Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Data Intensive Science”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

293 records · Page 17

In-Lab Rapid Analytical Detection of Lunar Volatiles By Universal Gas Analyzer With Comparison to GC-MS System

Introduction: The curation of permanently shadowed regions (PSRs) [1] on the lunar surface is centered around studies based upon the observed volatiles from the LCROSS mission [2]. The rapid detection of important volatile gases and vapors present in planetary bodies and Astromaterials by a standalone analytical device is an area of intense research interest in our group and Planetary Exploration & Astromaterials Research Laboratory (PEARL) facility and this work is relevant to the future preparation of viable lunar simulants for testing curation efforts down the road. The groundbreaking results obtained from the LCROSS Mission [2] open the requirements for the direct detection of volatiles present in regolith materials collected from the lunar surface. The mass spectrometry of volatile chemicals is a general technique that utilizes a set of instruments that creates charged ions from a gaseous chemical species and measures the intensities vs. mass-to-charge ratio (m/z) [3]. In this context, we discuss in-lab experimental results and procedures for rapid qualitative analysis of main LCROSS volatiles (water, H2S, NH3, CO2, and CH3OH) by a Universal Gas Analyzer (UGA) instrument. Additionally, the instrument performance was evaluated by measuring the isotopic abundance ratio of atmospheric Ar-40 to Ar-36 present in room air since, argon is a relevant gas in planetary studies as it can provide an insight and reference point to isotope studies [4]. Additional, cross comparisons were attempted and made between the two instruments to develop a robust analytical technique by comparing mass spectral data for H2S headspace samples with a Trace-1310/ ISQ 7000 (ThermoFisher Scientific.) GC-MS system. Background: The benchtop UGA System is equipped with an SRS UGA 300 quadrupole mass spectrometer designed and built by Stanford Research Systems [5]. This system can be configured for several types of gaseous chemical analysis. The inlet line continuously samples gases at low flow rates (several milliliters per minute) through a capillary limiting the intake pressure making the instrument ideal for online analysis of select gases and/or room atmosphere. Moreover, in our current UGA system, a change in composition at the inlet can be detected in about 200 milliseconds and a complete spectrum is acquired (for a range of 1-100 amu) in under 45 sec with masses measured at rates up to 25 msec per point [5]. This system provides a quick upstream analytical data that we can then compare to results obtained by our GC-MS system. Sample Preparation: Small volume (2-4 mL) of analyte sample was taken in a 10 mL glass vial and sealed with a crimped cap and purged with pure Ar or N2 gas to displace air from the top. The headspace sample was scanned by the UGA instrument at analog, histogram, and pressure vs. time modes. The isotopic abundance ratio for 40Ar-to-36Ar was estimated by measuring partial pressure vs. time scans and setting the mass at 40 and 36 respectively. Results and Discussions: In this work, we have investigated the applicability of the UGA system by qualitative analysis of a series of LCROSS volatiles measured individually. Fig. 1 demonstrates a set of vertically offset spectra for the partial pressures measured as a function of mass-to-charge (m/z) ratios. The average acquisition time for each spectrum was less than a minute suggesting that the UGA system is ideal for quick analysis of geochemical volatiles. For the cross-comparison, we analyzed an H2S headspace sample by a Trace-1310/ISQ-7000 system and compared mass spectral data with previously measured UGA histogram scan data (Fig. 2). In both cases, major peak positions are the same, however, the intensities of fragment ions ([1H132S]+ and [32S]+) are higher for UGA suggesting that the fragment ionization process is stronger in UGA compared to that of GC-MS. To investigate how the integrated area under each chromatogram varies with the headspace sample volume, a set of five H2S headspace samples with increasing volumes was analyzed by the GC-MS system (Fig. 3, inset). A small volume (e.g., 200 to 1000 µL) of H2S/H2O vapor was withdrawn from a 20 mL stock sample vial containing ~5 mL of 0.4% H2S in water by a gas-tight syringe and added to another 20 mL vial filled with argon and analyzed by the GC-MS system. Finally, the UGA detector sensitivity was evaluated by calculating the atmospheric 40Ar-to-36Ar isotopic abundance ratio in room air by running a partial pressure vs. time scan with setting the atomic mass at 40, and 36. Fig. 4(a) shows a ~25 min duration “P vs. time” scan for 40Ar (plot for 36Ar is not shown). The partial pressure values (~100 points) were corrected by subtracting the corresponding background pressure value for 37Ar and utilized to calculate 40Ar-to-36Ar isotopic abundance ratios as shown by Fig. 4b. The average isotopic abundance ratio is ~306 with a 2*STDEV ~13. This abundance ratio is significantly close to the previously reported value of 298.56 [6] and the ratio obtained by our GC-MS system (303 for a UHP grade Ar sample). Conclusions: Our study strongly evidenced that the benchtop UGA system is a valuable analytical tool for the detection of major LCROSS volatiles. The rapid scanning capability, the inexpensiveness of the whole system, and impressive detection sensitivity prove its worthiness as an essential device for advanced geochemical applications. Moreover, cross comparisons with the GC-MS provide important bridges into advanced curatorial efforts into the future. References: [1] Bickel, V.T., et al. (2021) Nat Commun 12, 5607. [2] Colaprete, A., et al. (2010) Science, 330, 463-468. [3] Glavin, D. P. et al. (2012) 2012 IEEE Aerospace Conference, 1-11. [4] Willett, C. D., et al. (2022) Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 329, 119-134. [5] Operation Manual and Programming Reference. (2018) Universal gas Analyzers, Stanford Research Systems. [6] Lee, J. Y., et al. (2006) Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 70, 4507–4512. Notes: (4 figures are attached with text as shown by the attached file)

