Embedded Files
Project Overview
Project Overview
Design and fabricate a rover constrained to CubeSat dimensions (10×10×20 cm) capable of autonomously deploying extremophile samples onto a simulated planetary surface and retrieving them via an electromagnet-based pickup system. The mission context: testing whether extremophiles could survive on a newly discovered planet, as a potential path toward off-Earth agriculture.
System Overview
System Overview
Chassis dimensions: 10×10×20 cm (CubeSat compliant)
4-wheel drive, dual DC motor configuration
Stepper-motor-driven rotary drop-off wheel for sample deployment
Linear actuator + electromagnet for autonomous sample retrieval
Enclosure: laser-cut acrylic chassis, 3D-printed PLA structural components, TPU tires
$500 material budget; final build completed for $327.08
My Role
My Role
Led chassis architecture and overall mechanical layout
Performed motor torque analysis and identified single-motor drive as insufficient and drove the redesign to dual motors
Built and ran the FMEA, including RPN calculations and model-based risk mitigation
Contributed to Design for Assembly redesigns (chamfered holes, filleted motor holder, stepper motor integration)
CAD modeling in Onshape
Decision Matrix
Decision Matrix
Concept generation began with a functional decomposition tree and morphological chart, producing three rover concepts scored against a weighted decision matrix benchmarked against NASA's Perseverance and Curiosity rovers and CMU's Iris rover. Our final concept scored highest (+5 vs. +2 and -1) by eliminating external moving parts, with no exposed arm, no extra mechanical structure, which best satisfied the CubeSat fit and mobility requirements.
FMEA
FMEA
The core engineering work was a Failure Modes and Effects Analysis, which surfaced four high-risk failure modes: drive motor overheating, insufficient drive torque, mechanical arm gripping reliability, and ejection misalignment. Two of these directly changed the final design.
Outcome
Outcome
Won the end-of-semester design competition, judged by faculty, TAs, and NASA judges on uniqueness/creativity, complexity, functionality, and robustness. Out of 8 teams, only 4 rovers achieved locomotion, and ours was one of just two to demonstrate a second mechanical function (sample deployment/retrieval) in addition to driving.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse