Vision System for the Mars Sample Return Capture Containment and Return System (CCRS)
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Brent J. Bos↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “Return”
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.
A Reliable Earth Return System for Safe Recovery of Mars Samples
The objective of a Mars sample return mission is to bring selected Mars surface materials to Earth. Numerous approaches for the Earth-return segment have been analyzed including propulsive or aerocapture return to low-Earth orbit followed by Space Shuttle rendezvous and direct entry. Of these approaches, ballistic entry of a small capsule terminating in a ground landing has been shown to be the lowest risk strategy. Over the past two years, significant work has been performed towards development of a robust direct entry vehicle for Mars sample return. In June 1999, the NASA Planetary Protection Officer provided initial guidance to the former Mars Sample Return Project. The sample return phase of the mission was assigned a restricted Earth return planetary protection classification. The draft mission requirement states that the total mean probability of release of unsterilized Mars material into the Earth;s biosphere must be less than 1.0E-06 (1 in a million). This strict requirement drives the approach and design of the Earth return system. To meet this requirement, selection of the Earth return strategy and development of the Earth return system must be guided by risk, not performance, based decisions. An initial Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) was performed to address the direct entry Earth return system containment assurance reliability and to identify high-risk elements of this system. The results of this PRA identified risk elements that include thermal protection system performance during entry, spin-eject orientation and aerodynamic stability during entry, structural integrity under atmospheric deceleration and impact loads, and tracking/recovery of this system. This initial probabilistic risk quantification demonstrates that, with the proper development program, a prototypical direct entry design can satisfy the containment assurance reliability requirement. Through the current Mars Sample Return Advanced Technology Development effort, an extensive design, analysis, and test program is presently proceeding with the aim of reducing the containment assurance risk of this system. This technology development effort, guided by a continuing PRA, focuses on key risk areas of a direct entry Earth return system including: the thermal protection system, impact dynamics, structural performance, aerodynamic stability, and ground recovery. This development program will culminate in a system validation flight test, 1-2 years prior to launch of the flight system. This flight test would include the launch, entry, and recovery of a full-scale Earth return system, as a scientific validation of the key risk elements to verify nominal design performance. The results of the initial PRA suggested several dominant failure sequences that can be validated in a flight test. These include: demonstrating the thermal protection system reliability and performance during entry, demonstrating the spin-eject orientation and aero-dynamic stability during entry, demonstrating the structural integrity under atmospheric deceleration and impact loads, and demonstrating tracking and recovery of the Earth return system. This single test will directly address over 50% of the total containment assurance risk elements. This presentation will begin by presenting the relative risk of various Earth return strategies. The results of the initial probabilistic risk assessment will be presented followed by a discussion of the development accomplishments and plans for demonstration of a highly reliable direct entry Earth return system.
Braun, R.↗
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↗
Room Return Path Sensitivity
Standard practice for HVAC return design has evolved from running a dedicated return to each room with a supply, to systems with returns in more centrally located areas of the home with jump ducts, transfer grilles, or simply door undercuts used as return air pathways from isolated rooms. In these latter systems, hallways and stairwells act as large open ducts for conveying air back to a single (or sometimes multiple) central return. When partition doors to an isolated room are closed, the return airflow resistance goes up, significantly impacting airflow balance if an adequate relief pathway is not installed. Airflow imbalances can lead to comfort and building durability issues and increased envelope leakage. To combat this, some jurisdictions have requirements for return air pathways. The supply system topology–or layout–impacts the airflow balance stability in response to adjustments of return pathway resistances. Branching supply topologies typically have reduced static pressure after each split. The static pressure at the final split will be lower than the primary supply plenum. Because of this, if there is a restriction in a room’s return path, supply airflow will tend to redistribute to adjacent ducts at the end of the branch. A properly designed trunk and branch supply system can effectively equalize static pressure by reducing the cross sectional area after each takeoff . Maintaining static pressure within the trunk will reduce the system’s sensitivity to changes in return paths. However, in practice, it is difficult to design and time consuming to install a complex supply plenum. Velocity effects and poor takeoff placement also impact airflow balance. This report considers return systems in three main categories: distributed, with a return duct to each room; multiple central, with one return grille on each floor of a home; and single central, with a single return grille located near the air handling unit. Three supply categories are also considered: radial splitter box, trunk and branch, and home-run with all ducts connecting directly to a central manifold.
32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
Designing for Supply and Return Air System Interaction in Residential Buildings
Standard practice for HVAC return design has evolved from running a dedicated return to each room with a supply, to systems with returns in more centrally located areas of the home with jump ducts, transfer grilles, or simply door undercuts used as return air pathways from isolated rooms . In these latter systems, hallways and stairwells act as large open ducts for conveying air back to a single (or sometimes multiple) central return. When partition doors to an isolated room are closed, the return airflow resistance goes up, significantly impacting airflow balance if an adequate relief pathway is not installed. Airflow imbalances can lead to comfort and building durability issues and increased envelope leakage. To combat this, some jurisdictions have requirements for return air pathways. The supply system topology – or layout - impacts the airflow balance stability in response to adjustments of return pathway resistances. Branching supply topologies typically have reduced static pressure after each split. The static pressure at the final split will be lower than the primary supply plenum. Because of this, if there is a restriction in a room’s return path, supply airflow will tend to redistribute to adjacent ducts at the end of the branch. A properly designed trunk and branch supply system can effectively equalize static pressure by reducing the cross sectional area after each takeoff . Maintaining static pressure within the trunk will reduce the system’s sensitivity to changes in return paths. However, in practice, it is difficult to design and time consuming to install a complex supply plenum. Velocity effects and poor takeoff placement also impact airflow balance. This fact sheet considers return systems in three main categories: distributed, with a return duct to each room; multiple central, with one return grille on each floor of a home; and single central, with a single return grille located near the air handling unit. Three supply categories are also considered: radial splitter box, trunk and branch, and home-run with all ducts connecting directly to a central manifold. A complete description of the modeling work and results can be found in the companion technical report.
buildings↗
An Efficient Approach for Mars Sample Return Using Emerging Commercial Capabilities
Mars Sample Return is the highest priority science mission for the next decade as recommended by the 2011 Decadal Survey of Planetary Science. This article presents the results of a feasibility study for a Mars Sample Return mission that efficiently uses emerging commercial capabilities expected to be available in the near future. The motivation of our study was the recognition that emerging commercial capabilities might be used to perform Mars Sample Return with an Earth-direct architecture, and that this may offer a desirable simpler and lower cost approach. The objective of the study was to determine whether these capabilities can be used to optimize the number of mission systems and launches required to return the samples, with the goal of achieving the desired simplicity. All of the major element required for the Mars Sample Return mission are described. Mission system elements were analyzed with either direct techniques or by using parametric mass estimating relationships. The analysis shows the feasibility of a complete and closed Mars Sample Return mission design based on the following scenario: A SpaceX Falcon Heavy launch vehicle places a modified version of a SpaceX Dragon capsule, referred to as "Red Dragon", onto a Trans Mars Injection trajectory. The capsule carries all the hardware needed to return to Earth Orbit samples collected by a prior mission, such as the planned NASA Mars 2020 sample collection rover. The payload includes a fully fueled Mars Ascent Vehicle; a fueled Earth Return Vehicle, support equipment, and a mechanism to transfer samples from the sample cache system onboard the rover to the Earth Return Vehicle. The Red Dragon descends to land on the surface of Mars using Supersonic Retropropulsion. After collected samples are transferred to the Earth Return Vehicle, the single-stage Mars Ascent Vehicle launches the Earth Return Vehicle from the surface of Mars to a Mars phasing orbit. After a brief phasing period, the Earth Return Vehicle performs a Trans Earth Injection burn. Once near Earth, the Earth Return Vehicle performs Earth and lunar swing-bys and is placed into a Lunar Trailing Orbit - an Earth orbit, at lunar distance. A retrieval mission then performs a rendezvous with the Earth Return Vehicle, retrieves the sample container, and breaks the chain of contact with Mars by transferring the sample into a sterile and secure container. With the sample contained, the retrieving spacecraft makes a controlled Earth re-entry preventing any unintended release of Martian materials into the Earth's biosphere. The mission can start in any one of three Earth to Mars launch opportunities, beginning in 2022.
