Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “exploration analog”

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 127 records · Page 7
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2011

Properties of Subsurface Soil Cores from Four Geologic Provinces Surrounding Mars Desert Research Station, Utah: Characterizing Analog Martian Soil in a Human Exploration Scenario

The DOMEX program is a NASA-MMAMA funded project featuring simulations of human crews on Mars focused on science activities that involve collecting samples from the subsurface using both manual and robotic equipment methods and analyzing them in the field and post mission. A crew simulating a human mission to Mars performed activities focused on subsurface science for 2 weeks in November 2009 at Mars Desert Research Station near Hanksville, Utah --an important chemical and morphological Mars analog site. Activities performed included 1) survey of the area to identify geologic provinces, 2) obtaining soil and rock samples from each province and characterizing their mineralogy, chemistry, and biology; 3) site selection and reconnaissance for a future drilling mission; 4) deployment and testing of Mars Underground Mole, a percussive robotic soil sampling device; and 5) recording and analyzing how crew time was used to accomplish these tasks. This paper summarizes results from analysis of soil cores

Stoker, C. R.↗
NASA NTRS2013

The Antarctic Search for Meteorites: A Model for Deep Space Exploration

In an era of shrinking buying power and reduced flight opportunities, NASA must extract the greatest possible value from all sources of insight into the future of human space exploration. Antarctica is one such source. The history of Antarctic exploration has many political and technical parallels with the development of space, and Antarctica's remoteness and harsh climate make it an excellent proxy for space (e.g., [1,2]). Links between exploration of space and of the Antarctic date back to the International Geophysical Year of 1957-1958, which saw both the launch of Sputnik 1 and the establishment of a station at the South Pole. The Antarctic Search for Meteorites (ANSMET) is an annual expedition to the south polar plateau to collect meteorites. Although its intent is not to simulate a space mission, the handful of astronauts who have participated in ANSMET agree that it is very similar to a long-duration space flight. Independently, NASA and other space agencies have simulated deep space exploration missions in "analog" activities at remote field sites on Earth (e.g., [3]). These include NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) [4,5], Desert Research And Technology Studies (Desert RATS) [6,7], and the Pavilion Lake Research Project (PLRP or simply Pavilion Lake) [8]. This report focuses on NEEMO, Desert RATS, and PLRP because of the author's firsthand experience with them. Other noteworthy analogs, such as the arctic Haughton Mars Project and the European Space Agency's underground Cooperative Adventure for Valuing and Exercising human behavior and performance Skills (CAVES), are not treated here. NASA analogs often include fully staffed control centers, astronauts serving as crew, and realistic mission timelines lasting one to two weeks. Analogs have provided key insights into system architectures and operational concepts for the future human exploration of deep space. They have pioneered techniques for human communication with significant speed-of-light delays, for conducting spacewalks on natural objects with negligible surface gravity, and for empowering exploration crews to work with reduced dependence on a ground control center. They have field-tested dozens of emerging technologies including spacewalking tools and full-scale prototype vehicles and habitats. They have provided valuable experience for astronauts preparing for their first space flight, and for flown crewmembers who will take command roles on later flights. Some analogs, especially PLRP, have connected observers in the field with science teams in remotely located control centers to produce high-quality, publishable scientific results. The analogs have accomplished all of this at a tiny fraction of the cost of an actual space flight. This report treats ANSMET as space flight analog. The chapter following this introduction describes ANSMET in depth. The report then presents data on logistics and crew considerations that may be useful for developers of future human space exploration missions. It offers detailed comparisons between ANSMET and past, present, and future space flights on the Space Shuttle, the International Space Station (ISS), and a proposed Mars mission. Those comparisons are intended to complement the work of Eppler [2], who compares ANSMET to the Apollo moon flights. This report also compares ANSMET with the Desert RATS, NEEMO, and PLRP analogs. It then presents observations and makes recommendations related to ANSMET's value as a simulated space mission. The report ends with a short conclusion. The remainder of this introductory chapter provides background material to help readers interpret the rest of the report. It gives brief overviews of Space Shuttle and ISS missions along with information on a notional future human flight to Mars. It also presents the general features of three of NASA's space flight "analog" projects. With those points of reference in place, the chapter concludes with an overview of ANSMET.

