Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “MSR”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Analytical Needs in a Sample Receiving Facility: Input from the MSR Operation Definition Team

The return of scientifically selected samples from Mars would provide a rare opportunity forinvestigation with the full range of the latest technology available, but to take full advantageof this opportunity, it is important to plan ahead to ensure the pristine nature of the samplesupon arrival within the Earth environment until scientific investigations can begin.The NASA/ESA science community-driven MSR Science Planning Group – Phase 2 (MSPG2)delivered recommendations and guidance regarding curation (1) and science (2, 3) activities tobe performed on the samples under containment. High-level requirements for the infrastruc-ture were also developed by MSPG2 (4). In order to prepare infrastructure-targeted input forthe ESA and NASA facility studies planned in the 2022-2023 timeframe, the agency-led MSROperational Scenarios Definition Team (MOSDT) was assembled to conceptualize the sampleoperations that will inform future architecture teams. Emphasis was placed on the respon-sibility of MOSDT to use community-defined requirements and to represent the view of the international scientific community.All necessary and sufficient instruments and analytical needs described in MSPG2 were inte-grated in MOSDT main deliverable, the operational workflow (see Hays et al, this conference).In MSPG2, notional instruments were split between curation analytical needs, and objective-driven (time-sensitive and sterilization-sensitive) science analytical needs. In MOSDT, whilethe first phases of curation, “pre-Basic Characterization” and “Basic Characterization” wererather streamlined and separate from other analytical needs, “Preliminary Examination” and“Science” instruments were not always physically segregated. In addition to the necessary andsufficient instruments described by MSPG2, the MOSDT recommended additional supportequipment for sterilization, cleanliness and contamination monitoring.It was sometimes necessary for the MOSDT to rely on assumptions to integrate instruments inthe activity workflow. In general, the assumptions were very conservative to limit contaminationand cross-contamination risks. It is expected that future work to refine limits of contaminationwill enable optimization of instrumentation.The community was consulted during the course of the MOSDT work. This abstract’s aimis two-fold: on one hand, inform the scientific community and overall MSR stakeholders, tobring their attention on the analytical needs currently considered as necessary and sufficient;on the other hand, to solicit feedback from a larger community audience to optimize and refineanalytical needs during the next phases of MSR ground-segment preparation.Disclaimer: The decision to implement Mars Sample Return will not be finalized until NASA’scompletion of the program’s National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. This docu-ment is being made available for informational purposes only.[1] Tait et al. (2021) Preliminary planning for Mars Sample Return (MSR) curation activities ina Sample Receiving Facility (SRF). Astrobiology in press, doi:10.1089/ast.2021.0105. [2] Toscaet al. (2021) Time-sensitive aspects of Mars Sample Return (MSR) science. Astrobiologyin press, doi:10.1089/ast.2021.0115. [3] Velbel et al. (2021) Planning implications relatedto sterilization-sensitive science investigations associated with Mars Sample Return (MSR).Astrobiology in press, doi:10.1089/ast.2021.0113. [4] Carrier et al. (2021) Science and curationconsiderations for the design of a Mars Sample Return (MSR) Sample Receiving Facility (SRF).Astrobiology in press, doi:10.1089/ast.2021.0110.

Mars Sample Return↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

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

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

A.D. Harrington↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Tours of High-containment and Pristine Facilities in Support of Mars Sample Return (MSR) Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) Definition Studies

