Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Small Science Landers”

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.

140 records · Page 8

Deep Learning Models for Planetary Seismicity Detection

Research in planetary seismology is fundamentally constrained by a lack of data. Seismo-logical science products of future missions can typically only be informed by theoretical signal/noise characteristics of the environment or likely Earth-analogues. Although objectives can be re-assessed after some initial data-collection upon lander arrival, transfer of high-resolution data back to Earth is costly on lander power usage. Over the last several years, development of GPU computing techniques and open-source high-level APIs have led to rapid advances in deep learning within the fields of computer vision, natural language processing, and collaborative filtering. These techniques are actively being adapted in seismology for a variety of tasks, including: earthquake detection, seismic phase discrimination, and ground-motion prediction. Until the recent detection of mars quakes during the Mars InSight mission, the only other measurements of seismicity recorded outside of Earth was on the Moon during the Apollo missions between 1969 to 1977. These unique data sets have been periodically revisited using new seismological methods, including ambient noise interferometry and Hidden Markov Models. Our objective is to develop a deep learning seismic detector and use it to catalog moonquakes from the Apollo 17 Lunar Seismic Profiling Experiment (LSPE) and compare the results with those obtained by other methods. Additionally, we will assess the accuracy tradeoff between using a training set of lunar data and one composed of Earth seismicity. In this document, we present preliminary results using a prototype classifier trained on a small set of earthquakes that was able to obtain detections for LSPE moonquakes with a greater accuracy than a recent study using Hidden Markov Models.

Civilini, F.↗

Dust Mitigation Technology to Enable Survive the Night Capabilities

Introduction: As we return to the Moon, the lunar regolith (i.e. lunar dust) covering the surface will be an obstacle to nominal operations. Accounts from Apollo astronauts and analysis of hardware returned from the surface illustrate just how deleterious the dust can be [1]. During Apollo missions, the lunar dust adhered to hardware mechanically and electrostatically [2]. Surviving the Night: Mitigating the lunar dust will be critical to surviving the night. Going hand-in-hand with other extreme environment considerations, dust mitigation is critical to mission success. Dust Impacts on Other Systems: The lunar dust can have negative implications for power, thermal, mechanisms, and several other systems or sub-systems. For example, Apollo encountered marked degradation of performance in heat rejection systems for the lunar roving vehicle, science packages, and other components because of the lunar dust [1]. For power alone, dust can cause internal clogging for power connectors, heat rejection issues, excessive dust on reflective surfaces, reduced power output for solar arrays, and so on. Dust Mitigation Strategy: In addition to considering technology solutions, it is important for hardware, systems, and or components to have a dust mitigation strategy. At a high level, hardware that will encounter the lunar dust should consider these things when defining a dust mitigation strategy: • Understand Natural Environment • Understand Induced Environment • Understand Tolerance to Dust • Write Dust Requirements • Select Dust Mitigation Solutions • Test Hardware in Dusty Environment More information on each of these can be provided to hardware owners. Dust Mitigation Technology Development: NASA has a series of technologies that may be available for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night. Many of these solutions are leveraging dust mitigation technology development efforts from NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD), as well as efforts from ESDMD programs, industry, and academia. Through a series of STMD programs (both internal to NASA and through partnerships), there are several technologies in development as considerations as dust mitigation solutions for hardware. Within STMD, the Game Changing Development Program (GCD) has funded several internal dust mitigation projects including low to mid TRL development, demonstrations on CLPS landers of high TRL solutions, and creating standards and best practices for dust mitigation. STMD dust mitigation efforts also include a series of partnerships for developing technologies and advancing the state of dust mitigation at NASA. This includes the Lunar Surface Innovation Consortium (LSIC), Small Business Innovation Research, Early Stage Innovations (ESI), Space Technology Research Grants (STRG), Announcement of Collaboration Opportunities (ACOs) and Tipping Points (TPs), and Challenges and Crowdsourcing, among others. There are also a series of dust mitigation solutions that have been widely used terrestrially, or during Apollo. In recent years, several studies have produced more data on the efficacy of these potential solutions in the lunar environment. Dust Mitigation Solutions: Dust mitigation solutions generally fall into four categories: • Dust Tolerant Mechanisms • Passive Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Active Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Dust Measurement Capabilities There are a series of solutions that may prove beneficial for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night, including new technology development as well as proven, terrestrial solutions. This presentation will discuss in more detail what some of these solutions are for payloads going to the surface. References: [1] J. R. Gaier, NASA/TM—2005-213610, The Effects of Lunar Dust on EVA Systems During the Apollo Missions [2] T. J. Stubbs, et al. Impact of Dust on Lunar Exploration, 2005

dust mitigation↗

Survive the Dust: Dust Mitigation Technology to Enable Survive the Night Capabilities

