NASA Contest: Design an Electro-Mechanical Arm

公開説明ボード

• 

  MarkBravo1

  • 5年間前

  Thank you so much. So much effort and great ideas in this contest, from everybody. Honestly, I feel lucky.

  • 5年間前
• 
  コンテスト所有者

  • 5年間前

  Please join us in congratulating Marco Saul C. as the winner for this challenge. This submission was the lowest mass solution that provided all of the required supporting data. Thanks to all of the participants for all of your hard work on this challenge. The judging panel was very impressed with the submitted designs.

  • 5年間前
• 

  engAngelov

  • 5年間前

  Hi is it possible to extend like 10 minutes

  • 5年間前
  もっとメッセージ3を表示
  1. 
     コンテスト所有者

     • 5年間前

     Thanks Mark M. Note that we are also planning another wave of 3-6 contests as soon as they are ready.

     • 5年間前
  2. 

     DepartmentS

     • 5年間前

     Good show. Definitely be keeping an eye out for them.

     • 5年間前
• 

  Dasing7

  • 5年間前

  Thank you very much, Nasacoeci
  Greetings to all from Argentina!
  David

  • 5年間前
• 
  コンテスト所有者

  • 5年間前

  This contest is now closed. Thank you for all of your hard work on some really great designs. The team will be evaluating the submissions and announcing the winners as soon as we can (likely about 1-2 weeks). There are several other contests currently active with even more launching this month. We look forward to seeing more of this amazing talent! Thanks!

  • 5年間前
• 

  Jun01

  • 5年間前

  #extended 3 days. please?

  • 5年間前
  1. 
     コンテスト所有者

     • 5年間前

     Sorry, but we extended by 10 days already and will not be able to extend any more.

     • 5年間前
• 

  engAngelov

  • 5年間前

  Hi please extend a few more hours. I am doing the finishing touches #extended

  • 5年間前
  1. 
     コンテスト所有者

     • 5年間前

     Sorry, but we extended by 10 days already and will not be able to extend any more.

     • 5年間前
• 

  abhijeetk829

  • 5年間前

  I need to ask one thing, how are we supposed to calculate the mass of our design if we don't know what material is it made of ?

  • 5年間前
  1. 
     コンテスト所有者

     • 5年間前

     You need to select a material for your design and calculate the mass based on the selected material.

     • 5年間前
• 

  Jun01

  • 5年間前

  #extended

  • 5年間前
• 

  alalkhanfl93

  • 5年間前

  Hello Sir, Please check my designs #28 #29 #30 #31 #32 Thank you very much

  • 5年間前
• 

  varunvp

  • 5年間前

  Dear NASA, will I also have to design the housing for the mechanisms?

  • 5年間前
  1. 
     コンテスト所有者

     • 5年間前

     We are looking for a complete design per the required specifications. I don't believe there is a specific housing requirement, but there should be protection from humans or debris getting caught in mechanisms or being exposed to any hazard.

     • 5年間前
• 

  varunvp

  • 5年間前

  Also can you or anyone explain me what loop of material means? I asked this in an earlier challenge, but I don't remember the answer, and their comments section is closed.

  • 5年間前
  1. 
     コンテスト所有者

     • 5年間前

     Here is the Q&A exchange from the AM: "Please could you elaborate on requirement 14 regarding loops of material not greater than 25.4mm.
     When is it applicable? Would a finger of a grabber be regarded as a loop of material?
     Maybe by providing an example or purpose would help contextualize this requirement.
     Thank you in advance."

     • 5年間前
  2. 
     コンテスト所有者

     • 5年間前

     Answer: R14 is included as a requirement to reduce the likelihood that Astrobee would get entangled on part of the AM when it is attached to a Handrail. An example of a loop of material that would violate this requirement would be a loop of cable or string that extends 40 mm away from the rest of the structure of your solution in the Attached configuration.

     • 5年間前
• 

  Yashaswi26

  • 5年間前

  Hey NTL, maybe #extended by some time please, I'm working on it and I really want to submit a solution this time. Thanks

  • 5年間前
  1. 
     コンテスト所有者

     • 5年間前

     This contest has already been extended by 10 days, so I don't think there will be any further extensions. We hope you will be able to make the deadline. Thanks.