During 2019 and 2020, the NASA Tiger Team RAMA (acronym of the authors) toured several high-containment biosafety laboratories and pristine space-mission facilities worldwide to better understand their practices, capabilities, and lessons-learned to aid in planning a Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) in support of Mars Sample Return (MSR). The team also included tours of a manufacturer of mobile and modular high-containment facilities as well as manufacturers of isolators and gloveboxes. In addition, the team visited the European Space Agency (ESA)ultraclean and sterile ISO 3 / airborne molecular contamination -9 (AMC-9) isolator line to clean and assemble the most critical hardware for ESA’s ExoMars Mars Lander System, and researchers developing a novel double-walled isolator (DWI) and robotic handling techniques in support of an MSR SRF. The RAMA team visits covered several construction modalities for an MSR SRF: (1) a new traditional fixed facility; (2) use of an existing fixed Biosafety Level 4(BSL-4) facility; (3) a novel modular BSL-4 approach; and (4) a hybrid combination of fixed, modular, and existing facilities. A new fixed facility approach can be tailored to MSR’s needs and is the approach used by all U.S. BSL-4 laboratories constructed to date. However, this approach could be the most expensive modality, take the longest to implement (8-12 years), and have significant programmatic risk of delay. The utilization of an existing BSL-4 facility may be possible depending on the final contamination control and science requirements for the MSR SRF. Due to the internal dimensions of the labs visited and facility structural requirements, it is unlikely that any modification can be made to the facility to meet cleanliness requirements. Furthermore, due to possible construction delays, possible capacity issues, and potential cross contamination vectors from in-house select agents, there may also be significant programmatic risks for sharing an existing facility. Another approach is building a contemporary modular facility. This is a novel approach that has recently been used for a BSL-3/3Ag facilities. The modular elements would be installed in a traditional building or shell structure. A modular facility has many advantages over a traditional fixed facility with lower costs, shorter design/construction/ commissioning schedule, and flexibility for easier retrofits and future expansion. Lastly, a hybrid approach of combining the use of either: (1) a modular facility inside a new fixed facility or (2) a modular and/or fixed BSL-4 annex in conjunction with an existing BSL-4 space should be considered. The advantage of a hybrid approach is that the facility could leverage the strengths of other approaches. Beyond facility construction approaches, the RAMA team investigated technologies and techniques for isolating and handling Martian samples in pristine environments. For example, ESA has been studying and developing a DWI breadboard along with other sample-handling technologies. The research and development investment for clean, remote manipulation and robotics at the start of the facility design phase would be beneficial to the SRF. Additionally, under-standing the lessons learned from Thales Alenia Space during the construction and operation of the most advanced state-of-the-art precision cleaning, sterilization, and assembly glovebox isolators ever developed for spacecraft hardware are also critical for the SRF. The RAMA team lays out a summary of the 18 facilities toured, and includes 43 observations,18 findings, and 22 areas of possible follow-up that the RAMA team and others could pursue to enable further findings. The observations and findings illustrate that constructing an MSR SRF would combine the complexity of both high-containment and pristine facilities, and merging these technologies would be challenging, but achievable.

Mars Sample Return↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Integrated Design Results for the MSR SRC Mars Ascent Vehicle

The primary mission of the NASA Mars Sample Return (MSR) Campaign is to return samples of the Martian surface to Earth for scientific study. As part of this campaign, NASA is developing a Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV). This vehicle must survive an approximate two year journey to the Martian surface as a payload aboard a separate lander spacecraft. After residing on the surface for another year, the MAV will carry a payload of samples into orbit. From there, following ejection from the MAV, the samples will rendezvous with an Earth return spacecraft for capture, and ultimately, return to Earth.The design of the MAV represents a number of unique challenges, as no launch vehicle has ever left the surface of a planet other than Earth. Although conceptual designs for a MAV have been in various levels of development since the 1970s, none have achieved the level of fidelity and support that exists in the current MSR-MAV design. Early MSR-MAV concept studies examined multiple methods of propulsion, ultimately deciding that a Two Stage to Orbit (TSTO) solid propulsion vehicle would provide the most capable performance in a Martian environment. Following this key architecture decision, the vehicle design was further matured to a Solid-Solid Guided-Guided (SSGG) architecture for NASA Key Decision Point A (KDP-A). Although the SSGG design was able to meet all mission constraints, concerns were raised regarding limited mass margin on other elements of the MSR campaign at such an early phase. A design challenge was issued to reduce MAV total mass by as much as possible. It was ultimately determined that by moving a number of components of the vehicle second stage to the first stage, the overall vehicle mass could be reduced significantly. The new design featured a much smaller and completely unguided second stage. This paper describes the resultant Solid-Solid Guided-Unguided (SSGU) MAV design concept developed as part of the Systems Requirement Cycle (SRC). This design was developed primarily by NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), in association with NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC). The TSTO vehicle includes one solid rocket motor per stage. As the vehicle second stage is unguided, it features spin-stabilization to maintain vehicle stability during flight. An electromechanically actuated Thrust Vector Control (TVC) and a monopropellant Reaction Control System (RCS) is employed for active guidance on the first stage. The vehicle is designed to deliver up to 0.47kg of Martian samples to a Mars circular orbit of 380km at 27° inclination. Due to the extremely unique design constraints of this mission, and a recent transition to a Risk Class A posture, the MAV team was compelled to devise unconventional solutions to the vehicle design. The detailed design and analysis of these subsystems and the vehicle as a whole are discussed in this paper relative to all of the engineering disciplines involved.

