DEVELOPTMENT AND OPERATIVE PERFORMANCE ANALYSES OF THE

MODULAR ROVER CHASSIS PLATFORM (MRCP)

Moritz Nitz (1), Tristan Meyer (1), Sabine Klinkner (1)

(1)
Institute of Space Systems, University of Stuttgart
Pfaffenwaldring 29, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany
nitz@irs.uni-stuttgart.de, tmeyer@irs.uni-stuttgart.de, klinkner@irs.uni-stuttgart.de

1. ABSTRACT formulated in order to be able to verify the chassis

In 2017 the development process for the design and
realisation of a reconfigurable rover chassis platform was
initiated at the Institute of Space Systems (IRS) of the
University of Stuttgart. The intention of this development
was to build up a system that allows a maximum of
configuration adaptability by being able to change major
influencing parameters for an optimised locomotion
performance analyses. More specified, the setup of a
reconfigurable chassis leads to an inevitable contribution
for the verification of analytical and simulation
development tools along with an effective cost reduction
by minimising the amount of required hardware models
and the effort of redevelopment. The proceeding design
process strengthened the aim to increase the field of
application by implementing modular interfaces for a
future subsystem and payload integration. The rover
system is described as the Modular Rover Chassis
Platform (MRCP) and is developed in the context of
developing mobile autonomous systems and scientific
exploration technologies. This paper presents the
development procedures for the setup and operation of
the MRCP in order to validate a previously developed
analytical design tool and to investigate the advanced
mobile capabilities of the system.
performance at the IRS test environment and to be
operated in uneven terrain with slopes up to ± 20°, as
well as overcoming obstacle heights of a least 10 cm. For
the operation in a soft-soil environment, the analytical
background was derived by literature assessment for off-
the-road locomotion as formulated by Becker et al [1]
and simplified quasi static kinematic analyses which lead
to the setup of a chassis development tool. The tool
allows top-level analytical analyses of changing
performance parameter as wheel dimensions, individual
subsystem and payload mass variations and relocations,
as well as a more detailed assessment of the influences of
kinematic parameter variations on the suspension system
and the overall rover footprint. Characteristic data output
are the expected wheel-loads during operation in rough
environments, as well as the parameter to determine the
static stability limits of a specific rover configuration.

