Animated GIF Sol 502 from IDC shows a little re-positioning on the end cap and possibly a pre-loading.
Maybe this is in preparation for another hammering session?
Click to view attachment
Full Version: InSight Surface Operations
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26
I have a Good Feeling about this!
a couple of those frames from sol502 had enough parallax for stereograms:
Click to view attachmentClick to view attachment
Click to view attachmentClick to view attachment
Sol 509 'Hammer Time' (animated GIF)
IDC 14 frames (reduced is size to meet the upload limits) but no other processing
Click to view attachment
IDC 14 frames (reduced is size to meet the upload limits) but no other processing
Click to view attachment
QUOTE (PaulH51 @ May 3 2020, 07:11 AM) 
Sol 509 'Hammer Time' (animated GIF)
Looks like the mole went in about 3/4in.
Interestingly, right around the time that Insight launched, researchers came up with an interesting result, and a bit of advice for future heat-flow experiments, based on the results from Apollo.
It was too late for Insight to benefit from this lesson, but at least we can be sure that Insight did not disturb the locale as much as an Apollo mission did. And now, we hope that we get the instrument underground so that that matters.
https://eos.org/research-spotlights/the-cas...-finally-solved
It was too late for Insight to benefit from this lesson, but at least we can be sure that Insight did not disturb the locale as much as an Apollo mission did. And now, we hope that we get the instrument underground so that that matters.
https://eos.org/research-spotlights/the-cas...-finally-solved
Bonjour,
It seems to me that there has been a clear evolution of the situation.
I feel like the bucket is almost at ground level...
Let’s wait for Paul’s Gif and hope for an article by Tilmann Spohn...
https://mars.nasa.gov/insight-raw-images/su...0000_0817M_.JPG
It seems to me that there has been a clear evolution of the situation.
I feel like the bucket is almost at ground level...
Let’s wait for Paul’s Gif and hope for an article by Tilmann Spohn...
https://mars.nasa.gov/insight-raw-images/su...0000_0817M_.JPG
In this picture, my diagnosis seems more obvious :
https://mars.nasa.gov/insight-raw-images/su...0000_0817M_.JPG
https://mars.nasa.gov/insight-raw-images/su...0000_0817M_.JPG
QUOTE (JRehling @ May 6 2020, 02:34 AM)
It was too late for Insight to benefit from this lesson, but at least we can be sure that Insight did not disturb the locale as much as an Apollo mission did. And now, we hope that we get the instrument underground so that that matters.
6 years and the subsurface was still warming up? How long until equilibrium? I wonder if the number of lunar days matters, and I suppose 6 years is only 72 days.
QUOTE (stevesliva @ May 7 2020, 03:19 PM)
6 years and the subsurface was still warming up? How long until equilibrium? I wonder if the number of lunar days matters, and I suppose 6 years is only 72 days.
The foot prints and other surface disturbances effect how heat is absorbed from the sun so maybe you should ask how long they will last.
QUOTE (stevesliva @ May 7 2020, 09:19 AM)
6 years and the subsurface was still warming up? How long until equilibrium?
'Equilibrium' is not a straightforward concept here. The basic issue is the propagation of a surface disturbance (and for the principal goal of HP3, heat flow, all solar effects - diurnal, seasonal, etc. - are 'disturbances') into a conductive medium : this is a depth- and time-dependent effect.
Basically the e-folding propagation distance is (kappa * tau)^0.5, where kappa is the thermal diffusivity (typically 1E-7 to 1E-6 m^2/s for regoliths, or most materials) and tau is the time in seconds. You can assess the relevance of this length scale, by substituting how long it takes a hot potato to cool down from some initial condition, or a pea, or an asteroid...
Anyway, the reason HP3 needs to pull the sensors down to 3-5m is to get below the seasonal (annual) heat wave (tau~7E7s). Note that surface disturbances with a longer timescale will propagate deeper, and could influence the interpretation of the temperature gradient into a geothermal heat flux. I wrote a paper (Icarus, 2015, I think) showing that if the Little Ice Age on Earth (200-1000 yrs, tau ~ 6E9-3E10s) were due to a change in solar constant, there might be a measureable change in the Mars subsurface temperature gradient at the depths accessible to HP3 (and down to some tens of meters). There is a LIA signal in Greenland ice cap temperature profiles. Confidently attributing a measurement on Mars to such an effect would be a challenge (you'd be better off on the moon, I guess). [NB there is some evidence, notably the weaker climatological signatures in the terrestrial southern hemisphere, that the temporal association of the LIA with the Maunder Minimum in sunspots, and thus a possible reduced solar constant, is coincidental, and that the LIA was caused by e.g. volcanic effects]
Anyway, if HP3 does get going and gets down to 3m+ depth, the near-surface temperature changes due to any albedo effects by soft-landing propulsion will not matter, they will not have had time to propagate down.
