Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Surface exploration”

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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2003

Low Cost Mars Surface Exploration: The Mars Tumbleweed

The "Mars Tumbleweed," a rover concept that would utilize surface winds for mobility, is being examined as a low cost complement to the current Mars exploration efforts. Tumbleweeds carrying microinstruments would be driven across the Martian landscape by wind, searching for areas of scientific interest. These rovers, relatively simple, inexpensive, and deployed in large numbers to maximize coverage of the Martian surface, would provide a broad scouting capability to identify specific sites for exploration by more complex rover and lander missions.

Antol, Jeffrey↗
NASA NTRS2006

Electrodynamic Dust Shield for Surface Exploration Activities on the Moon and Mars

The Apollo missions to the moon showed that lunar dust can hamper astronaut surface activities due to its ability to cling to most surfaces. NASA's Mars exploration landers and rovers have also shown that the problem is equally hard if not harder on Mars. In this paper, we report on our efforts to develop and electrodynamic dust shield to prevent the accumulation of dust on surfaces and to remove dust already adhering to those surfaces. The parent technology for the electrodynamic dust shield, developed in the 1970s, has been shown to lift and transport charged and uncharged particles using electrostatic and dielectrophoretic forces. This technology has never been applied for space applications on Mars or the moon due to electrostatic breakdown concerns. In this paper, we show that an appropriate design can prevent the electrostatic breakdown at the low Martian atmospheric pressures. We are also able to show that uncharged dust can be lifted and removed from surfaces under simulated Martian environmental conditions. This technology has many potential benefits for removing dust from visors, viewports and many other surfaces as well as from solar arrays. We have also been able to develop a version of the electrodynamic dust shield working under. hard vacuum conditions. This version should work well on the moon.

Calle, C. I.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Rovers as Geological Helpers for Planetary Surface Exploration

Rovers can be used to perform field science on other planetary surfaces and in hostile and dangerous environments on Earth. Rovers are mobility systems for carrying instrumentation to investigate targets of interest and can perform geologic exploration on a distant planet (e.g. Mars) autonomously with periodic command from Earth. For nearby sites (such as the Moon or sites on Earth) rovers can be teleoperated with excellent capabilities. In future human exploration, robotic rovers will assist human explorers as scouts, tool and instrument carriers, and a traverse "buddy". Rovers can be wheeled vehicles, like the Mars Pathfinder Sojourner, or can walk on legs, like the Dante vehicle that was deployed into a volcanic caldera on Mt. Spurr, Alaska. Wheeled rovers can generally traverse slopes as high as 35 degrees, can avoid hazards too big to roll over, and can carry a wide range of instrumentation. More challenging terrain and steeper slopes can be negotiated by walkers. Limitations on rover performance result primarily from the bandwidth and frequency with which data are transmitted, and the accuracy with which the rover can navigate to a new position. Based on communication strategies, power availability, and navigation approach planned or demonstrated for Mars missions to date, rovers on Mars will probably traverse only a few meters per day. Collecting samples, especially if it involves accurate instrument placement, will be a slow process. Using live teleoperation (such as operating a rover on the Moon from Earth) rovers have traversed more than 1 km in an 8 hour period while also performing science operations, and can be moved much faster when the goal is simply to make the distance. I will review the results of field experiments with planetary surface rovers, concentrating on their successful and problematic performance aspects. This paper will be accompanied by a working demonstration of a prototype planetary surface rover.

Stoker, Carol↗
NASA NTRS2024

Heat-Exchange Driven Aircraft for Low Altitude and Surface Exploration of Venus: Phase 1 Study Final Report

Exploration of Venus below its clouds has long been impaired by the planet’s massive CO2 atmosphere, corrosive trace gases, and high opacity. Except for a few narrow spectral windows, the 20 km thick global cloud cover blocks light over the entirety of the ultraviolet through thermal infrared spectrum, impeding orbital studies of the surface and lower portion of the atmosphere. In addition to the cloud opacity, Rayleigh scattering through 80 bars of CO 2 in the lower 40 km of the atmosphere results in a Rayleigh scattering depth between 25 and1 in the visible through near infrared portion of the spectrum. That optically thick scattering, combined with the uniform angular distribution of the illumination provided by the highly diffusing clouds overhead greatly reduces even very large surface albedo contrasts (Crisp, pers. Comm.). To date, the surface has only been mapped via synthetic aperture radar by the Magellan mission at scales of 120 to 300 m/pixel. In addition to contributing to the difficulty of performing studies of the surface from orbit, the extreme temperatures and pressures at the surface also create a challenging environment to utilize a lander for exploration. The longest-lived lander on Venus’ surface survived for 2 hours. Hence, limited access to observe the surface and lower atmosphere of Venus arguably puts the surface and lower atmosphere of Venus as one of the least explored regions of the inner Solar System.

