NASA JSC Planetary Analog Test Site
Joseph Bibby. Public domain (NASA / US government work).
The Planetary Analog Test Site at NASA JSC, universally called the Rock Yard, is an outdoor multi-acre terrain field in five named areas, built for integrated tests that put crew, suits, rovers and robots on the same terrain at the same time [1]. The five areas are the Mars Yard, the Mt Kosmo hill, the Lunar Yard with its three craters, the Sand Pit and the Cat Box, and each is a capability section below.
Three of the five sit on a sprayed concrete underlay, so most of the site is a made surface rather than a deformable soil bed. Nothing on it is a lunar or Martian simulant, and there is no vacuum, no thermal control and no gravity offload outdoors. The indoor JSC facilities that cover those cases sit in other buildings under other organizations.
A 2025 NASA survey of planetary rover mobility test practice places outdoor terrain fields like this one alongside indoor soil bins and single-wheel test rigs as one leg of a mobility test program, useful for geometry, obstacle negotiation and operations rehearsal but not for the bearing-capacity and slip measurements a controlled soil bed is built to produce [7]. Other national programs have built comparable outdoor fields for the same integrated purpose: DLR’s Moon-Mars Test Site, for example, pairs a similar strewn-terrain area with instrumentation the Rock Yard does not have, an explicit point of contrast rather than a shared design [8].
Laboratory data
Section titled “Laboratory data”| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Operator | NASA JSC |
| Location | Houston, Texas, United States |
| Commissioned | Not published. In documented rover use by at least 2015 |
| Type | Outdoor analogue terrain field in five named areas |
| Floor area | Multi-acre; the five areas total roughly 6,000 m2 as dimensioned |
| Capabilities | Mars Yard, Mt Kosmo, Lunar Yard, Sand Pit, Cat Box |
| Simulant or terrain | Crushed limestone, decomposed granite, Blackstar granite, basalt, sand, gravel |
| Instrumentation | None installed. Slope maps and Gazebo world models available for some areas |
| Ground truth | Not published. No independent position measurement described |
| Fidelity limits | No simulant, no vacuum, no thermal control; three areas on sprayed concrete |
| Access | Test planning, consultation and integration offered as a service; no lead time published |
| Cited by | Robonaut 2 on Centaur 2, Resource Prospector [3], PUFFER [9] |
Source: [1].
Where outdoor analog terrain sits among test methods
Section titled “Where outdoor analog terrain sits among test methods”A rover has to be shown to cross rocks, climb slopes and navigate before anyone trusts it on another body, and the three ways of showing it each leave a gap. A soil bin or single-wheel rig controls the soil and measures wheel forces, but at the scale of one wheel or one lane. A field site such as the Rock Yard offers the whole vehicle on geometry and obstacles with no control of soil. Flight data give the real surface but only for the vehicles that have flown. The sections below place the Rock Yard among these, and state for each family whether the method has flown, has been used on Earth in the field, or has only been proposed.
Terramechanics and soil-bed measurement. The wheel-soil relations used to predict sinkage and drawbar are fits to the apparatus that produced them, a point made in 1968 from inside the Army mobility program [21]. The only in situ Martian soil values come from Sojourner: shear force from motor current, with a cohesion average of 0.238 kPa that rests on assuming the friction angle equals the photographed angle of repose [20], and friction angles of about 34 to 39 degrees for cloddy deposits and 26 to 28 degrees for drift deposits [27]. The Rock Yard supplies none of these quantities, which is why a 2025 NASA review sets soil-bed and wheel-level tests beside outdoor fields rather than in place of them [7].
Outdoor terrain fields built for rovers. The Rock Yard is one of several. Before MER, JPL ran the Rocky 7 prototype, which carries a mini-manipulator with non-backdrivable joints [30], in a three-day Mojave campaign in which all six stated objectives were met, including a 200 m landerless traverse, reported qualitatively with no slip or success-rate figures [15]. The same rover’s desert navigation tests used a sun sensor for absolute heading and gave 6 percent relative position error and 3.4 degrees of heading error over more than one kilometer in three traverses by one rover, with a known sun-sensor miscalibration [14]. Earlier Rocky 3.2 work combined an indoor terrain simulator with an overhead metrology system and planned outdoor traverses at Avawatz near Baker, California [17]. The last major MER operations rehearsal used the FIDO rover at one field site, with a stated difference in size and mass from the flight vehicles and no quantified navigation performance [16]. DLR’s Moon-Mars Test Site publishes its requirement-to-terrain chain and builds steep slopes from drainage concrete so they do not slump [8], the same construction choice the Rock Yard made with sprayed concrete. PISCES, a Mauna Kea analog site in Hawaii proposed as a rentable NASA test facility, is a plan with wheel design targets and no test data [11].
Characterizing the terrain itself. A field site is useful in proportion to how well its rocks match a target surface. A 1997 analysis fit rock size-frequency distributions at Viking sites and Earth analog sites with exponentials, with correlation coefficients of 0.96 to 0.99 at the Viking sites and above 0.90 at the analogs [12]. A JPL performance evaluation used a family of Mars analog terrains built from a published rock size-frequency model, with an overhead optical ground truth, to measure rover navigation as a function of terrain difficulty [13]. The Rock Yard publishes a rock height range of 0.05 m to 1.0 m [3] but no size-frequency distribution, so a result there cannot be placed on that scale.
Comparable sites in current use. JPL’s MarsYard III is the closest peer: 66 m by 36 m, over 2000 m2 of terrain with 7 slopes of variable angle and cohesion, built from beach sand, decomposed granite, brick dust and volcanic cinders with basalt rocks placed to match Mars rock size distributions [31]. The operator states that its large rocks are less dense than Mars rock so they can be moved by hand, and the page gives no soil strength values or slope angles, the same gaps as the Rock Yard [31]. At Kennedy, the IPEx Autonomy Test-Site is a 21.3 by 33.5 m enclosure with a granular bed, scattered rocks, a full-scale lander mockup, low-angle stadium lighting and motion capture for robot pose [33]. A 2024 five-day demonstration there ran 334 excavation and unload cycles and 58.1 km of driving in 77 h 46 min, and penetration resistance rose by up to 11 times after repeated excavation, a soil-state change that a field site without ground truth cannot record [32]. The Artemis Arena at Kennedy is 6.8 by 5.0 m with a 45 cm bed of BP-1 crushed basalt and specified boulder and crater obstacles, offered to outside customers [34]. The Colorado School of Mines reports a new Lunar Surface Simulator with a gantry-based rover motion capture system, in a news article that gives no dimensions or soil properties [38]. Verti-Arena, an 8 by 8 m indoor testbed with ten terrain types, 0.7 m of elevation difference and eight-camera motion capture, serves 1/10-scale vehicles and has been used on terrestrial terrain only [37]. All of these are ground facilities at 1 g; none is flown hardware.
Transferring 1 g results to reduced gravity. The Rock Yard offers no gravity offload [1], so any result there needs a transfer rule. Parabolic flight tests of a single wheel on the Falcon 20 found that reduced-weight testing overstates mobility, with drawbar pull to weight falling by 20 percent or more and sinkage rising up to 40 percent in lunar gravity at equal load [36]. Granular scaling laws predicted lunar-gravity performance with a conservative bias, and the cone index gradient matching method did not reproduce it [36]. A 2025 NASA overview of tire-ground contact modeling lists semi-empirical, finite element, SPH and discrete element methods and states that the model comparison is preliminary and not validated against test data [35]. These are laboratory and parabolic-flight results, not flight results.
Rover navigation data and ground truth. The MADMAX data set pairs stereo, inertial and omnidirectional imagery from a human-portable sensor rig with RTK GNSS ground truth quoted at 2 cm horizontal and 5 cm vertical, and compares hand-held sequences with rover-mounted ones [18]. The Rock Yard has no comparable stated ground truth [1].
Crewed and operations field tests. Multi-day crewed tests of a pressurized rover at the Black Point Lava Flow in Arizona produced habitability and productivity results from only one or two crews per condition [25]. A field test of a walkabout-first strategy needed 74 sols against an estimated 84 for a linear traverse of the same 14 stations, an extrapolation, not measured rover time [23]. A suited caving study with one subject identified darkness, cold, confinement and loss of signal as the requirements that separate subsurface from surface EVA, as engineering judgment without hardware tested [26]. Rock Yard use for RP15 sits in this family, validating distributed operations rather than mobility [3].
