Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “eds”

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 1,045 records · Page 58
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Space Launch System Begins Integration, Stacking in Preparation for Artemis I Launch

The Artemis era of human lunar exploration is nearing take-off as NASA’s new super heavy-lift launch vehicle, the Space Launch System (SLS), begins stack-ing and integration operations in mid-2020 at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in Florida. With a planned upgrade path to progressively more powerful vehicles and availability in crew and cargo configurations, SLS provides a unique and flexible launch solution to send crew, large-scale infrastructure and robotic probes to deep space. The SLS Block 1 vehicle, the initial variant to fly, is optimized for lunar missions with a proven propulsion system consisting of four liquid hydrogen (LH2)/liquid oxygen (LOX)-fed RS-25 engines and twin five-segment solid rocket boosters (SRBs). The Block 1 vehicle can also be outfitted with an industry-standard 5 m-class payload fairing (the “cargo” configuration) and will launch at least 27 metric tons (t) of mass to trans-lunar injection (TLI). SLS is the backbone of NASA’s Artemis program, which will return the agency’s human spaceflight program to the Moon for the first time since 1972. For the Artemis I mission, SLS will send an uncrewed Orion spacecraft to TLI, where it will enter a distant retrograde lunar orbit and fly 38,000 nmi past the Moon – farther than any spacecraft built for humans has ever traveled. The SLS Block 1 vehicle for Artemis I completed manufacturing in 2019. Several elements, including the upper stage, have been delivered to the Exploration Ground Systems (EGS) program at KSC and are being prepped for integration and stack-ing. The five-segment solid rocket boosters – the largest and most powerful ever built for flight – are also complete. The booster motor segments for the Artemis I flight are scheduled to ship from prime contractor Northrop Grumman’s Utah facilities and begin stacking and integration at KSC in June 2020. The SLS core stage is the largest rocket stage NASA has ever built in terms of volume and height, and includes the avionics and the tanks that feed cryogenic propellant to the four RS-25s (formerly Space Shuttle Main Engines [SSMEs]). They have been modified with an updated controller and nozzle insulation to protect them from the hotter launch environment. The SLS core stage is currently being test-ed at NASA’s Stennis Space Center (SSC) in a series of “green run” tests to verify it meets design and performance requirements. Following the green run test series, which is scheduled to culminate with a full-duration hot-fire of the four RS-25 engines, the core stage will ship to KSC and be stacked between the sol-id rocket boosters in the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB). Integration of the vehicle will continue with the upper stage, known as the Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS) and the Launch Vehicle Stage Adapter (LVSA) on the core stage. Another adapter, the Orion Stage Adapter (OSA), connects SLS to Orion and provides housing for 13 6U CubeSat payloads manifested on Artemis I. The CubeSats will be released in deep space after Orion separates from the vehicle, and the flight marks the first ride share opportunity for independent small-sats to deep space. The second major SLS variant to come online, Block 1B, replaces the single-engine ICPS with a four-engine LH2/LOX Exploration Upper Stage (EUS). This more powerful upper stage, along with other vehicle up-grades, will enable the Block 1B vehicle to launch 38-42 t to TLI, depending on crew or cargo configuration. The final evolution of the vehicle, Block 2, will onramp evolved solid rocket boosters to increase mass to TLI to 43-46 t, de-pending on crew or cargo configuration. The Block 1B/Block 2 vehicles can be outfitted with an 8.4 m-diameter payload fairing in 19.1 m or 27.4 m lengths, to provide unprecedented volume for payloads. With the initial Block 1 vehicle completely manufactured and the core stage in final testing before shipping to KSC, the SLS Program and its industry partners have made significant progress manufacturing subsequent vehicles. For the second Block 1 vehicle, the solid rocket motor segments are complete, as are the RS-25 engines with controllers. All five major components of the Artemis II core stage – the forward skirt, LOX and LH2 tanks, intertank and engine section – are manufactured and technicians are installing subsystems at NASA’s rocket factory, Michoud Assembly Facility. The RL-10 engine for the Artemis II ICPS is complete and panels have been machined for its LH2 tank. In addition, panels are machined for the vehicle’s two adapters, with welding scheduled to begin in summer 2020. Flight hard-ware is also in production for the third SLS vehicle, with several booster motor segments cast. The pace of development on the EUS has increased, with the goal to complete Critical Design Review (CDR) in December 2020. Several EUS test rings have been machined at Michoud. The EUS is designed to exe-cute a variety of missions – human spaceflight, deployment of deep-space infra-structure, or high-C3 missions to the outer solar system – with crew and cargo configurations available beginning in the mid-2020s. The near-term goal for the nation’s powerful new space exploration asset, however, is to launch the Arte-mis program, and send the first woman and the next man to the lunar surface. At the Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, the SLS program will update the community on the progress of the initial Block 1 vehicle in final green run test-ing, integration and stacking. In addition, this paper will provide an update to the community on the manufacturing status of subsequent Block 1 and Block 1B vehicles.

Steve Creech↗
NASA NTRS2020

Structure and Parameter Uncertainty in Centennial Projections of Forest Community Structure and Carbon Cycling

Secondary forest regrowth shapes community succession and biogeochemistry for decades, including in the Upper Great Lakes region. Vegetation models encapsulate our understanding of forest function, and whether models can reproduce multi‐decadal succession patterns is an indication of our ability to predict forest responses to future change. We test the ability of a vegetation model to simulate C cycling and community composition during 100 years of forest regrowth following stand‐replacing disturbance, asking (a) Which processes and parameters are most important to accurately model Upper Midwest forest succession? (b) What is the relative importance of model structure versus parameter values to these predictions? We ran ensembles of the Ecosystem Demography model v2.2 with different representations of processes important to competition for light. We compared the magnitude of structural and parameter uncertainty and assessed which sub‐model–parameter combinations best reproduced observed C fluxes and community composition. On average, our simulations underestimated observed net primary productivity (NPP) and leaf area index (LAI) after 100 years and predicted complete dominance by a single plant functional type (PFT). Out of 4,000 simulations, only nine fell within the observed range of both NPP and LAI, but these predicted unrealistically complete dominance by either early hardwood or pine PFTs. A different set of seven simulations were ecologically plausible but under‐predicted observed NPP and LAI. Parameter uncertainty was large; NPP and LAI ranged from ~0% to >200% of their mean value, and any PFT could become dominant. The two parameters that contributed most to uncertainty in predicted NPP were plant–soil water conductance and growth respiration, both unobservable empirical coefficients. We conclude that (a) parameter uncertainty is more important than structural uncertainty, at least for ED‐2.2 in Upper Midwest forests and (b) simulating both productivity and plant community composition accurately without physically unrealistic parameters remains challenging for demographic vegetation models.

