By Mike Greife,
May 2, 2017
WARRENSBURG, MO – Combining technical knowledge with problem-solving and teamwork,
12 University of Central Missouri students recently returned from the 2017 NASA Human
Exploration Rover Challenge at the U.S. Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville, Ala.,
with an impressive finish and a list of improvements for next year’s team.
This was the third trip to the annual event for the UCM team and the two lunar rover
prototypes they designed and built. This year’s team placed 4th and 6th out of 50
teams from around the world in the race, and they received first place in the Drive
Train Technology Challenge.
Rover Challenge 2017
Rover drivers Brittany Kallenberger and Casey Philpot demonstrate the rover’s ability
to navigate a variety of terrains during a practice run on course at UCM.
A direct drive transmission on one of the rovers was developed by the team to replace
the traditional chain drive. The new concept drew the attention of Debra Barnhart,
chief executive officer and executive director of the U.S. Space and Rocket Center.
Barnhart visited with the UCM team after they had competed and complimented them on
their ingenuity.
The rules for construction and operation of the rover in the competition require each
team to design and build a vehicle that is human-powered and steerable. Wheels were
to be large enough to navigate over obstacles such as large rocks and sandy terrain,
but pneumatic tires were not allowed. Fenders were required to control dust, and the
vehicle must fit into a 5x5x5-foot box when disassembled. In addition, the two drivers
providing pedal power in the vehicle must be able to carry it a minimum of 20 feet
and assemble it.
Additional specifications addressed turning radius and safety equipment for passengers.
Each vehicle was required to complete a specially designed course of timed travel
that included varying grades and obstacles.
“They’re making progress each year,” said Shelby Scott, advisor for the team. He is
confident that next year’s team can place even better, based upon the insights of
this year’s team.
According to Scott, the strategic planning put into the design and construction of
each vehicle is equaled by the strategy required to drive the vehicle in the competition.
The weight of the vehicle and the two-person team piloting it is carefully evaluated
to create a vehicle that is as light as possible with as much human power possible,
resulting in increased speed and maneuverability. Vehicle drivers are carefully selected
for their strength and ability to deal with issues as they arise during the race.
Many of the team members are enrolled in Scott’s Manufacturing Problem Solving course,
along with other students who are interested in the project.
“It’s about teaching them to work as a team and solve problems,” Scott said. “They
have to apply the knowledge they’ve gained in the classroom, analyze what went wrong
and what went right last year, and determine what materials and design elements they
can use to create a better rover vehicle for the next year’s competition.”
Financial support through an Opportunity Grant from the UCM Alumni Foundation assists
with the purchase of materials. Scott and team members also research sources for the
best prices on available materials, and all parts that can be used from one of the
previous year’s vehicles are reused.
For the students, the opportunity to compete is equaled by the experience of designing
and building a vehicle that will survive the obstacle course and complete it in record
time. The course changes each year, and competitors are not aware of what challenges
they will face on the course until they arrive at the competition.
“Everybody on the team has something to offer,” said team member Callie Gieselman.
“A lot of our final decisions were the result of trial and error, but everyone had
ideas, and everyone was part of the discussion. That variety of ideas and skills were
important.”
Plans for vehicle design changes for the 2018 competition already are underway.
“This was our third year in the competition,” Scott said, “Each year, the students
on the team have made improvements based upon what they learned along the way, and
the next year’s team has implemented those improvements and made them work. I’m confident
next year’s team will do the same. We just keep getting better, and I think we have
a good shot at a very good finish.”