2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The initial configuration of the MRCP is described by a
wheeled 6 x 6 x 4 system with a rocker-bogie-suspension
system, allowing a maximum footprint of 820 x 700 mm.
A realisation of the chassis out of Aluminium profile
frames allows a straight forward adaption of the design
for changing configuration parameters (Fig. 1). A counter
rotating differential gear connects the left and right sided
rocker bogie suspension, allowing an optimised load
distribution on all wheels. A rectangular central body
structure provides a mechanical interface for additional
subsystem integration. For application within the test-
environment at the IRS facilities, this initial design
includes tethered connection to a mobile power supply
station and control of the rover via an amplified USB data
connection to an external lab computer. Mobility
requirements for the initial MRCP configuration were
Figure 1: MRCP on 20° slope test-track mock-up
Based on derived design requirements of the
development tool, suitable and commercially available
components for the MRCP prototype model were
selected. Driven by a cost-efficient realisation and in
order to fulfil the budget limitation of maximum 4000 €,
all rover subsystems are realised as commercial of the
shelf (COTS) components if applicable and components
manufactured in the institutes workshops as well as by
additive manufacturing. After the successful integration
and first operation of the MRCP, the ongoing verification
of pre-defined design requirements as well as actual
research topics shall be further described.
3. ANALYTICAL ASSESSMENT
Driving design criteria for the analytical assessment are
the implementation of a straight forward adaptability of
the parameters defined by the overall rover configuration
as well as a possibility to further adapt the development
tool for future reconfigurations and additional subsystem
implementations. Characteristic input for the analytical
tool are kinematic parameters of the suspension system
defining the overall footprint of the rover. In the design
tool, all subsystems and components are implemented as
point-masses for calculation simplification, whereas the
mass of structural components is calculated along their
specific weight per length. Major visual output of the tool
is a simplified two dimensional characterisation of the
suspension system kinematics, including characteristic
parameters for the static stability analyses. Characteristic
wheel loads depending on the kinematic parameters
(Fig. 2) as well as the shifting centre of mass during
operation can be derived.
Figure 2: Exemplary kinematic visualisation output for the
MRCP configuration
As the mobile capabilities of the overall system are
especially determined by the wheel load characteristics,
major investigations lie in the verification of these
development parameters. To verify the analytical output
of the development tool as well as to characterise the
MRCP performance a test campaign was set up at the IRS
facilities.
Figure 3: MRCP on a wheel load test platform simulating a
10° slope (left) and a 12cm step (right)
Fig. 3 shows the MRCP setup on a test platform
measuring the static axial wheel loads of the system for a
simulated 10° slope and while overcoming a 12 cm step
obstacle. Characteristic measured wheel loads for the
rover on a flat surface, as well as the output of the
analytical tool for the respective setup are shown in
Tab. 1. The deviation between the analytical calculation
of the actual specific overall MRCP wheel loads on a flat
surface is 1.01 %, whereas the mean deviation for each
wheel is around 3.65 %. This also includes a potential
error of the axial force sensor along the measurement.
Axial force sensors and electronics by Burster (Type
8526) were used for the static force analyses. Calculating
the actual system mass at the surface gravity of
9.81 N/m² the MRCP weight is defined as 18.535 kg.
Table 1: Wheel load distribution vs. analytical output on a flat
solid surface
Left side Right side Total
Wheel No. #1 #3 #5 #2 #4 #6
Mean [N] 29.79 28.66 32.75 29.3 27.57 33.77 181.83
Analytical [N] 30.71 27.69 31.61 30.71 27.69 31.61 180.02
Deviation [%] 3.000 3.476 3.606 4.591 0.425 6.823 1.01
To also verify the impact of the suspension system
kinematics while operating the rover in a rough terrain
environment several tests included the wheel load
classification while driving slopes and overcoming step
sized obstacles, being able to analyse the shift of the