canopy radiative transfer↗
NASA NTRS2017

Analyzing the Operational Behavior of the Alignment and Phasing System of the Thirty Meter Telescope using SysML

The Alignment and Phasing System (APS) of the Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) is responsible for positioning individual segments of the primary mirror, as well as the secondary and tertiary mirrors. Given its essential role, understanding the as-speci ed behavior and verifying related requirements is vital to the correct operation of the TMT. Analyzing the behavior of APS is challenging due to the variety of interactions with other subsystems. This paper presents results from developing an integrated system model that captures the structure, behavior, and requirements in a formal modeling language to enable automated veri cation using appropriate solvers. Speci cally, demonstrated and discussed are the results of applying a Systems Modeling Language (SysMLTM) based approach in which operational modes, behavior speci cations and use case scenarios are used for the purpose of verifying requirements on timing, power, and pointing error through system-level simulation using a single, integrated model.

Troy, Mitchell↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

In-Situ Alloying of GRCop-42 via Additive Manufacturing: Precipitate Analysis

GRCop-42, a Cu-4at% Cr-2at% Nb alloy, was designed as a high temperature, high strength, high heat flux material for rocket engine combustion chamber liners by NASA Glenn Research Center. In situ alloying of GRCop-42 (ISGRCop-42) using powder bed fusion (PBF) additive manufacturing (AM) takes elemental powders of Cu, Cr, and Nb to be introduced into the PBF environment and develop the GRCop alloy while simultaneously building an AM component. Elemental powders were milled together prior to printing in an effort to facilitate the alloying process. Success of the in situ alloying process may provide lower cost, faster lead times, alloying optimization, and more design freedom in the development of regeneratively-cooled rocket propulsion systems. Evaluation of the ISGRCop-42 was conducted using a phase extraction procedure to isolate the Cr2Nb precipitates from the pure Cu matrix. The isolated precipitates were then examined using x-ray powder diffraction (XRD), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and energy dispersion spectroscopy (EDS). It was found that ISGRCop-42 successfully and repeatedly formed Cr2Nb at a yield as high as 89% of potential Cr2Nb. Further, it was identified that the preparation of the powder was the most influential factor in alloying success, and the second most influential factor was the laser power.

In Situ alloying↗
NASA NTRS2021

AIAA Ascend 2021 Conference On Demand Manufacturing of Electronics Panel Abstract

1. Session Proposal o Session Title NASA’s In Space Manufacturing and the On Demand Manufacturing of Electronics o Session Topic Primary -- Space Logistics, Autonomy, and Robotics; Secondary – Transformative Research and Technologies o Session Format: Panel Discussion. o Requested Session Duration: 60 minutes o Short Session Description: The goal of NASA’s On Demand Manufacturing of Electronics project is to develop and demonstrate the feasibility of a low-gravity, on-demand manufacturing system for flexible hybrid electronic devices on the International Space Station. This panel will feature several key collaborators and team members from the commercial sector, academia, and internal to NASA, each of which are contributing an unique and vital role to the design and implementation of this new technology system. o Extended Session Description (Please describe in detail the activity proposed, including how you intend to use the requested session duration. This session description will be provided to the reviewers for consideration and will not be displayed in the online agenda.): The session will be moderated by Curtis Hill, the Project Lead for the On Demand Manufacturing of Electronics (ODME), and he will start by giving a brief introduction to the ODME project which is working to produce a demo system for the manufacturing of electronic devices on the International Space Station. Panelists consisting of collaborators and team members to the ODME project will then give a brief (~5 min) introduction highlighting their contributions to the project, followed by time for Q&A from the audience. The panel will consist of: 1. Kenneth Church, nScrypt. nScrypt is a leader in multi-material printing with a modular system that incorporates a direct write thick film print head, a polymer fused filament fabrication print head, a laser sintering attachment, a drill head attachment for milling, and a pick and place. The system can print a layer and scan for accuracy of prints. The combination of multiple print heads and scanning allows for the on-demand production of intricate electronic components. 2. Andy Kurk, TechShot, Inc. Techshot, Inc. has collaborated extensively with NASA on the in space manufacturing of both printed electronics and fused metal materials. They are currently working to develop and integrate a test system for printed electronics, and a flight demonstration on the International Space Station is anticipated in 2024. 3. Ed Hendricks, NextFlex. NextFlex has the goal of advancing the manufacture of flexible hybrid electronics in the U.S. They are working with ODME on the development of AstroSense, an additively manufactured, wireless, flexible, and wearable health sensor. 4. Dr. Pradeep Lall, Auburn University. Professor Lall is the MacFarlane Endowed Distinguished Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering with a Courtesy Joint Appointment in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering and a Courtesy Joint Appointment in the Department of Finance. He is collaborating with NASA’s ODME project to develop multilayer printable devices and to develop techniques to test the quality of a printed electronic device. 5. Dr. Wei Gao, California Institute of Technology. Professor Gao is an Assistant Professor of Medical Engineering. His group is developing fully printed, flexible, and wearable biosensors for crew health monitoring in collaboration with NASA’s ODME project. In addition, they are working on using sweat to power biofuel cells for wearable, self-powered electronic devices. 6. Beth Paquette, NASA Goddard. The ODME branch at NASA Goddard is spearheading a sounding rocket flight demo to prove the capability of a printed electronic device with multiple sensors. In addition, they focus on thin film and flexible energy storage evaluations. o Session Goal(s)/Outcome(s): Please list the learning objectives and/or tangible outcomes (technical paper or other publication). The goal of this session is to highlight the internal and collaborative efforts of NASA’s On Demand Manufacturing of Electronics project to develop a system for printing electronics that will be tested on the International Space Station in 2024. In addition, the session with facilitate discussion with the community on the state of the art of printable electronics, current challenges, and new avenues for collaboration.

