DOCSLIB.ORG

Bhermalyn KISS Workshop Im

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bhermalyn KISS Workshop Im Impacts KISS Workshop 7/23/13 Brendan Hermalyn University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI Deep Impact LCROSS O. R. Hainaut et al.: P/2010 A2 LINEAR 5 Aladdin N E Sun P 2010/ A2 Linear Vel N E Sun Vel N E Sun Vel N E Sun Vel Fig. 2. Continued. From top to bottom, images from UT 19.5 Jan. 2010 using GN, UT 22.3, 23.4, 25.3 Jan. 2010 using UH 2.2-m. Artificial Lunar Impacts V (km/s) Mass (kg) Angle Crater Size Ranger 7 2.62 365.6 64° 14 Ranger 8 2.65 369.7 42° 13x14 Ranger 9 2.67 369.7 - 16 Apollo 13 2.58 13925 76° 41 Apollo 14 2.54 14916 69° 39 LCROSS 2.5 2200 >85° 25 Grail 1.6 200 ~2° 5 Baldwin (1967), Moore (1968,1971), Whitaker (1971) Overview: •Why use impacts? New experimental methods and data •enabling novel missions •Why we care: - Cratering as a sensing tool Examination of Subsurface •Spectrometers? - Limited depth (~70cm) and resolving abilities (is it water or H?) •Lander? - Expensive - Difficult to land and excavate on small bodies - Excavator depth is limited - Unknown surface properties can negate methodology •Impactor? - Allows examination of subsurface and material properties (what’s down there? Grain size? Etc.,) - Excellent for initial survey - Cheap DI: $330M LCROSS: $79M <$.1M-$10sM NASA Ames Vertical Gun Range Impact Relevance • Ejecta: • Where does it go? • Where does it come from? • Volatile Release: • Heating during impact • Heating in sunlight • Ejecta return scouring and heating What can the ejecta tell you about the •subsurface? - Strength - Density - Homogeneity/Layering - Materials - Etc. How can a small impacts guide future •investigations? (ISRU, excavator design) 100 ● ● 100 10 ● ● gR ● ● √ 10 / ● e V ● gR ● √ 1 / ● e ! Anderson, et al, (2003) V 1 Cintala, et al, (1999) ! Anderson, et al, (2003) Piekutowski (1980) Cintala, et al, (1999) Piekutowski (1980) Housen, et al (1983) Housen, et al (1983) 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 xe/R xe/R Main-stage Scaling (vertical impacts) 100 Position: ● ● 10 100 ● ● gR ● √ ● 10 / ● e V ● gR ● √ 1 / ● e ! Anderson, et al, (2003) V 1 Cintala, et al, (1999) ! Anderson, et al, (2003) Piekutowski (1980) Cintala, et al, (1999) Housen, et al (1983) Piekutowski (1980) Housen, et al (1983) Time: 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 xe/R xe/R µ cδν V µ δν V Relies on Coupling I = µF ν ,pΠi = p i C = aVi δ ν m ν µ Parameter: Viδ cµ δ c ✓✓ t ◆◆ ✓ t ◆ [Housen, et al 1983] 100 Minimum Ve for LCROSS ? Sunlight Horizon ● ● 100 10 ● ● gR ● ● √ 10 / ● e V ● gR ● √ 1 / ● e ! Anderson, et al, (2003) V 1 Cintala, et al, (1999) ! Anderson, et al, (2003) Piekutowski (1980) Cintala, et al, (1999) Piekutowski (1980) Housen, et al (1983) Housen, et al (1983) 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 xe/R xe/R Planned Impacts Standard Impact Mission Hollow, Low-density, Solid Spheres / flyer plates Irregular Shape 5 km/s and up 2.5 km/s ? Sand or Solid Material Unconsolidated, compressible regolith Shock Heating Low Peak Pressure Almost vertical (90 degrees) 20-70 degrees to grazing Okeefe, J. D. & Ahrens, T. J. 1977 2000 Schultz 1996 LCROSS IR Camera Hypothetical Case: Cubesat Mission - 2.5km/s - 1.3kg - 10cmˆ3 - Into the moon How Much? 5 x 10 6 100 50m 50m 100m 100m 5 500m 80 500m 1000m 1000m 4 60 3 LCROSS 40 Cubesat 2 20 1 Cumulative Mass above height (kg) Cumulative Mass above height (kg) 0 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 100 200 300 400 Time After Impact (sec) Time After Impact (sec) From Hermalyn and Schultz, 2012 From Where? y prime vs tau Prime 0 5 10 y/a 15 20 25 1 0 1 2 3 10 10 10 10 10 Volume Vs. Time 0 τ ! 10 1 10 3 Target c 2 Surface x 10 V/R } 3 ! 10 yy 4 } 10 5 10 4 3 2 1 10 10 10 10 From Hermalyn and Schultz, 2012 t/Tc.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • An Impacting Descent Probe for Europa and the Other Galilean Moons of Jupiter