Commercial↗
Propulsion Technology Development for Sample Return Missions Under NASA's ISPT Program
The In-Space Propulsion Technology (ISPT) Program was tasked in 2009 to start development of propulsion technologies that would enable future sample return missions. Sample return missions could be quite varied, from collecting and bringing back samples of comets or asteroids, to soil, rocks, or atmosphere from planets or moons. The paper will describe the ISPT Program s propulsion technology development activities relevant to future sample return missions. The sample return propulsion technology development areas for ISPT are: 1) Sample Return Propulsion (SRP), 2) Planetary Ascent Vehicles (PAV), 3) Entry Vehicle Technologies (EVT), and 4) Systems/mission analysis and tools that focuses on sample return propulsion. The Sample Return Propulsion area is subdivided into: a) Electric propulsion for sample return and low cost Discovery-class missions, b) Propulsion systems for Earth Return Vehicles (ERV) including transfer stages to the destination, and c) Low TRL advanced propulsion technologies. The SRP effort will continue work on HIVHAC thruster development in FY2011 and then transitions into developing a HIVHAC system under future Electric Propulsion for sample return (ERV and transfer stages) and low-cost missions. Previous work on the lightweight propellant-tanks will continue under advanced propulsion technologies for sample return with direct applicability to a Mars Sample Return (MSR) mission and with general applicability to all future planetary spacecraft. A major effort under the EVT area is multi-mission technologies for Earth Entry Vehicles (MMEEV), which will leverage and build upon previous work related to Earth Entry Vehicles (EEV). The major effort under the PAV area is the Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV). The MAV is a new development area to ISPT, and builds upon and leverages the past MAV analysis and technology developments from the Mars Technology Program (MTP) and previous MSR studies.
Anderson, David J.↗
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.↗
Sample Return Systems for Extreme Environments (SaRSEE)
Sample return missions offer a greater science yield when compared to missions that only employ in situ experiments or remote sensing observations, since they allow the application of more complex technological and analytical methodologies in controlled terrestrial laboratories,that are both repeatable and can be independently verified. The successful return of extraterrestrial materials over the last four decades has contributed to our understanding of the solar system, but retrieval techniques have largely depended on the use of either soft-landing, or touch-and-go procedures that result in high V requirements, larger spacecraft mass ratios, and return yields typically limited to a few grams of surface materials that have experienced varying degrees of alteration from space weathering. Hard-landing methods using planetary penetrators offer an alternative for sample return that significantly reduce a mission's V and mass ratios,increase sample yields, and allow for the collection of subsurface materials, and lessons can be drawn from previous sample return missions. The following details progress in the design,development, and testing of penetrator/sampler technology capable of surviving subsonic and low, supersonic impact velocities (<700 m/s) that would enable the collection of geologic materials using tether technology to return the sample to a passing spacecraft. The testing of energy absorbing material for protecting the sample, design evolution and field testing of the penetrator, and dynamic modeling of tether behavior during sampling are discussed. It is shown through both modeling and field testing that penetrators at speeds between 300-600 m/s (~Mach 1-2) can penetrator into the ground to depths of 1-2 m with overall structural integrity attained.The first flight tests demonstrated the potential for survivability at these speeds. The second flight series demonstrated core sample collection with partial ejection of the sample return canister. The 3rd flight series demonstrated self-ejection of the sample return system fully intact and with the core retaining the full stratigraphy of the rock bed. The tether analysis shows that the forces on the tether during release and return of the sample to the main spacecraft are all at levels that can easily be handled by existing tether materials. The mass analysis of the requirements indicates that sample return form the asteroids could be handled with Discovery or New Frontier range of missions dependent on the number of samples to be returned to the Earth.
