Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “SAMPLING”

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.

At least 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2024

Will MSR Samples Cached on the Martian Surface Experience Significantly Greater Thermal Degradation than Samples Retained in the Rover?

Since the first Mars Sample Return (MSR)-related report published by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in 1974, a series of panels, reports, and white papers have recognized the importance of sample temperature in meeting mission goals and defined a sample maximum temperature (henceforth SMT) limit. The Mars Sample Handling and Requirements Panel (MSHARP, 1999) flatly stated that “[t]he main issue in sample preservation is temperature”. The Mars Exploration Program Analysis Group (MEPAG)’s “Science Priorities for Mars Sample Return” report (2008), declared that “[s]ignificant loss, particularly to biological studies, occurs if samples reach +50°C for three hours ” whereby “scientific objectives related to life goals could be seriously compromised”. Overall, a total of seven panels, white papers, and conference reports adopted a SMT of -40±17°C to preserve samples sufficiently to confidently achieve success in studies of past or present Martian life (see more detail in [5]). In contrast, the Mars 2020 rover (M2020) mission adopted a SMT of +60°C for samples stored on the Martian surface and +50°C for samples retained inside the rover, as stated in a conference poster presented by Beaty et al., 2016. M2020 is currently collecting samples for MSR in tubes. Half of those tubes will be retained within the M2020 rover body (hereafter rover samples, or RS) and half will be deposited on the Martian surface (cached samples or CS), with a currently undetermined number of each collected up to ten years later for return to Earth. CS samples can be expected to experience significantly higher temperatures than RS samples based on their exposed location in sunlight. This work will explore differences in deleterious chemical reaction rates due to thermal environment of both tube types. The findings here should be debated openly and considered when deciding which samples to return to Earth.

M Fries↗
NASA NTRS2020

Analysis of Volatile Organic Compounds in the Apollo Next Generation Sample Analysis (ANGSA) 73002 Core Sample

Understanding the organic content of lunar regolith was an early priority upon the return of Apollo samples, with amino acids being of special interest because of their importance to life on Earth and their astrobiological relevance. Many initial studies focused on the detection of amino acids in these samples and attempts to determine the origin of those compounds. Although no consensus on the origin of the amino acids was reached in those early studies, more recent work determined that the detected amino acids originated from both terrestrial contamination and meteoritic or cometary in fall to the lunar surface. A majority of the amino acids in the Apollo samples studied originated from precursor molecules, either indigenous to the lunar samples or contaminants, that reacted during the water extraction and acid hydrolysis process for analysis in the laboratory, but the identities of the amino acid precursors still remain poorly understood. Such precursors could include hydrogen cyanide (HCN) and other volatile organic compounds such as amines, carboxylic acids, or aldehydes and ketones. The identities of these compounds, as well as the effects of years of curation on their abundances in lunar regolith samples stored at ambient temperature under nitrogen gas purge, are not clear. The specially curated samples available through the Apollo Next Generation Sample Analysis (ANGSA) program provide a unique opportunity to use state-of- the-art analytical techniques to examine previously unstudied lunar materials. The ANGSA samples include three types of samples: 1) samples stored frozen since <1 month after Earth arrival; 2) samples stored under helium; and 3) a double drive tube collected by Apollo 17 astronauts, with the bottom portion of the drive tube sealed under vacuum on the Moon and never opened. In contrast to the typically curated Apollo samples that have been kept for decades at room temperature under flowing nitrogen purge that may have significantly reduced the abundance of volatiles, the vacuum-sealed and frozen samples may have enhanced preservation of these volatiles. Our initial investigation examines amino acids and their potential volatile precursors, including hydrogen cyanide (HCN), aldehydes, ketones, amines, and mono-carboxylic acids, in a sample from the top portion of the Apollo 17 double drive tube. These results will aid in understanding the lunar abundances of these molecules and will also be compared to future analyses of other drive tube and frozen ANGSA samples.

