Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

F M Mccubbin

Publications and source records attributed to F M Mccubbin.

11 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2021

Understanding the Space Weathering of Mercury Through Laboratory Experiments

Introduction: Airless surfaces across the solar system are continually modified by energetic particles from solar wind and micrometeoroid bombardment [1,2]. This process is known as space weathering, and it alters the chemical, microstructural, and optical properties of surface regoliths on airless bodies, including Mercury. On the Moon and S-type asteroids, the reflectance spectral signatures of space weathering include reddening (increasing reflectance with increasing wavelength), darkening (lowering of reflectance), and the attenuation of characteristic absorption bands [2]. Such spectral changes are driven by the production of Fe-bearing nanoparticles(npFe) through both solar wind irradiation and micrometeoroid bombardment. While our understanding of space weathering for the Moon and near-Earth S-types asteroids is advanced, insight into how these processes operate on other planetary bodies is limited. In particular, Mercury experiences a uniquely intense space weathering environment than planetary counterparts at 1 AU, including a moreintense solar wind flux and higher velocity micrometeoroid impacts [4]. Additionally, Mercury has a surface composition unique in the inner solar system, including regions of the surface with very low albedo known as the low reflectance material (LRM), which is enriched in carbon, likely graphite, up to 4wt.% [5].In addition, the concentration of Fe across Mercury’s surface islow (<2 wt.%) compared to the Moonor S-type asteroids asteroids[6]. Our understanding of the effects of space weathering on C-rich and Fe-poor phases is limited. Since Fe plays a critical role inthe development of space weathering characteristicson other airless surfaces(e.g., npFe), its limited availability may significantly affect the development of space weathering features in Mercury surface materials. We can simulate space weathering processes in the laboratory to explore their effects on the microstructural, chemical, and spectral characteristics of Mercury surface materials[7]. Here we used pulsed laser irradiation to simulate the short duration, high-temperature events associated with micrometeoroid impacts. We performed coordinated analyses including reflectance spectroscopy and electron microscopy to investigate the spectral, chemical, and microstructural changes in these mercurian analog samples. Methods: For these experiments, we usedforsteritic olivine with varying FeOcontents, a mineral phase proposed to be abundant on the surface of Mercury. We mixed each sample with graphite to simulate LRM regions of the surface. Wesynthesized the olivinesamplesat 1-bar at NASA’s Johnson Space Centerand prepared pressed powder pellets for laser irradiation [8].We prepared three samples, each with a base layer of olivineto maintain structural integrity and topped witha surface layer containing the graphite-olivine mixture: 1) Sample SC-001 San Carlos olivine(Fo90.91),2)Sample F-S-002 with0.05 wt.% FeO olivine, and 3) F-T-004 with 0.53 wt.% FeO olivine. Each sample was mixed with 5 wt.% powdered graphite and had grain sizes ranging from 45to 125μm. We irradiated each sample usinga pulsed Nd-YAG laser, (l=1064 nm, ~6 ns pulse duration, energy of 48 mJ/pulse) while undervacuumat Northern Arizona University. The laser was rastered1x and then 5x over the surfaceof each sample to simulate progressive space weathering. We collected in situreflectance spectra from the samples after each laser pulse witha Nicolet IS50 Fourier-Transform Infrared spectrometer (lfrom 0.65-2.5 μm). We used an FEI Nova NanoSEM200scanning electron microscope (SEM) and a Hitachi TM4000 Plus benchtop SEM at Purdue University to image the surface morphology and topography of the samples. We extracted thin sections for analysis in the transmission electron microscope(TEM)using the FEI Helios NanoLab 660 focused ion beam (FIB) SEM at the University of Arizona.We performed analysis of the microstructural and chemical characteristics of the samples using the 200 keV JEOL 2500 scanning TEM at Johnson Space Center. Reflectance Spectroscopy Results:Reflectance spectra for each sample are shown in Fig. 1.SC-001:The spectrum of the unirradiated sample exhibits a weak 1.0 μm absorption feature, associated with Fe2+in the olivine,and low overall reflectance (Fig. 1a). Thereflectance and the depth of the absorption band increases after 1x laser raster but are at their lowest after 5x laser rasters.F-T-004:The unirradiated sample has a blue-sloped spectrum with low reflectance without identifiable absorption features (Fig. 1b). With progressive laser irradiation, the sample reflectance increases and becomes strongly red-sloped.F-S-002:The unirradiated sample exhibits a dark, blue-slopedspectrum. The brightness of the sample increases significantly from <0.2average reflectance over >0.8 reflectance in the most irradiated sampleand thespectral slope also becomesslightly reddened (Fig. 1c). Microstructural and Chemical Analysis: Two primary alteration textures were observed in the samples exposed to simulated space weathering: 1) fluffy C-rich,and 2) vesiculated melt. The fluffy C-rich texture is composed oflow-densitydeposits distributed across the surface of the sample(Fig. 2A). Analysis of a FIB section extracted from a low-density C-rich region in sample SC-001 reveals multiple globule-type deposits, discrete from stacked graphite, likely produced via melting from the laser irradiation [9].The vesiculated melt textureis smooth and uniformly distributed across isolated regions of the sample surface. The vesicles measure up to 100s of nmin diameter. Analysis of a FIB section from this texture was extracted from sample F-T-004 reveals a layer of amorphous melt material, close to 100 nm thick and uniform across the FIB section (Fig. 2B). Isolated regions of this melt layer contain small nanoparticles, <5 nm in diameter. Chemical analysis through energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy reveals the composition of this layer is enriched in Si and depleted in Mg and O compared to the underlying sample. Implications for Space Weathering on Mercury: Previous experiments simulating space weathering of Mercury have showndarkening and reddening of spectra[7,10].However, our use of low-Fe materials and graphite to create a sample set more analogous to the mercurian surface. Our results indicate that sample composition plays a significant and important role in the space weathering of Mercury. In particular, our spectral data demonstrates a strong correlation between spectral slope, Fe content, and simulated space weathering. While the variation in FeO content between samples F-S-002 and F-T-004 is <0.6 wt.%, the spectra deviate from flat to strongly red-sloped(F-T-004). This reddeningmay be linked to the presence of very small nanoparticles observed in the melt textures extracted from sample F-T-004. For the SC-001 sample, the fluffy C-rich textures may be developed by the amalgamation of small graphite particles into these unique morphologies. Such observations indicate that space weathering on Mercury may result in both familiar and new microstructural and chemical characteristics. References: [1]Hapke B. (2001) J. Geophys. Res.-Planet.,106,10039–10073. [2]Pieters C.M. and Noble S.K. (2016) J. Geophys. Res-Planet., 121, 1865–1884. [3] Lucey P.G., and Riner, M.A. (2011) Icarus,212, 451-462.[4]CintalaM.J.(1992)J. Geophys. Res.-Planet.,97,947–973.[5]Klima R.L.et al.(2018)Geophys.Res.Letters, 45, 2945–2953. [6]Nittler L.R., et al. (2011) Science 333, 1847-1850.[7]Sasaki S. and Kurahashi E. (2004) Space weathering on Mercury, Adv.Space Res., 33, 2152-2155.[8] Vander KaadenK.E., et al. (2018) LPSCXLIX, Abstract 1230. [9] McGlaun M.L. et al. (2019) LPSCL, Abstract 2019. [10] TrangD.et al. (2018)LPSCXLIX,Abstract2083

