Learn about the GrabCAD Platform
Get to know GrabCAD as an open software platform for Additive Manufacturing
Visit our new homepage
Show off your skills and solve real design problems
This NASA challenge is to develop a super heavy surface transportation system for use on both the Moon and Mars. The system should be assumed to be deployed prior to the establishment of surface infrastructure – in a sense it could be the first infrastructure element. It must be capable of transporting the Common Habitat, a large, monolithic payload measuring 15.6 meters in length, 8.4 meters in diameter, and massing just under 100,000 kg. This system will transport the Common Habitat a distance of up to 5 kilometers from its delivery lander to its surface outpost location. This traverse path is unprepared surface terrain with slopes up to 20 degrees.
Technical Background:
The Common Habitat Architecture is a feasibility study for the exploration of the inner solar system using habitats constructed from the Space Launch System Core Stage’s Liquid Oxygen Tank. Just like Skylab in the 1970s, the SLS LOX tank would be manufactured as a habitat and launched as a payload. This habitat has an internal design that allows it to be used on the Moon, on Mars, in deep space, and in other destinations across the inner solar system, though the primary focus will be on the Moon, Mars, and deep space. The Common Habitat Architecture is not part of the current Artemis program but is instead a feasibility assessment of possible future options for space exploration that might follow Artemis.
On the Moon and Mars, the Common Habitat is combined with other elements to form a surface Base Camp. In space, it is combined with other elements to form the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle. Once delivered to the surface and offloaded from its lander (offload is a separate challenge and is out of scope for this challenge) it must be lifted and manipulated to transport it from the landing site to the Habitation Zone of the surface base camp, a distance that is likely at least one kilometer, but may be as many as five kilometers across unprepared surface terrain.
The goal of this challenge is to develop an innovative, low mass, super-heavy logistics Transport system that can Transport the Common Habitat as many as 5 kilometers across unprepared surface terrain. The design must include an initial stowed configuration for launch and delivery to the surface as well as its operational configuration. This system must work on both the Moon and Mars.
One option that has been identified as potentially viable (solvers are NOT required to advance this specific option) is a large robotic crane system that can repeatedly be repositioned by NASA ATHLETE robots, though no design for such a crane exists to date and many design and engineering details would need to be created to enable such a solution. This crane option is a brute force solution that works in conjunction with ATHLETE robots to slowly transport the Common Habitat over the involved distances. It will lift the Common Habitat from one side, translate it a short distance (either by linear transportation or by rotating 180 degrees), and set it down. The net result is to have moved the habitat a few meters in one direction. The crane will then be repositioned by two ATHLETEs to the opposite side of the Common Habitat, where it will reattach and repeat the process. This will continue for hundreds of times, inch-worming the Common Habitat across the surface until it has reached its destination. Alternately, if two cranes are present, the two can hand off the Common Habitat between each other (instead of setting the habitat down), with one performing the short distance translation of the habitat while the other is being repositioned, effectively acting as a bucket brigade, passing the Common Habitat to each other until the destination is reached. If the crane option is pursued, the designed crane must provide a means of lifting, precisely positioning, transporting, and lowering a 100-ton monolithic payload on both the Moon and Mars. (Ton, as used in this challenge, is a metric unit of mass, equalling 1,000 kg. Outside of the United States, this unit is sometimes written as a tonne.) It must also address tip-over concerns and implement a solution (such as, but not necessarily, counterbalances) while remaining under its mass constraints. For this option, reference the conference paper Surface Transportation of the Common Habitat from Lander to Habitation Zone as a starting point, specifically the LSMS-Derived Moon and Mars 90-Ton Transporter, and size a Crane system that can be transported by up to two ATHLETEs and is capable of lifting 100 tons on Mars. It is not, however, required that solvers choose this option. Any solution that meets the requirements is acceptable.