Elsila, J. E.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Microgravity Testing of a Surface Sampling System for Sample Return from Small Solar System Bodies

The return of samples from solar system bodies is becoming an essential element of solar system exploration. The recent National Research Council Solar System Exploration Decadal Survey identified six sample return missions as high priority missions: South-Aitken Basin Sample Return, Comet Surface Sample Return, Comet Surface Sample Return-sample from selected surface sites, Asteroid Lander/Rover/Sample Return, Comet Nucleus Sample Return-cold samples from depth, and Mars Sample Return [1] and the NASA Roadmap also includes sample return missions [2] . Sample collection methods that have been flown on robotic spacecraft to date return subgram quantities, but many scientific issues (like bulk composition, particle size distributions, petrology, chronology) require tens to hundreds of grams of sample. Many complex sample collection devices have been proposed, however, small robotic missions require simplicity. We present here the results of experiments done with a simple but innovative collection system for sample return from small solar system bodies.

Franzen, M. A.↗
NASA NTRS2011

MEPAG Recommendations for a 2018 Mars Sample Return Caching Lander - Sample Types, Number, and Sizes

The return to Earth of geological and atmospheric samples from the surface of Mars is among the highest priority objectives of planetary science. The MEPAG Mars Sample Return (MSR) End-to-End International Science Analysis Group (MEPAG E2E-iSAG) was chartered to propose scientific objectives and priorities for returned sample science, and to map out the implications of these priorities, including for the proposed joint ESA-NASA 2018 mission that would be tasked with the crucial job of collecting and caching the samples. The E2E-iSAG identified four overarching scientific aims that relate to understanding: (A) the potential for life and its pre-biotic context, (B) the geologic processes that have affected the martian surface, (C) planetary evolution of Mars and its atmosphere, (D) potential for future human exploration. The types of samples deemed most likely to achieve the science objectives are, in priority order: (1A). Subaqueous or hydrothermal sediments (1B). Hydrothermally altered rocks or low temperature fluid-altered rocks (equal priority) (2). Unaltered igneous rocks (3). Regolith, including airfall dust (4). Present-day atmosphere and samples of sedimentary-igneous rocks containing ancient trapped atmosphere Collection of geologically well-characterized sample suites would add considerable value to interpretations of all collected rocks. To achieve this, the total number of rock samples should be about 30-40. In order to evaluate the size of individual samples required to meet the science objectives, the E2E-iSAG reviewed the analytical methods that would likely be applied to the returned samples by preliminary examination teams, for planetary protection (i.e., life detection, biohazard assessment) and, after distribution, by individual investigators. It was concluded that sample size should be sufficient to perform all high-priority analyses in triplicate. In keeping with long-established curatorial practice of extraterrestrial material, at least 40% by mass of each sample should be preserved to support future scientific investigations. Samples of 15-16 grams are considered optimal. The total mass of returned rocks, soils, blanks and standards should be approximately 500 grams. Atmospheric gas samples should be the equivalent of 50 cubic cm at 20 times Mars ambient atmospheric pressure.

Allen, Carlton C.↗
NASA NTRS2024

Volatiles in melt inclusions from lunar mare basalts: Bridging the gap in the H 2 O/Ce ratio between melt Inclusions in lunar pyroclastic sample 74220 and other mare samples

