Cryogenic Hibernation Assessment of Commercial Cells for Space Flight Applications
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Lunar Night↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “Lunar Surface 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.
Simulating the Lunar Thermal Environment for the Surface-Deployed LEMS Artemis III TVAC Test
The Lunar Environment Monitoring Station (LEMS) is an autonomous, survive-the lunar-night seismic suite to be deployed on the Lunar surface by the Artemis III crew and designed to operate continuously for two years. It will see the extremes of the Lunar south pole thermal environment where surface temperatures range from -200°C to +20°C and where nighttime duration is at least 354 hours. Given power and mass constraints, the thermal system is limited to 2.5 Watts of heat during the lunar night. Presented is the system thermal vacuum test plan and configuration to validate the thermal control system performance in a flight-like environment. The test will measure the nighttime heat leaks for the bus and 18 seismometers to ensure lunar night survival and operability.
Thermal↗
Simulating the Lunar Thermal Environment for the Surface-Deployed LEMS Artemis III TVAC Test
The Lunar Environment Monitoring Station (LEMS) is an autonomous, survive-the lunar-night seismic suite to be deployed on the Lunar surface by the Artemis III crew and designed to operate continuously for two years. It will see the extremes of the Lunar south pole thermal environment where surface temperatures range from -200°C to +20°C and where nighttime duration is at least 354 hours. Given power and mass constraints, the thermal system is limited to 2.5 Watts of heat during the lunar night. Presented is the system thermal vacuum test plan and configuration to validate the thermal control system performance in a flight-like environment. The test will measure the nighttime heat leaks for the bus and 18 seismometers to ensure lunar night survival and operability.
TVAC↗
Harness Thermal Heat Loss Measurement for A Lunar Surface-Deployed LEMS Artemis III Payload
The Lunar Environment Monitoring Station (LEMS) is an autonomous, survive-the-lunar-night seismic suite to be deployed on the Lunar surface by the Artemis III crew and designed to operate continuously for two years. It will see the extremes of the Lunar south pole thermal environment where surface temperatures range from -200°C to +20°C and where nighttime duration is at least 354 hours. Given power and mass constraints, the thermal system is limited to 2.5 Watts of heat during the lunar night. The electrical harnessing named the Signal and Power Passthrough (SAPP) was designed to minimize heat loss while meeting power and signal integrity requirements. To mitigate risk due to uncertainty associated with the harnessing materials, routing, and tie-downs, a flight-like thermal conductance test was performed to measure the heat loss. The test methodology, results, and model correlation are presented.
Thermal↗
Harness Thermal Heat Loss Measurement for A Lunar Surface-Deployed LEMS Artemis III Payload
The Lunar Environment Monitoring Station (LEMS) is an autonomous, survive-the-lunar-night seismic suite to be deployed on the Lunar surface by the Artemis III crew and designed to operate continuously for two years. It will see the extremes of the Lunar south pole thermal environment where surface temperatures range from -200°C to +20°C and where nighttime duration is at least 354 hours. Given power and mass constraints, the thermal system is limited to 2.5 Watts of heat during the lunar night. The electrical harnessing named the Signal and Power Passthrough (SAPP) was designed to minimize heat loss while meeting power and signal integrity requirements. To mitigate risk due to uncertainty associated with the harnessing materials, routing, and tie-downs, a flight-like thermal conductance test was performed to measure the heat loss. The test methodology, results, and model correlation are presented.
TVAC↗
Ground Slope Effects on Lander Radiator Performance
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Lunar Surface Thermal Modeling↗
The Relevance of the VIPER Mission to NASA’s Artemis Human Exploration of the Moon
NASA has ambitious plans to send astronaut crews to the south polar region of the Moon and explore this lunar terrain with humans for the first time through a series of Artemis missions. Artemis will provide economic benefits, drive technological advancement, and inspire the next generation of explorers. Simultaneously, Artemis presents a unique opportunity for humans to conduct high-priority planetary science in situ in the south polar region of the Moon. Prior to human exploration, landed robotic precursor investigations can provide valuable information to reduce risk and maximize discovery and productivity of subsequent crewed missions. NASA’s Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER) is a robotic mission designed to explore and characterize the lunar south polar region prior to crewed Artemis landed missions. VIPER is designed to explore multiple thermal regimes to characterize the lunar polar environment and regolith properties, and to explore for surface and subsurface ices. Each of these objectives are key for both scientific investigation and to detect and assess volatile deposits to support in situ resource utilization (ISRU) and a sustained human presence on the Moon. VIPER would also operate with a real-time mission operations architecture with relevance and feed-forward to Artemis crewed operations on the lunar surface. VIPER would provide key information regarding the lunar environment, scientific exploration, technologies, and real-time operations to optimize the valuable surface exploration time of Artemis crew members while simultaneously reducing risk to crew and increasing health and human safety on the lunar surface.
Jennifer L Heldmann↗
NIAC Phase I Final Report Lunar South Pole Oxygen Pipeline (LSPOP)
The Lunar South Pole Oxygen Pipeline (LSPOP) Phase I NIAC, is to analyze the feasibility of constructing a pipeline at the Moon’s South Pole for transporting gaseous oxygen from point of generation to point of use. A lunar pipeline has never been pursued and will revolutionize lunar surface operations for the Artemis program and reduce cost and risk. Our starting concept is for a 5 km pipeline to transport oxygen gas from an oxygen production source, for example from our molten regolith electrolysis (MRE, currently at TRL 5, see references[1],[2],[3],[4],[5],[6] for technical discussions of the MRE process) extraction site, or any other source, to an oxygen storage/liquification plant near a lunar base. The pipeline is designed to: 1) be constructed robotically from regolith-derived metals with minimal material transferred from Earth, 2) be repairable robotically, 3) have an oxygen flow rate of ~2 kg/hour, which is commensurate with the NASA initial projected need of 10,000 kg/year, 4) operate with minimal power over the lifetime of the pipeline, with a goal of high operational reliability and the ability to survive in the lunar environment for > 10 years. We compare this concept to a pipeline concept with pipe produced on Earth and then transported to and assembled on the Moon. Both approaches will use earth-based compressors, valves, and fittings which are integrated into the pipeline on the Moon.
NIAC Phase I↗
Lunar and Planetary Science XXXV: Asteroids, Meteors, Comets
Session 13 of the Thirty-Fifth Lunar and Planetary Science Conference that took place on Tuesday, March 16, 2004. This session includes reports on asteroids, meteors, and comets. The attached document is a listing of all reports included in this session. The full text documents for each report is available in the Related Records section.
Lunar and Planetary Institute↗
Parametric-Based Heat Rejection Trade Study for Lunar and Martian Surface Operations
Establishing and maintaining a sustained presence on the lunar and/or Martian surfaces will require a diverse portfolio of surface elements (e.g., habitation, mobility, power generation, etc.). Many of these systems generate excess heat that must be rejected across a wide range of magnitudes, temperatures, and duty cycles and under variable environmental conditions. To identify the most promising heat rejection approaches for this diverse portfolio, a heat rejection trade study was conducted to evaluate the performance of different technology approaches across a spectrum of surface environments and heat-load requirements. The trade study consisted of three stages: (1) development of a parametric-based modeling framework, (2) creation of a database of heat rejection technologies, surface elements, and environmental conditions for the Moon and Mars, and (3) execution of a quantitative analysis of various heat rejection technologies across different operating conditions and surface elements. The modeling framework is developed in Python and Excel to prioritize small model size and hence low computational cost to enable large parametric sweeps while avoiding the reliance on proprietary software. Individual heat rejection processes are represented as simple Excel models, and a centralized Python script interfaces with the models to coordinate the parametric study. These simple sizing models were developed to take heat load requirements and environmental parameters as inputs and compute mass, power, and volume as outputs. Rather than assess each heat rejection technology separately for each surface element, a unified parametric space was developed to evaluate all technologies across all elements. This parametric space includes factors related to heat load (e.g., magnitude or temperature) and environment (e.g., surface temperature, sky temperature, solar flux). This effort generated a database containing information on over 60 heat rejection technologies and 30 surface elements. For each surface element, the expected heat rejection requirements were documented and analyzed to determine the most common needs shared across all elements. Environmental conditions at various lunar and Martian latitudes were also established for worst-case hot and worst-case cold scenarios. High-fidelity heat rejection models are currently under development. Preliminary trades between heat rejection technologies including radiators, venting technologies, convective coolers, and more have been conducted to identify promising options. This presentation will summarize the preliminary trade results and provide an overview and discussion of the expected heat loads and thermal environments for sustained surface operations on the Moon and Mars.
