Insight lander - Page 10

Previous 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 Next
Author Message
Dana Johnson

Posts: 1195

Reply: 181

PostPosted: November 13, 2019 12:02 PM 

Sol 343, November 13, 2019, and a weather swing is underway, either long term spring or short term regional change.
The air pressure is dropping fairly steadily, winds are high at 40-50 MPH, high temperature is rising a few degrees in the day time from the average highs of the past month, and even the lows have risen along with a strong increase in the average daily temperatures.
It will be interesting to read whether the vertical cycling can produce steady 24 hour and weekly patterns of pressure, wind speed, and temperature swings caused by local influence, or, perhaps the distant Southern hemisphere is capable of distant southern winter weather control of the equatorial belt.

The images returned for 342 show the arm and scoop are being lowered towards the right side contact with the tube yet remain above the ground surface.
The lowering seems to be about 1 cm between 339 and 342. Not much change in the scoop surface appearance and ground area where lighted.
They may be in progress of another attempt to hammer into the obstruction with pressure applied from the scoop body.
Rising temperatures of only a few degrees, could that be a reason for the new motion? Overall lifetime of the machinery probably is a more motivational reasoning.

Image credits, originals; NASA/JPL-Caltech

Dana Johnson

Posts: 1195

Reply: 182

PostPosted: November 17, 2019 12:10 PM 

A quick upload of the newest images showing the motion of the hammer during action, in just three cropped shots from Sol 346.
The vibration blurs the middle long image and the flattened ground behind the right side of the scoop depression is disrupted.
No real progress downward in appearance yet.

More later. Sorry for the mis-reference to the downward movement of the scoop as '1 cm'. It was actually more like a inch, or 2 1/2 cm.

Dana Johnson

Posts: 1195

Reply: 183

PostPosted: November 18, 2019 4:19 PM 

My use of the three images from Sol 347 wasn't sufficient to tell the story from yesterday. In the series of images there was a motion to the tube with the arm, and during the motion the smooth near vertical pressed dust surface was disturbed, causing the collapse seen on the right side of the scoop body. The scoop is suspended in the air but against the tube now. At the timing of the images there is no indication that there was hammering during the collapse, but it could be there was hammering between images not seen.
It was therefore not the vibration seen in the image a couple minutes later which caused the collapse of dust.
It pays to look at each detail in a sequence.
If the simple pressure of the movement to the left with the arm caused the collapse of surface dust without hammering does that indicate a very leveraged or losse interaction within the soil between the tube and the surface dust above?
I interpret this as an open question of great importance.
I am presenting the stills of the problem for others asking NASA for answers if they choose.
How much hammering has been done without in real penetration distance again?

4:18:41pm Sol 346 Prior to collapse.

4:19;14pm Sol 346 Collapse evidenced between images.

4:20:16pm Sol 346 Vibration of grapple fingers, tube end, and general details, including the loose debris from the collapse of pressed dust on the right of scoop body.

A animated GIF of the Sol 343 and Sol 347 images showing a slight move to the left by the arm against the tube.

Open questions about number of hammer blows with no downward movement yet.

Dana Johnson

Posts: 1195

Reply: 184

PostPosted: November 22, 2019 11:07 AM 

New effort to hammer into the regolith of Mars seems to be working currently, with an inch or two of depth at a stable angle after the scoop was placed against the tube during the week. A slight change of angle occurred during the scoop placement against the tube, and the changes improved the penetration as during prior efforts. Perhaps this hammering will work to at least the depth of the tube length.

An anigif for the view at actual size of the ICC camera view, crop at 650x510 pixels.
Image credits, originals; NASA/JPL-Caltech

Images for the 3 image sequence were early morning views from Sol 343, 347, and 350.

Another interesting weather topic trend is the continued SSE versus SW wind direction as a primary weather repeat occurrence.
The average wind direction and daily temperature differences are repeating as a weather pattern, seeming to be within a regional/hemispheric or planet-wide pressure gradient swing which is stable in pressure, but fluctuating in daily averages with averaged wind direction.
It would be better if we had trained persons to discuss the weather process here on the blog this year.

