Competition Questions

[1.Q] There's no paper aside from the financial report due at the end of the competition, right?
[1.A]  Several reports are required this year:

1.      Rover Design and Specification due April 27. See section 2.a and 2.c

2.      Financial report due May 25. See section 4.a

3.      Presentation Task at MDRS (May 30 – June 1). See section 3.h

All teams are highly encouraged to submit abstracts for and present at the Annual Mars Society Convention. Teams who present have the opportunity to submit full papers to be published by the Mars Society’s MarsPapers.  Teams are also highly encouraged to submit papers to any other journals or conferences.

[2.Q] Are overamplified communications devices permitted?
[2.A] All communications devices used must adhere to FCC standards.  Any modified devices must be documented and submitted for approval alongside a statement of applicable FCC regulations.  Team members are permitted to obtain and utilize any relevant licenses, but must document the license, applicable regulations, and devices as part of the communications documentation deadline.

[3.Q] Can teams expect access to a live internet connection during the competition?
[3.A] Due to significant bandwidth limitations at the MDRS Hab, teams should not plan for internet to be available in the field. Internet is available at hotels in Hanksville.

[4.Q] Regarding the landscape in the competition areas, what is the visibility like between the command station and all competition areas?  Will we have line of sight to our robot, or will there be big obstacles in the way, such as mountains, rock formations, or hills?
[4.A] Teams will be blocked from visually observing the rover and will need to navigate based solely on data transmitted from the rover to the command post. There should be radio communication line-of-sight from the command tent to the rover for the sample return and equipment servicing tasks. For the terrain traversing task there should be reasonable line-of-sight for most of the course but it will not be guaranteed for the whole course since it may be rough and undulating in places. For the astronaut assistance 1 or 2 of the astronauts will purposefully be placed out of direct line-of-sight such as behind a small hill. There will be a separate command station at each competition area and rovers are not expected to travel more than 1km at most from the command tent. 

Rover Questions

[5.Q] Is it allowable for a team member to follow the rover as a standby for intervention? Specifically, they are there to hit our kill switch in case of an overcurrent condition (that would kill our computer/motor controller).
[5.A] Teams may allow a member to walk on the course along/near the rover, and use his/her judgment to activate a kill switch if conditions warrant such an action. This individual may not otherwise interfere with the rover, and must do everything reasonable to stay out of view of the rover's sensors/cameras. If the judges feel that this individual is providing feedback to the rover or rest of the team through the rover's sensors, the judges may elect to penalize the team accordingly since this is not allowed under section 1.d. Similarly, this individual may not communicate with team members in the command and control tent via voice, radio, etc.; however this individual can be utilized as a "runner" per section 2.h. of the rules. If this individual activates the kill switch it will count as an intervention.

Sample Return Task Questions

[6.Q] For those tasks requiring high-resolution images, would a 640x480 image be of high enough resolution, or are you looking for 800x600 and above?
[6.A] There is no specific minimum resolution requirement. The most important requirement with cameras is to obtain usable and useful images (i.e. a 1280x1024 image that is washed out and has almost no color depth is not as good as a 640x480 image that is perfectly focused, has good white balance, and is clear). It should go without saying that assuming all other aspects of the images are constant, higher resolution is better; however resolution is just one aspect of a quality image.

[7.Q] In the remote science documentation definition, it asks for a panorama with cardinal directions on the picture and some indication of scale. Scaling a panorama is not really useful because in the stitching process of combining pictures, the ranges are often distorted so that the image can fit the entire horizon. This creates a tunnel vision like phenomenon and scale is not very useful. Panoramas are used to get an entire horizon shot with the most information in them. Scale is used for high resolution imaging to locate or analyze a single subject.  Should teams be prepared to present some form of scale in our panorama?
[7.A] The wide-angle panorama is not required to be a 360 degree horizon image, and thus does not require image stitching (that is not to say that stitched images aren't allowed, or aren't useful in their own right). The intent of the wide-angle image is to provide perspective of the sample location with respect to the local geography and other features of interest. The requested scale indication should be applicable to the sample region, and does not need to be perfectly precise. While a highly accurate scale is always desirable, the main intent of the scale in a wide-angle shot is to provide an order-of-magnitude level of spatial awareness (in the desert, without a known size reference, 100 meter features can easily appear to be close up shots of 10 meter features).

[8.Q] For the remote science report due at the end of the Sample Return Task, does that need to be printed or is a soft copy on a disk or flash drive sufficient?
[8.A] A written report is not required for the sample return task. Instead, teams will be giving a field briefing to the judges; 15 minutes to present data of interest in any format deemed appropriate, and also to field questions from the judges. The data used in the presentation can be on a laptop or monitor, or can be printed if the team supplies its own printer. Teams will be judged on the effectiveness at presenting meaningful analysis over the course of those 15 minutes, and are not required to submit any hard documentation.