    An Impacting Descent Probe for Europa and the other Galilean Moons of Jupiter P. Wurz1,*, D. Lasi1, N. Thomas1, D. Piazza1, A. Galli1, M. Jutzi1, S. Barabash2, M. Wieser2, W. Magnes3, H. Lammer3, U. Auster4, L.I. Gurvits5,6, and W. Hajdas7 1) Physikalisches Institut, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland, 2) Swedish Institute of Space Physics, Kiruna, Sweden, 3) Space Research Institute, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Graz, Austria, 4) Institut f. Geophysik u. Extraterrestrische Physik, Technische Universität, Braunschweig, Germany, 5) Joint Institute for VLBI ERIC, Dwingelo, The Netherlands, 6) Department of Astrodynamics and Space Missions, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands 7) Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen, Switzerland. *) Corresponding author, [email protected], Tel.: +41 31 631 44 26, FAX: +41 31 631 44 05 1 Abstract We present a study of an impacting descent probe that increases the science return of spacecraft orbiting or passing an atmosphere-less planetary bodies of the solar system, such as the Galilean moons of Jupiter. The descent probe is a carry-on small spacecraft (< 100 kg), to be deployed by the mother spacecraft, that brings itself onto a collisional trajectory with the targeted planetary body in a simple manner. A possible science payload includes instruments for surface imaging, characterisation of the neutral exosphere, and magnetic field and plasma measurement near the target body down to very low-altitudes (~1 km), during the probe’s fast (~km/s) descent to the surface until impact. The science goals and the concept of operation are discussed with particular reference to Europa, including options for flying through water plumes and after-impact retrieval of very-low altitude science data.
    [Show full text]
  • Jjmonl 1603.Pmd
    alactic Observer GJohn J. McCarthy Observatory Volume 9, No. 3 March 2016 GRAIL - On the Trail of the Moon's Missing Mass GRAIL (Gravity Recovery and Interior Laboratory) was a NASA scientific mission in 2011/12 to map the surface of the moon and collect data on gravitational anomalies. The image here is an artist's impres- sion of the twin satellites (Ebb and Flow) orbiting in tandem above a gravitational image of the moon. See inside, page 4 for information on gravitational anomalies (mascons) or visit http://solarsystem. nasa.gov/grail. The John J. McCarthy Observatory Galactic Observer New Milford High School Editorial Committee 388 Danbury Road Managing Editor New Milford, CT 06776 Bill Cloutier Phone/Voice: (860) 210-4117 Production & Design Phone/Fax: (860) 354-1595 www.mccarthyobservatory.org Allan Ostergren Website Development JJMO Staff Marc Polansky It is through their efforts that the McCarthy Observatory Technical Support has established itself as a significant educational and Bob Lambert recreational resource within the western Connecticut Dr. Parker Moreland community. Steve Barone Jim Johnstone Colin Campbell Carly KleinStern Dennis Cartolano Bob Lambert Mike Chiarella Roger Moore Route Jeff Chodak Parker Moreland, PhD Bill Cloutier Allan Ostergren Cecilia Dietrich Marc Polansky Dirk Feather Joe Privitera Randy Fender Monty Robson Randy Finden Don Ross John Gebauer Gene Schilling Elaine Green Katie Shusdock Tina Hartzell Paul Woodell Tom Heydenburg Amy Ziffer In This Issue "OUT THE WINDOW ON YOUR LEFT" ............................... 4 SUNRISE AND SUNSET ...................................................... 13 MARE HUMBOLDTIANIUM AND THE NORTHEAST LIMB ......... 5 JUPITER AND ITS MOONS ................................................. 13 ONE YEAR IN SPACE ....................................................... 6 TRANSIT OF JUPITER'S RED SPOT ....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lunar Orbiter Ii