Introduction: As we return to the Moon, the lunar regolith (i.e. lunar dust) covering the surface will be an obstacle to nominal operations. Accounts from Apollo astronauts and analysis of hardware returned from the surface illustrate just how deleterious the dust can be [1]. During Apollo missions, the lunar dust adhered to hardware mechanically and electrostatically [2]. Surviving the Night: Mitigating the lunar dust will be critical to surviving the night. Going hand-in-hand with other extreme environment considerations, dust mitigation is critical to mission success. Dust Impacts on Other Systems: The lunar dust can have negative implications for power, thermal, mechanisms, and several other systems or sub-systems. For example, Apollo encountered marked degradation of performance in heat rejection systems for the lunar roving vehicle, science packages, and other components because of the lunar dust [1]. For power alone, dust can cause internal clogging for power connectors, heat rejection issues, excessive dust on reflective surfaces, reduced power output for solar arrays, and so on. Dust Mitigation Strategy: In addition to considering technology solutions, it is important for hardware, systems, and or components to have a dust mitigation strategy. At a high level, hardware that will encounter the lunar dust should consider these things when defining a dust mitigation strategy: • Understand Natural Environment • Understand Induced Environment • Understand Tolerance to Dust • Write Dust Requirements • Select Dust Mitigation Solutions • Test Hardware in Dusty Environment More information on each of these can be provided to hardware owners. Dust Mitigation Technology Development: NASA has a series of technologies that may be available for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night. Many of these solutions are leveraging dust mitigation technology development efforts from NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD), as well as efforts from ESDMD programs, industry, and academia. Through a series of STMD programs (both internal to NASA and through partnerships), there are several technologies in development as considerations as dust mitigation solutions for hardware. Within STMD, the Game Changing Development Program (GCD) has funded several internal dust mitigation projects including low to mid TRL development, demonstrations on CLPS landers of high TRL solutions, and creating standards and best practices for dust mitigation. STMD dust mitigation efforts also include a series of partnerships for developing technologies and advancing the state of dust mitigation at NASA. This includes the Lunar Surface Innovation Consortium (LSIC), Small Business Innovation Research, Early Stage Innovations (ESI), Space Technology Research Grants (STRG), Announcement of Collaboration Opportunities (ACOs) and Tipping Points (TPs), and Challenges and Crowdsourcing, among others. There are also a series of dust mitigation solutions that have been widely used terrestrially, or during Apollo. In recent years, several studies have produced more data on the efficacy of these potential solutions in the lunar environment. Dust Mitigation Solutions: Dust mitigation solutions generally fall into four categories: • Dust Tolerant Mechanisms • Passive Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Active Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Dust Measurement Capabilities There are a series of solutions that may prove beneficial for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night, including new technology development as well as proven, terrestrial solutions. This presentation will discuss in more detail what some of these solutions are for payloads going to the surface. References: [1] J. R. Gaier, NASA/TM—2005-213610, The Effects of Lunar Dust on EVA Systems During the Apollo Missions [2] T. J. Stubbs, et al. Impact of Dust on Lunar Exploration, 2005

dust mitigation↗

Laponite-Incorporated UiO-66-NH2-Polyethylene Oxide Composite Membranes for Protection against Chemical Warfare Agent Simulants

A strategy is developed to enhance the barrier protection of polyethylene oxide (PEO)-metal–organic framework (MOF) composite films against chemical warfare agent simulants. To achieve enhanced protection, an impermeable high-aspect-ratio filler in the form of Laponite RD (LRD) clay platelets was incorporated into a composite PEO film containing MOF UiO-66-NH 2 . The inclusion of the platelets aids in mitigating permeation of inert hydrocarbons (octane) and toxic chemicals (2-chloroethyl ethyl sulfide, 2-CEES) of dimensions/chemistry similar to prominent vesicant threats while still maintaining high water vapor transport rates (WVTR). By utilizing small-angle neutron scattering, small-angle X-ray scattering, and wide-angle X-ray scattering, the LRD platelet alignment of the films was determined, and the structure of the films was correlated with performance as a barrier material. Performance of the membranes against toxic chemical threats was assessed using permeation testing of octane and 2-CEES, a common simulant for the vesicant mustard gas, and breathability of the membranes was assessed using WVTR measurements. To assess their robustness, chemical exposure (in situ diffuse reflectance infrared Fourier transform spectroscopy) and mechanical (tensile strength) measurements were also performed. It was demonstrated that the barrier performance of the film upon inclusion of the LRD platelets exceeds that of other MOF-polymer composites found in the literature and that this approach establishes a new path for improving permselective materials for chemical protection applications.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