M S Thompson↗
NASA NTRS2019

Diamondites: Evidence for a Distinct Tectono-Thermal Diamond-Forming Event Beneath the Kaapvaal Craton

The petrogenesis and relationship of diamondite to well-studied monocrystalline and fibrous diamonds are poorly understood yet would potentially reveal new aspects of how diamond-forming fluids are transported through the lithosphere and equilibrate with surrounding silicates. Of twenty-two silicate- and oxide-bearing diamondites investigated, most yielded garnet intergrowths (n = 15) with major element geochemistry (i.e. Ca-Cr) classifying these samples as low-Ca websteritic or eclogitic. The garnet REE patterns fit an equilibrium model suggesting the diamond-forming fluid shares an affinity with high-density fluids (HDF) observed in fibrous diamonds, specifically on the join between the saline–carbonate end- members. The δ13C values for the diamonds range from -5.27 to -22.48 ‰ (V-PDB) with δ18O values for websteritic garnets ranging from +7.6 to +5.9 ‰ (V-SMOW). The combined C-O stable isotope data support a model for a hydrothermally altered and organic carbon-bearing subducted crustal source(s) for the diamond- and garnet-forming media. The nitrogen aggregation states of the diamonds require that diamondite-formation event(s) pre-dates fibrous diamond-formation and post-dates most of the gem monocrystalline diamond-formation events at Orapa. The modelled fluid compositions responsible for the precipitation of diamondites match the fluid-poor and fluid-rich (fibrous) monocrystalline diamonds, where all grow from HDFs within the saline-silicic-carbonatitic ternary system. However, while the nature of the parental fluid(s) share a common lithophile element geochemical affinity, the origin(s) of the saline, silicic, and/or carbonatitic components of these HDFs do not always share a common origin. Therefore, it is wholly conceivable that the diamondites are evidence of a distinct and temporally unconstrained tectono-thermal diamond-forming event beneath the Kaapvaal craton.