overall centre of mass (CoM) of the system. Tab. 2 gives
the exemplary wheel load characteristics for a 12 cm step
obstacle, whereas the front rocker wheels already
climbed the step and the second pair of wheels rest at its
base (Fig. 3). Further tests included also a nominal
“reverse driving”, resulting the bogie wheels climbing
the obstacles first. The mean divergence between the
development tool and the measured wheel loads
respecting the full test series is 4.23 %.
Table 2: Wheel loads at 12 cm obstacle overcoming
Left side Right side Total
Wheel No. #1 #3 #5 #2 #4 #6
Mean [N] 27.64 28.98 33.03 28.03 28.09 34.71 180.48
Analytical [N] 29.26 28.41 32.34 29.26 28.41 32.34 180.02
Deviation [%] 5.540 2.018 2.127 4.211 1.111 7.315 0.255
Besides the verification of the mass model of the
development tool, the overall centre of mass of the
MRCP can be derived from the wheel load
characterisation. Eq. 1 describes the standard analytical
approach for the CoM calculations exemplary. The
measured wheel loads at the respective wheels were
compared to the analytically calculated.
∑𝑁
𝑛 𝐹𝑛 ∗ 𝑥𝑛
𝐶𝑜𝑀𝑥 = (1)
∑𝑁𝑛 𝐹𝑛
Test results in Tab. 3 show, that the deviation for the
simplified calculation are highest for xCoM with slightly
above 3 %, whereas deviations for yCoM are 0.395 %. The 4. DRIVE UNIT CHARACTERISTICS
vertical coordinate zCoM is directly derived from the Major investigations for an in-depth performance
analytical calculations of the development tool. analyses and especially the validation of the chassis
performance are to provide reliable odometry data of the
Table 3: CoM calculation results
rovers’ proprioceptive feedback sensors. The
Axis CoM (test) [m] CoM (analyt.) [m] Deviation [%]
characteristic data collected on-board the MRCP is
x 0.416 0.404 3.057 mainly defined by the drive unit characteristics. The
y 0.352 0.351 0.395 design loads for the drive unit component selection were
z - 0.201 derived from the analytical assessment, respecting the
expected wheel loads, wheel dimensions as well as
In the context of providing the capabilities of additional tolerable subsystem mass, costs and interface realisation.
subsystem integration, a respective payload mass of 4 kg The selected solution of hall sensor commutated
was implemented and simulated in the tool, located at the brushless DC motor (EC-32) with a 318:1 ceramic
front payload compartment at 𝐶𝑜𝑀𝑃𝑙 = (0.35/ 0.35/ planetary reduction gear by Maxon provide a nominal
0.40). The mass capacity of 4 kg is set as a reasonable torque of up to 4.7 Nm and a maximum continuous
limitation for the actual rover configuration, in order to output speed of up to 25 rpm (Tab. 4). The maximum
maintain required mobility requirements like a maximum allowable continuous input speed of the planetary gear of
slope gradability of a least 20°. 8000 rpm (clock or counter clockwise) is set as an all-
time limitation for the motor speed control. For a closed
loop speed control ESCON 24/4 modules by Maxon are
implemented. For the steering units Dynamixel MX-
64AR servos are integrated, using Maxon motors with
and attached 200:1 metal spur gear to provide up to
6.0 Nm output torque at 12 V supply voltage. 360°
position control is enabled using contactless absolute
encoders with a 4096 steps resolution (see Tab. 4).
Table 4: Drive and steering unit characteristics
Configuration Drive Unit: Maxon Motor Steering Unit: Dynamixel
Type of motor EC 32 flat MX64AR / maxon motor
Nominal motor torque 24,5 mNm
Motor and gear mass 277 g 135 g
Figure 4: Analytical wheel load distribution including an Gear reduction ratio 318:1 (ceramic planetary gear) 200:1 (metal spur gear)
additional 4 kg payload Max. output speed 25 RPM 63 RPM
Max. allowable torque 7,5 Nm 6,0 Nm (at 12 V)
Nominal current 1,06 A
Fig. 4 shows the characteristic wheel load distribution Max. output current limit 3,06 A 5,2 A
output from which the static stability limitations for the Detection of rotor position Digital Hall Sensors Contactless abs. encoder
Mode of operation Speed Controller (Closed Loop) Position control
actual MRCP configuration, including a 4 kg payload, Enable, dig. Input 2, high active 360° for 4096 steps
can be derived as − 47° to + 49° for longitudinal and Set control PWM, digital input 1 RS485 Asych. Serial Com.
15%: -8000 RPM; 85%: 8000 RPM
± 48° for lateral slopes (Fig. 5). A test campaign for the Analog Output 1 Actual Current
verification of the calculated stability limits is part of 0 V: -3.06 A; 1.8 V: 3.06 A
Analog Output 2 Actual Speed
further investigations. 0 V: -8000 RPM; 1.8 V: 8000 RPM