Despite the difference in the state of the art versus needed performance, there are no “laws of physics” showstoppers, and terrestrial examples of systems that manipulate greater than 100 tons on Earth are relatively common. The Kennedy Space Center, for a space-related example, uses large capacity cranes in the Vehicle Assembly Building, which it used throughout the 30-year space shuttle program to lift the 100-ton Orbiter from a horizontal position to attach it vertically to the side of the External Tank. The technical challenge in this project will be adapting such a system to the volume constraints of a lander that will co-manifest numerous other surface elements as payloads, ensuring safe robotic operation, providing for system stability, mitigating tip over concerns, operating on unprepared lunar terrain, and manipulating the 100-ton required cargo mass.
Ground Rules:
Ground Rules are the constraints/boundaries that scope project activity. All work is to remain consistent with the ground rules.
An acceptable alternative may be to lift and translate the habitat a distance of twice its diameter or greater before setting it down.
Assumptions:
Assumptions are initial starting points surrounding the project. These may be changed if justifying rationale emerges as the project unfolds.
Delivering large cargo from Earth to the Martian Surface
Concepts for Loading/Unloading Payloads on Lunar Surface
Additional Common Habitat Background:
Surface Transportation of the Common Habitat from Lander to Habitation Zone
Common Habitat Base Camp for Moon and Mars Surface Operations
A Safe Haven Concept for the Common Habitat in Moon, Mars, and Transit Environment
A Multi-Functional, Two-Chamber Airlock Node for a Common Habitat Architecture
Internal Architecture of the Common Habitat
Graphical Products
Data Product
Report Products
File Format Guidelines
Copyright Stipulations
Eligibility
In order to be eligible for a prize, solutions must originate from either the U.S. or a designated country (see definition of designated country at https://www.acquisition.gov/far/part-25#FAR_25_003), OR have been substantially transformed in the US or designated country prior to delivery pursuant to FAR 25.403(c).
Intellectual Property
The Government is seeking a full government-purpose usage license for the further development of a heavy logistics Transport concept. It is hoped that the winning concepts can be included in the follow-on study.
ENTERING THE COMPETITION The Challenge is open to everyone except employees and families of GrabCAD and the Sponsor. Multiple entries are welcome. Team entries are welcome. By entering the Challenge you: 1. Accept the official GrabCAD Challenges Terms & Conditions. 2. Agree to be bound by the decisions of the judges (Jury). 3. Warrant that you are eligible to participate. 4. Warrant that the submission is your original work. 5. Warrant, to the best of your knowledge, your work is not, and has not been in production or otherwise previously published or exhibited. 6. Warrant neither the work nor its use infringes the intellectual property rights (whether a patent, utility model, functional design right, aesthetic design right, trademark, copyright or any other intellectual property right) of any other person. 7. Warrant participation shall not constitute employment, assignment or offer of employment or assignment. 8. Are not entitled to any compensation or reimbursement for any costs. 9. Agree the Sponsor and GrabCAD have the right to promote all entries. If you think an entry may infringe on existing copyrighted materials, please email challenges@grabcad.com.
SUBMITTING AN ENTRY Only entries uploaded to GrabCAD through the "Submit entry" button on this Challenge page will be considered an entry. Only public entries are eligible. We encourage teams to use GrabCAD Workbench for developing their entries. Entries are automatically given the tag "NASAHEAVYLOGISTICS2023" when uploading to GrabCAD. Please do not edit or delete this tag. Only entries with valid tag will participate in the Challenge.
AWARDING THE WINNERS The sum of the Awards is the total gross amount of the reward. The awarded participant is solely liable for the payment of all taxes, duties, and other similar measures if imposed on the reward pursuant to the legislation of the country of his/her residence, domicile, citizenship, workplace, or any other criterion of similar nature. Only 1 award per person. Prizes may not be transferred or exchanged. All winners will be contacted by the GrabCAD staff to get their contact information and any other information needed to get the prize to them. Payment of cash awards is made through Checks mailed to the Winners. All team awards will be transferred to the member who entered the Challenge. Vouchers will be provided in the form of Stratasys Direct Manufacturing promo codes. We will release the finalists before the announcement of the winners to give the Community an opportunity to share their favorites in the comments, discuss concerns, and allow time for any testing or analysis by the Jury. The Jury will take the feedback into consideration when picking the winners. Winning designs will be chosen based on the Rules and Requirements schedule.
