A Study Demonstrating That Using Gravitational Offset to Prepare Extraterrestrial Mobility Missions Is Misleading

ABSTRACT Recently, there has been a surge of international interest in extraterrestrial exploration targeting the Moon, Mars, the moons of Mars, and various asteroids. This contribution discusses how current state‐of‐the‐art Earth‐based testing for designing rovers and landers for these missions currently leads to overly optimistic conclusions about the behavior of these devices upon deployment on the targeted celestial bodies. The key misconception is that gravitational offset is necessary during the terramechanics testing of rover and lander prototypes on Earth. The body of evidence supporting our argument is tied to a small number of studies conducted during parabolic flights and insights derived from newly revised scaling laws. We argue that what has prevented the community from fully diagnosing the problem at hand is the absence of effective physics‐based models capable of simulating terramechanics under low‐gravity conditions. We developed such a physics‐based simulator and utilized it to gauge the mobility of early prototypes of the Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover. This contribution discusses the results generated by this simulator, how they correlate with physical test results from the NASA‐Glenn SLOPE lab, and the fallacy of the gravitational offset in rover and lander testing. The simulator, which is open‐source and publicly available, also supports studies for in situ resource utilization activities, for example, digging, bulldozing, and berming, in low‐gravity environments.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Field Robotics
Published
2025-05-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/rob.22597
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Planetary Science and Exploration
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.77

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Study Demonstrating That Using Gravitational Offset to Prepare Extraterrestrial Mobility Missions Is Misleading

Arno Rogg, Ken Kamrin, Dan Negruţ, Samuel Chandler et al.
5 citations
Journal of Field Robotics
Planetary Science and Exploration
5.77
article

A Study Demonstrating That Using Gravitational Offset to Prepare Extraterrestrial Mobility Missions Is Misleading

Arno Rogg, Ken Kamrin, Dan Negruţ, Samuel Chandler, Alexander Schepelmann, Wei Hu, Pei Li
article en
5 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT Recently, there has been a surge of international interest in extraterrestrial exploration targeting the Moon, Mars, the moons of Mars, and various asteroids. This contribution discusses how current state‐of‐the‐art Earth‐based testing for designing rovers and landers for these missions currently leads to overly optimistic conclusions about the behavior of these devices upon deployment on the targeted celestial bodies. The key misconception is that gravitational offset is necessary during the terramechanics testing of rover and lander prototypes on Earth. The body of evidence supporting our argument is tied to a small number of studies conducted during parabolic flights and insights derived from newly revised scaling laws. We argue that what has prevented the community from fully diagnosing the problem at hand is the absence of effective physics‐based models capable of simulating terramechanics under low‐gravity conditions. We developed such a physics‐based simulator and utilized it to gauge the mobility of early prototypes of the Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover. This contribution discusses the results generated by this simulator, how they correlate with physical test results from the NASA‐Glenn SLOPE lab, and the fallacy of the gravitational offset in rover and lander testing. The simulator, which is open‐source and publicly available, also supports studies for in situ resource utilization activities, for example, digging, bulldozing, and berming, in low‐gravity environments.

Journal of Field RoboticsVol. 42(7)
Ames Research Center (US), University of Wisconsin–Madison (US), Shanghai Jiao Tong University (CN), Glenn Research Center (US), EduInnovation (US), Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
National Science Foundation, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Natural Science Foundation of China, Nuclear Safety and Security Commission, Glenn Research Center, Army Research Office
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Planetary Science and Exploration
5.77
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.