Curation↗

Grant Proposal for the Continuation of the Voyager Interstellar Mission: LECP Investigation

This proposal documents the plans of the Low Energy Charged Particle (LECP) investigation team for participation in NASA's Voyager Interstellar Mission (VIM) as the Voyager 1 and 2 spacecraft explore the outer reaches of the heliosphere and search for the termination shock and the heliopause. The proposal covers the four year period from 1 January 1997 to 31 December 2000. The LECP instruments on Voyager 1 and 2 measure in situ intensities of charged particles with energies from about 30 keV to 100 MeV for ions, and about 20 keV to greater than 10 MeV for electrons. The instruments provide detailed spectral, angular, and compositional information about the particles. Composition is available for greater than 200 keV/nuc using multi-parameter measurements. Angular information is obtained by a mechanically scanned platform that rotates at various commanded rates. Measurements of low energy ion and electron intensities versus time and spatial location within the heliosphere contain an abundance of information regarding various transport and acceleration processes on both local (approx. 1 hr, approx. 0.01 AU) and global (approx. 11 yrs, approx. 100 AU) scales. The LECP instruments provide unique observations of such dynamical processes, and we anticipate that it will return critical information regarding the boundaries of the heliosphere. Several recent and exciting discoveries based on LECP measurements emphasize the important role that low energy charged particle distributions play in physical processes in the interplanetary medium. Yet, at the same time, these discoveries also underscore the fact that our understanding of processes in the outer heliosphere is, in most cases, incomplete, and in others, only rudimentary at best. Among the discoveries referred to above are the following: (1) Shocks: Examination of greater than 30 keV ion intensities have revealed: (a) a total absence of acceleration beyond only -100-200 keV at a strong transient shock in May 1991 at 35 AU, despite an enhanced level of seed particles; (b) a large transient shock in September 1991 of global scale, with intensities of shock-accelerated ions greater than or equal to 30 keV to approx. 30 MeV showing complex, highly energy-dependent spatial evolution, and small-scale (approx. few gyroradii), often anisotropic, micro-structures; (c) recurrent intensity increases in greater than or equal to 30 keV to -few MeV ions, with structures that, in some cases, show no correlation with the associated corotating shock. (2) Superthermal ion pressure: A global merged interaction region with a leading shock, downstream of which the superthermal ion (greater than or equal to 30 keV to approx. 4 MeV) pressure is comparable to that of the thermal plasma, and the total particle pressure yields a plasma beta of order unity. (3) Pickup ions: Measurements of the C/O ratio within transient structures at 35-45 AU showing the first clear evidence that transient shocks can pre-accelerate interstellar pickup ions from approx. 1 keV/nuc to at least 1 MeV/nuc. (4) Seed particles: Injection of ions for acceleration to high energies at the termination shock is unlikely to be a problem, since interplanetary transient and recurrent shocks are continually accelerating ions, of solar wind or interstellar origin, to highly superthermal energies. (5) Precursor electrons: Ambient solar electrons (greater than or equal to few tens of keV) that exist in the outer heliosphere ca form a broad precursor, several days wide, that is upstream of the termination shock and potentially observable a few months prior to the shock crossing. (6) Solar wind velocity at Voyager 1: We can use LECP ion data to obtain the solar wind velocity at Voyager 1, enabling us to provide critical measurement of the plasma flow as we approach and encounter the termination shock and other regions (necessary due to the partial failure of the Voyager 1 PLS experiment). The work of the LECP investigator team during the VIM will include: (1) Continuing operations with regard to the receipt, processing, verification, cataloging, display, and distribution of the data from the LECP instruments on Voyager 1 and 2, (2) Monitoring the health and performance of the LECP instruments, and evaluating and characterizing the response of the LECP instruments to various energetic particle and plasma environments, (3) Participating in, and supporting Voyager Project planning exercises and other coordinated activities relevant to exploration of the outer heliosphere, (4) Developing analysis techniques and operational procedures suitable for searching for and characterizing the boundaries and unique regions of the outher heliosphere, (5) Continuing the preparation of data sets appropriate for submission to the National Space Sciences Data Center (NSSDC) and, where appropriate, the Planetary Data System (PDS), (6) Maintaining direct Web access to online LECP data through the JHU/APL Voyager LECP home page, (7) Performing scientific evaluations of the Voyager 1 and 2 LECP data sets in conjunction with other data sets and other investigators, with particular focus on the outer regions of the heliosphere, and (8) Publishing the results of these evaluations in the scientific literature and presenting the results in scientific conferences.