Jennifer McInnis Jones↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Chemical Reactivity of In-Situ Lunar Dust for Biotoxicity Assessment

Introduction: How does the chemical reactivity of in-situ lunar dust compare to Apollo samples currently stored in curation facilities here on Earth? Essential investigations of this question will help us to further mitigate exploration risks for future human explorers on the Moon and will also provide critical information for astrobiologists and space biologists using the Moon for scientific inquiry. Discussion: Apollo 14 dust biotoxicity studies, carried out by the NASA Lunar Airborne Dust Toxici-ty Assessment Group (LADTAG), included numerous physiochemical studies[1] and cellular and animal ex-periments. Intratracheal instillation [2] and inhalation studies [3] in rats both showed Apollo 14 dust to be intermediate in toxicity compared to low-tox titanium dusts and high-tox quartz dusts of similar particle siz-es. The collective results were used in models [4] to establish a safe exposure limit for astronauts [5]. Alt-hough LADTAG took extensive steps to preserve what chemical reactivity may still have existed in the sam-ples, it is simply unknown if they possessed true in-situ chemical reactivity or if that reactivity has de-cayed. Initial gas loss on collection and other altera-tions, and even intermittent exposure to Earth-normal conditions during subsequent decades of handling, obscure a forensic reconstruction of the initial state. Because a mineral dust’s chemical reactivity influ-ences its biotoxicity [6], researchers have developed methods to “activate” lunar dust and simulants [7][8]. Past studies that modeled impact processes and radia-tion [9] in the lunar environment suggest that in-situ lunar dust is likely to be more chemically reactive than Earth-exposed samples. Because of these results, in-situ measurements are warranted [10]. Other studies have examined the hydroxyl generating capability of iron bearing mineral phases [11][12] and further em-phasize the role iron plays in chemical reactivity of lunar material, as well as decay of chemical reactivity in mineral dusts [12]. Recent observations of the lunar surface reveal the presence of hematite [13], a finding that further supports the hypothesis that in-situ lunar dust is reactive. Since the lunar surface is heterogene-ous, dust biotoxicity is expected to vary from site to site [14] due to particle size, mineralogy, physical characteristics, degree of space weathering, and chemi-cal reactivity (Figure 1). This circumstance dictates dust assessments at a suite of lunar sites enabled by upcoming NASA and commercial lunar payload ser-vices (CLPS) opportunities. Dose, location, and dura-tion of particle exposure will also affect biological responses. In-situ chemical reactivity measurements can inform cross-cutting collaborative research cam-paigns such as astrobiology studies examining regolith interactions with organisms and its ability to preserve chemical and structural biomarkers, as well as space biology investigations that examine regolith-microbe interactions relating to life support systems, plant growth, biomining, and development of regolith bio-composites. Figure 1: Environment conditions on the lunar surface that may alter regolith reactivity. Summary A series of in-situ measurements of lu-nar dust free radical chemistry at future Artemis and CLPS landing sites, combined with LADTAG-like studies of freshly collected lunar dust specimens, will reveal the true chemical reactivity of in-situ lunar dust and generate scientific data that can be compared to the chemical reactivity and biotoxicity of samples from Apollo landing sites. Furthermore, results from in situ measurements and biotoxicity studies of freshly col-lected specimens can also be used to validate, or re-quire revision of, the current astronaut permissible exposure limit [15]. References: [1] McKay D et al (2015), Acta As-tronaut 107:163–176. [2] Rask J et al (2013), LPSC, p 3062. [3] Lam CW et al (2013), Inhal Toxicol 25:661–678. [4] James JT, et. al. (2013) , Inhal Toxicol 25:243–256. [5] Scully RR, et.al. (2013), Inhal Toxi-col 25:785–793. [6] Porter, D. W., et.al., (2002), Tox-icology 175, 63–71. [7] Wallace WT, et.al., (2009), Meteorit Planet Sci 44:961–970. [8] Wallace WT, et.al., (2010), Earth Planet Sci Lett 295:571–577. [9] Loftus D, Rask J, et.al., (2010), Earth Moon Planet 107:95–105. [10] Rask J, et.al., (2009) LEAG p 57. [11] Turci F, et.a., (2015), Astrobiology. 2015;15(5):371-380. [12] Hendrix DA, et.al., (2019), Geohealth. 2019;3(1):28-42. [13] Li, S., et.al., (2020), Science advances, 6(36), p.eaba1940. [14] Rask J. (2018), In: Cudnik B. (eds) Encyclopedia of Lunar Science. Springer, Cham. [15] Rask, J, (2020), LPI, Artemis III Sci. def. paper 2120.

chemical reactivity↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Next Generation Thermal Protection System for Outer Planet Probes and Orbiter

Saturn Probe and Ice Giant Orbiter along with in-situ Probe Missions continue to be very high priority mis-sions. A result of the advocacy by OPAG and other Analysis Groups, the 3D Woven, Dual-Layer HEEET thermal protection system, mature at TRL 6, has closed the TPS gap for extreme environment missions. A mid density follow on to DL HEEET, developed to meet earth entry requirements, is a Single Layer vari-ant of the 3D woven TPS, which provides a mass effi-cient single layer 3D Mid-Density TPS (3MDCP) that has been baselined as the heatshield for MSR EEV. Continued development of 3MDCP will elevate it to TRL 6 by 2025. Conformal-PICA (C-PICA) devel-opment was pursued to establish a more efficient and robust alternate to PICA, and it is at TRL 4+. Our rationale for the next generation of TPS de-velopment is based on the on the missions needs of the next decade Outer Planet missions that are unique and more demanding than any other destinations. Taking advantage of the recent planned development of sev-eral materials, the next generation of TPS offers a much more mass efficient option for small, medium, and large class Outer Planet missions. Saturn Probes: While mission designers are gen-erally interested in shallow entry to maintain the g-load during entry around 50g, the heat-load for shallow entry can range between (100 kJ/cm2 – 300 kJ/cm2), two orders of magnitude higher than Venus or Sample Return missions. TPS must not only offer protection but must be mass efficient to perform reasonable sci-ence. TPS mass can quickly become 50% or more of the mass of the entire entry system. Recent analysis performed shows Saturn Probe missions could signifi-cantly benefit from the single layer HEEET (SL-HEEET/3MDCP). A DL-HEEET based heatshield mass could be ~ (40% -50%), SL-HEEET can provide additional (30% - 50%) mass savings. At the same time, C-PICA can provide (30% - 50%) mass savings on the backshell. The combined mass savings can be significant enough to carry an additional probe, if de-sired. Ice Giant Aerocapture Missions: Aerocapture mission architectures can provide significant ad-vantage over traditional propulsive insertion missions in multiple ways. 1) Reduced trip time ~ (4- 6) years (30% -40%), 2) Enables placing the orbiter, probe, and lander, all together and 3) Allows for greater science mass (probes and landers) due to mass efficiency. The delivery of a probe from orbit makes it easier and eliminates mission design constraints by HEEET for direct entry [4] of probes and allows for more targeted in-situ science once the Orbiter is able to collect data. In the past 20 years, progress made in GN&C for lift-guided entry missions (MSL, Orion EFT1, Mars 2020) and the expertise in blunt body aerodynamics at large scale (~ 5m) has led the EDL community to conclude that aerocapture is a “go do” engineering activity. An aerocapture mission that will deplete the excess energy of a fast arrival mission will require a mass efficient TPS that can handle extreme heat-load, ~ (100 kJ/cm2 – 500 kJ/cm2). Hence TPS, feasibility as well as mass efficiency requires assessment. Utilizing the recent developments, a comprehensive, bounding analysis was done to establish the potential for SOA (HEEET) system as well as emerging new TPS such as SL-HEEET and C-PICA. In this proposed poster, we will outline the process by which we establish bounding aerocapture trajecto-ries for hyperbolic excess velocities ranging from 27 km/s to 35 km/s, for low L/D (~ 0.4) configurations and determine conservative/bounding estimate of aer-othermal environment by using a combination of CFD simulations and stagnation point heating estimates [7]. This engineering approach allows us to assess the TPS need vs. TPS capability and determine the applicability of existing TPS. Once an applicable suite of TPS is determined, the TPS thickness and mass are comput-ed. We show that the TPS mass fraction can be as low as 5% to as high as 20%, depending on the use of ad-vanced TPS, while HEEET is sufficient but will require 50% of the entry mass.