Winglee, R. M.↗
Small Spacecraft Sample Return Mission Concept to Support Gateway and Lunar Science
The Lunar Gateway is a planned orbital outpost to support Lunar surface, Cislunar, and deep space exploration activities. NASA, together with international and commercial partners, are providing various capabilities, infrastructure, and services to build the Lunar economy. As Gateway capabilities and transportation logistics evolve, utilization is expected to increase, providing ample science, technology demonstration, and commercial development opportunities. Elements of the transportation network supporting Lunar activities are primarily focused on the outbound segment, which include Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS), Human Landing System (HLS), Deep Space Logistics (DSL), and the SLS/Orion crew transportation system. Initially, the only Earth return segment will be provided via Orion. However, infrequent mission cadence (once every 12 months), limited payload return mass (100 kg), and operational constraints suggest that additional sample return logistics capability will be needed. Sustaining long-term presence at the Moon will likely require innovative approaches for frequent and affordable payload return. NASA Ames Research Center and the DSL team at Kennedy Space Center (which provides the Gateway Logistics Services missions) have investigated the development of a small spacecraft-based sample return capability to complement Orion. The goal of the first mission is to demonstrate the capability as a part of an early DSL mission, and provide up to 10 kg of scientific sample return from the Gateway. The mission concept envisions the progressive addition of sample return capabilities, including returning temperature- and acceleration-sensitive payloads, and evolution into a commercially provided service, similar to existing ISS payload return logistics. An overview of payload science and technology use cases and small spacecraft mission concepts will be presented to engage scientists, payload developers and mission planners who are considering Lunar exploration activities that will require the return of high-value samples from the Gateway and/or the lunar surface.
Small Spacecraft↗
Assessing the Transferability of Statistical Predictive Models for Leaf Area Index Between Two Airborne Discrete Return LiDAR Sensor Designs Within Multiple Intensely Managed Loblolly Pine Forest Locations in the South-Eastern USA
Leaf area is an important forest structural variable which serves as the primary means of mass and energy exchange within vegetated ecosystems. The objective of the current study was to determine if leaf area index (LAI) could be estimated accurately and consistently in five intensively managed pine plantation forests using two multiple-return airborne LiDAR datasets. Field measurements of LAI were made using the LiCOR LAI2000 and LAI2200 instruments within 116 plots were established of varying size and within a variety of stand conditions (i.e. stand age, nutrient regime and stem density) in North Carolina and Virginia in 2008 and 2013. A number of common LiDAR return height and intensity distribution metrics were calculated (e.g. average return height), in addition to ten indices, with two additional variants, utilized in the surrounding literature which have been used to estimate LAI and fractional cover, were calculated from return heights and intensity, for each plot extent. Each of the indices was assessed for correlation with each other, and was used as independent variables in linear regression analysis with field LAI as the dependent variable. All LiDAR derived metrics were also entered into a forward stepwise linear regression. The results from each of the indices varied from an R2 of 0.33 (S.E. 0.87) to 0.89 (S.E. 0.36). Those indices calculated using ratios of all returns produced the strongest correlations, such as the Above and Below Ratio Index (ABRI) and Laser Penetration Index 1 (LPI1). The regression model produced from a combination of three metrics did not improve correlations greatly (R2 0.90; S.E. 0.35). The results indicate that LAI can be predicted over a range of intensively managed pine plantation forest environments accurately when using different LiDAR sensor designs. Those indices which incorporated counts of specific return numbers (e.g. first returns) or return intensity correlated poorly with field measurements. There were disparities between the number of different types of returns and intensity values when comparing the results from two LiDAR sensors, indicating that predictive models developed using such metrics are not transferable between datasets with different acquisition parameters. Each of the indices were significantly correlated with one another, with one exception (LAI proxy), in particular those indices calculated from all returns, which indicates similarities in information content for those indices. It can then be argued that LiDAR indices have reached a similar stage in development to those calculated from optical-spectral sensors, but which offer a number of advantages, such as the reduction or removal of saturation issues in areas of high biomass.