The increased pressures of the past months have altered to a continued drop in pressures as a pattern. The temperatures were locally dropping in past months, and now are trending slightly warmer, with short term patterned swings in both directions based on the local wind direction sources. Minute to minute records must be as difficult as Earth's weather patterns to calculate and explain.


Posts: xxx

Reply: 185

PostPosted: November 25, 2019 5:22 PM 

Outstanding post Dana!

John Radogno

Posts: 37

Reply: 186

PostPosted: November 26, 2019 4:43 PM 

Thanks for the weather report!

Dana Johnson

Posts: 1195

Reply: 187

PostPosted: December 1, 2019 11:27 AM 

Something very strange is underway here on the blog, on my laptop, or, at the image host.
I have just gone over the posts 181, 182, and 183, to find that my viewing of the animated GIF's I produced are now missing the important images of downward motion I included in them. The two images show the sideward motion of the scoop against the tube, causing the vertical incident angle to change, yet the subsequent hammering process doesn't show on the sequence as it exists now.
There was only a small change of depth with the new pressured attempt, and it was the big news of the month.
I'll find the current problem and upload replacement image sequences if needed.
New ICC and arm camera views do not seem to show additional movement, as discussed in this recent popular news article about the impasse.

Here is another recent prior month article about the earlier stall before the November 1" to 1" 1/2 depth success. This article mentions about 100 SEIS events with 21 suspected of being Marsquakes. There may be many research reports eventually from the mission, both weather, regional, and deep morphology geological results, but we may not be able to do the soil temperature transition studies that were originally very important.
Possibly a new hammer type on another mission will work.

There was a slight backsliding of the warming trend of the recent weeks, but the landing spot is now warming yet further this week.

I can't get out of my mind the oddity of seeing my own image sequences missing the images in the sequence which were most important. My mind is a little 'slippery' as are many in the news these days. Fortunately mine (mind)is not that important as many others.

Thank you for checking in with me.

Dana Johnson

Posts: 1195

Reply: 188

PostPosted: December 2, 2019 3:54 PM 

Great joke on me, I now a day later find the post 182 anigif set working with three images, and my memory is partly recovered as I know the downward applied arm was used after that date of the GIF set.
We enjoy the mysteries life brings even in the digital realm, with movies about the unexplained content we can see with 'reruns'. Not any different in various realms of our lives.
The last week of November 2019 gives just three images closeup of the scoop vibrating and showing that in the soil particles bouncing and moving on the scoop body. Only a few ground particles are moving, and there seems no downward movement of the HP3 hammer tube with the work underway.
The related stories in the prior post are in agreement on the content shown here in a 725 x 500 crop version of the three days sequence imaged over a 5 to 6 day timing.
While the wind is peaking at 40 to 50 MPH it appears the motion can be attributed to vibration of the instruments and I assume it is the hammer mechanism and not the arm as I see no side shifting and no vertical motion of the entire IDA(arm).

Image credits, originals; NASA/JPL-Caltech

Dana Johnson

Posts: 1195

Reply: 189

PostPosted: December 6, 2019 11:17 AM 

Today I can see to post #186, and I was going to add yet another anigif from Sol 355 to Sol 364, but thought to extend the sequence and make an enlarged closeup of the scoop particulates to show that the Insight was actually hammering or in motion. Looking at the new weeks cycle I could see that hammer seems to never really be in motion, yet scoop particles are moving from one location to another against the dark background of the scoop body. A few particles are in motion in the formerly compressed zone of prior scoop influence, yet no real change seems to occur anywhere beyond the former scoop depression zone. The margins of the tube seem unaffected during that timing.
There seems to be an increase in the amount of clumped particulates on the scoop, along the fairly horizontal surfaces away from the edges, and a lessening of the line of particulate on the far right inner scoop flat surface right surface area.
If this is not wind motion induced, what action of the arm or hammer would leave the piled loose material on the tube edge unmoved and not altered in combination?
Something is causing both a very slight movement of the grapple fingers against the background, and a lack of angular movement of the hammer tube against the background. I could imagine a slight cable motion but can't see that, wind influence on the entire grapple mechanism but can't actually see that except by implication, and possibly some changes in the degree of pressure applied by the arm to the scoop against the tube, with the tube stable in the soil material as a unwritten possibility. I'll have to check the DLR blog about why the increased particulates would be accumulating without hammering underway.

