Skip to content
Space Robotics

NASA ARC Roverscape

MGRU3, the weight-equivalent mobility and navigation test platform for VIPER, on the Roverscape surface. The graded crushed-rock terrain and scattered rocks are the test surface itself NASA/Don Richey. Public domain (NASA / US government work).

A rover’s navigation and hazard-detection software has to be exercised on ground that looks like the terrain it will fly over before anyone trusts it on a mission, and orbit, thermal vacuum and radiation chambers do nothing for that: none of them puts a wheel on a slope, a boulder field or a shadow. NASA ARC answers that gap with an outdoor lot rather than an indoor rig. The Roverscape is a two-acre outdoor lunar analogue terrain field, designed to support testing of rover locomotion, navigation and operations, and also suitable for simulating planetary surface missions [4]. Its free surface is pea gravel rather than a regolith simulant, laid out with boulder distributions and an average surface albedo of 8 percent chosen to resemble lunar regolith [2]. It is the terrain the Intelligent Robotics Group drives on, and it is where the K10 planetary rover was operated from the International Space Station in 2013 [1][3].

A 2025 NASA state-of-practice survey gives the field’s area as 11,500 m2, larger than the “two acres” (about 8,100 m2) the site’s own operators state in the papers describing the 2013 and 2017 campaigns [4]; nothing published reconciles the two figures.

The Arc Jet Complex shares the center but nothing else, and has its own page: it is run by a different branch, in different buildings, for a different purpose.

Laboratory data

Section titled “Laboratory data”
ParameterValue
OperatorNASA ARC, Intelligent Robotics Group [1]
LocationMoffett Field, California, United States
CommissionedNot published; in use for Surface Telerobotics in summer 2013
TypeOutdoor analogue terrain field [4]
Floor areaTwo acres, approximately 8,100 m2; 11,500 m2 per a later NASA survey [2][4]
CapabilitiesTerrain field
Simulant or terrainPea gravel free surface, boulder distributions, 8 percent albedo
InstrumentationNot published as installed capability; users bring their own metrology
Ground truthSite imagery at 0.75 m/pixel and a 1.5 m/post elevation model
Fidelity limits1 g, Earth atmosphere, ambient daylight, pea gravel not simulant [2]
AccessNot published; no external user route, lead time or fee schedule located
Cited byVIPER, photographed running its Moon Gravity Representative Unit test platform on the surface

Orbital-resolution imagery of the site at 0.75 m/pixel and a digital elevation map at 1.5 m/post were produced for mission planning, both deliberately degraded to match what is available for the Moon, which gives the site a ground truth layer that is independent of any rover driving on it: surface-level survey data can be compared against what orbital resolution would have shown [1]. Campaign metrology is otherwise brought by the user, for example the multi-dot laser projector and camera mounted on the leading edge of K-REX2 for the virtual bumper work [2].

Where it sits among planetary test fields

Section titled “Where it sits among planetary test fields”

Facilities that test a rover or its software on the ground fall into four families, and the Roverscape belongs to only one of them.

Open-air terrain fields. The Roverscape is the example with an on-orbit operator: crew on the ISS drove a rover here in 2013 [1][3]. It trades control of the surface for scale, so it suits perception, autonomy and operations questions and not soil mechanics.

Enclosed analog sites with engineered lighting and metrology. The Kennedy Space Center IPEx test site is a 39.6 by 21.3 m light-tight tent with a rock-populated floor, six 1400 W stadium lights standing in for the low polar sun, a full-scale mock lander and OptiTrack ground truth [9]. A five-day continuous run there in August 2024 logged 334 excavation and unload cycles and 58.1 km of driving, and the site records its own wear: penetration resistance rose up to 11 times at the dig site and up to 2 times in trafficked areas against a 0.5 kg/cm2 baseline [9]. The Roverscape has neither the lighting rig nor an installed motion-capture volume, but it is larger and is not consumed by a continuous mission.

Simulant sandboxes. A 4 by 4 m, 0.5 m deep JSC-1A box holding 8 metric tons of simulant was built at Moffett Field’s NASA Research Park for the Regolith Excavation Challenge, with a 6 by 6 by 2.4 m dust containment tent and a compacted bulk density averaging 1.84 g/cm3 against 1.54 to 1.71 g/cm3 in situ at the Apollo sites [8]. The paper describes the facility and reports no excavation or mobility results [8]. This is the family that answers the regolith question the pea gravel cannot.

Small-scale indoor arenas. Verti-Arena is an 8 by 8 m reconfigurable indoor testbed with ten terrain types, up to 0.7 m of elevation difference and eight-camera motion capture, used with a 1/10-scale vehicle to show that learned kinodynamic models depend on terrain type [10]. It has no regolith simulant, lunar gravity, vacuum or lunar lighting [10], so it bears on learning-based traversability and not on lunar fidelity.

None of the four reproduces lunar gravity. That is done by gravity offload, by weight-equivalent platforms, or in flight: cable suspension at the NASA ARGOS rig is limited by where the gimbal pivot sits relative to the combined center of gravity, with functional settings in a zone roughly 2.5 to 6.4 cm above and 1.3 to 2.5 cm aft of it across 14 suit subjects [13]. Parabolic flights on a Falcon 20 showed that matching only wheel load in 1 g overstates mobility: drawbar pull to weight fell 20 percent or more and sinkage rose up to 40 percent in lunar gravity at equal load [12]. Granular scaling laws predicted lunar-gravity wheel performance to within about 9 percent in that work, always in the conservative direction [12]. The consequence for the Roverscape is that its wheel-terrain results are not a prediction of lunar traction.

Capabilities

Section titled “Capabilities”

Terrain field

Section titled “Terrain field”
ParameterValue
Working volumeTwo acres, approximately 8,100 m2; no layout plan published
Test article limitsFull-scale rovers K10 and K-REX2 run here; VIPER’s MGRU has been photographed on the surface [1][2]
VacuumNot applicable; outdoors at Earth ambient pressure
TemperatureNot controlled; Moffett Field outdoor conditions
IlluminationAmbient; night running used for directional lighting cases
Simulant or terrainPea gravel, boulder distributions, 8 percent average albedo
SlopeNot published; no slope inventory or settable slope rig described
Gravity offloadNot applicable; weight-equivalent test platforms used instead

Everything published about the field’s physical construction fits in two sentences of a computer vision paper: it is a two-acre outdoor planetary analog terrain with boulder distributions and an average surface albedo of 8 percent similar to lunar regolith, whose free surface is covered in a layer of pea gravel and not a regolith simulant, for reasons of practicality [2]. Obstacle test cases have been designed to mirror the geometric possibilities likely in craters at the lunar poles. No tonnage, grain size distribution, bearing capacity or preparation procedure between tests is published.

Illumination is not an engineered capability but it is used as a variable. Day and night tests have been run to recreate direct and indirect illumination conditions, the two chosen so that total incident illumination and dominant directionality were similar, which is how a structured-light hazard detector was evaluated on the site. There is no solar simulator and no settable solar elevation angle.

Lunar weight is approximated elsewhere by building a weight-equivalent test platform rather than by offloading; VIPER’s Moon Gravity Representative Unit is such a platform, its mass tuned to give Earth-gravity wheel loads matching the flight rover’s lunar wheel loads, and it has been photographed running on the Roverscape surface [11]. The MGRU’s mobility and terramechanics test program itself runs at a different NASA test bed and is not described here. NASA’s consolidated mobility test guidance, written around the Lunar Terrain Vehicle, states a 15 km/h speed requirement and notes that no known facility reproduces the resulting inertial and dynamic tire-terrain effects [11]; the Roverscape’s published uses sit at human walking speed, up to 90 cm/s for K10 [1].

Instrumentation

Section titled “Instrumentation”

The site has no published installed metrology. What exists as facility infrastructure is the prior survey: satellite imagery of the site degraded to 0.75 m/pixel and a 1.5 m/post digital elevation model, both chosen to match the orbital data resolution available for the Moon, plus a control shelter from which operations are run [1]. Everything measured about a test article is brought by the campaign.

What it does not reproduce

Section titled “What it does not reproduce”

Gravity and atmosphere. The field is at 1 g under Earth atmosphere and ambient daylight, and there is no offload rig [1]. Lunar weight is approximated instead by building a weight-equivalent test platform, the approach behind the VIPER Moon Gravity Representative Unit that has been driven here.