MSR↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Integrated Design Results for the MSR SRC Mars Ascent Vehicle

The primary mission of the NASA Mars Sample Return (MSR) Campaign is to return samples of the Martian surface to Earth for scientific study. As part of this campaign, NASA is developing a Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV). This vehicle must survive an approximate two-year journey to the Martian surface as a payload aboard a separate lander spacecraft. After residing on the surface for another year, the MAV will carry a payload of samples into orbit. From there, following ejection from the MAV, the samples will rendezvous with an Earth return spacecraft for capture, and ultimately, return to Earth. The design of the MAV represents a number of unique challenges, as no launch vehicle has ever left the surface of a planet other than Earth. Although conceptual designs for a MAV have been in various levels of development since the 1970s, none have achieved the level of fidelity and support that exists in the current MSR-MAV design. Early MSR-MAV concept studies examined multiple methods of propulsion, ultimately deciding that a Two-Stage-to-Orbit (TSTO) solid propulsion vehicle would provide the most capable performance in a Martian environment. Following this key architecture decision, the vehicle design was further matured to a Solid-Solid Guided-Guided (SSGG) architecture for NASA Key Decision Point A (KDP-A). Although the SSGG design was able to meet all mission constraints, concerns were raised regarding limited mass margin on other elements of the MSR campaign at such an early phase. A design challenge was issued to reduce MAV total mass by as much as possible. It was ultimately determined that by moving a number of components of the vehicle second stage to the first stage, the overall vehicle mass could be reduced significantly. The new design features a much smaller and completely unguided second stage. This paper describes the resultant Solid-Solid Guided-Unguided (SSGU) MAV design concept developed as part of the Systems Requirement Cycle (SRC). This design was developed primarily by NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), in association with NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC). The TSTO vehicle includes one solid rocket motor per stage. As the vehicle second stage is unguided, it features spin-stabilization to maintain vehicle stability during flight. An electromechanically actuated Thrust Vector Control (TVC) system and a monopropellant Reaction Control System (RCS) are employed for active guidance on the first stage. The vehicle is designed to deliver up to 0.47kg of Martian samples to a Mars circular orbit of 380km at 27° inclination. Due to the extremely unique design constraints of this mission, and a recent transition to a Risk Class A posture, the MAV team was compelled to devise unconventional solutions to the vehicle design. The detailed design and analysis of these subsystems and the vehicle as a whole are discussed in this paper relative to all of the engineering disciplines involved.

MAV↗
NASA NTRS2022

The Scientific Importance of Returning Airfall Dust as a Part of Mars Sample Return (MSR)

Dust transported in the martian atmosphere is of intrinsic scientific interest and has relevance for the planning of human missions in the future. The MSR Campaign, as currently designed, presents an important opportunity to return serendipitous, airfall dust. The tubes containing samples collected by the Perseverance rover would be placed in cache depots on the martian surface perhaps as early as 2023–24 for recovery by a subsequent mission no earlier than 2028–29, and possibly as late as 2030–31. Thus, the sample tube surfaces could passively collect dust for multiple years. This dust is deemed to be exceptionally valuable as it would inform our knowledge and understanding of Mars' global mineralogy, surface processes, surface-atmosphere interactions, and atmospheric circulation. Preliminary calculations suggest that the total mass of such dust on a full set of tubes could be as much as 100 mg and, therefore, sufficient for many types of laboratory analyses. Two planning steps would optimize our ability to take advantage of this opportunity: (1) the dust-covered sample tubes should be loaded into the Orbiting Sample container (OS) with minimal cleaning and (2) the capability to recover this dust early in the workflow within an MSR Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) would need to be established. A further opportunity to advance dust/atmospheric science using MSR, depending upon the design of the MSR Campaign elements, may lie with direct sampling and the return of airborne dust.