Love, Stanley G.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Human-in-the-Loop Operations over Time Delay: NASA Analog Missions Lessons Learned

Teams at NASA have conducted studies of time-delayed communications as it effects human exploration. In October 2012, the Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Analog Missions project conducted a Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) with the primary stakeholders to share information and experiences of studying time delay, to build a coherent picture of how studies are covering the problem domain, and to determine possible forward plans (including how to best communicate study results and lessons learned, how to inform future studies and mission plans, and how to drive potential development efforts). This initial meeting s participants included personnel from multiple NASA centers (HQ, JSC, KSC, ARC, and JPL), academia, and ESA. It included all of the known studies, analog missions, and tests of time delayed communications dating back to the Apollo missions including NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO), Desert Research and Technology Studies (DRATS/RATS), International Space Station Test-bed for Analog Research (ISTAR), Pavilion Lake Research Project (PLRP), Mars 520, JPL Mars Orbiters/Rovers, Advanced Mission Operations (AMO), Devon Island analog missions, and Apollo experiences. Additionally, the meeting attempted to capture all of the various functional perspectives via presentations by disciplines including mission operations (flight director and mission planning), communications, crew, Capcom, Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA), Behavioral Health and Performance (BHP), Medical/Surgeon, Science, Education and Public Outreach (EPO), and data management. The paper summarizes the descriptions and results from each of the activities discussed at the TIM and includes several recommendations captured in the meeting for dealing with time delay in human exploration along with recommendations for future development and studies to address this issue.

Rader, Steven N.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Testing the Exploration Conops (Excon) Mockup Suit in Lunar Analog Environments in 2022

Understanding how to effectively train for Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) for Artemis missions is critical. Developing high-fidelity simulation environments is important for Artemis mission preparation. Because the actual Lunar exploration environment cannot be fully replicated on Earth, it is paramount to determine where and how to properly train the Artemis team. Tasked by the new Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility Program(EHP), a team of stakeholders from engineering, flight operations, human health and performance, astromaterials and science, and the crew office worked together to perform EVAs in 3 simulated lunar environments. The overall focus for this test series was developing the capability to perform Artemis simulated EVAs in high-fidelity, full-scale environments. This test series was broken into 3 distinct tests titled after the EHP integrated test team: Joint EVA Test Team (JETT). The test locations are planned to serve as Artemis training sites and were selected because of their relevance to the expected Artemis Lunar terrain. JETT1was conducted near Kilbourne Holeby El Paso, Texas and focused on hardware development and checkout. JETT2 was conducted in the Icelandic Highlands and began the transition towards EVA concept operations(con-ops), risks and technology.JETT3 was conducted near SP Crater by Flagstaff Arizona and focused on simulating the Artemis III mission with a simulated Houston based Flight Control Team (FCT) and a Science Mission Directorate (SMD) science team. All three JETT tests utilized the Excon mockup space suit. The Excon mockup suit is a light-weight, unpressurized Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU)simulator. While it cannot replicate the feel of working within a pressurized suit, it does introduce similar volume constraints and some of the mobility programing to simulate the user experience in the xEMU. Overall, the JETT testing was able to create a simulated Lunar EVA and have two subjects perform full scale operations in line with Artemis III mission expectations. Future work is planned to continue to improve the simulation quality of Lunar EVA simulations.

spacesuit↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Testing the Exploration ConOps (ExCon) Mockup Suit in Lunar Analog Environments in 2022

Understanding how to effectively train for Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) for Artemis missions is critical. Developing high-fidelity simulation environments is important for Artemis mission preparation. Because the actual Lunar exploration environment cannot be fully replicated on Earth, it is paramount to determine where and how to properly train the Artemis team. The overall focus for this test series was developing the capability to perform Artemis simulated EVAs in high-fidelity, full-scale environments. This test series was broken into three distinct tests titled after the EVA & Human Surface Mobility (HSM) Program (EHP) integrated test team: Joint EVA & HSM Test Team (JETT). The test locations are planned to serve as Artemis training sites and were selected because of their relevance to the expected Artemis Lunar terrain. JETT1 was conducted near Kilbourne Hole by El Paso, Texas and focused on hardware development and checkout. JETT2 was conducted in the Icelandic Highlands and began the transition towards EVA concept of operations (con-ops), risks and technology. JETT3 was conducted near SP Crater by Flagstaff, Arizona and focused on simulating the Artemis III mission including a Houston based Flight Control Team (FCT) and a Science Mission Directorate (SMD) science team. All three JETT tests utilized the Exploration Concept of Operations (ExCon) mockup space suit. The ExCon mockup suit is a lightweight, unpressurized Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) simulator. While it cannot replicate the feel of working within a pressurized suit, it does introduce similar volume constraints and some of the mobility programing to simulate the user experience in the xEMU. Overall, the JETT testing was able to create a simulated Lunar EVA and have two subjects perform full scale operations in line with Artemis III mission expectations. Future work is planned to continue to improve the simulation quality of Lunar EVA simulations.