Heat Rejection↗
Lunar and Planetary Science XXXIV
The 34th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference was held March 17-21, 2003. Topics included planetary exploration, crater research on Mars, Earth, Moon, and other planets or satellites, imaging techniques and image analysis, age determination, albedo studies, petrographic studies, isotope composition studies, instrument design, sampling methods, landform analysis, asteroids, impact analysis, impact melts, and related research.
Lunar and Planetary Institute↗
Lunar and Planetary Science XXXVI, Part II
Some topics covered: Implications of internal fragmentation on the structure of comets; Atmospheric excitation of mars polar motion; Dunite viscosity dependence on oxygen fugacity; Cross profile and volume analysis of bahram valles on mars; Calculations of the fluxes of 10-250 kV lunar leakage gamma rays; Alluvian fans on mars; Investigating the sources of the apollo 14 high-Al mare basalts; Relationship of coronae, regional plains and rift zones on venus; and Chemical differentiation and internal structure of europa and callisto.
Lunar and Planetary Science↗
Twenty-Third Lunar and Planetary Science Conference
Presented here is a collection of papers from the Twenty-Third Lunar and Planetary Science Conference that were chosen for having the greatest potential interest for the general reading public. The presentations avoid jargon and unnecessarily complex terms. Topics covered include electron microscopy studies of a circumstellar rock, the fractal analysis of lava flows, volcanic activity on Venus, the isotopic signature of recent solar wind nitrogen, and the implications of impact crater distribution on Venus.
Source record↗
NASA Talks: Harsh Lunar Environments
NASA Talks - Exploration drives technology, and as NASA works toward sustained operations on the lunar surface for a permanent moonbase, it is critical to understand how the location drives what’s needed to accomplish these goals. This is especially important as we land on the lunar South Pole, which will be different and riskier than the previous Apollo landing sites. The thermal conditions will be much colder, the lighting environment is challenged with low sun angles, the regolith holds a charge in the plasma sheath, and the radiation is significantly higher than in low Earth orbit (LEO). Stephanie Sipila, Deputy Manager of Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility Program (EHP) Technology, Integration and Partnerships Office, provided knowledge and insight into the game-changing technologies NASA is exploring to mitigate these risks.
Stephanie Sipila↗
NASA’s SLS (Space Launch System) Rocket Ready for Artemis II Lunar Mission
In early 2026, NASA will launch the Artemis II mission, an approximately 10-day long lunar mission that will fly three NASA astronauts and one CSA (Canadian Space Agency) astronaut on a free-return trajectory around the Moon, following a one-day checkout of their Orion spacecraft in Earth orbit. The mission will be the first to launch astronauts aboard NASA’s Orion spacecraft and on top of the agency’s SLS (Space Launch System) rocket. The mission will also deploy four 12U CubeSats as secondary payloads from the Orion stage adapter, following Orion separation and departure. The payloads, developed by four of NASA’s international partners, will perform a variety of science and technology investigations. The SLS and Orion for the mission are currently stacked in the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida and are undergoing final preparations to rollout to Launch Pad 39B for a tanking test before launch. In addition to preparations for the Artemis II mission, significant progress is being made on the SLS for the Artemis III mission, which is targeted to return astronauts to the lunar surface no later than 2029. Major components of the core stage and solid rocket boosters are already at NASA Kennedy undergoing build-up for the mission. Data from the Artemis II launch and mission, as well as progress to subsequent missions, as available, will be presented.
Bruce Askins↗
NASA’s SLS (Space Launch System) Rocket Ready for Artemis II Lunar Mission
In early 2026, NASA will launch the Artemis II mission, an approximately 10-day long lunar mission that will fly three NASA astronauts and one CSA (Canadian Space Agency) astronaut on a free-return trajectory around the Moon, following a one-day checkout of their Orion spacecraft in Earth orbit. The mission will be the first to launch astronauts aboard NASA’s Orion spacecraft and on top of the agency’s SLS (Space Launch System) rocket. The mission will also deploy four 12U CubeSats as secondary payloads from the Orion stage adapter, following Orion separation and departure. The payloads, developed by four of NASA’s international partners, will perform a variety of science and technology investigations. The SLS and Orion for the mission are currently stacked in the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida and are undergoing final preparations to rollout to Launch Pad 39B for a tanking test before launch. In addition to preparations for the Artemis II mission, significant progress is being made on the SLS for the Artemis III mission, which is targeted to return astronauts to the lunar surface no later than 2029. Major components of the core stage and solid rocket boosters are already at NASA Kennedy undergoing build-up for the mission. Data from the Artemis II launch and mission, as well as progress to subsequent missions, as available, will be presented.
