Best Place To BuildThis IIT Madras team is building rovers & drones for MARS EXPLORATION | BP2B: Student Edition! Ep.05
CHAPTERS
- 1:07 – 2:31
Team Anveshak’s mission: prototype Mars rovers + a complementary drone
The host introduces IIT Madras’ space robotics team, and team lead Adithi explains what Anveshak builds and why. She frames the team’s goal as developing robust rover capabilities (traversal, manipulation, autonomy) inspired by real planetary missions, while also exploring the bigger question of extraterrestrial life.
- •Anveshak builds prototype Mars rovers and has added a drone module
- •Aims to mirror real rover operations (e.g., Perseverance/Curiosity; inspiration from ISRO missions)
- •Core rover capabilities: rugged traversal, manipulation, and semi-autonomous operation
- •Team’s motivation includes exploration and life-detection curiosity
- 2:31 – 3:11
Why pair a rover with a drone? Extending reach, visibility, and mission capability
Adithi explains the rationale for rover–drone teaming: rovers reach places humans can’t, and drones reach places even rovers can’t. Together they expand the exploration envelope and improve terrain understanding and mission efficiency.
- •Rovers enable remote exploration where humans can’t go
- •Drones extend access to otherwise unreachable areas
- •Combined systems expand operational coverage of a mission area
- •Partnership improves exploration and scouting potential
- 3:11 – 6:52
Why Mars—and how competitions simulate Martian constraints
The discussion shifts to why Mars is a compelling target and how teams test Earth-built systems under Mars-like constraints. Adithi describes rugged terrain setups and the “base station” model where operators must rely on camera feeds rather than line-of-sight driving.
- •Mars interests: atmospheric similarity cues and potential habitability questions
- •Competitions build rugged, dusty, cratered terrains to mimic Mars-like conditions
- •Base-station operation: drivers can’t directly see the rover; they use camera/sensor feeds
- •Typical mission categories: manipulation, autonomy, and astrobiology
- 6:52 – 8:42
Competition pressure vs. thrill: operating blind, crashes, and rapid recovery
Adithi describes what it feels like to compete under strict operating constraints, including the role of “runners” who escort the rover for safety. She recounts a dramatic incident where the rover toppled on a steep slope but survived and resumed the mission—showcasing robustness and team preparedness.
- •Base station creates high-stress, low-visibility decision-making
- •Safety runners shadow the rover to prevent catastrophic crashes
- •70° slope attempt caused a topple onto the antenna; rover recovered fully
- •Reliability and quick reset procedures are crucial in mission success
- 8:42 – 10:25
Meet “Isaac”: the 10th rover iteration and the sprint toward International Rover Challenge
With competitions approaching, Adithi explains the team’s intense testing cadence and iteration philosophy. She introduces the current rover, Isaac, and outlines how the month leading to competition is spent fault-finding, simulating tasks, and improving performance.
- •Current build is the 10th iteration, named “Isaac” (alphabetical naming tradition)
- •Preparing for International Rover Challenge (India) with daily testing
- •Competition prep involves simulation runs, debugging, and rapid iteration
- •Confidence is balanced with acknowledgment of remaining improvement scope
- 10:25 – 12:01
The competition roadmap: IROC, IRDC, and ambitions for Utah’s URC testing grounds
Adithi outlines the major competitions the team targets and how each pushes different technical capabilities. She highlights the value of ISRO-linked challenges and the aspiration to compete and test in globally recognized Mars-analog sites.
- •IROC (ISRO Robotics Challenge): autonomy and rover–drone complementary objectives
- •IRDC: online rover design challenge for hypothetical Mars/lunar resilience
- •URC (Utah/Mars Desert Research Station): aspirational participation at NASA-linked test grounds
- •Competitions serve as a structured preview of real space-exploration constraints
- 12:01 – 14:03
Track record and credibility: wins, rankings, and national-level testing invitations
Adithi lists Anveshak’s recent achievements across autonomy, design, and rover performance. The chapter emphasizes how consistent competition results validate subsystem integration and team maturity.
- •1st in Caterpillar Autonomy Challenge; Best Rover Design; prize funding
- •2nd in IRC 2024; 4th in IROC 2024 (autonomous rover focus)
- •Participated in drone-focused IROC variant; 12th in URC 2019
- •Invited for preliminary testing at an Indian Mars-analog initiative (Akka Studio/PRL)
- 14:03 – 15:40
Designing ‘for Mars’ vs ‘for Earth’: constraints, materials, and mission objectives
Mechanical lead Ayush explains why Mars rover design differs fundamentally from Earth prototypes. He contrasts cost, reliability, unknown conditions, and material choices with competition-driven optimization and practical Earth-environment compromises.
- •Mars missions demand extreme reliability due to cost and irrecoverability
- •Unknown/harsh environments drive design parameters (soil, terrain, extremes)
- •Real Mars rovers rely on expensive materials (e.g., titanium) vs simpler Earth builds
- •Competition rovers optimize for performance within known constraints and rules
- 15:40 – 17:04
Iteration upgrades: steering, 3D printing adoption, and mechanical evolution over 10 years
Ayush describes the rover’s evolution from early pneumatic tires and aluminum-heavy builds to newer architectures featuring steering and substantial 3D-printed components. He emphasizes continuous innovation as a yearly mandate and explains how new technologies open experimentation bandwidth.