Sumnall, Matthew↗
The Importance of Contamination Knowledge - Insights into Mars Sample Return
The Astromaterials Acquisition and Curation Office at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC), in Houston, TX (henceforth Curation Office) manages the curation of all past, present, and future extraterrestrial samples returned by NASA missions and shared collections from international partners, preserving their integrity for future scientific study while providing the samples to the international community in a fair and unbiased way. The Curation Office also curates all reference and witness materials for each mission (e.g., flight and non-flight hardware coupons; lubricants; non-flight, flight-like, and flown witness plates). These reference and witness materials provide the scientific community with the fundamental ability to reconstruct the contamination/alteration history of the sample collection through the course of the mission, with the overall goal of strengthening the scientific conclusions drawn from the study of returned materials. The information gained from characterizing the physical, biological, inorganic, and organic chemical properties of reference and witness materials is defined as the Contamination Knowledge (CK) of the sample collection. Unlike the data collected for Contamination Control (CC) and Planetary Protection (PP), CK is exclusively concerned with preserving reference and witness materials for study by future scientists upon sample return. Although CC and PP data collected for sample integrity and forward contamination purposes can be complementary to CK, they are two separate data sets with distinct objectives. A robust collection of samples for CK is necessary to allow the extraterrestrial material in a returned sample to be distinguished from terrestrial contamination. Traditionally CK is utilized by sample scientists in order to accomplish the mission’s scientific objectives, however this information can also be utilized by the Office of Planetary Protection to help evaluate the presence of any back contamination. Mars 2020, the first phase of a potential multipart Mars Sample Return (MSR) campaign, is expected to contribute to NASA’s Mars Exploration Program Science Goals by filling in knowledge gaps concerning: 1) the existence of past or present life on Mars, 2) the past and present climate of Mars, 3) the geology of Mars, and 4) hazards associated with human exploration of Mars. Although there is debate concerning which samples will best answer these questions, the necessity for proper sample blanks is well-understood. The CC and PP requirements, driven by the restricted Class V mission designation, are the most stringent of any sample return mission in recent history. The extremely low levels of allowable terrestrial contamination on the spacecraft and rover can complicate these analyses given the detection limits of current analytical instrumentation, especially in the case of biological contamination. By collecting and curating unanalyzed samples specifically for CK, future sample scientists will not be relegated to: 1) relying on data collected using possibly obsolete tools and techniques for return sample blanks, or 2) using remnants of extracted and/or cultured samples from ATLO (Assembly, Test, and Launch Operations), which could be incompatible with the desired experimental endpoints or state-of-the-art techniques available at the time of sample return.The addition of biological experimental endpoints to a sample return campaign’s objectives broadens the requisite range in preservation environments (e.g. inert ultra-pure nitrogen gaseous environment at 18 degrees Centigrade versus less than or equal to minus 80 degrees Centigrade) and types of CK samples. As a result, the Curation Office will also curate the following CK samples at less than or equal to minus 80 degrees Centigrade for the Mars 2020 mission: 1) unanalyzed swabs and wipes in sterile containers, 2) all recirculation filters from the clean rooms used for sample and caching subsystem assembly and all filters from the laminar flow benches used to assemble sample intimate hardware, and 3) witness plates collecting airborne contamination within the assembly clean rooms. It has been Curation Office policy since the Apollo missions to preserve as many pristine samples as possible for future scientific research. Although CK is required to be collected for all stages of the MSR campaign, the CK for the Mars 2020 mission is the most critical for understanding contamination in the returned samples given the intimacy between the Martian samples and the Mars 2020 flight hardware. This presentation highlights the importance of CK for sample return missions as well as the traditional and novel types of CK samples required for a successful MSR campaign.
