You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!

Join diydrones


  • +1 on the toughness of Traxxas gear but...

    One consideration usually not evident, or even explained generally, is that all the hardware that goes into orbit, or to a planetary body, or 'out there' must meet *flight rules* and mission parameters.  This limitation/specification is especially true when humans are involved in the mission - not an issue, yet, with Mars.

    The Traxxas E-REVO could be a fine vehicle if ALL the components, materials, lubrication, wiring, electronics, fasteners, and shiny red flame stickers met flight rules and the operational parameters of the mission.

    Homework assignment: Look up the high/low temp of Mars and then the operational specifications from Traxxas of the vehicle to determine if they fit. ;)  (We will skip the part where it has to withstand the launch and transition from Earth to Mars dirt. If I had a E-REVO with Mars dirt on it, I would never wash it off).

    That is why a hammer used on ISS costs so much. The hammer may have purchased with a NASA PO# from Home Depot for $29.00 (US). The tests and confirmation that the silly thing won't do something odd, outgas something toxic, cause magnetic or RF interference, etc is why the newspaper reports hammers (etc) as costing $1M or so.

    Most of the designs are a blend of best practices often based on previous experience and *competitions* open to the universities and corporations. Just like the DARPA autonomous vehicle competition, NASA sponsors competions for 'what if' scenarios. These are usually great team experiences for engineering students and developers. Let us hope that one day, a team employs APMx.

  • I've always been wondering why NASA keep on designing fragile weird complicated rovers like the one on this picture... I guess the KISS principle wouldn't justify the billions spent.

    They should send a Traxxas E-REVO and they wouldn't even need to care about landing. (Those who own one will understand.)

  • thank you gentlemen for these posts on this issues about how we can go further with this incredible platform,im thinking on a shielded system level , multiple ardu-pilot mega network   (for the Am tel memory storage),,Kinect would be a good idea,and maybe3692484333?profile=original a piece of raspberry pi?

      as the on-board computer ? 

  • Ok Monroe, I gotta ask:  Ardulon?

    I'm assuming this isn't an Arduino powered aquatic bird?

  • It would probably need a few more megabytes of flash to handle all the contingency routines & a longer lead time for the community to implement it, during their weekends.  More likely, the rover's computer will soon be resold by 3D Robotics as the Ardupilot 3.0.

  • Sort of... In theory a lot of individual tasks that Curiosity can do could be controlled by an ArduPilot Mega. Though the full package is beyond what the ATmega2560 on the ArduPilot Mega is capable of. For starters it would be impractical or impossible to fit the code needed in 256KB (the amount of flash memory on the ATmega2560). The principals have the same roots but in a much more complex implementation. There's some interesting information about the rover on Wikipedia including the types of computers used.

  • An Ardu-crane for search and rescue with a Ardu-quad dropping a 4WD Ardu-rover into an inaccessible area.

    Has a nice ring to it !


  • mmmm....maybe a sky crane project utilizing a quad and the apm2. Lots of uses here on Earth. Getting an ardu-rover 4 wheel drive into an inaccessible area for search and rescue to start with.

    Ardu-crane......has a nice ring to it !


  • Moderator


    mhh i don't think that is enought AVR platform for doing a robot as curriosity. Coul be better to use an PX4 or VBRAIN with Overo. I'm doing a good experience with Kinect for 3d perception ... PCL library and SLAM that ar component of ROS .

    Our board can connect with ROS systems by Mavlink , so with this kind of configuration is possible to develop something similar to Curiosity.



  • nice!!

This reply was deleted.