E Venkatapathy↗
NASA NTRS2021

NASA SpaceCube Edge TPU SmallSat Card for Autonomous Operations and Onboard Science-Data Analysis

Using state-of-the-art artificial intelligence (AI)frameworks onboard spacecraft is challenging because common spacecraft processors cannot provide comparable performance to datacenters with server-grade CPUs and GPUs available for terrestrial applications and advanced deep-learning networks. This limitation makes small, lo w-p o we r AI microchip architectures, such as the Google Coral Edge Tensor Processing Unit (TPU), attractive for space missions where the application-specific design enables both high-performance and power-efficient computing for AI applications. To address these challenging considerations for space deployment, this research introduces the design and capabilities of a CubeSat-sized Edge TPU-based co-processor card, known as the SpaceCube Low-power Ed g e Artificial Intelligence Resilient Node (SC-LEARN). This design conforms to NASA’s CubeSat Card Specification (CS2) for integration into next-generation SmallSat and CubeSat systems. This paper describes the overarching architecture and design of the SC-LEARN, as well as, the supporting test card designed for rapid prototyping and evaluation. The SC-LEARN was developed with three operational modes: (1) a high-performance parallel-processing mode,(2)a fault-tolerant mode for onboard resilience, and (3) a power-saving mode with cold spares. Importantly, this research also elaborates on both training and quantization of Tensor Flow models for the SC-LEARN for use onboard with representative, open-source datasets. Lastly, we describe future research plans, including radiation-beam testing and flight demonstration.

Advanced avionics↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Understanding the Feasibility of MAB Phase Structures for Lunar Applications

During the ten-week internship, my work focused on synthesis, characterization, and tailoring the flowability of the MAB phase powders for improving the surface finish and decreasing porosity of 3D-printed MAB phase structures. My mentor for the project was Dr. Samuel Hocker from NASA Langley and my faculty advisor was Dr. Surojit Gupta from the University of North Dakota. I also collaborated with Daniel Trieff from the University of North Dakota in developing characterization paradigm of 3D printed samples. The microencapsulation was performed via novel solvent casting-based microencapsulation process pioneered in UND, wherein a polymer (PLA, PHA) was dissolved into dichloromethane and precipitated onto the surface of the MoAlB particles. Two 100mL samples of microencapsulated powder was outsourced to Particle Technology Labs for flowability testing along with a 100mL control sample to determine if microencapsulation is a valid method for improving the flowability. The microencapsulated powders were characterized using SEM, Differential Scanning Calorimetry, and optical microscopy. The SEM images showed no change between the pure and microencapsulated powders. The optical microscopy analysis indicated a reduction in reflectivity for the PLA microencapsulated powders as well as hydrophobic properties. Both results suggest that microencapsulation was successful as PLA is a hydrophobic polymer and the change in reflectivity could be a result of the light being dispersed through the polymer coating. A reflectivity analysis will be done to bring more perspective to these observations. If powder flowability is improved, then the project will move forward with testing the printability of the microencapsulated powders and characterizing the structures using the designed characterization protocol. We are waiting for the DSC results. The characterization protocol for the 3D-printed MAB structures included a visual inspection of the plates to rule out any samples that had spalled or delaminated, optical microscopy to document surface features, porosity, and decomposition, and cleaning of the plates using an ultrasonic bath in preparation for SEM, EDS, and profilometry analyses.

MAB Phase↗
NASA NTRS2021

Measurement Uncertainty Analysis of 6x9 Icing Research Tunnel (IRT)

This paper presents the results of the measurement uncertainty analysis that was performed on the aero-thermal characteristics of the 6- by 9-Foot Icing Research Tunnel (IRT) at the NASA Glenn Research Center. The engineering judgments and statistical methods used to determine the elemental uncertainties are described. Instrumentation uncertainty was quanti ed using MANTUS (Measurement Analysis Tool for Uncertainty in Systems) and instrument speci cation sheets. The Monte Carlo method was used to propagate systematic components of uncertainty in order to quantify the uncertainty of the Variables of Interest (VOI). A detailed description of the Monte Carlo method and the MANTUS tool can be found in the Uncertainty Analysis of the NASA Glenn 8x6 Supersonic Wind Tunnel report [1]. Detailed uncertainty results for test section airspeed and temperature as well as other variables of interest are described within this document.

6x9 Icing Research Tunnel↗
NASA NTRS2021

Radio Counterpart Candidates to 4FGL-DR2 Unassociated Sources

For the duration of the Fermi Gamma-Ray Space Telescope's mission, approximately one-third of the point sources detected have been noted as "unassociated," meaning that they seem to have no known counterpart at any other wavelength/frequency. This mysterious part of the gamma-ray sky is perhaps one of the largest unknowns in current astronomical pursuits, and as such has been probed extensively by various techniques at various frequencies. Radio frequencies have been perhaps one of the most fruitful, producing a large fraction of the identi ed and associated Active Galactic Nuclei (AGN) and pulsars noted in each update of the point source catalogs. Here we present a catalog of 7432 radio counterpart candidates for unassociated gamma-ray elds in the 2nd Data Release of the 4th Fermi Point Source Catalog (4FGL-DR2). A description of the catalog and source types is provided followed by a discussion that demonstrates how the results of this work will aid new associations and identi cations. As part of this work, we also present a rst catalog derived from "quicklook" images of the Very Large Array Sky Survey (VLASS).

