Hypography X Prize Entry

[CraigD]

From the 13251. [(link added)]

 

OK my question is: how much warning/if any is there before a hit by Cosmic Rays and what kind of safeguard (other then shutting down the computers) can we build into the system?

I think you’re misunderstanding the event described in the linked news thread.

 

A “cosmic ray hit” is typically the collision of a single very-high energy proton (less commonly an alpha particle consisting of 2 protons and 2 neutrons) with a computer memory chip, causing a single bit to erroneously change from a zero to a one or vice versa. When the memory is next read, and compared to its parity check bit, the error is detected. Because it’s impractical to determine quickly how severe the consequences of the error might be, the system “safes” itself, entering a “do nothing” state until a human controller commands it otherwise. A similar event can occur due to a hardware defect – though uncommon in PCs and other electronics built in recent years, most people with experience with 1980s PCs have seen the occasional, sporadic memory error, and possibly even gone through the exercise of tracking down and replacing the offending chip. (I have a wax candle studded with defective 8KB memory chips from such operations – it’s sole purpose is to cause somebody to ask me about the curio, allowing me to wield the pun “oh, those are just bad memories” :eek: )

 

Cosmic rays are very rare, but a single one can trigger one of these safing events. They don’t come in “storms” like the unusual high fluxes of high energy solar particles associated with coronal mass ejections – “solar storms” – which can be detected before they arrive due because the photons emitted by the event arrive before them.

 

Though there are lots of available approaches for allowing a computer to cope with hard errors due to any cause, the approach used by the Phoenix seems a good one for its current mode of spaceflight, which is basically coasting through space. I suspect the system is designed to react differently in other modes, such as when making critical maneuvers.

I'm having some trouble with this I don't like the idea of turning off the computers, can we incorporate a shield?

As noted above, Phoenix doesn’t turn off its computer, and has no advanced warning of a cosmic ray hit. Since cosmic ray particles are charged, one could potentially shield against them with a strong magnetic field, or a massive layer of mater, but the energy cost for the first kind (since there’s no advanced warning, such a shield would have to be operated all the time at full power), and the mass cost of the second, would, I think, be excessive. Programming the computer to handle with them seems a better solution, particularly since such it must be able to handle these sorts of errors due to other causes, such as hardware defects, thermal problems, etc., even if completely protected from cosmic rays.

 

 

PS: The last 2 posts don’t have much to do with simulators, so should probably be in the general thread.

[freeztar]

I did a google search for "moon GIS" and came up with several links.

This one is great because it is shaded relief and has the GIS controls built-in, allowing anyone to view the data:

Map-a-planet

 

This should be a great resource for finding a landing site.

[CraigD]

I did a google search for "moon GIS" and came up with several links.

…

This should be a great resource for finding a landing site.

The wealth of lunar map data and software is wonderful. However, given that this mission is more technological than scientific – an exercise in successfully getting to and operating on the moon, rather than collecting and returning significant data – and that there’s a bonus prize for returning images of previous landers, I vote for a landing site within rover range of one of the Apollos.

[freeztar]

However, given that this mission is more technological than scientific – an exercise in successfully getting to and operating on the moon, rather than collecting and returning significant data – and that there’s a bonus prize for returning images of previous landers, I vote for a landing site within rover range of one of the Apollos.

 

Hear, hear.

 

If for no other reason, it would be nice to deal a good blow to the lunar mission skeptics. :confused:

 

I was originally thinking that a prime landing spot would be a space free of craters and large topographic features. I would imagine NASA was thinking the same with the Apollo lunar rover missions. It's hard to know without access to high-res imagery WITH known locations of vessels superimposed. Does anyone know the lunar coordinates for the various Apollo relics?

 

I find the link I posted to be much more detailed and usable media than the Google Earth version. I plan on downloading some GIS files and opening them in ArcGIS to create some scalable maps that can be reviewed for a proper landing area. My hope is that a suitable landing, and operating, site will correspond to human-based lunar relics.

[CraigD]

Does anyone know the lunar coordinates for the various Apollo relics?

This NASA document has them to a resolution of .001° latitude and longitude, less than 31 m.

[freeztar]

This NASA document has them to a resolution of .001° latitude and longitude, less than 31 m.

 

Perfect, thank you. :shrug:

I'll get to work on some maps. They will be scalable, so detail is only limited by the resolution of the image. I'm thinking that visible and shaded relief are sufficient for our endeavors, but if someone has a valid reason for wanting IR or other media then let me know.

[Jay-qu]

Hear, hear.

 

If for no other reason, it would be nice to deal a good blow to the lunar mission skeptics. :)

 

I was originally thinking that a prime landing spot would be a space free of craters and large topographic features. I would imagine NASA was thinking the same with the Apollo lunar rover missions. It's hard to know without access to high-res imagery WITH known locations of vessels superimposed. Does anyone know the lunar coordinates for the various Apollo relics?

Im not sure if it was posted earlier but there is a 'google moon' that works the same as google earth, Im think that might be able to help you out

 

Google Moon

[freeztar]

bumpity bump

:Glasses:

[Jay-qu]

Not much happening on this front :Glasses:

[TheBigDog]

In my garage I have the RC that will become my prototype rover. I have not even broken the seal on the box, but when the weather warms up and I can work comfortably in the garage, I will be getting back on track again.

 

Bill

[Giles Corey]

I would love to help!

Just ignore the fact that i have an 11th grade education, and I'll be the biggest asset to the team!