In the surrounding soil there may be too much brightness for detection of motion, or some other cause similar which I haven't thought of.

The change to grapple finger angle to camera seems to be continuous and yet no change in the tube incident angle. Not just motion, but a motion in one direction only. I will post that after looking at an enlarged view, unless someone can explain the motion to me.

Can wind be the factor or pressure against the tube be a motion rather than the hammering that I would have expected over a couple weeks timing?

Is it even remotely possible that we are seeing a sublimating change in the soil conditions resulting in movement of particles? Has a dust devil or other effect passed the lander in the past week?
The wind has increased to 45-55 MPH maximum on some days from a range 35-45, with averages around 10 MPH most days.
The recent seasonal trend to slight warming of the daily highs is continuing.
I would doubt the minor seismic events would be close enough to cause any small particle motions at the scoop placement.

Dana Johnson

Posts: 1195

Reply: 190

PostPosted: December 6, 2019 5:27 PM 

Made post #189 today, and now this is the anigif which shows the sequence of bright clumps on the scoop body at 1 to 1 size, cropped to 725x500 with four images from Sol 355 to Sol 364. It may be of sufficient size to show something at both the inner scoop central area and a 'matching' item in the prior image on the soil surface at the right side of the scoop. Both items are only present in each image, and seem to show a transfer of the object to the scoop body in the final image from the soil in the third image. That is to say the movement accompanies both the single item moving to the scoop from outside on the right, and a general increase in the overall content of very small faint 'spots' across the scoop body in the central and horizontal surface.
The amount of diffused brightness in the final and forth image seems possibly to also be greater although I haven't done checks on the shadow brightness in the photo editor.
Can this be a weather event, or an image taking adjustment from the semi-autonomous camera system?
Why would the brightness change accompany the bright spot in motion?

I imagine we will have to wait for the weather events to be published to see the actual cause and effects. Sure looks to me to be a possible precipitation type event, but it is claimed this is too close to the equator for that. Possibly an unseen dust devil?
The grapple seems to swing in the sequence in correlation.

Dana Johnson

Posts: 1195

Reply: 191

PostPosted: December 7, 2019 9:34 AM 

Strange how difficult it is to see the 'weather' events on Mars, but there is real event seen on Sol 364 as a one day process. Wind cycles and is slightly high at maximum, average wind is higher, even seen in the chart. Average direction has also changed to S from SSE before and after. A suite of detectors would show a weather event.
What caused the scoop brightness, weather, and movement of particles?
Is this possible condensation ice with weather event important as a daily pattern?
Does the slight increase of maximum temperature with 20 degree swing of average accompany viewable frost cycling or movement of regional particle ground level 'clouds', or is this a descending, ascending particle cloud pattern?
Something is in motion with the weather daily.

Dana Johnson

Posts: 1195

Reply: 192

PostPosted: December 7, 2019 2:45 PM 

The weather is active, and the grapple-arm assembly has an active component in the sum of events between about 335 and 345, possibly influencing the overall particle assemblieson the ground and in the scoop body.
Dependent upon the mix of wax and lubricants the cable to grapple finger area has been dripping wax-like material in November. Brightness of the small spot in motion is similar to the wax- like material. The rate of disappearance of the solid seems slow on the cable and grapple. The spots either move or are matched in size shape and brightness.
Two questions and I cannot answer them.
Below is an anigif I showing the 'star' pattern on the largest lump of the semi-liquid result of some leakage. Adding this to a general apparent brightness on the scoop, and a 'jumping' small rounded 'bleb', gives me now about a half dozen unsolvable problems to add to a real weather event.
The semi-liquid seems to have been a several day process in bulk volume, but stable over a couple weeks. I don't see soil drops, but we see only a few points in time on any day.
Could this material transfer to the scoop flat surface between images and appear similar to ice on the metal scoop body?
All this gives the impression of a problem without solution.