NIAC Phase I↗
NASA NTRS2012

NASA Human Spaceflight Architecture Team: Lunar Surface Exploration Strategies

NASA s agency wide Human Spaceflight Architecture Team (HAT) has been developing Design Reference Missions (DRMs) to support the ongoing effort to characterize NASA s future human exploration strategy. The DRM design effort includes specific articulations of transportation and surface elements, technologies and operations required to enable future human exploration of various destinations including the moon, Near Earth Asteroids (NEAs) and Mars as well as interim cis-lunar targets. In prior architecture studies, transportation concerns have dominated the analysis. As a result, an effort was made to study the human utilization strategy at each specific destination and the resultant impacts on the overall architecture design. In particular, this paper considers various lunar surface strategies as representative scenarios that could occur in a human lunar return, and demonstrates their alignment with the internationally developed Global Exploration Roadmap (GER).

Mueller, Rob P.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Survey of Autonomous Navigation Techniques Applicable to Lunar Surface Exploration

As humanity returns to the Moon, and more and more attention is being paid to lunar surface operations, there is a greater need than ever for methods of surface navigation. These could be methods of computer-assisted orienteering for astronauts exploring on foot during an Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA), or methods of solving the Lost-on-the-Moon problem to initialize a crewed or autonomous rover’s state estimate. It may also be necessary to process navigation data associated with surface samples or other surface operations a posteriori to better understand where that analysis occurred. Autonomous rover operation will also require Hazard Detection and Avoidance (HDA) and terrain-aware pathfinding. While navigation on the surface of the Moon will likely rely on Earth-based assets such as the Deep Space Network (DSN) or communication with other spacecraft (e.g., LunaNet, LCRNS, pre-deployed moon beacons, a nearby lander) it may be necessary to navigate in a loss-of-communication scenario. This paper analyzes the methods of surface navigation used on other celestial bodies, such as those used during the Apollo missions and autonomous exploration of Mars, as well as novel methods which have been studied but not yet implemented which may prove useful. It is shown that the navigator has myriad options when processing data from an Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU), a star tracker, (rover) wheel encoders, optical cameras, and LIght Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) sensors. The intention of this paper is to provide a broad overview of what has been done and what could be done, to aid those designing vehicles and/or missions to the lunar surface.

Paul D Mckee↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Survey of Autonomous Navigation Techniques Applicable to Lunar Surface Exploration

As humanity returns to the Moon, and more and more attention is being paid to lunar surface operations, there is a greater need than ever for methods of surface navigation. These could be methods of computer-assisted orienteering for astronauts exploring on foot during an Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA), or methods of solving the Lost-on-the-Moon problem to initialize a crewed or autonomous rover’s state estimate. It may also be necessary to process navigation data associated with surface samples or other surface operations a posteriori to better understand where that analysis occurred. Autonomous rover operation will also require Hazard Detection and Avoidance (HDA) and terrain-aware pathfinding. While navigation on the surface of the Moon will likely rely on Earth-based assets such as the Deep Space Network (DSN) or communication with other spacecraft (e.g., LunaNet, LCRNS, pre-deployed moon beacons, a nearby lander) it may be necessary to navigate in a loss-of-communication scenario. This paper analyzes the methods of surface navigation used on other celestial bodies, such as those used during the Apollo missions and autonomous exploration of Mars, as well as novel methods which have been studied but not yet implemented which may prove useful. It is shown that the navigator has myriad options when processing data from an Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU), a star tracker, (rover) wheel encoders, optical cameras, and LIght Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) sensors. The intention of this paper is to provide a broad overview of what has been done and what could be done, to aid those designing vehicles and/or missions to the lunar surface.