In view of this picture, I have the unpleasant feeling that the probe is now practically lying on the ground ...
https://mars.nasa.gov/insight-raw-images/su...0000_0817M_.JPG
https://mars.nasa.gov/insight-raw-images/su...0000_0817M_.JPG
QUOTE (Quetzalcoatl @ May 12 2020, 12:26 PM)
In view of this picture, I have the unpleasant feeling that the probe is now practically lying on the ground ...
https://mars.nasa.gov/insight-raw-images/su...0000_0817M_.JPG
https://mars.nasa.gov/insight-raw-images/su...0000_0817M_.JPG
The context camera can me zoomed to show the angle:
Click to view attachment
That's superb insight (no pun intended), Ralph. It is certainly a priori surprising to have a system still seeking equilibrium after years, but that just speaks to how different situations like this are from our everyday experience.
I've felt the frosty chill in two different caves on two different hot, summer Midwestern days (~12C in the cave, ~30C at the surface), however, which makes it clear that a few months is not enough time for equilibrium to be reached at that particular depth – not even close – so a few years is not wildly outside that range.
It may also be worth noting that Apollo 15 messed up the surface a lot more than, say, Apollo 11, and certainly vastly more than Mars Insight. They had two astronauts and a car operating on three different EVAs. The effect certainly would have been less if one astronaut had walked down the ladder, installed the heat probe, and then they blasted off. (And, speculation on my part – what was the contribution of powered descent and ascent? Mars Insight only has descent.)
I've felt the frosty chill in two different caves on two different hot, summer Midwestern days (~12C in the cave, ~30C at the surface), however, which makes it clear that a few months is not enough time for equilibrium to be reached at that particular depth – not even close – so a few years is not wildly outside that range.
It may also be worth noting that Apollo 15 messed up the surface a lot more than, say, Apollo 11, and certainly vastly more than Mars Insight. They had two astronauts and a car operating on three different EVAs. The effect certainly would have been less if one astronaut had walked down the ladder, installed the heat probe, and then they blasted off. (And, speculation on my part – what was the contribution of powered descent and ascent? Mars Insight only has descent.)
QUOTE (stevesliva @ May 12 2020, 06:51 PM)
The context camera can me zoomed to show the angle:
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment
Thank you Steve,
I had imagined an even more critical situation
Another hammer session takes the mole closer to being flush
Sol 523 IDC camera over about 7 minutes Animated GIF of 9 selected frames.
Click to view attachment
Sol 523 IDC camera over about 7 minutes Animated GIF of 9 selected frames.
Click to view attachment
Sol 530: animation of cropped IDC frames shows the scoop being re-positioned on the end cap of the mole. Recent activities suggest the next hammer session may be on or about May 31, 2020
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment
Hope in troubled times: Sol 536 animation of the latest push on the end cap of the mole, ends with the mole flush with the ground 
Link to the animation on Streamable
Link to the animation on Streamable
Nice to see that! Meanwhile, here is a possible blast from the past...
Click to view attachment
This picture shows two CTX images of an area about 100 km east of the InSight landing site, the top one taken a couple of months after the landing. The bottom one is from a decade before the landing.
There is a dark spot in the more recent image but not the older image. It is just outside the rim of an oldish crater, and there seems to be a small dark spot within it. The size and location relative to the landing site are broadly similar to the impact of part of the Curiosity cruise stage relative to that landing site:
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/MRO/mult...a/pia16456.html
Curiosity's cruise stage broke into two large pieces and several smaller pieces, whose impacts were imaged by HiRISE. It is possible that this dark marking is the site of the impact of InSight's cruise stage or part of it. So far these are the only two images of the site that I can find.
No guarantees that this is correct! But other albedo markings in the images are pretty much identical between images. I will get a more detailed analysis out later with properly scaled and processed images.
EDIT: probably a bit too far south, but I don't see anything further north yet.
Another edit: looking at the approach groundtrack, may not be as far off as I thought. This might be it. I have requested a HiRISE image.
Phil
Click to view attachment
This picture shows two CTX images of an area about 100 km east of the InSight landing site, the top one taken a couple of months after the landing. The bottom one is from a decade before the landing.