The H2O concentration and H 2 O/Ce ratio in olivine-hosted melt inclusions are high in lunar pyroclastic sample 74220 (H 2 O up to 1410 ppmw; H 2 O/Ce up to 77) but lower (H2O 10 to 430 ppmw; H 2 O/Ce 0.3 to 9.4) in all other lunar samples studied before this work. The difference in H 2 O concentration and in H 2 O/Ce ratio is absent for other volatile elements (F, S, and Cl) in melt inclusions in 74220 and other lunar samples. Because H 2 O (or H) is a critical volatile component with significant ramifications on the origin and evolution of the Moon, it is important to understand what causes such a large gap in H 2 O/Ce ratio between 74220 and other lunar samples. Two explanations have been advanced. One is that volcanic product in sample 74220 has the highest cooling rate and thus best preserved H 2 O in melt inclusions compared to melt inclusions in other samples. The other explanation is that sample 74220 comes from a localized heterogeneity enriched in some volatiles. To distinguish these two possibilities, here we present new data from two rapidly cooled lunar samples with glassy melt inclusions: olivine-hosted melt inclusions (OHMIs) in 79135 regolith breccia (unknown cooling rate but with glassy MIs similar in texture with those in 74220), and pyroxene-hosted melt inclusions (PHMIs) in 15597 pigeonite basalts (known high cooling rate, second only to 74220 and 15421). In addition, we also investigated new OHMIs in sample 74220. If the gap is due to the difference in cooling rates, samples with cooling rates between those of 74220 and other studied lunar samples should have preserved intermediate H2O concentrations and H 2 O/Ce ratios. Our results show that melt inclusions in 79135 and 15597 contain high H 2 O concentrations (up to 969 ppmw in 79135 and up to 793 ppmw in 15597) and high H 2 O/Ce ratios (up to 21 in 79135 and up to 13 in 15997), bridging the big gap in H 2 O/Ce ratio among 74220 and other lunar samples. Combined with literature data, we confirm that H 2 O/Ce ratios of different lunar samples are positively correlated to the cooling rates and independent of the type of mare basalts. We hence reinforce the interpretation that the lunar sample with the highest cooling rate best represents pre-eruptive volatiles in lunar basalts due to the least degassing. Based on Ce concentration in the primitive lunar mantle, we estimate that H 2 O concentration in the primitive lunar mantle (meaning bulk silicate Moon) is 121 ± 15 ppmw. Our new data also further constrain F/P, S/Dy and Cl/Ba ratios in lunar basalts and the lunar mantle. Estimated F, P, and S concentrations in the lunar primitive mantle are 4.4 ± 1.1 ppmw, 22 ± 8 ppmw, and 67 +67 −33 ppmw, respectively.

Xue Su↗
NASA NTRS2006

Small Body GN and C Research Report: G-SAMPLE - An In-Flight Dynamical Method for Identifying Sample Mass [External Release Version]

G-SAMPLE is an in-flight dynamical method for use by sample collection missions to identify the presence and quantity of collected sample material. The G-SAMPLE method implements a maximum-likelihood estimator to identify the collected sample mass, based on onboard force sensor measurements, thruster firings, and a dynamics model of the spacecraft. With G-SAMPLE, sample mass identification becomes a computation rather than an extra hardware requirement; the added cost of cameras or other sensors for sample mass detection is avoided. Realistic simulation examples are provided for a spacecraft configuration with a sample collection device mounted on the end of an extended boom. In one representative example, a 1000 gram sample mass is estimated to within 110 grams (95% confidence) under realistic assumptions of thruster profile error, spacecraft parameter uncertainty, and sensor noise. For convenience to future mission design, an overall sample-mass estimation error budget is developed to approximate the effect of model uncertainty, sensor noise, data rate, and thrust profile error on the expected estimate of collected sample mass.

in-flight sample-mass identification↗
NASA NTRS2009

Lunar Samples: Apollo Collection Tools, Curation Handling, Surveyor III and Soviet Luna Samples

The 6 Apollo missions that landed on the lunar surface returned 2196 samples comprised of 382 kg. The 58 samples weighing 21.5 kg collected on Apollo 11 expanded to 741 samples weighing 110.5 kg by the time of Apollo 17. The main goal on Apollo 11 was to obtain some material and return it safely to Earth. As we gained experience, the sampling tools and a more specific sampling strategy evolved. A summary of the sample types returned is shown in Table 1. By year 1989, some statistics on allocation by sample type were compiled [2]. The "scientific interest index" is based on the assumption that the more allocations per gram of sample, the higher the scientific interest. It is basically a reflection of the amount of diversity within a given sample type. Samples were also set aside for biohazard testing. The samples set aside and used for biohazard testing were represen-tative, as opposed to diverse. They tended to be larger and be comprised of less scientifically valuable mate-rial, such as dust and debris in the bottom of sample containers.