S Bruzewski↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

TEM and XRD Investigation of Impact Glass Alteration Products: Amorphous Materials, Phyllosilicates and Everything in Between

Impact cratering is one of the most ubiquitous geologic processes shaping the surface of all solid bodies in our solar system. Impacts are also a major source of clay minerals and poorly crystalline, clay-like materials on Earth and Mars[1,2].These phyllosilicates and related clay-like phases comprise an incredibly complex group of materials, and their characterization, even in controlled laboratory settings, remains a challenging endeavor. The nature and origin of clay minerals and amorphous materials on Mars, which form a major component (~20-70 wt %) of rock and soil samples in Gale Crater as determined by the CheMin instrument on Curiosity, have remained ambiguous[3]. These amorphous phases likely fall on a spectrum between pristine volcanic and/or impact-produced primary materials and clay minerals and related phases formed from aqueous alteration. Amorphous materials are common weathering products in terrestrial sediments, soils, and paleosols [e.g., 4,5].Primary impact materials (glass, melt rocks)are comparable in some ways to those generated volcanically [6], and so it may be possible that an amorphous component is preserved within altered impactites. There are hundreds of thousands of impact craters on Mars, and Curiosity and Perseverance are currently exploring ancient impact craters. We hypothesize that the sediments and lithologies in Gale and Jezero Craters and elsewhere contain altered impact products; it is therefore important to better understand the composition and structure of these materials. Here we present the first results from a study characterizing materials produced from impact glass alteration–clay minerals, poorly crystalline/amorphous materials–in terrestrial craters using Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM), powder X-ray diffraction (pXRD)and chemical (EDS) analysis.

Impact crater↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Pink Spinel in Apollo Impact Melt Rock 68815: Implications for Mg-Suite Magmatism

Introduction: Magnesian rocks from the lunar highlands are collectively termed the Mg-suite. Characterized by high (>60) Mg# (molar 100×Mg/[Mg+Fe]) in mafic phases and calcic plagioclase, these rocks are plutonic to hypabyssal in origin, and include a range of bulk mineralogies such as troctolites, dunites, norites, gabbronorites, and spinel troctolites [1]. These Mg-suite lithologies have distinct trace element concentrations and ratios that differentiate them from other lunar rock types. These rocks are ancient, generally dated to between 4.5 and 4.1 Ga, although it is unknown if this represents the full range of Mg-suite ages [1–2]. Among the Mg-suite lithologies, the spinel troctolites are relatively rare, to date only found in polymict breccias [3]. Spinel troctolites, as their name suggests, consist of calcic plagioclase and forsteritic olivine, with minor amounts of spinel (MgAl2O4), ± pyroxene and cordierite [1,4]. This form of spinel is often called ‘pink’ spinel because of its appearance in thin section under plane polarized light (PPL; Fig. 1), due to minor amounts of Cr. Spinel troctolites are generally plutonic or hypabyssal in origin (subsequently exhumed and incorporated into polymict breccias), or formed through impact processes (e.g., crystalline impact melt) [5]. A spinel-rich lithology has also been found in the Moscoviense region of the Moon via the Moon Mineralogy Mapper (M3) and lacks other mafic phases [6]. Finally, while the Mg-suite sampled thus far consists of plutonic (or hypabyssal) rocks, the question remains if such magmas could have erupted on the surface of the Moon [7]. These magmas have much lower density than mare basalts, but little sample or remote sensing evidence has been found to support the idea that extrusive Mg-suite volcanism occurred [7]. Here, we present a coordinated microanalytical study of spinel-bearing lithic and mineral clasts found in Apollo sample 68815. These data will be used to understand their petrogenesis (magmatic or impact) and modification histories, and to shed light on the existence of volcanic Mg-suite rocks. Sample Description: Apollo sample 68815 is a polymict impact melt breccia containing a variety of lithic and mineral fragments embedded in devitrified impact melt. This sample was chipped off the top of a boulder at Station 8 during the Apollo 16 mission and had an original weight of nearly 1.8 kg. In this study, we investigated two polished thin sections of 68815: 68815,17 and 68815,148, both containing spinel. Methods: The thin sections of 68815 were studied using optical light microscopy (PPL, cross-polarized light, and reflected light) with a Keyence VHX-7100 Digital Microscope. Each section was then X-ray mapped for 13–14 elements using a Cameca SX100 electron probe microanalyzer (EPMA) located in the Kuiper Materials Imaging and Characterization Facility (KMICF) at the University of Arizona. We have obtained geochemical information about the phases (olivine, plagioclase, spinel, pyroxene) in the thin sections also using the EPMA. In addition, we have used ThermoScientific Helios NanoLab 660 Focused-Ion-Beam Scanning-Electron Microscope (FIB-SEM) and a Hitachi S-4800 SEM (both in KMICF) to obtain backscattered electron (BSE) images and energy dispersive Xray spectrometry (EDS) maps of areas of interest. Using a JEOL 7900F SEM at the Astromaterials Research & Exploration Science (ARES) at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC), we have obtained electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) maps of the spinel-bearing portions of the thin sections. The EBSD data were collected under beam conditions of 20 kV, and ~90 μA, with step sizes varying from 0.05 to 2 μm. Following EBSD data collection, we processed the data using AZtecCrystal and MTEX, a free MATLAB toolbox. Results: We have found clasts with subophitic textures, that consist of primarily olivine and plagioclase, with minor amounts of pink Mg-Al spinel and pyroxene (Fig. 1). These clasts are up to ~1 mm in length and contain spinels up to 50 μm across. We have additionally identified pink Mg-Al spinels within the impact melt (i.e., not contained in lithic clasts) in both thin sections. In one instance, a single spinel grain is approximately 300 μm across (Fig. 1b, 2). The spinel fragments embedded in impact melt have varying compositions, typically distinct from the compositions of spinels in the lithic clasts. Spinel-Bearing Clasts: Ten lithic clasts with similar textures and mineral compositions were identified between 68815,17 (two clasts) and ,148 (eight clasts). These clasts fall into two groups. The first has skeletal olivine with intergranular plagioclase, with minor amounts of pyroxene and spinel (Fig. 1a, 2c, 2d). The spinel in these clasts are found amid the plagioclase. The second group have an intergranular texture of olivine and plagioclase, again with minor spinel and pyroxene. The second group may contain spinels surrounded by plagioclase, and spinels enclosed in olivine. Spinels located within both clast types range from no apparent Cr zoning, to reverse zoning (Cr-enrichment inward; Fig. 2d), to normal zoning (Cr-enrichment outward). In the clasts thus far investigated with EPMA, plagioclase compositions range from An# (molar 100×Ca/[Ca+Na+K]) 92–96. Olivine Mg# ranged from 77 to 94, while pyroxene had Mg# from 54–84. Spinel in the clasts have Cr# (molar 100×Cr/[Cr+Al]) 2–4 and Mg# 88–91, which is within the range of pristine and plutonic spinel troctolites [8]. Isolated Spinels: These crystals are generally euhedral to subhedral, and can exhibit reverse Cr zoning (Cr enrichment inward) or no apparent Cr zoning. The spinels thus far investigated via EPMA have Cr# 9–14 and Mg# 65–82. The Cr# for these spinels is within the range reported by [8], but have lower Mg#. Future Work: We will continue to process the EBSD data for these lithic and mineral clasts. We will also continue to characterize these clasts using EPMA and SEM. By thoroughly characterizing the various spinels and spinel-bearing clasts, we aim to constrain the petrogenesis of these minerals and rock fragments. Acknowledgments: We thank NASA for the loan of these thin sections. We thank Ken Domanik and Jerry Chang for their support with data collection. Work was supported by a University of Arizona RII Core Facilities Pilot Program grant and start-up funds to JJB. We acknowledge support from NASA’s Planetary Science Research program for analysis performed at JSC. References: [1] Shearer C. K. et al. (2015) Am. Min. 100, 294–325. [2] Borg L. E. et al. (2020) GCA 290, 312–332. [3] Warren P. H. (1993) Am. Min. 78, 360–376. [4] Dymek R. F. et al. (1976) LPS VII, 2335–2378. [5] Treiman et al. (2019) Am. Min. 104, 370–384. [6] Pieters et al. (2011) JGR: Plan. 116:E00G08. [7] Prissel et al. (2016) Icarus 277, 319–329. [8] Prissel et al. (2016) Am. Min. 101, 1624–1635.