Fig. 6 shows a detailed sketch of the straight forward

Figure 5: Lateral MRCP stability limitations
realisation of the chosen drive and steering unit
components including all mechanical components
(bearings, sealings, housings etc.) provided for structural
rigidity of the system. In the context of a reconfiguration
concept, mechanical and electronical interfaces between
the drive units and adaptable structural components are
designed interchangeable. Future implementation of
different wheels up to a diameter of 0.24 m or even a
variation in the suspension system kinematics can be
easily realised. To prevent a re-routing of the drive unit’s
harness for a future configuration extension, an
additional margin of 5 % was added to the conservatively
calculated required harness length for each wheel
individually (up to a maximum length of 1900 mm).
Figure 6: Drive and steering unit detail sketch (left) and
hardware realisation (right)
To verify motor performance characteristics, a drive unit
test environment was set up. Main goal was to analyse
the rover-sided recorded data compared to the data
recorded by the commercially available motor control
software provided by the manufacturer and haptic
verification tests. The maximum turning speed of the
rover wheel drive units is limited by the allowable input
speed of the ceramic planetary gear of 8000 rpm, which
result in a maximum MRCP velocity for straight driving
of vmax = 21.07 cm/s. Nevertheless, a nominal input speed
(straight forward driving) for all drive units of 1000 rpm
result in the nominal rover velocity vnom = 2.63 cm/s.
First tests for the verification of commanded, recorded
and actual speed control of the drive units were
conducted in a test environment prior to the final
integration of the rover. The tests included all expected
demanded turning speeds during rover operation (up to
8000 rpm clock- and counter clockwise) in either a no
load mode, or with several simulated torque loads (up to
1.50 Nm) at the gear output shaft. Test results for a single
wheel test in Fig. 7 show, that a test series of commanded,
recorded and actual turning speeds can be verified with a
low average speed variation of below 0.7 %. The speed
ramps result from the limited temporal resolution of the
acquired data, as well as by a specific acceleration and
deceleration of the motors. The mean recorded motor
speed deviation for a large scale test series is 3.66 %.
Additionally, correlations between applied load, motor
speed and current were determined in order to analyse the
drive unit characteristics. In a set up test environment
according loads up to 1.5 Nm were applied to a single
drive unit at different motor speeds up to 8000 rpm. In
addition, a respective no load test series was conducted.
Using the motor characteristics provided by the
manufacturer and the no load measurements, the
estimated analytical power consumption was compared
to the one measured at the drive unit.
Figure 7: Motor speed testing at +/- 2000 rpm (0.5 Nm load)
and +/- 8000 rpm (0.25 Nm load) demand
The electrical power consumption (Pel) of a drive unit
(DC motor) follows simplified Eq. 2, which describes the
mechanically applied power (Pmech) due to the load, and
characteristic losses (Ploss) such as friction (Pfric),
acceleration (Pac) and thermal related losses (Ptherm).
𝑃𝑒𝑙 = 𝑃𝑚𝑒𝑐ℎ + 𝑃𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠 = 𝑈 ∗ 𝐼𝑚𝑜𝑡 (2)
Eq. 3 and 4 describe simplified relations of the motor
voltage related to the speed constant kn and motor torque
constant km, which are provided by the manufacturer.
𝑛
𝑈 = 𝐼𝑚𝑜𝑡 ∗ 𝑅 + (3)
𝑘𝑛
𝑀𝐿𝑜𝑎𝑑
𝐼𝑖𝑑 = (4)
𝑘𝑚
The recorded drive unit power consumption results from
the recorded motor current Imot and the corresponding
voltage U, determined by Eq. 3. For DC motors, Eq. 2
can be further derived as formulated in Eq. 5,
implementing the motor resistance R, as well as resistive
torques MRes due to friction, acceleration etc. The no load
current I0 describes losses such as inertia of the rotor,
friction of the bearings, core losses etc.
𝜋
𝑃𝑒𝑙 = ∗ 𝑛 ∗ (𝑀𝐿𝑜𝑎𝑑 + 𝑀𝑅𝑒𝑠 ) + 𝑅 ∗ (𝐼𝑖𝑑 + 𝐼0 )² (5)
30
For the analytical approach, the ideal current Iid (Eq. 4)
resulting for a specific load Mload is calculated. Iid
therefore implies the losses due to the planetary reduction
gear, which are considered to be constant for this
simplification. Fig 8 shows an exemplary plotted drive
unit power consumption at 2000 rpm for varying loads,
comparing the consumption calculated by recorded data
provided from the MRCP and the analytical expected
power consumption. Also, the power consumption
calculated by data recorded from manufacturer software
(ESC) is shown. The overall mean deviation of the
analytical values and the data recorded by the MRCP on-
board computer (OBC) is 5.6 %.
Figure 8: Recorded and analytical drive unit power
consumption for characteristic load tests at 2000 rpm
Due to losses, which might not be respected in this
assessment, deviations may vary for other loads and
motor speeds. Respective tests showed deviations of up
to 8 %.
printed circuit board (PCB) to the drive unit motor
controller (ESC). All ESC can be individually
reconfigured by accessing an integrated micro USB
connector. This interface is also used to simultaneously
transmit the drive unit data to the lab computer and
analyse the data provided by the manufacturer within the
development tests. The servo controller (U2D2) is
directly connected via the BBB`s USB adapter and
provides a RS485 communication to the steering unit
servos. The servo hub also allows daisy chain
transmission between the main controller and the steering
units. The PCB includes a power supply unit, distributing
required bus voltage to all consumers. MRCP main
power supply is provided by a 5 m long twisted and
grounded cable connected to an external mobile power
supply station. Internal converters provide redundant
24 V bus voltage for the drive unit motor controller and
12 V bus voltage for the drive unit interfaces, as well as
a 5 V bus for devices inside the avionics box and the
OBC. The power supply unit also routes a separated
redundant 24 V and 12 V power supply to a D-SUB
interface at the front of the avionics box for the supply of
additional payloads or rover subsystems. All internal
consumers are connected to a redundant fuse board on the
PCB for overvoltage protection.

Similar performance tests were performed with the

steering unit, defining the positioning accuracy of the
actuator in an idle (no load) and operational mode.
Repeated testing showed a mean deviation in the actual
positioning accuracy of 1.03 %. Fig. 9 shows an
exemplary test for a demanded and measured wheel
position of 30° and 60°.