spacesuit↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Testing the Exploration Conops (Excon) Mockup Suit in Lunar Analog Environments in 2022

Understanding how to effectively train for Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) for Artemis missions is critical. Developing high-fidelity simulation environments is important for Artemis mission preparation. Because the actual Lunar exploration environment cannot be fully replicated on Earth, it is paramount to determine where and how to properly train the Artemis team. The overall focus for this test series was developing the capability to perform Artemis simulated EVAs in high-fidelity, full-scale environments. This test series was broken into three distinct tests titled after the EVA & Human Surface Mobility (HSM) Program (EHP) integrated test team: Joint EVA & HSM Test Team (JETT). The test locations are planned to serve as Artemis training sites and were selected because of their relevance to the expected Artemis Lunar terrain. JETT1 was conducted near Kilbourne Hole by El Paso, Texas and focused on hardware development and checkout. JETT2 was conducted in the Icelandic Highlands and began the transition towards EVA concept of operations (con-ops), risks and technology. JETT3 was conducted near SP Crater by Flagstaff, Arizona and focused on simulating the Artemis III mission including a Houston based Flight Control Team (FCT) and a Science Mission Directorate (SMD) science team. All three JETT tests utilized the Exploration Concept of Operations (ExCon) mockup space suit. The ExCon mockup suit is a lightweight, unpressurized Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) simulator. While it cannot replicate the feel of working within a pressurized suit, it does introduce similar volume constraints and some of the mobility programing to simulate the user experience in the xEMU. Overall, the JETT testing was able to create a simulated Lunar EVA and have two subjects perform full scale operations in line with Artemis III mission expectations. Future work is planned to continue to improve the simulation quality of Lunar EVA simulations.

spacesuit↗
NASA NTRS2010

Space Medicine in the Human System Integration Process

This slide presentation reviews the importance of integration of space medicine in the human system of lunar exploration. There is a review of historical precedence in reference to lunar surface operations. The integration process is reviewed in a chart which shows the steps from research to requirements development, requirements integration, design, verification, operations and using the lessons learned, giving more information and items for research. These steps are reviewed in view of specific space medical issues. Some of the testing of the operations are undertaken in an environment that is an analog to the exploration environment. Some of these analog environments are reviewed, and there is some discussion of the benefits of use of an analog environment in testing the processes that are derived.

Scheuring, Richard A.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Planetary Exploration of Lava Tubes with Lidar at Craters of the Moon, Idaho

We completed a lidar survey of lava tubes in Idaho as an analog to the exploration of pits on the Moon and Mars. Pits are exploration targets for future missions because they provide both lucrative science and possible shelter. Exploration at these sites will require innovative engineering to access the interiors. We present findings that demonstrate the scientific and operational potential of lidar within such challenging environments, and discuss our results for Indian Tunnel, the largest tube we surveyed (Fig. 1).

LAVA Tubes↗
NASA NTRS2017

Dust Storm Impacts on Human Mars Mission Equipment and Operations

Although it is tempting to use dust impacts on Apollo lunar exploration mission equipment and operations as an analog for human Mars exploration, there are a number of important differences to consider. Apollo missions were about a week long; a human Mars mission will start at least two years before crew depart from Earth, when cargo is pre-deployed, and crewed mission duration may be over 800 days. Each Apollo mission landed at a different site; although no decisions have been made, NASA is investigating multiple human missions to a single Mars landing site, building up capability over time and lowering costs by re-using surface infrastructure. Apollo missions used two, single-use spacecraft; a human Mars mission may require as many as six craft for different phases of the mission, most of which would be re-used by subsequent crews. Apollo crews never ventured more than a few kilometers from their lander; Mars crews may take "camping trips" a hundred kilo-meters or more from their landing site, utilizing pressurized rovers to explore far from their base. Apollo mission designers weren't constrained by human for-ward contamination of the Moon; if we plan to search for evidence of life on Mars we'll have to be more careful. These differences all impact how we will mitigate and manage dust on our human Mars mission equipment and operations.