[9.Q] Are we allowed to carry a sample from one site and dump it later if we find a better sample at another site? Will teams be allowed to chip or drill pieces of the rock away? Is flipping over rocks, or removing a rock and then returning it to its original location, considered invasive?
[9.A] Yes. Teams can certainly investigate as many sites as time allows, although please be mindful of being minimally invasive. Teams should keep in mind that many teams will be investigating the same sample sites, so rovers should avoid causing major changes that will impact other competitors (including leaving excessively large holes, and causing significant disturbance to the soil). In general, physically manipulating a rock for closer inspection is not considered to be invasive as long as it is done with discretion, targeting specific samples. As a general rule of thumb, teams should design their systems to take only the amount of soil needed to perform a given test, and minimize visual disturbance. Teams should make reasonable efforts to return rocks they flip to their original orientation. If there is still uncertainty regarding a particular science package design, teams are encouraged to discuss designs with the URC Director in advance.

[10.Q] In regards to the Sample Return Task, is the soil composition going to be such that we would be able to just scoop it up, or is it going to be compacted enough that we would need a drill? Will there be any indication of where to perform the soil tests? There won’t be large purple or green patches of cyanobacteria in plain view, right? How dispersed throughout the soil will they be? Will we need to test multiple times in the same locale?
[10.A] There are many different types of soil conditions at MDRS (this is also partly influenced by the amount of rainfall the region receives in the late spring and early summer). There is no specific guidance on the specific sample types that teams should be prepared for (i.e. hard rock vs. soft soil). This is left as a design decision for each team.
Judges will be providing general descriptions of the task site. Otherwise, no markers will be provided. It is the intent of this task that teams search for any evidence of extremophiles, and make the case for their existence. Depending on the amount of rain that the region has received throughout the spring, the relative levels of reflected light in the spectra of interest can be higher than would otherwise be encountered throughout the year. This does not mean that teams should expect to encounter bright green patches with high contrast from the background (teams are, after all, searching for extremophiles), but teams will be afforded a seasonal advantage. Soil is not the only place where evidence of extremophiles may exist. For example desert varnish could be visible on rocks at a distance. Also, remember that a major component of this task will be how well teams justify their results in the field briefing based on the data that they did collect.

[11.Q] Regarding the Sample Return Task, are there any restrictions or issues with using chemical methods to tests for life, either on the rover itself or back at the base station during the data analysis period?
[11.A] Teams are permitted to use chemical methods to test for life, provided their use is consistent with the rules and relevant Q&A (in particular, Subsection 3.b of the rules, and Q&A topics on this task). The use of hazardous chemicals should be pre-approved prior to the competition, and be implemented safely with appropriate precautions and emergency equipment on hand. As an extension of the requirement for minimally-invasive operations, we strongly suggest that any liquid or solid chemicals used on-board the rover should follow a no-spill policy, and be completely contained within the rover including the by-products of any reactions.

[12.Q]For the Sample Return Task, detailed spectral analysis is an option that increases the budget (not to mention complexity) of our rover to a level that may not be feasible. So our question is: How firm are the budget restrictions? With in-kind donations we think it might be possible to perform this type of analysis. Otherwise our only option is to purchase an inexpensive ($200) digital microscope and try to image the bacteria with that. However, to find naturally occurring cyanobacteria with this method would be nearly impossible. So our other question is: Are judges going to seed the sites with additional bacteria, so the population density is greater?
[12.A] The objective of this task isn't necessarily to find conclusive proof of the cyanobacteria or other life forms defined in the task, but rather to build the case that a particular site likely contains target life forms. Section 3.c of the rules states that "in the field briefing to judges, teams will be required to describe and analyze their data for all sites investigated, and provide a justification for returning the sample that was selected". Regarding the cost of various tools and sensors, this is one of many trade-offs that teams are required to make as part of their design process. Section 3.b for example suggests using reflected visible light as the primary indicator of the presence of extremophiles. Part of the judges' decision will also focus on how well teams have used the tools that they do have, and how well they interpreted the data returned to make an educated analysis. The judges will ensure that this task is feasible in terms of finding sufficient opportunities for data collection to enable an educated analysis. In regards to the budget restrictions - these are firm limits. Teams may only field equipment that is listed on their budget submission. Teams should also take note of Section 4.a.ii.

[13.Q] For the Sample Return Task, are teams allowed to do further experiments on the returned sample once the rover is back at the start point (command and control tent) during the field briefing preparation time? More specifically, are teams allowed to have different lab equipment in the command and control tent? If yes, is there any restriction for number of instruments/weight?
[13.A] Teams are allowed to perform additional analysis on the returned samples, and there are no restrictions (mass or budget) on the equipment that may be used in the command and control tent. The primary intent of this analysis should be to confirm analysis performed with the rover and to support the justification made when selecting the sample for return. Sample investigations should not be based solely on post-traverse analysis. Before teams begin any sample-destructive testing, they are required to photograph the sample on the scale (to be provided) to ensure that it meets the mass requirements. In the field briefing to judges, teams will be expected to tie any post-traverse analysis to their in-field analysis and selection criteria. Points will be awarded not by the size and extensiveness of a team's laboratory, but rather based on how well teams are able to relate their analysis to the work performed with the rover. The main idea is to judge the performance of the rover as described in section 3c. Teams must notify the URC Director if they intend to use any power-intensive equipment in the command and control tent.

[14.Q] Regarding the Sample Return Task, the rules state that teams are to return a single sample weighing between 25-250g. However, in previous years, some teams have returned multiple samples that they thought were good and through base station analysis select the best one.  What are the guidelines regarding that this year?  Will we also be able to collect multiple samples, and if we can, do all these samples together have to weigh less than 250g or each sample taken can range from 25-250g?
[14.A] Teams may chose only one discrete sample to return on board their rover from the field.  Teams may select multiple samples in the field for closer inspection, and may even carry multiple samples while looking for other potential options.  However, teams must clearly keep such samples separate, and must discard all but a single sample before the rover returns to the command and control tent.  This sample must be 25-250g.

[15.Q] For the Sample Return Task, teams are allowed to collect multiple samples, but can only return one at the end of the task.  If a rover picks up sample A from Site A and then finds another sample at Site B that is preferable, will teams be required to bring sample A back to Site A or would it be acceptable to drop it at Site B? Also, if the same tool is used to collect both samples, will teams have to account for contamination (e.g. if there was life teams wouldn't be able to say definitively that it came from Sample B since the tool also touched Sample A).
[15.A] Teams will not be required to return a rejected sample to its original location, however teams should use discretion with disrupting the environment (see Q&A 8 for more detail) . As with all scientific analysis, teams must seek to minimize possible sources of contamination, yet understand and disclose possible sources when they do exist.

[16.Q] Section 3.b says that the sample must be "sub-surface" and "must be collected from just below the topsoil at 5cm (2”) depth or deeper". The Q&A suggests that we can find desert varnish on rocks at the surface.  Do we still have a choice to retrieve a soil sample or a rock from the surface, or are the rules implying that we have to dig up a soil sample or a rock that is buried underground?
[16.A] As specified in section 3.b the sample must be obtained from at least 5cm (2") below the surface.

[17.Q] Is it okay if we pick up both the top soil and soil that's 2" deeper as long as we can tell where the top soil is (and therefore discard it) at the base station?
[17.A] Teams are permitted to to collect samples that include the topsoil; however they must be able to distinguish the soil depth for any data collected, and the topsoil must be discarded for any analysis.  The full sample returned (including topsoil) will be used to determine the returned sample's mass.

Astronaut Assistance Task Questions

[19.Q] For the Astronaut Assistance Task, are teams required to utilize the VELCRO style fastener to secure the box, or are other fasteners (ropes, tie downs) allowed? Are the packages allowed to be modified by attaching our own handles/hooks with Velcro? Will these handles/hooks count towards the "rover weight" or the "additional equipment weight"?
[19.A] Teams may implement drop-off package handling devices for this task that remain fixed to the packages after deployment.  Any such devices shall connect to the boxes using only Velcro style attachments, weigh no more than 1kg each, and may only connect to one face of each package.  Placement of these additional devices may be done by team members before the clock officially starts, or by the rover after the clock starts.  Removal of these devices shall not degrade the packages in any way, aside from normal wear on the package's Velcro style fasteners.  No assurance is made of the strength of adhesives that hold the Velcro style fasteners to the package, and teams will be penalized if a package is damaged during transport (e.g. if the Velcro style fastener is removed during transport).  The weight of these devices will count towards the overall system weight per section 2.b of the rules (they will count against either the rover weight, or the additional equipment weight, depending upon the rover's configuration at weigh-in).

Terrain Traversing Task Questions

[20.Q] Could you clarify on the following subjects? We need these information for estimation of power consumption/torque. The rule mentioned "step-like drops" and "steep slopes in excess of 45%."  Will such "boulders" be only small portions of the route (i.e. only one step drop boulder along the route; only few feet of steep slope) or more of a continuous part of the path (i.e. several step-down paths; continuous climb along a steep path for more than 10 feet)? Should we expect the "steep slopes in excess of 45 degrees" be an angle that is relatively close to 45 degrees, or will an angle as steep as 60 degrees?
[20.A] The course will feature a range of terrain at increasing levels of difficulty. Teams should expect some easy terrain, some moderate terrain, and some difficult terrain.  Easy terrain may include small isolated drops and shallow slopes. Extremely difficult terrain may include continuous steps and slopes even steeper than 60 degrees, although we do not expect rovers to be able to climb or traverse vertical faces. The course will be designed to try and avoid teams getting completely stuck if they cannot overcome a particular obstacle. For example if they cannot climb a steep slope to a gate, they may be able to skip it and try their luck at another gate. Exact specifications are purposefully not given, so teams will need to make their own decisions on compromises between capability in this and other tasks, weight, durability, complexity, cost, etc. Such ambiguity is a fundamental tenant of exploration since in real life often you don't know enough information to make the "right" choice, and you need to make educated guesses.  That's part of the fun of real engineering!