 

All i can say for now is that if your going to bother to go to the moon, make sure your doing something new for the first time, even if small. For example, Take a rock from the earth to the moon for a change! :hihi::shrug:

~Giles be Useless!

[freeztar]

I would love to help!

 

Everyone's invited! :shrug:

 

Take a rock from the earth to the moon for a change!

 

That's a "scientifically ethical" risk.

 

What if we found, say, Ebola virus, on Mars? Would we thump ourselves on the head for not sterilizing EVERY component of the equipment, or would we profess "life on Mars found!". Fortunately, space agencies have taken this into consideration (being the smart folk that they are) and the Mars rovers, for example, should not contaminate Mars at all. (barring the minute losses of steel and plastic and whatever else; and of course the final trash heap)

[freeztar]

I found a good article on landing balloons. Unfortunately they don't give numbers, but it seems like a good way to go. The explosive technique can also be used as a coolant through condensation.

 

'Instant bubblewrap' makes for soft planetary landings - tech - 29 January 2008 - New Scientist Tech

[alexander]

and nobody has thought of doing cool geeky things yet, eh?

 

I am available if you guys want to make the project just one bit more geeky ;)

 

already know what we need basically too:

 

the big boomy boosty thingy to bring the rover where it needs to go, i suggest a multiple high altitude balloon launch platform for the mission, chemical energy/weight saving would be enormous :xx:

 

and you will need autonomous control for the mission (mind you this is all software based)... so i was thinking, we could send some really crazy device up in space, like a wireless router that will do all sorts of insane things.... or one of those eee pcs without the monitor ofcourse, or something like that... that would be real elite, can you imagine wearing a shirt that say "i landed a wireless router on the moon"...

 

hmm, what else... can we make the craft into a giant wireless antenna, for the longest 802.11n communication?

 

need a cool way to land, since parachute won't quite work, and the airbag method has been used already, i suggest releasing a set of explosive devices, set to explode in precise places at precise times to slow the craft down using directed shockwaves...

 

ooh another cool way to crash would be to send one of those exit ramp protective boxes made of plastic and styrofoam...

 

also it would be cool to have a web cam on the moon.... just throwing some thoughts out there...

[freeztar]

and nobody has thought of doing cool geeky things yet, eh?

 

Yes, we have! :xx:

I am available if you guys want to make the project just one bit more geeky :)

 

Cool!

the big boomy boosty thingy to bring the rover where it needs to go, i suggest a multiple high altitude balloon launch platform for the mission, chemical energy/weight saving would be enormous ;)

Can you go into more details about this?

 

and you will need autonomous control for the mission (mind you this is all software based)... so i was thinking, we could send some really crazy device up in space, like a wireless router that will do all sorts of insane things.... or one of those eee pcs without the monitor ofcourse, or something like that... that would be real elite, can you imagine wearing a shirt that say "i landed a wireless router on the moon"...

TBD beat you to it. He suggested using a router and setting up a web page that would be used to control the camera-equipped rovers from Earth, using php or something.

 

More here:

http://hypography.com/forums/spaceship-design/13028-lunar-computer-software-team.html

 

hmm, what else... can we make the craft into a giant wireless antenna, for the longest 802.11n communication?

Yep.

 

need a cool way to land, since parachute won't quite work, and the airbag method has been used already, i suggest releasing a set of explosive devices, set to explode in precise places at precise times to slow the craft down using directed shockwaves...

This thread has touched on the subject pretty extensively and would be a good place to suggest your idea.

 

Here are some other related threads:

http://hypography.com/forums/spaceship-design/13132-lunar-mission-sim.html

http://hypography.com/forums/spaceship-design/13149-lunar-exploration-history.html

http://hypography.com/forums/spaceship-design/13007-team-solid-state.html

http://hypography.com/forums/spaceship-design/13121-team-tuttle-park-rover.html

[alexander]

Can you go into more details about this?

certainly, you as a space person, should be aware of where the majority of chemical energy of a rocket is spent. right, to accelerate the craft over the first 10000feet. the air is dense here, and it takes lots of energy to propel a vehicle through it. This is why for a very long time, russians, in their Buran project, were working on creating a flying shuttle launch platform, because the energy saving is termendous, so, you need less fuel, which means less weight and ability to use a smaller craft. This is also why the original x-prize used a plane to launch the "runner" (i think they called it) which had the rocket booster that then accelerated the craft to where it needed to go...

 

I suggest a similar design, only instead of a plane, it would be cool to use high altitude balloons, and thinking about the weight of the craft, most likely multiple high altitude baloons, to get the craft to over 10000feet, in fact to something like 100-120 000 feet prior to using rocket boosters to then break the earth's pull... I'm a math person, but i'm not a rocketry person, so i can not give you precise figures, but maybe someone with rocketry experience can, but it would be a hefty amount of fuel that would take you 35km up.... though it's still miniscule compared to the totel distance that is needed to travel, methinks its the biggest friction barrier for the mission :phones:

 

i think i'll stop here and go start working on changing over my linux install to xubuntu on my mac (dont worry it's a dual boot)

[freeztar]

Thanks for the explanation Alex, it's an interesting idea.

My first thought is "Why aren't we employing this method already?". I can only assume that there is a logical reason for not using this method, else space agencies would be using it. Perhaps the amount of balloons needed is impractical? Not enough lift? I'm not sure, but it would need some number crunching to verify the possibility.

 

I think I'll stop here and go check out xubuntu.