There is a dark spot in the more recent image but not the older image. It is just outside the rim of an oldish crater, and there seems to be a small dark spot within it. The size and location relative to the landing site are broadly similar to the impact of part of the Curiosity cruise stage relative to that landing site:
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/MRO/mult...a/pia16456.html
Curiosity's cruise stage broke into two large pieces and several smaller pieces, whose impacts were imaged by HiRISE. It is possible that this dark marking is the site of the impact of InSight's cruise stage or part of it. So far these are the only two images of the site that I can find.
No guarantees that this is correct! But other albedo markings in the images are pretty much identical between images. I will get a more detailed analysis out later with properly scaled and processed images.
EDIT: probably a bit too far south, but I don't see anything further north yet.
Another edit: looking at the approach groundtrack, may not be as far off as I thought. This might be it. I have requested a HiRISE image.
Phil
Nice work, Phil. It looks like a small impactor hit just outside a small, existing crater. There may be some clues there in the way the extremely local topography blocked the blast which could then indicate the direction of the impactor?
Possibly! I'm looking forward to seeing the HiRISE view of this feature. Ray-like extensions of the dark markings (easily visible for the Curiosity cruise stage) will also help reveal the direction. Additional small impactors would also be of interest, suggesting fragmentation before impact.
Phil
Phil
Bonjour,
Finally detailed news of HP3 is given to us by T. Spohn on his blog. Things are progressing favorably...
https://www.dlr.de/blogs/en/all-blog-posts/...on-logbook.aspx
From the gif he regularly offers us, Paul had established the right diagnosis
Finally detailed news of HP3 is given to us by T. Spohn on his blog. Things are progressing favorably...
https://www.dlr.de/blogs/en/all-blog-posts/...on-logbook.aspx
From the gif he regularly offers us, Paul had established the right diagnosis
QUOTE (Quetzalcoatl @ Jun 3 2020, 12:09 PM)
This all sounds great! Go mole, go...
QUOTE
Therefore, the next step will be another hammering with the scoop pushing on the back-cap. During that hammering, we expect the scoop to be stopped by the regolith (if it has not been stopped already at the end of the Sol 536 hammering) and we can see whether the Mole is able to dig on its own. We call this the 'free-Mole' test.
Clearly, the Mole was not stopped by a stone as has been suggested
You may recall that our leading theory was that the Mole did not move into the subsurface because the regolith did not provide enough friction to balance the recoil force of the Mole. Although this force is much smaller than the force that drives the Mole forward (five to seven newtons as compared to 900 newtons) it still needs to be provided by the overburden pressure. Calculations that I had discussed earlier in this blog suggest that the friction force will suffice if the Mole is fully buried. Some additional friction can be provided if we use the arm to load the surface, which we will do.
Should the Mole move into the subsurface on its own (albeit being helped somewhat by the regolith push), friction will increase and improve the situation as the Mole moves deeper. When the Mole back cap is at a depth of approximately 20 centimetres, loading the surface will have become ineffective and the regolith push should no longer be necessary. We will then do what we planned to do more than a year ago – command the Mole to hammer to depth.
So, you see, the next step, the free Mole test, will be very exciting. But what if the Mole is just not deep enough in for sufficient friction? We then have two options, either fill the pit to provide more friction and push on the regolith, or use the scoop to push at the back-cap again, but this time with its tip rather than with its flat bottom surface. This would be a somewhat more difficult operation but doable, as the Instrument Deployment Arm (IDA) team thinks.
Clearly, the Mole was not stopped by a stone as has been suggested
You may recall that our leading theory was that the Mole did not move into the subsurface because the regolith did not provide enough friction to balance the recoil force of the Mole. Although this force is much smaller than the force that drives the Mole forward (five to seven newtons as compared to 900 newtons) it still needs to be provided by the overburden pressure. Calculations that I had discussed earlier in this blog suggest that the friction force will suffice if the Mole is fully buried. Some additional friction can be provided if we use the arm to load the surface, which we will do.
Should the Mole move into the subsurface on its own (albeit being helped somewhat by the regolith push), friction will increase and improve the situation as the Mole moves deeper. When the Mole back cap is at a depth of approximately 20 centimetres, loading the surface will have become ineffective and the regolith push should no longer be necessary. We will then do what we planned to do more than a year ago – command the Mole to hammer to depth.