Instrument validation at analog sites. The TRIDENT drill was validated at Mars and lunar analog field sites, where the record is of failures: faults were counted without a denominator, and the proposed mitigation of a smaller bite size has only field evidence, taken at ambient pressure and temperature [24].
Legged and heavy testbeds. Ambler, a 2500 kg six-legged walker, was measured on Earth on a wall-powered tether with 600 W of propulsion power above a 1400 W steady-state overhead and 2 percent dead-reckoning error, and was not space qualified [19]. It shows what a terrain-field test of a testbed does and does not carry to a flight vehicle.
What has flown. Apollo 15 drove the Lunar Roving Vehicle on slopes of 10 to 15 degrees, so the 25 degree requirement was never demonstrated in flight [22]. Sojourner is the flight reference for rover operations on Mars, with operations figures from the surface [28] and a flight navigation error budget [29]. None of the Rock Yard campaigns above is a flight result: RP15 was canceled in 2018 [3].
Capabilities
Section titled “Capabilities”Working volumes, slopes and materials for all five areas below come from the operator’s own facility description [1] unless a source is stated otherwise.
Mars Yard
Section titled “Mars Yard”| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Working volume | Approximately 40 x 45 m |
| Test article limits | Suited subjects, Centaur 2 and the RP15 rover run to date [3] |
| Vacuum | Not applicable. Outdoors at ambient pressure |
| Temperature | Not controlled. Houston outdoor conditions |
| Illumination | Not applicable. Terrestrial sky; low-light work is done at night |
| Simulant or terrain | Stabilized crushed limestone and decomposed granite, strewn basaltic rock |
| Slope | Level. Graded slopes are at Mt Kosmo |
| Gravity offload | Not available outdoors. Full Earth weight |
| Instrumentation | None installed. Slope map and Gazebo world model available |
The Mars Yard is the reference surface for the site: a stabilized crushed limestone and decomposed granite base covered with strewn basaltic rocks, over an underlay of sprayed concrete. The Resource Prospector team, describing the same yard from a user’s side, gives its rocks as 0.05 m to 1.0 m in height [3].
Mt Kosmo
Section titled “Mt Kosmo”| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Working volume | Approximately 30 x 43 m, summit about 7 m above the Mars Yard |
| Temperature | Not controlled. Houston outdoor conditions |
| Simulant or terrain | Same as the Mars Yard, over sprayed concrete stabilizing the slopes |
| Slope | Approaches from 15 to over 30 degrees, fixed by construction |
| Gravity offload | Not available. A rover climbs at full Earth weight |
| Instrumentation | None installed |
Mt Kosmo is the only graded terrain on the site, and its slopes are set by construction rather than adjustable. The sprayed concrete underlay is there to hold the slopes in place, which also means a climb on it is a climb on a made road. The Resource Prospector description of the site gives a 5 m tall hill and slopes from flat to 20 degrees [3], both lower than the operator’s own figures; neither document reconciles the two.
Lunar Yard
Section titled “Lunar Yard”| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Working volume | Approximately 40 x 40 m, with three representative lunar craters |
| Temperature | Not controlled. Houston outdoor conditions |
| Simulant or terrain | Stabilized crushed limestone covered with Blackstar granite, over sprayed concrete |
| Slope | Crater walls only; angles and crater dimensions not published |
| Gravity offload | Not available. Full Earth weight |
| Instrumentation | None installed |
The Lunar Yard swaps the Mars Yard’s basaltic surface cover for Blackstar granite and adds the three craters. Crater diameters and depths are not published, and the granite is a terrestrial aggregate rather than a lunar simulant.
Sand Pit
Section titled “Sand Pit”| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Working volume | Approximately 15 x 30 m; depth not published |
| Simulant or terrain | Masonry sand over local soil, mostly unconsolidated clay |
| Gravity offload | Not available. Full Earth weight |
| Instrumentation | None installed |
One of the two deformable areas on the site, and the only one described purely as sand. No depth, relative density target or preparation procedure between tests is published.
Cat Box
Section titled “Cat Box”| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Working volume | Approximately 14 x 50 m; depth not published |
| Simulant or terrain | Coarse gravel with masonry sand at one end, over local soil |
| Slope | Set by sculpting; range not published |
| Gravity offload | Not available. Full Earth weight |
| Instrumentation | None installed |
The Cat Box is the reconfigurable area: the only one the operator describes as supporting limited sculpting into various terrain, which makes it the place where a specific crater, berm or trench geometry can be built for a campaign.
Instrumentation
Section titled “Instrumentation”The published facility description lists terrain data as an available product rather than instrumentation as an installed capability: slope maps and Gazebo world models exist for some areas. No permanent motion capture, total station or load instrumentation is described for any of the five areas, unlike the Glenn and Kennedy soil bins, so a slip or sinkage measurement made here rests on the article’s own sensing.
Site support is 110 V and 220 V AC electrical power, the latter on an SS2-50R outlet, a climate-controlled work and mission support area with 110 V power, limited non-climate-controlled storage during testing, pop-up shade canopies, and space suit hardware and test subject support on an as-required cost basis [1].
What it does not reproduce
Section titled “What it does not reproduce”Deformable terrain, over most of the site. Three of the five areas sit on a sprayed concrete underlay beneath a stabilized aggregate base. Sinkage, slip and drawbar pull on those surfaces are properties of a made road, not of regolith. The Sand Pit and Cat Box are the exceptions, and the Cat Box is the only area described as reconfigurable.
Regolith of any kind. The listed materials are crushed limestone, decomposed granite, Blackstar granite, basalt, masonry sand, coarse gravel and local clay. No lunar or Martian simulant appears in the facility description, and no preparation or density control procedure is published, which is the structural difference between this site and the GMRO bins or the Glenn SLOPE lanes.
Lighting. The site is outdoors under Earth’s sky and atmosphere. Low solar elevation and the hard shadow of the lunar south pole are not producible; night operations are the substitute, and the lunar lighting problem is addressed instead in the rendered visual model driving the B16 motion table [2].
Gravity. Nothing outdoors offloads. A rover driving the Mars Yard or climbing Mt Kosmo does so at full Earth weight.
Weather. Houston conditions apply. The published service list offers pop-up shade canopies and a climate-controlled support area, which locates the problem.
Campaigns run there
Section titled “Campaigns run there”Resource Prospector RP15 distributed operations, 2015. RP15 was a Phase A engineering test unit taken from concept to a rover driving in the lunar analogue Rock Yard within a single year [3]. The point of running it there was to validate fully distributed operations: the driver and co-driver worked from Ames, rover systems from Johnson and payload operations from Kennedy, with command allocations refined through fortnightly procedural simulations that began on paper and voice calls and then added data from a processor-in-the-loop rig. The rover was driven by waypoints, sized against an expected round trip command and control time of six to over 25 seconds for the flight mission [3]. Its flight software was built on NASA’s Core Flight Software, and the 2015 build 1 provided hardware interfaces, basic mobility, waypoint driving, odometry and inertial measurement unit localization, basic error checking and camera services. The team records that the rover was capable of operating in the yard by day and by night [3].
Robonaut 2 on Centaur 2, February 2011. The Centaur 2 wheeled base, derived from lessons learned on the Space Exploration Vehicle, was integrated with Robonaut 2 and run at the Planetary Analog Test Site [1]. The Space Exploration Vehicle lineage is itself a wheeled chassis under a reconfigurable upper body, the same layout description JSC used for ATHLETE’s own “Centaur-like” cargo variant, a humanoid torso on a wheeled frame built for a different mission [10].
PUFFER mapping trials. JPL’s Pop-Up, Flat-Folding Explorer Rovers ran autonomous mapping trials at the Mars Yard, using multiple trails through the strewn rock to evaluate mapping performance on the same terrain the operator catalogs here [9].