    NASA CONTRACTOR NASA CR-883 REPORT LUNAR ORBITER II Photographic Mission Summary Prepared by THE BOEING COMPANY Seattle, Wash. for Langley Research Center NATIONAl AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION • WASHINGTON, D. C. • OCTOBER 1967 THE CRATER COPERNICUS - Photo taken by NASA-Boeing Lunar Orbiter II, November 23, 1966,00:05:42 GMT, from a distance of 150 miles. NASA CR-883 LUNAR ORBITER II Photographic Mission Summary Distribution of this report is provided in the interest of information exchange. Responsibility for the contents resides in the author or organization that prepared it. Issued by Originator as Document No. D2-100752-1 Prepared under Contract No. NAS 1-3800 by THE BOEING COMPANY Seattle, Wash. for Langley Research Center NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION For sole by the Clearinghouse for Federal Scientific and Technical Information Springfield, Virginia 22151 - CFSTI price $3.00 CONTENTS Page No. 1.0 LUNAR ORBITER II MISSION SUMMARY 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION 4 1.1.1 Program Description 4 1.1.2 Program Management 5 1.1.3 Program Objectives 6 1.1.3.1 Mission II Objectives 6 1.1.4 Mission Design 8 1.1.5 Flight Vehicle Description 12 1.2 LAUNCH PREPARATION AND OPERATIONS 19 1.2.1 Launch Vehicle Preparation 19 1.2.2 Spacecraft Preparation 21 1.2.3 Launch Countdown 21 1.2.4 Launch Phase 22 1.2.4.1 Flight Vehicle Performance 22 1.2.5 Data Acquisition 24 1.3 MISSION OPERATIONS 29 1.3.1 Mission Profile 29 1.3.2 Spacecraft Performance 31 1.3.2.1 Photo Subsystem Performance 32 1.3.2.2 Power Subsystem Performance 34 1.3.2.3 Communications
    [Show full text]
  • Photographs Written Historical and Descriptive
    CAPE CANAVERAL AIR FORCE STATION, MISSILE ASSEMBLY HAER FL-8-B BUILDING AE HAER FL-8-B (John F. Kennedy Space Center, Hanger AE) Cape Canaveral Brevard County Florida PHOTOGRAPHS WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD SOUTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior 100 Alabama St. NW Atlanta, GA 30303 HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD CAPE CANAVERAL AIR FORCE STATION, MISSILE ASSEMBLY BUILDING AE (Hangar AE) HAER NO. FL-8-B Location: Hangar Road, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS), Industrial Area, Brevard County, Florida. USGS Cape Canaveral, Florida, Quadrangle. Universal Transverse Mercator Coordinates: E 540610 N 3151547, Zone 17, NAD 1983. Date of Construction: 1959 Present Owner: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Present Use: Home to NASA’s Launch Services Program (LSP) and the Launch Vehicle Data Center (LVDC). The LVDC allows engineers to monitor telemetry data during unmanned rocket launches. Significance: Missile Assembly Building AE, commonly called Hangar AE, is nationally significant as the telemetry station for NASA KSC’s unmanned Expendable Launch Vehicle (ELV) program. Since 1961, the building has been the principal facility for monitoring telemetry communications data during ELV launches and until 1995 it processed scientifically significant ELV satellite payloads. Still in operation, Hangar AE is essential to the continuing mission and success of NASA’s unmanned rocket launch program at KSC. It is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) under Criterion A in the area of Space Exploration as Kennedy Space Center’s (KSC) original Mission Control Center for its program of unmanned launch missions and under Criterion C as a contributing resource in the CCAFS Industrial Area Historic District.