So, you see, the next step, the free Mole test, will be very exciting. But what if the Mole is just not deep enough in for sufficient friction? We then have two options, either fill the pit to provide more friction and push on the regolith, or use the scoop to push at the back-cap again, but this time with its tip rather than with its flat bottom surface. This would be a somewhat more difficult operation but doable, as the Instrument Deployment Arm (IDA) team thinks.
"...fill the pit to provide more friction and push on the regolith..."
I like this option! Although I hope no further options are necessary. Feeling optimistic!
I like this option! Although I hope no further options are necessary. Feeling optimistic!
Animated GIF using 11 processed IDC frames: Features a scoop reposition and a hammer session during sol 543.
There was a delay (see time stamps and lighting change) between the scoop being re-positioned and the hammer session, I guess that could be a ground in the loop delay prior to the hammer session? Whatever it was, there was some definite progress, and the mole is now a little deeper (see the movement of the tether) and the front edge of the scoop ended up just below the surface of the regolith. Here's a link to a larger resolution (MP4) version, as the one posted here was reduced to 640x640 to fit the upload limits LINK.
Click to view attachment
There was a delay (see time stamps and lighting change) between the scoop being re-positioned and the hammer session, I guess that could be a ground in the loop delay prior to the hammer session? Whatever it was, there was some definite progress, and the mole is now a little deeper (see the movement of the tether) and the front edge of the scoop ended up just below the surface of the regolith. Here's a link to a larger resolution (MP4) version, as the one posted here was reduced to 640x640 to fit the upload limits LINK.
Click to view attachment
I'm wondering about the slack in the tether, will it be long enough to get to operational depth? There's no need to reposition the main structure support assembly again, it will just 'unwind' as intended? It's just this illustration that got me concerned that perhaps they might need the arm to reposition the assembly once more. The science tether and engineering tether are all just one long piece?
Great news otherwise, of course!
Great news otherwise, of course!
QUOTE (Explorer1 @ Jun 8 2020, 07:45 AM)
I'm wondering about the slack in the tether, will it be long enough to get to operational depth? There's no need to reposition the main structure support assembly again, it will just 'unwind' as intended? It's just this illustration that got me concerned that perhaps they might need the arm to reposition the assembly once more. The science tether and engineering tether are all just one long piece?
Great news otherwise, of course!
Great news otherwise, of course!
Repositioning of the HP3 housing over the mole to reduce the possibility of snags / damage to the tether is one of the things the team were considering after the mole starts to make unassisted progress (posted by a team member on Reddit)
I not convinced that the science and engineering tethers are one continuous piece of ribbon as the engineering tether gathers measurement data from the TLM (located inside the housing) and triggers the frangible bolt mechanism that released the mole from the housing are both mounted in the housing, so it's logical that they are separate cables.
QUOTE (PaulH51 @ Jun 7 2020, 04:16 PM)
I not convinced that the science and engineering tethers are one continuous piece of ribbon...
They are separate. The science tether is the cable that connects to the mole. The engineering tether connects the spacecraft to the support structure. There's a diagram in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_Flow_and...perties_Package
Sol 550 (June 12, 2020) The mole is pushed below the surface with the scoop on the robotic arm.
Here is a link to a simple timelapse of the 17 available IDC frames, the file was too large to upload here, so the link should open the looping animation on a streaming service: LINK
EDIT 2:
They downlinked 2 more IDC frames, so I assembled another animation.
There is strong indication of some 'free mole' penetration 'after' the scoop stops moving .
Note the movement of the science tether throughout the animation. Also note at frame 12 the sand grains in the scoop stop moving as the mole continues down, indicating they are no longer in contact.
If that's correct it's great news indeed.
I'll add another animation if additional IDC images are downlinked.
Here is the link to the 19 frame version LINK
One processed frame from the animation
Click to view attachment
Here is a link to a simple timelapse of the 17 available IDC frames, the file was too large to upload here, so the link should open the looping animation on a streaming service: LINK
EDIT 2:
They downlinked 2 more IDC frames, so I assembled another animation.
There is strong indication of some 'free mole' penetration 'after' the scoop stops moving .
Note the movement of the science tether throughout the animation. Also note at frame 12 the sand grains in the scoop stop moving as the mole continues down, indicating they are no longer in contact.
If that's correct it's great news indeed.
I'll add another animation if additional IDC images are downlinked.
Here is the link to the 19 frame version LINK
One processed frame from the animation
Click to view attachment
That's great! Can the GIF be downloaded? I don't see how at the moment.
Is there a bit of a jump upwards just before the end? - based on the tether movement. The last few frames look like they might be going down-down-up-down-down.