spinel↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Developing Mass Spectrometry for Water Quantitation and Volatiles Analysis from In-Situ Regolith

With a revived focus to create a sustainable hu-man presence on the moon, and in preparation for future Mars exploration, it is imperative that all resources are utilized to their fullest potential [1]. In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) will be critical for future mission success as it would enable in-dependent operation of missions while reducing the dependence on the complex supply chain created between the Earth, the moon and Mars. One of the most critical resources that has been identified for ISRU on the lunar surface is water [2]. Water is a versatile resource that can be used in various space operations, such as ra-diation shielding and conversion to oxygen (O2) for propellant [3,4]. One of the most water rich resources is thought to be within the regolith lo-cated in the permanently shadowed regions (PSR) of the Moon; several upcoming missions, such as PRIME-1 and VIPER, are already sched-uled to confirm this hypothesis [5,6]. However, there are currently no missions planned to quanti-fy the abudance of water at these regions. The quantity of water contained in the ice will inform and help the development of future ISRU plants and operation. Water and other volatile gases can be detect-ed upon controlled heating of icy lunar regolith for an accurate quantification of water. This method is similar to thermogravimetric analysis, which was used to analyze Apollo lunar regolith sam-ples. However, losses via sublimation/evaporation or contamination may have occurred with the samples due to the transit and exposure to the terrestrial environment. Furthermore, water would not be expected for these samples since they were not collected from a PSR. Thus, for more accurate results, icy lunar regolith should be ana-lyzed in situ to provide the most representative composition of both water and other volatile gas-es. The Light Water Analysis and Volatile Extract (LightWAVE) project aims to address this knowledge gap. A system has been developed to collect, heat and analyze evolved gases from lu-nar regolith on the lunar surface. The gases will be analyzed by a modified commercial off the shelf (COTS) residual gas analyzer (RGA) quad-rupole mass spectrometer. Evolved gases from heated regolith samples can be identified by the observed mass-to-charge (m/z) ratios, and the peak intensities correlate to the abundances of the observed gases for quantitation. Therefore, our group is developing a calibration methodology utilizing a COTS RGA to quantitate water from in-situ regolith samples on the lunar surface. The partial pressure of water and ideal gas law will be used to quantify the total water evolved from a regolith sample. Here we present our methodol-ogy for the design and calibration for water quan-titation using a COTS RGA.

Nilab Azim↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Unraveling Solar Wind Space Weathering of Carbon-Rich Asterods: Low-Flux VS. High-Flux Ion Irradiation of Murchison

Introduction: Space weathering processesalter the microstructural, compositional, and optical properties of airless planetary surfaces.Solar wind space weatheringforms ion-damaged rims within the outermost ~100 nm of regolith grains through atomic-displacements and implantation of energetic H+and He+ions[1]. Transmission electron microscope(TEM)studies of space weathered Itokawa and lunar olivine particles reveal predominantly nanocrystalline solar wind-damaged rims with only minor regions of amorphization[2-5]. This finding differs from laboratoryion irradiation experiments in which samples become amorphous at fluences 2-3 orders of magnitude lower than the independentlyconstrained fluences for still-crystalline natural samples [6-7].Ion flux is generally considered to have a secondaryeffectcompared to fluence in these irradiation experiments. However, solar wind irradiation of natural samples occurs at a flux that is ~4-5 orders of magnitude lower than whatisused inlaboratory simulations (e.g., [6,8-9]). Constraining how the very low ion flux of solar wind influences the microstructural, chemical, and spectral alteration of silicate minerals will improve our understanding of solar wind space weathering and aid in the analysis of returned samples from the Hayabusa2 and OSIRIS-REx missions. Here we report results from low-and high-flux ion irradiation experiments on the Murchison (CM2)meteoritewithcomparable total fluences. Methods: We performed low-flux and high-flux He+(4 keV) and H+(1 keV) irradiation experiments on separate, dry-cut Murchison slabs. Low-flux He+irradiation reached a total fluence of 2.1 x 1016ions/cm2(~400 years of exposure at Bennu) using a flux of 3.6 x 1011ions/cm2/s; low-flux H+irradiation reached a total fluence of 3.9 x 1016ions/cm2(~30 years) using a flux of 6.6 x 1011ions/cm2/s. High-flux He+irradiation reached a total fluence of 2.0 x 1016ions/cm2(~400 years)using a flux of 9.1 x 1012ions/cm2/s; high-flux H+irradiation reached a total fluence of 5.8 x 1016ions/cm2(~50 years)using flux of 8.4 x 1012ions/cm2/s. By irradiating to similar total fluences in both the low-flux and high-flux experiments, we can better isolate and evaluatethe effects of ion flux. Differences between unirradiatedand irradiated surfaces are determined using threeanalytical techniques:(1) in situX-ray photoelectron spectroscopy(XPS) reveals changes in surface chemistry,(2) visible to near-infrared spectroscopy (VNIR; 0.35-2.5 μm) highlights changes in spectraltrends, such as albedo and slope, and (3) TEM and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) identifieschanges in nanoscale structure and elemental composition within olivine and matrix electron-transparent thin sections prepared using focused ion beam scanning electron microscopy (FIB-SEM). Results and Discussion: XPS analyses of the low-fluxand high-fluxHe+-and H+-irradiated samples showa minorreduction in surface carbon contentand chemicalreduction ofFe3+to Fe2+. The latter result is consistent with the higher Fe2+/Fe3+ratios observed in phyllosilicate-rich space weathered rims of Ryugu grains [10].VNIR analyses suggest that the low-flux H+-irradiated spectrum has a slightly bluer slope (over 0.65-2.5 μm) compared to the unirradiated VNIR spectrum from [9] while the low-flux He+-irradiated spectral slope is comparable to the unirradiated surface. Both the high-flux He+-and H+-irradiated VNIR spectra exhibitslightlyhigheralbedos at shorter wavelengths relativeto their unirradiated counterparts, with He+irradiation yielding a greater change. Thus far, the low-flux He+-irradiated matrix and olivine FIBsections as well as the low-flux H+-irradiated olivine FIBsection have been examined with TEM. The surfaces of all three samplesshowless vesiculation than high-flux/high-fluenceirradiated matrix and olivine samples from [9]. The depth of phyllosilicate amorphization in thelow-fluxHe+-irradiated matrix FIBsection varieslaterally, with crystalline domains occurring as shallow as ~25 nm in some regions. Thelow-flux He+-irradiated olivine FIBsection has acontinuous,~40-90 nm thick ion-affected layer with polycrystalline and amorphous microstructures. The low-flux H+-irradiated olivine sampleexhibits a distinct, ~10-40 nm ion-affected layer whose uppermost ~20 nmin thicker regions is predominantly amorphous.Continuing to compare results from this work to those from [9] will provide a comprehensive understanding of how ion flux impacts the microstructural, chemical, and optical modification of various mineral phases and, in turn,help identify space weathering features from parent body alteration in Hayabusa2 and OSIRIS-REx returned samples.