    [Show full text]
  • Apollo Over the Moon: a View from Orbit (Nasa Sp-362)
    chl APOLLO OVER THE MOON: A VIEW FROM ORBIT (NASA SP-362) Chapter 1 - Introduction Harold Masursky, Farouk El-Baz, Frederick J. Doyle, and Leon J. Kosofsky [For a high resolution picture- click here] Objectives [1] Photography of the lunar surface was considered an important goal of the Apollo program by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The important objectives of Apollo photography were (1) to gather data pertaining to the topography and specific landmarks along the approach paths to the early Apollo landing sites; (2) to obtain high-resolution photographs of the landing sites and surrounding areas to plan lunar surface exploration, and to provide a basis for extrapolating the concentrated observations at the landing sites to nearby areas; and (3) to obtain photographs suitable for regional studies of the lunar geologic environment and the processes that act upon it. Through study of the photographs and all other arrays of information gathered by the Apollo and earlier lunar programs, we may develop an understanding of the evolution of the lunar crust. In this introductory chapter we describe how the Apollo photographic systems were selected and used; how the photographic mission plans were formulated and conducted; how part of the great mass of data is being analyzed and published; and, finally, we describe some of the scientific results. Historically most lunar atlases have used photointerpretive techniques to discuss the possible origins of the Moon's crust and its surface features. The ideas presented in this volume also rely on photointerpretation. However, many ideas are substantiated or expanded by information obtained from the huge arrays of supporting data gathered by Earth-based and orbital sensors, from experiments deployed on the lunar surface, and from studies made of the returned samples.
    [Show full text]
  • Deep Space Chronicle Deep Space Chronicle: a Chronology of Deep Space and Planetary Probes, 1958–2000 | Asifa
    dsc_cover (Converted)-1 8/6/02 10:33 AM Page 1 Deep Space Chronicle Deep Space Chronicle: A Chronology ofDeep Space and Planetary Probes, 1958–2000 |Asif A.Siddiqi National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA SP-2002-4524 A Chronology of Deep Space and Planetary Probes 1958–2000 Asif A. Siddiqi NASA SP-2002-4524 Monographs in Aerospace History Number 24 dsc_cover (Converted)-1 8/6/02 10:33 AM Page 2 Cover photo: A montage of planetary images taken by Mariner 10, the Mars Global Surveyor Orbiter, Voyager 1, and Voyager 2, all managed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. Included (from top to bottom) are images of Mercury, Venus, Earth (and Moon), Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune. The inner planets (Mercury, Venus, Earth and its Moon, and Mars) and the outer planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune) are roughly to scale to each other. NASA SP-2002-4524 Deep Space Chronicle A Chronology of Deep Space and Planetary Probes 1958–2000 ASIF A. SIDDIQI Monographs in Aerospace History Number 24 June 2002 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Office of External Relations NASA History Office Washington, DC 20546-0001 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Siddiqi, Asif A., 1966­ Deep space chronicle: a chronology of deep space and planetary probes, 1958-2000 / by Asif A. Siddiqi. p.cm. – (Monographs in aerospace history; no. 24) (NASA SP; 2002-4524) Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Space flight—History—20th century. I. Title. II. Series. III. NASA SP; 4524 TL 790.S53 2002 629.4’1’0904—dc21 2001044012 Table of Contents Foreword by Roger D.