Regolith and the vacuum environment. The surface is pea gravel, an explicit practicality substitution by the operators [2], so nothing about dust, sinkage, cohesion or tribology transfers. The Roverscape tests navigation, perception and operations, not terramechanics. A high-fidelity lunar surface simulation has to reproduce the dust, vacuum, temperature, solar radiation and reduced gravity together, and the NASA Glenn dust adhesion bell jar, which was designed to do so, documents how far even a purpose-built chamber falls short on some of them [14]. The Roverscape attempts none of the five.

Repeatability of the terrain. No preparation procedure between tests is published, and the field is outdoors, so surface state is a condition of the day rather than a set variable. The IPEx site shows the size of the effect on a terrain left in place: a continuous mission changed its penetration resistance by up to an order of magnitude [9].

Campaigns run there

Section titled “Campaigns run there”

Surface Telerobotics, summer 2013. Three astronauts of ISS Expedition 36 remotely operated the K10 planetary rover on the Roverscape from orbit, simulating a mission in which an astronaut in lunar orbit deploys a radio telescope on the lunar far side [1][3]. A later paper from the same NASA group gives each of the three sessions as 3.5 hours [3], a figure the campaign paper’s own numbers, 40 minutes of crew training plus two hours of operations per session, do not add up to and that neither paper explains.

Session 1, on 17 June 2013 [1], surveyed the site and began deployment of a simulated telescope array, using surface-level survey data to assess terrain obstacles, slopes and undulations below the resolution of the orbital imagery or ambiguous because of its nadir pointing; session 2, on 26 July, deployed all three arms of the array and ran ahead of schedule into the inspection phase; session 3, on 20 August, started midway through deployment and performed remote visual inspection. Commanding ran over Ku-band by a combination of supervisory command sequencing and manual discrete commanding, for 11 hours of operation and 221.43 m, 170.14 m and 200.15 m driven across the three sessions [1].

The operator-side figures are flight data and the rover-side figures are terrestrial analog. The rover worked 65 to 80 percent of in-simulation time, situation awareness stayed above 67 percent at every Endsley level, and crew workload was rated 1 to 3 on the Bedford scale after 40 minutes of onboard training [1]. Three subjects each flew a different mission phase, the authors state that no statistical result can be obtained, and loss-of-signal periods of up to 35 percent of a phase were excluded from the utilization figures [1]. The comparable European effort commanded DLR’s Rollin’ Justin from the ISS in a simulated Martian solar farm; its 2017 and 2018 sessions had astronauts complete all scenarios without traditional operator training, with no task times or workload instrument reported [3].

Structured-light hazard detection, published 2017. A multi-dot laser projector and camera mounted on the leading edge of the K-REX2 rover were evaluated on the field against obstacle cases designed to mirror the geometry likely in lunar polar craters, in day and night runs chosen so that total incident illumination and dominant directionality matched [2]. Detection exceeded 97 percent over roughly 2700 images, the night false alarm rate was 1.7 percent, and the analytic 15.9 pixel disparity threshold for a 10 cm obstacle compared with an empirical best of 15 pixels [2]. Processing was offline, driving was manual and no negative obstacles were tested, so the result is a field analog and not a flight demonstration. The pea gravel itself produced the dominant error: its granules acted as tiny occluders whose reflectance variegation sometimes exceeded the laser’s contribution [2].

Other Ames robotics outside the lot. The Ames group tests free-flying and swarm systems on other facilities, which marks the limit of what the Roverscape is used for. Astrobee was developed with ground testing on the Granite Lab air-bearing table, which offloads three degrees of freedom and replicates ISS visual features, and then flew: the six-year record reports more than 165 real-time operations and more than 90 Guest Science test sessions [5][6]. A change-detection study used both Granite Lab and ISS Japanese Experiment Module survey data and reports no detection or false-positive rates [6]. The Troupe testbed, a 4 to 10 rover swarm on commercial radio-control chassis built for autonomous mapping, is described without measured results and without lunar terrain [7].

VIPER, ongoing. The Moon Gravity Representative Unit, a weight-equivalent platform built to VIPER’s lunar wheel loads, has been photographed driving on the Roverscape surface. No source found states what test objective that run served, or whether it is a routine part of VIPER’s mobility and navigation development rather than a one-off imaging opportunity [4].

Section titled “Related Ames programs and neighboring facilities”

Rover lineage and simulation. The Resource Prospector rover that preceded VIPER reached a driven prototype, and its Virtual Bumper hazard detector is named alongside the structured-light work above; the only success rate attached to it is stated on a slide without sample size, lighting condition or failure mode [27]. Ames and Open Robotics built a Gazebo and ROS lunar driving simulator for the Resource Prospector reference mission, with synthetic terrain from fractal upsampling of lunar elevation maps and a GPU Hapke reflectance model. Its slip model is a compliance parameter fitted to two ground tests and not a terramechanics model [28]. A simulator of this kind complements the outdoor lot, because it can vary lighting and terrain statistics that the pea gravel field cannot.

VIPER ground testing elsewhere. The VIPER program record places its wheel endurance test over simulant and rocks, slip characterization at the NASA Glenn SLOPE facility and sink-tank tests in spherical beads at other sites, with no results reported for the slip and sink-tank campaigns [15]. The flight rover passed vibration and acoustic testing, with thermal vacuum still ahead when the paper was written [16]. The rover’s navigation sensors and traverse planning requirements are fixed in the proposal information package, which is pre-flight design description and was never validated on the Moon [17]. The mission did not fly [16].

Other Ames test environments. The Planetary Aeolian Laboratory at Ames is a 4000 m3, 30 m tall chamber, originally a 1960s rocket vibration test facility, used for full-scale Mars rotor hover tests at Mars density with vacuum supplied by the Ames Steam Vacuum System, which limits the usable low-pressure window to about 40 to 60 minutes per operating day [18]. A parallel Mars rotor campaign ran in the JPL 25 ft Space Simulator [19]. These are atmosphere facilities and share nothing with the Roverscape beyond the center. The Thermophysics Facilities Branch customer guide for the Ames site is a visitor logistics document with no technical envelope, so it supports only the observation that on-site work requires badging and building-specific protective equipment [26]. The center’s Arc Jet Complex has its own page.

Comparable telerobotics and field sites. ESA’s METERON Analog-1 had an astronaut drive a rover and arm from the ISS in 2019 and a retired astronaut operate a rover on Mount Etna in 2022; effectiveness is reported as objectives addressed and not as task times or tracking accuracy [29]. The PISCES center at Mauna Kea is a simulated lunar outpost site, and its described wheel work is a plan with design targets and no test data [30]. Facility inventories for on-orbit servicing list the ground rigs by type, and the larger survey does not assess which of them reproduce contact dynamics [24][25].

What simulant fidelity adds. Standardized ASTM testing of six lunar simulants shows that particle size distribution alone is not a sufficient fidelity measure, so a result obtained on one material cannot be assumed to hold on another [20]. The Apollo dust record sorts recorded problems into nine categories, including loss of traction, clogging of mechanisms and abrasion, none of which a pea gravel field exercises [21]. The IPEx actuator qualification ran in the KSC Small Space Environment Dynamometer and fitted an empirical current-torque model, with only 10 s recorded per setpoint in two of the four tests [23]. The Astrobee operations concept compares the four ISS free flyers and gives design values only, written before launch [22].

What is not established

Section titled “What is not established”

The field’s own operators have published almost nothing about its physical construction: no tonnage or grain size distribution for the pea gravel, no bearing capacity figure, no preparation procedure run between test campaigns, and no slope inventory. Nothing published states when the site was commissioned; the earliest documented use is the 2013 Surface Telerobotics campaign [1][3]. The two published area figures, 8,100 m2 and 11,500 m2, are not reconciled by any source found [2][4], and no external user access route, lead time or fee schedule has been located. The MGRU photograph is the only evidence found that VIPER has used the site at all, and no source found states what that test was for [4]. No published study compares Roverscape results against lunar-gravity or regolith-simulant results for the same rover, so how far navigation and hazard-detection performance measured here carries over to the Moon is not quantified. Hazard-detection and telerobotics results from the site are single-campaign field analogs: none has been repeated by another group on the same terrain in the sources held.