Allton, J.H.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Dynamic Acquisition and Retrieval Tool (DART) for Comet Sample Return : Session: 2.06.Robotic Mobility and Sample Acquisition Systems

The 2011 Decadal Survey for planetary science released by the National Research Council of the National Academies identified Comet Surface Sample Return (CSSR) as one of five high priority potential New Frontiers-class missions in the next decade. The main objectives of the research described in this publication are: develop a concept for an end-to-end system for collecting and storing a comet sample to be returned to Earth; design, fabricate and test a prototype Dynamic Acquisition and Retrieval Tool (DART) capable of collecting 500 cc sample in a canister and eject the canister with a predetermined speed; identify a set of simulants with physical properties at room temperature that suitably match the physical properties of the comet surface as it would be sampled. We propose the use of a dart that would be launched from the spacecraft to impact and penetrate the comet surface. After collecting the sample, the sample canister would be ejected at a speed greater than the comet's escape velocity and captured by the spacecraft, packaged into a return capsule and returned to Earth. The dart would be composed of an inner tube or sample canister, an outer tube, a decelerator, a means of capturing and retaining the sample, and a mechanism to eject the canister with the sample for later rendezvous with the spacecraft. One of the significant unknowns is the physical properties of the comet surface. Based on new findings from the recent Deep Impact comet encounter mission, we have limited our search of solutions for sampling materials to materials with 10 to 100 kPa shear strength in loose or consolidated form. As the possible range of values for the comet surface temperature is also significantly different than room temperature and testing at conditions other than the room temperature can become resource intensive, we sought sample simulants with physical properties at room temperature similar to the expected physical properties of the comet surface material. The chosen DART configuration, the efforts to identify a test simulant and the properties of these simulants, and the results of the preliminary testing will be described in this paper.

Dynamic Acquisition and Retrieval Tool (DART)↗
NASA NTRS2024

Sampling the Margin Unit of Jezero Crater, Mars for Future Mars Sample Return

Mars 2020 Perseverance rover is currently exploring Jezero crater, which contains an ancient lake-delta system with a high potential for past habitability. One of Perseverance’s primary science goals is to collect a set of scientifically return-worthy samples for return to Earth (Mars Sample Return; MSR). Between February 2021 and December 2023, Perseverance has sealed 23 tubes containing 20 rock cores, 2 regolith samples and one atmosphere sample. All rock and regolith samples are accompanied by a set of observations (Sample Threshold Observation Protocol, the STOP List) performed on abrasion patches or regolith near each sample collection site. These observations are documented in the Initial Reports and the Sample Dossier (https://pds-geosciences.wustl.edu/missions/mars2020/returned_sample_science.htm). Here we provide an overview of the samples collected during the Margin campaign. The Margin unit is situated interior and adjacent to the western crater rim and exhibits a strong carbonate signal from orbital reflectance spectroscopy. Stratigraphically the unit lies beneath the previously explored curvilinear and blocky units of the fan top and is therefore older than those units. Based on its position near the crater rim and the strong carbonate detections it has been proposed to be a shoreline deposit with possible lacustrine carbonates. Alternative hypotheses include pyroclastic, fluviolacustrine and aeolian deposits. Based on rover observations a lacustrine shoreline deposit seems most likely. The planning of the Margin campaign took place during the summer of 2023, and 3-5 samples were baselined to be collected. Exploration of the Margin unit began in September 2023 and so far, two samples have been collected: the Pelican Point core at the Hans Amundsen Memorial Workspace in the Mandu Wall region , and the Lefroy Bay core at Lake Newell in the Turquoise Bay region (Fig. 1). The associated abrasion patches are Amherst Point (Pelican Point) and Bills Bay (Lefroy Bay) . Mandu Wall is interpreted to be stratigraphically lower than Turquoise Bay based on topography.