D L Laczniak↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

CoCoSim Tutorial: Contract-based Compositional Verification of Simulink Models

This tutorial presents CoCoSim, a verification framework for MATLAB Simulink and Stateflow models. We demonstrate CoCoSim’s architecture, designed to be compatible with Lustre-based verification tools, as well as easily extensible to other candidate backends. We focus on CoCoSim’s powerful compositional verification scheme, which allows for scalable verification through the usage of abstractions of subsystems, express ed in the form of Assume-Guarantee Contracts. We show CoCoSim’s interconnection with NASA’s Formal Requirements Tool (FRET), that enables a seamless transition between authoring and formally verifying requirements for Simulink/Stateflow models. Finally, we discuss work in progress with regards to test case generation options in CoCoSim, demonstrating the generation of MC/DC tests for Simulink artifacts.

Formal Verification↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Advancing Dust Tolerant Mechanisms for a Sustained Exploration of the Moon

Introduction: “I think dust is probably one of our greatest inhibitors to a nominal operation on the Moon. I think we can overcome other physio-logical or physical or mechanical problems except dust.”– Gene Cernan, Apollo 17 Technical Debrief The Apollo missions revealed the impact of lu-nar dust on mechanisms. Lunar dust particles are jagged and electrostatically charged, giving them the ability to bind or damage mechanisms and alter thermal properties. Reports documented clogged equipment and jammed mechanisms in every mission, regardless of surface duration, as well as clogged mechanisms in the Extravehicular Mobility Suit (EMS), including zippers, wrist and hose locks, faceplates, and sunshades [1-2]. Several astronauts remarked they could not have sustained surface activity much longer because clogged joints would have frozen up completely [2]. Effective dust mitigation strategies are need-ed to support longer duration stays on the lunar surface [3-4]. State of the Art: Technology for mechanisms able to operate in dusty enviroments is advancing rapidly due to the needs of both Mars rovers and the Artemis program. Vacuum-tight connectors are essential for spacesuits and habitats, and their performance can be dependent on cleaning technologies, which have proven difficult on the lunar surface. Several TRL 3-5 technologies are undergoing tests with the expectation to reach TRL 6 within 1-2 years. Some mechanisms will be infused and tested on the VIPER (Volatiles Inves-tigating Polar Exploration Rover) mission planned for mid-2020s. NASA Funded Efforts: NASA has recognized the need for dust tolerant mechanisms, and has partnered with industry to advance the state-of-the-art. At NASA GRC, KSC, and JSC, the Dust Tolerant Mechanisms Project is working to devel-op advanced actuator seals for rotary joints and rotary bearing technologies for long-term sus-tained operation in lunar dust environments. An-other NASA project at NASA GRC, partnered with GSFC, JPL, and KSC is Motors for Dusty & Ex-treme Cold Environments (MDECE). MDECE is developing an unheated magnetically-geared mo-tor that can operate continuously for a long dura-tion at an ambient temperature of -243 ºC (33 K). NASA GRC has the capability to characterize the effects of dust on seals, mechanisms, and other mating surfaces and components under lunar conditions [5]. Through the SBIR/STTR program, NASA has funded several companies to advance dust toler-ant mechanisms via the Dust Tolerant Mecha-nisms sub-topic with applications in surface mobil-ity, spacesuits, connectors, joints, and more. LSIC and Community Efforts: The Lunar Surface Innovation Consortium (LSIC) Dust Miti-gation focus group has fostered collaborations across NASA, industry, and academia to develop solutions that minimizes the impact of lunar dust on robotic and human systems. Community ef-forts have included topical meetings on dust tol-erant mechanisms, featured technology presenta-tions, and feedback to NASA on potential gaps and needs. Testing: In 2021, NASA released NASA-STD-1008 [6]. This NASA Technical Standard estab-lishes minimum requirements and provides guid-ance for testing systems and hardware to be ex-posed to dust in planetary environments. The standard has specific sections dedicated to Mechanisms Testing (e.g. bearings, gears) as well as Seals and Mating Surfaces Testing (e.g. hatches, docking systems). Gaps and Needs: NASA is tracking dust tol-erant mechanisms as a gap in a cross-directorate analysis of capability areas needed to enable fu-ture human space-flight architectures. Two high-priority gap areas include additional facilities for testing mechanisms in lunar-surface conditions, and a better understanding of vulnerabilities to the smallest, nanometer-scale dust particles. Conclusion: Understanding and mitigating lu-nar dust is critical to successful, sustained opera-tions on the lunar surface – whether autonomous or otherwise. This presentation will discuss both the state-of-the-art and open needs in lunar dust tolerant mechanisms, technology impacts, mitiga-tion approaches, testing, LSIC community efforts, and more. References: [1] Gaier, J. R. (2020). The Im-pact of Dust on Lunar Surface Equipment During Apollo. Lunar Dust 2020. [2] GRC, & Gaier, J. R. (2005). The Effects of Lunar Dust on EVA Sys-tems During the Apollo Missions. [3] Johansen, M. R. (2020). An Update on NASA’s Lunar Dust Mitigation Strategy. Lunar Dust 2020. [4] ASI, CSA, ESA, JAXA, & NASA. (2016). Dust Mitiga-tion Gap Assessment Report. [5] Jimenez, N. et al (2022), LPSC Abstract 2572. [6] NASA-STD-1008, 2021.