References

  1. Bualat, M., Schreckenghost, D., Pacis, E., Fong, T., Kalar, D. and Beutter, B. (2014). Results from Testing Crew-Controlled Surface Telerobotics on the International Space Station . iSAIRAS - International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and Automation in Space, 20150007985. Source
    BibTeX
    @inproceedings{bualat2014results,
  title = {Results from Testing Crew-Controlled Surface Telerobotics on the International Space Station},
  author = {Bualat, Maria and Schreckenghost, Debra and Pacis, Estrellina and Fong, Terrence and Kalar, Donald and Beutter, Brent},
  booktitle = {iSAIRAS - International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and Automation in Space},
  number = {20150007985},
  institution = {NASA},
  address = {Montreal, Quebec},
  year = {2014},
  url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20150007985},
  abstract = {During Summer 2013, the Intelligent Robotics Group at NASA Ames Research Center conducted a series of tests to examine how astronauts in the International Space Station (ISS) can remotely operate a planetary rover. The tests simulated portions of a proposed lunar mission, in which an astronaut in lunar orbit would remotely operate a planetary rover to deploy a radio telescope on the lunar far side. Over the course of Expedition 36, three ISS astronauts remotely operated the NASA "K10" planetary rover in an analogue lunar terrain located at the NASA Ames Research Center in California. The astronauts used a "Space Station Computer" (crew laptop), a combination of supervisory control (command sequencing) and manual control (discrete commanding), and Ku-band data communications to command and monitor K10 for 11 hours. In this paper, we present and analyze test results, summarize user feedback, and describe directions for future research.}
}
  2. Nefian, A. V., Wong, U. Y., Dille, M., Bouyssounouse, X., Edwards, L. and To, V. (2017). Structured Light-Based Hazard Detection for Planetary Surface Navigation . IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision, 20170009200. Source
    BibTeX
    @inproceedings{nefian2017structured,
  title = {Structured Light-Based Hazard Detection for Planetary Surface Navigation},
  author = {Nefian, Ara V. and Wong, Uland Y. and Dille, Michael and Bouyssounouse, Xavier and Edwards, Laurence and To, Vinh},
  booktitle = {IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision},
  number = {20170009200},
  pages = {2665-2671},
  institution = {NASA Ames Research Center},
  year = {2017},
  doi = {10.1109/iros.2017.8206090},
  abstract = {This paper describes a structured light-based sensor for hazard avoidance in planetary environments. The system presented here can also be used in terrestrial applications constrained by reduced onboard power and computational complexity and low illumination conditions. The sensor consists on a calibrated camera and laser dot projector system. The onboard hazard avoidance system determines the position of the projected dots in the image and through a triangulation process detects potential hazards. The paper presents the design parameters for this sensor and describes the image based solution for hazard avoidance. The system presented here was tested extensively in day and night conditions in Lunar analogue environments. The current system achieves over 97% detection rate with 1.7% false alarms over 2000 images.}
}
  3. Schmaus, P., Leidner, D., Bayer, R., Pleintinger, B., Krüger, T. and Lii, N. Y. (2019). Continued Advances in Supervised Autonomy User Interface Design for METERON SUPVIS Justin . IEEE Aerospace Conference. Source
    BibTeX
    @inproceedings{schmaus2019continued,
  title = {Continued Advances in Supervised Autonomy User Interface Design for METERON SUPVIS Justin},
  author = {Schmaus, Peter and Leidner, Daniel and Bayer, Ralph and Pleintinger, Benedikt and Krüger, Thomas and Lii, Neal Y.},
  booktitle = {IEEE Aerospace Conference},
  pages = {1-11},
  address = {Big Sky, Montana},
  year = {2019},
  doi = {10.1109/aero.2019.8741885},
  abstract = {The exploration of the universe remains a challenging endeavor, constantly pushing the limits of technology. Of special interest is the investigation of the other planets of our solar system such as Mars, which has been examined by various tele-operated and (semi-) autonomous satellites and landers. But an important milestone that is needed for a deeper understanding of the planet is still missing: A crewed landing. In order to send humans to such a remote location, an infrastructure for the landing crew including an energy supply, a habitat, and a return vehicle needs to be provided on the surface of the planet. The construction and maintenance of these structures is envisioned to be done by semiautonomous robots that are commanded from orbiting spacecrafts. The teleoperation of such ground-based robots poses high demands on the capabilities of the system including robot autonomy, orbiter-robot communication, and human-robot interface design. The METERON SVPVIS Justin space telerobotics experiment suite has been initiated by the German Aerospace Center (DLR) together with the European Space Agency (ESA) to investigate the requirements for such a system and evaluate an approach. During the experiment sessions, astronauts onboard the International Space Station (ISS) command DLR's humanoid service robot Rollin' Justin on Earth to execute complex surveillance, service, and repair tasks in a simulated Martian solar farm. The robot uses its local intelligence to support the astronaut operator upon task completion allowing a simple intuitive command interface and lowering the requirements on the communication link. This work gives an overview of the developed robotic system, communication link, and tablet computer user interface (UI). In particular the tight coupling between the autonomy system of the robot and the UI, that allows the intuitive robot commanding including action parameterization, is described in detail. The first space-ground experiment sessions of METERON SUPVIS Justin were conducted in August 2017, and March 2018 by four astronauts in total. During the first session, three astronauts demonstrated the operational readiness of our system by commanding Rollin' Justin to perform surveillance and inspection tasks. The astronauts were even able to successfully command the robot in scenarios, which were not trained prior to their spaceflight. This was possible, because our astronaut-robot collaboration concept efficiently guides the operator towards task completion. We used this property in the second experiment session to evaluate our system in even more complex scenarios. While in the first session it was sufficient for the astronaut to select the correct commands, the operator was now required to manually parameterize some of the commands to optimize the task outcome. By that, the robot has been successfully commanded to perform complex maintenance and adjustment tasks in the simulated Martian solar farm. In this work, we evaluate the preliminary results of the space-ground experiments and discuss the feedback we received from the astronauts and its impact on future space telerobotics UI design.}
}
  4. Mulvaney, J., Arney, D., Williams, C., Morel, J., Stockdale, C., Whitlock, C. and Balaji, V. (2025). In-Space Servicing, Assembly, and Manufacturing (ISAM) State of Play, 2025 Edition . NASA, 20250008988. Source
    BibTeX
    @techreport{nasa2025space,
  title = {In-Space Servicing, Assembly, and Manufacturing (ISAM) State of Play, 2025 Edition},
  author = {Mulvaney, John and Arney, Dale and Williams, Christina and Morel, Jose and Stockdale, Christopher and Whitlock, Christopher and Balaji, Vishruth},
  number = {20250008988},
  institution = {NASA},
  year = {2025},
  url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20250008988},
  abstract = {The future of spaceflight will yield increasingly more ambitious missions to support civil, national security, 
and commercial space sectors. Achieving some of these missions will not be feasible by launching an 
integrated, fully functioning system on a single launch vehicle. Future science and human exploration 
missions will require payloads that are larger than any foreseeable launch vehicle fairing, national security 
missions will require persistent assets that are mobile and resilient, and commercial space missions will 
require cost-effective ways to update to the latest technology on orbit.

In-space Servicing, Assembly, and Manufacturing (ISAM) can vastly expand the performance, availability, 
and lifetime of space systems compared to the traditional paradigm of launching an asset with no intent 
to ever interact with it again. ISAM capabilities foster an ecosystem that changes the space operations 
paradigm, creating the foundation for sustainable exploration and serving as a multiplier for other 
capabilities like space logistics, power generation, and reusability.

Previous achievements in ISAM have enabled ambitious human and robotic space missions. The 
assembly, operation, and maintenance of NASA’s International Space Station (ISS); servicing missions to
the Hubble Space Telescope (HST); and Northrop Grumman’s Mission Extension Vehicle (MEV) 
demonstrate the dramatic operational missions that can be achieved using ISAM capabilities. Many 
current and upcoming flight demonstrations are advancing areas that will enable the next generation of 
civil, national security, and commercial space missions.