- •Shift from pneumatic tires and simpler early builds to more advanced systems
- •~30% of the rover now uses 3D-printed parts, enabling lighter, faster iteration
- •New steering integration improves mobility and maneuverability
- •Innovation is planned annually across modules to keep improving performance
- 17:04 – 20:49
Why 3D-printed wheels (and gearboxes) beat pneumatic tires in competitions—plus limits for real Mars
The team explains the practical reasons behind moving away from pneumatic wheels—punctures and mid-mission maintenance constraints. They detail which components are printed (wheels, gripper, gearboxes) and clarify that current polymer 3D printing may not survive true Martian extremes or regolith sharpness.
- •3D-printed wheels reduce puncture risk and maintenance downtime during missions
- •Printed parts include wheels, arm elements, gripper, and cycloidal gearboxes
- •In-house printing accelerates iteration and enables complex custom geometries
- •Polymer prints may not withstand Mars temperature extremes or sharp regolith like metal would
- 20:49 – 24:47
Cost and reliability lessons: rover budget, savings from printing, and ‘one bolt can end a mission’
Ayush quantifies rover cost and explains how 3D printing reduces expenses that can be redirected into new features. He also shares a high-stakes failure story where a single loose bolt led to motor issues and mission abandonment, underscoring the importance of meticulous mechanical checks and systems rigor.
- •Typical rover cost: ~₹3.5–4 lakh per build
- •3D printing cut costs by ~20–30%, funding added innovations (e.g., steering, cycloidal gearbox)
- •Competition incident: sparks/smoke traced to a loose bolt causing wheel resistance
- •Key takeaway: small assembly details can cause major performance and ranking losses
- 24:47 – 27:01
Drone–rover teaming in practice: scouting, communication relay, and why it protects expensive assets
Electronics/software lead Soham explains how drone and rover roles differ across Indian vs international competitions. He details how drones can scout objectives, map paths, and even serve as a communication relay—mirroring how real missions reduce risk to enormously expensive rover hardware.
- •In India, drone and rover often compete separately; full collaboration is still emerging
- •Drone can relay commands as a mid-point antenna between base station and rover
- •Drone scouting finds objects faster and helps operators plan efficient rover paths
- •Real-mission motivation: avoid losing extremely expensive rover assets; improve look-ahead visibility
- 27:01 – 29:27
How autonomy works on another planet: semi-autonomous approvals, path planning, and sensor/compute stack
Soham breaks down why Mars autonomy can be easier than Earth autonomy (static environment, fewer safety constraints) yet remains semi-autonomous with human approval loops. He then outlines the perception and compute stack—LiDAR, stereo vision, GPS/IMU—running on an NVIDIA Jetson Orin for real-time planning.
- •Mars autonomy is simpler than Earth due to less dynamic surroundings
- •Semi-autonomous workflow: operator sets goal, rover plans path, operator approves, rover executes slowly
- •Dynamic replanning handles unexpected obstacles not seen in maps/sensors
- •Key autonomy hardware: stereo camera, LiDAR, GPS, IMU + Jetson Orin Nano for AI/perception
- 29:27 – 33:08
In-house engineering deep dive: power architecture, custom PCBs/motor drivers, and software ownership
The conversation moves to the lower-level electrical system: battery separation for compute/arm vs drive, microcontrollers on custom PCBs, and motor driver design. Soham emphasizes in-house development to improve robustness (e.g., protection from wiring mistakes) and describes the team’s balance of open-source software with custom code.
- •Two 24V batteries split loads: one for compute/arm, one for drive
- •Custom PCBs: microcontrollers read sensors and control motor drivers under rough terrain constraints
- •In-house motor drivers improve resilience to issues like reverse polarity
- •Software stack is ~50% open-source packages + ~50% in-house code; astrobiology spectrometer is also team-built
- 33:08 – 35:00
Astrobiology module: drilling, sample storage, and a low-cost 3D-printed spectrometer for biosignatures
Abhishek explains how the rover becomes a mobile science lab: it drills, stores soil, and performs onboard spectrometry. The team built a 3D-printed spectrometer to cut costs dramatically and focuses on detecting broad biosignature categories like proteins and carbohydrates.
- •Mission flow: drill soil → collect/store sample → analyze on the rover
- •In-house 3D-printed spectrometer reduces cost vs off-the-shelf instruments
- •Targets biosignatures such as proteins, carbohydrates (and related organics)
- •Onboard analysis returns data/spectra for interpretation rather than lab-only processing
- 35:00 – 37:09
Choosing drill sites & interdisciplinary science: ML rock classification + chemical tests + systems integration
The team describes how they decide where to drill using site knowledge, feasibility, and ML-based rock identification. They also explain the chemistry side—using reagents to detect molecules—highlighting how astrobiology forces tight integration of mechanical drilling, electronics sensors, software models, and scientific reasoning.
- •Drill-site selection uses competition-site context, terrain feasibility, and expected biosignatures
- •ML model supports rock classification/identification to guide sampling choices
- •Chemical assays (e.g., Benedict’s test for sugars) complement spectrometry
- •Astrobiology is inherently interdisciplinary: mechanical + electrical + software + chemistry + biology
- 37:09 – 43:14
Women in STEM & the long-term vision: Adithi’s journey, advice, and Anveshak’s Mars ambition
Adithi reflects on what drew her to engineering, navigating stereotypes around mechanical engineering, and why she stayed and grew into leadership. She closes with advice for girls in STEM and the team’s long-term vision: advancing space technology with the ambition of one day sending a rover to Mars.
- •Personal motivation: affinity for physics/maths and family support in mechanical engineering
- •Advice: prioritize what you enjoy over others’ expectations; persist through early hardships
- •Engineering vs leadership: she prefers hands-on engineering but is growing into mentoring
- •Future vision: push space tech forward and aim toward a rover mission to Mars