BioSentinel: NASA’s First Deep Space Biological Mission

Since Apollo 17 in 1972, NASA has sent no humans or other biological organisms outside of Earth’s protective magnetosphere. NASA’s current Artemis program plans to put astronauts back on the Moon and eventually land human missions on Mars. One of the major challenges to long-duration crewed travel and habitation in deep space is an in-depth understanding of the biological effects of space radiation, often convoluted by the impact of reduced gravity. Such missions will require significant countermeasures, likely both technological and biomedical, to protect organisms from chronic radiation exposure. Small satellite missions like CubeSats can inform these countermeasures by investigating model organisms in relevant space environments. The BioSentinel mission is comprised of four segments developed at NASA Ames Research Center: a 6U CubeSat (1U = 10-cm cube), an ISS payload launched in December 2021 and two ground units, one for the mission’s CubeSat and one for the ISS payload. The last three segments have been operational since January 2022 and serve as experimental controls. BioSentinel’s 6U CubeSat is planned to launch as a secondary payload on the Artemis-1 rocket. It will be deployed on a lunar fly-by trajectory and into a heliocentric orbit. BioSentinel will be the first interplanetary satellite to study the biological response to space radiation outside Low Earth Orbit (LEO) in almost 50 years. BioSentinel is a complete, autonomous spacecraft capable of conducting experiments in deep space. Its 4U BioSensor payload is a fully automated and adaptable platform that can perform biological measurements with a range of microorganisms in multiple space environments, including the ISS, free flyers, and other platforms like the Lunar Gateway and lander vehicles. Once it reaches its orbit, BioSentinel’s CubeSat will measure the DNA damage response to ambient radiation in a model organism, the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, which will be compared to information provided by an onboard radiation sensor and to data obtained in LEO (on ISS) and on Earth. Once in interplanetary space, fluidic cards containing desiccated yeast will be activated by growth medium addition at different time points throughout the mission. Growth and metabolic activity will be tracked continuously via optical measurements. This paper describes BioSentinel’s objectives, science, data management, and preliminary results from the ISS and ISS ground control segments.

BioSentinel↗

BioSentinel: NASA’s First Deep Space Biological Mission

Since Apollo 17 in 1972, NASA has sent no humans or other biological organisms outside of Earth’s protective magnetosphere. NASA’s current Artemis program plans to put astronauts back on the Moon and eventually land human missions on Mars. One of the major challenges to long-duration crewed travel and habitation in deep space is an in-depth understanding of the biological effects of space radiation, often convoluted by the impact of reduced gravity. Such missions will require significant countermeasures, likely both technological and biomedical, to protect organisms from chronic radiation exposure. Small satellite missions like CubeSats can inform these countermeasures by investigating model organisms in relevant space environments. The BioSentinel mission is comprised of four segments developed at NASA Ames Research Center: a 6U CubeSat (1U = 10-cm cube), an ISS payload launched in December 2021 and two ground units, one for the mission’s CubeSat and one for the ISS payload. The last three segments have been operational since January 2022 and serve as experimental controls. BioSentinel’s 6U CubeSat is planned to launch as a secondary payload on the Artemis-1 rocket. It will be deployed on a lunar fly-by trajectory and into a heliocentric orbit. BioSentinel will be the first interplanetary satellite to study the biological response to space radiation outside Low Earth Orbit (LEO) in almost 50 years. BioSentinel is a complete, autonomous spacecraft capable of conducting experiments in deep space. Its 4U BioSensor payload is a fully automated and adaptable platform that can perform biological measurements with a range of microorganisms in multiple space environments, including the ISS, free flyers, and other platforms like the Lunar Gateway and lander vehicles. Once it reaches its orbit, BioSentinel’s CubeSat will measure the DNA damage response to ambient radiation in a model organism, the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, which will be compared to information provided by an onboard radiation sensor and to data obtained in LEO (on ISS) and on Earth. Once in interplanetary space, fluidic cards containing desiccated yeast will be activated by growth medium addition at different time points throughout the mission. Growth and metabolic activity will be tracked continuously via optical measurements. This paper describes BioSentinel’s objectives, science, data management, and preliminary results from the ISS segment.

BioSentinel↗

The Pascal Discovery Mission: A Mars Climate Network Mission

The climate of Mars is a major focus of Mars exploration. With the loss of MCO, however, it remains uncertain how it will be achieved. We argue that a truly dedicated climate mission to Mars should have both orbital and landed components, and that these should operate simultaneously for at least 1 Mars year if not longer. Pascal is a Discovery mission that emphasizes the landed component. Its principal goal is to establish a network of 24 small weather stations on the surface of Mars that will operate for 2 Mars years, with an extended mission option for an additional 8 Mars years bringing the total mission lifetime up to 10 Mars years. The stations will collect hourly measurements of pressure, temperature, and optical depth. After delivering the probes to Mars, Pascal's carrier spacecraft will go into an elliptical orbit which will serve as a relay for the landers, and a platform for synoptic imaging. These simultaneous measurements from the surface and from orbit will allow us to characterize the planet's general circulation and its interaction with the dust, water, and CO2 cycles. During entry, descent, and landing, each of Pascal's 24 probes will also measure the temperature structure of the atmosphere and acquire images of the surface. These data will allow us to determine the global structure of the atmosphere between 15 and 130 km, and characterize the local terrain to help interpret the landed data. The descent images are part of Pascal's outreach program, as the probe camera system will be developed by faculty-supervised student project. The intent is to generate enthusiasm for the Pascal mission by directly involving students. Pascal will be launched on a Delta II-7925 in August of 2005. A type I trajectory will deliver Pascal to Mars in January of 2006. On approach, the three-axis stabilized carrier spacecraft will spring deploy the Pascal probes in 4 separate salvo's of 6 each. Global coverage is achieved with small time-of-arrival adjustments in between each salvo. Pascal's probes utilize an aeroshell, parachute, and crushable material for entry, descent and landing. On the surface, their long life and global coverage is enabled by a Micro Thermal Power Source with demonstrated heritage. After all probes are released, the carrier spacecraft will execute a small burn for insertion into an elliptical orbit. The long lifetime of the Pascal network was chosen in part to maximize the chances that orbital sounding, like that planned with MCO, would occur at some point during the mission. If Pascal is selected for launch in '05, this could occur if MCO-like science is reflown in the '05 opportunity or, if it is reflown in '03, the mission is extended to overlap with Pascal. The combination of temperature sounding from orbit, and surface pressure mapping from the surface will allow a direct determination of the full 3-D wind field for the first time.

