Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T18:41:36.192Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Robotic magnetic mapping with the Kapvik planetary micro-rover

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 July 2017

A. Hay Open the ORCID record for A. Hay [Opens in a new window] ,
C. Samson  and
A. Ellery
A. Hay*
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1S 5B6, Canada
C. Samson
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1S 5B6, Canada
A. Ellery
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1S 5B6, Canada
*
e-mail: andrewhay@cmail.carleton.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Geomagnetic data gathering by micro-rovers is gaining momentum both for future planetary exploration missions and for terrestrial applications in extreme environments. This paper presents research into the integration of a planetary micro-rover with a potassium total-field magnetometer. The 40 kg Kapvik micro-rover is an ideal platform due to an aluminium construction and a rocker-bogie mobility system, which provides good manoeuvrability and terrainability. A light-weight GSMP 35U (uninhabited aerial vehicle) magnetometer, comprised of a 0.65 kg sensor and 0.63 kg electronics module, was mounted to the chassis via a custom 1.21 m composite boom. The boom dimensions were optimized to be an effective compromise between noise mitigation and mechanical practicality. An analysis using the fourth difference method was performed estimating the magnetic noise envelope at ±0.03 nT at 10 Hz sampling frequency from the integrated systems during robotic operations. A robotic magnetic survey captured the total magnetic intensity along three parallel 40 m long lines and a perpendicular 15 m long tie line over the course of 3.75 h. The total magnetic intensity data were corrected for diurnal variations, levelled by linear interpolation of tie-line intersection points, corrected for a regional gradient, and then interpolated using Delaunay triangulation to lead a residual magnetic intensity map. This map exhibited an anomalous linear feature corresponding to a magnetic dipole 650 nT in amplitude. This feature coincides with a storm sewer buried approximately 2 m in the subsurface. This work provides benchmark methodologies and data to guide future integration of magnetometers on board planetary micro-rovers.

