Results for “Apollo” — Page 2

NASA NTRS1977

Radioactivity of the Moon, Planets, and Meteorites

This paper reviews and summarizes analytical data for the content of natural radioactive elements in meteorites, eruptive terrestrial rocks, and also, in lunar samples returned by Apollo missions and the Luna series of automatic stations. The K-U systematics of samples analyzed in the laboratory are combined with data for orbital gamma-ray measurements for Mars (Mars 5) and with the results of direct gamma-ray measurements of the surface of Venus by the Venera 8 lander. Using information about the radioactivity of solar system bodies and evaluations of the content of K, U, and Th in the terrestrial planets, we examine certain aspects of the evolution of material in the protoplanetary gas-dust cloud and then in the planets of the solar system.

Yu A Surkov↗

NASA NTRS2026

NASA Talks: Harsh Lunar Environments

NASA Talks - Exploration drives technology, and as NASA works toward sustained operations on the lunar surface for a permanent moonbase, it is critical to understand how the location drives what’s needed to accomplish these goals. This is especially important as we land on the lunar South Pole, which will be different and riskier than the previous Apollo landing sites. The thermal conditions will be much colder, the lighting environment is challenged with low sun angles, the regolith holds a charge in the plasma sheath, and the radiation is significantly higher than in low Earth orbit (LEO). Stephanie Sipila, Deputy Manager of Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility Program (EHP) Technology, Integration and Partnerships Office, provided knowledge and insight into the game-changing technologies NASA is exploring to mitigate these risks.

Stephanie Sipila↗

NASA NTRS1977

Lunar Igneous Rocks and the Nature of the Lunar Interior

Lunar igneous rocks, properly interpreted, can give useful information about mineral assemblages and mineral chemistry as a function of depth in the lunar interior. Though intensely brecciated, terra rocks reveal, in their chemistry, evidence for a magmatic history. Partial melting of feldspathic lunar crustal material occurred in the interval 4.6 to 3.9 Gy. Melting of ilmenite-bearing cumulates at depths near 100 km produced parent magmas for Apollo 11 and 17 titaniferous mare basalts in the interval 3.8 to 3.6 Gy. Melting of ilmenite-free olivine pyroxenites (also cumulates?) at depths greater than 200 km produced low-titanium mare basalts in the interval 3.4 to 3.1 Gy. No younger igneous rocks have yet been recognized among the lunar samples and present-day melting seems to be limited to depths greater than 1000 km.

James Fred Hays↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Fire-Resistant Textile Development for Exploration Vehicles With Enriched-Oxygen Cabin Environments

Material selection is a key part of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) spacecraft fire safety management plan. Non-flammable textiles are necessary to ensure large-scale flame propagation events do not occur inside a spacecraft. An increased use of textiles and other softgood material is crucial to the pursuit of exploration spaceflight to reduce mass and volume. Exploration spaceflight missions benefit from enriched oxygen cabin environments (>21% O2) by allowing a reduced prebreathe protocol before Extravehicular Activity (EVA). However, materials become exponentially more flammable the higher the O2 levels become. Recent testing within the agency has revealed the lack of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) materials that can meet safety requirements in oxygen-enriched environments. Most of the fibers and textiles developed during Apollo (100% O2 cabin environment) and Skylab (>70% O2 cabin environment) are no longer commercially available due to those Programs ending and the discontinuation of raw materials or closure of the original manufacturers. As NASA returns to higher oxygen concentrations inside spacecraft, non-flammable textile development efforts have begun to meet the agency’s needs. This paper discusses those efforts including overall fire safety approach, priorities, interactions with industry, flammability testing and expected challenges.

Karim Aly↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Fire-Resistant Textile Development for Exploration Vehicles With Enriched-Oxygen Cabin Environments

Material selection is a key part of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) spacecraft fire safety management plan. Non-flammable textiles are necessary to ensure large-scale flame propagation events do not occur inside a spacecraft. An increased use of textiles and other softgood material is crucial to the pursuit of exploration spaceflight to reduce mass and volume. Exploration spaceflight missions benefit from enriched oxygen cabin environments (>21% O2) by allowing a reduced prebreathe protocol before Extravehicular Activity (EVA). However, materials become exponentially more flammable the higher the O2 levels become. Recent testing within the agency has revealed the lack of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) materials that can meet safety requirements in oxygen-enriched environments. Most of the fibers and textiles developed during Apollo (100% O2 cabin environment) and Skylab (>70% O2 cabin environment) are no longer commercially available due to those Programs ending and the discontinuation of raw materials or closure of the original manufacturers. As NASA returns to higher oxygen concentrations inside spacecraft, non-flammable textile development efforts have begun to meet the agency’s needs. This paper discusses those efforts including overall fire safety approach, state-of-the-art textile review and testing, an agency-wide assessment of textile needs performed by the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC), the textile development strategy and expected challenges.