S Mikhail↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Using X-Ray Computed Tomography to Image Apollo Drive Tube 73002

The Apollo missions collected 382 kg of rock, regolith, and core samples from six locations on the nearside of the Moon. Today, just over 84% by mass of the Apollo collection remains in pristine condition within the curation facility at Johnson Space Center. Most Apollo samples have been well characterized, however there are several types of samples that have remained wholly or largely unstudied since their return, and/or that have been curated under special conditions. These sample types are: (1) unopened samples sealed under vacuum on the Moon; (2) unopened (but unsealed) drive tubes; (3) Apollo 17 samples frozen shortly after their return; and (4) Apollo 15 samples opened and stored in a helium atmosphere since their return. NASA solicited proposals for the Apollo Next Generation Sample Analysis Program (ANGSA), and 9 teams were selected to study: (1) unsealed, unopened drive tube 73002; (2) sealed, unopened drive tube 73001 (paired with 73002); and (3) a subset of the frozen and He-purged samples [1]. The first sample opened as part of the ANGSA program was drive tube 73002. This was originally a ~30 cm long, 4 cm diameter drive tube collected on a landslide deposit near Lara Crater at the Apollo 17 landing site. It was part of a ~60 cm long double drive tube collected, and the bottom half of the tube (73001) was sealed under vacuum on the Moon [2]. Prior to opening sample 73002, the sample was imaged with a high resolution X-ray Computed Tomography (XCT) scan of the entire tube. Additional XCT scans have been made of “large” clasts removed from the core as part of the dissection process [3]. Here we present the whole tube and close-up XCT data from 73002, and talk about the utility of the scans as part of the curation process, including the potential for future science returns from the high resolutions scans.

R A Zeigler↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exploring A Lunar Landslide Deposit In The Taurus-Littrow Valley (TLV). Variations In Mineralogy And Mineral Volatile Traps.

The double drive tube core sample (73001/73002), collected at Station 3 during the Apollo 17 mission, penetrated a lunar landslide deposit that was transported from the slope of the South Massif into the TLV (Figure 1). Orbital data suggest that this deposit represents multiple events that were triggered by movement along the Lee-Lincoln scarp [e.g., 1] or impact events [e.g., 2,3]. Although numerous core and trench samples were collected during the Apollo pro-gram and numerous landslide deposits have been identified on the lunar surface by orbital missions [e.g., 3], the Station 3 double drive tube is the only core that penetrated a landslide deposit. The intentions of our study are: to establish the stratigraphy of the deposit; to better understand the processes at work during the event(s), including the role of volatiles in the event(e.g., fluidization-enabled flow, escape of fluidizing volatiles) [1] and the capability of deposits for trapping indigenous volatiles; the number of landslide events; and the trigger(s) of such events. Here, we report some initial petrologic observations of the < 1mm fraction of the regolith. A companion abstract [4] emphasizes <1 mm lithic fragments, compares them to surface lithologies, and to > 4 mm lithic fragments.