Other NASA JSC facilities named in the same catalog
Section titled “Other NASA JSC facilities named in the same catalog”The NASA JSC analogs and mockups catalog that describes the Rock Yard also lists several indoor facilities [1], and a 2024 full paper describes a further one [2]. They sit in different buildings under different organizations, they are not part of this test site, and none of them has a published description detailed enough to carry a laboratory page of its own yet, so their figures are recorded here in prose.
NASA. Public domain (NASA / US government work).
Chamber B is the human-rated thermal vacuum capability: an internal volume 7.6 m (25 ft) in diameter by 7.9 m (26 ft), a pressure range from 1 x 10^-6 torr to 760 torr and a low temperature range of -300 F, with a traversing monorail that provides weight relief to one suited crew member at a time and dual crew airlocks for access and for moving test crew in and out during a test [1]. The facility’s own test planning guide frames the chamber as a service offered to both NASA and commercial hardware and software customers, with a stated roadmap of milestones, roles and required inputs rather than a fixed price list [4].
ARGOS, the Active Response Gravity Offload System, has its own page: NASA JSC Active Response Gravity Offload System. It is an overhead bridge crane arrangement 41 x 24 x 25 ft overall giving a 13 x 30 x 15 ft workspace at 750 lb offload capability, with gimbal payload interfaces for suited, unsuited and unmanned articles, pressurized breathing air, suit cooling water and AIBEL motion tracking [1]. A companion paper on characterizing the suit-side gimbal describes fourteen subjects used to locate the pivot point against each subject’s suited center of gravity, since a pivot point set even slightly off that point produces a righting moment that makes the rig artificially stable or artificially unstable [5]. The same offload problem, tracking a moving article on two horizontal axes rather than fixing it under one overhead crane, has been attempted on a smaller scale with an infrared-tracked counterweight rig built for rover testing at a different laboratory, evidence that JSC’s overhead-crane geometry is one of more than one way to cancel inertial and friction forces during a reduced-gravity test [6].
The Partial Gravity Simulator is servos, air bearings and gimbals providing reduced gravity simulation for astronaut training, task evaluation and EVA equipment development [1]. The Precision Air Bearing Floor is a flat, smooth surface giving two-dimensional frictionless motion to large articles floated on perforated pads over a cushion of compressed air, for rendezvous and contact testing and low or zero g mass handling. The Building 360 Lunar Development and Dust Containment Room covers dust work [1].
The B16 six degree of freedom motion table is the newest addition. Installed in the B16 Mini Dome at the Systems Engineering Simulator and commissioned by Mikrolar in January 2023, it carries 2,500 lb on a 69.25 in platform with plus or minus 25 in of horizontal travel, plus or minus 12 in vertical, plus or minus 28 degrees of roll, pitch and yaw, and 1 mm repeatability and accuracy across all six axes, with mechanical brakes on every axis [2]. It drives a lunar south pole visual model built on the Trick simulation framework with a multibody dynamic model of the Lunar Terrain Vehicle front-entry reference design, NASA JSC Engineering Orbital Dynamics model, a nodal electrical power system model in GUNNS, and a contact model, so that a shirt-sleeve subject on the platform feels the physical consequence of driving the simulated rover [2].
It was used in 2022 and 2023 for a preliminary handling qualities study of the LTV front-entry reference design, with a shirt-sleeve subject on the platform driving through a virtual reality view of the lunar south pole [2]. Drivers reported that braking stopped the vehicle quickly, with some describing it as abrupt, twitchy and harsh, and some observed that the one-sixth g environment affected stopping distance. The stated rationale for building it is that the only other lunar rover motion simulator was a modified US Air Force SMK23 flight simulator built at Marshall in the late 1960s, which ran a moving map of a smooth Maria area under a television camera, and that no other lunar surface simulator with these capabilities exists [2]. The LTV that the motion table drives is the same vehicle class a 2025 NASA mobility survey uses as its case study for identifying the test gaps a wheeled lunar rover still has to close, tires and mobility hardware rather than driver handling [7].
What is not established
Section titled “What is not established”Nothing on the outdoor site is a measurement rather than a description: no grain size distribution, bulk density, cohesion, friction angle or bearing capacity is published for any of the five areas, and no preparation, raking or compaction procedure between runs is stated. The site’s own figures disagree on scale, calling itself a multi-acre field in one place and a quarter acre in another, and no accuracy, resolution or survey method is given for the slope maps and Gazebo world models it does offer [1]. The B16 motion table’s handling qualities results are a simulation’s answers, not a rover’s: the terramechanics model computes only compression, bulldozing and lumped rolling resistance under uniform soil properties, half the test drivers showed simulator sickness symptoms and five of thirteen did not finish the traverse, and a table angle discrepancy ran one task at 15 degrees rather than the intended 20 without being noticed until after the fact [2]. Resource Prospector’s RP15 distributed-operations run predates the program’s 2018 cancellation and reports no drilling, water-detection or traverse performance, only that the rover operated [3]. ARGOS’s own documentation gives no offload force accuracy, bandwidth, residual horizontal force or cable-angle error for its overhead crane, so the rig’s fidelity as a gravity analog has no published error bar even where a pivot point has been characterized against a subject’s center of gravity [1][5].
References
- NASA Johnson Space Center. (2024). JSC Analogs and Mockups. nasa.gov/reference/jsc-analogs-mockups
BibTeX
@misc{nasajscanalogs, title = {JSC Analogs and Mockups}, author = {{NASA Johnson Space Center}}, organization = {nasa.gov}, year = {2024}, url = {https://www.nasa.gov/reference/jsc-analogs-mockups/} } - Litaker, H. L. J., Vos, G. A., Lieberman, A. P., Bingham, L. K., Cramer, M. O., Gelo, T. J., Scharunovych, N., Frangoudis, A. A., Royer, J. M. and Jones, V. L. (2024). Developing a Motion-Based System for Lunar Vehicle Handling Qualities Testing
. IEEE Aerospace Conference, 20230013022. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{litaker2024developing, title = {Developing a Motion-Based System for Lunar Vehicle Handling Qualities Testing}, author = {Litaker, Harry L., Jr. and Vos, Gordon A. and Lieberman, Asher P. and Bingham, Lee K. and Cramer, Mark O. and Gelo, Terence J. and Scharunovych, Nadia and Frangoudis, Athena A. and Royer, Jeffrey M. and Jones, Vanessa L.}, booktitle = {IEEE Aerospace Conference}, number = {20230013022}, pages = {1-22}, institution = {NASA}, year = {2024}, doi = {10.1109/aero58975.2024.10521283}, abstract = {Motion and visual cue influences are critical in any simulator system, as they impact multiple aspects of the human’s neurovestibular and visual systems. Cues of real motion proceeds to the brain before cues of visual change. It is important therefore for simulator motion cues to exist and to match those realistically with those of the real vehicle to provide transferable training of the activity for operations. The United Kingdom’s Royal Air Force Institute of Aviation Medicine (1989)[1] stated that motion platforms are the only simulation devices capable of fully stimulating the body motion sensors. They confirmed that motion platforms can impart accelerations to the whole body and therefore exercise the automatic motion feedback-loop that operators are used to. With both visual and motion cues handling the vehicle becomes more realistic. Strachan (2019)[1] confirms motion cueing from a well set-up motion platform has been found to be important especially in conditions such as night or reduced visibility where motion cues may be more relied upon. As of this writing, the only lunar rover motion simulator is housed at the General Motors (GM) Milford Proving Ground, which only simulates the motions of a traditional car. A NASA Test Team proposed to complete a motion-based simulation system for NASA’s Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) which resides at Johnson Space Center’s Systems Engineering Simulator facility. This activity integrated existing fixed base simulation capabilities with a newly procured six-degree of freedom motion base platform for the design, development, evaluation, and training associated with the LTV project. This would incorporate a South Pole Lunar virtual reality simulation using Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter 5m/pixel high-resolution imagery and Unreal 5.2 Virtual