Mary Walker↗

NASA NTRS1969

Surveyor Project Final Report: Part 1 - Project Description and Performance, Volume 1

The Surveyor Project planned and conducted seven unmanned lunar missions for which spacecraft were launched between May 1966 and January 1968. Each of the spacecraft was successfully launched with the then newly developed Atlas/Centaur vehicle which utilized for the first time a high-specific-impulse, liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen fueled stage. Five of the spacecraft successfully soft-landed and returned a great quantity of engineering and scientific data on extensive postlanding operations, accomplishing all mission and project objectives. Four of the spacecraft soft-landed at selected mare sites to provide data which were required to support the Apollo Program. The final spacecraft was then successfully used for scientific investigation of a contrasting site in the rugged lunar highlands. Surveyor was a fully attitude-stabilized spacecraft designed to receive and execute a wide variety of earth commands, as well as to perform certain automatic functions including the critical terminal-descent and soft-landing sequences. Significant new and advanced subsystems that were developed and/or used in combination to enable Surveyor to execute the complex terminal phase of flight were: (1) a solid-propellant main retro motor, (2) throttlable liquid-propellant vernier engines (also used for midcourse velocity correction), (3) highly sensitive velocity- and altitude-sensing radars, and (4) an automatic closed-loop guidance and control system. The first Surveyor spacecraft carried a survey television camera which, together with other engineering instrumentation, obtained in-flight and postlanding data. The complement of instruments carried on later missions included various combinations of the following additional devices: (1) a soil mechanics/surface sampler instrument for picking, digging, and handling lunar surface material; (2) an alpha scattering instrument for performing a chemical analysis of the lunar surface material; and (3) magnets attached to the spacecraft for determining magnetic properties of the soil.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory↗

NASA NTRS1969

Surveyor Project Final Report: Part 1 - Project Description and Performance, Volume 2

The Surveyor Project planned and conducted seven unmanned lunar missions for which spacecraft were launched between May 1966 and January 1968. Each of the spacecraft was successfully launched with the then newly developed Atlas/Centaur vehicle which utilized for the first time a high-specific-impulse, liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen fueled stage. Five of the spacecraft successfully soft-landed and returned a great quantity of engineering and scientific data on extensive postlanding operations, accomplishing all mission and project objectives. Four of the spacecraft soft-landed at selected mare sites to provide data which were required to support the Apollo Program. The final spacecraft was then successfully used for scientific investigation of a contrasting site in the rugged lunar highlands. Surveyor was a fully attitude-stabilized spacecraft designed to receive and execute a wide variety of earth commands, as well as to perform certain automatic functions including the critical terminal-descent and soft-landing sequences. Significant new and advanced subsystems that were developed and/or used in combination to enable Surveyor to execute the complex terminal phase of flight were: (1) a solid-propellant main retro motor, (2) throttlable liquid-propellant vernier engines (also used for midcourse velocity correction), (3) highly sensitive velocity- and altitude-sensing radars, and (4) an automatic closed-loop guidance and control system. The first Surveyor spacecraft carried a survey television camera which, together with other engineering instrumentation, obtained in-flight and postlanding data. The complement of instruments carried on later missions included various combinations of the following additional devices: (1) a soil mechanics/surface sampler instrument for picking, digging, and handling lunar surface material; (2) an alpha scattering instrument for performing a chemical analysis of the lunar surface material; and (3) magnets attached to the spacecraft for determining magnetic properties of the soil.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory↗