Rucker, M. A.↗
NASA NTRS2007

An Experimental Approach to Understanding the Optical Effects of Space Weathering

The creation and accumulation of nanophase iron (npFe(sup 0)) is the primary mechanism by which spectra of materials exposed to the space environment incur systematic changes referred to as "space weathering." The optical effects of this npFe(sup 0) on lunar soils are well documented. Space weathering though, should occur on the surface of any planetary body that is not protected by an atmosphere. There is no reason to assume that cumulative space weathering products throughout the solar system will be the same as those found in lunar soils. In fact, these products are likely to be very dependent on the specific environmental conditions under which they were produced. We have prepared a suite of analog soils to explore the optical effects of npFe(sup 0). By varying the size and concentration of npFe(sup 0) in the analogs we found significant systematic changes in the Vis/NIR spectral properties of the materials. Smaller npFe(sup 0) (<10 nm in diameter) dramatically reddens spectra in the visible wavelengths while leaving the infrared region largely unaffected. Larger npFe(sup 0) (>40 nm in diameter) lowers the albedo across the Vis/NIR range with little change in the overall shape of the continuum. Intermediate npFe(sup 0) sizes impact the spectra in a distinct pattern that changes with concentration. The products of these controlled experiments have implications for space-weathered material throughout the inner solar system. Our results indicate that the lunar soil continuum is best modeled by npFe(sup 0) particles with bulk properties in the approx.15-25 nm size range. Larger npFe0 grains result in spectra that are similar in shape to the Mercury continuum. The continuum of S-type asteroid spectra appear to be best represented by small amounts of npFe(sup 0) that is similar to, but slightly smaller on average, than the npFe(sup 0) in lunar soils (approx.10-15 nm).

Noble, Sarah K.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Drilling on the Moon and Mars: Developing the Science Approach for Subsurface Exploration with Human Crews

DOMEX (Drilling on the Moon and Mars in Human Exploration) is using analog missions to develop the approach for using human crews to perform science activities on the Moon and Mars involving exploration and sampling of the subsurface. Subsurface science is an important activity that may be uniquely enabled by human crews. DOMEX provides an opportunity to plan and execute planetary mission science activities without the expense and overhead of a planetary mission. Objectives: The objective of this first in a series of DOMEX missions were to 1) explore the regional area to understand the geologic context and determine stratigraphy and geologic history of various geologic units in the area. 2) Explore for and characterize sites for deploying a deep (10 m depth) drilling system in a subsequent field season. 3) Perform GPR on candidate drill sites. 4) Select sites that represent different geological units deposited in different epochs and collect soil cores using sterile procedures for mineralogical, organic and biological analysis. 5) Operate the MUM in 3 different sites representing different geological units and soil characteristics. 6) Collect rock and soil samples of sites visited and analyze them at the habitat. Results: At mission start the crew performed a regional survey to identify major geologic units that were correlated to recognized stratigraphy and regional geologic maps. Several candidate drill sites were identified. During the rest of the mission, successful GPR surveys were conducted in four locations. Soil cores were collected in 5 locations representing soils from 4 different geologic units, to depths up to 1m. Soil cores from two locations were analyzed with PCR in the laboratory. The remainder were reserved for subsequent analysis. XRD analysis was performed in the habitat and in the field on 39 samples, to assist with sample characterization, conservation, and archiving. MUM was deployed at 3 field locations and 1 test location (outside the habitat) where it operated autonomously for 2-4 hours at each site. Depths achieved ranged from 15 to 70 cm depending on the soil compressive strength and the presence and depth of subsurface indurated layers. Subsurface samples weighing 0.5 to 1 g were collected at the deepest depth encountered at each of the sites using the MUM automated sample collection system, and subsequently analyzed with XRD. Downhole inspection of holes produced by MUM with the Raman spectrometer was acquired on two of the holes and spectral features associated with selenite were identified in specific soil layers. Previously unreported fossilized remains of vertebrate fauna from the Jurassic era were discovered during our mission. Analysis of mineral biomarkers associated with this discovery are underway.