Shadow Maps, combined with a virtual reality (VR) headset, integrated within a rover cockpit on a Mikrolar Motion Platform for evaluating human performance and vehicle handling qualities for concept roving vehicle designs. The motion-based system received its Human Rating Certification on March 2023. To begin testing the new facility, a preliminary handling qualities study was conducted. The objectives were to determine if there is a correlation amongst three handling quality methods of performance for a lunar vehicle and to understand the effects of a simulated 1/6-g loads and visuals with a motion platform on the operator while in a 1-g physical environment. The capability this system provides directly benefits the NASA’s Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility Program and NASA’s Flight Operations Directorate in evaluating the driving qualities of vehicle concepts, human performance related to the operating of a lunar surface vehicle, and assessment of suit related driving impacts. It would also provide direct operational benefit by providing a first-in-class and unique simulation platform for the lunar astronaut training curriculum. The empirical knowledge of rover and human performance on this scale is paramount as there is currently no other lunar surface simulator with these capabilities. The result of this study ensures a broadly applicable method of testing for shirtsleeve, unpressurized and pressurized suited rover handling qualities.} } - Andrews, D., Colaprete, A., Quinn, J., Bluethmann, W. and Trimble, J. (2015). Resource Prospector (RP) - Early Prototyping and Development
. AIAA SPACE Conference, 20150018395. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{andrews2015resource, title = {Resource Prospector (RP) - Early Prototyping and Development}, author = {Andrews, Dan and Colaprete, Anthony and Quinn, Jacqueline and Bluethmann, William and Trimble, Jay}, booktitle = {AIAA SPACE Conference}, number = {20150018395}, publisher = {American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics}, institution = {NASA}, address = {Pasadena, California}, year = {2015}, doi = {10.2514/6.2015-4460}, abstract = {The Resource Prospector (RP) is an In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) technology demonstration mission under study by the NASA Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate's (HEOMD) Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Division. The mission, currently planned to launch in 2020, will demonstrate extraction of oxygen from lunar regolith to validate ISRU capability. The mission will address key Strategic Knowledge Gaps (SKGs) for robotic and human exploration to the Moon, Near Earth Asteroids (NEAs), and ultimately Mars, as well as meet the strategic goals of the Global Exploration Roadmap (GER), offered by the International Space Exploration Coordination Group (ISECG). In this roadmap, the use of local resources is specifically addressed relating to human exploration. RP will provide knowledge to inform the selection of future mission destinations, support the development of exploration systems, and reduce the risk associated with human exploration. Expanding human presence beyond low-Earth orbit to asteroids and Mars will require the maximum possible use of local materials, so-called in-situ resources. The moon presents a unique destination to conduct robotic investigations that advance ISRU capabilities, as well as providing significant exploration and science value. Lunar regolith contains useful resources such as oxygen, water, silicon, and light metals, like aluminum and titanium. Oxygen can be separated from the regolith for life support (breathable air), or used to create rocket propellant (oxidizer). Regolith can be used to protect against radiation exposure, be processed into solar cells, or used to manufacture construction materials such as bricks and glass. RP will characterize the constituents and distribution of water and other volatiles at the poles of the Moon, enabling innovative uses of local resources, in addition to validating ISRU capabilities. This capability, as well as a deeper understanding of regolith, will be valuable in the exploration of near-Earth asteroids (NEAs) and Mars. In order to reduce risk and explore system designs, the RP project is attempting two-fold approaches to development as it looks towards flight. We continue to explore flight planning, requirements, and interfaces definition by using Engineering Test Units (ETUs), looking towards lunar deployment, while also using fiscal year 2015 to develop, build and test an earth-terrestrial prototype rover and payload system. This terrestrial prototype, called "RP15", is built to both inform the system design, and to be a partnership advocacy tool for this unique mission. RP15 must be affordable within the resource and time constraints of fiscal year 2015, while working to the following Needs, Goals, and Objectives provided by HEOMD/AES: 1. Demonstrate rover mobility in a 1g environment 2. The Surface Segment (prototype rover + payload system) shall represent the flight system concept with as much fidelity as affordable (limited by cost and schedule) - Surface Segment shall be the approximate size/dimension/footprint -Surface Segment shall package all the expected devices (instruments, systems, etc.), even if some facets are mocked-up due to time/cost constraints -Overall Surface Segment fidelity negotiable to make achievable 3. Priority should be given to illustrating mission functionality over support functionality, which exists solely to support mission functionality This paper will provide an overview of RP project developments, including the design and build, capturing the development and initial integrated testing of RP15 in relevant environments.} } - Montz, M. and Trevino, L. (2012). Chamber B Thermal/Vacuum Chamber: User Test Planning Guide
. NASA Johnson Space Center, 20120003246. Source
BibTeX
@techreport{montz2012chamber, title = {{Chamber B} Thermal/Vacuum Chamber: User Test Planning Guide}, author = {Montz, Michael and Trevino, Louis}, number = {20120003246}, institution = {NASA Johnson Space Center}, year = {2012}, url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20120003246}, abstract = {Test process, milestones and inputs are unknowns to first-time users of Chamber B. The User Test Planning Guide aids in establishing expectations for both NASA and non-NASA facility customers. The potential audience for this guide includes both internal and commercial spaceflight hardware/software developers. It is intended to assist their test engineering personnel in test planning and execution. Material covered includes a roadmap of the test process, roles and responsibilities of facility and user, major milestones, facility capabilities, and inputs required by the facility. Samples of deliverables, test article interfaces, and inputs necessary to define test scope, cost, and schedule are included as an appendix to the guide.} } - 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.} } - Wavrunek, T. A. (2021). Active Gravity Offloading System with Infrared Tracking for Rover Testing
. Michigan Technological University. Source
BibTeX
@mastersthesis{wavrunek2021active, title = {Active Gravity Offloading System with Infrared Tracking for Rover Testing}, author = {Wavrunek, Travis A.}, publisher = {Michigan Technological University}, school = {Michigan Technological University}, type = {Master of Science report, Mechanical Engineering}, year = {2021}, doi = {10.37099/mtu.dc.etdr/1213}, abstract = {Gravity offloading is a tool used to test how different gravitational forces will impact the mobility of rovers bound for Lunar or Martian expeditions. Previous approaches have been successful in simulating partial gravity environments, and this report details how the Infrared- Gravity offload (IRGO) system, developed for the Planetary Surface Technology Development Laboratory (PSTDL) and lunar simulant sandbox, has a similar aim. Through a series of iterations, IRGO has been developed to actively track an infrared beacon and follow a rover within the test chamber to eliminate inertial and friction forces along two horizonal axes. A portion of a rover’s weight is offloaded using a passive counterweight system to provide a third translational degree of freedom. Future plans to incorporate a lightweight gimbal as well as an active vertical axis are also discussed as solutions to improving the IRGO system.} } - 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.} } - Görner, M., Cebulsky, J., Dömel, A., Durner, M., Giubilato, R., Kuhne, M., Müller, M. G., Lakatos, K., Lehner, P., Lichtenheldt, R., Rebele, B., Roser, M., Sakagami, R., Scheeler, Y., Schuster, M. J., Schütt, M., Stürzl, W., Vayugundla, M. and Wedler, A. (2024). The DLR Moon-Mars Test Site for Robotic Planetary Exploration