NASA NTRS1977

Magnetic and Dielectric Properties of Lunar Samples

The dielectric properties of lunar soil and rock samples show a systematic character when careful precautions are taken to ensure there is no moisture present during measurement. The dielectric constant (K) above 10 5 Hz is directly dependent on density according to the formula K = (1.93 ± 0.17) p where p is the density in g/cc. The dielectric loss tangent is only slightly dependent on density and has values less than 0.005 for typical soils and 0.005-0.03 for typical rocks. In addition to a density dependence, the loss tangent appears to be directly related to the metallic ilmenite content. These results are in good agreement with the results of the Surface Electrical Properties Experiment carried on Apollo 17. It showed a surface layer of dielectric constant 3.8 and a loss tangent of 0.008. This is presumed to be a layer of compact soil about 7 m thick, overlying a medium with a dielectric constant of roughly 7.5 and a loss tangent interpreted to be 0.035, The medium is presumed to be bedrock. These results are compatible with seismic results. The magnetic properties of lunar samples can be used to study the distribution of metallic and ferrous iron which shows systematic variations from soil-type to soil-type and a general tendency to increasing Fe°/Fe** distribution in the more highly rewelded breccias. The other magnetic characteristics can also be used to determine the distribution of grain sizes. There are a number of ways of interpreting the origin of the stable remanent magnetization in lunar samples, but several lines of evidence suggest that it is of thermal origin and was acquired at a time when the igneous rocks and breccias cooled from above 800°C in the presence of an ancient field.

D W Strangway↗

NASA NTRS2026

In-suit CO2 Washout Test System (ICWTS) for CO2 Washout Verification in Spacesuits

Since the time of Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo, NASA has been performing CO 2 washout verification of spacesuits with Human in the Loop (HITL) test methods. Classically, the only instrumentation both with the accuracy and response time necessary was that of external mass spectrometers or medical gas analyzers fed by a long capillary line from the oro-nasal region within the suit. The helmet CO 2 washout configuration including the challenges posed by variation of a suited human subject frequently created difficulty in capturing adequate breath by breath data. For example, a nasal cannula could be worn with reasonable comfort however it posed the following challenges: (1) impeded the test subject’s ability to do a proper Valsalva maneuver; (2) frequently provided a corrupted waveform with relative movement; (3) precluded the ability to evaluate the Flow Weighted Average (FWA) at subject interface. A mouthpiece could be used in lieu of a cannula but posed challenges as well: (1) created potential disturbances of the flow field; (2) precluded the test subject from speaking during usage; and (3) presented comfort issues limiting the duration of test points. These challenges made it impractical to use a mouthpiece for anything other than short lab ambient environment tests. Technology development and NASA investment have afforded new capabilities to address some of these measurements providing improved data collection and are implemented in the In-suit CO 2 Washout Test System (ICWTS) which provides suit inlet/outlet pressure, temperature, relative humidity, partial pressure of oxygen, partial pressure of CO 2 , and flow measurement coupled with the acquisition of the inspired PPCO 2 including the ability for FWA measurement. This test system, coupled with use of the In-suit Respiration Mannequin Assembly (IRMA) and Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) combine to provide a full picture of the in-suit oro-nasal flow field and effectiveness of CO 2 washout in a spacesuit design.

Colin Campbell↗

NASA NTRS2026

In-suit CO 2 Washout Test System (ICWTS) for CO 2 Washout Verification in Spacesuits

Since the time of Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo, NASA has been performing CO 2 washout verification of spacesuits with Human in the Loop (HITL) test methods. Classically, the only instrumentation both with the accuracy and response time necessary was that of external mass spectrometers or medical gas analyzers fed by a long capillary line from the oro-nasal region within the suit. The helmet CO 2 washout configuration including the challenges posed by variation of a suited human subject frequently created difficulty in capturing adequate breath by breath data. For example, a nasal cannula could be worn with reasonable comfort however it posed the following challenges: (1) impeded the test subject’s ability to do a proper Valsalva maneuver; (2) frequently provided a corrupted waveform with relative movement; (3) precluded the ability to evaluate the Flow Weighted Average (FWA) at subject interface. A mouthpiece could be used in lieu of a cannula but posed challenges as well: (1) created potential disturbances of the flow field; (2) precluded the test subject from speaking during usage; and (3) presented comfort issues limiting the duration of test points. These challenges made it impractical to use a mouthpiece for anything other than short lab ambient environment tests. Technology development and NASA investment have afforded new capabilities to address some of these measurements providing improved data collection and are implemented in the In-suit CO 2 Washout Test System (ICWTS) which provides suit inlet/outlet pressure, temperature, relative humidity, partial pressure of oxygen, partial pressure of CO 2 , and flow measurement coupled with the acquisition of the inspired PPCO 2 including the ability for FWA measurement. This test system, coupled with use of the In-suit Respiration Mannequin Assembly (IRMA) and Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) combine to provide a full picture of the in-suit oro-nasal flow field and effectiveness of CO 2 washout in a spacesuit design.