J I Nunez↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Applicability of Micro X-Ray Fluorescence Spectroscopy to Astromaterials Curation and Research

Introduction: The Astromaterials Acquisition and Curation Office at NASA’s Johnson Space Center (JSC) curates NASA’s astromaterial sample collections which includes: Apollo samples, Luna samples, Ant-arctic meteorites, cosmic dust particles, microparticle impacts into space-flown materials, Genesis solar wind atoms, Stardust comet Wild-2 particles, Stardust inter-stellar particles, Hayabusa asteroid Itokawa particles, Hayabusa 2 asteroid Ryugu particles, and future OSIRIS-Rex asteroid Bennu particles (landing in Sep-tember, 2023) [1–3]. To enhance JSC’s advanced cu-ration capabilities, we have recently installed a high-performance micro-X-ray fluorescence (µXRF) spec-trometer to assist in sample characterization through rapid, non-destructive, in-situ elemental analyses that do not require the sample preparation protocols (i.e., polishing and carbon-coating) commonly needed for electron beam analyses. With this new instrument, we are capable of detecting all elements down to carbon in a variable-pressure or He-purged chamber for anal-ysis of a wide range of sample types. Here we describe the instrumental set-up, capabilities, and applicability of µXRF analysis to astromaterials curation and re-search. Instrumentation and Methodology: The X-ray fluorescence and computed tomography lab (X-FaCT) lab at JSC is now equipped with a Bruker M4 Tornado Plus µXRF (Fig. 1). This system is an energy-dispersive x-ray spectrometer equipped with two 60 mm2 silicon drift detectors (SDD) that are able to be used simulta-neously for output count rates ~500,000 cps. New light element windows allow detecting and analyzing the entire elemental range from carbon to americium. Two x-ray tubes (micro-focus Rh with polycapillary lenses and W with collimators of 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, and 4.5 mm) with max excitation parameters of 50 kV, 30 W and 50 kV, 40 W, respectively, allow for more flexibility of the analysis of high energy lines. The motorized X-Y-Z stage has a mapping range of 190 x 160 mm and can support samples up to 7 kg (~15.5 lbs) and a height of 120 mm [4]. Analytical modes include elemental analysis (down to ~20 µm spot size) via point, line, or area of bulk materials (rock surfaces, thin sections, thick sections, etc.) as well as coating analysis (determination of thickness and composition) of samples. This system has a variable vacuum chamber (1 mbar to 1 atm) that is also equipped with a He-purge system which accommodates vacuum sensitive samples while still allowing detection of light elements at atmospheric pressure. Utility and Applicability of µXRF in Astro-materials research and exploration science (ARES): Elemental analysis using µXRF is commonly em-ployed for both terrestrial and planetary geological science disciplines [5]. It is especially useful for analy-sis of astromaterials given the limited sample prepara-tion required, which is not feasible for certain materi-als. Here we show select applications of µXRF anal-yses of astromaterials that can, have, and will be done at JSC’s X-FaCT lab. Point analysis: In-situ spot analyses (~20 µm spot size) on a cut slab of Martian meteorite NWA 10922 allowed for the discovery, qualitative elemental analy-sis and determination of different feldspar minerals [6]. These point analyses served as an effective prelim-inary step for subsequent quantitative analyses. Ana-lytical standards can be employed for more accurate quantification of µXRF spot analyses. Area analysis: This analytical mode measures all detectable elements (from C to Am) at each pixel (>5 µm pixel size) in a user-defined area. The results are shown as elemental maps which can be extracted as 16-bit TIFF’s for further data processing. In Fig. 2. we show elemental distribution maps of the high-Ti basalt 73001,531 that have been processed using ImageJ software. From these maps you can accurately and quickly (this map took ~50 mins.) identify mineral components, such as pyroxene, plagioclase, oxides, and phosphates, compositional zoning, and mineral textures. Detection of high-Z phases: µXRF techniques are es-pecially effective at analyzing trace minerals with high-atomic-number (high-Z) elements because the high-energy characteristic X-rays used (relative to SEM EDS) allow for mapping of K lines in elements up to La (typically SEM maps use L X-ray lines for elements >Zn, and these can often have interferences). Thus, µXRF is especially suited for identifying minerals like zircon, baddeleyite, REE-rich phosphates, Fe-rich met-als, oxides, sulfides, and phosphides [4]. In Fig. 3 we show elemental distribution maps for 73001,530 where we are able to correlate the original video image with, Zr, Si, Y and Hf elemental maps together identi-fying the location of a zircon. In this location you would expect lower Si compared to surrounding mate-rial, as well as higher Zr, Y, and Hf content compared to surrounding material, all of which is confirmed by our XRF ele-mental distribution maps (Figure 2.) Conclusions: The new M4 Tornado Plus µXRF within the Astromaterials Acquisition and Curation office at NASA JSC allows for rapid and non-destructive elemental analysis of astromaterials with limited or no sample preparation. µXRF analyses pro-vide crucial compositional knowledge for the prelimi-nary examination and curation of astromaterials. This instrument enhances the advanced curation capabili-ties in the X-FaCT laboratory at JSC by allowing pro-ductive, cohesive, and non-destructive multi-modal x-ray analyses on astromaterial samples, which is neces-sary for the comprehensive curation and study of our current and future astromaterial collections. Addition-ally, µXRF can provide complimentary information to researchers for studies on astromaterials. References: [1] Allen, C. et al., (2011). Chemie De Erde Geochemistry, 71, 1-20. [2] McCubbin, F. M. et al., (2016) 47th LPSC, abstract #2668 [3] Zeigler, R. A. et al., (2017) 48th LPSC, abstract #2772 [4] Bruker User Manual [5] Young et al., (2016) Appl. Geochemistry, 72, 77-87 [6] Mor-ris, R. V. et al., (2023) 54th LPSC.

E W O'Neal↗