Krimigis, Stamatios M.↗

NASA’s Moon Trek Portal: New Capabilities Supporting Mission Planning and Engagement

Introduction: NASA’s Moon Trek (https://trek.nasa.gov/moon/) is one of a growing number of interactive, browser-based, online portals for planetary data visualization and analysis produced by NASA’s Solar System Treks Project (SSTP). Moon Trek continues to be enhanced with new data and new capabilities enabling it to facilitate the planning and conducting of upcoming lunar missions by NASA, its commercial partners, and its international partners, as well as advancing its role as a valuable outreach tool. A Comprehensive Online Web Portal: Developed at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and managed as a project of NASA’s Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute (SSERVI) at NASA Ames Research Center, Moon Trek is a browser-based web portal. The portal provides easy-to-use tools for browsing, data layering, data product blending, and feature search among thousands of data products covering topography, mineralogy, elemental abundance, geology, and much more. Visualizations are provided in var-ious map projections, interactive 3D viewing, and in virtual reality. Using an in-house stereo workflow, SSTP is able to produce new NAC-based high-resolution mosaics and DEMs. Diverse Applications for Lunar Exploration: Baseline analytic tools available to all users include dis-tance measurement, elevation profiling, sun angle calculation, and 3D print file generation. More advanced account-level tools allow users to perform more computationally intensive analyses. These include ray-traced lighting analysis for user-specified areas over user-specified time/date ranges and time intervals, electro-static surface potential analysis, subsetting of large data products, slope analysis, and Lunar Laser Ranging geometry calculation. Artificial intelligence (AI) and ma-chine learning (ML) based tools have been implemented for crater detection and hazard analysis, boulder detection and hazard analysis, and rockfall detection. New Tools Facilitating Exploration: Additional, new tools have recently been added and others are in development, offering even greater functionality in con-ducting analyses of potential landing sites and areas of surface operations. The new Line-of-Sight tool facilitates communications planning between locations on the lunar surface, between any given site on the lunar surface and a specified ground station on the Earth, and between a site on the lunar surface and a relay asset in lunar orbit, all taking into account local lunar topography. The new Data Plotter tool provides both tabular and graphical representations of pixel values along a user specified path for a growing number of data products. The new NAC Finder tool will identify and pro-vide access to NAC images that intersect a user-defined path or bounded area. The SSTP development team is looking to leverage the capabilities of its existing AI and ML crater, boulder, and rockfall detection and analysis tools, and extend that technology to a generalized feature detector that can be trained on instances of specific types of landforms and then search the lunar surface for more examples of such features. New traverse planning tools are being developed with use cases in generalized concept studies and specific mission planning in mind. These will facilitate finding optimal traverse paths based on constraints such as slope, lighting, hazard avoidance, and communications. These will be complemented by new traverse visualization capabilities. Users will be able to interactively ride along with a rover, examining 3D views of the terrain while adjusting camera height and viewing angle along with selecting different data layer overlays to drape across the terrain. Engaging the Public: The capabilities being developed for mission planning are being leveraged to further enhance Moon Trek’s proven utility as a valuable public outreach resource. This includes providing multiple lev-els of engagement with different points of entry. At its simplest level, promoting understanding through visualization, media and the public will be able to easily visualize and conduct their own exploration of lunar sites targeted by NASA and its partners. For a more in-depth experience, we are working with our stakeholders to promote understanding through interaction by extend-ing our current landing site and traverse analysis capabilities, making simplified access to these tools available to those who want to explore more deeply key factors in planning a mission through interactive and possibly even gamified experiences. The highest degree of public outreach, focusing on engagement through scientific participation, could be achieved through our work with missions and the NASA Office of the Chief Scientist on Moon Trek’s extension as a tool with specialized capabilities for facilitating citizen science. In such scenarios, participants become members of extended mis-sion science teams, using dedicated and integrated interfaces to analyze mission data to help answer questions key to lunar science and exploration. We are work-ing with NASA’s Office of Communications, museums, planetariums, and the media to help them easily integrate accurate, detailed visualizations of NASA’s lunar destinations and exploration into their content/productions and to engage diverse audiences in diverse venues.