. International Conference on Space Robotics. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{goerner2024dlr, title = {The DLR Moon-Mars Test Site for Robotic Planetary Exploration}, author = {Görner, Martin and Cebulsky, Jennifer and Dömel, Andreas and Durner, Maximilian and Giubilato, Riccardo and Kuhne, Moritz and Müller, Marcus G. and Lakatos, Kristin and Lehner, Peter and Lichtenheldt, Roy and Rebele, Bernhard and Roser, Mattias and Sakagami, Ryo and Scheeler, Yunis and Schuster, Martin J. and Schütt, Manuel and Stürzl, Wolfgang and Vayugundla, Mallikarjuna and Wedler, Armin}, booktitle = {International Conference on Space Robotics}, pages = {245-252}, institution = {DLR Institute of Robotics and Mechatronics}, year = {2024}, doi = {10.1109/isparo60631.2024.10687411}, abstract = {Building robots for planetary exploration missions requires intensive testing throughout all phases of the design process. Especially, during hard- and software development as well as mission training the process benefits of easy-to-access test sites that offer realistic conditions. For this purpose we have built the 1500 m2DLR Moon-Mars test site in Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany. The facility provides a large variety of geological formations and ground substrates on a compact terrain as well as a rich set of power and network connections. As a unique feature of the outdoor test site, we prepared a dedicated link to the German Space Operations Center that enables telerobotic experiments from ISS. Furthermore, we provide an optical tracking system for ground truth measurement and control. We describe the design and construction process of the test site and present an overview of its features. Three experiments with our robots LRU1, LRU2 and the Scout rover regarding autonomous navigation and mapping, autonomous manipulation and sampling as well as advanced mobility tests demonstrate the usage of the test site.} } - de la Croix, J.-P. and Karras, J. (2019). Pop-Up, Flat-Folding Explorer Rovers: Meet PUFFER—NASA's Origami Rover. Source
BibTeX
@technical_report{delacroix2019puffer, title = {Pop-Up, Flat-Folding Explorer Rovers: Meet PUFFER—NASA's Origami Rover}, author = {de la Croix, Jean-Pierre and Karras, Jaakko}, year = {2019}, url = {https://dataverse.jpl.nasa.gov/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=hdl:2014/52071} } - Wilcox, B. H. (2010). ATHLETE: Lunar Cargo Handling for International Lunar Exploration
. AIAA SPACE Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{wilcox2010athlete, title = {ATHLETE: Lunar Cargo Handling for International Lunar Exploration}, author = {Wilcox, Brian H.}, booktitle = {AIAA SPACE Conference}, year = {2010}, url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20150008942}, abstract = {As part of the Human-Robot Systems Project within the NASA Exploration Technology Development Program, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory is developing a vehicle called ATHLETE: the All-Terrain Hex-Limbed Extra-Terrestrial Explorer. The basic idea of ATHLETE is to have six relatively small wheels on the ends of legs. The small wheels and associated drive actuators are much less massive than the larger wheels and gears needed for an "all terrain" vehicle that cannot "walk" out of extreme terrain. The mass savings for the wheels and wheel actuators is greater than the mass penalty of the legs, for a net mass savings. Starting in 2009, NASA became engaged in detailed architectural studies for international discussions with the European Space Agency (ESA), the Japanese Space Agency (JAXA), and the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) under the auspices of the International Architecture Working Group (IAWG). ATHLETE is considered in most of the campaign options considered, providing a way to offload cargo from large Altair-class landers (having a cargo deck 6+ meters above the surface) as well as offloading international landers launched on Ariane-5 or H-2 launch vehicles. These international landers would carry provisions as well as scientific instruments and/or small rovers that would be used by international astronauts as part of an international effort to explore the moon.Work described in this paper includes architectural studies in support of the international missions as well as field testing of a half-scale ATHLETE prototype performing cargo offloading from a lander mockup, along with multi-kilometer traverse, climbing over greater than 1 m rocks, tool use, etc.} } - 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.} } - Golombek, M. and Rapp, D. (1997). Size-frequency distributions of rocks on Mars and Earth analog sites: Implications for future landed missions
. Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets, E2. Source
BibTeX
@article{golombek1997size, title = {Size-frequency distributions of rocks on Mars and Earth analog sites: Implications for future landed missions}, author = {Golombek, M. and Rapp, Donald}, journal = {Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets}, volume = {102}, number = {E2}, pages = {4117--4129}, year = {1997}, doi = {10.1029/96je03319}, abstract = {The size‐frequency distribution of rocks at the Viking landing sites and a variety of rocky locations on the Earth that formed from a number of geologic processes all have the general shape of simple exponential curves, which have been combined with remote sensing data and models on rock abundance to predict the frequency of boulders potentially hazardous to future Mars landers and rovers. Rock data from the near field of the Viking landers where dimensions can be measured accurately in stereo images and estimates from the far field of Viking 1 have convex up curved shapes on log‐log graphs of cumulative frequency per square meter or cumulative fractional area versus diameter. The rock data show a sharp drop‐off at large diameters and a progressive approach to a plateau with decreasing diameter (approaching the total rock coverage), which can be fit well with simple exponential functions. Similar shaped size‐frequency distributions of rocks are found at a wide variety of rocky surfaces on the Earth and can be fit well with simple exponential functions. This distribution is compatible with fracture and fragmentation theory, which provides a physical basis for its wide application. A combined fit to rock area data at both Viking sites was made with a general exponential function, in which the pre‐exponential is the total area covered by rocks. Simple linear height versus diameter relationships were also derived from height‐diameter ratios at the Viking sites, which suggest that rockier areas on Mars have higher standing rocks than less rocky areas. Height was then substituted into the general exponential function derived for diameter, yielding the cumulative fractional area of rocks versus height for any given total rock coverage on Mars. Results indicate that most of Mars is rather benign with regard to hazards from landing on large rocks. For total rock coverage of 8%, equivalent to modal rock coverage on Mars and the Viking 1 site without the outcrops, about 1% of the surface is covered by 20 cm or higher rocks. A lander designed to accommodate landing on 0.5‐m‐high boulders, such as the Mars Pathfinder airbag system, could land on a surface covered by about 20% rocks, similar to the Viking 2 site (which is rockier than ∼95% of the planet), with ∼1% of the surface covered by rocks of 0.5 m or higher.} } - Matthies, L., Gat, E., Harrison, R., Wilcox, B., Volpe, R. and Litwin, T. (1995). Mars Microrover Navigation: Performance Evaluation and Enhancement
. Autonomous Robots, 4. Source
BibTeX
@article{matthies1995mars, title = {Mars Microrover Navigation: Performance Evaluation and Enhancement}, author = {Matthies, Larry and Gat, Erann and Harrison, Reid and Wilcox, Brian and Volpe, Richard and Litwin, Todd}, journal = {Autonomous Robots}, volume = {2}, number = {4}, pages = {291--311}, year = {1995}, doi = {10.1007/bf00710796} } - Hayati, S., Volpe, R., Backes, P., Balaram, J., Welch, R., Ivlev, R., Tharp, G., Peters, S., Ohm, T., Petras, R. and Laubach, S. (1997). The Rocky 7 Rover: A Mars Sciencecraft Prototype
. International Conference on Robotics and Automation. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{s.1997, title = {The Rocky 7 Rover: A Mars Sciencecraft Prototype}, author = {Hayati, S. and Volpe, R. and Backes, P. and Balaram, J. and Welch, R. and Ivlev, R. and Tharp, G. and Peters, S. and Ohm, T. and Petras, R. and Laubach, S.}, booktitle = {International Conference on Robotics and Automation}, volume = {3}, pages = {2458-2464}, year = {1997}, doi = {10.1109/robot.1997.619330}, abstract = {This paper describes the design and implementation at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory of a small rover for future Mars missions requiring long traverses and rover-based science experiments. The small rover prototype, called Rocky 7, is capable of long traverses, autonomous navigation, and science instrument control. This rover carries three science instruments, and can be commanded from any computer platform from any location using the World Wide Web. In this paper we describe the mobility system, the sampling system, the sensor suite, navigation and control, onboard science instruments, and the ground command and control system. We also present key accomplishments of a recent field test of Rocky 7 in the Mojave Desert in California.} } - Tunstel, E., Huntsberger, T. and Baumgartner, E. (2004). Earth-based rover field testing for exploration mission on Mars. dataverse.jpl.nasa.gov/dataset.xhtml