Paul McKee↗
NASA NTRS2017

Regenerative Fuel Cell Power Systems for Lunar and Martian Surface Exploration

This paper presents the preliminary results of a recent National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) study funded under the Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Modular Power Systems (AMPS) project. This study evaluated multiple surface locations on both the Moon and Mars, with the goal of establishing a common approach towards technology development and system design for surface power systems that use Regenerative Fuel Cell (RFC) energy storage methods. One RFC design may not be applicable to all surface locations; however, AMPS seeks to find a unified architecture, or series of architectures, that leverages a single development approach to answer the technology need for RFC systems. Early system trades were performed to select the most effective fuel cell and electrolyzer architectures based on current state-of-the-art technology, whereas later trades will establish a detailed system design to enable a near-term ground (non-flight) demonstration. This paper focuses on the initial trade studies, presents the selected fuel cell and electrolyzer architectures for follow-on system design studies, and suggests areas for further technology investment.

lunar and Mars exploration↗
NASA NTRS2011

In-Situ XRF Measurements in Lunar Surface Exploration Using Apollo Samples as a Standard

Samples collected during the Apollo lunar surface missions were sampled and returned to Earth by astronauts with varying degrees of geological experience. The technology used in these EVAs, or extravehicular activities, included nothing more advanced than traditional terrestrial field instruments: rock hammer, scoop, claw tool, and sample bags. 40 years after Apollo, technology is being developed that will allow for a high-resolution geochemical map to be created in the field real-time. Handheld x-ray fluorescence (XRF) technology is one such technology. We use handheld XRF to enable a broad in-situ characterization of a geologic site of interest based on fairly rapid techniques that can be implemented by either an astronaut or a robotic explorer. The handheld XRF instrument we used for this study was the Innov-X Systems Delta XRF spectrometer.

Young, Kelsey E.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Optimization Approach to Support Science Decision Making for Lunar Surface Exploration