Haberle, R. M.↗

The Pascal Discovery Mission: A Mars Climate Network Mission

The climate of Mars is a major focus of Mars exploration. With the loss of MCO, however, it remains uncertain how it will be achieved. We argue that a truly dedicated climate mission to Mars should have both orbital and landed components, and that these should operate simultaneously for at least I Mars year if not longer. Pascal is Discovery mission that emphasizes the landed component. Its principal goal is to establish a network of 24 small weather stations on the surface of Mars that will operate for 2 Mars years, with an extended mission option for an additional 8 Mars years bringing the total mission lifetime up to 10 Mars years. The stations will collect hourly measurements of pressure, temperature, and optical depth. After delivering the probes to Mars, Pascal's carrier spacecraft will go into an elliptical orbit which will serve as a relay for the landers, and a platform for synoptic imaging. These simultaneous measurements from the surface and from orbit will allow us to characterize the planet's general circulation and its interaction with the dust, water, and CO2 cycles. During entry, descent, and landing, each of Pascal's 24 probes will also measure the temperature structure of the atmosphere and acquire images of the surface. These data will allow us to determine the global structure of the atmosphere between 15 and 130 km, and characterize the local terrain to help interpret the landed data. The descent images are part of Pascal's outreach program, as the probe camera system will be developed by faculty-supervised student project. The intent is to generate enthusiasm for the Pascal mission by directly involving students. Pascal will be launched on a Delta 11-7925 in August of 2005. A type I trajectory will deliver Pascal to Mars in January of 2006. On approach, the three-axis stabilized carrier spacecraft will spring deploy the Pascal probes in 4 separate salvo's of 6 each. Global coverage is achieved with small time-of-arrival adjustments in between each salvo. Pascal's probes utilize an aeroshell, parachute, and crushable material for entry, descent and landing. On the surface, their long life and global coverage is enabled by a Micro Thermal Power Source with demonstrated heritage. After all probes are released, the carrier spacecraft will execute a small bum for insertion into an elliptical orbit. The long lifetime of the Pascal network was chosen in part to maximize the chances that orbital sounding, like that planned with MCO, would occur at some point during the mission. If Pascal is selected for launch in -05, this could occur if MCO-like science is reflown in the '05 opportunity or, if it is reflown in '03, the mission is extended to overlap with Pascal. The combination of temperature sounding from orbit, and surface pressure mapping from the surface will allow a direct determination of the full 3-D wind field for the first time.

Haberle, Robert M.↗

Current NASA In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) Strategic Vision

Perform development to TRL 5/6 through ground demonstration in relevant environment. Perform component/subscale subsystem flight demonstrations on small/mid-size landers. Assess and characterize water in volatiles in lunar polar shadowed regions and craters. Reduce risk of ISRU for mission critical consumables through Integrated End-to-End Flight Demonstrations (pilot scale). Establish initial Human Mission Scale production capability to promote sustainable operations and as anchor for commercial involvement. Identify and characterize polar region environment and resources/volatiles for Science and future Exploration/Commercial applications. Provide ground-truth physical, mineral, and water/volatile resource characteristic information at multiple locations to provide geological context for science-focused theories of volatile placement and initial mining assessments.Test technologies and processes to reduce risk of future extraction/mining systems. Quantify concentration and lateral/vertical distribution of resources/volatiles. Utilize ISRU capabilities to Extend and Enhance Human Lunar Exploration Missions. Provide oxygen (and fuel) to enable reusable human lunar lander (10+ MT/yr O2)Process carbon-based crew waste/trash into gases and propellants; can reduce logistics while minimizing public perception issues (alternative is conversion to radiation shielding). Scavenge unused propellants and hardware from spent landers. Metal extraction from regolith as feedstock for in situ and in space manufacturing demonstrations. Civil engineering and construction aimed at future outpost/infrastructure build-up. Develop and Demonstrate ISRU for Human Mars Missions. ISRU for propellant production (10-15 MT/yr); Liquefy, store, transfer, and refuel ascent vehicle. Use Moon for operational experience and mission validation for Mars: Pre-deployment & remote activation and operation without crew. Storing and transferring mission consumables Landing crew with empty tanks with ISRU propellants already made and waiting. Support/Promote Commercialization of Space. Large scale polar ice mining (100+ MT/yr water)O2/H2 propulsion for landers/cis-lunar transportation with surface and in space depots. In situ construction and energy expansion at mining and human outpost site(s). ISRU Ground Development. Develop and advance ISRU technologies to enable acquisition of resources and processing into mission consumables. Utilize Multi-center collaboration with a portfolio that includes internal NASA work, external contracts, and collaborative agreements/partnerships. Where appropriate, develop lunar ISRU components and subsystems with a Mars-forward application. Engage industry through public-private partnerships to lay the foundation for long-term lunar and space economic development. Spin-in/spin-out technologies for terrestrial applications and industry (mining, oil & gas, alternative energy, construction). Flight Demonstration Path to Operational ISRU. Utilize small demonstrations with near off-the-shelf hardware to obtain critical information quickly on lunar resources and operations. Demonstrate critical technologies and processes that interact with lunar materials and environments. Perform 'pilot plant' demonstrations at architecture relevant scales and durations to reduce the risk for ISRU-provided products for critical human mission applications.