BibTeX
@misc{tunstel2004earth, title = {Earth-based rover field testing for exploration mission on Mars}, author = {Tunstel, Edward and Huntsberger, Terry and Baumgartner, Eric}, year = {2004}, url = {https://dataverse.jpl.nasa.gov/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=hdl:2014/37972} } - Zimmerman, W. (1994). JPL Rover Technology Program. dataverse.jpl.nasa.gov/dataset.xhtml
BibTeX
@misc{zimmerman1994jpl, title = {JPL Rover Technology Program}, author = {Zimmerman, W.}, year = {1994}, url = {https://dataverse.jpl.nasa.gov/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=hdl:hdl:2014/33733} } - Meyer, L., Smíšek, M., Fontan Villacampa, A., Oliva Maza, L., Medina, D., Schuster, M. J., Steidle, F., Vayugundla, M., Müller, M. G., Rebele, B., Wedler, A. and Triebel, R. (2021). The MADMAX data set for visual-inertial rover navigation on Mars
. Journal of Field Robotics, 6. Source
BibTeX
@article{meyer2021madmax, title = {The MADMAX data set for visual-inertial rover navigation on Mars}, author = {Meyer, Lukas and Smíšek, Michal and Fontan Villacampa, Alejandro and Oliva Maza, Laura and Medina, Daniel and Schuster, Martin J. and Steidle, Florian and Vayugundla, Mallikarjuna and Müller, Marcus G. and Rebele, Bernhard and Wedler, Armin and Triebel, Rudolph}, journal = {Journal of Field Robotics}, volume = {38}, number = {6}, pages = {833-853}, publisher = {Wiley}, year = {2021}, doi = {10.1002/rob.22016}, abstract = {Abstract Planetary rovers increasingly rely on vision‐based components for autonomous navigation and mapping. Developing and testing these components requires representative optical conditions, which can be achieved by either field testing at planetary analog sites on Earth or using prerecorded data sets from such locations. However, the availability of representative data is scarce and field testing in planetary analog sites requires a substantial financial investment and logistical overhead, and it entails the risk of damaging complex robotic systems. To address these issues, we use our compact human‐portable DLR Sensor Unit for Planetary Exploration Rovers (SUPER) in the Moroccan desert to show resource‐efficient field testing and make the resulting Morocco‐Acquired data set of Mars‐Analog eXploration (MADMAX) publicly accessible. The data set consists of 36 different navigation experiments, captured at eight Mars analog sites of widely varying environmental conditions. Its longest trajectory covers 1.5 km and the combined trajectory length is 9.2 km. The data set contains time‐stamped recordings from monochrome stereo cameras, a color camera, omnidirectional cameras in stereo configuration, and from an inertial measurement unit. Additionally, we provide the ground truth in position and orientation together with the associated uncertainties, obtained by a real‐time kinematic‐based algorithm that fuses the global navigation satellite system data of two body antennas. Finally, we run two state‐of‐the‐art navigation algorithms, ORB‐SLAM2 and VINS‐mono, on our data to evaluate their accuracy and to provide a baseline, which can be used as a performance reference of accuracy and robustness for other navigation algorithms. The data set can be accessed at https://rmc.dlr.de/morocco2018 .} } - Krotkov, E. P., Simmons, R. G. and Whittaker, W. L. (1995). Ambler: Performance of a Six-Legged Planetary Rover
. Acta Astronautica, 1. Source
BibTeX
@article{krotkov1995ambler, title = {Ambler: Performance of a Six-Legged Planetary Rover}, author = {Krotkov, Eric P. and Simmons, Reid G. and Whittaker, William L.}, journal = {Acta Astronautica}, volume = {35}, number = {1}, pages = {75--81}, year = {1995}, doi = {10.1016/0094-5765(94)00078-6} } - Matijevic, J. (1997). Characterization of the Martian Surface Deposits by the Mars Pathfinder Rover, Sojourner
. AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{matijevic1997characterization, title = {Characterization of the Martian Surface Deposits by the Mars Pathfinder Rover, Sojourner}, author = {Matijevic, J.}, booktitle = {AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference}, volume = {278}, pages = {1765-1768}, publisher = {JPL Open Repository}, year = {1997}, doi = {10.1126/science.278.5344.1765}, abstract = {Sojourner, the Mars Pathfinder rover, discovered pebbles on the surface and in rocks that may be sedimentary—not volcanic—in origin. Surface pebbles may have been rounded by Ares flood waters or liberated by weathering of sedimentary rocks called conglomerates. Conglomerates imply that water existed elsewhere and earlier than the Ares flood. Most soil-like deposits are similar to moderately dense soils on Earth. Small amounts of dust are currently settling from the atmosphere.} } - Wiendieck, K. W. (1968). Stress-displacement relations and terrain-vehicle mechanics: a critical discussion
. Journal of Terramechanics. Source
BibTeX
@article{wiendieck1968stress, title = {Stress-displacement relations and terrain-vehicle mechanics: a critical discussion}, author = {Wiendieck, Klaus W.}, journal = {Journal of Terramechanics}, volume = {5}, pages = {67-85}, year = {1968}, doi = {10.1016/0022-4898(68)90081-5} } - Jones, C. S. J. and Nola, F. J. (1971). Mobility systems activity for lunar rovers at MSFC
. NASA, NASA-TM-. Source
BibTeX
@techreport{jones1971mobility, title = {Mobility systems activity for lunar rovers at MSFC}, author = {Jones, C. S., Jr. and Nola, F. J.}, number = {NASA-TM-}, institution = {NASA}, year = {1971}, url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19720004516}, abstract = {The Apollo Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV) mobility system is described. Special emphasis is given to the redundancy aspects and to the selection of the drive motors. A summary chart of the performance on the lunar surface during the Apollo 15 flight is included. An appendix gives details on some development work on high efficiency drive systems and compares these systems to the selected system.} } - Yingst, R. A., Berger, J., Cohen, B. A., Hynek, B. M. and Schmidt, M. E. (2017). Determining best practices in reconnoitering sites for habitability potential on Mars using a semi-autonomous rover: A GeoHeuristic Operational Strategies Test
. Acta Astronautica. Source
BibTeX
@article{yingst2017determining, title = {Determining best practices in reconnoitering sites for habitability potential on Mars using a semi-autonomous rover: A GeoHeuristic Operational Strategies Test}, author = {Yingst, R. Aileen and Berger, Jeffrey and Cohen, Barbara A. and Hynek, Brian M. and Schmidt, Mariek E.}, journal = {Acta Astronautica}, volume = {132}, pages = {268-281}, publisher = {Elsevier BV}, year = {2017}, doi = {10.1016/j.actaastro.2016.12.018}, abstract = {We tested science operations strategies developed for use in remote mobile spacecraft missions, to determine whether reconnoitering a site of potential habitability prior to in-depth study (a walkabout-first strategy) can be a more efficient use of time and resources than the linear approach commonly used by planetary rover missions. Two field teams studied a sedimentary sequence in Utah to assess habitability potential. At each site one team commanded a human "rover" to execute observations and conducted data analysis and made follow-on decisions based solely on those observations. Another team followed the same traverse using traditional terrestrial field methods, and the results of the two teams were compared. Test results indicate that for a mission with goals similar to our field case, the walkabout-first strategy may save time and other mission resources, while improving science return. The approach enabled more informed choices and higher team confidence in choosing where to spend time and other consumable resources. The walkabout strategy may prove most efficient when many close sites must be triaged to a smaller subset for detailed study or sampling. This situation would arise when mission goals include finding, identifying, characterizing or sampling a specific material, feature or type of environment within a certain area.} } - Glass, B., Stoker, C., Battah, H., Boelter, S., Fortuin, C., King, I., Stevenson, T. and Stucky, T. (2024). TRIDENT Drill Validation at Mars and Lunar Analog Field Sites