     • 5年間前
• 

  DepartmentS

  • 5年間前

  Problems -
  
  1: Tilting Action: (90°)I can get the Bee to park its arse at the correct position relative to the handles centoid. Problem is I can't get the Bee to adopt the correct zero position at the beginning. I can fix the problem by introducing a soft release mechanism to raise and lower the height of the docking arm relative to the Bee's body– as Bee tilts the mechanism releases in parity and that way transitions fine.
  
  Is a thing like that going to be a problem or can I get away with a centimeter(ish) too high at the horizontal zero position - for now at any rate?

  • 5年間前
  もっとメッセージ11を表示
  1. 
     コンテスト所有者

     • 5年間前

     @Mark M, First question: Confirm Yes or No?
     
     Sorry for the confusion. The offset zero point (the fact tha the Handrail is not always aligned with the centerline of Astrobee when attaching starts) is a byproduct of the fact that Astrobee may not be able to perfectly allign with the ISS Handrail. Once you have attached you may move the Astrobee to any point you choose or reallign astrobee as you see fit.
     
     @Varun V:
     
     The Astrobee once parked, can not rotate, but works to allign the flat face of the open side with the wall, to which the ISS Handrail is attached to.
     
     @Mark M: Second question: Unless it's something....
     
     We wish the EMA to be able to attach to an ISS Handrail within this region as there could be errors with the Astrobee's positioning.
     
     @Mark M: Third question: Appreciated. Thank you....
     
     Standby... will post a response when we have one.

     • 5年間前
  2. 

     DepartmentS

     • 5年間前

     Good, good NASA - thank you. And all in words I can understand as well. Priceless.
     
     Since we have demonstrated you could - if you needed to - pan the unit with an off-set start-point I don't really need to go into that in any great depth in any proposal. You've got an animated simulation, it just needs referencing.
     
     Now I understand that the presence of the off-set is simply a contingency - that makes life a whole lot easier. Thank you.
     
     My - and everyone else's - sincere appreciation.
     
     Have a good weekend, assuming NASA takes weekends.
     
     M : )

     • 5年間前
• 

  Myrds

  • 5年間前

  Hello NASA, during doing some interference testing, the nearest coordinates of X(as tested), any values of Z that is aligned with the Astrobee Keep Out Zone, and Y= -25mm, (X, -25, Z), when tilted at +90 degrees seems that the handrail will collide with the Astrobee Keep Out Zone. This is already at the maximum given data wherein the Point of Center Rotation from the Centroid of the Handrail is already R=130mm. Is it ok to add 10mm to the given radial reference, wherein adding an approximate of 10mm will prevent collision? Or shall I just use the maximum value of 130mm. Kindly correct me if I am wrong, thank you.

  • 5年間前
  もっとメッセージ5を表示
  1. 
     コンテスト所有者

     • 5年間前

     The EMA is required to move as necessary to prevent its internal parts from colliding with itself or the Astrobee and to prevent the Astrobee from hitting the handrail. The point of rotation may change as well as necessary within the point of rotation acceptable region.

     • 5年間前
  2. 

     Myrds

     • 5年間前

     Thank you NASA

     • 5年間前
• 

  MarkBravo1

  • 5年間前

  Hallo. Just a question regarding the next statements:
  
  “…a mechanical system that will be driven and controlled by electrical components (like motors, switches, and sensors). However, you are not required to design or select those components”
  
  So... I don’t have to implement a specific actuator model, right? but just to indicate the type of actuator and reasonably depict its housing in the design. But… if so, do I have to exclude the actuators from the mass estimation then?

  • 5年間前
  1. 
     コンテスト所有者

     • 5年間前

     We expect things that are powered by electricity and a command signal that create movement to be listed in the mass and parts list. If you have a specific model of a component that is commercially available, its information would be appreciated when assessing feasibility, but you don't need to select a specific one (It just should be grounded in reality) or you could develop or design your own.

     • 5年間前
• 

  varunvp

  • 5年間前

  Dear NASA, I want to know if you can accept small custom designed parts in the design, or do you want them to be from standard sources.

  • 5年間前
  1. 

     DepartmentS

     • 5年間前

     Actually - good question. I guess it makes sense to use off-the-shelf parts where ever possible - but at the end of the day the job is to build as low a mass solution as possible that doesn't compromise on strength and function. You're really not going to find all the bits to do that in RadioShack...
     
     Though, upon saying that – IKEA really do do some interesting bits.
     