Introduction: Scientific exploration is one of the three pillars of NASA’s Moon2Mars architecture, with crew surface extra vehicular activities (EVA) serving a critical enabling function. Development of surface EVA operational planning and execution, specifically integrating science and flight control teams (FCT), is currently being explored through analog scenarios. This integration, exercised, for example, through the Joint EVA and Hu-man Surface Mobility Test Team (JETT), allows for science input on EVA activities in near real-time through a Science Evaluation Room (SER), or Arte-mis science backroom, which integrates with the broader FCT through the Science Officer. The SER works within the FCT to support dynamic EVA planning in response to changes in operational constraints as well as science opportunities and re-prioritization, increasing the mission science return and accelerating the accomplishment of the Moon2Mars science objectives. The SER works within the FCT to provide recommendations to traverse execution in near real-time. One challenge is the requirement to deliver SER inputs to the FCT on operationally relevant timelines. Failure to do so may result in suboptimal execution of science exploration EVAs or even loss of key science objectives. To close this gap, we present a network optimization tool to allow the SER to provide rapid input to the FCT in response to changes in operational constraints or science opportunities. Inputs are predicated on approved science objectives, and clear rationale must be provided to the FCT for any requested change. Accordingly, this tool incorporates the Science Traceability Matrix (STM), SER prioritization scheme, and station characterization and action planning with operational constraints such as duration, traverse speed, and distance to maximize science objectives based on SER priorities, consistent with FCT operational requirements. Method: As a proof of concept, we used an existing linear programing software package used to simulate optimal routes through cellular metabolism. We built a Demonstrative Model with three STM objectives and four stations on a region of the Moon. The objectives were given an arbitrary prioritization and mapped to the stations through four possible crew actions. (Figs. 1 and 2). This station to STM mapping is consistent with the method used by the JETT5 Science Team to develop analog surface EVA science planning. We used a grid system with the landing site at the origin and the four stations placed across the positive x,y quadrant. Actions were assigned to each station and the accomplishment of those actions resulted in a numerical “reward” based on the ability of that action to achieve science objectives. The aggregate reward from each individual STM objective contributes to a global score (Science Yield), weighted by its priority. Operational constraints included a requirement to start and end at the landing site, 5 minutes each for initial station characterization and “clean up,” and variable total EVA time, traverse rate (fixed to 0.5 meters per second in our example), and time to perform each action (10, 5, 7, and 15 min for actions 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively). Additional constraints and variables will be added in the future (e.g., sample mass, number of stations, traverse route constraints, illumination). Optimization. We converted the connections (arcs) between these stations (nodes) into a mixed integer linear programming optimization problem (arcs = constraints, nodes = variables) with the objective to maximize Science Yield. For any action, the Science Yield is equal to the relevance of that action to an STM objective [3, 2, and 1 point(s) for High, Med., and Low relevance, respectively], multiplied by the STM Objective Priority [3, 2, and 1 point(s) for High, Med., and Low priority, respectively]. This resulted in a model that computes the optimal station and action combination to maximize the Science Yield. These weightings can be adjusted by the SER as desired. Results: We explored three test cases for the Demonstrative Model. First, we set the maximum EVA duration to 120 minutes and computed the optimal route (Fig. 3A). The model suggested per-forming Actions 1 and 2 at Station P01, followed by Actions 1 and 2 at Station P02, and finally Actions 1 and 3 at Station P04 before returning to the Landing Site. Second, we adjusted the STM Objective Priori-ty order and computed the new optimal route (Fig. 3B). Under this situation, the model suggested per-forming all Actions at Station P02 followed by all Actions at Station P03. The previous test cases were relevant to SER planning activities. Next, we explored providing mid-EVA replanning input to the FCT. Scenario: While executing the Route in Fig. 3A the crew finishes at Station P01 and FCT decides that the EVA needs to finish in 45 minutes back at the Landing Site. FCT asks SER to recommend changes to the plan to accommodate this operation-al change. Using the model and incorporating these new constraints (start at Station P01, max. time of 45 min), the model suggested performing Actions 2 and 4 at Station P03 (Fig. 4), requiring 41 minutes to complete and return to the Landing Site. Interestingly, Station 3 was not part of the original route. Using the model, we determined the EVA would need 66 minutes, instead of 45, in order for the original Station P04 to yield a larger Science Yield than Station P03. The parametrization and simulation was per-formed in less than a minute, demonstrating the operational relevance of the approach. Future Efforts: The results from the Demonstrative Model suggest this tool can accelerate SER decision making on operationally relevant timelines. Use in analog activities, such as JETT5 or follow-ons, which have over a dozen stations for a crew to explore and over a dozen actions per station, will provide needed validation of the utility of this tool for planning EVAs, replanning mid-EVA, or planning follow-on EVAs based on previous results. Further integration with FCT execution monitoring tools may provide additional efficiency gains, al-lowing rapid and iterative exploration of operation-al and science decision space by the FCT and SER.

Science Operations↗
NASA NTRS1971

The characterization of facsimile camera systems for lunar and planetary surface exploration

Advantages of facsimile camera systems are reviewed for imagery of lunar and planetary surfaces from stationary or stopped remotely controlled vehicles. They include: better geometric fidelity than television systems, more picture elements per frame, ability to take single frame panoramic pictures, a very high contrast ratio within a picture, a choice of one or more narrow-band spectral responses over a wide possible range, image transmission over a low bit-rate communications channel without storage, very low power, small size, low weight, and ruggedizability to meet space flight requirements. Systems of this kind are under development for the 1975 Viking Martian lander, and have been used by the Soviets on Lunas and Lunokhod laboratory and field evaluation of a completed facsimile camera system is presented. The applicability of facsimile cameras to lunar and planetary rovers is demonstrated.

Eisenman, A.↗
DOE OSTI2024

Enhanced nucleation mechanism in ruthenium atomic layer deposition: Exploring surface termination and precursor ligand effects with RuCpEt(CO)2