This document describes the current state of ISAM missions, activities, and technologiesto the best ability 
of the authors. Compiling and organizing the available ISAM capabilities will help mission designers 
incorporate ISAM technologies into their concepts, create the starting point for technology development 
plans and roadmaps, and provide technologists a survey of the field they are developing. This document 
divides the ISAM capabilities into 11 functional capability areas that describe the functions or activities 
that can be performed in space using ISAM.}
}
  5. Alexandrov, O., Barlow, J., Benavides, J., Bualat, M., Carlino, R., Coltin, B., Cortez, J., Daley, E., Feller, J., Flückiger, L., Fong, T., Fusco, J., Garcia Ruiz, R., Hamilton, K., Kanis, S., Katterhagen, A., Kim, Y., Love, J. F., McIntyre, M., McLachlan, B., Mora Vargas, A., Moratto, Z., Moreira, M., Morse, T., Orosco, H., Park, I.-W., Provencher, C., Sanchez, H., Sharif, K., Smith, E., Smith, T., Soussan, R., Symington, A., Talavera, R. O., To, V., Wheeler, D. and Yoo, J. (2026). Astrobee: Free-Flying Robots for the International Space Station . IEEE Transactions on Field Robotics. Source
    BibTeX
    @article{alexandrov2026astrobee,
  title = {Astrobee: Free-Flying Robots for the International Space Station},
  author = {Alexandrov, Oleg and Barlow, Jonathan and Benavides, Jose and Bualat, Maria and Carlino, Roberto and Coltin, Brian and Cortez, Jose and Daley, Earl and Feller, Jeffrey and Flückiger, Lorenzo and Fong, Terrence and Fusco, Jesse and Garcia Ruiz, Ruben and Hamilton, Kathryn and Kanis, Simeon and Katterhagen, Aric and Kim, Yunkyung and Love, John F. and McIntyre, Michael and McLachlan, Blair and Mora Vargas, Andres and Moratto, Zack and Moreira, Marina and Morse, Theodore and Orosco, Henry and Park, In-Won and Provencher, Christopher and Sanchez, Hugo and Sharif, Khaled and Smith, Ernest and Smith, Trey and Soussan, Ryan and Symington, Andrew and Talavera, Rafael Omar and To, Vinh and Wheeler, DW and Yoo, Jongwoon},
  journal = {IEEE Transactions on Field Robotics},
  year = {2026},
  url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20260001396},
  abstract = {The Astrobees are free-flying robots that operate inside the International Space Station (ISS) and were launched to the ISS
in 2019. Since then they have successfully performed hundreds of activities in space supporting almost two dozen separate
research projects. The robots were designed to overcome multiple challenges unique to the ISS environment, including safety,
upgradeability and maintainability, limited mass and computation, and unique localization challenges from lack of gravity and a
constantly changing environment. This article provides an overview of Astrobee, from hardware and software design to deployment
results and activities.}
}
  6. Dinkel, H., Di, J., Santos, J., Albee, K., Borges, P., Moreira, M., Alexandrov, O., Coltin, B. and Smith, T. (2023). Multi-Agent 3D Map Reconstruction and Change Detection in Microgravity with Free-Flying Robots . International Astronautical Congress, IAC-23,D1,6,1,x78669. Source
    BibTeX
    @inproceedings{dinkel2023multi,
  title = {Multi-Agent 3D Map Reconstruction and Change Detection in Microgravity with Free-Flying Robots},
  author = {Dinkel, Holly and Di, Julia and Santos, Jamie and Albee, Keenan and Borges, Paulo and Moreira, Marina and Alexandrov, Oleg and Coltin, Brian and Smith, Trey},
  booktitle = {International Astronautical Congress},
  number = {IAC-23,D1,6,1,x78669},
  publisher = {JPL Open Repository},
  year = {2023},
  doi = {10.48577/jpl.lbsjso},
  abstract = {Assistive free-flyer robots autonomously caring for future crewed outposts---such as NASA’s Astrobee robots on the International Space Station (ISS)---must be able to detect day-to-day interior changes to track inventory, detect and diagnose faults, and monitor the outpost status. This work presents a framework for multi-agent cooperative mapping and change detection to enable robotic maintenance of space outposts. One agent is used to reconstruct a 3D model of the environment from sequences of images and corresponding depth information. Another agent is used to scan the environment for inconsistencies against the 3D model. Change detection is validated using real image and pose data collected by Astrobee robots on Earth in a test environment and in space on the ISS. This work outlines the objectives, requirements, and algorithmic modules for the multi-agent reconstruction system, including recommendations for its use aboard future microgravity outposts.}
}
  7. Benz, N. A., Sljivo, I., Woodard, A., Vlastos, P. G., Carter, C. K. and Hejase, M. (2024). The Troupe System: An Autonomous Multi-Agent Rover Swarm . AIAA SCITECH Forum. Source
    BibTeX
    @inproceedings{benz2024troupe,
  title = {The Troupe System: An Autonomous Multi-Agent Rover Swarm},
  author = {Benz, Nathaniel A. and Sljivo, Irfan and Woodard, Aaron and Vlastos, Pavlo G. and Carter, Corey K. and Hejase, Mohammad},
  booktitle = {AIAA SCITECH Forum},
  institution = {NASA Ames Research Center},
  address = {Orlando, FL},
  year = {2024},
  url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20240000218},
  abstract = {Autonomous cooperative robotic systems are the future of space exploration. The complexity of such systems makes their development, verification and assurance challenging. The Robust Software Engineering group at NASA Ames has developed the Troupe project that aims to explore the design and development of a swarm of autonomous rovers tasked to perform autonomous exploration and mapping of an unknown terrain. In this paper, we showcase the system design, and accompanying verification and validation tools integrated in the Troupe system development life-cycle.}
}
  8. Everingham, M. and Pelster, N. (2009). Lunar Analog Creation: Preparation and Operation of a Lunar Regolith Simulant Testbed . AIAA SPACE Conference. Source
    BibTeX
    @inproceedings{everingham2009lunar,
  title = {Lunar Analog Creation: Preparation and Operation of a Lunar Regolith Simulant Testbed},
  author = {Everingham, Matt and Pelster, Nick},
  booktitle = {AIAA SPACE Conference},
  publisher = {American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics},
  year = {2009},
  doi = {10.2514/6.2009-6510}
}
  9. Cloud, J. M., Nick, A. J., Buckles, B. C., Dixon, K. L., Muller, T. J., Ortega, V. V., Smith, J. D., Clark, C. J., Dyas, J. E., Zhang, E. L., Leucht, K. W., Mueller, R. P. and Schuler, J. M. (2025). The IPEx Autonomy Test-Site: Terrestrial Testing of Autonomous Excavation in Lunar South Pole Conditions . ASCE Earth and Space Conference, 20250000128. Source
    BibTeX
    @inproceedings{cloud2025ipex,
  title = {The IPEx Autonomy Test-Site: Terrestrial Testing of Autonomous Excavation in Lunar South Pole Conditions},
  author = {Cloud, Joseph M. and Nick, Andrew J. and Buckles, Bradley C. and Dixon, Kyle L. and Muller, Thomas J. and Ortega, Victoria V. and Smith, Jonathan D. and Clark, Casey J. and Dyas, Jeffrey E. and Zhang, Elizabeth L. and Leucht, Kurt W. and Mueller, Robert P. and Schuler, Jason M.},
  booktitle = {ASCE Earth and Space Conference},
  number = {20250000128},
  pages = {1-14},
  institution = {NASA},
  year = {2025},
  doi = {10.1109/aero63441.2025.11068688},
  abstract = {NASA's Artemis program aims to send humans to the lunar south pole (LSP), requiring in-situ resource utilization (ISRU) technologies like the ISRU Pilot Excavator (IPEx) to perform site preparation and resource extraction. The LSP is a uniquely challenging environment, characterized by low solar angles and long shadows that disrupt vision-based autonomy. To approximate these conditions, we developed the IPEx autonomy test-site, a 21.3×33.5 m enclosed area for testing excavation technologies under simulated LSP conditions. The test-site is equipped with granular material, scattered rocks, and a full-scale lander model. Strategically placed high-power lights replicate the low solar angles, while a motion capture system offers ground truth robot poses. Additional site awareness cameras provide complete coverage of the test area for monitoring. The test-site has been utilized to evaluate performance of both autonomous navigation and excavation tasks. Finally, we discuss initial results obtained from test runs, calculations compared against a digital simulation, features of the terrain that mimic the visual properties of lunar regolith, and challenges observed.}
}
  10. Chen, H., Datar, A., Xu, T., Cancelliere, F., Rangwala, H., Rao, M. B., Song, D., Eichinger, D. and Xiao, X. (2025). Verti-Arena: A Controllable and Standardized Indoor Testbed for Multi-Terrain Off-Road Autonomy . IEEE International Symposium on Safety, Security, and Rescue Robotics. Source
    BibTeX
    @inproceedings{chen2025verti,
  title = {Verti-Arena: A Controllable and Standardized Indoor Testbed for Multi-Terrain Off-Road Autonomy},
  author = {Chen, Haiyue and Datar, Aniket and Xu, Tong and Cancelliere, Francesco and Rangwala, Harsh and Rao, Madhan Balaji and Song, Daeun and Eichinger, David and Xiao, Xuesu},
  booktitle = {IEEE International Symposium on Safety, Security, and Rescue Robotics},
  pages = {133-138},
  year = {2025},
  doi = {10.1109/ssrr68451.2025.11391317},
  abstract = {Off-road navigation is an important capability for mobile robots deployed in environments that are inaccessible or dangerous to humans, such as disaster response or planetary exploration. Progress is limited due to the lack of a controllable and standardized real-world testbed for systematic data collection and validation. To fill this gap, we introduce Verti-Arena, a reconfigurable indoor facility designed specifically for off-road autonomy. By providing a repeatable benchmark environment, Verti-Arena supports reproducible experiments across a variety of vertically challenging terrains and provides precise ground truth measurements through onboard sensors and a motion capture system. Verti-Arena also supports consistent data collection and comparative evaluation of algorithms in off-road autonomy research. We also develop a web-based interface that enables research groups worldwide to remotely conduct standardized off-road autonomy experiments on Verti-Arena.}