Mars sample return↗
NASA NTRS2020

Apollo Next Generation Sample Analysis (ANGSA): A Segue to the Next Era of Lunar Exploration and Sample Return Activities

In the fifty years since the first lunar samples were collected on Apollo 11, significant advancements have taken place in laboratory analysis, planetary science, and astromaterials curation. These advances are now being leveraged for the Apollo Next Generation Sample Analysis (ANGSA) Program, which aims to study specially curated Apollo samples that have never been studied before. Since Apollo 17 in 1972, a great deal has been learned about the Moon, including the unique environments of the poles. Building upon Apollo and remote sensing studies since then, the Artemis Program aims to explore the cold environments near the lunar south pole while achieving the concurrent goals of landing the first woman and the next man on the Moon by 2024. Recent developments for ANGSA have significantly accelerated our readiness for Artemis sample return, particularly in the area of cold sample studies. Four science teams were selected to study cold and/or volatile-bearing samples collected during the Apollo program. These samples have special storage and handling requirements that necessitate their processing in a -20°C environment that meets the Apollo materials and cleanliness requirements. NASA has recently undertaken the development and implementation of a cold sample processing facility to support ANGSA. A similar facility will be needed to process the cold, volatile-bearing samples planned to be returned by Artemis missions; therefore, ANGSA provides excellent preparation for Artemis’ future cold sample processing efforts. We will outline the goals of the ANGSA and Artemis programs, illustrating the complementary nature of the work for both. We will describe the efforts to date in designing, testing, and implementing a cold curation facility that meets the requirements of ANGSA and Apollo curation. We will then outline future work for that facility to reach operational readiness. Finally, we will present the sample collection and curation strategies for Artemis, showing how they overlap and build on ANGSA efforts. The development of cold curation at NASA represents a significant leap in the knowledge, experience, and technologies used in astromaterials curation, opening the door for new investigations of lunar volatiles, impacts, formation processes, prebiotic chemistry, and resource utilization, among many others.

Julie Mitchell↗
NASA NTRS2015

Using Technology to Better Characterize the Apollo Sample Suite: A Retroactive PET Analysis and Potential Model for Future Sample Return Missions

From 1969-1972 the Apollo missions collected 382 kg of lunar samples from six distinct locations on the Moon. Studies of the Apollo sample suite have shaped our understanding of the formation and early evolution of the Earth-Moon system, and have had important implications for studies of the other terrestrial planets (e.g., through the calibration of the crater counting record) and even the outer planets (e.g., the Nice model of the dynamical evolution of the Solar System). Despite nearly 50 years of detailed research on Apollo samples, scientists are still developing new theories about the origin and evolution of the Moon. Three areas of active research are: (1) the abundance of water (and other volatiles) in the lunar mantle, (2) the timing of the formation of the Moon and the duration of lunar magma ocean crystallization, (3) the formation of evolved lunar lithologies (e.g., granites) and implications for tertiary crustal processes on the Moon. In order to fully understand these (and many other) theories about the Moon, scientists need access to "new" lunar samples, particularly new plutonic samples. Over 100 lunar meteorites have been identified over the past 30 years, and the study of these samples has greatly aided in our understanding of the Moon. However, terrestrial alteration and the lack of geologic context limit what can be learned from the lunar meteorites. Although no "new" large plutonic samples (i.e., hand-samples) remain to be discovered in the Apollo sample collection, there are many large polymict breccias in the Apollo collection containing relatively large (approximately 1 cm or larger) previously identified plutonic clasts, as well as a large number of unclassified lithic clasts. In addition, new, previously unidentified plutonic clasts are potentially discoverable within these breccias. The question becomes how to non-destructively locate and identify new lithic clasts of interest while minimizing the contamination and physical degradation of the samples.