Harrington, A. D.↗
Implementing CubeSat Avionics Components to Full-Scale Capsule Return Missions
Returning samples from Low Earth Orbit (LEO) is no simple task. Whether the samples are scientific experiments or surveillance footage, engineers must overcome many challenges to achieve mission success. In August of 1960 the first payload recovered from LEO, the Corona capsule, carried “more photographic coverage of the Soviet Union than all previous U-2 missions”. The Corona program proved that re-turning surveillance footage from LEO is possible, the program is still referenced today when designing new sample return missions. Although there are many crucial subsystems that make up a sample return capsule, the avionics subsystem demands the most attention. This paper will discuss how current CubeSat avionics components can be applied to large sample return missions. One advantage of using CubeSat avionics components is that they can fit into a 1.5 U (10x10x15 cm) compartment, leaving more room for the payload. This paper is broken down as follows. First, the reader is introduced to the history of sample return projects. The major design strengths of previous projects are analyzed and applied to the current capsule design. Next, the typical trajectory of a capsule is presented along with mission requirements and operations. During the re-entry phase, the avionics subsystem is responsible for commanding the deployment of the parachute, back shell, and the heat shield. Next, the power subsystem is discussed in detail including a trade study on batteries and voltage regulators. Next, the interface between the Ground Support Equipment (GSE) and the avionics components is discussed. It is important that the capsule is able to provide avionics system state of health to ensure proper functionality before the capsule is launched. Next, an in-depth analysis of current TechEdSat avionics components, with proven flight history, are presented. The various avionics components including the radios, GPS, IMU, temperature sensors, altitude sensors, and ejectors are discussed. The application of cur-rent avionics components to a sample return projects are analyzed. After, the wiring diagram is presented along with a discussion of the design. Next, a summary of how the avionics components are tested and validated is pro-vided. Finally, this article will present current sample return missions TechEdSat avionics components are being applied to. CubeSat Avionics can be applied to almost all sample return missions due to their compact configuration and proven space flight heritage. The TechEdSat team is currently making great progress in returning samples from the International Space Station (ISS) and is excited to present how their avionics components can be applied to a full-scale sample return mission.
Hughes, Z. M.↗
The Multi-Mission Earth Entry Vehicle for Sample Return Missions – Past, Present, and Future
The Multi-Mission Earth Entry Vehicle (MMEEV) is an enabling technology developed at NASA’s Langley Research Center (LaRC) over the last two decades for returning samples to Earth across a wide array of space science missions. Currently, the MMEEV is being considered for NASA’s Mars Sample Return (MSR) mission. The original vehicle concept, the Earth Entry Vehicle (EEV), was innovated at LaRC in 1998 as a robust solution to return Mars soil samples to Earth under stringent backward contamination requirements. These backward contamination requirements drove the EEV to have higher reliability than any capsule previously designed for a return-to-Earth sample return mission. The EEV achieved this high reliability by employing a passive (no active systems) vehicle architecture optimized for fault tolerance in a compact, low-mass configuration that is extensible to virtually any sample return mission. The original EEV concept utilized a carbon-carbon primary structure with high-density carbon phenolic thermal protection system. The capsule had a 60-degree sphere-cone forebody and a backshell geometry uniquely tailored to produce aerodynamics that would passively re-orient the vehicle if it entered the atmosphere with an off-nominal attitude. Contrary to every other sample return capsule conceived at the time, the EEV was designed to land without a parachute. The vehicle incorporated an integral energy-absorbing crushable structure that protected the Mars sample for landings on surfaces ranging from soft soil to solid concrete. This paper describes 20 years of technological advancements LaRC has incorporated into the EEV architecture to evolve it from the original, MSR-enabling vehicle, to a true multi-mission capability relevant to any sample return mission. The vehicle’s unique Integrated Composite Stiffener Structure (ICoSS) has been optimized for specific strength - supporting high-G atmospheric entries with steep entry angles that produce precise landing footprints on the ground. The vehicle geometry has been refined through wind tunnel testing and computational fluid dynamics simulations to improve the vehicle’s aerodynamic stability and robustness to off-nominal conditions from hypersonic to subsonic flight. The resulting configuration of the current MMEEV architecture is described, with details provided on its sample carrying capacity and atmospheric entry trajectory capabilities. The upgraded vehicle performance is mapped into current space science objectives, showing how the MMEEV supports future sample return missions and continues to be an enabling technology for NASA’s vision to return samples from Mars.