Bruce R Askins↗
Performance of a Regenerative Fuel Cell System for the Lunar Surface
Regenerative fuel cells (RFCs) are an attractive energy storage solution for lunar missions as a technology capable of providing a higher specific energy (i.e., W∙h/kg) than state-of-the-art packaged Li-ion battery systems. An RFC consists of the (1 & 2) electrochemical stacks (chemical to electrical energy conversion to supply electricity to an external load, i.e. the fuel cell reaction, and electrical to chemical energy conversion of supplied electrical power to dissociate water into hydrogen and oxygen gases, i.e. water electrolysis), (3) fluidic conditioning, (4) reactant storage, (5) avionics, (6) power management and distribution (PMAD), and (7) thermal management. NASA’s Glenn Research Center has designed, assembled, and tested a breadboard RFC sys-tem capable of operating autonomously for multiple simulated lunar day/night cycles in a laboratory environment. The system is comprised of a non-flow through proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell stack and a liquid-anode feed PEM electrolyzer (EZ) stack designed to electrochemically compress the reactants at balanced pressures up to 12.4 MPa (1800 psia). The fluidic conditioning, avionics, PMAD, and thermal management sub-systems are largely comprised of commercial-off-the-shelf components for this system-level development effort. The hardware is controlled by a CubeSat space processor running an operational program based on core flight architecture that can control the RFC hardware autonomously through a state machine with fault monitoring. The testing results highlighted here were completed with the system in an open-loop configuration such that reactants generated through water electrolysis were vented while gas cylinders supplied fuel cell operation. The breadboard operated autonomously, but there were five unplanned transitions to a safe state that required a manual restart after reviewing the data, determining a root cause, and implementing a solution. Four of the transitions were caused by the thermal management subsystem and the fifth was caused by a water management control issue in the EZ sub-system. The RFC system operated for over 550 hours with the final cycle being slightly abbreviated due to reasons unrelated to system performance.
Kerrigan Cain↗
Performance of a Regenerative Fuel Cell System for the Lunar Surface
Regenerative fuel cells (RFCs) are an attractive energy storage solution for lunar missions as a technology capable of providing a higher specific energy (i.e., W∙h/kg) than state-of-the-art packaged Li-ion battery systems. An RFC consists of the (1 & 2) electrochemical stacks (chemical to electrical energy conversion to supply electricity to an external load, i.e. the fuel cell reaction, and electrical to chemical energy conversion of supplied electrical power to dissociate water into hydrogen and oxygen gases, i.e. water electrolysis), (3) fluidic conditioning, (4) reactant storage, (5) avionics, (6) power management and distribution (PMAD), and (7) thermal management. NASA’s Glenn Research Center has designed, assembled, and tested a breadboard RFC sys-tem capable of operating autonomously for multiple simulated lunar day/night cycles in a laboratory environment. The system is comprised of a non-flow through proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell stack and a liquid-anode feed PEM electrolyzer (EZ) stack designed to electrochemically compress the reactants at balanced pressures up to 12.4 MPa (1800 psia). The fluidic conditioning, avionics, PMAD, and thermal management sub-systems are largely comprised of commercial-off-the-shelf components for this system-level development effort. The hardware is controlled by a CubeSat space processor running an operational program based on core flight architecture that can control the RFC hardware autonomously through a state machine with fault monitoring. The testing results highlighted here were completed with the system in an open-loop configuration such that reactants generated through water electrolysis were vented while gas cylinders supplied fuel cell operation. The breadboard operated autonomously, but there were five unplanned transitions to a safe state that required a manual restart after reviewing the data, determining a root cause, and implementing a solution. Four of the transitions were caused by the thermal management subsystem and the fifth was caused by a water management control issue in the EZ sub-system. The RFC system operated for over 550 hours with the final cycle being slightly abbreviated due to reasons unrelated to system performance.
Kerrigan Cain↗