. Lunar and Planetary Science Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{glass2024trident, title = {{TRIDENT} Drill Validation at Mars and Lunar Analog Field Sites}, author = {Glass, Brian and Stoker, Carol and Battah, Hussein and Boelter, S. and Fortuin, C. and King, I. and Stevenson, T. and Stucky, T.}, booktitle = {Lunar and Planetary Science Conference}, year = {2024}, url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20240000585}, abstract = {Drilling on Earth is typically a human-intensive activity. Drilling on other planets is further complicated by the lack of prior local field surveys of their target area, hence blindly drilling into uncertain target rocks. Field conditions on the Moon or Mars are also different than for shallow drilling on Earth: lower temperatures and pressures, less power available, low masses (hence less weight-on-bit). Given the cost of transport from Earth, no drilling muds or working fluids are likely to be available to carry away cuttings. And impact-gardened regolith and dust vary mechanically and texturally from most terrestrial soils. The Regolith and Ice Drill for Exploration of New Terrains (TRIDENT) is a rotary-percussive 1m-class drill from Honeybee Robotics. It is low-power (rotary and percussive actuators are 200 W each) and lightweight (<20 kg) with the maximum weight on bit limited to 200 N. TRIDENT has been manifested for the Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER) and PRIME-1 lunar south pole missions in 2024, has previously been field tested at a hot, dry analog site in the Atacama Desert, and in lunar conditions in thermal vacuum chamber tests. TRIDENT was also part of the 2019 Icebreaker Mars Discovery proposal, as well as in the Mars Life Explorer concept. During ARADS tests, drill control and fault recovery automation software enabled hands-off operations of a rover-mounted TRIDENT drill. TRIDENT Drill Analog Site Validation: Past TRIDENT tests in thermal vacuum (TVAC) chambers targeted containers of manufactured lunar simulants with added volatiles. 2022 TRIDENT ambient testing at NASA Ames drilled into cemented lunar simulant materials. Low cuttings-permeability led to cuttings buildup, and drill choking and binding was observed. The Atacama analog site in ARADS had desiccated unconsolidated sediments that did not challenge the TRIDENT design. However, lunar polar regolith is expected to be diverse and heterogeneous with varying clast sizes, with abundant impactites and perhaps subsurface ice deposits. Neither the simulants nor Atacama testing had completely covered the TRIDENT-targeted field characteristics, motivating further analog tests prior to the planned lunar missions. To gain more insight into the behavior of the TRIDENT hardware in diverse impactites and subsurface ice, and to verify the software automation in that environment, in August 2023 TRIDENT was brought to Haughton Crater, a field analog site in the Canadian Arctic. In September 2023 the same drill was brought to the Bishop Tuff in southern California to verify whether drilling binding behaviors previously seen in lunar simulant testing would be observed in naturally occurring fine-grained massive layers. The ~22 Ma Haughton Crater impact structure is located at 75 ̊22’ N, 89 ̊41’ W, on northwestern Devon Island, Nunavut, Canada. Numerous deposits of pale-grey crater-fill polymictic impact-melt breccia are found within the crater with a typical thickness reaching ~125 m or greater and covering ~60 km<sup>-2</sup>. An approximately 600m-thick permafrost layer is also present with ice typically found within 0.5-0.6m of the surface. The volcanic tableland north of Bishop, CA exposes densely welded tuff laid down during the eruption that created the Long Valley Caldera at approximately 0.76 Ma. Extensional faults and the Owens River gorge expose cross-sections across the plateau. The area is viewed as an analog site for Mars features believed to be of pyroclastic origin. Results: Haughton Crater.Drilling tests were conducted 8-13 August 2023 at a previously undisturbed area separated 5-10 m from past years’ Drill Hill test sites (75.4208, -089.7613). In six days, TRIDENT drilled 8 holes to nearly 1 m depth each, totaling 7.80 m. The active layer/ice boundary was at ~67 cm depth, with a total of approximately 2.4 m drilled into ice or ice-cemented impact breccia. During drilling, five drill fault states were observed and successfully recovered. Holes 23-1, 4 and 7 were drilled under manual control, using Honeybee’s Thorax user interface. Holes 23-5, 6, and 8 were drilled with the Ames IBexec automated drilling control software. TRIDENT was observed to have little difficulty in the thawed uncemented impact breccia above the active layer boundary, but required percussion to make slower headway in the ice-cemented breccia. In Hole 23-7 (Fig.1), drilling slowed down in a massive unit just above the active-layer boundary (perhaps a large rock extending into the ice-cementation?), with only 7cm progress made in 27 minutes of high auger torque and constant percussion, leading to a choking fault and then a binding fault. A similar pattern had been observed in TRIDENT Rio Tinto test data from 2017 [6] as well as in the 2022laboratory tests.Bishop Tuff.A team from NASA Ames and the US Geological Survey deployed the same TRIDENT drill to Bishop Sites 1B and 1C (37.4203, -118.4289; 37.4265, -118.4215) on 13-16 September 2023, on the Bishop Tuff plateau. A third drill site was used 17-18 September 2023(37.4598, -118.3667) in an abandoned pumice mine. Four holes (totaling 2.5m depth) were drilled into the fine-grained, meters-thick tuff units at Sites 1B and 1C, and a further two boreholes (totaling 1.98m depth) were made at the pumice site. Drill behavior in the tuff below 10 cm depth was similar to that seen at 65-74 cm depth in Haughton Hole 23-7 (Fig. 1) and that seen in the 2022 lab simulant drilling. Drill safety torque limits were exceeded multiple times resulting in drill stops downhole. These freezes then required external added torques (with a pipe wrench) to resume rotation, to unstick the drill for withdrawal. To prevent this choking and binding behavior we found that more-frequent cuttings removal was necessary, e.g., reducing the “drill bite” size from the nominal 10 cm to 2 cm per bite --bringing the auger up to the surface more frequently, as seen in Bishop Site 1C Hole 2 (Fig.2). This permitted slow progress without drill binding and without external interventions. Conversely, TRIDENT drilling in the more porous pumice target material showed no cuttings buildup issue, and single bites as large as 40 cm were demonstrated. Discussion: We observed that TRIDENT easily penetrated unconsolidated heterogeneous soils (both above the active layer boundary at Haughton and previously in the Atacama). Cemented or consolidated targets that were cuttings-permeable (icy impact breccia, pumice) required more energy applied and percussion. However, in non-cuttings-permeable targets (welded microporous tuff, cemented simulants, boulder) TRIDENT was observed to be prone to excessive cuttings accumulation leading to choking/binding faults and stalling. The wedge cutting bit, used by TRIDENT in field tests and in its flight versions, pulverizes the target rock and creates fine cuttings that ideally are transported up the auger spirals for removal. In porous, fractured or vesicular target materials (such as at the Bishop pumice site) a significant portion of the cuttings are pushed aside, but for non-fractured, microporous targets the cuttings remain in the borehole and accumulate. Rock powder is relatively incompressible as a working fluid at only 100-200N downward force (TRIDENT limits) and hence eventual drilling progress slows or stops. Our recommended strategy for improving TRIDENT cuttings removal in massive target units with low cuttings-permeability is to reduce TRIDENT bite sizes when encountering these units, from 10cm to as little as 1-2cm, to effectively bail the accumulating cuttings. This approach was demonstrated to reduce choking and allowed slow progress to continue in cuttings-impermeable microporous target units (viz. the Bishop tuff in our September 2023 tests or cemented simulants in 2022 ambient tests). } } - Litaker, H. L. and Howard, R. L. (2020). Habitability Lessons Learned from Field Testing of a Small Pressurized Rover
. ASCEND. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{litaker2020habitability, title = {Habitability Lessons Learned from Field Testing of a Small Pressurized Rover}, author = {Litaker, Harry L. and Howard, Robert L.}, booktitle = {ASCEND}, publisher = {American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics}, year = {2020}, url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20205007271} } - Lee, P., Quinn, G., Rohrig, J., Schuster, A. H., Dalal, S. and Kahn, S. (2024). Caving on the Moon and Mars: First Analog Field Study of EVA Systems and Operations Requirements for Moon and Mars Cave and Pit Exploration at Skylight Cave Lava Tube, Oregon