Zeigler, R. A.↗
NASA NTRS2026

The NASA OSIRIS-REx Sample Catalog: Samples Returned from Investigators

OSIRIS-REx is a sample return mission that collected carbon-rich material from B-type asteroid Bennu. After landing on September 24th, 2023, the science canister was transported to NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston, Texas where it was opened and samples were processed by the curation team in pristine sample nitrogen gloveboxes. As the sample analysis phase of the OSIRIS-REx mission concludes, the Sample Analysis Team (SAT) has returned the majority of mission samples to NASA JSC curation and will return the remaining samples on a defined timetable. The curation team processed and documented as many of these samples as possible to include in the spring 2026 catalog update and are steadily working to process hundreds of more samples to include in the fall 2026 catalog update.

OSIRIS-REx↗
NASA NTRS2010

Sample Return: What Happens to the Samples on Earth?

As space agencies throughout the world turn their attention toward human exploration of the Moon, Mars, and the solar system beyond, there has been an increase in the number of robotic sample return missions proposed as precursors to these human endeavors. In reality, however, we, as a global community, have very little experience with robotic sample return missions: 3 of the Russian Luna Missions successfully returned lunar material in the 1970s; 28 years later, in 2004, NASA s Genesis Mission returned material from the solar wind; and in 2006, NASA s Stardust Mission returned material from the Comet Wild2. [Note: The Japanese Hyabusa mission continues in space with the hope of returning material from the asteroid 25143 Itokawa.] We launch many spacecraft to LEO and return them to Earth. We also launch spacecraft beyond LEO to explore the planets, our solar system, and beyond. Some even land on these bodies. But these do not return. So as we begin to contemplate the sample return missions of the future, some common questions arise: "What really happens when the capsule returns?" "Where does it land?" "Who retrieves it and just how do they do that?" "Where does it go after that?" "How do the scientists get the samples?" "Do they keep them?" "Who is in charge?" The questions are nearly endless. The goal of this paper/presentation is to uncover many of the mysteries of the post-return phase of a mission - from the time the return body enters the atmosphere until the mission ends and the samples become part of a long term collection. The discussion will be based largely on the author s own experience with both the Genesis and Stardust missions. Of course, these two missions have a great deal in common, being funded by the same NASA Program (Discovery) and having similar team composition. The intent, however, is to use these missions as examples in order to highlight the general requirements and the challenges in defining and meeting those requirements for the final phase of sample return missions. The choices made by the Genesis and Stardust teams regarding recovery and sample handling will be discussed. These will be compared with the handling of returned lunar samples and the proposed handling of the Hyabusa samples as well. Finally, though none of these recent missions have been restricted within NASA s Planetary Protection Protocol, this is likely to change as missions venture farther from Earth. The implementation of Planetary Protection requirements will vary significantly based on mission scenario, however some of the potential implications of restricted Earth return will be considered.

McNamara, Karen↗
NASA NTRS2010

Mars Science Laboratory Sample Acquisition, Sample Processing and Handling: Subsystem Design and Test Challenges

The Sample Acquisition/Sample Processing and Handling subsystem for the Mars Science Laboratory is a highly-mechanized, Rover-based sampling system that acquires powdered rock and regolith samples from the Martian surface, sorts the samples into fine particles through sieving, and delivers small portions of the powder into two science instruments inside the Rover. SA/SPaH utilizes 17 actuated degrees-of-freedom to perform the functions needed to produce 5 sample pathways in support of the scientific investigation on Mars. Both hardware redundancy and functional redundancy are employed in configuring this sampling system so some functionality is retained even with the loss of a degree-of-freedom. Intentional dynamic environments are created to move sample while vibration isolators attenuate this environment at the sensitive instruments located near the dynamic sources. In addition to the typical flight hardware qualification test program, two additional types of testing are essential for this kind of sampling system: characterization of the intentionally-created dynamic environment and testing of the sample acquisition and processing hardware functions using Mars analog materials in a low pressure environment. The overall subsystem design and configuration are discussed along with some of the challenges, tradeoffs, and lessons learned in the areas of fault tolerance, intentional dynamic environments, and special testing