In-situ Resource Utilization↗

Swarm Flyby Gravimetry

This study describes a new technology for discerning the gravity fields and mass distribution of a solar system small body, without requiring dedicated orbiters or landers. Instead of a lander, a spacecraft releases a collection of small, simple probes during a flyby past an asteroid or comet. By tracking those probes from the host spacecraft, one can estimate the asteroid's gravity field and infer its underlying composition and structure. This approach offers a diverse measurement set,equivalent to planning and executing many independent and unique flyby encounters of a single spacecraft. This report assesses a feasible hardware implementation, derives the underlying models,and analyzes the performance of this concept via simulation.In terms of hardware, a small, low mass, low cost implementation is presented, which consists of a dispenser and probes. The dispenser contains roughly 12 probes in a tube and has a total size commensurate with a 6U P-Pod. The probes are housed in disc shaped sabots. When commanded,the dispenser ejects the top-most probe using a linear motor. The ejected probe separates from its sabots and unfolds using internal springs. There are two types of probes, each designed for a particular tracking modality. The reflective probe type, tracked by a telescope, unfolds to forma diffusely reflective sphere. The retroreflector probe type, tracked by a lidar, unfolds to form a corner-cube retroreflector assembly. Both types are designed to spherical so that their attitude doesn't affect the spacecraft's tracking performance.This analysis indicates that the point-mass term of small bodies larger than roughly 500 m in diameter can be observed from a host spacecraft that tracks locally deployed probes throughout a flyby to an uncertainty of better than 5%. The conditions by which this measurement is possible depends on the characteristics of the asteroid (size, type), the flyby velocity, and the type of tracking available (angles-only or angles+ranging). For most encounters, a few (1-3) well placed probes can be very effective, with marginal improvement for additional probes. Given realistic deployment errors, an encounter may require roughly 10-12 probes to ensure that 1-3 achieve their target. Long duration tracking of probes flying by large asteroids (>5 km diameter) can sometimes provide observability of the gravity field's first spherical harmonic, J( sub 2). In summary, this method offers a feasible, affordable approach to enabling or augmenting flyby science.

Atchison, Justin↗

NASA Space Environment Analog for Training, Engineering, Science, and Technology (SEATEST) 6 Detailed Final Report

After more than 50 years since the last crewed lunar landing, plans for more missions to the moon are in development. For these missions, efficient and sustainable logistics will be critical. Additionally, innovative methods of cargo transfer to and from a lunar outpost should be considered for successfully establishing a permanent presence on the moon. SEATEST (Space Environment Analog for Training, Engineering, Science, and Technology) is an immersive mission-analogous operational atmosphere where buoyancy effects and supplemental weights can simulate partial gravity conditions similar to those astronauts will experience on the moon. SEATEST 6 took place at the University of Southern California (USC) Wrigley Marine Science Center on Santa Catalina Island from July 18-30, 2023. The analog was used to collect preliminary logistics data on two different offloading conceptual methods (a davit and a zipline) during a simulated lunar mission. Pre-test analysis indicated for a crew of two on a 14-day mission, approximately three Medium Pressurized Logistics Containers (MPLC) sized logistics containers (or a total of 37.5 single Cargo Transfer Bag Equivalents (CTBE)) would be needed to support a mission. A Computer-Aided Design (CAD) analysis was employed on the SEATEST airlock mockup to determine how many logistic containers would fit with two suited crewmembers, don/doff stands, and hatch operations. It was determined that for SEATEST, a total of 15 1.0 Small Pressurized Logistics Containers (SPLCs) and 8 2.0 SPLCs would adequately fit into the approximate 9.5 cubic meter airlock volume. This does not fully represent a complete 14-day logistic supply; however, it does provide a preliminary estimate to initiate design conversations between logistics teams and crew at this early stage of development. Data were collected in eight logistics transfer scenarios over two days with four scenarios per day. Five test subject crew participated in scenarios as pairs. Scenarios included two sizes of logistics containers – 1.0 SPLC (equivalent to a single Cargo Transfer Bag (CTB) and 2.0 SPLC (equivalent to two CTBs). Planed evaluations included the use of a logistics port compared to transfer through an Airlock hatch, offloading methods based on either a davit or a zipline system, choreography of cargo in the airlock to permit ingress and suit doffing, and dust removal protocols for an understanding of the overall impact to transfer ops. Data collected included objective data (task times for conducting overall tasks and subtasks, full audio/video of test activities, and inadvertent “dings” on hardware) and subjective data (crew consensus of: task acceptability and capability assessment ratings related to best practices, considerations, and constraints for EVA-driven logistics transfer ConOps, sim quality of the test environment, and more general debrief comments). The two logistic offloading transfer concepts (davit, zipline) presented both advantages and limitations. The davit’s flexibility in allowing the crew to pick up the containers without physical interaction was well regarded by the crew. Some limitations of select davit hardware components were noted, but the overall concept was acceptable. The zipline system proved to be the most efficient way of moving logistics from the lander to the airlock and eliminated the need for dust operations. However, extended and repetitive lifting of containers to the line could be fatiguing. In conclusion, logistics transfer could hypothetically be achieved without an offloading method; however, the time requirement for such operations would be prohibitive. Results of crew subjective feedback proposed a combined or hybrid davit/zipline method to increase efficiency.