$3000
$2000
$1000
$750
$250
Robert Howard
Dawn Martin
Scott Howe
Julia Cline
Iok Wong
Christopher Hisle
Sepehr Bastami
This contest supports the NASA NASA - Exploration Systems Mission Directorate - Strategy and Architectures - Lunar Architecture Team - Lunar Site Planning Team.
Have an awesome idea for this competition? Want to win cool prizes? Sign-up now to upload your entries.
If you don't receive the email within an hour (and you've checked your Spam folder), email us as confirmation@grabcad.com.
35 comments
Senftus 18 days ago
A very interesting challenge. Are there special lifting or attachment points at the Common Habitat or can the load be lifted at will?
DropelCAD 18 days ago
mmm yea this is a challenges but let i see what i can do with this given info.
Tommy Mueller 18 days ago
Great challenge! Just a few questions about the challenge requirements:
…
1] Payload Grapple and Release Mechanism: Could you provide more details on the specific requirements for the payload grapple and release mechanism? Understanding the precise method for securely attaching and detaching the Common Habitat is crucial for designing this system.
…
2] Integration with ATHLETE Robots: If the crane/ATHLETE option is pursued, how will the system integrate and collaborate with the pre-deployed ATHLETE robots? Clarifying the roles and responsibilities of the ATHLETE robots during the transportation process would help refine the overall system design.
…
3] Internal Energy Capacity: To ensure my solution of self-sustainability during continuous traverses, could you provide more information about the available internal energy capacity, the source of this energy, and how it can be replenished if necessary?
…
4] Environmental Conditions: While the challenge mentions that the solution should be designed to operate on both Mars and the Moon, could you provide more specific details about the key differences in environmental conditions between the two bodies? Understanding the unique challenges each environment poses will aid in designing an adaptable system.
…
5] Teleoperation from Earth: How will teleoperation from Earth be facilitated? Will there be any communication delay or limitations that should be considered in the design?
Thanks in advance!
Alfred Mugglesworth 17 days ago
does it need to be designed to support 100,000kg mass, so in effect only the weight in the environment? roughly 38,000 kg on mars?
TARUN KUMAR DUTTA 17 days ago
Thanks you many much for this New Challenge
Dirga Riwanda 17 days ago
can those of us who take part in the challenge get certificates for finalists and winners? because if you can, it will be highly appreciated for those who enter as finalists
Nazarii Vareshchuk 16 days ago
Thank you for the task.
It will be an interesting competition.
The main question. The task mentions a weight of 100 tons. But on Mars and the moon, these will be smaller weights. So 100tons is the equivalent in earth gravity, or would it be the weight in gravity of the place of transportation?
Siddhant Diwaker 16 days ago
Interesting
Reid Hardy 16 days ago
Will additional dimensional data, interface control documents, or models be provided for the ATHLETE?
Thank you
Robert L. Howard, Jr., Ph.D. 15 days ago
Great questions, everyone! I will reply individually.
Robert L. Howard, Jr., Ph.D. 15 days ago
Senftus
The lifting/attachment points are not defined in detail, but they would be located on ring frame segments that lie at the intersection between the barrel and dome segments of the Common Habitat. (Look up what you can on the space shuttle external tank's construction and consider its ring frames as representative.)
Robert L. Howard, Jr., Ph.D. 15 days ago
Tommy Mueller
1. I'm leaving those intentionally undefined. Because they have to attach and release autonomously, you will need to think outside the box a bit.
2. Remember that you are not required to use the crane/ATHLETE option. But in it, the ATHLETEs serve only to transport the crane. They never interface directly with the Common Habitat. The idea is a crane can lift an object and rotate it. If it has performed a 180-degree rotation, it has transported the habitat a distance roughly equal to twice the length of the crane arm. If that crane is then picked up by ATHLETES, moved to the opposite side of the habitat, it can repeat the process and it has now moved the habitat four times the length of the crane arm.
3. The internal energy capacity must be your design solution. Examples include batteries, regenerative fuel cells, etc. However, this energy can only be replenished in the form of electrical energy. This would be in the form of a power cart that would periodically rendezvous and dock.