     Were standard parts a necessary criteria it's beholden to NASA to state as such from the onset. Since they haven't, I'd say this was a challenge that demanded design.
     
     I mean, let's be realistic – this is an (in part) Government funded body here. Whatever solution we do come up with – astronauts are going to be stuck with it for decades. Possibly even centuries.
     
     Our duty here is to make it cleaver, as well as easy to fix.

     • 5年間前
  2. 
     コンテスト所有者

     • 5年間前

     Custom designed parts are acceptable.

     • 5年間前
• 

  varunvp

  • 5年間前

  #extended It would be nice if you could extend the competition. Broke my head attempting to solve the last 2 challenges, couldn't spend time on this!

  • 5年間前
  もっとメッセージ12を表示
  1. 

     TriassicXYZ

     • 5年間前

     @Mark M, Don't get me wrong, I totally understand your point of view, I was just trying to say that NASA has good reasons to make us submit in a particular format. Anyway, lets leave it up to NASA to decide how they want it. Very good conversation though :)

     • 5年間前
  2. 

     DepartmentS

     • 5年間前

     : )... Thank you. And yes - as to that last - they're already committed to the course they're on, so absolutely no point (myself) belabouring the point, I entirely agree. Besides - they do seem rather fixed on a pre-determined solution here. I expect the clue's probably in the title, not really that much wiggle-room in terms of anticipated approach.
     
     Irrespective – a material – as opposed to a typical, wholly mechanical - solution would have been fun to noodle around with.
     
     A mechanical arm seems an awfully over-engineered approach to accomplishing a relatively straightforward physical task.
     
     All this thing actually has to do is extend, attach and remain stiff enough to give the AstroBee something fixed it can mechanically pivot itself around, precisely without drifting all over the shop.
     
     An approach along these kind if lines would be perfect:
     
     https://tinyurl.com/Origami-Robot-Arm
     
     https://sproboticworks.com/blog/drone-has-retracting-arms-that-allow-it-to

     • 5年間前
• 
  コンテスト所有者

  • 5年間前

  We have extended this contest by 10 days. Best of luck!

  • 5年間前
• 

  MarkBravo1

  • 5年間前

  #extended An extension would be nice. Please consider it. Thanks.

  • 5年間前
• 

  Jun01

  • 5年間前

  Is the EMA responsible for orienting the Astrobee within proper distance and axial alignment to the ISS handrail, or is orienting/alignment of the Astrobee to the handrail done by maneuvering the Astrobee into position during flight prior to EMA deployment?

  • 5年間前
  1. 
     コンテスト所有者

     • 5年間前

     The EMA is to orient Astrobee with no help after EMA deployment.

     • 5年間前
• 

  FernandoHG11

  • 5年間前

  Good afternoon. I have a question, in the section 6 (Design Drawings), What do you mean with Attached to an ISS Handrail at (300 mm, 50 mm, -95 mm) ?

  • 5年間前
  1. 
     コンテスト所有者

     • 5年間前

     For EMA, there is a working envelop in which the ISS Handrail could be. The coordinates (300, 50, -95) are the location of a Handrail.

     • 5年間前
• 

  TriassicXYZ

  • 5年間前

  Please consider an extension, #extended

  • 5年間前
• 

  Myrds

  • 5年間前

  #extended . Kindly consider extending for the document creation. Thank you.

  • 5年間前
• 

  ricedylan3

  • 5年間前

  Hi I'm a little confused as to when this contest is ending? The PDF problem description says the 5th but the web page says its running for another week and three days? Thanks in advance for clarifying!

  • 5年間前
  1. 
     コンテスト所有者

     • 5年間前

     The PDF includes our original schedule which has since been adjusted. The web page is correct. Sorry for any confusion.

     • 5年間前
• 

  yesidgp

  • 5年間前

  Hi, someone please could clarify for me the screw hole designation. It says "4 x Ø 3 8-32 UNC 4 mm deep". The part I need help with is "3 8-32". Thanks in advance.

  • 5年間前
  もう一つメッセージを見る
  1. 
     コンテスト所有者

     • 5年間前

     The screw holes in the Astrobee Interface Plate are Unified Thread Standard UNC #8-32 coarse thread holes, which are 4mm deep.

     • 5年間前
  2. 

     yesidgp

     • 5年間前

     Thanks! Contest Holder.

     • 5年間前

コメントをもっと見る