}
  11. Creager, C., Breckenridge, J., Johnson, K., Oravec, H., Moreland, S., Sobey, A. and McBryan, E. (2025). Best Practices for the Testing of Planetary Roving Vehicle Mobility Systems and Tires . NASA, 20250003470. Source
    BibTeX
    @techreport{creager2025best,
  title = {Best Practices for the Testing of Planetary Roving Vehicle Mobility Systems and Tires},
  author = {Creager, Colin and Breckenridge, John and Johnson, Kyle and Oravec, Heather and Moreland, Scott and Sobey, Alexander and McBryan, Emily},
  number = {20250003470},
  institution = {NASA},
  year = {2025},
  url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20250003470},
  abstract = {NASA has an extensive history of conducting mobility testing on planetary tires, rovers, and mobility subsystems.  This paper contains a summary of the best practices and lessons learned from past test approaches, as well as from relevant test methodologies external to NASA, with a focus on tires and mobility systems.  It is intended to be a resource for future planetary rover developments. This document, which will be released in two phases, serves two objectives:  1) compile the existing knowledge of mobility related testing within NASA; and 2) identify major gaps in mobility related test needs and suggest potential paths forward.  This first release of the document (early 2025) captures information based on the authors’ existing knowledge and an abbreviated literature review.  A more thorough version will be released in late 2025 and will include more information on test methods external to NASA, as well as additional lessons learned through further investigations.  The Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) is used as case study to help identify major test needs; however, this document is intended to be applicable to a wide range of potential missions.  Though no current mobility standards exist for the testing of planetary tires and mobility subsystems, future motive is to utilize the information from this whitepaper to guide the development of NASA mobility test standards.}
}
  12. Daca, A. (2023). Predicting Planetary Rover Mobility in Reduced Gravity Using 1-g Experiments . Unpublished. Source
    BibTeX
    @phdthesis{daca2023predicting,
  title = {Predicting Planetary Rover Mobility in Reduced Gravity Using 1-g Experiments},
  author = {Daca, Adriana},
  journal = {Unpublished},
  school = {Concordia University},
  address = {Montreal, Quebec, Canada},
  type = {PhD thesis},
  month = {February},
  year = {2023},
  doi = {10.13140/rg.2.2.12718.28485},
  abstract = {Traversing granular regolith, especially in reduced gravity environments, remains a potential challenge for wheeled rovers. Mitigating hazards for planetary rovers requires testing in representative environments, but direct Earth-based testing fails to account for the effect of reduced gravity on the soil itself. Here, experimental apparatus and techniques for reduced-gravity flight testing are used to systematically evaluate three existing Earth-based testing methods and develop guidelines for their use and interpretation: (i) reduced-weight testing, (ii) matching soil testing instrument response through soil simulant design, and (iii) granular scaling laws (GSL). \nExperimentation campaigns flying reduced-gravity parabolas, with soil and wheel both in lunar-g, have shown reductions in net traction of 20% or more and increases in sinkage of up to 40% compared to Earth-based testing methods (i) and (ii). Scaled-wheel testing, according to GSL (method iii) has shown better agreement with reduced-g tests (less than 10% error) and also tends to err on the side of conservative predictions. \nLimitations of GSL are investigated including a recently proposed cohesion constraint (that the wheel radius ratio must be the inverse of the gravity ratio) and the effects of wheel size and aspect ratio on GSL’s accuracy. It was found that the cohesion constraint can most likely be ignored for mildly cohesive soils such as lunar regolith. Limits on wheel sizes and aspect ratio variation are also proposed. \nThe application of GSL to planetary rover testing is demonstrated through two studies undertaken in collaboration with NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory. One study compares wheel designs for a skid-steer lunar rover in single-wheel tests scaled by GSL, demonstrating that diagonal grousers improve turning performance without requiring larger wheels. The second study involves application of GSL to the design of two reconfigurable test platforms for evaluating steep-terrain mobility performance. \nAnother aspect of rover mobility testing—normal force control in single-wheel testbeds—is also investigated. An improved method for single-wheel testing, using a 4-bar mechanism, essentially eliminates normal force oscillations from frictional vertical sliders. \nFinally, guidelines for conducting and interpreting 1-g mobility tests for lunar rovers are presented, and potential avenues for future research are outlined.}
}
  13. Jarvis, S. L., Vu, L. Q., Gupta, G., Benson, E., Kim, K. H., Rhodes, R. and Rajulu, S. L. (2023). Development of ARGOS (Active Response Gravity Offload System) Offloading Assessments and Methodology for Lunar EVA Simulations . International Conference on Environmental Systems, 20230002430. Source
    BibTeX
    @inproceedings{jarvis2023development,
  title = {Development of ARGOS (Active Response Gravity Offload System) Offloading Assessments and Methodology for Lunar EVA Simulations},
  author = {Jarvis, Sarah L. and Vu, Linh Q. and Gupta, Garima and Benson, Elizabeth and Kim, K. Han and Rhodes, Richard and Rajulu, Sudhakar L.},
  booktitle = {International Conference on Environmental Systems},
  number = {20230002430},
  institution = {NASA},
  address = {Calgary},
  year = {2023},
  url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20230002430},
  abstract = {The Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) is an analog environment that can offload pressurized suited subjects for various reduced gravity simulations. The suit is suspended from a robotic overhead crane by a cable connected to the suit via a gimbal with an adjustable pivot point (i.e. offload attachment). There has been increased interest in providing planetary pressurized suited training at ARGOS in preparation for lunar missions. Determination of the appropriate gimbal pivot point location for a given subject is vital for a high-fidelity functional lunar simulation. Interactions between the pivot point location and human-spacesuit center of gravity (CG) can result in righting moments that may lead to artificially stable or unrealistically challenging
configurations. Changing the pivot point location is time consuming and repeated adjustment can result in loss of valuable pressurized suited time. This paper aims to share knowledge obtained from the offloading characterization efforts during pressurized suited testing at ARGOS and document the ongoing process to define an appropriate pivot point location through iterative quantitative and qualitative assessments. Human-spacesuit CG locations for the ARGOS lunar simulation were estimated using a 3D body scan and density model combined with spacesuit hardware CAD and specifications. Early pilot testing of the gimbal revealed that setting the pivot point coincident with the modeled CG location was not always possible due to the current gimbal design, and small pivot point shifts had noticeable effects on subject stability. Fourteen subjects performed a series of CG-related tasks in the
Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) to assess simulation characteristics. Through iterative testing, this task list evolved to streamline the process needed to efficiently identify a suitable pivot point for a given subject. The developed methodology will be critical for pivot point selection during astronaut training in the ARGOS environment.}
}
  14. Gaier, J. R. and Sechkar, E. A. (2007). Lunar Simulation in the Lunar Dust Adhesion Bell Jar . AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, NASA/TM-2007-214704. Source
    BibTeX
    @inproceedings{gaier2007lunar,
  title = {Lunar Simulation in the Lunar Dust Adhesion Bell Jar},
  author = {Gaier, James R. and Sechkar, Edward A.},
  booktitle = {AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting},
  number = {NASA/TM-2007-214704},
  institution = {NASA},
  year = {2007},
  doi = {10.2514/6.2007-963},
  abstract = {The Lunar Dust Adhesion Bell Jar has been assembled at the NASA Glenn Research Center to provide a high fidelity lunar simulation facility to test the interactions of lunar dust and lunar dust simulant with candidate aerospace materials and coatings. It has a sophisticated design which enables it to treat dust in a way that will remove adsorbed gases and create a chemically reactive surface. It can simulate the vacuum, thermal, and radiation environments of the Moon, including proximate areas of illuminated heat and extremely cold shadow. It is expected to be a valuable tool in the development of dust repellant and cleaning technologies for lunar surface systems.}
}
  15. Andrews, D. (2023). VIPER: Systems Integration Status . International Astronautical Congress, 20230001799. Source
    BibTeX
    @inproceedings{andrews2023viper,
  title = {VIPER: Systems Integration Status},
  author = {Andrews, Daniel},
  booktitle = {International Astronautical Congress},
  number = {20230001799},
  institution = {NASA},
  address = {Baku},
  year = {2023},
  url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20230001799},
  abstract = {NASA’s Artemis Program plans to return humans to the Moon for an extended stay. To do so will require substantial resources to sustain that continued human presence, including continuous supplies delivered from the Earth. Given the expense and complexity of resource deliveries from Earth, if some resources were indigenously available, substantial logistical savings could be available by “living off the land”, wherever possible. 