    [Show full text]
  • NASA and Planetary Exploration
    **EU5 Chap 2(263-300) 2/20/03 1:16 PM Page 263 Chapter Two NASA and Planetary Exploration by Amy Paige Snyder Prelude to NASA’s Planetary Exploration Program Four and a half billion years ago, a rotating cloud of gaseous and dusty material on the fringes of the Milky Way galaxy flattened into a disk, forming a star from the inner- most matter. Collisions among dust particles orbiting the newly-formed star, which humans call the Sun, formed kilometer-sized bodies called planetesimals which in turn aggregated to form the present-day planets.1 On the third planet from the Sun, several billions of years of evolution gave rise to a species of living beings equipped with the intel- lectual capacity to speculate about the nature of the heavens above them. Long before the era of interplanetary travel using robotic spacecraft, Greeks observing the night skies with their eyes alone noticed that five objects above failed to move with the other pinpoints of light, and thus named them planets, for “wan- derers.”2 For the next six thousand years, humans living in regions of the Mediterranean and Europe strove to make sense of the physical characteristics of the enigmatic planets.3 Building on the work of the Babylonians, Chaldeans, and Hellenistic Greeks who had developed mathematical methods to predict planetary motion, Claudius Ptolemy of Alexandria put forth a theory in the second century A.D. that the planets moved in small circles, or epicycles, around a larger circle centered on Earth.4 Only partially explaining the planets’ motions, this theory dominated until Nicolaus Copernicus of present-day Poland became dissatisfied with the inadequacies of epicycle theory in the mid-sixteenth century; a more logical explanation of the observed motions, he found, was to consider the Sun the pivot of planetary orbits.5 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Shoot the Moon – 1967
    Video Transcript for Archival Research Catalog (ARC) Identifier 45011 Assignment: Shoot the Moon – 1967 Narrator: The assignment was specific: get photographs of the surface of the Moon that are good enough to determine whether or not it’s safe for a man to land there. But appearances can be deceiving, just as deceiving as trying to get a good picture of, well, a candy apple. Doesn’t seem to be too much of a problem, just set it up, light it, and snap the picture. Easy, quick, simple. But it can be tough. To begin with, the apple is some distance away, so you can’t get to it to just set it up, light it, and so on. To make things even more difficult, it isn’t even holding still; it’s moving around in circles. Now timing is important. You have to take your picture when the apple is nearest to you so you get the most detail and when the light that’s available is at the best angle for the photo. And even that’s not all. You are moving too, in circles. You’re both turning and circling about the apple. Now, about that assignment. As the technology of man in space was developing, it became more and more apparent that our knowledge of the Moon’s surface as a possible landing site was not sufficient. To land man safely on the Moon and get him safely off again, we had to know whether we could set up a precise enough trajectory to reach the Moon.
    [Show full text]
  • OSIRIS-Rex Goes Asteroid Collecting
    OSIRIS-REx Goes Asteroid Collecting — Scott Messenger, NASA Johnson Space Center OSIRIS-REx is NASA’s third New Frontiers mission, following the New Horizons mission, which completed a flyby of Pluto in 2015, and the Juno mission to orbit Jupiter, which has just begun science operations. The OSIRIS-REx mission’s primary objective is to collect pristine surface samples of a carbonaceous asteroid and return them to Earth for analysis. Carbonaceous asteroids and comets are considered to be L “primitive” bodies that have preserved remnants of the solar system starting materials. By studying them, scientists can learn about the origin and earliest evolution of the solar system. The OSIRIS-REx spacecraft was launched on September 8, 2016, beginning its two- year journey to asteroid 101955 Bennu (formerly designated 1999 RQ36). After more than one year of detailed remote observations, OSIRIS-REx will obtain surface samples and return them to Earth in September 2023. The OSIRIS-REx proposal, led by the late Dr. Michael J. Drake, was selected during the 2011 New Frontiers competition, and is now led by Dr. Dante Lauretta of the University of Arizona. The Pmission name OSIRIS-REx (an acronym for Origins, Spectral Interpretation, Resource Identification, Security, Regolith Explorer) embodies five objectives: (1) Origins: Return and analyze a sample of a carbonaceous asteroid; (2) Spectral Interpretation: Provide ground truth for remote observations of asteroids; (3) Resource Identification: Determine the mineral and chemical makeup of a near-Earth asteroid; (4) Security: Directly measure the non-gravitational force known as the Yarkovsky effect, which changes asteroidal orbits through its Iinteraction with sunlight; and (5) Regolith Explorer: Determine the properties of unconsolidated material that covers the asteroid surface.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 9: the Flight of Apollo
    CHAPTER 9: The Flight of Apollo The design and engineering of machines capable of taking humans into space evolved over time, and so too did the philosophy and procedures for operating those machines in a space environment. MSC personnel not only managed the design and construction of space- craft, but the operation of those craft as well. Through the Mission Control Center, a mission control team with electronic tentacles linked the Apollo spacecraft and its three astronauts with components throughout the MSC, NASA, and the world. Through the flights of Apollo, MSC became a much more visible component of the NASA organization, and oper- ations seemingly became a dominant focus of its energies. Successful flight operations required having instant access to all of the engineering expertise that went into the design and fabrication of the spacecraft and the ability to draw upon a host of supporting groups and activities. N. Wayne Hale, Jr., who became a flight director for the later Space Transportation System (STS), or Space Shuttle, missions, compared the flights of Apollo and the Shuttle as equivalent to operating a very large and very complex battleship. Apollo had a flight crew of only three while the Shuttle had seven. Instead of the thousands on board being physically involved in operating the battleship, the thousands who helped the astronauts fly Apollo were on the ground and tied to the command and lunar modules by the very sophisticated and advanced electronic and computer apparatus housed in Mission Control.1 The flights of Apollo for the first time in history brought humans from Earth to walk upon another celes- tial body.