Monica M. Grady↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Operational Workflow in a Sample Receiving Facility: Input from the MSR Operation Definition Team

The return of scientifically selected samples from Mars would provide a rare opportunity for investigation with the full range of the latest technology available. To take full advantage of this opportunity, it is important to plan ahead to ensure the pristine nature of the samples upon arrival within the Earth environment until scientific investigations can begin. The NASA/ESA science community-driven MSR Science Planning Group – Phase 2 (MSPG2) delivered recommendations and guidance regarding curation (1) and science (2,3) activities to be performed on the samples under containment. High-level requirements for the infrastructure were also developed by MSPG2 (4). In order to prepare infrastructure-targeted input for the ESA and NASA facility studies planned in the 2022-2023 timeframe, the MSR agency-led Operational Scenarios Definition Team (MOSDT) was assembled to conceptualize the sample operations that will inform future architecture teams. Emphasis was placed on the responsibility of MOSDT to use community-defined requirements and to represent the view of the international scientific community. The main deliverable of MOSDT was an operational workflow for a Sample Receiving Facility (SRF). Two other deliverables were produced: a report to narrate the workflow, and a list of instruments (see Hutzler et al., this conference). Activities described in the main sequence of the workflow range from engineering operations to curation to science, with the latter term being used here as the science to be done within a SRF. Side sequences (e.g. engineering inspection of hardware, head gas extraction) were also identified, and detailed when they would have a significant impact on the infrastructure of a SRF. It was necessary for the MOSDT to rely on assumptions for some steps and activities, and though these were kept to a minimum (and are described in both the report supporting the workflow and in the full presentation), in general, the assumptions and overall work were very conservative, as the impact of underestimating the scope of the SRF infrastructure was considered more detrimental than overestimating it. It is expected that future work will be able to confirm or inform these assumptions. The community was consulted during the course of the MOSDT work. This abstract’s aim is two-fold: on one hand, inform the scientific community and overall MSR stakeholders, to make the infrastructure studies and trade-off more understandable; on the other hand, to solicit feedback from a larger community audience for the next iterations planning for SRF design and activities.

Mars Sample Return↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Status of the 3-MDCP, the 3-D Woven TPS enabling MSR Earth Entry System Development

While the HEEET project established the dual-layer, 3-D Woven TPS at TRL 6 for extreme entry environment missions such as Saturn and Ice-Giant Probe missions, subsequent to the completion of HEEET project in 2018, further development was undertaken to assess the viability of a variant of the 3-D Woven, a single, insulating layer alone as a viable TPS for Mars Sample Return mission. MSR Earth Entry System (EES) baselined it and named the TPS as 3D, mid-density, carbon-phenolic (3MDCP). MSR program invested in building a new loom and the weaver T.E.A.M. Inc is currently weaving 80” wide 1.2” thick insulating layer. Unlike HEEET, where a set of tiles and seams are integrated to form the heat-shield, 3MDCP is a seamless heatshield by wrapping and shaping a flat panel into the heatshield shape and then rigidizing the preform through resin infusion. MSR EES is investing in technology maturation of 3MDCP for the current mission launch in 2027. This lighting talk will provide key developments and time line for 3MDCP technology maturation to show that 3MDCP will be ready to support future UOP or Saturn Probe mission. In addition, the limitations of the capability will be presented so that Saturn mission proposers as well as UOP flagship mission study can be fully informed as to the 3MDCP capability.

HEEET↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

MSR Curation Technology Development – Developing Protocols for Pre-Basic Characterization Measurements