M J Cato↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Effect of Temperature on the Preservation of Volatile-Rich Lunar Samples

Introduction. The Moon’s south pole is a high-priority target for human exploration and scientific study. This interest is, in part, due to the presence of Permanently Shadowed Regions (PSRs), which could contain high concentrations of unique volatiles at cryogenic temperatures [1]. Returned samples from PSRs may include a unique combination of rocks, regolith, and volatile species, providing unprecedented insights into the history of the Solar System and the potential for resource utilization on the Moon. However, because PSR samples are cryogenic up-on collection, lunar polar sample return will eventually require cold stowage for the journey from the Moon to Earth. Without cold stowage, PSR sample return will likely result in phase changes and chemical reactions within the volatile component of the sample, which would negatively impact the resulting scientific studies of those samples. This abstract summarizes the initial results from an ongoing characterization of analog PSR samples at a range of temperatures, with the goal of defining the temperatures needed for a flight cold stowage freezer. Background. Based on remote sensing observations of the Moon [2], south polar PSRs range in temperature from ~120K for small and/or shallow PSRs to ~20K at the most extreme locations in large, deep PSRs. A range of volatiles have been hypothesized to exist at the surface or subsurface of the lunar poles [3-5 and others]. This hypothesis was verified when the LCROSS mission impacted the <50-K PSR in the crater Cabeus, detecting a range of volatiles from water to low condensation temperature species such as H2S and methane [6]. Species such as H2S and ammonia (also detected by LCROSS) are also highly reactive, and increase the likelihood of chemical reactions at elevated (non-cryogenic) temperatures. At the Johnson Space Center’s Planetary Exploration and Astromaterials Research Laboratory (JSC-PEARL), we have developed a volatile-bearing lunar simulant that incorporates several of the species detected by LCROSS [Table 1] mixed cryogenically with the USGS Lunar Highlands Type (LHT) regolith simulant. The new volatile-regolith simulant will be used to assess the degree of sample alteration at room temperature, -20°C, -80°C, and -196°C (liquid nitro-gen), over a two-week period. Room temperature samples represent those likely to be returned during initial missions without cold stowage, -20°C provides an analog to Apollo cold curated samples, -80°C is the temperature of multiple flight payload freezers (e.g., MELFI), and -196°C is analogous to lunar PSRs. Two weeks is an approximation of the time between sample collection and Earth return for initial Artemis missions. Over this period of time, sample head-space gases will be analyzed using a Universal Gas Analyzer (UGA, a type of mass spectrometer) coupled with a Baratron pressure sensor. After testing, the regolith component of the simulant will be purged of volatiles and preserved for future electron beam and/or FTIR analysis. Experimental Procedure. Volatile-regolith simulants will be produced as an initial homogenous batch; this batch will then be distributed into aliquots (gas chromatography/GC vials or cryo vials), ensuring that each sample has the same starting composition and conditions [Fig. 1]. In addition to the “full” simulant shown in Table 1, less complex simulant compositions will be used as baseline and control samples [Table 2]. Aliquots will be produced in triplicate for each simulant composition, storage temperature, and date of sampling. Headspace gases in all Day 0 samples will be analyzed by the UGA immediately. Cold storage samples for future analytical days will be placed in freezers appropriate to their target temperatures (-20°C, -80°C, -196°C). For ambient-temperature samples, regolith and regolith-water samples will be stored in a fume hood, while the full simulant will be stored in a sealed Parr vessel for safety; no other simulants (RWCM/ RWCM+) will be stored at ambient temperature for this test. Samples will be analyzed by UGA in this manner on each Analysis Day outlined in Table 2. Analytical Data. The UGA measures the partial pressures in a single sample aliquot over a set mass range of 0-105 atomic mass units (AMU) [Figure 2]; this set range was selected to slightly exceed the mass of the highest-mass expected reaction product (H2SO4). The Baratron complements the UGA by measuring the total pressure in the headspace of a sample vial. Coupled together, the quantitative abundances of gases will be monitored throughout the test. UGA analyses of the triplicate samples for each storage temperature, day, and simulant composition will be averaged, and standard deviations for each will be calculated. The compositions of starting species (shown in Table 1) will be characterized as a function of time, and the presence of any new compounds (reaction products) will be monitored as well. Total pressures will be recorded for each sample analysis, and any samples that show signs of leakage (e.g., a significant reduction in pressure or simulant volatiles) will be discarded. Anticipated Results. Testing is planned to begin in January 2022. The resulting data will allow compositional and phase changes in the volatile component of the simulants to be determined. Both the reduction in initial compounds and the addition of reaction products are expected to be observed. In addition, the relative efficacy of the different temperatures at pre-serving the initial composition of the simulants will be quantified. Finally, the regolith component of each sample will be argon-purged and stored in a controlled environment for future laboratory analysis. Compositional and morphological changes in the regolith are expected for samples above 0°C. This test will be repeated three times over the course of 2022. Understanding the effect of temperature on both the volatile and regolith components of analog lunar materials will allow requirements for a cold stowage freezer to be developed. The implementation of cold stowage for lunar polar missions will maximize the preservation of returned samples, enabling ground-breaking lunar and Solar System volatiles science for decades to come.

