Water-Prospecting Lunar Rover Prototype Built 36
Zothecula writes "Astrobotic Technology Inc., a spin-off company of Carnegie Mellon University (CMU), has debuted its full-size flight prototype of its Polaris lunar water-prospecting robot. Polaris is specially designed to work in the permanently shadowed craters at the Moon's poles. Scheduled to be sent to the Moon using a SpaceX Falcon 9 launch vehicle, the solar-powered rover is a contender in the US$20 million Google Lunar X Prize and is tasked with seeking ice deposits that could be used by future colonists."
So... (Score:1)
If it's solar powered, how's it going to work in the permanently shadowed craters?
Re:So... (Score:5, Funny)
Duh. It's going to use the photocells to power a light aimed at the photocells!
Obligatory XKCD (Score:2)
http://www.xkcd.com/1119/ [xkcd.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Mirrors, it's all done with mirrors ... all the sunlight you want.
Re: (Score:2)
Later, I suspect that Republicans will simply push to buy it from China.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
When they say permanently shadowed, they mean from directly above. I have seen the rover (I attend CMU), it has solar cells that face toward the horizon, to capture the small amount of energy that comes over the side. Apparently it works pretty well and efficiently, or so they say :)
How heavy is the rover ? (Score:2)
it has solar cells that face toward the horizon, to capture the small amount of energy that comes over the side
May I know what's the mass of the rover?
Is the "small amount of energy" captured by the solar cell enough to power the movement of the rover?
Re: (Score:1)
I'm not sure of the actual mass, they never mentioned it last time I saw them, but they did say that the rover could be operating for a large portion of the "day" on the moon.
It has a footprint of about 7 feet by 12 feet, give or take a foot in each. Two reasonably strong men were able to lift up one end of it when they were positioning it for a movement demo, so it can't be too massive...
A bright idea? (Score:1)
Re:A bright idea? (Score:5, Informative)
To find the ice, a rover thus must operate as close to the dark poles as possible, but not so far that it can't use solar arrays for power, Whittaker said. Polaris thus has three large solar arrays, arranged vertically to capture light from low on the horizon. The solar arrays will be capable of an average of 250 watts of electrical power.
Funny how they did actually consider this before designing a multi-million dollar robot. It looks like maybe they did complete Physics 101.
Re:A bright idea? (Score:5, Funny)
*tweet*
Internet Foul, on the Defense, Reading the Article and Thinking for More Than 4 Seconds. 15 Karma point penalty. Repeat First Post.
Re: (Score:2)
Damn, there goes my carefully generated karma...
Re: (Score:1)
So, I guess it'll be in craters that are shadowed by the depth of the walls of the crater, but by not too deep of a crater so as long as the panels are taller than them
Re: (Score:2)
It's actually much worse than this. The moon is basically a radiation nightmare. In addition to all the solar radiation from above (in the form of corona mass ejections), you've apparently got lots from below you as well (thorium and uranium in the crust).
I think most folks are thinking about using the water to make hydrogen (for rocket fuel) and for industrial purposes (e.g., thermal pumps, etc). Drinking water will likely be mostly closed-loop (not unlike how they do it on the ISS).
Re: (Score:2)
The only information that I know about is here...
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2005/08sep_radioactivemoon/ [nasa.gov]
Out in deep space, radiation comes from all directions. On the Moon, you might expect the ground, at least, to provide some relief, with the solid body of the Moon blocking radiation from below. Not so.
When galactic cosmic rays collide with particles in the lunar surface, they trigger little nuclear reactions that release yet more radiation in the form of neutrons. The lunar surface itself is radioactive!
So which is worse for astronauts: cosmic rays from above or neutrons from below? Igor Mitrofanov, a scientist at the Institute for Space Research and the Russian Federal Space Agency, Moscow, offers a grim answer: "Both are worse."
They are attempting to quantify this effect with CRaTER [harvard.edu] or Cosmic Ray Telescope for the Effects of Radiation. Basically, the CRaTER instrument is aboard the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (which is currently orbiting the Moon). However, I haven't seen any specific reports on their findings on their official website http://crater.sr.unh.edu/ [unh.edu], press reports [msn.com] indicate that initial fi
The dimensions are incredible (Score:1)
Only 150 lbs for such a large rover, and it can carry all of that weight? That's pretty impressive.
(Yes, I know 150lbs won't amount to much on the Moon. I'm still impressed)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The pound is also a unit of mass [wikipedia.org].
Fucking Imperial system, am I right?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing wrong with having a unit of force that is related to your unit of mass and earth gravity. The problem is having a unit that is overloaded to be both weight in earth gravity and mass because the unit predates the understanding that there is a difference and so to this day is used interchangeably and without qualification in both cases.
It's subtle, I know. Wait, no, it isn't.
Re: (Score:2)
(Yes, I know 150lbs won't amount to much on the Moon. I'm still impressed)
It'll amount to the same weight on the moon as on Earth. Granted, it'll take much more mass to get up to the weight. If it can haul 150lbs here, it can do the same anywhere.
Just curious... (Score:3)
Somewhere I read that there's little chance to find any good source of water on a planet (or other rock-ball type) without a magnetic field, because that is the only thing that prevents massive hydrogen/water molecules loss from upper parts of the atmosphere caused by solar winds. Therefore, Earth has water, other planets have only uninteresting amounts of it.
Maybe there are (ice) deposits from the time the planets (moon) had the magnetic field? Can anyone clarify?
Re: (Score:2)
The lack of liquid water on the surfaces of planets and moons is due to most being too cold and hence covered in ice or lacking a significant atmosphere and not having enough pressure for water to remain liquid.
We've explored exactly zero other planets so far . (Score:1)
Big assumptions in that.
One thing both the moon and mars do have is lots of dust, not only is dust an insulator, but water tends to stick to surfaces lowering the rate at which it'll move into the atmosphere. Once it hits the atmosphere, yes, it'll tend to get stripped by solar winds. However the initial quantities of water, the rate at which water ends up in the atmosphere and the rate of redeposition (particularly of hydrogen) are still unknowns.
come again? (Score:3)
What could possibly go wrong?
Awesome! (Score:2)
I can't wait for billions of my taxes to be spent finding water on the moon because we all know our economy is strong and infallible, humans have no disease or global strife, and the government is sitting flush with money just wasting away doing nothing because our education and healthcare are all top notch.
I hope one day soon scientists are going to find water on another moon or planet and be so happy they have never wasted one taxpayer dollar doing so.
I am also stoked for a new season of Sarcastaball to g