The joint NASA/ESA Mars Sample Return (MSR) campaign could deliver to Earth the first pristine Mar-tian rock and regolith samples, collected by the Mars2020 science mission, Perseverance. In preparation for their arrival, the NASA/ESA Joint Curation Office (JCO) within the Sample Receiving Project (SRP) is developing curation technology needed to perform initial characterization of the samples while isolating samples from the Earth’s biosphere and protecting the samples from terrestrial contamination. (RSTA; Fig. 1). The Mars Sample Return Planning Group 2 (MSPG2) identified methods for achieving an array of potential science objectives for MSR outlined by the International MSR Objectives and Samples Team (iMOST) [1]. One category of methods, called Pre-Basic Characterization, recommends potential analyses that would happen before the Returnable Sample Tube Assemblies (RSTA; Figure 1) are opened: 1) Magnetometer & Magnetic Susceptibility; 2) X-ray Computed Tomography (XCT) Scanner [2]. To be in compliance with planetary protection requirements, and to limit the amount of time sample tubes are out-side of an isolated contamination-controlled environment, secondary containment is necessary. A Sample Tube Isolation Container (STIC) and Secondary Outer Containment Case (SOCC) is currently being developed at NASA JPL under the direction of the SRP JCO.

V Tu↗
NASA NTRS2013

Developing Tools and Technologies to Meet MSR Planetary Protection Requirements

This paper describes the tools and technologies that need to be developed for a Caching Rover mission in order to meet the overall Planetary Protection requirements for future Mars Sample Return (MSR) campaign. This is the result of an eight-month study sponsored by the Mars Exploration Program Office. The goal of this study is to provide a future MSR project with a focused technology development plan for achieving the necessary planetary protection and sample integrity capabilities for a Mars Caching Rover mission.

fetch rover↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

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

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

Mars Sample Return↗
NASA NTRS2022

Sample Materials Considerations for Curating and Processing Pristine MSR Samples

The perseverance rover is collecting and caching samples of Mars as part of the Mars 2020 mission, which represents the first leg of a multi-mission Mars Sample Return Campaign. The MSR Campaign is an international partnership that will result in delivery of the first martian samples to Earth that were not delivered through meteoritic infall. All meteorites, regardless of how they were handled from recovery to curation, have experienced uncontrolled entry and exposure to the terrestrial environment. Whilst meteorite deliveries are serendipitous, they are also unplanned events that require reactionary responses for recovery and curation. However, with the direct return of pristine astromaterials from another body, we are afforded the ability to design a facility in advance of sample delivery to keep those samples in a pristine (i.e., as returned) state for an indefinite period of time. Given that the curation and processing infrastructure needs to be made out of something, it is important to choose materials for the pristine curation environment that will optimize between the need to effectively process samples and the need to minimize contamination of the samples. The Johnson Space Center (JSC) has an optimized list of materials that have been used in previous sample return missions that includes 304/316 Stainless Steel, Teflon, and T6061 Aluminum (1). This set of materials are compatible with inorganic, organic, and biological cleanliness requirements and protocols. Furthermore, only these materials are permitted to come in contact with pristine samples. We note that JSC uses Neoprene and Hypalon for the gloves on their gloveboxes, but the glove material never comes in direct contact with the samples, only the approved materials. The MSR sample tubes will be made of Ti, so Ti may be an acceptable material for making tools, but the minor and trace element abundances of 304 and 316 stainless steel are well known and do not inhibit scientific investigations of metals, including HSE (2). More work is needed to determine whether the same is true for Ti alloys. In addition to defining the materials in the pristine environment, one must also choose whether the pristine environment will be under vacuum or under a specific atmospheric composition and pressure. Although JAXA has successfully implemented pristine curation vacuum chambers for their Hayabusa and Hayabusa2 samples (3), a vacuum environment is not appropriate for martian samples because it may drive deliquescence of mineral phases in the samples that are sensitive to pressure and relative humidity (4). Consequently, the pristine environment for the martian samples should be under an inert gas. It will be crucial to minimize the number of gases that come into direct contact with samples and these gases will need to be high purity and consistent throughout the pristine isolators. Samples at JSC are stored under high purity gaseous nitrogen (1). Dry N2 gas has not been a problem for N isotope studies for high-T release phases, but an additional inert atmosphere like Ar may be needed for samples where there is a particular concern about low-T release of N from bulk sample analysis. References: (1) McCubbin FM, et al. (2019) Space Science Reviews, 215, 1-81. (2) Day JMD, et al. (2018) Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 53:1283-1291. (3) Yada, T., et al., (2014). Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 49, 135-153. (4) Tosca NJ, et al. (2021). Astrobiology, in press, doi:10.1089/ast.2021.0115.

