MODIFICATION
A -- HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE SUPPORTING THE MAKER PROJECT
- Notice Date
- 8/3/2009
- Notice Type
- Modification/Amendment
- NAICS
- 541330
— Engineering Services
- Contracting Office
- NASA/Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, Houston Texas, 77058-3696, Mail Code: BH
- ZIP Code
- 00000
- Solicitation Number
- NNJ09298123Q
- Response Due
- 8/7/2009
- Archive Date
- 8/3/2010
- Point of Contact
- Adrian D. Clayton, Contract Specialist, Phone 281-483-8498, Fax 281-244-0995, Email adrian.d.clayton@nasa.gov<br />
- E-Mail Address
-
Adrian D. Clayton
(adrian.d.clayton@nasa.gov)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- Total Small Business
- Description
- This is modification 2 to the synopsis entitled HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE SUPPORTINGTHE MAKER PROJECT under NNJ09298123Q which was posted on July 20, 2009. The intent ofthis modification is to answer all technical questions submitted. They are as follows:Question #1: Should we determine the associated rotational inertias of each of the limbsand understand the associated loads of the manipulator so that we can apply a feedback(feed forward) based control? Answer #1: The weight and corresponding momentum of the toolheads placed on themanipulator will undoubtedly effect the accuracy of the manipulator at highfeedrates/translation speeds. That being said, there is no minimum federate/translationspeed requirement for the assembled device. The vendor can choose to solve the problemby deploying advanced motion control compensation methods (if a high federate is to besought) or by simply establishing what the vendor recommended upper federate limit isbased on the method of control algorithm that is created. Question #2: Or is the scope of this project strictly related to controlling the robotarm based on the kinematics (i.e. x,y,z position &lt;-&gt; angular positions of therobotic arm) of the system? Answer #2: Refer to Answer #1. Question #3: If the robot uses stepper motors, is it safe to assume that position control(not force-based) is being used to control the robotic manipulator? Does that mean noforce feedback will be used? Answer #3: No, force feedback is not to be used in this effort. The position is to becontrolled by closed loop encoders communicating data about the step/direction/rate ofthe steppers. The only feedback component of the schema will be whatever amperage/powerlimits the motor drivers inherently use to protect the steppers from being overdriven.Question #4: Are LabVIEW or C++ acceptable languages to use for the underlying programand/or GUI? Is there a preference toward LabVIEW (which is fine by us as a NI AllianceMember)?Answer #4: There is no preference, although the end product must provide a graphical userinterface and either be compilable to a stand-alone executable or run on a commonlyavailable software platform. Whatever method is used, the sourcecode must be deliveredalong with the final executable and specific communication regarding what softwareplatform must be used use the software and/or modify/recompile it. Question #5: How much access will we have to the robotic manipulator itself to doevaluation/modeling/testing? Answer #5: The manipulator is housed in a development lab at NASA JSC in Houston Texas. Access to this facility can be established for US citizens on an as-needed basis forinspection of the manipulator, beta testing of the software, or supporting finalintegration of the software and electronics/computer. If the vendor believes such travelwill be necessary during the development cycle, the quote for such travel (along withnecessary travel during the final integration at JSC) should be included in the responseto this effort. If the vendor requires full-time access to the manipulator during thedevelopment phase, the device can be shipped to the vendors facility via NASA/JSCProperty Office policies and procedures.Question #6: With the system any 3 axis coordinates do not uniquely specify a point inspace--there is more than one way to specify most points. This may make it challengingto find the "best" coordinates for any given translation, and the "best" method oftranslating the arms to achieve a certain path. Upon initial review it does not appearthat request mentions a desire for an optimal path, is there? Answer #6: The only point on the device that must follow a given path is the X,Y,Z centerof the manipulators hand relative to the baseplate.This path is the toolpathdefined by conventional CNC g-codes established either by manual programming or automatedcode generation via CAD/CAM. It is understood that multiple shoulder/elbow jointrotation combinations could be developed to bring the center of the hand to a givenpoint in three-space. However, when following a coordinated path through three-space thesoftware must plan ahead such that in following a path the joint orientation/rotationchoices that are made do not result in a kinematic singularity that will fault themanipulator or controlling software. This means that the definition of optimal path isone that allows the manipulator hand to follow a pre-planned 3D pathway within theaccuracy limits of the mechanical system and reduces/eliminates singularities thatprevent continuous motion of the XYZ center of the manipulator hand along said 3D path. Question #7: Is this an open bid to Total Small Business contractors, or is there avendor who may be targeted for sole source? Is there currently an incumbent?Answer #7: This procurement is a total small business set aside. There are no incumbents.Question #8: Any changes or updates to the current response date? Any changes to theissuance and due dates for the RFP?Answer #8: The response due date is Aug 7th. The dates listed for release of the RFQ aretentative/estimated dates. Upon release of the RFQ the firm dates will be stated unlessotherwise amended.Question #9: Do you have any estimates on the materials required and the number of manhours that may be required in the bid?Answer #9: No, we do not. The due date for responses is not extended.Documents related to this procurement will be available over the Internet. Thesedocuments will reside on a World Wide Web (WWW) server, which may be accessed using a WWWbrowser application. The Internet site, or URL, for the NASA/JSC Business Opportunitieshome page is http://prod.nais.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/eps/bizops.cgi?gr=D&pin=73 Offerors are responsible for monitoring this site for the release of the solicitation andany amendments. Potential offerors are responsible for downloading their own copy ofthe solicitation and amendments (if any).
- Web Link
-
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/NASA/JSC/OPDC20220/NNJ09298123Q/listing.html)
- Record
- SN01896971-W 20090805/090803235459-d0a8a49374b35cc8d5d87c9e7f2245dd (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |