Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

J Gross

Publications and source records attributed to J Gross.

14 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2024

Emplacement of Shergottites in the Martian Crust Inferred From 3D Petrofabric and Crystal Size Distribution Analyses

Shergottites are mafic to ultramafic igneous rocks that represent a majority of known martian meteorites. They are subdivided into gabbroic, poikilitic, basaltic, and olivine-phyric categories based on differences in mineralogy and textures. Their geologic contexts are unknown so analyses of crystal sizes and preferred orientations have commonly been used to infer where shergottites solidified. Such environments range from subsurface cumulates to shallow intrusives to extrusive lava flows, which all have contrasting implications for interactions with crustal material, cooling histories, and potential in situ exposure at the surface. In this study, we present a novel three-dimensional (3D) approach to better understand the solidification environments of these samples and improve our knowledge of shergottites’ geologic contexts. Shape preferred orientations of most phases and crystal size distributions of late-forming minerals were measured in 3D using X-ray computed tomography (CT) on eight shergottites representing the gabbroic, poikilitic, basaltic, and olivine-phyric categories. Our analyses show that highly anisotropic, rod-like pyroxene crystals are strongly foliated in the gabbroic samples but have a weaker foliation and a mild lineation in the basaltic sample, indicating a directional flow component in the latter. Star volume distribution analyses revealed that most phases (maskelynite, pyroxene, olivine, and oxides/sulfides) preserve a foliated texture with variable strengths, and that the phases within individual samples are strongly to moderately aligned with respect to one another. In combination with relative cooling rates during the final stages of crystallization determined from interstitial oxide/sulfide crystal size distribution analyses, these results indicate that the olivine-phyric samples were emplaced as shallow intrusives (e.g., dikes/sills) and that the gabbroic, poikilitic, and basaltic samples were emplaced in deeper subsurface environments.

Martian meteorites↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Preserving and Curating the Moon: Adventures in Lunar Core Processing

The lunar crust is the most easily accessible part of the Moon to both remote sensing and sample analyses and provides an archive of information about planetary formation, crustal evolution, and contains a wealth of information about the origin of the Earth-Moon system [e.g., 1-5]. The Apollo mission returned 382 kg of rocks, soil and core samples. Studies of these lunar samples are crucial for our understanding of the Moon’s formation and geological evolution, and for the past 50 years these returned samples have provided the foundation for lunar science [5]. The returned samples are stored and cared for in the lunar curation facility at NASA’s Johnson Space Center. This facility is comprised of a large suite of clean rooms, sample vaults for pristine and return samples, thin section labs, core and saw rooms, storage and working areas, and ancillary labs all designed to minimize contamination from the environment and other samples. Some of the returned samples were intentionally set aside and left unopened. Recently, the Apollo Next Generation Sample Analysis (ANGSA) initiative was designed to examine these pristine samples so the next generation of lunar scientists can further our insight into the Moon’s history. Here, we present the meticulous process that involves preparing for, and ultimately opening, one of the unopened core samples: Apollo 17 drive tube 73002,0,which was collected on the Moon from a landslide deposit near Lara Crater by astronauts Gene Cernan and Jack Schmitt. In order to open, examine, and curate 73002,0withminimalpotential contamination, great care had to be taken prior to opening its container. Beginning18 months before extrusion of the sample, all core processing equipment was pulled out of storage, identified, sorted, cleaned, and purged with nitrogen gas. However, limited institutional memory has made this step challenging as most of the former core processors from the Apollo area have retired or passed away. Twelvemonths prior to extrusion, table-top rehearsals were initiated to identify equipment and learn how it fits together and operates. Five months before extruding the real core, preparations further evolved to include the extrusion and dissection of a lunar core simulant. In addition, a mock-up glovebox was designed and built to allow for a more realistic practice environment. One month prior to extrusion, the actual core cabinet was prepared for use, which included fitting it with lights, a webcam, and power. The tool and equipment cleaning procedure was also modified to include increased cleanliness and sterility requirements. While still sealed, the core was CT scanned at the University of Texas at Austin to maximize its scientific return. Days before the extrusion, witness plates and foil were deployed inside the core cabinet to monitor potential particle and organic contamination within the cabinet. On Nov. 5th, 2019, core sample 73002,0 was successfully opened and extruded(Fig.1). Dissection of 73002,0 began immediately afterwards and is still under way. Processing this sample will help us prepare for future sampling missions and core extrusions and will enable new scientific discoveries about the Moon.