4. You'll need to look up Mars and the Moon. Some key things to take note of is the Moon has highly abrasive regolith. Mars has dust storms. The Moon has severe temperature extremes (focus on the Moon's south pole region). Mars is cold, but not nearly as cold as the coldest temperatures on the Moon. The Moon has long periods of darkness. Mars has a day-night cycle close to that of Earth. The Moon has 1/6 the gravity of Earth. Mars has 3/8 the gravity of Earth. Mars has a thin atmosphere. The Moon has essentially no atmosphere. I'm most concerned with how you address the Martian gravity and secondarily with how you address thermal management.
5. Yes, there are definitely delays in communications. You'll need to do some research to understand the communications delays for the Moon and Mars. Mars is by far the worst, with one-way communication taking up to 22 minutes (and can be even longer if relay satellites are used).
Robert L. Howard, Jr., Ph.D. 15 days ago
Alfred
Mass and weight often get confused. I used kilograms, which is a unit of mass, not weight. Mass is the same no matter where you are. 10 kg on Earth is 10 kg on the Moon and is 10 kg on Mars. It is not mass, but force (and weight) that changes with local gravity. 10 kg on Earth yields 98.1 Newtons of force (weight). (F = m x a, or 10 kg x 9.81 m/s2) So, on Mars, 100,000 kg yields 100,000 kg x 9.81 m/s x 3/8 = 367,875 N. I often find it easier to work in units of kilograms and Newtons to avoid getting confused working with kg-force or lb-force units.
Robert L. Howard, Jr., Ph.D. 15 days ago
Dirga
I'm not certain as to whether GrabCAD can provide certificates or not. That would be a question hopefully the GrabCAD officials can answer.
Robert L. Howard, Jr., Ph.D. 15 days ago
Nazarii, please see my response to Alfred. I recommend working in SI units to avoid confusion.
Robert L. Howard, Jr., Ph.D. 15 days ago
There was a question from a Marcelo prior to the site being down for maintenance that I no longer see, but I will post the response I prepared:
6. Interior components will have been packaged for dynamic flight, but it's probably still a good idea to limit the rotational accelerations during surface transportation. I think up to 10 degrees in roll, pitch, or yaw during transportation. However, it should be able to zero out any angular offsets to within 1 degree prior to releasing its load at the end of transportation.
7. We don't have the detailed terrain maps of Mars to have precise terrain data, but I kind of softened things a bit here. Assume that the maximum height of any obstacle relative to the terrain average slope is less than 5 meters.
Robert L. Howard, Jr., Ph.D. 15 days ago
Reid Hardy
Unfortunately, our project team does not have authority to release CAD models of the ATHLETE (or of other NASA hardware). Be reminded it is not required that you use the ATHLETE in your solution. However, if you choose to do so, there are a number of technical papers on the ATHLETE at https://ntrs.nasa.gov. You can use those to build the basis of a CAD model. There will be no penalties for errors in participant-created CAD models of ATHLETE, LSMS, or the Common Habitat. (In all cases, you would need to modify any existing models anyway, so you do not need models of current hardware.) If you develop an ATHLETE model, scale its limbs to a 6-meter length. For the Common Habitat, the structure has a length of 15.6 meters, a dome height of 2.65 meters, and a diameter of 8.4 meters. You do not need to model it in detail, but you can use the references under Additional Common Habitat Background for context.
Marcelo Valderrey 15 days ago
Thank you very much Robert for your answers. I rushed to ask before reading everything carefully and therefore deleted my questions (I reiterate them now to give context to your answers):
...
Hello everyone! Thanks for this new challenge.
I'd like to add two queries to Tommy Muller's list, related to this requirement: "Common habitat must be shipped in a level, horizontal orientation."
...
6] Angular tolerances: What angular tolerances would be allowed for pitch and roll during transportation and any other operations required before or after transportation?
...
7] Heights of the terrain: it is indicated that there are slopes of up to 20°, but what maximum heights can the unevenness of the terrain have?
...
