1 / 27

Robotic Augmentation of EVA for Hubble Space Telescope Servicing

Robotic Augmentation of EVA for Hubble Space Telescope Servicing. David L. Akin Brian Roberts Kristin Pilotte Meghan Baker Space Systems Laboratory University of Maryland, College Park. Beam Assembly Teleoperator (c. 1984). HST EVA/Robotic Cooperation (1987).

nitesh
Download Presentation

Robotic Augmentation of EVA for Hubble Space Telescope Servicing

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. Robotic Augmentation of EVAfor Hubble Space Telescope Servicing David L. AkinBrian RobertsKristin PilotteMeghan Baker Space Systems Laboratory University of Maryland,College Park

  2. Beam Assembly Teleoperator (c. 1984)

  3. HST EVA/Robotic Cooperation (1987)

  4. Ranger Telerobotic Flight Experiment

  5. Ranger Neutral Buoyancy Vehicle I

  6. Ranger NBV I Operations (c. 1996)

  7. Ranger Telerobotic Shuttle Experiment

  8. Ranger Telerobotic Shuttle Experiment

  9. Ranger Flight Dexterous Arms

  10. Ranger TSX in HST Servicing Scenario

  11. EVA Daily Average from SM1 Ranger Application to HST SM1

  12. Impact of Ranger-class Robot on SM3A

  13. Grasp Analysis of SM-3B Numbers refer to instances of grasp type over five EVAsTotal discrete end effector types required ~8-10

  14. Results of Robot Dexterity Analysis • Broke 63 crew-hrs of EVA activity on SM-3B into 1860 task primitives • 82.5% of task primitives are viable candidates for 2DOF robotic end effectors • 62.2% 1DOF tasks • 2.8% 2DOF tasks • 17.5% tasks performed differently by robot than EVA (e.g., torque settings) • 4.1% inherently dexterous tasks • 13.1% not yet categorized • All SM-3B robotic tasks can be performed by suite of 8-10 different end effectors

  15. Ranger Dexterous Arm in HST SM4

  16. Baseline SM4 Task Allocations • RSUs (3) 3:00 • Battery Modules (2) 2:50 • COS 3:10 • WFC3 2:55 • ASCS/CPL 3:30 • FGS3 3:35 • NOBLs (3) 1:50 • ASCS/STIK 1:55 • DSC 1:00 • Setup & Closeout 5:00

  17. Approaches to Ranger Operations • All scenarios assume Ranger dexterous manipulator(s) mounted on RMS throughout SM4 • Case 1: Single dexterous arm on modified MFR • Case 1A: Operates only during EVA in support of crew (“third hand”) • Case 1B: Operates only when EVA is not underway (conservative mode) • Case 1C: Operates with and without EVA crew • Case 2: Dual dexterous arms on RMS • Case 2A: Mounted on MFR; used only for EVA support • Case 2B: Mounted on MFR; used only outside of EVA • Case 2C: Mounted on MFR; used with and without EVA • Case 2D: Dedicated RMS mount; both EVA crew free-floating • Only Case 2C has been considered to date in any detail

  18. Estimates of Relative Time Savings

  19. HERCULES Hubble EVA/Robotic Cooperative Utility for Logistics and Experiment Servicing • Incorporates one or two dexterous Ranger manipulators onto RMS foot restraints • Obtains power/data/video through RMS electrical grapple fixture • Arms can be powered and used to release/engage launch latches (EVA not required for integration and operation) • Can be used stand-alone and as aid to EVA crew in foot restraints

  20. HERCULES (Single Arm; Stowed)

  21. HERCULES (Dual Arm; non-EVA Ops)

  22. HERCULES (Dual Arm; EVA Operations)

  23. HERCULES/EVA Team in SM4 Operations

  24. HERCULES Proof-of-Concept Testing

  25. SM4 Time Savings with Ranger Arm(s)

  26. EVA/Robot Teams - ready for prime time! • ~25% reduction in EVA time for HST battery servicing using simple low-dexterity robot (neutral buoyancy) • ~50% reduction in EVA time using Ranger on RMS to set up and close out work site; supply logistics to EVA crew (neutral buoyancy) • 40% reduction in EVA time on SM-1 (analysis) • 80% reduction in EVA time on SM-2 (analysis) • 70% reduction in EVA time on SM-3A (analysis) • ≥82.5% of tasks feasible for robot on SM-3B with ≤10 discrete end effectors (analysis) • 43% reduction in task time for SM-4 using HERCULES system • 70% of flight hardware for HERCULES manipulators in bonded storage at SSL (already bought and paid for!)

  27. For More Information http://www.ssl.umd.eduhttp://ranger.ssl.umd.edu/data/

More Related