The tether touched the surface on sol 543 and has now lifted up to reveal an impression in the surface.
Phil
Is there a bit of a jump upwards just before the end? - based on the tether movement. The last few frames look like they might be going down-down-up-down-down.
The tether touched the surface on sol 543 and has now lifted up to reveal an impression in the surface.
Phil
Here's a cropped version to fit at 3mb limit. despite a slight hiccup near the end, i don't detect any rebound of the ribbon after that, very promising!
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment
QUOTE (atomoid @ Jun 16 2020, 04:39 AM)
Here's a cropped version to fit at 3mb limit. despite a slight hiccup near the end, i don't detect any rebound of the ribbon after that, very promising!
Nice: They downlinked another 6 IDC images, I added them in for completeness LINK
Thank you very much Paul
Not long ago, I was beginning to despair.
Seeing your beautiful animation, it is possible to regain hope.
Not long ago, I was beginning to despair.
Seeing your beautiful animation, it is possible to regain hope.
OOPS !
What is "OOPS"?
Don't scare me without saying what the problem is.
Looking at the animation, I don't see any problem but maybe I'm missing something.
Don't scare me without saying what the problem is.
Looking at the animation, I don't see any problem but maybe I'm missing something.
QUOTE (JRehling @ Jun 16 2020, 02:14 PM)
What is "OOPS"?
My guess: double post deleted
I’m sorry I caused some concern.
It was indeed a duplicate of my last post.
I will do penance and recite ten times and fully the charter of the forum.
[ADMIN: We have granted you absolution. ]
It was indeed a duplicate of my last post.
I will do penance and recite ten times and fully the charter of the forum.
[ADMIN: We have granted you absolution.
]
Sol 557
Looks like we had a short push of the scoop to apply pressure onto the regolith, followed by a 'free mole session', sadly what little progress the mole made appeared to be cancelled by small amounts of backing out.
I'm guessing the hull of the mole lost friction and we could be seeing small bounces. Note the grains of sand moving in the scoop which may suggest the mole was in contact with the underside of the scoop while hammering.
Here's a link to an MP4 file of the animated GIF that used 17 IDC frames LINK
More frames may be in the system
EDIT: As expected, 6 more IDC frames came down to fill in some of the gaps in the timelapse, one frame had data drop-out so I've only added the 5 full frames to the animation (now uses 22 frames).
The revised timelapse basically smooths out the action, but does not change the result LINK
EDIT 2: And more... Here's the 25 frame version: LINK
Looks like we had a short push of the scoop to apply pressure onto the regolith, followed by a 'free mole session', sadly what little progress the mole made appeared to be cancelled by small amounts of backing out.
I'm guessing the hull of the mole lost friction and we could be seeing small bounces. Note the grains of sand moving in the scoop which may suggest the mole was in contact with the underside of the scoop while hammering.
Here's a link to an MP4 file of the animated GIF that used 17 IDC frames LINK
More frames may be in the system
EDIT: As expected, 6 more IDC frames came down to fill in some of the gaps in the timelapse, one frame had data drop-out so I've only added the 5 full frames to the animation (now uses 22 frames).
The revised timelapse basically smooths out the action, but does not change the result LINK
EDIT 2: And more... Here's the 25 frame version: LINK
Is there motion out there? Looking at the ribbon, I see a very tiny bit of motion out, but I have no sense of whether or not slack in the ribbon is moving laterally.
It's clearly not moving down much, or maybe at all, but I can't tell if it's moving up, either.
It looks like there's a lot of possibility now to pack soil on top of the mole, press down with the arm, and resume hammering.
It's clearly not moving down much, or maybe at all, but I can't tell if it's moving up, either.
It looks like there's a lot of possibility now to pack soil on top of the mole, press down with the arm, and resume hammering.
For me, I discern light going and coming suggestive but not very exciting.
But will I have absolution this time ?
But will I have absolution this time ?
Bonjour,
As we might have feared, the news of the mole given to us by Tilman Spohn is not good. Recovery operations will continue... in vain most certainly...
https://www.dlr.de/blogs/en/all-blog-posts/...on-logbook.aspx
As we might have feared, the news of the mole given to us by Tilman Spohn is not good. Recovery operations will continue... in vain most certainly...
https://www.dlr.de/blogs/en/all-blog-posts/...on-logbook.aspx
It ain't over till it's over.
They're going to remove scoop, image, wait awhile, fill, press, and try again.
They're going to remove scoop, image, wait awhile, fill, press, and try again.