The LCROSS[1] , LRO and other missions have confirmed the presence of resources such as water-ice and other volatiles in lunar polar regions, so the next step is to understand the scientific nature and physical distribution of those candidate resources. Those local volatiles could be processed into propellants and human life-supporting needs, reducing risk of maintaining a permanent human presence on the Moon. 

The Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Resource (VIPER) is a surface mobility scientific platform, designed to spend ~100 days mapping and surveying four different Ice Stability Regions to understand the scientific nature and distribution of water and other volatiles. VIPER will also provide scientific mineralogical context of the lunar regolith, such as the presence of silicon and light metals in lunar regolith, providing a composite picture of resource availability and sustainment. 

This paper will discuss the latest systems-level integration activities by the VIPER team, following our initial introduction to this mission at IAC2021[2] . The VIPER team successfully passed its Systems Integration Review (SIR) in late-2022, and in early 2023, began system-level surface segment (rover) flight hardware assembly. 

VIPER is managed within NASA’s Science Mission Directorate (SMD), utilizing the Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) lunar delivery model with partner, Astrobotic, Inc.}
}
  16. Andrews, D. (2024). VIPER Rover: Flight Build and Environmental Test Status . International Astronautical Congress, 20240002248. Source
    BibTeX
    @inproceedings{andrews2024viper,
  title = {VIPER Rover: Flight Build and Environmental Test Status},
  author = {Andrews, Daniel},
  booktitle = {International Astronautical Congress},
  number = {20240002248},
  pages = {76-82},
  institution = {NASA},
  year = {2024},
  doi = {10.52202/078357-0013},
  abstract = {The NASA Artemis Program plans to return humans to the Moon to stay. Extended human stays on the Moon will require substantial resources to sustain human presence, requiring continuous supplies delivered from the Earth. However, if some of the resources were indigenously available, Earth logistical requirements could be substantially reduced by “living off the land” with in-situ lunar resources. Local volatiles could be processed into propellants and human life-supporting needs, reducing risk of maintaining a permanent human presence on the Moon.

LCROSS, LRO and other missions have confirmed the presence of lunar volatiles resources in polar regions, so the next step is to understand the physical distribution of those resources, as well as the scientific basis for how water got there, and why it is still there.

The Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Resource (VIPER) is a surface mobility scientific platform, designed to spend ~100 days mapping and surveying four different Ice Stability Regions to understand the scientific nature and distribution of water and other volatiles. VIPER will also provide scientific mineralogical context of the lunar regolith, such as the presence of silicon and light metals in lunar regolith, providing a composite picture of resource availability and sustainment. 

This paper will discuss VIPER’s completion of the flight rover build, as well as current progress in environmental testing, preparedness for mission operations, and overall readying for launch integration with our CLPS partner.