J L Mitchell↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Microbial Monitoring of New Cleanrooms Used to Curate Astrobiologically Relevant Asteroid Samples from Bennu and Ryugu

Introduction: NASA has constructed two new cleanrooms to house materials from the OSRIS-REx and Hayabusa2 missions to the asteroids Ryugu (162173) and Bennu (101955), respectively. In accordance with standard astromaterials curation practices, these cleanrooms will be monitored for particulate contamination and maintained to ISO 5 equivalent standards1. Since the samples in these collections are expected to contain prebiotic organic compounds that may help explain the origin of life on Earth, these labs will also be monitored for organic and biological contamination2. Samples from Ryugu arrived on Earth in December, 2020. After basic characterization in Japan, NASA received a subset of these samples at the astromaterials curation facility in Houston in December of 2021. OSIRIS-REx is expected to return samples in September, 2023. Here we present preliminary microbial monitoring results from monthly monitoring of these new labs and the connected microtomy and staging areas that support them, as they are being commissioned. We also compare these results to baseline values for other astromaterials curation labs. We will also briefly describe additional cleaning efforts employed to reduce the bioburden in these new cleanrooms. Methods: Microbial samples were collected from surfaces using a dry macrofoam swab (Puritan Brand 2518051PFRNDFD). Swabs were also opened in the lab but not touched to any surfaces to function as negative controls. Samples and controls were processed inside a class II biosafety cabinet to avoid inadvertent cross contamination. The swabs were suspended in 15 ml of PBS (Phosphate Buffered Saline) and vortexed for 20 seconds to remove cells from the swab surface. The PBS was used to inoculate Petri dishes filled with TSA (Tryptic Soy Agar), Blood Agar, or Reasoners 2 agar to check for microbial growth. Each plate was inoculated with 0.1 ml of PBS. The TSA and blood agar plates were incubated at 35˚C and the Reasoners 2 agar plates were incubated at 25˚C for seven days. Petri dishes filled with Potato dextrose agar, Saboraud dextrose agar, or Saboraud dextrose agar with 0.1 mg/ml of chloramphenicol, an antibiotic, were used to check for fungal growth. These plates were inoculated with 0.3 ml of PBS and incubated at 30˚C. The remaining PBS was frozen at -80 ˚C for DNA sequencing. After incubation, isolates were counted and reisolated for identification. Isolates were identified using the VITEK23 system or by sequencing a portion of the 16S rRNA gene for bacteria or the ribosomal internal transcribed spacer (ITS) for fungi. Sequencing was performed with an ABI 3500 Sanger sequencer. Results: During our initial sampling, six of the seven sites sampled (86%) displayed bacterial or fungal growth. Samples collected from the staging areas and microtomy labs are not included in this calculation since those areas are maintained at a lower ISO 7 equivalent cleanliness standard. A month later, only three of the seven sites (43%) displayed bacterial growth. No fungal growth was detected in the second sampling. Since new equipment had been introduced to the Hayabusa2 lab since the first round of sampling, an additional three sampling sites were included in the second round of sampling. None of these sites displayed microbial growth. These sites will be included in all future sampling efforts. Bacterial isolates have been identified from the following genera at multiple time points: Micrococcus, Staphylococcus, and Bacillus. Isolates from the genera: Microbacterium, Nocardioides, Methylocystis, and Microvirga were identified in the initial sampling, but were not present at later time points. Identification of fungal isolates is in progress. Results are summarized in Table 1. Discussion: The recovery rate or percentage of positive samples4 was initially 86%, which is higher than the median recovery rate for comparable ISO 5 equivalent curation labs like Stardust (33%), Hayabusa (33%), and Cosmic Dust (50%). However, after a month of operation, the recovery rate for these same sites decreased to 43%, which is similar to what we observe in comparable curation cleanrooms with no microbial control requirements. Adding in the new sampling sites further decreases the recovery rate to 30%. With the reduction in recovery rate, we also observed a decrease in microbial diversity. At the first time point, we observed at least 10 different bacterial species and at least two