PS: At first glance I can't justify the leveling requirement, considering the conditions in which the habitat takes off from planet earth (vertical position, gravity, and accelerations), lands on the Moon or Mars, and is finally unloaded from the spaceship. This requirement could create design restrictions that disqualify certain types of innovative solutions and/or induce the use of more classical solutions.
Marcelo Valderrey 15 days ago
I am sharing a PDF version of the questions and answers in this forum, which I will update to facilitate the review (at least in my case, seeing each answer after the question makes it easier for me to read).
Q&A_NASA_summary
Marcelo Valderrey 15 days ago
8] External silhouette of the habitat: can the external measurements of the habitat be specified?
I am not clear if the diameter of 8.4 and the length of 15.6 meters correspond to a "bounding cilinder" (and therefore include the stiffening rings and other elements that protrude) or not.
In the same link above I added some images with identifiers for their measurements and a simplified model of a tank with semi-elliptical caps. I think the rings with their dimensions should be confirmed as they are the most probable fixing areas.
Adam Kooperman 13 days ago
I have a question that says in the description that: " The Super Heavy Logistics Transport will lift the Common Habitat from a position to the left or right of the habitat’s longitudinal axis." Is it possible to stand over it with a bridge crane and lift it like that?
Nazarii Vareshchuk 12 days ago
This is not the first time I participate in these contests, but I have noticed a certain trend in the way entries are published.
So there are the following questions:
1. Are the entry release time taken into account and are the dynamics of entry changes analyzed?
2. Is the analysis of the mutual influence of entry carried out in the time dimension.
3. What do you recommend? Publish the entry as early as possible, or do it on the last day to avoid copying?
Some of my comments and suggestions:
1. I noticed situations when users publish incomplete entries and over time supplement them based on the entries of other users. Thus, it turns out that their entry has a lot of borrowed technologies and formally the publication date is very early.
2. In my opinion, it would be better and fairer if the entries were publicly available after the contest was over.
(The appropriateness of comments and suggestions depends on your answers to the questions.)
Thank you.
Marcelo Valderrey 12 days ago
I fully agree with Nazarii on the advisability of not making the proposals visible until the closing date. There would be more expectation among GrabCAD users and their feedback would be more spontaneous.
Looking at other entries makes it more difficult to keep your ideas fresh, as well as raising suspicions or accusations of plagiarism that are really hard to resolve.
The early publication of vague ideas is a way of saying "anything similar to this will be plagiarism" but in reality many things can look like something that is not perfectly defined.
I think of the challenge as a brainstorm where choosing the best ones, as well as their possible combinations and upgrades, is something that needs to happen after you're done.
jos groot 12 days ago
I support Marcelo's idea of a brainstorm with a lot of ideas and creativity. If you post early you will contribute to the solution (open sourse like spacex). For me its all about fun, creativity and the ideas Who is winning is not so important it is more the fun of solving the puzzle. and to learn things from each other
Mikel Iturbe 12 days ago
Hi,
it would be nice if NASA in collaboration with GrabCad could get in contact with the winners of the contest for the delivery of official certificates as Dirga mentioned in a comment before. Perhaps addressing the topic of the contest and the prize obtained.
Is this possible?
Robert L. Howard, Jr., Ph.D. 11 days ago
Marcelo
The external measurements of the habitat are the rough dimensions of the basic profile and do not include any elements that protrude. At the current fidelity of the Common Habitat Architecture Study, a detailed design has not been completed. So various interfaces remain to be designed. What you have represented in your model is close enough. Those ring frames should be considered the only element that lifting fixtures could be welded onto. (I don't want you to spend a lot of time on those - model/specify what you need them to be and assume the Common Habitat can incorporate them into its design.)
Robert L. Howard, Jr., Ph.D. 11 days ago
Adam
Yes, it is possible to stand over the Common Habitat with a bridge crane and lift it in that manner. (That is not the only allowable alternative - if you come up with other approaches you may try them, too.)
Robert L. Howard, Jr., Ph.D. 11 days ago
Nazarii
We do not consider how the proposals change prior to the deadline for final submissions and we do not track when they are first entered into the system. We only evaluate the final version. It is up to you as to whether you publish early or wait for the last day. There are pros and cons either way. How GrabCAD administers the process is up to them, but I agree with jos groot in that my main purpose is to include the entire world in the process of helping NASA to explore options to extend humanity into space beyond the Earth. I appreciate all of you and it really is a team effort. Plus, I hope you have fun in the process!