I hope that the arm can now be freed up to complete the panorama imaging. I could really use a full panorama, foreground as well as horizon. We have most of it but I think there are gaps. If I'm wrong, I hope we see it soon.
Phil
Phil
QUOTE (Phil Stooke @ Jul 9 2020, 12:05 AM)
I hope that the arm can now be freed up to complete the panorama imaging. I could really use a full panorama, foreground as well as horizon. We have most of it but I think there are gaps. If I'm wrong, I hope we see it soon.
Phil
Phil
Bonjour Phil,
On the official website of Insight we are told that the arm would first be used for an inspection of solar panels with its camera. In a second step, it would be oriented towards the sky for meteor observations. The purpose of these would be to see if it would be possible to correlate a luminous phenomenon with, shortly after, a recording of impact by SEIS...
For the panorama imaging, I don't know...
That news release is here. I think correlating with SEIS is a second goal - first is just to image meteors to get a sense of their frequency. Given we don't have any absolutely unambiguous meteor imaging from the surface, it seems like a long shot. But of course the more imaging we do the better the odds.
QUOTE (Phil Stooke @ Jul 8 2020, 04:05 PM)
I hope that the arm can now be freed up to complete the panorama imaging. I could really use a full panorama, foreground as well as horizon.
https://www.planetary.org/multimedia/space-...trait-as-a.html seems pretty complete, though it's hard to tell what gaps might have been filled and how.
I couldn't find an "official version" of the 360 pan anywhere, or even a well-documented amateur version -- maybe there's one upthread here?
I could bug Justin Maki about this but I've already bugged him enough for M2020 stuff.
That 360 view looks really nice, but it's not real. It is a partial panorama with gaps filled by cloning. One bit of evidence is the 'Rolling Stones Rock' which appears twice with its rolling track, one version flipped.
Phil
Phil
QUOTE (Phil Stooke @ Jul 9 2020, 09:31 AM)
That 360 view looks really nice, but it's not real. It is a partial panorama with gaps filled by cloning.
I should have suspected as much, but I still don't know just how many gaps remain if you look at the whole image dataset.
I have been working with the full image set. We have a full horizon panorama and all the workspace. I think there may be a few gaps around the edges of the workspace. It's possible we have the full area covered, but the neither the InSight team nor the wizards here have released a full cylindrical panorama including all of the workspace, which is what I am looking for to support other mapping. Eventually they intend to produce full panoramas with two or three different illumination directions.
Phil
Phil
Bonjour,
Without wanting to be systematically critical, it also seems that the efficiency of wind protection (WTS) is relatively poor.
I quote from the link provided yesterday by Fredk regarding SEIS operations :
"InSight's seismometer, called the Seismic Experiment for Interior Structure (SEIS), detected its first marsquake nearly three months after starting its measurements in January 2019. By the fall of 2019, it was detecting a potential quake or two per day. While SEIS has detected more than 480 seismic signals overall, the rate has dropped to less than one per week."
"This rate change is tied to seasonal variations of atmospheric turbulence, which creates noise that covers up the tiny quake signals. Despite the protective Wind and Thermal Shield, SEIS is sensitive enough that shaking from the wind hitting the shield can make quakes harder to isolate."
The difficulties to overcome are innumerable for the accomplishment of a planetary mission, I am perfectly aware of it. And the unexpected takes its share.
Let’s see how the WTS was sold to us before the launch of Insight:
https://www.seis-insight.eu/en/public-2/seis-instrument/wts
Without wanting to be systematically critical, it also seems that the efficiency of wind protection (WTS) is relatively poor.
I quote from the link provided yesterday by Fredk regarding SEIS operations :
"InSight's seismometer, called the Seismic Experiment for Interior Structure (SEIS), detected its first marsquake nearly three months after starting its measurements in January 2019. By the fall of 2019, it was detecting a potential quake or two per day. While SEIS has detected more than 480 seismic signals overall, the rate has dropped to less than one per week."
"This rate change is tied to seasonal variations of atmospheric turbulence, which creates noise that covers up the tiny quake signals. Despite the protective Wind and Thermal Shield, SEIS is sensitive enough that shaking from the wind hitting the shield can make quakes harder to isolate."
The difficulties to overcome are innumerable for the accomplishment of a planetary mission, I am perfectly aware of it. And the unexpected takes its share.
Let’s see how the WTS was sold to us before the launch of Insight:
https://www.seis-insight.eu/en/public-2/seis-instrument/wts
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.