J M Corliss↗
Small Spacecraft Sample Return to Support Gateway and Lunar Science
The Lunar Gateway is a planned orbital outpost to support Lunar surface, Cislunar, and deep space exploration activities. NASA, together with international and commercial partners, are providing various capabilities, infrastructure, and services to build the Lunar economy. As Gateway capabilities and transportation logistics evolve, utilization is expected to increase, providing ample science, technology demonstration, and commercial development opportunities. Elements of the transportation network supporting Lunar activities are primarily focused on the outbound segment, which include Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS), Human Landing System (HLS), Deep Space Logistics (DSL), and the SLS/Orion crew transportation system. Initially, the only Earth return segment will be provided via Orion. However, infrequent mission cadence (once every 12 months), limited payload return mass (100 kg), and operational constraints suggest that additional sample return logistics capability will be needed. Sustaining long-term presence at the Moon will likely require innovative approaches for frequent and affordable payload return. NASA Ames Research Center and the DSL team at Kennedy Space Center (which provides the Gateway Logistics Services missions) have investigated the development of a small spacecraft-based sample return capability to complement Orion. The goal of the first mission is to demonstrate the capability as a part of an early DSL mission, and provide up to 10 kg of scientific sample return from the Gateway. The mission concept envisions the progressive addition of sample return capabilities, including returning temperature- and acceleration-sensitive payloads, and evolution into a commercially provided service, similar to existing ISS payload return logistics. An overview of payload science and technology use cases and small spacecraft mission concepts will be presented to engage scientists, payload developers and mission planners who are considering Lunar exploration activities that will require the return of high-value samples from the Gateway and/or the lunar surface.
Alan Cassell↗
Small Spacecraft Sample Return Mission Concept to Support Gateway and Lunar Science
The Lunar Gateway is a planned orbital outpost to support Lunar surface, Cislunar, and deep space exploration activities. NASA, together with international and commercial partners, are providing various capabilities, infrastructure, and services to build the Lunar economy. As Gateway capabilities and transportation logistics evolve, utilization is expected to increase, providing ample science, technology demonstration, and commercial development opportunities. Elements of the transportation network supporting Lunar activities are primarily focused on the outbound segment, which include Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS), Human Landing System (HLS), Deep Space Logistics (DSL), and the SLS/Orion crew transportation system. Initially, the only Earth return segment will be provided via Orion. However, infrequent mission cadence (once every 12 months), limited payload return mass (100 kg), and operational constraints suggest that additional sample return logistics capability will be needed. Sustaining long-term presence at the Moon will likely require innovative approaches for frequent and affordable payload return. NASA Ames Research Center and the DSL team at Kennedy Space Center (which provides the Gateway Logistics Services missions) have investigated the development of a small spacecraft-based sample return capability to complement Orion. The goal of the first mission is to demonstrate the capability as a part of an early DSL mission, and provide up to 10 kg of scientific sample return from the Gateway. The mission concept envisions the progressive addition of sample return capabilities, including returning temperature- and acceleration-sensitive payloads, and evolution into a commercially provided service, similar to existing ISS payload return logistics. An overview of payload science and technology use cases and small spacecraft mission concepts will be presented to engage scientists, payload developers and mission planners who are considering Lunar exploration activities that will require the return of high-value samples from the Gateway and/or the lunar surface.