Logistics↗

Exploring the Relationship Between Science Funding and Science Productivity on Extended Missions

Introduction: The goal of this summer internship research project was to explore the relationship between the level of funding for science team research and science productivity for planetary spaceflight missions. The productivity and funding for the prime and extended missions were compared when possible. Determining the actual rather than anecdotal relationship between the level of science team funding and their productivity will help determine the adequacy of science team funding. Additionally, determining whether productivity increases or decreases over time (within missions, or within the years between different missions) provides insights into ongoing trends. This project was conducted using data from 11 extended missions within the Planetary Science Division. The main goals of this project were to 1) quantify the level of productivity of the science team during the extended portion of each mission, 2) compare the level of productivity between different types of missions, and 3) compare the level of productivity between the prime missions and extended missions. Methodology: The central metric enters around the “publication rate” of each mission. This rate is normalized in a variety of ways, including the number of publications per year, per Co-I, and per instruments. For the most part, this data was attainable through mission websites, team rosters, and data collected from previous projects. The publication data for this project utilized the SAO/NASA Astrophysics Data System, and it consisted of a search for any papers from the extended mission that had a co-investigator as an author. The time period for these searches also included an additional two years after the end of the extended mission to account for additional time it typically takes to finish data analysis and publish papers. Data from prime missions was collected from a previous project that measured similar metrics for the same missions. When comparing the different types of missions, three factors were used: mission size, dates of the prime and extended missions, and the type of the mission (rover, flyby, orbiter, or lander). To determine mission size, missions were compared by the number of Co-I’s on the mission, the number of instruments in the payload, and the mission class. Findings: On average, prime mission publication rates were generally higher than those of extended missions. Out of the nine missions used for this comparison, six had a higher prime mission publication rate and three had a higher extended mission publication rate. This distinction was interesting to observe, but it should be noted that the methodology for determing the number of published papers differed for the prime missions and the extended missions Discovery missions were found to be the most scientifically productive. Additionally, more recent extended missions tend to possess greater productivity. When comparing missions of different types, it was found that orbiters were much more productive than other types of missions. Future Work: There are a number of opportunities to extend and improve on this project in the future. Even though the metrics used were the same, the prime mission data could be recollected from the same sources as the extended mission data (Astrophysics Data System) to insure greater consistency. The impact level of the publications could also be accounted for, and financial data could be used to compare teams with different levels of funding. Additionally, more missions could be examined to increase the sample size of these comparisons, especially the comparison of different mission types which had an incredibly small sample size for some categories.