Jandura, Louise↗
NASA NTRS2018

Applying Modern Analytical Techniques to the Apollo Samples: A Potential Model for Future Sample Return Missions

From 1969-1972 the Apollo missions collected 382 kg of lunar samples from six distinct locations on the Moon. Studies of the Apollo sample suite have shaped our understanding of the formation and early evolution of the Earth-Moon system, and have had important implications for studies of the other terrestrial planets (e.g., through the calibration of the crater counting record). Despite nearly 50 years of research on Apollo samples, scientists are still developing new theories about the origin and evolution of the Moon. In order to resolve these questions, scientists need access to new lunar samples, particularly new plutonic samples. Although no new large plutonic samples (i.e., hand-samples) remain to be discovered in the Apollo sample collection, there are many large polymict breccias in the Apollo collection containing relatively large (1 cm or larger) previously identified plutonic clasts, as well as a large number of unclassified lithic clasts. In addition, new, previously unidentified plutonic clasts are potentially discoverable within these breccias. The question becomes how to non-destructively locate and identify new lithic clasts of interest while minimizing the contamination and physical degradation of the samples.

Zeigler, Ryan A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

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

NASA, in partnership with the European Space Agency (ESA), is seeking to return Martian geological and atmospheric samples to Earth for scientific study in the early 2030s. Due to the possibility that the samples could contain extraterrestrial life, Mars Sample Return (MSR) is classified as a Category V: Restricted Earth Return mission by the NASA Planetary Protection Office. As a result of this classification, a MSR Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) must not only provide a pristine environment to ensure samples are protected from terrestrial contamination for scientific investigations, it must also provide high-containment (biosafety level 4 [BSL-4]-equivalence) to isolate the samples from Earth’s biosphere until the samples are deemed safe for release and/or sterilized. The nominal utilization period for a SRF is anticipated to be 2-5 years and is intended to enable curation activities, biohazard assessment, select early science activities, and the rapid release of samples to the scientific community. However, to account for possible delays in schedule or the identification of extant life, this anticipated period of time must be flexible to accommodate schedule extensions and contingency plans. Due to requirements for high-level biological containment and cleanliness, a traditional receiving/curation facility cannot be utilized for MSR. Therefore, beginning in 2022, NASA Johnson Space Center is performing a MSR SRF Assessment Study (MSAS) to investigate the most optimal facility modality for a MSR SRF, as well as start to define programmatic early estimate of costs and schedules before the initial design phase begins. NASA is partnering with industry contractors (architectural and engineering firms with BSL-4 and cleanroom technology experience, as well as other contracted infrastructure and construction specialists) along with selected experts from NASA, ESA, existing U.S. BSL-4 facilities, and other U.S. government agencies, to carry out the assessment study. The MSAS should also aid in the future refinement of the science requirements (e.g., contamination control, equipment accommodations) before site-specific design would commence. As part of the MSAS, NASA is planning to assess an array of possibilities for a MSR SRF. One of the main considerations is the facility modality and whether an existing BSL-4 facility can be utilized (for some or all functions); or, if new constructure would be required, would a traditional fixed facility or a modular facility the best choice. MSAS will also investigate the ability of the modalities to accommodate two different facility capability endmembers: 1) a minimal facility focusing on biohazard assessment and curation tasks with a small footprint, and 2) an enhanced facility with additional capabilities to enable expedited processing and the completion of time-sensitive and (some) sterilization-sensitive science. The assessment is intended to generate information that will inform the selection of facility modalities for high-level conceptual design development. While the assessment study will focus on SRF requirements for accommodating curation, science, and sample safety assessment infrastructure, it will also consider an array of other factors, such as ease of access for international users, decommissioning, repurposing, future sale or lease following MSR’s use of the facility, and uncontained preparatory laboratory spaces. Upon completion of the study, the preferred modality and refined requirements would be utilized for site-specific design but will not be finalized until NASA’s completion of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process.

A.D. Harrington↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

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

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

Mars Sample Return↗