    [Show full text]
  • Workshop on Lunar Crater Observing and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS) Site Selection, P
    WORKSHOP PROGRAM AND ABSTRACTS LPI Contribution No. 1327 WWWOOORRRKKKSSSHHHOOOPPP OOONNN LLLUUUNNNAAARRR CCCRRRAAATTTEEERRR OOOBBBSSSEEERRRVVVIIINNNGGG AAANNNDDD SSSEEENNNSSSIIINNNGGG SSSAAATTTEEELLLLLLIIITTTEEE (((LLLCCCRRROOOSSSSSS))) SSSIIITTTEEE SSSEEELLLEEECCCTTTIIIOOONNN OOOCCCTTTOOOBBBEEERRR 111666,,, 222000000666 NNNAAASSSAAA AAAMMMEEESSS RRREEESSSEEEAAARRRCCCHHH CCCEEENNNTTTEEERRR MMMOOOFFFFFFEEETTTTTT FFFIIIEEELLLDDD,,, CCCAAALLLIIIFFFOOORRRNNNIIIAAA SSSPPPOOONNNSSSOOORRRSSS LCROSS Mission Project NASA Ames Research Center Lunar and Planetary Institute National Aeronautics and Space Administration SSSCCCIIIEEENNNTTTIIIFFFIIICCC OOORRRGGGAAANNNIIIZZZIIINNNGGG CCCOOOMMMMMMIIITTTTTTEEEEEE Jennifer Heldmann (chair) NASA Ames Research Center/SETI Institute Geoff Briggs NASA Ames Research Center Tony Colaprete NASA Ames Research Center Don Korycansky University of California, Santa Cruz Pete Schultz Brown University Lunar and Planetary Institute 3600 Bay Area Boulevard Houston TX 77058-1113 LPI Contribution No. 1327 Compiled in 2006 by LUNAR AND PLANETARY INSTITUTE The Institute is operated by the Universities Space Research Association under Agreement No. NCC5-679 issued through the Solar System Exploration Division of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this volume are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Material in this volume may be copied without restraint for
    [Show full text]
  • Computing Depth Maps from Descent Images
    Machine Vision and Applications (2005) Machine Vision and Digital Object Identifier (DOI) 10.1007/s00138-004-0160-7 Applications Computing depth maps from descent images Yalin Xiong1, Clark F. Olson2, Larry H. Matthies3 1 KLA-Tencor, 160 Rio Robles St., San Jose, CA 95134, USA 2 University of Washington, Computing and Software Systems, 18115 Campus Way NE, Box 358534, Bothell, WA 98011, USA 3 Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, 4800 Oak Grove Drive, M/S 125-209, Pasadena, CA 91109, USA Received: 7 November 2002 / Accepted: 13 September 2004 Published online: 25 February 2005 – c Springer-Verlag 2005 Abstract. In the exploration of the planets of our solar sys- multiresolution terrain maps from a sequence of descent im- tem, images taken during a lander’s descent to the surface of ages. We use motion-estimation and structure-from-motion a planet provide a critical link between orbital images and techniques to recover depth maps from the images. A new surface images. The descent images not only allow us to lo- technique for computing depths is described that is based on cate the landing site in a global coordinate frame, but they correlating the images after performing anti-aliasing image also provide progressively higher-resolution maps for mission warpings that correspond to a set of virtual planar surfaces. planning. This paper addresses the generation of depth maps It is well known that, when the viewed terrain is a planar from the descent images. Our approach has two steps, motion surface, the motion-recovery problem is ill-posed, since trans- refinement and depth recovery.
    [Show full text]