VIPER is managed within NASA’s Science Mission Directorate (SMD), utilizing the Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) lunar delivery model}
}
  17. Colaprete, A. (2021). Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER) . NASA, 20210015009. Source
    BibTeX
    @techreport{colaprete2021volatiles,
  title = {Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER)},
  author = {Colaprete, Anthony},
  number = {20210015009},
  institution = {NASA},
  year = {2021},
  url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20210015009},
  abstract = {VIPER is a lunar volatiles detection and measurement mission that will be launched as a payload on the CLPS (Commercial Lunar Payload Services) provided Astrobotic's Griffin lander to the lunar south polar region. VIPER includes a suite of rover-mounted instruments that will conduct science and map volatiles (especially hydrogen-bearing volatiles). The VIPER rover is also designed to excavate volatiles such as hydrogen, oxygen, and water from the Moon.
After landing the VIPER rover will travel to investigate a range of Ice Stability Regions (ISRs) across scales from 100s of meters to kilometers and conduct surface and subsurface assessment of lunar water and other volatiles. The VIPER science mission team will use the instrument data to characterize the nature of the volatiles in the area and to extrapolate these data to create global lunar water resource maps. The expected lunar surface mission duration is up to four lunar days, with active surface operations during the periods when both Sun exposure and direct to Earth (DTE) communication conditions overlap. When comm and Sun are not both available, VIPER will go into ‘Safe Haven operations’ and maintain survival temperatures until Sun and comm return. The rover is controlled in near-real time and science decisions are made both tactically (short-term) and strategically (longer-term) to achieve the mission science success criteria and objectives.}
}
  18. Perez Perez, B. N., Cummings, H. V., Koning, W. J. F., Haddad, F. B., Romander, E. A., Johnson, W., Datta, A., Nagata, T., Asai, K., Nonomura, T., Caros Roca, L., Buxton, O. and Vincent, P. (2025). Novel Guidelines and Designs for Airfoils and Helicopter Blades for Mars Applications With Experimental Validation . AIAA Sci Tech Forum. Source
    BibTeX
    @inproceedings{perezperez2025novel,
  title = {Novel Guidelines and Designs for Airfoils and Helicopter Blades for Mars Applications With Experimental Validation},
  author = {Perez Perez, B. N. and Cummings, H. V. and Koning, Witold J. F. and Haddad, F. B. and Romander, Ethan A. and Johnson, Wayne and Datta, A. and Nagata, Taiichi and Asai, K. and Nonomura, T. and Caros Roca, L. and Buxton, O. and Vincent, P.},
  booktitle = {AIAA Sci Tech Forum},
  institution = {NASA Ames Research Center},
  address = {Orlando, Florida},
  year = {2025},
  url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20250010782},
  abstract = {The Rotor Optimization for the Advancement of Mars eXploration (ROAMX) project advances the design and validation of airfoils and blades for next-generation Mars rotorcraft. A comprehensive computational modeling and experimental campaign was conducted to address the unique low-density flight environment of Mars. An airfoil and rotor modeling and optimization framework tailored to Mars Reynolds and Mach number regimes was developed and applied to generate a portfolio of candidate geometries. A novel lift-generation mechanism was identified and experimentally validated, broadening the design space for airfoil and rotor performance. Airfoil performance was rigorously assessed through a combination of wind tunnel testing and high-fidelity computational fluid dynamics simulations under Mars representative flow conditions. Airfoil optimization resulted in airfoils that had a 25% increase in coefficient lift to drag ratio at the 75% radial station, compared to the clf5605 baseline airfoil (Ingenuity Mars Helicopter). A structural design methodology for Mars rotor blades was established and the strength of the rotor blades was verified via static pull testing at 110% of the centrifugal force experienced at a tip Mach number of 0.95. Facility enhancements at NASA Ames further expanded Mars rotorcraft testing capabilities, including the development of a state-of-the-art hover stand capable of high-accuracy performance measurements at very low pressure. Collectively, these efforts culminated in the demonstration of optimized rotor performance at Mars flight conditions, providing validated design tools, test infrastructure, and performance data to support future scientific and exploration rotorcraft missions on Mars. The full-scale ROAMX optimized rotor was tested and achieved a 29% increase in peak Figure of Merit, compared to the Ingenuity helicopter rotor, at the design density.}
}
  19. Withrow-Maser, S., Johnson, W., Tzanetos, T., Grip, H., Koning, W., Schatzman, N., Young, L., Chan, A., Ruan, A., Cummings, H., Allan, B., Malpica, C., Meyn, L., Pipenberg, B. and Keennon, M. (2023). Mars Sample Recovery Helicopter: Rotorcraft to Retrieve the First Samples from the Martian Surface . Vertical Flight Society Annual Forum and Technology Display, 20230005247. Source
    BibTeX
    @inproceedings{withrowmaser2023mars,
  title = {Mars Sample Recovery Helicopter: Rotorcraft to Retrieve the First Samples from the Martian Surface},
  author = {Withrow-Maser, Shannah and Johnson, Wayne and Tzanetos, Theodore and Grip, Havard and Koning, Witold and Schatzman, Natasha and Young, Larry and Chan, Athena and Ruan, Allen and Cummings, Haley and Allan, Brian and Malpica, Carlos and Meyn, Larry and Pipenberg, Benjamin and Keennon, Matthew},
  booktitle = {Vertical Flight Society Annual Forum and Technology Display},
  number = {20230005247},
  pages = {1-8},
  institution = {NASA Ames Research Center and Jet Propulsion Laboratory},
  year = {2023},
  doi = {10.4050/f-0079-2023-17969},
  abstract = {The Mars Sample Return Mission (MSR) will carry the next set of Mars helicopters, Sample Recovery Helicopters (SRHs), to the Martian surface. After successfully demonstrating extraterrestrial flight in 2021, Ingenuity has acted as a}
}
  20. Jehn, M., Just, G. H., Sargeant, H. M., Long-Fox, J. and Britt, D. T. (2025). Implications of Lunar Simulant Geotechnical Properties on Testbed Experimentation and Engineering Analysis . Space and Planetary Resources. Source
    BibTeX
    @article{jehn2025implications,
  title = {Implications of Lunar Simulant Geotechnical Properties on Testbed Experimentation and Engineering Analysis},
  author = {Jehn, Marcus and Just, Gabriele H. and Sargeant, Hannah M. and Long-Fox, Jared and Britt, Daniel T.},
  journal = {Space and Planetary Resources},
  volume = {1},
  pages = {5},
  year = {2025},
  doi = {10.1007/s44461-025-00002-7},
  abstract = {Understanding the mechanical behavior of lunar regolith simulants is crucial for progressing engineering analysis in surface infrastructure design and testbed evaluation. This study provides a detailed geotechnical characterization of the Colorado School of Mines Lunar Highlands Type-Testbed simulants, including a new highland-type lunar simulant integrated into the Mines Lunar Surface Simulator testbed. It includes the determination of key geotechnical properties such as particle size distribution, density, compressibility, cohesion, friction angle, and particle shape, using standardized ASTM testing procedures. Key findings show that while particle size distribution similarities exist among the simulants and actual lunar regolith, there are significant differences in density-dependent mechanical behaviors such as shear strength, compressibility, and deformation responses. These results emphasize the complexity of simulant fidelity and its impact on testbed experiments when simulating mid-Technology Readiness Level environments. Additionally, we emphasize the importance of density-specific testing for evaluating both geotechnical properties and simulant performance. This work presents the first comprehensive publication of the full geotechnical profile of Colorado School of Mines highland simulants and highlights the importance of using multiple parameters beyond just particle size distribution to evaluate simulant fidelity. Future research will concentrate on characterizing testbed variability and assessing properties across different density states to improve the application of lunar simulants in engineering analysis and testbed experimentation.}
}
  21. Gaier, J. R. (2007). The Effects of Lunar Dust on EVA Systems During the Apollo Missions . NASA, NASA/TM-2005-213610/REV1. Source
    BibTeX
    @techreport{gaier2007effects,
  title = {The Effects of Lunar Dust on EVA Systems During the Apollo Missions},
  author = {Gaier, James R.},
  number = {NASA/TM-2005-213610/REV1},
  institution = {NASA},
  year = {2007},
  url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20070021819},
  abstract = {Mission documents from the six Apollo missions that landed on the lunar surface have been studied in order to catalog the effects of lunar dust on Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA) systems, primarily the Apollo surface space suit. It was found that the effects could be sorted into nine categories: vision obscuration, false instrument readings, dust coating and contamination, loss of traction, clogging of mechanisms, abrasion, thermal control problems, seal failures, and inhalation and irritation. Although simple dust mitigation measures were sufficient to mitigate some of the problems (i.e., loss of traction) it was found that these measures were ineffective to mitigate many of the more serious problems (i.e., clogging, abrasion, diminished heat rejection). The severity of the dust problems were consistently underestimated by ground tests, indicating a need to develop better simulation facilities and procedures.}
}
  22. Bualat, M. G., Smith, T., Fong, T. W., Smith, E. E. and Wheeler, D. W. (2018). Astrobee: A New Tool for ISS Operations . SpaceOps Conference. Source
    BibTeX
    @inproceedings{bualat2018astrobee,
  title = {Astrobee: A New Tool for ISS Operations},
  author = {Bualat, Maria G. and Smith, Trey and Fong, Terrence W. and Smith, Ernest E. and Wheeler, D. W.},
  booktitle = {SpaceOps Conference},
  address = {Marseille, France},
  year = {2018},
  doi = {10.2514/6.2018-2517},
  abstract = {The Astrobee}
}
  23. Clark, C. J., Smith, J. D., Nick, A. J., Ortega, V. V., Schuler, J. M., Dyas, J. E. and Lahl, J. (2025). Design and Testing of TRL5 IPEx Actuators . IEEE Aerospace Conference, 20250000003. Source
    BibTeX
    @inproceedings{clark2025design,
  title = {Design and Testing of TRL5 IPEx Actuators},
  author = {Clark, Casey J. and Smith, Jonathan Drew and Nick, Andrew J. and Ortega, Victoria V. and Schuler, Jason M. and Dyas, Jeffrey E. and Lahl, John},
  booktitle = {IEEE Aerospace Conference},
  number = {20250000003},
  institution = {NASA},
  address = {Big Sky, MT},
  year = {2025},
  url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20250000003},
  abstract = {NASA is advancing In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) by focusing on missions aimed at establishing sustainable infrastructure on the Moon and Mars. On the Moon, regolith serves as the most abundant resource. To support ISRU objectives, a 30-kg-class robot called ISRU Pilot Excavator (IPEx) is being developed to excavate 10,000 kg of lunar regolith during a future technology demonstration mission. IPEx uses novel excavation tools, called bucket drums, which are hollow cylinders with scoops staggered around the outside. Regolith is collected with the scoops and flows into the drum where it is captured by an internal baffle system. The excavator can then transport the regolith in the drum and reverse the direction of the drum rotation to dispense the regolith out. IPEx uses two sets of bucket drums that dig simultaneously in opposing directions and results in counteracting excavation forces. This combination of bucket drum excavation tools and counteracting excavation forces enables low mass robotic excavators to effectively dig in reduced gravity environments. This is a significant departure from terrestrial excavators that rely on high mass to produce tractive forces to counteract the forces of excavation.

IPEx is made up of several custom actuators that all need to be verified for their intended application. This paper focuses on the initial design, testing and modifications of three actuators: the mobility actuator, the shoulder actuator, and the excavation actuator.