Keywords

cultural targetsgeophysical surveyingmagnetic interferencemagnetic methodmicro-roverrover-sensor integration
Type
Research Article
Information
International Journal of Astrobiology , Volume 17 , Special Issue 3: Robotic Astrobiology , July 2018 , pp. 218 - 227
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Banerdt, W.B. et al. (2013). InSight: a discovery mission to explore the interior of Mars. In 44th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, The Woodlands.Google Scholar
Boivin, A. et al. (2013). Electromagnetic induction sounding and 3D laser imaging in support of a Mars methane analogue mission. Planet. Space Sci. 82–83, 27–33.Google Scholar
Castano, R. et al. (2007). Oasis: onboard autonomous science investigation system for opportunistic rover science. J. Field Robot. 24(5), 379–397.Google Scholar
Ciarletti, V. et al. (2011). WISDOM GPR designed for shallow and high-resolution sounding of the Martian subsurface. Proc. IEEE 99(5), 824–836.Google Scholar
Coles, R.L. (1988). Proceedings of the international workshop on magnetic observatory instruments. Geol. Surv. Canada 88(17), 22–33.Google Scholar
Coyle, M. et al. 2014. Geological Survey of Canada aeromagnetic surveys: design, quality assurance, and data dissemination, s.l.: Geological Survey of Canada, Open File 7660.Google Scholar
Dartnell, L.R., Desorgher, L., Ward, J.M. & Coates, A.J. (2007). Martian sub-surface ionising radiation: biosignatures and geology. Biogeosci. Discuss. Euro. Geosci. Union 4(1), 455–492.Google Scholar
Dolginov, S.S. et al. (1976). Study of magnetic field, rock magnetization and lunear electrical conductivity in the Bay Le Monnier. Moon 15(1), 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyal, P. & Gordon, D. (1973). Lunar surface magnetometers. IEEE Trans. Magnet. 9(3), 226–231.Google Scholar
Ellery, A. (2015). Planetary rovers: robotic exploration of the solar system. Springer. Published in association with Praxis Publishing, Chichester, UK.Google Scholar
Gallant, M.J., Ellery, A. & Marshall, J.A. (2013). Rover-Based autonomous science by probabilistic identification and evaluation. J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 72(3–4), 591–613.Google Scholar
Heinzel, G., Rüdiger, A. & Schilling, R. (2002). Spectrum and spectral density estimation by the Discrete Fourier transform (DFT), including a comprehensive list of window functions and some new at-top windows. [Online] Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0013-557A-5Google Scholar
Hamran, S.-E. et al. (2015). RIMFAX: A GPR for the Mars 2020 rover mission. s.l., Proc. the 8th Int. Workshop on Advanced Ground Penetrating Radar.Google Scholar
Hrvoic, I. & Hollyer, G.M. (2015). Brief Review of Quantum Magnetometers. [Online] Available at: http://www.gemsys.ca/pdf/MM3_GEM_Brief_Review_of_Quantum_Magnetometers.pdf [Accessed March 2015].Google Scholar
Lee, D.T. & Schachter, B.J. (1980). Two algorithms for constructing a Delaunay triangulation. Int. J. Comput. Inf. Sci. 9(3), 219–242.Google Scholar
Lillis, R.J. et al. (2011). Mars’ Ancient Dynamo and Crustal Remanent Magnetism – Whitepaper. s.l.: NASA: [Online] Available at: https://mepag.jpl.nasa.gov/reports/decadal/Decadal_survey_Whitepaper_Mars_crustal_magnetism-final-20090818.pdfGoogle Scholar
Liu, G., Liu, Y., Zhang, H., Gao, X., Yuan, J. & Zheng, W. (2015). The kapvik robotic mast: an innovative onboard robotic arm for planetary exploration rovers. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine. 22(1), pp.34–44.Google Scholar
Lorenz, R.D., Jones, J.A. & Wu, J.J. (2003). Mars magnetometry from a tumbleweed rover. IEEEAC (1054).Google Scholar
Meglich, T.M., Williams, M.C., Hodges, S.M. & DeMarco, M.J. (2003). Subsurface Geophysical Imaging of Lava Tubes, Lava Beds National Monument, California. 3rd International Conference on Applied Geophysics, Orlando.Google Scholar
Ness, N.F. (1979). The magnetic fields of Mercury, Mars, and Moon. Ann. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 7, 249–288.Google Scholar
Qadi, A. et al. (2015). Mars methane analogue mission: mission simulation and rover operations at Jeffrey mine and Norbestos mine, Quebec Canada. Adv. Space Res. 55(10), 2414–2426.Google Scholar
Samson, C. et al. (2017). Combined electromagnetic geophysical mapping at Arctic perennial saline springs: possible applications for the detection of water in the shallow subsurface of Mars.. Adv. Space Res. 59, 2325–2334.Google Scholar
Setterfield, T.P. & Ellery, A. (2013). Terrain response estimation using an instrumental rocker-bogie mobility system. IEEE Trans. Robot. 1(29), 172–188.Google Scholar
Teskey, D.J. et al. (1991). Guide to aeromagnetic specifications and contracts, s.l.: Geological Survey of Canada, Open File 2349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trigg, D.F. & Olson, D.G. (1990). Pendulously suspended magnetometer sensors. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 61(10), 2632–2636.Google Scholar
Vanyan, L.L. et al. (1979). Electrical conductivity anomaly beneath mare serenitatis detected by Lunokhod 2 and Apollo 16 magnetometers. Moon Planets 21(2), 185–192.Google Scholar
Weiss, B.P. et al. (2014). Mars Compass: A Magnetometer for the Mars 2020 Rover. s.l., 45th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference.Google Scholar
Woods, M. et al. (2009). Autonomous science for an ExoMars Rover-like mission. J. Field Robot. 26(4), 358–390.Google Scholar