F M McCubbin↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

3D Woven Mid-Density Carbon Phenolic (3MDCP) Full-Scale Heatshield Development for Mars Sample Return (MSR) Earth Entry System (EES)

The Mars Sample Return (MSR) mission will be returning samples of Martian soil to Earth. The samples will be returned in the Earth Entry System (EES). The EES capsule is protected by a new thermal protection system; the 3-Dimensionally Woven, Mid-Density, Carbon Phenolic (3MDCP) material which is derived from the Heatshield for Extreme Entry Environment Technology (HEEET). The baseline 3MDCP design is a single piece thermal protection system that avoids the manufacturing and certification challenges associated with a tiled configuration. A 3MDCP heatshield begins as a flat woven preform that is formed to the final heatshield shape and then infused with phenolic resin. A NASA Ames lead team, in collaboration with Spirit Textiles (formerly TEAM Inc.), Fiber Materials Inc. (FMI, a Spirit AeroSystems Company), and Kratos SRE, has been developing and demonstrating the processes to fabricate the 3MDCP heatshield and characterize the resulting properties. The process of forming the flat woven preform into the final heatshield shape, a sphere-cone geometry with a 52.5° cone angle, involves local but substantial movement of the yarns in the weave. This results in continuous fibers across the single piece heatshield, albeit with property variations between different regions of the heatshield. This presentation will provide a high-level status of 3MDCP development for the MSR EES heatshield. This will include an overview of the manufacturing processes with an emphasis on the impact of forming on fiber orientation, material properties, and performance. Results comparing preliminary formed and flat materials will be shown. Additionally, the presentation will layout the broader plan for property testing and tie-in to aerothermal performance.

Peter Edward Marshall↗
NASA NTRS2024

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

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

M Fries↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Integrated Design Results for the MSR DAC-0.0 Mars Ascent Vehicle

The NASA Mars Sample Return (MSR) Campaign endeavors to return Martian regolith, rock, and atmospheric samples to Earth for scientific study. One of many significant challenges to overcome in the return of thesesamples lies in transporting them from the Martian surface to space. In order to surmount this challenge, the Campaign has conceptualized the need for a Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) to perform this function and deliver Martian samples to orbit. There, the samples will be ejected and captured by a separate spacecraft for return to Earth. Many concepts for a MAV have existed in the past, but it has not been until now that an integrated, detailed design solution has been developed and analyzed. Preliminary assessments of the initial architecture examined multiple methods of propulsion. The team ultimately determined that a Two Stage to Orbit (TSTO) solid propulsion vehicle would provide the most effective performance and be the most technologically ready to support this mission. Following the decision to adopt a TSTO solid propelled vehicle, the first official Design Analysis Cycle, DAC-0.0, was performed in Spring 2020 to formally advance the fidelity of the vehicle to a maturity level acceptable for NASA Key Decision Point A (KDP-A). This paper describes the resultant MAV design concept developed as part of the DAC-0.0 study by the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), in association with the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). The TSTO vehicle features two solid rocket motors, one powering each stage. Their thrust vectors are controlled with Thrust Vector Control (TVC) systems consisting of independent electromechanical actuators acting on gimballed nozzles. The vehicle is designed to deliver up to 0.47kg of Martian samples to a Mars circular orbit of 343km at 27° inclination. Due to the unique environmental conditions that this vehicle is required to operate in, the subsystem design teams were compelled to develop creative and unorthodox designs to ensure a successful mission. The detailed design and analysis of these subsystems are discussed in this paper and include topics on the MAV Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC); structures and mechanisms; integrated vehicle thermal; avionics and flight software; a hydrazine-based Reaction Control System (RCS); aerosciences; and vehicle assembly, integration, and test (AI&T) considerations, among others. Following the conclusion of the MAV DAC-0.0, additional alternative architecture concepts were also studied to further reduce the mass of the overall system.

Mars↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

MAV Software Development: Streamlined Collaboration for MSR

This poster presents the coordinated efforts of the Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) software development teams, encompassing Flight Software, Ground Software, and Hardware-in-the-Loop Labs. This collaborative approach, which stems from the Artemis program, ensures efficiency in preparing for the Mars Sample Return (MSR) mission, focusing on the critical role of software integration for mission success.

MAV↗