Each actuator was tested under four separate test profiles: ambient motor characterization, hot and cold motor characterization, accelerated life test (ALT), and concept of operations (ConOps) test. The motor characterization tests enabled derivation of torque equations for each actuator to estimate output torque without implementing sensors. The accelerated life tests were successful for each actuator and verified the motors’ ability to survive the mission. For the ConOps test, only the bucket drum actuator performed a complete ConOps without the need to restart the test. Overall, the first series of testing resulted in various failure modes and minor design alterations for each actuator. The test results, failure modes, and design alterations are highlighted within this paper. This paper focuses on discussing the mobility, excavation, and shoulder actuator design, testing principles, and results that qualified it as a TRL 5 system.}
}
  24. Alizadeh, A. and Zhu, Z. H. (2024). A comprehensive survey of space robotic manipulators for on-orbit servicing . Frontiers in Robotics and AI. Source
    BibTeX
    @article{alizadeh2024comprehensive,
  title = {A comprehensive survey of space robotic manipulators for on-orbit servicing},
  author = {Alizadeh, Ali and Zhu, Zheng H.},
  journal = {Frontiers in Robotics and AI},
  volume = {11},
  pages = {1470950},
  year = {2024},
  doi = {10.3389/frobt.2024.1470950},
  abstract = {On-Orbit Servicing (OOS) robots are transforming space exploration by enabling vital maintenance and repair of spacecraft directly in space. However, achieving precise and safe manipulation in microgravity necessitates overcoming significant challenges. This survey delves into four crucial areas essential for successful OOS manipulation: object state estimation, motion planning, and feedback control. Techniques from traditional vision to advanced X-ray and neural network methods are explored for object state estimation. Strategies for fuel-optimized trajectories, docking maneuvers, and collision avoidance are examined in motion planning. The survey also explores control methods for various scenarios, including cooperative manipulation and handling uncertainties, in feedback control. Additionally, this survey examines how Machine learning techniques can further propel OOS robots towards more complex and delicate tasks in space.}
}
  25. Papadopoulos, E., Aghili, F., Ma, O. and Lampariello, R. (2021). Robotic Manipulation and Capture in Space: A Survey . Frontiers in Robotics and AI. Source
    BibTeX
    @article{papadopoulos2021robotic,
  title = {Robotic Manipulation and Capture in Space: A Survey},
  author = {Papadopoulos, Evangelos and Aghili, Farhad and Ma, Ou and Lampariello, Roberto},
  journal = {Frontiers in Robotics and AI},
  volume = {8},
  pages = {686723},
  year = {2021},
  doi = {10.3389/frobt.2021.686723},
  abstract = {Space exploration and exploitation depend on the development of on-orbit robotic capabilities for tasks such as servicing of satellites, removing of orbital debris, or construction and maintenance of orbital assets. Manipulation and capture of objects on-orbit are key enablers for these capabilities. This survey addresses fundamental aspects of manipulation and capture, such as the dynamics of space manipulator systems (SMS), i.e., satellites equipped with manipulators, the contact dynamics between manipulator grippers/payloads and targets, and the methods for identifying properties of SMSs and their targets. Also, it presents recent work of sensing pose and system states, of motion planning for capturing a target, and of feedback control methods for SMS during motion or interaction tasks. Finally, the paper reviews major ground testing testbeds for capture operations, and several notable missions and technologies developed for capture of targets on-orbit.}
}
  26. NASA Ames Research Center, T. F. B. (2019). Thermophysics Facilities Branch Customer Resource Guide . NASA Ames Research Center, Entry Systems and Technology Division, TSF-17-017. Source
    BibTeX
    @techreport{tsf2019customer,
  title = {Thermophysics Facilities Branch Customer Resource Guide},
  author = {{NASA Ames Research Center, Thermophysics Facilities Branch}},
  number = {TSF-17-017},
  institution = {NASA Ames Research Center, Entry Systems and Technology Division},
  year = {2019},
  url = {https://www.nasa.gov/thermophysics-facilities-branch/}
}
  27. Fong, T., Bluethmann, W., Allan, M., Askew, S., Cannon, H., Deans, M., Fraser-Chanpong, N. and Markee, M. (2015). Development of the Resource Prospector Planetary Rover . Moon - : A New Era of Coordinated Human and Robotic Exploration. Source
    BibTeX
    @inproceedings{fong2015development,
  title = {Development of the Resource Prospector Planetary Rover},
  author = {Fong, Terrence and Bluethmann, William and Allan, Mark and Askew, Scott and Cannon, Howard and Deans, Matthew and Fraser-Chanpong, Nathan and Markee, Mason},
  booktitle = {Moon - : A New Era of Coordinated Human and Robotic Exploration},
  year = {2015},
  url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20190000455},
  abstract = {The Resource Prospector (RP) is an In-­‐Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) lunar rover mission under study by NASA. RP is planned to launch in 2020 to prospect for subsurface volatiles and to extract oxygen from lunar regolith. The mission will address several of NASA's "Strategic Knowledge Gaps" for lunar exploration. The mission will also address the Global Exploration Roadmap's strategic goal of using local resources for human exploration. The distribution of lunar subsurface volatiles drives the mission requirement for mobility. The spatial distribution is hypothesized to be governed by impact cratering with the top 0.5 m being patchy at scales of 100 m. The mixing time scale increases with depth (less frequent larger impacts). Consequently, increased mobility reduces the depth requirement for sampling. The target RP traverse will extend 1 km radially from the landing site to sample craters of varying sizes. Sampling craters with different ages will reveal possible volatile emplacement history. In 1 Ga, approximately 60-­70 craters of 10 m diameter form per km2. Thus, the rover will need to sample at least ten of these craters, which may require a total traverse path length of 2-­‐3 km. During 2014-­2015, we developed an initial prototype rover for RP. The current design is a solar powered, four-­wheeled vehicle, with hub motor drive, offset four wheel steering, and active suspension. Active suspension provides capabilities including changing vehicle ride height, traversing comparatively large obstacles, and controlling load on the wheels. All-­wheel steering enables the vehicle to point arbitrarily while roving, e.g., to keep the solar array pointed at the sun while in motion. The offset steering combined with active suspension improves driving in soft soil. The rover's on-­board software utilizes NASA's Core Flight Software, which is a reusable flight software environment. During 2015, we completed the initial rover software build, which provides low-­level hardware interfaces, basic mobility control, waypoint driving, odometry, basic error checking, and camera services. Development of the prototype rover has enabled maturation of many of the subsystems to TRL 5. During the next year, we will conduct integrated testing of concepts of operation, navigation, and remote driving tools. In addition, we will perform environmental tests including radiation (avionics), thermal and thermal/vacuum (mechanisms), and gravity offload (mobility).}
}
  28. Allan, M., Wong, U., Furlong, P. M., Rogg, A., McMichael, S., Welsh, T., Chen, I., Peters, S., Gerkey, B., Quigley, M., Shirley, M., Deans, M., Cannon, H. and Fong, T. (2019). Planetary Rover Simulation for Lunar Exploration Missions . IEEE Aerospace Conference, 20190027571. Source
    BibTeX
    @inproceedings{allan2019planetary,
  title = {Planetary Rover Simulation for Lunar Exploration Missions},
  author = {Allan, Mark and Wong, Uland and Furlong, Padraig M. and Rogg, Arno and McMichael, Scott and Welsh, Terry and Chen, Ian and Peters, Steven and Gerkey, Brian and Quigley, Morgan and Shirley, Mark and Deans, Mathew and Cannon, Howard and Fong, Terry},
  booktitle = {IEEE Aerospace Conference},
  number = {20190027571},
  pages = {1-19},
  institution = {NASA},
  year = {2019},
  doi = {10.1109/aero.2019.8741780},
  abstract = {When planning planetary rover missions it is useful to develop intuition and skills driving in, quite literally, alien environments before incurring the cost of reaching said locales. Simulators make it possible to operate in environments that have the physical characteristics of target locations without the expense and overhead of extensive physical tests. To that end, NASA Ames and Open Robotics collaborated on a Lunar rover driving simulator based on the open source Gazebo simulation platform and leveraging ROS (Robotic Operating System)components. The simulator was integrated with research and mission software for rover driving, system monitoring, and science instrument simulation to constitute an end-to-end Lunar mission simulation capability. Although we expect our simulator to be applicable to arbitrary Lunar regions, we designed to a reference mission of prospecting in polar regions. The harsh lighting and low illumination angles at the Lunar poles combine with the unique reflectance properties of Lunar regolith to present a challenging visual environment for both human and computer perception. Our simulator placed an emphasis on high fidelity visual simulation in order to produce synthetic imagery suitable for evaluating human rover drivers with navigation tasks, as well as providing test data for computer vision software development. In this paper, we describe the software used to construct the simulated Lunar environment and the components of the driving simulation. Our synthetic terrain generation software artificially increases the resolution of Lunar digital elevation maps by fractal synthesis and inserts craters and rocks based on Lunar size-frequency distribution models. We describe the necessary enhancements to import large scale, high resolution terrains into Gazebo, as well as our approach to modeling the visual environment of the Lunar surface. An overview of the mission software system is provided, along with how ROS was used to emulate flight software components that had not been developed yet. Finally, we discuss the effect of using the high-fidelity synthetic Lunar images for visual odometry. We also characterize the wheel slip model, and find some inconsistencies in the produced wheel slip behavior.}
}
  29. Carey, W., Krueger, T., Wormnes, K., Grenouilleau, J., Ferreira, E., Nergaard, K., van der Hulst, F., den Exter, E. and Gerdes, L. (2022). METERON Analog-1: A Touch Remote . International Astronautical Congress, IAC-22-A3.2B.4. Source
    BibTeX
    @inproceedings{carey2022meteron,
  title = {METERON Analog-1: A Touch Remote},
  author = {Carey, William and Krueger, Thomas and Wormnes, Kjetil and Grenouilleau, Jessica and Ferreira, Edmundo and Nergaard, Kim and van der Hulst, Frank and den Exter, Emiel and Gerdes, Levin},
  booktitle = {International Astronautical Congress},
  number = {IAC-22-A3.2B.4},
  year = {2022},
  url = {https://elib.dlr.de/190115/}
}
  30. Marzwell, N., Larson, W. E., Duke, M. and Schowengerdt, F. (2008). PISCES : developing new design, materials and technologies for sustained . Earth and Science Conference. Source
    BibTeX
    @inproceedings{marzwell2008pisces,
  title = {PISCES : developing new design, materials and technologies for sustained},
  author = {Marzwell, Neville and Larson, William E. and Duke, Mike and Schowengerdt, Frank},
  booktitle = {Earth and Science Conference},
  year = {2008},
  url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20110013192},
  abstract = {PISCES, the Pacific International Space Center for Exploration Systems. This paper describes the PISCES development plans, particularly in the areas of In-Situ Resource Utilization, Robotics and Education and Outreach.}
}