Miniaturization of microelectronic devices necessitates atomic precision in manufacturing techniques, particularly in the deposition of thin films. Atomic layer deposition (ALD) is recognized for its precision in controlling film thickness and composition on intricate three-dimensional structures. This study focuses on the ALD nucleation and growth mechanisms of ruthenium (Ru), a metal that has significant future implications for microelectronics. Despite its advantages, the deposition of a high surface-free energy material like Ru on a low surface-free energy material such as an oxide often faces challenges of large nucleation delays and non-uniform growth. To address these challenges, we explored the effectiveness of organometallic surface pretreatments using trimethylaluminum (TMA) or diethylzinc (DEZ) to enhance Ru film nucleation and growth. Our study employed a less-studied Ru precursor, cyclopentadienylethyl(dicarbonyl)ruthenium [RuCpEt(CO)2], which demonstrated promising results in terms of reduced nucleation delay and increased film continuity. Ru ALD was performed on silicon substrates with native oxide, using RuCpEt(CO)2 and O2 as coreactants. Our findings reveal that surface pretreatment significantly improves nucleation density and film thickness within the initial 60 ALD cycles, achieving up to a 3.2-fold increase in Ru surface coverage compared to nonpretreated substrates. Supported by density functional theory calculations, we propose that the enhanced nucleation observed with RuCpEt(CO)2 compared to previously-studied Ru(Cp)2 is due to two key mechanisms: the facilitated removal of CO ligands during deposition, which enhances the reactivity of the precursor, and a hydrogen-abstraction reaction involving the ethyl ligand of RuCpEt(CO)2 and the metal-alkyl groups on the surface. This study not only advances our understanding of Ru ALD processes but also highlights the significant impact of precursor chemistry and surface treatments in optimizing ALD for advanced microelectronic applications.

Materials Science↗
NASA NTRS1971

Lunar surface exploration

Experiences of living on moon, discussing effects on task performance and physical movements and observations of lunar surface, lighting and color

Armstrong, N.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Power System for Venus Surface Exploration

A radioisotope power and cooling system is designed to provide electrical power for a probe operating on the surface of Venus. Most foreseeable electronics devices and sensors cannot operate at the 450 C ambient surface temperature of Venus. Because the mission duration is substantially long and the use of thermal mass to maintain an operable temperature range is likely impractical, some type of active refrigeration may be required to keep electronic components at a temperature below ambient. The fundamental cooling parameters are the cold sink temperature, the hot sink temperature, and the amount of heat to be removed. In this instance, it is anticipated that electronics would have a nominal operating temperature of 300 C. Due to the highly thermal convective nature of the high-density (90 bar CO2) atmosphere, the hot sink temperature was assumed to be 50 C, which provided a 500 C temperature of the cooler's heat rejecter to the ambient atmosphere. The majority of the heat load on the cooler is from the high temperature ambient surface environment on Venus, with a small contribution of heat generation from electronics and sensors. Both thermoelectric (RTG) and dynamic power conversion systems were analyzed, based on use of a standard isotope (General-purpose heat source, or GPHS) brick. For the radioisotope Stirling power converter configuration designed, the Sage model predicts a thermodynamic power output capacity of 478.1 watts, which slightly exceeds the required 469.1 watts. The hot sink temperature is 1200 C, and the cold sink temperature is 500 C. The required heat input is 1740 watts. This gives a thermodynamic efficiency of 27.48 %. It is estimated that the mechanical efficiency of the power converter design is on the order of 85 %, based on experimental measurements taken from 500-watt power class, laboratory-tested Stirling engines. The overall efficiency is calculated to be 23.36 %. The mass of the power converter is estimated at approximately 21.6 kg. Additional information is included in the original extended abstract.

Landis, Geoffrey A.↗
DOE OSTI2025

Structure, dynamics, and electrochemistry of choline chloride/ethylene glycol eutectic solvents at an electrode surface explored by molecular dynamics simulations

Choline chloride and ethylene glycol mixtures with 1:2, 1:4, and 1:6 molar ratios on the surfaces of graphite and gold electrodes were studied using classical molecular dynamics simulations. Both neutral and charged electrodes were considered. The liquid composition, solvation structure, molecular orientation, and dynamics at the electrode surface are significantly different from those of the bulk liquid. These properties strongly depend on the electrode material and charge density, whereas they are less sensitive to the overall solvent composition. The effect of the electrode on the composition, structure, and orientation of the liquid fades beyond ∼10 Å from the surface of the electrode. This distance corresponds to about two layers of the structured solvent, despite the fact that the layered structure extends to at least five layers or about 25 Å. However, the electrode influences solvent dynamics over a longer distance. The electrochemical properties of the eutectic solvent at both electrode surfaces were also studied. The simulations captured the experimental differential capacitance shapes for both electrode systems, although the magnitudes and exact shapes differ. The simulations further revealed that the solvent in the first solvation layer can both overscreen and underscreen the electrode charges depending on the electrode material and electrode potential.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