Colin Campbell↗

NASA NTRS1992

On the isotopic signature of recent solar-wind nitrogen

One of the most intriguing discoveries yielded by the Apollo samples was evidence pointing towards a significant long-term change in the composition of the sun. Such a change, of the size inferred from the lunar sample data, is inconsistent with present theories of solar evolution. Consequently, there is much interest in exploring this phenomenon as closely as possible, to determine exactly what compositional changes have taken place and whether those changes really did take place in the sun, or whether the cause lies elsewhere. The reason why we can use the moon to analyze the elements in the sun is that the sun emits a stream of ions, known as the solar wind, whose composition, on average, is believed to be the same as that in the surface regions of the sun. When the solar-wind ions hit the surface of the moon, many of them penetrate a short distance into the dust grains lying on the lunar surface. Thus, after a grain has sat on the lunar surface for a while, it has a rim of material that is partly lunar and partly solar in composition. For most chemical elements, the difference between lunar and solar composition is so sufficiently small that the solar elements cannot be detected, but for a handful of elements that are missing from the moon, their solar 'signature' can be observed in samples of lunar soil brought back by the astronauts. Among those elements is nitrogen, the most common element in the air we breathe, but very rare indeed on the moon. Our analytical techniques are not sophisticated enough yet to enable us to analyze individual lunar soil grains for nitrogen, much less to zero in on just the nitrogen in the surface of such a grain. Consequently we are forced to analyze samples consisting of many different grains, each of which could have experienced its own individual history. This makes it difficult to identify the nitrogen implanted in grain surfaces, and also to define the age of a sample.

Kim, Y.↗

NASA NTRS1977

Calculations of the Moon's Thermal History at Different Concentrations of Radioactive Elements, Taking Into Account Differentiation on Melting

Calculations of the thermal history of the moon were carried out by solving the thermal conductivity equation for the case in which the heat sources are the long-lived radioactive elements Th, U, and K 40 . The concentrations of these elements were adjusted to give four variations of the heat flow: 1.35 x 10 -8 and 0.91 x 10 -6 cal cm -2 s -1 (I and I**), 0.61 x 10 -6 (variant II, the terrestrial mixture of Lyubimova and Starkova), and 0.236 x 10 -6 (variant III, the chondrite model of Urey and MacDonald). In the same calculations, we considered layering of the differentiated material with transport to the surface of the radioactive elements after the temperature of the layer rose to 200 K above the melting temperature, which is considered in five variants that differ in the amount of transported radioactive elements: 100 percent ( n = 1), 80 percent n = 0.8), 40 percent, 20 percent ( n = 0.6, 0.4, 0.2). During fusion the heat capacity and heat conductivity were changed. We considered two variants of an initially cold (273 K) and hot (900 K) Moon. Calculations show that the interior of the Moon was heated to melting during the first 0.7 to 2.3 x 10 9 years. The maximum fusion involved practically the entire Moon to a distance from 15 to 45 km beneath the surface, and started 3.5 to 4.0 x 10 9 years ago (I, I**), or 2.5 to 3.0 x 10 9 years ago (II, III) and continued for 1 to 2 x 10 9 years. Today the Moon is cooling. The current thickness of the solid crust is from 150 to 200 km and the heat flow exceeds the stationary value 1.5 fold. Apparently the most realistic variant is II (terrestrial mixture) for an initially hot Moon, and gives, regardless of the moderate concentration of radioactive elements, a heat flow of 0.9 to 0.95 x 10 -6 cal cm -2 s -1 , which agrees with the radioastronomical measurements of Troitsky and Krotikov and with the Apollo 15 data.

O I Ornatskaya↗

NASA NTRS2026

High Temperature Dielectric Properties and Differential Scanning Calorimetry of Lunar Simulants