Figure 9: Recorded steering unit performance for demanded

30° and 60° angular position (no load)

5. CONTROL AND ONBOARD DATA

HANDLING
Central element for on-board command and data
handling is the rover’s avionics box, including a
BeagleBone black (BBB) microcontroller as the main on-
board computer. Fig. 10 gives a sketched overview of the
main electronic components. The BBB is connected by a Figure 10: Simplified schematics of the MRCP avionics box
For the actual design of the MRCP and operation within
the IRS test environment, communication to the rover
OBC is accessed via an 5 m amplified USB cable
connected to the backside of the avionics box, accessing
via SSH on a lab computer. Using the BeagleBone
controller as the main computing unit, a control network
in Python was set up to command all drive and steering
units respectively and transmit all collected data (motor
currents, motor speed, servo position and load, etc.) to the
lab computer for analyses. Each motor controller
provides feedback of the actual motor current and wheel
turning speed as an analogue signal. To reduce the
amount of required analogue IO-pins on the BBB two
analogue multiplexer switches (Fig. 11) are
implemented.

Figure 12: Exemplary harness design for the drive and steering
unit

For the rover control, a graphical user interface (GUI) can

be accessed via a Python web-server hosted by the OBC
(Fig. 13), providing major control functions to the rover
operator, such as overall speed and steering control, as
well as the selection of the operational modes of the rover
relevant for locomotion. For the rover operation it can be
derived between Dual-Ackermann, point-turning, skid-
steering or idle mode. Data recording can be activated
separately. A generated standardised JSON file provides
all recorded outgoing data with a constant time step,
which can be transmitted via the webserver. All recorded
Figure 11: ADG switch schematics for the motor controller
data recording parameter per time step can also be monitored in the
console during operation.
Standardised 15 pin D-SUB connectors outside the
rover’s avionic box provide the interface for the required
communication lanes and power supply for the harness
routing to the drive and steering units. To prevent signal
interference and to allow a stable electronic commutation
of the brushless DC motors using digital hall sensors,
separately shielded and twisted cables are used for the
harness routing to the drive and steering units. Fig. 12
shows the exemplary harness design for the J1 drive and
steering unit. As shown, two separately twisted and
shielded cables are used for the three motor windings
(M1 to M3) and the motor commutation. A third
separately shielded cable leads to the drive unit
connector. A total harness mass for the external drive unit
connection of around 1.6 kg is still an open point for mass
reduction.

Figure 13: Rover control panel GUI

During operation, the maximum allowable speed of
± 8000 rpm can be submitted directly depending on the
operational mode. The relative turning angle for a Dual-
Ackermann steering manoeuvre can be submitted
between ± 60°, which results in a minimum effective
MRCP turning radius of 0.36 m. This is set as a minimum
value as the induced centre of rotation describes almost a
point turn around the left- or right-sided central wheel.
Forcing very low turning speeds of below 300 rpm at the
respective wheels can result in motor commutation
problems especially when under load, and are not
recommended by the manufacturer.
6. PERFORMANCE ANALYSES
Full system performance test allow insight of all related
parameters to analyse derivations to the analytical
assessment of a nominal test environment. In Fig. 15 and
Fig. 16 the recorded motor rpm and steering unit
positions are given for a 60° clockwise 4000 rpm
Ackermann steering manoeuvre. The dashed lines in the
figures indicate the analytical demand value. The
nominal deviation between the demand and the actual
wheel turning speed is 0.96 %. For very low demanded
motor speeds this deviation may increase due to the
described hall sensor commutation problems.

l
r

Figure 14: Control modes of the MRCP (sketched)

All individual turning angles of each steering unit for a

Dual-Ackermann manoeuvre can be simplified along
Figure 15: Recorded motor speed for 60° Dual-Ackermann
Eq. 6, whereby the control algorithm distinguishes manoeuvre at 4000 rpm
between left or right side driving.
The steering units reach and hold the demanded position
𝑙𝑖 𝑙𝑖 of 𝜃𝐴𝐶+60° = (203° / 240° / 157° / 120°) along the
𝛽𝑖 = arctan 𝑎𝑖 = arctan (6)
𝑏 𝑏 required manoeuvre time. The deviations between
(𝑟 − ) (𝑟 + )
2 2
demanded ideal Ackermann and actual recorded wheel
The nominal chassis turning radius of the MRCP is positions are below 0.8 %.
calculated geometrically after Eq. 7 for a respective
turning angle:
l 𝑏
𝑟𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑛 = + (7)
𝑎𝑖 2