Alan Cassell↗
OSIRIS-REx, Returning the Asteroid Sample
This paper addresses the technical aspects of the sample return system for the upcoming Origins, Spectral Interpretation, Resource Identification, and Security-Regolith Explorer (OSIRIS-REx) asteroid sample return mission. The overall mission design and current implementation are presented as an overview to establish a context for the technical description of the reentry and landing segment of the mission.The prime objective of the OSIRIS-REx mission is to sample a primitive, carbonaceous asteroid and to return that sample to Earth in pristine condition for detailed laboratory analysis. Targeting the near-Earth asteroid Bennu, the mission launches in September 2016 with an Earth reentry date of September 24, 2023.OSIRIS-REx will thoroughly characterize asteroid Bennu providing knowledge of the nature of near-Earth asteroids that is fundamental to understanding planet formation and the origin of life. The return to Earth of pristine samples with known geologic context will enable precise analyses that cannot be duplicated by spacecraft-based instruments, revolutionizing our understanding of the early Solar System. Bennu is both the most accessible carbonaceous asteroid and one of the most potentially Earth-hazardous asteroids known. Study of Bennu addresses multiple NASA objectives to understand the origin of the Solar System and the origin of life and will provide a greater understanding of both the hazards and resources in near-Earth space, serving as a precursor to future human missions to asteroids.This paper focuses on the technical aspects of the Sample Return Capsule (SRC) design and concept of operations, including trajectory design and reentry retrieval. Highlights of the mission are included below.The OSIRIS-REx spacecraft provides the essential functions for an asteroid characterization and sample return mission: attitude control propulsion power thermal control telecommunications command and data handling structural support to ensure successful rendezvous with Bennu characterization of Bennus properties delivery of the sampler to the surface, and return of the spacecraft to the vicinity of the Earth sample collection, performed by the Touch-and-Go Sample Acquisition Mechanism (TAGSAM), to acquire a regolith sample from the surface Earth re-entry and SRC recovery. Following sample collection, OSIRIS-REx drifts away from Bennu until the Asteroid Departure Maneuver is commanded on March 4, 2021, sending OSIRIS-REx on a ballistic return cruise to Earth. No additional large deterministic maneuvers are required to return the SRC to Earth. During the cruise, tracking and trajectory correction maneuvers (TCMs) are performed as necessary to precisely target the entry corridor. As OSIRIS-REx approaches Earth, the reentry plans are reviewed starting about a year before arrival, and preparations begin. The spacecraft is targeted away from the Earth until 7 days before entry. The final two trajectory correction maneuvers bring the spacecraft on target toward the Utah Test and Training Range (UTTR), with sufficient time for contingency resolution. The SRC releases 4 hours prior to atmospheric entry interface and, using the Stardust capsule heritage design, employs a traditional drogue and main parachute descent system for a soft touchdown.
reentry↗
Physical Controls on Irrigation Return Flow Contributions to Stream Flow in Irrigated Alluvial Valleys
Irrigation can be a significant source of groundwater recharge in many agricultural regions, particularly in arid and semi-arid climates. Once infiltrated, irrigation recharge can travel via subsurface flowpaths that return to the river system in a lagged manner, supplementing natural streamflow weeks, months, or even years from when the irrigation was applied. In regions that experience low flows during summer and early fall, return flows can be a significant source of supplementary streamflow. Many water planning and operations models either ignore return flows or roughly approximate them with analytical solutions. Thus, return flows represent an important but often overlooked component of the hydrological exchange and overall water balance in agricultural regions. This study uses groundwater models to explore a wide range of factors that control irrigation return flow timing in irrigated alluvial valleys. A sensitivity analysis approach is used to assess how factors such as the extent of irrigated land adjacent to a stream, irrigation recharge rate, aquifer hydraulic conductivity, aquifer thickness, water table configuration, and seasonal fluctuations in stream stage control the timing of subsurface return flows. Modeling is conducted using MODFLOW models representing an irrigated alluvial valley adjacent to a stream. While a simplification of the full complexity in real systems, the models are a significant advancement from the analytical solution and provide new insight into the timescales of return flows over a broad range of possible conditions. To contextualize our modeling results, they are compared to an analytical solution commonly used for approximating return flows to evaluate its performance. Our findings show what factors and conditions influence return flow timing and control whether they contribute to streamflow over short term (months) or longer term (seasonal) time scales.
Ferencz, Stephen B.↗