Cameron Maxwell Thompson↗

Navigation Strategy for the Mars 2001 Lander Mission

The Mars Surveyor Program (MSP) is an ongoing series of missions designed to robotically study, map and search for signs of life on the planet Mars. The MSP 2001 project will advance the effort by sending an orbiter, a lander and a rover to the red planet in the 2001 opportunity. Each vehicle will carry a science payload that will Investigate the Martian environment on both a global and on a local scale. Although this mission will not directly search for signs of life, or cache samples to be returned to Earth, it will demonstrate certain enabling technologies that will be utilized by the future Mars Sample Return missions. One technology that is needed for the Sample Return mission is the capability to place a vehicle on the surface within several kilometers of the targeted landing site. The MSP'01 Lander will take the first major step towards this type of precision landing at Mars. Significant reduction of the landed footprint will be achieved through two technology advances. The first, and most dramatic, is hypersonic aeromaneuvering; the second is improved approach navigation. As a result, the guided entry will produce in a footprint that is only tens of kilometers, which is an order of magnitude improvement over the Pathfinder and Mars Polar Lander ballistic entries. This reduction will significantly enhance scientific return by enabling the potential selection of otherwise unreachable landing sites with unique geologic interest and public appeal. A landed footprint reduction from hundreds to tens of kilometers is also a milestone on the path towards human exploration of Mars, where the desire is to place multiple vehicles within several hundred meters of the planned landing site. Hypersonic aeromaneuvering is an extension of the atmospheric flight goals of the previous landed missions, Pathfinder and Mars Polar Lander (MPL), that utilizes aerodynamic lift and an autonomous guidance algorithm while in the upper atmosphere. The onboard guidance algorithm will control the direction of the lift vector, via bank angle modulation, to keep the vehicle on the desired trajectory. While numerous autonomous guidance algorithms have been developed for use during hypersonic flight at Earth, this will be the first flight of an autonomously directed lifting entry vehicle at Mars. However, without sufficient control and knowledge of the atmospheric entry conditions, the guidance algorithm will not perform effectively. The goal of the interplanetary navigation strategy is to deliver the spacecraft to the desired entry condition with sufficient accuracy and knowledge to enable satisfactory guidance algorithm performance. Specifically, the entry flight path angle must not exceed 0.27 deg. to a 3 sigma confidence level. Entry errors will contribute directly to the size of the landed footprint and the most significant component is entry flight path angle. The size of the entry corridor is limited on the shallow side by integrated heating constraints, and on the steep side by deceleration (g-load) and terminal descent propellant. In order to meet this tight constraint it is necessary to place a targeting maneuver seven hours prior to the time of entry. At this time the trajectory knowledge will be quite accurate, and the effects of maneuver execution errors will be small. The drawback is that entry accuracy is dependent on the success of this final late maneuver. Because propulsive maneuvers are critical events, it is desirable to minimize their occurrence and provide the flight team with as much response time as possible in the event of a spacecraft fault. A mission critical maneuver at Entry - 7 hours does not provide much fault tolerance, and it is desirable to provide a strategy that minimizes reliance on this maneuver. This paper will focus on the Improvements in interplanetary navigation that will decrease entry errors and will reduce the landed footprint, even in the absence of aeromaneuvering. The easiest to take advantage of are Improvements In the knowledge of the Mars ephemeris and gravity field due to the MGS and MSP'98 missions. Improvements In data collection and reduction techniques such as "precislon ranging' and near-simultaneous tracking will also be utilized. In addition to precise trajectory control, a robust strategy for communications and flight operations must also be demonstrated. The result Is a navigation and communications strategy on approach that utilizes optimal maneuver placement to take advantage of trajectory knowledge, minimizes risk for the flight operations team, is responsive to spacecraft hardware limitations, and achieves the entry corridor. The MSP2001 mission Is managed at JPL under the auspices of the Mars Exploration Directorate. The spacecraft flight elements are built and managed by Lockheed-Martin Astronautics in Denver, Colorado.