All geometric parameters (wheel stand, base, etc.) for a

precise and slip-reduced turning manoeuvre are derived
from the rover input configuration sheet. Required
turning speeds of each individual wheel are calculated
respectively with a factor derived from the actual
nominal turning radius, the rover configuration and Figure 16: Recorded steering angle for 60° Dual-Ackermann
geometric wheel parameter. The commanded steering manoeuvre
angle (as well as the respective turning speeds of the
Maximum power performance testing resulted in a 57 W
wheels) for a point turn maneuver is a fixed value for
each steering unit which is defined by the geometric peak power load for driving up a 20° slope at 𝑣𝑚𝑎𝑥
centre of the MRCP, depending on the actual including a 4 kg payload mass in the front compartment.
configuration values. Skid mode describes the only Nominal operation with 2000 rpm motor speed in flat
mode, in which all wheels are nominally commanded the terrain result in around 16 W average power demand,
same turning speed, in order to turn the rover on spot. The including the 4 kg payload mass.
demand speed is submitted in the GUI.
7. SIMULATION ENVIRONMENT AND
SUBSYSTEM INTERFACE
Besides the functional verification of the operative
chassis performance characteristics and the analytical
development tool, a simulation environment based on the
robot operating system (ROS) is being set up for an
inevitable knowledge gain by analysing and verifying
consolidated control algorithms within the hardware and
simulation environment (Fig. 17).
frontal payload interface. Besides operational
constraints, both arms should be able to handle adapted
sample tube container, as proposed by the Mars
Exploration Program Analysis Group (MEPAG) for a
future sample return mission scenario [2]. Both robotic
arms on the MRCP are developed and operated in a full
ROS environment and can be remotely controlled via a
wireless connection. The arms also operate a
commercially available Raman Spectrometer (Fig.18)
provided by the German Aerospace Centre (DLR)
Institute of Optical Sensor Systems in Berlin-Adlershof.

Figure 17: Visualisation of the ROS based simulation

environment for the MRCP

Along with the generated output of the development tool

a generic CAD model of the actual MRCP configuration
is derived. All actuator joints and structural linkages are
embedded in a unified robot description format (URDF)
with respective attitudes (mass, inertia, turning speed,
positioning control, etc.) as defined for the MRCP model.
A control architecture similar to the control algorithms
for the hardware MRCP model is implemented, including
respective operational modes like Dual-Ackermann
steering, point-turn and skid steering with an identical
speed and positioning accuracy. The control architecture
was transferred to the ROS based simulation
environment Gazebo, to allow a real-time simulation of a
respective model of the MRCP rover. As ROS allows
straight-forward adaptability for a hardware system Figure 18: Sample return challenge with two different 4 kg
control framework, this implementation allows an robotic arm payload systems attached to the MRCP
additional verification possibility of analytical
assessments and provides a first step for a ROS based Besides the optimisation of control algorithms for
rover operation and a simultaneously real time simulation operation of the MRCP as well as the robotic arms within
of the system. The ROS environment additionally the ROS framework, actual developments focus on the
provide the opportunity of a straight forward implementation of rover sided instrument mechanisms
implementation of additional robotic subsystems and for the operation of a Laser-Induced Breakdown
mechanisms, as well as interfaces for the control and Spectrometer (LIBS), which is also being developed at
operation of these. DLR. Further investigations and cooperation focus on the
implementation of scientific instruments and sensory
As the project is strongly linked to the educational components on the MRCP to increase the operational,
context of the University, ongoing developments focus mobile and autonomous capabilities of the system.
on the implementation of a robotic arm for instrument
and sample handling. Since 10/2018 two 5 DOF robotic REFERENCES
arms are developed within a practical course at the IRS [1] Bekker, M.G. (1960). Off-the-road-locomotion,
for the integration and operation in the MRCP front University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, USA.
payload compartment (Fig. 18). Requirements for the
development were derived from the MRCP design, such [2] Mustard, J.F. et al. (2013). Report of the Mars 2020
Science Definition Team, posted July 2013, by the
as a 4 kg mass limitation and the power supply via the
Mars Exploration Program Analysis Group