Moon Trek↗

NASA Software Engineering Benchmarking Study

To identify best practices for the improvement of software engineering on projects, NASA's Offices of Chief Engineer (OCE) and Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) formed a team led by Heather Rarick and Sally Godfrey to conduct this benchmarking study. The primary goals of the study are to identify best practices that: Improve the management and technical development of software intensive systems; Have a track record of successful deployment by aerospace industries, universities [including research and development (R&D) laboratories], and defense services, as well as NASA's own component Centers; and Identify candidate solutions for NASA's software issues. Beginning in the late fall of 2010, focus topics were chosen and interview questions were developed, based on the NASA top software challenges. Between February 2011 and November 2011, the Benchmark Team interviewed a total of 18 organizations, consisting of five NASA Centers, five industry organizations, four defense services organizations, and four university or university R and D laboratory organizations. A software assurance representative also participated in each of the interviews to focus on assurance and software safety best practices. Interviewees provided a wealth of information on each topic area that included: software policy, software acquisition, software assurance, testing, training, maintaining rigor in small projects, metrics, and use of the Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) framework, as well as a number of special topics that came up in the discussions. NASA's software engineering practices compared favorably with the external organizations in most benchmark areas, but in every topic, there were ways in which NASA could improve its practices. Compared to defense services organizations and some of the industry organizations, one of NASA's notable weaknesses involved communication with contractors regarding its policies and requirements for acquired software. One of NASA's strengths was its software assurance practices, which seemed to rate well in comparison to the other organizational groups and also seemed to include a larger scope of activities. An unexpected benefit of the software benchmarking study was the identification of many opportunities for collaboration in areas including metrics, training, sharing of CMMI experiences and resources such as instructors and CMMI Lead Appraisers, and even sharing of assets such as documented processes. A further unexpected benefit of the study was the feedback on NASA practices that was received from some of the organizations interviewed. From that feedback, other potential areas where NASA could improve were highlighted, such as accuracy of software cost estimation and budgetary practices. The detailed report contains discussion of the practices noted in each of the topic areas, as well as a summary of observations and recommendations from each of the topic areas. The resulting 24 recommendations from the topic areas were then consolidated to eliminate duplication and culled into a set of 14 suggested actionable recommendations. This final set of actionable recommendations, listed below, are items that can be implemented to improve NASA's software engineering practices and to help address many of the items that were listed in the NASA top software engineering issues. 1. Develop and implement standard contract language for software procurements. 2. Advance accurate and trusted software cost estimates for both procured and in-house software and improve the capture of actual cost data to facilitate further improvements. 3. Establish a consistent set of objectives and expectations, specifically types of metrics at the Agency level, so key trends and models can be identified and used to continuously improve software processes and each software development effort. 4. Maintain the CMMI Maturity Level requirement for critical NASA projects and use CMMI to measure organizations developing software for NASA. 5.onsolidate, collect and, if needed, develop common processes principles and other assets across the Agency in order to provide more consistency in software development and acquisition practices and to reduce the overall cost of maintaining or increasing current NASA CMMI maturity levels. 6. Provide additional support for small projects that includes: (a) guidance for appropriate tailoring of requirements for small projects, (b) availability of suitable tools, including support tool set-up and training, and (c) training for small project personnel, assurance personnel and technical authorities on the acceptable options for tailoring requirements and performing assurance on small projects. 7. Develop software training classes for the more experienced software engineers using on-line training, videos, or small separate modules of training that can be accommodated as needed throughout a project. 8. Create guidelines to structure non-classroom training opportunities such as mentoring, peer reviews, lessons learned sessions, and on-the-job training. 9. Develop a set of predictive software defect data and a process for assessing software testing metric data against it. 10. Assess Agency-wide licenses for commonly used software tools. 11. Fill the knowledge gap in common software engineering practices for new hires and co-ops.12. Work through the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) program with universities in strengthening education in the use of common software engineering practices and standards. 13. Follow up this benchmark study with a deeper look into what both internal and external organizations perceive as the scope of software assurance, the value they expect to obtain from it, and the shortcomings they experience in the current practice. 14. Continue interactions with external software engineering environment through collaborations, knowledge sharing, and benchmarking.

Rarick, Heather L.↗

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↗