The motion of the grapple may have a relationship, but that's just another added question to the list.

Happy anniversary, Insight.

Dana Johnson

Posts: 1195

Reply: 193

PostPosted: December 8, 2019 1:40 PM 

Still stuck at viewing post #186 each new day, with other details accumulating which require careful assessment. A new anigif which I did not expect to make yesterday is at 1.5X enlargement, forcing the lower area of the closest view at the second mouseclick on the image host to drop below the viewing area on my laptop screen. Downloading it should show the details of the 'dripping' semi-liquid 'frozen'on the grapple fingers 'disappear' in the final two images.
The bright 'bleb' on the scoop body remains at the same volume and brightness.
Items on the ground move, particularly around the HP3 hammer tube, and a substantial downward penetration has been achieved on Sol 366 in the 6 image sequence.
Want to make a series with similar lighting in appearance for each of the 6 images. The final two are for 4:20 PM and 5:00 PM Mars time, and the shadow jump and general brightness is distracting. It appears there may be a half pixel movement of the arm camera viewpoint on some items, and it makes me wonder if this renewed hammering can achieve a full movement to the length of the tube.
Nice to see such good effect and a few new mysteries to add to the dozen already in place this past couple weeks.
A 'subliming' semi-liquid draining down the arm and the cable/grapple. The 'bleb' jumping yet remaining, giving a different effect between the grapple-heater area and the scoop- ground conduction area which is separated from the grapple activation pin source of possible local heat.
Direct sunlight on both items over several days continuing.
Low angle sunlight shows some 3D effect on faint scoop surface 'blebs' which are possibly not stand-alone shapes but semi-rounded and attached to the scoop body.
The bright 'bleb' is in motion each day and stand-alone in shape.
Would a heated liquid hammering work to secure a shaping of a bore hole in an unlighted subsurface attempt?
What is the activity underway over the weeks?

Image credits, originals; NASA/JPL-Caltech
DLR blog to check for answers next, as well as NASA news releases now that success is underway again.
Great anniversary display Insight and teams.

Dana Johnson

Posts: 1195

Reply: 194

PostPosted: December 14, 2019 3:15 PM 

Prior weeks slightly drift to higher maximums is continuing with some minor setbacks, but this Sol 357 extreme apparent drop in the minimum beats any other recent change during the entire recent weeks swings. Can a low minimum of -219 degrees F be a true temperature for springtime on Mars at this location? The wind was a peak of 49 MPH, but SSE in average, that is an apparent change of more than 50 degrees, I presume in the nighttime timing.
-50 F is as cold as I've experienced during my life, and Mars beat that by another 169 degrees in the cold direction.
Much of what is occurring on Mars is not visible to us other than the charts released after the weather has past.

I see no new vibration of particulates in the past week, since the Sol 366 date.

Is it possible the tube was heated prior to the hammering success last week? I do not see a chart view of any use of the HP3 heater, and then just after penetration of an inch or so, this one day swing to -219 F.

Sol 373, December 14, 2019

A note of interest is the slight drift to lesser pressure during the past weeks, which may be the reason for a sudden massive drop in short term temperature as a possible cause relationship. Southern precipitation may be forcing a weather event not described on the site main links.
The equatorial realm may be affected by polar weather events, or Mars may have a capable transport of high altitude or distant events in circulation not displayed in local daily weather averages, and the daily hour by hour averages.
Would local water be forced by CO2 events at a distance?
Is the disappearance of the material on the grapple fingers during less than a one hour timing, from 4:20 PM to 5 PM, related to the subsequent day's apparent extreme change?
Are extremes like this real and are they a pattern of changing weather?

Dana Johnson

Posts: 1195

Reply: 195

PostPosted: December 14, 2019 3:22 PM 

The day described in entry # 194 is actually Sol 367, not Sol 357.
The loss of material on the grapple fingers was on Sol 366.
Failed to proofread the entry before posting.