Mase, Robert A.↗

Selection and Assessment of Predictions of the Mars Pathfinder Landing Site

The successful landing of the Mars Pathfinder spacecraft on Mars allows the review of the process of selecting the landing site and assessing predictions made for the site based on Viking and Earth-based data. Selection of the landing site for Mars Pathfinder was a two-phase process. The first phase took place from October 1993 to June 1994 and involved: initial identification of engineering constraints, definition of environmental conditions at the site for spacecraft design, and evaluation of the scientific potential of different landing sites. This phase culminated with the first "Mars Pathfinder Landing Site Workshop", held at the Lunar and Planetary Institute in Houston, Texas on April 18-19, 1994, in which suggested approaches and landing sites were solicited from the entire scientific community. A preliminary site was selected by the project for design purposes in June 1994. The second phase took place from July 1994 to March 1996 and involved: developing criteria for evaluating site safety using images and remote sensing data, testing of the spacecraft and landing subsystems (with design improvements) to establish quantitative engineering constraints on landing site characteristics, evaluating all potential landing sites on Mars, and certification of the site by the project. This phase included a second open workshop, "Mars Pathfinder Landing Site Workshop II: Characteristics of the Ares Vallis Region and Field Trips in the Channeled Scabland, Washington" held in Spokane and Moses Lake September 24-30, 1995 and formal acceptance of the site by NASA Headquarters. Engineering constraints on Pathfinder landing sites were developed from the initial design of the spacecraft and the entry, descent and landing scenario. The site must be within 5 degrees of the subsolar latitude at the time of landing (15N for maximum solar power and flexible communications with Earth. It also must be below 0 km elevation to enable enough time for the parachute to bring the lander to the proper terminal velocity for landing. The entire landing ellipse, which is 70 km by 200 km due to navigational, ephemeris and atmospheric uncertainties, must be free of steep slopes, scarps and obvious hazards in Viking orbiter images, have acceptable radar reflectivity, moderate rock abundances and have little or no dust. Scientific considerations of the Mars Pathfinder payload and mission indicate that analyses of "grab bag" samples at the mouths of outflow channels can offer a first order assessment of a variety of rock types on Mars. Highland sites offer the advantage of in situ analysis of ancient rocks on Mars that record crustal differentiation and the nature of the early environment. Dark gray sites offer the potential of analyzing unweathered and unoxidized materials. Following a general assessment of the safety of different sites, a preliminary selection of a "grab bag" site was made. This site, Ares Vallis, is near the mouth of an outflow channel that may contain ancient Noachian terrain, Hesperian ridged plains, and reworked channel materials. All potential landing sites on Mars that met basic safety criteria were analyzed in detail. Sites (100 by 200 km target ellipses) were considered safe if they were below 0 km elevation, were free of obvious hazards (high relief surface features) in high-resolution (< 50 m/pixel) Viking orbiter images and had acceptable reflectivity and roughness at radar wavelengths, high thermal inertia, moderate rock abundance, low red to violet ratio, and low albedo. Only 4 sites on Mars met all the above criteria, which included 1995 opposition 3.5 cm delay-Doppler radar data. Complete data were evaluated for 7 sites and the Viking landing sites for comparison for all the above criteria as well as crater abundance, hill and mesa abundance, slopes over meter to kilometer scales, low altitude winds (from global circulation models and slopes), the size-frequency distribution of large rocks, as well as rover trafficability and science potential. Discussion of potential hazards at Ares Vallis using a variety of data sets (including radar) at a second open workshop, indicated this site cannot be shown to be any more hazardous than the Viking landing sites. Field trips to the Channeled Scabland and the Ephrata Fan, analogs for Ares Vallis and the landing site, respectively, provided valuable insight into possible geologic processes and potential surface characteristics. Three sites met all the data requirements and safety criteria for landing Pathfinder. Ares Vallis was selected by the project because it appeared acceptably safe (although it appeared to have greater rock abundances than other sites, its elevation was likely the best known) and offered the prospect of analyzing a variety of rock types expected to be deposited by catastrophic floods, which would enable addressing first-order scientific questions such as differentiation of the crust, the development of weathering products, and the nature of the early martian environment and its subsequent evolution. The selection was reviewed by an external board at a number of meetings and accepted, and the site was approved by NASA Headquarters. Data gathered by the Pathfinder lander' and rover provides the opportunity to test the predictions made for the site in the selection process based on remote observations from Earth, orbit, and the surface. The discussion below is taken from Golombek et al. to which the reader is referred for a more complete discussion and a complete list of references, which are omitted here for brevity. Many characteristics of the landing site are consistent with its being shaped and deposited by the Ares and Tiu catastrophic floods. The rocky surface is consistent a depositional plain comprising semi-rounded pebbles, cobbles and tabular boulders (some of which appear imbricated and/or inclined in the direction of flow) that appear similar to depositional plains in terrestrial catastrophic floods. The Twin Peaks appear to be streamlined hills in lander images, which is consistent with interpretations of larger hills in Viking orbiter images of the region that suggest the lander is on the flank of a broad, gentle ridge trending northeast from Twin Peaks. This ridge, which is the rise to the north of the lander, is aligned in the downstream direction from the Ares and Tiu Valles floods, and may be a debris tail deposited in the wake of the Twin Peaks. Channels visible throughout the scene may be a result of late stage drainage. As predicted by delay-Doppler radar measurements and tracking results, the average elevation of the center of the site was about the same as Viking Lander I relative to the 6.1 mbar geoid. The Doppler tracking and two-way ranging estimate for the elevation of the spacecraft is only 45 in lower than the Viking I Lander and within 100 in of that expected, which is within the uncertainties of the measurements. After landing, surface pressures and winds (5-10 m/s) were found to be similar to expectations based on Viking data, although temperatures were about 10 K warmer. The temperature profile below 50 km was also roughly 20 K warmer. As a result, predicted densities were 5% higher near the surface and up to 40% lower at 50 km but within the entry, descent and landing design margins. The populations of craters and small hills and the slopes of the hills measured in high-resolution (38 m/pixel) Viking orbiter images and the radar derived slopes of the landing site are all consistent with observations of these properties in the lander images. A rocky surface was expected from Viking Infra-Red Thermal Mapper (IRTM) observations and comparisons with the Viking landing sites. The observed cumulative fraction of area covered by rocks with diameters greater than 3 cm and heights greater than 0.5 in (potentially hazardous to landing) at Ares is similar to that predicted by IRTM observations and models of Viking lander and Earth analog rock size-frequency distributions. The IRTM prediction postulated an effective thermal inertia of 30 (10(exp -3) cgs units - cal/cubic cm/s(exp 0.5)/K) for the rock population, but we obtain a slightly different effective thermal inertia for the actual rock population. The validity of interpretations of radar echoes prior to landing are supported by a simple radar echo model, an estimate of the reflectivity of the soil from its bulk density, and the fraction of area covered by rocks. In the calculations, the soil produces the quasi-specular echo and the rocks produce the diffuse echo. The derived quasispecular cross section is comparable to the cross-sections and reflectivities reported for 3.5-cm wavelength observations. The model yields a diffuse echo that is modestly larger than the polarized diffuse echo reported for 3.5-cm wavelength observations. At 12.5-cm wavelength, similar rock populations at Ares and the Viking I site were expected because the diffuse echoes are comparable, but the large normal reflectivities suggests that bulk densities of the soils at depth are greater than those at the surface. We also obtain a fine-component inertia near 8.4 which agrees with the fine-component inertia of 8.7 (in 10(exp -3) cgs units) estimated from thermal observations from orbit by the IRTM; for this estimate, we used a bulk thermal inertia of 10.4 for the landing site, an effective thermal inertia near 40 (10(exp -3) cgs units) for the rock population, and a graphical representation of Kieffer's model. Color and albedo data for Ares suggested surfaces of materials at Ares Vallis would be relatively dust free or unweathered prior to landing compared with the materials at the Viking landing sites. This suggestion is supported by the abundance of relatively dark-gray rocks at Ares and their relative rarity at the Viking landing sites, where rocks are commonly coated with bright red dust. Finally, the 40 km long Ephrata Fan of the Channeled Scabland in Washington state, which was deposited where c

Golombek, M. P.↗