terms of robotic astrobiology investigation strategy. For the 05’ campaign, we suggest a new strategy that will provide the best of the two “worlds” of the current targeted sampling and regional mapping: • Tentative definitions: • Regional Mapping Reconnaissance Survey • Targeted Sampling Focused Investigation NASA Ames Research Center /Carnegie Mellon

  14. Post-Mission Exploration Strategy Adjustments (2) RM A B TS A RS A B NASA Ames Research Center /Carnegie Mellon

  15. Nathalie Cabrol: Post-Mission Exploration Strategy Adjustments (3) -- ADDED VALUE • Pros of the Reconnaissance Strategy: • Maximize the use of rover mobility to cover long-range fast; • Grasp quickly the main characteristics of an area; • Allow time for the S.T to “digest” the information, thus; • Decrease the chances of missing sites of high-science payoff; • Still allows to perform regional mapping; • Improve quality of samples and increase our ability to make educated conclusions NASA Ames Research Center /Carnegie Mellon

  16. Post-Mission Exploration Strategy Adjustments (4) • Requirement: • Robust demonstration of ability to go back to a specific site: • Using way points, ground and satellite imagery; (this year demo) • Develop technology that would allow the rover to follow its tracks back; • Other methods? NASA Ames Research Center /Carnegie Mellon

  17. Issues to be discussed • Difference between targeted sampling and regional mapping? • Ground-Truthing and Sampling • Info archival • Other? NASA Ames Research Center /Carnegie Mellon

  18. Post-Mission RST Duties and Timeline NASA Ames Research Center /Carnegie Mellon

  19. 04’ RFE LITA Science Publications • 5 LPSC Abstracts (to be submitted 01/13) • 11 projects of JGR papers about the 04’ Campaign + 2 papers from Mckay’s group (deadline for 1st drafts : 04/01/05) • 1 Science report (in progress) • Already accepted: • Wettergreen et al., ICRA 2005 - First experiments in the robotic investigation of life in the Atacama desert of Chile. • Other? NASA Ames Research Center /Carnegie Mellon

More Related