Vince S 10 days ago
Just to clarify your answer to Marcelo item 6, are you saying the load could encounter a 5m diam bolder as it is going up a 20 degree slope? Multiple at once? Is there an inference that such obstacles would be so frequent that steering around them would not be possible? If it is, do you have a feel for a turn radius that could work to allow sufficient navigation of the actual terrain / route plotting before-hand? Is there going to be an accurate route survey able to be made and available to inform transport route at the beginning of the transport stage rather than simply being able to handle all things that are in the way?
Please clarify about the criticality or otherwise of level transport. Do you mean parallel to the surface, or actually mean level? If you mean the latter, within what tolerances for tilt, pitch and possibly yaw?
Is it safe to assume there will be no unconstrained inertial loads from items moving around within the load? Similarly, is there an inertial load limit that could be imposed on the load, ie a needed cotton-wool effect? Which would somewhat dictate the damping / travel of the attachment system.
Thank you.
Kamen Rusev 9 days ago
Just as an ideas to think about :
1. Good time to build the first railroad at the surface of other celestial body. Easy to assemble by robots and manage the movement.
2. The whole think can be rotated to position and then in arrival to be installed in the correct position. For this scenario protecting "wheels" will be needed.
Scott Frash 3 days ago
Hi question about the ATHLETE robots. It is mentioned that there will be (eight) pre-deployed robots that can assist if needed, however an earlier bullet point states "no assistance from other human or robotic surface assets". I was wondering if you could provide more clarity on the assistance allowed by these robots. Also, it is stated that we are allowed to bring an additional two robots to assist, if the design is a crane. Does this mean we have 8+2 = 10 robots that can assist in total... or does it mean only 2 can assist, and the other 8 cannot, if the design is a crane?
Robert L. Howard, Jr., Ph.D. 1 day ago
Vince
Yes, the load could hypothetically encounter a 5m diameter boulder as it is going up a 20-degree slope. I suspect this would be rare, not the norm. Remember this comes from your assumptions, not your ground rules. You must comply with all ground rules. You can specify rationale to change an assumption. You gave a good example – go around the boulder instead of over it.
You can assume that an accurate route will be available to inform transport prior to the launch of the Common Habitat, but after the design of this surface transportation system. In other words, the more capable this system is, the more options Mission Control will have. A viable, but not very capable system will be able to complete the transport, but will often have to detour around obstacles, resulting in a longer total route that takes more time to traverse. A highly capable system will be able to negotiate its way around any obstacles, but might be more massive, more expensive, perhaps even less reliable. You will need to make a design trade regarding your system’s ability to handle boulders in its path.
Level is perpendicular to the gravity vector, but I am not levying an exact tolerance. Just like a car provides level transportation but will not be perfectly level when going up or down a hill, this system can deviate from perfectly level. It is safe to assume there will be no unconstrained inertial loads from items moving around inside the habitat. Everything that can move will have been tied down before launch from Earth. The main point is you should not have the habitat suspended such that it is swinging around like a pendulum.
Robert L. Howard, Jr., Ph.D. 1 day ago
Scott
You slightly misunderstood. There are only 8 ATHLETE robots, not 10. If the design is the crane, 2 of those 8 ATHLETEs are made available to assist by transporting the crane. If you come up with other ways to use those 2 ATHLETEs, you can do so. I did not make it entirely clear in the description what the other 6 are doing. In general, they may have limited availability for tasks such as scouting the route prior to habitat landing and positioning power stations for recharging the surface transportation system, but for active transportation they are not available to assist. (They are mainly needed/used to build up other portions of the surface basecamp.)
Marcelo Valderrey 1 day ago
Q&A_NASA_summary
I update the file every time Robert answers some questions.
fer about 17 hours ago
Is the center of gravity of the habitat at its geometric center or is it displaced? If so, how far from the center is it?
Please log in to add comments.
Log in