To guide development of microwave process technology that could be used during in situ construction on the Moon, we measured the high-temperature basic dielectric properties (εʹ and εʺ) of 17 lunar simulants and related materials. In order to confidently use these data one needs to understand the data’s strengths and weaknesses. Therefore, a goal of this publication is to provide insights into the comparative effects of sample composition, pre-treatments, experimental variables, high temperatures, and other factors on the measured response. The dielectric measurements were performed using the cavity perturbation method over a temperature range between room temperature to 1000 °C, or higher, and provided the real and imaginary components of permittivity at six frequencies. The utility of the original values was limited by the varying density of the pellets used in the measurement. Therefore, all of the εʹ and εʺ measurements at the frequency of 2466 MHz have been scaled to a constant density, 1.75 g/cm 3 . Here the data are presented as graphs chosen to aid analysis within and across simulant groups. To gain additional insight into the processes happening at the elevated temperatures in the dielectric measurements, heat capacity data was obtained using differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) on several of the simulant materials. Our data show that over the frequency range 397 MHz – 2985 MHz a material’s behavior does not greatly change, as compared to the scale of differences observed between lunar mare and highland simulants at high temperatures. For example at 1000 °C, the mare simulant JSC-1A absorbs 10 times more power than the highland simulant NUW-LHT-5M. We observe that as melting temperatures are reached both permittivity and dielectric loss rise non-linearly, helping to explain thermal runaway during microware heating. Our data show that even less than a few weight % of many non-lunar minerals, and the use of mixtures in simulants can affect the dielectric behavior at higher temperatures. A comparison of our results with published dielectric data for Apollo samples and with remote sensing of the Moon supports the conclusion the simulants and lunar material at room temperature have very similar dielectric values.

Differential Scanning Calorimetry↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Engineering the Interface: Advanced Surface Technologies for Lunar Dust Management and Equipment Longevity

Through the Artemis program, NASA intends to develop a sustainable human foothold on the Moon, ultimately paving the way for crewed exploration of Mars. The Moon's hostile environment poses numerous obstacles, including exposure to radiation, temperature extremes, micrometeoroid threats, and particularly the persistent problem of lunar dust. Lunar dust impacts nearly every aspect of surface operations through adhesion and abrasion mechanisms, with contamination from anthropogenic activities (landing, rovers) far outweighing natural phenomena. Multiple adhesion pathways contribute to surface contamination in the lunar environment, including van der Waals forces, electrostatic forces, chemical reaction, and magnetic forces from elemental iron deposits. Sharp asperities from micrometeoroid bombardment and atmospheric absence increase interaction potential and enable mechanical interlocking. Low cohesion between dust particles exacerbates these challenges, as minimal interaction potential between dust and nearby surfaces overcomes particle cohesion, causing contamination. Lunar dust adhesion mitigation technologies can be categorized as either active, requiring external energy, or passive, relying on intrinsic material properties. Ultrasonic and electrodynamic technologies have been developed to the highest technology readiness level for active approaches. Passive strategies primarily focus on surface chemistry and topography modifications. At NASA Langley Research Center, approaches include surface migration agents to reduce surface energy, topographical modification using laser ablation patterning, and tailored surface conductivity to reduce intrinsic adhesion force. Performance has been evaluated using custom-built ultrasonic and centrifuge instruments. Plume-surface interactions from lunar landers can propel micrometer-sized particles at velocities up to 1000 m s-1.8 These particles pose risks to landers, habitats and infrastructure, leading to erosion, degradation, and reduced component lifespan. A panel recovered from Surveyor III was determined to have been severely abraded because of lunar dust displaced from the Apollo 12 lunar module that landed 160 m away. The performance of metallic surfaces has been evaluated via high velocity single particle impact using the laser-induced project impact test (LIPIT) facility at the University of Utah. Peridynamics modeling, a form of continuum mechanics that uses a nonlocal approach enabling greater simulation capabilities of crack initiation and fracture, has also been utilized to gain greater insight into material response during impact events. Lunar dust contamination challenges extend to power generation systems and moving equipment. Cables, rotation stages, and other mechanisms may experience limited range of motion and reduced lifetime due to dust infiltration. NASA Langley Research Center has evaluated traditional aerospace alloys, softgoods, wear resistant ceramics, and several polymer and polymer composite materials. Test methods have included traditional techniques like Taber abrasion testing, as well as designed test configurations developed in the DUSTE (dust, ultraviolet radiation, and space thermal environmental) chamber that reproduce mechanism functions in operational environment. Beyond laboratory experiments, several flight experiments have been conducted. Materials were exposed to the low Earth orbit environment on the Materials International Space Station Experiment (MISSE) and to the lunar surface environment through the Aegis Aerospace Regolith Adherence Characterization (RAC) payload and the Honeybee Robotics PlanetVac payload. Determining lunar dust's impact on surface exploration and habitation requires comprehensive experimental and computational capabilities combined with lessons learned from initial lunar activities. Identifying the greatest environmental challenges and developing mitigation technologies provides the clearest path toward successfully, expeditiously, and efficaciously completing NASA's mission. This presentation will discuss ongoing efforts at NASA Langley Research Center and collaborator contributions to these critical objectives.

Surface Engineering↗