. International Conference on Environmental Systems. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{lee2024caving, title = {Caving on the Moon and Mars: First Analog Field Study of EVA Systems and Operations Requirements for Moon and Mars Cave and Pit Exploration at Skylight Cave Lava Tube, Oregon}, author = {Lee, Pascal and Quinn, Gregory and Rohrig, Jake and Schuster, Ashley Himmelmann and Dalal, Sawan and Kahn, Saad}, booktitle = {International Conference on Environmental Systems}, publisher = {International Conference on Environmental Systems}, year = {2024}, doi = {10.32865/2346/99020}, abstract = {Over 300 caves and pits are known to exist on the Moon, and close to 1000 on Mars. Lunar and planetary caves and pits are sheltered microenvironments on planetary bodies offering environmental conditions that differ greatly from those prevailing at the surface, in particular shielding from ionizing space radiation and micro-meteoritic bombardment, dampened diurnal temperature variations, generally colder temperatures, and the possibility in some cases of volatile cold-trapping and maybe even life. On the Moon, high-latitude caves represent a type of permanently shadowed region (PSR) in which H2O and other volatile ices might be sequestered. On Mars, volcanic caves might be astrobiological oases, offering sheltered habitats for even extant life. On both worlds, caves and pits thus represent high priority targets for science and future robotic and human exploration. We report here on the first field study engaging an EVA spacesuit system manufacturer of requirements for EVA systems and operations to enable safe and productive cave and pit exploration on the Moon and Mars. Analog field tests were conducted in the context of the NASA Haughton-Mars Project in collaboration with Collins Aerospace at Skylight Cave lava tube in Deschutes National Forest, Oregon. Recommended augmentations to spacesuit features include LED lighting at several key locations on the upper and lower torso, glove and boot tips; additional abrasion-resistant outer garments; and a removable shield cage to protect the helmet visor. Lessons learned for lunar and Mars caving operations will also be presented.} } - Moore, H. J., Bickler, D. B., Crisp, J. A., Eisen, H. J., Gensler, J. A., Haldemann, A. F. C., Matijevic, J. R., Reid, L. K. and Pavlics, F. (1999). Soil-like deposits observed by Sojourner, the Pathfinder rover
. Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets, E4. Source
BibTeX
@article{moore1999soil, title = {Soil-like deposits observed by Sojourner, the Pathfinder rover}, author = {Moore, Henry J. and Bickler, Donald B. and Crisp, Joy A. and Eisen, Howard J. and Gensler, Jeffrey A. and Haldemann, Albert F. C. and Matijevic, Jacob R. and Reid, Lisa K. and Pavlics, Ferenc}, journal = {Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets}, volume = {104}, number = {E4}, pages = {8729-8746}, publisher = {American Geophysical Union (AGU)}, year = {1999}, doi = {10.1029/1998je900005}, abstract = {Most of the soil-like materials at the Pathfinder landing site behave like moderately dense soils on Earth with friction angles near 34 degrees through 39 degrees and are called cloddy deposits.} } - Mishkin, A. H., Morrison, J. C., Nguyen, T. T., Stone, H. W. and Cooper, B. K. (1998). Operations and Autonomy of the Mars Pathfinder Microrover
. NASA, 20060035694. Source
BibTeX
@techreport{mishkin1998operations, title = {Operations and Autonomy of the Mars Pathfinder Microrover}, author = {Mishkin, Andrew H. and Morrison, J. C. and Nguyen, T. T. and Stone, Henry W. and Cooper, Brian K.}, number = {20060035694}, institution = {NASA}, year = {1998}, url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20060035694}, abstract = {The Microrover Flight Experiment (MFEX) is a NSAS OACT (Office of Advanced Concepts and Technology) flight experiment which, integrated with the Mars Pathfinder (MPF) lander and spacecraft system, landed on Mars on July 4, 1997.} } - Wilcox, B. and Nguyen, T. (1998). Sojourner on Mars and Lessons Learned for Future Planetary Rovers
. SAE Technical Paper Series. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{wilcox1998sojourner, title = {Sojourner on Mars and Lessons Learned for Future Planetary Rovers}, author = {Wilcox, B. and Nguyen, T.}, booktitle = {SAE Technical Paper Series}, volume = {1}, publisher = {SAE International}, year = {1998}, doi = {10.4271/981695}, abstract = {<div class="htmlview paragraph">On July 4, 1997, the Mars Pathfinder spacecraft successfully landed on Mars in the Ares Vallis landing site and deployed an 11.5-kilogram microrover named Sojourner. This microrover accomplished its primary mission objectives in the first 7 days, and continued to operate for a total of 83 sols (1 sol = Mars day = 1 Earth day + ∼24 mins) until the lander lost communication with Earth, probably due to lander battery failure. The microrover navigated to many sites surrounding the lander, and conducted various science and technology experiments using its on-board instruments.</div> <div class="htmlview paragraph">In this paper, the rover navigation performance is analyzed on the basis of received rover telemetry, rover uplink commands and stereo images captured by the lander cameras. Its physical traversal path is redrawn from the stereo images containing tracks and is compared with the rover-recorded path and the driver-planned path. Implications for next-generation planetary rovers are described, including the sub-1-Kg Nanorover being built by NASA to conduct asteroid exploration as part of the Japanese MUSES-C sample return mission and the large rover with the Athena payload which will be used as part of the Mars sample return program.</div>} } - Volpe, R., Balaram, J., Ohm, T. and Ivlev, R. (1997). Rocky 7: A Next Generation Mars Rover Prototype
. Advanced Robotics. doi.org/10.1163/156855397x00362
BibTeX
@misc{volpe1997rocky, title = {Rocky 7: A Next Generation Mars Rover Prototype}, author = {Volpe, R. and Balaram, J. and Ohm, T. and Ivlev, R.}, journal = {Advanced Robotics}, year = {1997}, doi = {10.1163/156855397x00362}, abstract = {This paper provides a system overview of a new Mars rover prototype, Rocky 7.} } - NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory. (2026). The MarsYard III. www-robotics.jpl.nasa.gov/how-we-do-it/facilities/marsyard-iii
BibTeX
@misc{jplmarsyard, title = {The MarsYard III}, author = {{NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory}}, organization = {www-robotics.jpl.nasa.gov}, year = {2026}, url = {https://www-robotics.jpl.nasa.gov/how-we-do-it/facilities/marsyard-iii/} } - 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.} } - NASA Kennedy Space Center. (2025). Surface Autonomy Test Site. public.ksc.nasa.gov/partnerships/surface-autonomy-test-site
BibTeX
@misc{ksc2025surface, title = {Surface Autonomy Test Site}, author = {{NASA Kennedy Space Center}}, organization = {public.ksc.nasa.gov}, year = {2025}, url = {https://public.ksc.nasa.gov/partnerships/surface-autonomy-test-site/} } - NASA Kennedy Space Center. (2025). Artemis Arena. public.ksc.nasa.gov/partnerships/artemis-arena
BibTeX
@misc{ksc2025artemis, title = {Artemis Arena}, author = {{NASA Kennedy Space Center}}, organization = {public.ksc.nasa.gov}, year = {2025}, url = {https://public.ksc.nasa.gov/partnerships/artemis-arena/} } - Schepelmann, A., Creager, C. M., Proctor, M. P., Johnson, K. A., Breckenridge, J. R., Elmland, A., Naghipour Ghezeljeh, P. and Oravec, H. A. (2025). An Overview of Tire-Ground Contact Modeling Approaches for Surface Mobility Applications
. NASA Glenn Research Center, NASA/TM-20250006958. Source
BibTeX
@techreport{schepelmann2025overview, title = {An Overview of Tire-Ground Contact Modeling Approaches for Surface Mobility Applications}, author = {Schepelmann, Alexander and Creager, Colin M. and Proctor, Margaret P. and Johnson, Kyle A. and Breckenridge, John R. and Elmland, Asher and Naghipour Ghezeljeh, Paria and Oravec, Heather A.}, number = {NASA/TM-20250006958}, institution = {NASA Glenn Research Center}, year = {2025}, url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20250006958}, abstract = {Wheels and tires serve as the critical interface between vehicles and the ground, enabling traction, force transmission, and ultimately mobility. As planetary exploration systems adopt increasingly complex wheel and tire designs, look to explore increasingly extreme terrains, and adopt increasingly aggressive performance requirements, physics-based modeling has become essential for both designing these mechanisms and predicting performance under conditions that are difficult or impractical to replicate experimentally, such as reduced gravity. This paper provides a high-level overview of commonly used modeling approaches for simulating tireground interaction, including those currently employed or under development at NASA Glenn Research Center, NASA Johnson Space Center, and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The paper first categorizes modeling techniques based on their fidelity and underlying assumptions. It then discusses the applications, benefits, and limitations of each approach, highlighting current knowledge gaps and modeling challenges. Finally, the paper outlines ongoing and future work aimed at addressing these limitations, including initial results from automated soil preparation experiments that support the generation of consistent physical test data and the development of terramechanics simulations for evaluating and comparing model fidelity.} } - 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.} } - 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.} } - David, L. (2025). New Lunar Surface Simulator in Colorado Puts Moon Machinery to the Test. space.com/astronomy/moon/new-lunar-surface-simulator-in-colorado-puts...
BibTeX
@misc{david2025lunar, title = {New Lunar Surface Simulator in Colorado Puts Moon Machinery to the Test}, author = {David, Leonard}, organization = {Space.com}, year = {2025}, url = {https://www.space.com/astronomy/moon/new-lunar-surface-simulator-in-colorado-puts-moon-machinery-to-the-test} }