C H Krysher↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Making Thin Sections from National Treasures: A Little Moon Rock Goes a Long Way

NASA’s Johnson Space Center curates the Apollo sample collection through their facilities in Houston, TX. It is a dual-purpose facility, intended both to store and preserve the precious samples, as well as to make them available for ongoing scientific study and public examination. The facilities consist of multiple vaults and lab spaces, including the Apollo Thin Section Lab. Although it is a part of the Curation facilities, this lab is intended to process specific lunar rock and dust samples into what are called “thin sections”. A thin section is a microscope slide with a very thin, highly polished slice of rock material mounted on it. These are used not only for microscope viewing, but also for a range of other sophisticated scientific instruments to map and measure fine details of the rock’s physical and chemical composition and structure. The process of making a thin section requires great care and patience and is an art in itself; each one is unique, and each sample can behave very differently while going through the same basic procedures. In general, it begins by taking a small chip of rock from a much larger sample. The rock fragment is placed within a small mold and liquid epoxy is poured over it and allowed to harden, producing what is called a “potted butt” (Figure 1). This is to stabilize the rock so that it won’t fragment or crumble during polishing, and to fill any cracks or voids within the rock. Once hardened, the epoxy on the bottom is carefully ground away to expose the rock surface within, which is then polished to a 1-micron finish. A thin new layer of fresh epoxy is then applied to the polished surface and used to mount it to a silica slide. Once the mounting epoxy has hardened, the potted butt is cut off less than one millimeter above the slide using a low-speed circular saw. This thin layer of sample material attached to the slide undergoes further grinding and polishing, typically bringing the sample thickness down to about 35 microns – roughly one third of the thickness of a human hair. The remaining potted butt is saved for future scientific investigations and can be re-polished and used again until all the rock material within it is used up. A single thin section can be reused countless times by numerous different researchers. In addition, thin sections are often exquisitely beautiful (Figure 2) and in some cases, lunar thin sections are used as public display samples, such as at the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum in Washington, DC. The production of thin sections allows an immense variety of research to be conducted on a tiny amount of rock or mineral material, allowing the bulk of the Apollo collection to stay pristine and unaltered, and thus, remain available for next generation of lunar scientists to further our insight into the Moon’s geological diversity, and to bring valuable new insights to our understanding of the origin of the Earth-Moon system.

J J Kent↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The ANGSA Program: A Low-cost Lunar "Sample Return Mission". An Overview and Progress over the Last 18 Months

The Apollo Program returned 381 kg of samples. Analyses of these samples have provided fundamental insights into the origin and history of the Earth-Moon system and how planets and even solar systems work. These samples have provided ground truth for every post-Apollo mission to the Moon for the interpretation of remotely sensed data. After 50 years of analysis and study, our sophistication for handling and examining samples has greatly increased. Some special samples that were collected or preserved in unique containers or environments remain unexamined by standard or advanced analytical approaches. The Apollo Next Generation Sample Analysis (ANGSA) Program was designed to examine a subset of these special samples. The ANGSA consortium consists of 9 original teams funded by NASA that have combined into a single science team referred to as the ANGSA Science Team. The program was designed to function as the sample analysis portion of a sample return mission with processing, preliminary examination, and analyses utilizing new and improved technologies and recent mission observations. The ANGSA Program links the first generation of lunar explorers (Apollo) with future explorers of the Moon (Artemis). The purpose of this abstract is to highlight the ANGSA samples, science and engineering goals, and progress made so far. Related abstracts and talks will focus on the links between Apollo and Artemis, geologic context, and initial examination, processing, and results.

F M McCubbin↗
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

Using X-Ray Computed Tomography to Catalog Rock Fragments in Apollo Drive Tube 73002

Overview: The Apollo missions collected 382 kg of rock, regolith, and core samples from six locations on the nearside of the Moon. Approximately 84% by mass of the Apollo collection remains in pristine condition within the curation facility at Johnson Space Center (i.e., never allocated, continuously stored in dry-N2 purged cabinets, exposure history restricted to Teflon, stainless steel, and Al-metal). Although most Apollo samples have been well characterized, there are several types of samples that have remained wholly or largely unstudied since their return, and/or that have been cu-rated under special conditions, e.g., frozen samples, samples stored in He-purged environment, and previously unopened drive tubes. NASA solicited proposals for the Apollo Next Generation Sample Analysis Pro-gram (ANGSA), and 9 teams were selected to study a subset of the unopened and frozen samples [1]. The first sample opened as part of the ANGSA pro-gram was drive tube 73002. This was originally a ~30 cm long, 4 cm diameter drive tube collected on a land-slide 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 [3], which provided invaluable information during the dissection process [4]. In addition to the pre-dissection XCT scans, individual >4 mm particles were separated from the 73002 regolith during processing and scanned at high resolution by XCT. Here we pre-sent the initial lithologic classification of 134 individual >4 mm rock fragments separated from the 73002 core during the dissection process. Methodology: Drive tube 73002 was manually dissected in 0.5 cm depth intervals in three passes (Fig. 1) [4,5]. Each interval from pass 1 and 2 was sieved to <1 mm and >1 mm size fractions, and >1 mm particles were further manually subdivided into 1-2, 2-4, 4-10, and >10 mm size fractions. Pass 3 was not sieved, but >10 mm clasts were separated manually. Each 4-10 mm and >10 mm fragment was individually weighed, triply bagged in Teflon, and scanned by XCT. There are 60 rock fragments in Pass 1, 64 rock fragments in Pass 2 (from the 4-10 mm and >10 mm size fractions), and 8 rock fragments from Pass 3 (>10 mm size fraction). Each individually bagged rock fragment was scanned using the 180 kV nano-focus transmission source on the Nikon XTH 320 XCT system at NASA Johnson Space Center [6]. Scanning conditions varied considerably for individual particles, in large part be-cause of the large variation in size (0.008-19.623 g). All scans fell within the following range of scan conditions: 2.8-20.6 um voxel size; 90-155 kV voltage; 18-39 uA current; 1891-3141 projections; and 902-2000 slices. Results and Discussion: The 132 rock fragments from sample 73002 fall into the following general cat-gories: agglutinates (n = 6); basalts (13); impact melts (5); impact melt breccias (IMB; 42); regolith breccias (62); and soil breccias (4); see Figure 2 for representative examples of each lithology. Within most of these broad lithologic groups are recognizable subgroups. For example, a significant portion of regolith breccia fragments contain some agglutinate-like glass (n = 9) or are dilithologic (7) because they contain a single large clast (~50% or more by volume). Subgroups can be based on similarities to previously identified lunar lithologies, such as high-Ti basalts (9) and VLT basalts (4; Fig. 3), or based on commonly seen features within the fragments, such as poikilitic ilmenite IMB (10), ilmenite-lath IMB (12), or vesicular IMB (11) “groups”. Particles in the same “group” are not necessarily intended to be genetically related, but rather identify particles that are similar and that follow-up studies can classify in more detail [7]. Conclusion: Identification of lithologies based on XCT is a powerful tool, but a more absolute classification will sometimes require additional textural information from thin sections (e.g., glassy-matrix regolith vs. impact-melt vs. granulitic breccia) or quantitative mineral compositions (e.g., basalt vs. monomict breccia).

R A Zeigler↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

X-Ray Computed Tomography During Preliminary Examination of Apollo Drive Tube 73001

Introduction: Starting in 2019, the Apollo Next Generation Sample Analysis (ANGSA) Program has enabled consortium studies of specially curated Apollo samples that were previously unstudied (or under studied). This began with unsealed core tube 73002 [1,2] that is the upper part of a station 3 double drive tube. More recently the pro-gram extended to the study of a variety of frozen Apollo 17 samples [3], as well as the gas extraction [4] and dis-section [5] of 73001, the lower half of the station 3 double drive tube, that was sealed under vacuum on the Moon. In this abstract we will examine the role of X-ray Computed Tomography (XCT) during the preliminary examination process for sealed core 73001, including: (1) engineering scans to aid in understanding the gas extraction process, whole-core scanning prior to opening to inform extrusion and dissection work, and (3) individual particle scanning to characterize rock fragment lithologies for follow on studies. Methodology: Sample 73001 is a 33 cm long, 4 cm diameter regolith sample collected inside a drive tube (~1 mm aluminum walls). That drive tube was sealed inside a 0.5 mm thick stainless steel (SS) Core Sample Vacuum Container (CSVC). XCT scans for engineering purposes were done on the Nikon XTH 320 system at Johnson Space Center using the 225 kV multi-metal reflection source at 215 kV, 179 A, and a 38.49 m voxel size. Individual >4 mm particles separated from the core during processing (then triply sealed in Teflon bags) were also scanned at JSC using the 180 kV source at 90 kV, 33 A, and a 2.98 – 10.65 m voxel size. Whole-core scans were done at the University of Texas High-Resolution X-ray Computed Tomography Facility (UTCT) on the 225 kV reflection source on the North Star Imaging cabinet XCT system. These scans included: (1) a series of 9 overlapping super-resolution scans each covering a ~4 cm length of the tube at 190 kV, 180 µA, and a 12.9 µm voxel size and (2) a lower resolution continuous helical scan of the entire core at 190 kV, 180 µA, and a 51.8 µm voxel size. Progress and Results: Before piercing and extracting the gas from sample 73001, an XCT scan of the bottom portion of the CSVC was used to confirm the location of the Teflon cap on the inner drive tube, to ensure it was not accidentally pierced during gas extraction. Similarly, after piercing, the bottom and top portions of the CSVC were scanned in order to capture engineering knowledge about the results of the piercing process, as well as the metal knife edge vacuum seal (SS into In-Ag alloy). Both scans will provide constraints on future work of this type, particularly for samples collected during the Artemis mission. Another finding from these "engineering" scans was that the device in the drive tube that immobilizes the regolith (the keeper) was not seated in the tube properly. This meant that (1) the drive tube could not be removed from the CSVC for the trip to UTCT, and (2) the procedure for opening and extruding the drive tube had to be modified. Had either of these things not been known prior to opening the CSVC, it could have led to an inability to XCT scan the whole core at high resolution and/or potential disruption of the core stratigraphy during extrusion. At UTCT, the entire length of the core was scanned at high resolution (12.9 microns per voxel). This scan serves multiple purposes: (1) A lower resolution (and uncorrected) version of these scans stitched together was used to help inform the processors of potential pitfalls during extrusion and dissection; and (2) the full resolution corrected data will serve as the permanent in situ record of the stratigraphy of the sample and will enable future researchers to perform a variety of analyses. So far, 92 of the 121 >4 mm particles separated during dissection pass 1 of sample 73001 have been individually scanned. These scans clearly show the lithology of each particle while keeping the particles in pristine condition. Because of the dust adhering to particle exteriors it would otherwise be impossible to determine lithologies in a non-contaminating way. Thus far the types of lithologies seen in sample 73001 (e.g., regolith breccias, impact-melt breccias, agglutinates, and basalts) are similar to those previously identified in sample 73002 [2]. By the time of the meeting, all particles from all 3 dissection passes will have been scanned and statistics on the different lithologies in 73001 compiled. References: [1] Shearer et al. (2020) 51st LPSC, abstract 1181. [2] Zeigler et al. (2020) 51st LPSC, abstract 3023. [3] Kent et al. (2022) This Volume. [4] McDonald et al. (2022) European Lunar Symposium. [5] Gross et al (2022) This volume.

Moon↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

X-Ray Computed Tomography of Apollo Drive Tube 73001 as Part of the Apollo Next Generation Sample Analysis Program

Introduction: Starting in 2019, the Apollo Next Generation Sample Analysis (ANGSA) Program has enabled consortium studies of specially curated Apollo samples that were previously unstudied (or under studied). This program was intended as a participating scientist program for these Apollo samples, as well as a preparation for upcoming lunar sample return missions (e.g., Artemis). The work began with studies of unsealed core tube 73002 [1,2] that is the upper ~35 cm of an Apollo 17 double drive tube (~70 cm total depth) collected on the landslide deposit near Lara Crater at Station 3 in the Taurus Littrow Valley. More recently the program extended to the study of a variety of frozen Apollo 17 samples [3], as well as the gas extraction [4] and dissection [5] of 73001, the lower half of the station 3 double drive tube. Sample 73001 was sealed under vacuum on the Moon in a Core Sample Vacuum Container (CSVC). In this abstract we will examine the role of X-ray Computed Tomography (XCT) during the preliminary examination process for sealed core 73001, including: (1) engineering scans to aid in understanding the gas extraction process, (2) whole-core scanning prior to opening to inform extrusion and dissection work, and (3) individual particle scanning to characterize rock fragment lithologies for follow on studies. Methodology: Sample 73001 is a 33 cm long, 4 cm diameter regolith sample collected inside a lunar drive tube (~1 mm aluminum walls). That drive tube was sealed inside a 0.5 mm thick stainless steel (SS) CSVC. XCT scans for engineering purposes were done on the Nikon XTH 320 system at Johnson Space Center using the 225 kV multi-metal reflection source at 215 kV, 179 A, and a 38.49 m voxel size. Individual >4 mm particles separated from the core during processing (then triply sealed in Teflon bags) were also scanned at JSC using the 180 kV source at 90 kV, 33 A, and a 2.98 – 10.65 m voxel size. Whole-core scans were done at the University of Texas High-Resolution X-ray Computed Tomography Facility (UTCT) on the 225 kV reflection source on the North Star Imaging cabinet XCT system. These scans included: (1) a series of 9 overlapping super-resolution scans each covering a ~4 cm length of the tube at 190 kV, 180 µA, and a 12.9 µm voxel size and (2) a lower resolution continuous helical scan of the entire core at 190 kV, 180 µA, and a 51.8 µm voxel size. Progress and Results: Before piercing and extracting the gas from sample 73001, an XCT scan of the bottom portion of the CSVC was used to confirm the location of the Teflon cap on the inner drive tube and whether there was an “air” gap between the Teflon cap and the CSVC. This was to ensure the Teflon cap (which immobilized the soil inside the drive tube) was not accidentally pierced during gas extraction. Similarly, after piercing, the bottom and top portions of the CSVC were scanned in order to capture engineering knowledge about the results of the piercing process, as well as the metal knife edge vacuum seal (SS into an In-Ag alloy). Both scans will provide constraints on future work of this type, both for the design of tools used on the lunar surface during Artemis, as well as how we open future samples of this type. An unexpected finding from these engineering scans was that the device in the drive tube that immobilizes the regolith (the keeper) was not seated in the tube properly. This meant that (1) the drive tube could not be removed from the CSVC for the trip to UTCT, and (2) the procedure for opening and extruding the drive tube had to be modified. Had either of these things not been known prior to opening the CSVC, it could have led to an inability to XCT scan the whole core at high resolution and/or potential disruption of the core stratigraphy during extrusion. At UTCT, the entire length of the core was scanned at high resolution (12.9 microns per voxel). This scan serves multiple purposes: (1) A lower resolution (and uncorrected) version of these scans stitched together was used to help inform the processors of potential pitfalls during extrusion and dissection (voids, angular fragments at the edges of the sample, etc.); and (2) the full resolution corrected data will serve as the permanent in situ record of the stratigraphy of the sample and will enable future researchers to perform a variety of analyses. All 121 >4 mm particles separated during dissection pass 1 of sample 73001 have been individually scanned. These scans clearly show the lithology of each particle while keeping the particles in pristine condition (they are individually triply bagged in Teflon within our N2 purged processing cabinets). Because of the dust adhering to particle exteriors, it would otherwise be impossible to determine lithologies in a non-contaminating way. Thus far the types of lithologies seen in sample 73001 (e.g., regolith breccias, impact-melt breccias, agglutinates, and bas-alts) are similar to those previously identified in sample 73002 [2]. By the time of the meeting, all particles from all 3 dissection passes will have been scanned and statistics on the different lithologies in 73001 compiled. References: [1] Shearer et al. (2020) 51st LPSC, abstract 1181. [2] Zeigler et al. (2020) 51st LPSC, abstract 3023. [3] Kent et al. (2022) This Volume. [4] McDonald et al. (2022) European Lunar Symposium. [5] Gross et al (2022) This volume.

Moon↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

From Apollo to Artemis: How Processing ANGSA Core Samples 73001/2 Can Help to Prepare for Future Sample Return Missions to the Moon and Beyond.

Introduction: Apollo Sample 73001/2 is a ~71cm long double drive tube consisting of an upper part (73002) and a lower part (73001) that contains regolith collected near Lara Crater at the Apollo 17 site, Station 3. The double drive tube is believed to have penetrated a lunar landslide deposit that was transported from the slope of the South Massif into the Taurus-Littrow Valley [1]. As part of the ANGSA (Apollo Next Generation Sample Analyses) initiative, preparing a preliminary examination (PE) catalog of 73001/2 is a crucial first step for the early identification of material types such as rock fragments and potential stratigraphy within the core. Many new curation and scientific tools such as X-ray computed tomography (XCT) [3], multi-spectral imaging [4], and gas extraction manifold with piercing tool [5-7], have been applied to the ANGSA core to benefit curation strategy, PE efforts, sample allocation to the planetary science community, and ultimately help to prepare for future sample return missions like Artemis. 73001/2 Preliminary Examination and Processing: Sample 73002 was successfully opened and extruded in Nov. 2019 and fully dissected at the end of 2021. Sample 73001 (Fig. 1) was successfully extruded in March 2022 after careful planning before opening the Core Sample Vacuum Container (CSVC) that was holding the drive tube of 73001. XCT, as part of PE, was used to scan the bottom and top part of the 73001 core tube within the CSVC prior to opening it to 1) facilitate non-destructive, rapid detection of any contamination potentials due to piercing of the CSVC during gas extraction [7]; and 2) to aid in the Artemis sample tool development and provide data on the knife edge seal of the CSVC. This knowledge will help us connect the mechanics of the implemented design (i.e., XCT data) to the performance of the seal (i.e., data on the gas samples will tell us how well the seal preserved the volatile record of lunar samples). Both type of information will feed forward into Artemis tool and storage strategies for future samples. Results and Lessons learned: The XCT data of the CSVC and core tube within showed that the bottom Teflon cap was not pierced during gas extraction (Fig. 1c) and thus, the sample integrity remained guaranteed during piercing and subsequent gas extraction. However, the XCT scan of the top of the core (Fig. 1b) revealed that the drive tube was overfilled with lunar soil and the tool that keeps the soil constrained within the drive tube was not fully deployed. These preliminary data allowed us to implement the necessary steps to prevent loss of sample integrity, including any potential stratigraphy shifts during extrusion. Processing Apollo core 73001/2, creating an informative PE catalog, and applying new and refined tools and technologies for sample analyses are invaluable activities that will assist in circumventing any potential pitfalls, aid in the characterization of samples, and help in the assessment of how well any lunar material has been collected and preserved in the past. This will aid in designing future sample collections and curation procedures and help to prepare for future human exploration and sampling missions such as Artemis. References: [1] Schmitt H. (2017) Icarus 298, 2-33. [3] Zeigler et al. (2021) LPSC 52nd, #2632; [4] Sun et al. (2021), LPSC 52nd, #1789; [5] Parai et al. (2021), LPSC 52nd #2665; [6] Schild et al. (2021) LPSC 52nd #1888; [7] McDonald (2022) ESL 2022.

ANGSA↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Mineralogical, Elemental, and Tomographic Reconnaissance Investigation for CLPS (Metric)

Geological solids are characterized by their mineral structure, elemental composition, and morphology. The Mineralogical, Elemental, and Tomographic Reconnaissance Investigation for CLPS (METRIC) is an instrument payload that will quantify all three. METRIC comprises a suite of instruments in a lander to perform X-ray diffraction (XRD) for mineral structure, X-ray fluorescence (XRF) for elemental composition, and X-ray Micro Computed Tomography (XCT) for 3D internal micromorphology. The instruments are accompanied by an Infrared Spectrometer (IRS) provide geologic context. A Honeybee Robotics pneumatic sampling and transfer system [e.g., 1] will be positioned under the lander to deliver sieved regolith to the X-ray instruments for analysis. This payload is envisioned for deployment to the lunar surface on a Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) lander but could be carried on a lander or rover to any solid surface in the solar system.

E B Rampe↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Mineralogical, Elemental, and Tomographic Reconnaissance Investigation for CLPS (METRIC): A Proposed Mission to the Lunar South Pole-Aitken Basin

The global Lunar Magma Ocean (LMO) hypothesis is based on analyses of ferroan anorthosites (FAN), magnesian plutonic rocks (Mg-suite), and KREEPy (Potassium - K; Rare Earth Elements - REE; Phosphorous - P) material present at the Apollo landing sites and the assumed global distribution of these lithologies. However, orbital spacecraft data over the last two decades have highlighted that the location of the Apollo missions within and near the Procellarum KREEP Terrane (PKT) is compositionally anomalous and not representative of the entire lunar surface and suggests that Apollo samples provide a biased view of the Moon. Further, meteorites, which originate from random areas on the lunar surface, including those not visited by Apollo, Luna, or Chang’E-5, provide complementary datasets that reveal a more complex lunar formation and evolution than the simple LMO onion skin model. While many recent investigations support and refine the LMO model, other recent studies have questioned whether this mechanism alone is responsible for the primordial differentiation of the Moon. Thus, relating the distinct and asymmetrically distributed geochemical terranes on the Moon, especially KREEP which is a predicted global LMO product, to lunar formation and differentiation remains a fundamental goal of lunar science. The South Pole-Aitken (SPA) impact carved a two-and-a-half thousand-kilometer basin into the Moon’s ancient crust, excavating material from as deep as the upper mantle. Orbital remote sensing of the basin indicates compositions with elevated thorium (Th) contents and unique mineralogies that provide a window into early lunar structure and LMO processes. We propose to land a powerful characterization laboratory at Birkeland crater on the far side of the Moon–where Th-rich SPA ejecta have been re-exposed near the surface–in order to address outstanding questions about the evolution of the Moon.

K M Cannon↗
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↗