Dana Johnson

Posts: 1195

Reply: 196

PostPosted: December 15, 2019 12:16 PM 

The mole is being hammered most of the depth into the soil now, with no new material appearing on the grapple, and seemingly without incidents such as tilting, so we will be confronting within a day or two the problem of 'unassisted' further hammering.

I was as an untrained person following the weather in the simplified and averaged charts watching for weather events which may dominate the records shown. It is clear the daily pattern dominates the hourly and daily patterns, requiring professional interpretation of the displays. The minute to minute research records will show the weather when the math is applied.
This is a very simple altered view of the '3 Day Weather' chart for Sol 371 to Sol 373.
I added the 'air temperature' line over the 'wind speed', both by inverting the line for a match of the nighttime effects(fainter), and daytime as a non-inverted line(darker) also overlain.
The Blue(night) and Day(yellow) lines show correlated day and night patterns at times dominating the chart patterns, displaying complex relationships of timing offset and much detail which others will extract from the minute to minute records.
The slight path of air pressure which is long term is clear in the red lines as three correlated effects patterns.
I don't believe I should interpret the information by cause, but it is clear there is a daily set of controlling factors that can be extracted from even the simple view I built from a single three day chart view.
Looking forward to a trained view of the research as it arrives online.

Image credits, originals; NASA/JPL-Caltech

There is no claim that my interpretations of the basic charts is accurate or scientific in content, simply a use of an image editor to apply very simplified timing and averaged trends by hourly and daily suggestions indicated by the simplest chart line angles shown.

Dana Johnson

Posts: 1195

Reply: 197

PostPosted: December 17, 2019 11:25 AM 

Events in both hemispheres affect the climate at the equatorial region, so this aspect from the Maven research seemed worthwhile as a study of details which may be part of the story in the weather charts. Possibly this is part of the explanation for the high altitude 'cloud' visible in telescope views of Mars Southern and equatorial a few years past?

In the current circumstance, the hammering has taken the device to near the surface level accomplished in prior months. The latest view for Sol 374.

Dana Johnson

Posts: 1195

Reply: 198

PostPosted: December 19, 2019 10:51 AM 

The Twitter entries for Insight mission are a good reference for some details and anigifs.

Today's weather report update includes another event which is difficult to see in the general imaging and site reporting. A screen capture here is marked for the Sol 377 maximum temperature detail. A high of -47.3 F defines a weather event with nearly routine wind speeds, fairly steady trend of declining pressure figures, and no advisement onsite of where the change originates nor why the temperature can change so much for both this maximum and the recent extreme low.

This is an unrelated view of high altitude 'sprites' from far above thunderclouds on Earth. It was imaged from a location near my home area, and while not a Mars weather characteristic, shows high altitude activity for our Earth bound water and oxygen atmosphere events which are only recently being discovered and evidenced on our planet.

Dana Johnson

Posts: 1195

Reply: 199

PostPosted: December 21, 2019 10:38 AM 

The updated weather report for Sol 377 shows both the maximum and the average has been adjusted, with all other details the same for the day.
The adjustment moves the weather into register with other days and trends of the week.
The image is an anigif overlay of just the one day former view, added to the following(current) days weather report. I decided to leave the single figure boxed in red, with the changed average figure not marked.
This has happened on previous days from time to time, but clears some confusion about repeated large changes in weather detail seen as common. The slight trends of pressure and temperature are continuing.
No apparent change in the hammering depth.

Dana Johnson

Posts: 1195

Reply: 200

PostPosted: January 7, 2020 6:41 PM 

Accessing this topic, I am still stuck on reply #193, Dec. 8, 2019.
The weather is steadily sliding into lesser pressure and the temperatures are now remaining at the '0 F' range as maximums.
Wind is swinging SE from SSW this week.

Possibly the wait for warmer afternoons is a forward thought in the teams minds?

Previous 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 Next

Join the conversation:

Very Happy Smile Sad Surprised
Shocked Confused Cool Laughing
Mad Razz Embarassed Crying or Very Sad
Evil or Very Mad Twisted Evil Rolling Eyes Wink
Powered by MTSmileys