different fungi. This is a higher diversity than the median values for comparable ISO 5 equivalent labs (2-4 isolates per sampling event). After the second sampling, we observed at least 4 bacterial species and no fungi, which is more consistent with comparable labs. We expect the recovery rate and diversity in both labs to continue to decrease as routine operation continues. We will use ultrapure hydrogen peroxide to disinfect equipment and work areas prior to opening any sample containers. Most of the bacterial and fungal isolates were detected on samples from the cleanroom floors. This is consistent with baseline results from other curation labs. Organisms from the genera Bacillus, Staphylococcus, and Micrococcus that were repeatedly detected are common in cleanrooms and on human skin5,6. These organisms are generally thought to be introduced when people enter the cleanroom. Microbacterium, Nocardioides, and Microvirga have also previously been identified in astromaterials cleanrooms, but not as frequently as Bacillus, Staphylococcus, and Micrococcus. Methylocystis is a novel genus in the astromaterials cleanrooms, but it was identified with low accuracy (93% match in the sequenced region of the 16S rRNA gene) and further work is needed to confirm this identification. Microbacterium is a diverse genus with isolates identified from terrestrial and aquatic sediments. Some species of Microbacterium are capable of degrading complex organic compounds found in crude oil. The presence of these bacteria in the OSIRIS REx and Hayabusa2 cleanrooms should be closely monitored. Methylocystis is a genus of methanotrophic bacteria capable of oxidizing methane. If this identification proves to be correct and it is detected again, it should be closely monitored as well. Under nominal operating conditions, samples should not ever encounter the cleanroom floor or other high traffic areas. If we observe an increase in the bioburden in sensitive work areas that appears to be influenced by organism transfer from high traffic areas like the floors, we can employ additional hydrogen peroxide treatments to disinfect high traffic areas. Routine microbial monitoring of these labs will ensure that NASA’s astromaterials collections remain pristine and useful for scientific study. Table 1. Sampling Locations and Colony Counts Bacterial CFUa Fungal CFU Bacterial CFU Fungal CFU Lab - Location 11/2/2021 11/2/2021 12/13/2021 12/13/2021 H2b-Floor 4 8 1 0 H2-staging pass through 3 0 0 0 H2-microtomy pass through TNTCc 0 0 0 H2 Microscope 1 NA NA 0 0 H2 Microscope 2 NA NA 0 0 H2-Table NA NA 0 0 OREXd- microtomy pass through 0 0 6 0 OREX – Anteroom pass through 0 0 0 0 OREX – Floor 1 2 0 0 OREX Witness Foil Table 3 0 1 0 Staging-Floor 16 0 15 0 Microtomy-Floor 3 0 2 0 a: CFU = Colony Forming Unit b: H2 = Hayabusa2 Lab c: TNTC = too numerous to count d: OREX = OSIRIS-REx Lab References: 1. ISO 14644-1:2015 - Cleanrooms and associated controlled environments -- Part 1: Classification of air cleanliness by particle concentration. 37 (2015). 2. McCubbin, F. M. et al. Space Sci Rev 215, (2019). 3. Pincus, D. H. Encyclopedia of Rapid Microbiological Methods (2005). 4. The United States Pharmacopeial Convention. USP General Chapter <1116> 17, 784–794 (2013). 5. Sheraba, N. S., Yassin, A. S. & Amin, M. BMC Research Notes 3, 278 (2010). 6. Utescher, C. L. de A., Franzolin, M. R., Trabulsi, L. R. & Gambale, V. Brazilian Journal of Microbiology 38, 710–716 (2007).

A B Regberg↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Mars Sample Return (MSR) Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) Assessment Study (MSAS)

The Mars Sample Return (MSR) campaign, initiated in 2020 with the launch of the Per-severance Rover, is an international partnership be-tween NASA and the European Space Agency (ESA) to return Martian geological samples to Earth for scientific study in the early 2030s. Not only is MSR the first mission to bring samples back to Earth from an-other planet, it is the first time since Apollo 14to have a mission classified as a Category V: Restricted Earth Return by the NASA Planetary Protection Office due to the possibility that the samples could harbor extra-terrestrial life. As a result of this classification, the Sample Receiving Facility (SRF)must not only pro-vide a pristine environment to ensure samples are protected from terrestrial contamination for scientific investigations, it must also provide high-containment (biosafety level 4 [BSL-4]-equivalence)to isolate the samples from Earth’s biosphere until the samples are deemed safe for release and/or sterilized.