Stoker, C. R.↗
NASA NTRS2016

NEEMO 18-20: Analog Testing for Mitigation of Communication Latency During Human Space Exploration

NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) is an underwater spaceflight analog that allows a true mission-like operational environment and uses buoyancy effects and added weight to simulate different gravity levels. Three missions were undertaken from 2014-2015, NEEMO's 18-20. All missions were performed at the Aquarius undersea research habitat. During each mission, the effects of communication latencies on operations concepts, timelines, and tasks were studied. METHODS: Twelve subjects (4 per mission) were weighed out to simulate near-zero or partial gravity extravehicular activity (EVA) and evaluated different operations concepts for integration and management of a simulated Earth-based science team (ST) to provide input and direction during exploration activities. Exploration traverses were preplanned based on precursor data. Subjects completed science-related tasks including pre-sampling surveys, geologic-based sampling, and marine-based sampling as a portion of their tasks on saturation dives up to 4 hours in duration that were designed to simulate extravehicular activity (EVA) on Mars or the moons of Mars. One-way communication latencies, 5 and 10 minutes between space and mission control, were simulated throughout the missions. Objective data included task completion times, total EVA times, crew idle time, translation time, ST assimilation time (defined as time available for ST to discuss data/imagery after data acquisition). Subjective data included acceptability, simulation quality, capability assessment ratings, and comments. RESULTS: Precursor data can be used effectively to plan and execute exploration traverse EVAs (plans included detailed location of science sites, high-fidelity imagery of the sites, and directions to landmarks of interest within a site). Operations concepts that allow for pre-sampling surveys enable efficient traverse execution and meaningful Mission Control Center (MCC) interaction across communication latencies and can be done with minimal crew idle time. Imagery and contextual information from the EVA crew that is transmitted real-time to the intravehicular (IV) crewmember(s) can be used to verify that exploration traverse plans are being executed correctly. That same data can be effectively used by MCC (across comm latency) to provide meaningful feedback and instruction to the crew regarding sampling priorities, additional tasks, and changes to the EVA timeline. Text / data capabilities are preferred over voice capabilities between MCC and IV when executing exploration traverse plans over communication latency.

Chappell, Steven P.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Proceedings of the 40th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference

The 40th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference included sessions on: Phoenix: Exploration of the Martian Arctic; Origin and Early Evolution of the Moon; Comet Wild 2: Mineralogy and More; Astrobiology: Meteorites, Microbes, Hydrous Habitats, and Irradiated Ices; Phoenix: Soil, Chemistry, and Habitability; Planetary Differentiation; Presolar Grains: Structures and Origins; SPECIAL SESSION: Venus Atmosphere: Venus Express and Future Missions; Mars Polar Caps: Past and Present; SPECIAL SESSION: Lunar Missions: Results from Kaguya, Chang'e-1, and Chandrayaan-1, Part I; 5 Early Nebula Processes and Models; SPECIAL SESSION: Icy Satellites of Jupiter and Saturn: Cosmic Gymnasts; Mars: Ground Ice and Climate Change; SPECIAL SESSION: Lunar Missions: Results from Kaguya, Chang'e-1, and Chandrayaan-1, Part II; Chondrite Parent-Body Processes; SPECIAL SESSION: Icy Satellites of Jupiter and Saturn: Salubrious Surfaces; SNC Meteorites; Ancient Martian Crust: Primary Mineralogy and Aqueous Alteration; SPECIAL SESSION: Messenger at Mercury: A Global Perspective on the Innermost Planet; CAIs and Chondrules: Records of Early Solar System Processes; Small Bodies: Shapes of Things to Come; Sulfur on Mars: Rocks, Soils, and Cycling Processes; Mercury: Evolution and Tectonics; Venus Geology, Volcanism, Tectonics, and Resurfacing; Asteroid-Meteorite Connections; Impacts I: Models and Experiments; Solar Wind and Genesis: Measurements and Interpretation; Mars: Aqueous Processes; Magmatic Volatiles and Eruptive Conditions of Lunar Basalts; Comparative Planetology; Interstellar Matter: Origins and Relationships; Impacts II: Craters and Ejecta Mars: Tectonics and Dynamics; Mars Analogs I: Geological; Exploring the Diversity of Lunar Lithologies with Sample Analyses and Remote Sensing; Chondrite Accretion and Early History; Science Instruments for the Mars Science Lander; . Martian Gullies: Morphology and Origins; Mars: Dunes, Dust, and Wind; Mars: Volcanism; Early Solar System Chronology; Seek Out and Explore: Upcoming and Future Missions; Mars: Early History and Impact Processes; Mars Analogs II: Chemical and Spectral; Achondrites and their Parent Bodies; and Planning for Future Exploration of the Moon The poster sessions were: Lunar Missions: Results from Kaguya, Chang'e-1, and Chandrayaan-1; LRO and LCROSS; Geophysical Analysis of the Lunar Surface and Interior; Remote Observation and Geologic Mapping of the Lunar Surface; Lunar Spectroscopy; Venus Geology, Geophysics, Mapping, and Sampling; Planetary Differentiation; Bunburra and Buzzard Coulee: Recent Meteorite Falls; Meteorites: Terrestrial History; CAIs and Chondrules: Records of Early Solar System Processes; Volatile and Organic Compounds in Chondrites; Crashing Chondrites: Impact, Shock, and Melting; Ureilite Studies; Petrology and Mineralogy of the SNC Meteorites; Martian Meteorites; Phoenix Landing Site: Perchlorate and Other Tasty Treats; Mars Polar Atmospheres and Climate Modeling; Mars Polar Investigations; Mars Near-Surface Ice; Mars: A Volatile-Rich Planet; Mars: Geochemistry and Alteration Processes; Martian Phyllosilicates: Identification, Formation, and Alteration; Astrobiology; Instrument Concepts, Systems, and Probes for Investigating Rocks and Regolith; Seeing is Believing: UV, VIS, IR, X- and Gamma-Ray Camera and Spectrometer Instruments; Up Close and Personal: In Situ Analysis with Laser-Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy and Mass Spectrometry; Jupiter and Inscrutable Io; Tantalizing Titan; Enigmatic Enceladus and Intriguing Iapetus; Icy Satellites: Cryptic Craters; Icy Satellites: Gelid Geology/Geophysics; Icy Satellites: Cool Chemistry and Spectacular Spectroscopy; Asteroids and Comets; Comet Wild 2: Mineralogy and More; Hypervelocity Impacts: Stardust Models, LDEF, and ISPE; Presolar Grains; Early Nebular Processes: Models and Isotopes; Solar Wind and Genesis: Measurements and Interpretation; Education and Public Outreach; Mercury; Pursuing Lunar Exploration; Sources and Eruptionf Lunar Basalts; Chemical and Physical Properties of the Lunar Regolith; Lunar Dust and Transient Surface Phenomena; Lunar Databases and Data Restoration; Meteoritic Samples of the Moon; Chondrites, Their Clasts, and Alteration; Achondrites: Primitive and Not So Primitive; Iron Meteorites; Meteorite Methodology; Antarctic Micrometeorites; HEDs and Vesta; Dust Formation and Transformation; Interstellar Organic Matter; Early Solar System Chronology; Comparative Planetology; Impacts I: Models and Experiments; Impacts II: Craters and Ejecta; Mars: Volcanism; Mars: Tectonics and Dynamics; Martian Stratigraphy: Understanding the Geologic History of Mars Through the Sedimentary Rock Record; Mars: Valleys and Valley Networks; Mars: Aqueous Processes in Valles Marineris and the Southern Highlands; Mars: Aqueous Geomorphology; Martian Gullies: Morphology and Origins; Mars: Dunes, Dust, and Wind; Mars: Remote Sensing; Mars: Geologic Mapping, Photogrammetry, and Cratering; Martian Mineralogy: Constraints from Missions and Laboratory Investigations; Mars Analogs: Chemical and Physical; Mars Analogs: Sulfates and Sulfides; Missions: Approaches, Architectures, Analogs, and Actualities; Not Just Skin Deep: Electron Microscopy, Heat Flow, Radar, and Seismology Instruments and Planetary Data Systems, Techniques, and Interpretation.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1981

Analogical acts as conceptual strategies in science, engineering and the humanities

The composing models which operate by means of analogy are identified. The importance of analogical acts in the prewriting stage of the composing process is discussed. The relations between analogical acts and concept formation are explored. A basic correspondence between the analogical thinking employed in successful learning and analogical thinking as a composing strategy is discussed. Teaching analogical acts as conceptual strategies for exploring problems and generating the form and content of discourse is presented in support of the contention that writing is a unique mode of learning.

Winkler, V. M.↗
NASA NTRS1990

NASA/NSF Antarctic Science Working Group

A collection of viewgraphs on NASA's Life Sciences Biomedical Programs is presented. They show the structure of the Life Sciences Division; the tentative space exploration schedule from the present to 2018; the biomedical programs with their objectives, research elements, and methodological approaches; validation models; proposed Antarctic research as an analog for space exploration; and the Science Working Group's schedule of events.

Stoklosa, Janis H.↗