Mars Sample Return↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Collection, Usage, and Preliminary Examination of the Apollo Sample Suite: Lessons for Artemis

Apollo Sample Collection and Usage: From 1969 to 1972 there were six Apollo missions to the surface of the Moon during which the astronauts collected 382 kg of rock and regolith (~2200 samples). The samples collected fall into these general categories: rocks (~66% by mass), rake samples (~4%), bulk regolith (~24%), and specialty regolith (deep drill cores, drive tubes, sealed bulk regolith) samples (~6%). In each category there are a variety of different subtypes available for study, e.g., among the bulk regolith samples there are also skim, trench, and (partially) shaded regolith samples each sampling unique types or depths of regolith. This variety of subsamples has enabled a multitude of different studies over the past 55 years (>3400 individual requests). We are still averaging ~50 unique requests and have allocated >500 individual Apollo samples annually for the past 10 years (2020 excepted). Looking at the 4,675 non-ANGSA (Apollo Next Generation Sample Analysis) samples allocated over the past 10 years, the proportions of allocated samples do not precisely align with the abundance (by mass) of those samples withing the collection: Rock (69.4 %); Rake (10.8 %); Bulk Regolith (15.5 %); Drive Tube (3.3 %); Core/Specialty (1.0 %). Apollo Preliminary Examination (PE): The PE process differs significantly for the various sample types enumerated above; we focus on regolith and rock samples here. During the Apollo mission era, the PE process evolved over the course of the missions; below is what was done for the Apollo 17 mission. For regolith samples, the PE process was: (1) documented bags containing regolith are opened, photographed, and described; (2) large rocks are removed and treated separately; (3) 25% to 33% of the bulk soil is scooped out, weighed, and stored in reserve; (4) the remaining sample is sieved to produce the size fractions <1, 1- 2, 2-4, and 4-10 mm, all of which are weighed. For rock samples, the process is: (1) removing rocks from the container(s) it came back from the Moon in; (2) rematching any materials that spalled off the rock to their original location; (3) numbering, weighing, and basic photographic documentation; (4) dusting with a gentle N2 gas jet; (5) Orthogonal photography; (6) detailed description of the textures and features of the rock; (7) rock modelling and measurement; (8) stereophotography; (9) determination of the orientation of the rock on the lunar surface. Drive tubes and deep drill cores were not characterized during PE beyond an initial weight and a sketch of the interior tube materials derived from 2D medical X-ray images. Catalogs: The ongoing utility of the Apollo samples is enabled by the robust cataloguing process for the samples [3-5], which allows the scientific community to accurately request samples uniquely suited to their proposed studies. A common misconception, however, is the amount of detail that goes into the initial catalog (e.g., [6]) for a collection from the preliminary examination (PE) period, versus what goes into the catalogs that come later in the life cycle of the samples from that mission (e.g., [7]). The only required data for a PE catalog is a weight, a basic photograph, and a description of the nature of the sample. Artemis PE: Over the past few years, the ongoing ANGSA project studied previously unopened Apollo 17 double drive tube samples 73001/2 [1], and a PE of the drive tubes was done. The PE took the existing core dissection process (developed during PE of Apollo cores in the 1970s, 1980s), and modernized it [7]. The main lesson from the ANGSA PE relative to future missions was that the physical work done during PE of lunar samples has not changed much over the past 5 decades. The use of “modern” technology during PE (e.g., XCT; multispectral analyses) resulted in an enhanced initial understanding of the 73001 and 73002 drive tubes, but greatly increased the time required. The lessons learned from recent astromaterial PEs (e.g., ANGSA and OREx) are important to consider when planning for Artemis, but the unique nature of the Artemis Campaign means many lessons learned from these mission will not be applicable. Given the time constraints (6 months) and likely number of samples that will be returned by Artemis (>200), the Artemis PE catalog will necessarily look much more like [4] than [6].

J Gross↗